Fr. Nikolaos Hadjinikolaou

Orthodoxy and Modern Life

Interviewed by Prof. Nikos Kokosalakis

Religione e Societa, 15.3.1996

π. Νικόλαος Χατζηνικολάου

Ὀρθοδοξία καὶ Σύγχρονη Ζωή

Συνέντευξη στὸν Καθηγητὴ κ. Νικόλαο Κοκοσαλάκη

Μετάφραση στὰ Ἑλληνικὰ ἀπὸ τὸ περιοδικὸ Religione e societa, 15.3.1996

Orthodox Spirituality

N.K. I am grateful to you, father Nikolaos, that you kindly accepted to talk to me on the theme Orthodoxy and Modern Life. Your vocation as a monk, living and serving a spiritual ministry at this outpost of Mount Athos, here in the middle of Athens, and your training in the natural sciences makes an excellent combination for a view of Orthodoxy from a deep personal experience and a scientific perspective. Your views, therefore, will be of great interest to the readers of the journal Religioni e Societa.

Let's start with the topic of the spiritual dimension of Orthodoxy. More specifically, could you elaborate on Orthodox spirituality as a way of life, as an experience and its compatibility with contemporary every day life and social reality?

Fr. N.H. As you were posing your question, I thought what other dimension could Orthodoxy have but a spiritual one? I realized, however, that the question is essential, especially when it is based on purely scholastic or scientifc grounds. Orthodoxy can also have a social as well as a psychological dimension. That is, how Orthodoxy affects social relations and human feelings. The spiritual dimension is the dimension of its essence; the others of its consequences.

I should start from two concepts: the way of life and experience. Orthodoxy as a way of life is basically neither an intellectual achievement, nor a sentimental experience aiming at making us feel well; but it is the inner sense of the mystical presence of God and His grace in one's life. Everything that makes God remote, improbable, questionable, vague or false is a sin.

On the contrary, the Orthodox faith and way of thinking makes God proximate, real, clear and true, easy to reach, not a fantasy but tangible, not an abstract idea but a real person.

Therefore, in the heart of Orthodox spirituality lies the growth of an authentic faith and genuine Orthodox way of thinking, resulting in a true spiritual life. Orthodox spirituality constitutes the life's journey towards our reconciliation with God, in such a way that Cod consciously becomes the very center of every breath and action of ours. This journey starts with a pure yearning to approach God and is gradually being transformed into faith, which through humility, leads to the experience of the grace of God; and finally come the fruits of the Holy Spirit, that is, a holy life; a holy life which is not a human achievement aiming at making us “good people” and feeling well, but a holy life granted to us as a gift from God, thus expressing more his love to us than ours to Him. His love is godly; ours is human. A holy life is more an expression and manifestation of God's power than an evidence of man's ability.

N.K. It seems that spiritual experience in Orthodox tradition has a purely theocentric dimension. In other words, the idea that permeates Orthodox spirituality is the experience of reality and transcendence of God.

Fr. N.H. Certainly. These are expressed in the name of God: YAHVEH, that is, THE ONE WHO IS. BEING is God's. We are partakers of God's BEING. Therefore, everything, even our spiritual desire, is more a fulfilment of His longing to commune with us than an expression of our need to commune with Him. This is only understood if one humbles himself. And this is why Orthodoxy means humility. Anything that hurts our sense of humbleness inside us and before God is not Orthodox, even if it is included in the ways or forms through which the Orthodox Church expresses itself and functions.

Thus, humility and man's decrescense in the presence of God is in absolute harmony with the simultaneous longing for the revelation of His love to us. In this sense, someone who lives humbly and truly longs for God and anticipates His love in his life, may live in the 20th century as well as in the 30th or the 15th century. In other words, it is the spiritual dimension, and not the social or psychological one, that makes Orthodoxy everlasting.

However, since there is also a social dimension, we can certainly comment on the functioning of Orthodoxy within contemporary reality, as the forms, expressions and problems change according to the times.

N.K. At this point, father Nikolaos, I would like you to link the second part of my question. How compatible is the spiritual dimension of Orthodoxy with contemporary social reality? We live in a secular society where the emphasis is on the material and economic factors. How can one be a good Christian, in a spiritually impoverished age in the circumstances of today's Athens or today's Rome?

Fr. N.H. From an ethical point of view, today's Rome is the same as the old one. Undoubtedly, today's Rome is characterized by materialism and secularization, elements which were almost non-existent in the past; however, there is something hidden behind these two elements which remains intact through time; and this is sin. Its expressions and manifestations constantly change, but its essense stays the same.

Despite all these, we could say that the spirit of our times is not compatible with what we just said. There is an explicit discord between the spirit of God and the social climate of our era. And I don't only mean the mentality of the conflicts, the disagreements, the selfishness, the drugs or the sins of the flesh, so widely spread in our days; but mainly the deterioration of the social morals, the degenaration of institutions, the disorientation of principles, the disquality of the criteria, elements that in some instances have imbued even the structure of the Church's body and religious organizations. Of course, God and the Holy Spirit have nothing to do with all this. This is the world of apostasy which existed in the past under various forms, but today is widely spread and unpredictably powerful. Can the word of the Cross and the logic of the Resurrection be possibly related to the mentality of the ephemeral and selfishness?

Although the spirit of the world cannot be in accordance with the spirit of God and the spirit of Orthodoxy, it is possible for someone to experience the grace of God in this world; certainly, not by extracting all these elements of spiritual perversion. One can participate in the social dimension of the world, meet the demands of his profession and may conform to the prevailing social forms and shapes, and at the same time have a different way of thinking and attitude altogether towards life. To materiality, he does not respond with materialism, neither to logic with rationalism. To the mentality of human ego, he proposes in return the reality of true God. The Orthodox Christian is “in the world” but not “of the world.” He rejects anything that has to do with sin and alienates him from God.

Orthodoxy is saying the same thing for the past 2,000 years: Humble yourself, see God as real and then you will experience Him as true. In our days, our ego functions in a different way. The higher education of people leads to greater arrogance.

In the old days, when people fell ill, they used to take oil from the oil lamp of the holy icons and apply it to their body and along with their prayer, they were waiting to be cured. Today, we first think of the doctor, the medicines, the antibiotics.

In the past, people's homes were full of icons, holy water and other holy items. Now, even in the cells of monks you can find medicines, prescriptions and doctors' telephone numbers.

In the older days, in periods of drought, people prayed to God or had a litany to ask for rain; and God always answered back. Their lives were God-dependent. Today, when it is not raining, we seek information through the weather report and the satellites. But satellites do not respond with solutions, instead they disappoint us with explanations. Our lives are man-dependent.

Our hope is directed towards human achievement, which can be terribly impressive regarding its influence on the quality of our material life, but is a total failure when it comes to man's happiness. Material prosperity and biological health are accompanied by poverty of principles and spiritual stagnation. Blindly neglecting the causes, we try to improve the outcome. As a result, less and less people are happy. Life ends up being like a chain, every link of which could be called “success,” but its final name is “failure.” The inheritance of anxiety and the unprecedented illness of social relationships consist an indisputable characteristic of contemporary societies.

The Church is saying: Let's put God in our life, let's trust in the presence of His love, let's lean our expectations and hopes on Him, and He will respond to everything: our deeper existential quests, our family or heatlh problems, our daily needs.

N.K. I would like to say that it seems the mission of Orthodoxy is very difficult today due to the circumstances you just described. Is it then “a voice in the wilderness?”

Fr. N.H. I believe it always has been and still is. During the times of the Apostles, the word of God was also “a voice in the wilderness” of atheism, and so was the voice of the martyrs in the wilderness of paganism, and the voice of the ascetics in the wilderness of rationalism. However, the grace of God abides in these wildernesses. “Where sin abounds, grace is in excess” (1Tim 1:14). The grace of God overflows the desert of sin, of history, of this perishable world. And since in the center of the world and its events lies God, the criterion of good and evil is not the human perception of things, but the grace of God itself. So, divine grace can also function in the desert of our era. Through our logic, we understand its difficulty, but through our faith, we ascertain its functioning. This is what Orthodoxy is basically doing; it preserves the grace of God in this world. It makes all of us long for that; more than the birth of our child, the accomplishment of our academic or financial goals, we long for and enjoy the experience of God's grace in our life.

N.K. From your experience as a spiritual father, do you have any indications of the functioning of God's grace in our days?

Fr. N.H. Here in Athens, I experience a very moving reality. Most of the people who approach me are not practicing Christians. However, when their lives at some point reach an impasse, they turn to God. So, they come here, either for advice, or discussion of their problems, or, fewer, being in a complete state of repentance.

I believe, that here in Greece, the seed of faith is very widely spread. Even an atheist Greek has faith deeply rooted in him. What I am trying to do everytime someone comes to me is to stimulate the growth of that seed, so he can gradually find God on his own. I say a few words in the beginning to give the initial push. I am impressed that in our times it is quite easy for someone to turn to God, but it is very hard to follow Him. That is to say, christian life has become very difficult, because society itself has imposed on people a certain mentality and lifestyle which create an atmosphere very different from the one of the Church; an atmosphere that constantly disappoints man and betrays itself. So, people become disillusioned and, having nowhere else to turn to, they easily turn to God. They make the first step, but find it difficult to proceed.

N.K. So, there is an existential quest and turn towards God, but its fulfilment is not so easy due to the practical difficulties?

Fr. N.H. Difficulties do not really exist, but it is the wrong attitude that makes the easy difficult, the self-evident hard to understand, as the criteria of good and evil have changed today. People understand the truth; this means that the seed exists in them. But, when they have lived for years in a different way, when their environment is set against christian life, it becomes a mere torture to end up wanting something they believe they can't achieve. The solution is to humble ourselves and let God do what we are unable to.

At this point, there is a difference between East and West. Orthodoxy does not make good people. Her goal is not ethical perfection, but God's revelation in our lives. Ethical perfection is the fruit, the natural result of the functioning of God's grace in our lives. The aim of spiritual struggle is not victory, but humility and death. The grace of God is neither an achievement nor an accomplishment. If it were, then man would be entitled to brag about it. It is a gift; a gift that humbles the soul and is granted to us as an experience. In the fraction of everyone's life, it seems that God is the numerator and man the denominator. As the denominator’s value decreases and the numerator’s increases, the fraction as a whole acquires a greater value.

Ἡ Πνευματικὴ Διάσταση τῆς Ὀρθοδοξίας

Ν.Κ. Σᾶς εἶμαι εὐγνώμων, πάτερ Νικόλαε, ποὺ δεχτήκατε νὰ μιλήσουμε πάνω στὸ θέμα Ὀρθοδοξία καὶ Σύγχρονη Ζωή. Ἡ ἰδιότητά σας ὡς μοναχοῦ Ἁγιορείτου, ποὺ ὅμως ἐπιτελεῖτε μιὰ πνευματικὴ διακονία ὡς οἰκονόμος ἐδῶ στὸ ἁγιορείτικο Μετόχι τῆς Ἀναλήψεως, στὴν καρδιὰ τῆς Ἀθήνας ἀφ᾿ ἑνός, καὶ ἡ παιδεία σας στὶς θετικὲς ἐπιστῆμες ἀφ᾿ ἑτέρου, ἀποτελοῦν ἄριστο συνδυασμὸ γιὰ τὴν θεώρηση τῆς σύγχρονης θρησκευτικῆς ζωῆς ἀπὸ θεολογικῆς, ἐμπειρικῆς καὶ ἐπιστημονικῆς σκοπιᾶς. Οἱ ἀπόψεις σας θὰ ἐνδιέφεραν πολὺ τοὺς ἀναγνῶστες τοῦ περιοδικοῦ Religione e societa.

Θὰ ἤθελα λοιπὸν ν᾿ ἀρχίσουμε ἀπὸ τὸ θέμα τῆς πνευματικῆς διάστασης τῆς Ὀρθοδοξίας. Θὰ σᾶς παρακαλοῦσα νὰ μᾶς πεῖτε λίγα λόγια γι᾿ αὐτὴ τὴν πνευματικὴ διάσταση τῆς Ὀρθοδοξίας ὡς τρόπου ζωῆς, ὡς βιώματος καὶ ἐμπειρίας, καὶ πῶς αὐτὸ τὸ βίωμα κατὰ τὴν ἐκτίμησή σας συμβιβάζεται μὲ τὴν σύγχρονη κοινωνικὴ πραγματικότητα.

π.Ν.Χ. Στὴν ἀρχή, ὅταν διατυπώσατε τὸ ἐρώτημά σας, μοῦ γεννήθηκε ἡ ἀπορία· μὰ μπορεῖ ἡ Ὀρθοδοξία νὰ ἔχει καὶ ἄλλη διάσταση ἐκτὸς ἀπὸ πνευματική; Ἀμέσως ὅμως μετὰ σκέφτηκα ὅτι τὸ ἐρώτημά σας εἶναι οὐσιαστικό, καὶ πολὺ μάλιστα, ἰδίως ὅταν διατυπώνεται μὲ καθαρὰ δυτικά, σχολαστικὰ ἢ ἐπιστημονικὰ κριτήρια. Καὶ τοῦτο ἐπειδὴ ἡ Ὀρθοδοξία ἐκτὸς ἀπὸ τὴν πνευματική της διάσταση φαίνεται πὼς ἔχει καὶ κοινωνικὴ ἢ ἀκόμη καὶ ψυχολογικὴ διάσταση. Αὐτὴ τὴν διάσταση ἡ ὁποία δείχνει τὸ πῶς ἡ Ὀρθοδοξία ἐπηρεάζει τὶς κοινωνικὲς σχέσεις ἢ διαμορφώνει ἐσωτερικὰ τὸν ἄνθρωπο καὶ τὸν κάνει νὰ νοιώθει καλά. Ἡ πρώτη εἶναι ἡ διάσταση τῆς οὐσίας της· οἱ ὑπόλοιπες τῶν συνεπειῶν καὶ ἀποτελεσμάτων της.

Καὶ ἂς ξεκινήσω αὐτὰ ποὺ θὰ πῶ παίρνοντας ἀφορμὴ ἀπὸ τὴ λέξη βίωμα καὶ ἐμπειρία. Τὸ βίωμα, στὴν Ὀρθόδοξη Ἐκκλησιαστικὴ ἀντίληψη, δὲν εἶναι βασικὰ ἕνα συναίσθημα καὶ ἡ ἐμπειρία δὲν εἶναι τόσο κάτι ποὺ μᾶς κάνει νὰ νοιώθουμε καλύτερα ἐμεῖς οἱ ἴδιοι, ἀλλὰ εἶναι στοιχεῖα ποὺ ἀποτελοῦν ἐσωτερική, μυστικὴ ἀπόδειξη καὶ τῆς παρουσίας τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἀλλὰ καὶ τῆς λειτουργίας Του, τῶν ἐνεργειῶν Του δηλαδή, στὴ ζωή μας. Κάθε τι τὸ ὁποῖο κάνει τὸν Θεὸ ἀπόμακρο, ἀπίθανο, ψεύτικο, ἀσαφῆ, αὐτὸ εἶναι ἁμαρτία.

Ἡ Ὀρθόδοξη Ἐκκλησία, ἡ Ὀρθόδοξη πίστη καὶ τὸ Ὀρθόδοξο φρόνημα εἶναι ἀκριβῶς αὐτὸς ὁ δρόμος ποὺ ἐπιτελεῖ τὴν ἀντίθετη διαδικασία. Τὸν Θεὸ τὸν προσεγγίζει ὡς ἀληθινό, πραγματικό, κοντινό, ὄχι φαντασία, ἁπτὸ ἂν μποροῦμε νὰ ποῦμε, πρόσωπο μὲ συγκεκριμένη μορφὴ καὶ φυσιογνωμία. Πνευματικὰ ἐννοῶ τοὺς ὅρους.

Μ᾿ αὐτὴ τὴν ἔννοια, ὄχι μόνο στὴ σημερινὴ ἐποχή, ἀλλὰ καὶ σὲ κάθε ἐποχὴ καὶ στὶς ἐπερχόμενες, ὅσες δώσει ὁ Θεός, αὐτὸ θὰ εἶναι τὸ μήνυμα τῆς Ὀρθοδοξίας· τὸ πῶς νὰ ἐμπνεύσει μέσα μας ἕνα ὀρθὸ φρόνημα κατὰ βάσιν καὶ ἔπειτα, ὡς ἀποτέλεσμα, νὰ μᾶς ὁδηγήσει σὲ μιὰ ὀρθή, ἀναγεννημένη ζωή. Μὲ ἄλλα λόγια, τὸ ταξείδι ποὺ ἔχει ὡς στόχο του τὴν συμφιλίωση μας μὲ τὸν Θεὸ σὲ ἐπίπεδο ποὺ νὰ τὸ καταλαβαίνει ἡ ψυχὴ αὐτὸ τὸ πρᾶγμα καὶ νὰ τὸ αἰσθάνεται, καὶ ποὺ καθιστᾶ τὸν Θεὸ ἐπίκεντρο τῆς κάθε ἀνάσας καὶ τῆς κάθε ἐνέργειας στὴ ζωή μας, ξεκινᾶ ἀπὸ ἕνα ἁγνὸ πόθο νὰ τὸν πλησιάσουμε, ὁ ὁποῖος μεταμορφώνεται σιγὰ-σιγὰ σὲ πίστη. Αὐτὴ ἡ πίστη, ὅταν συνδυάζεται μὲ τὴν ταπείνωση, ὁδηγεῖ σὲ αἴσθηση τῆς χάριτος τοῦ Θεοῦ καὶ σὲ βίωση τῶν καρπῶν τοῦ Ἁγίου Πνεύματος, δηλαδὴ σὲ ἁγία ζωή. Μιὰ ἁγία ζωὴ ποὺ δὲν ἔχει σκοπὸ νὰ κάνει ἐμᾶς καλύτερους, ἀλλὰ μιὰ ἁγία ζωὴ ποὺ ἔρχεται ἀπὸ τὸν Θεὸ ὡς ἔκφραση περισσότερο τῆς δικῆς Του ἀγάπης σὲ μᾶς, παρὰ τῆς δικῆς μας σ᾿ Ἐκεῖνον. Τὸ πρῶτο εἶναι θεϊκό· τὸ δεύτερο ἀνθρώπινο. Ἡ ἁγία ζωὴ εἶναι ἔκφραση καὶ φανέρωση τῆς δυνάμεως τοῦ Θεοῦ καὶ ὄχι μαρτυρία τῆς ἱκανότητος τοῦ ἀνθρώπου.

Ν.Κ. Ἀπ᾿ ὅ,τι βλέπω δηλαδή, στὴ θεώρηση τῆς Ὀρθοδοξίας ὡς βιώματος, ὅσον ἀφορᾶ τὴν Ὀρθόδοξη παράδοση, ὑπάρχει μιὰ ἀπόλυτα θεοκεντρικὴ διάσταση. Μὲ ἄλλα λόγια ἡ βασικὴ ἔννοια ἡ ὁποία διαχέει τὴν ὅλη Ὀρθόδοξη πνευματικότητα εἶναι ἡ ἔννοια τῆς πραγματικότητας καὶ ὑπερβατικότητας τοῦ Θεοῦ ὡς βιώματος.

π.Ν.Χ. Μάλιστα! Καὶ αὐτὰ ἀποτυπώνονται στὸ ὄνομα τοῦ Θεοῦ· ὁ ΩΝ, δηλαδὴ αὐτὸς ποὺ ΕΙΝΑΙ. Τὸ ΕΙΝΑΙ εἶναι τοῦ Θεοῦ. Ἐμεῖς εἴμαστε οἱ μέτοχοι τοῦ ΟΝΤΟΣ Θεοῦ. Καὶ γι᾿ αὐτὸ ὅ,τι γίνεται, ἀκόμη καὶ ἡ ἐπιθυμία μας γιὰ τὰ πνευματικὰ εἶναι περισσότερο ἱκανοποίηση τῆς ἀγαπητικῆς ἐπιθυμίας τοῦ Θεοῦ νὰ κοινωνεῖ μαζί μας, παρὰ ἔκφραση τῆς δικῆς μας ἀνάγκης νὰ κοινωνοῦμε μαζί Του. Αὐτὸ γιὰ νὰ τὸ δεχθεῖ ἡ ψυχὴ θέλει ταπείνωση. Γι᾿ αὐτὸ καὶ Ὀρθόδοξο φρόνημα σημαίνει ταπεινὸ φρόνημα. Κάθε τι ποὺ πληγώνει αὐτὴν τὴν αἴσθηση τῆς ταπεινότητος μέσα μας δὲν εἶναι Ὀρθόδοξο, ἔστω κι ἂν εἶναι ἐντεταγμένο ὡς τρόπος καὶ ὡς μορφὴ στὶς μορφὲς μὲ τὶς ὁποῖες λειτουργεῖ ἡ Ὀρθόδοξη Ἐκκλησία.

Ἡ ταπείνωση λοιπὸν καὶ ἡ συστολὴ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐνώπιον τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐναρμονίζεται ἀπόλυτα μὲ τὴν ταυτόχρονη προσδοκία τῆς φανερώσεως τῆς δικῆς Του ἀγάπης σὲ μᾶς. Ὑπ᾿ αὐτὴν τὴν ἔννοια, ἕνας ἄνθρωπος ποὺ ζεῖ ταπεινά, ὁ ὁποῖος πραγματικὰ προσδοκᾶ τὸν Θεὸ καὶ περιμένει τὴ δικὴ Του ἀγάπη στὴ ζωή του, αὐτὸς μπορεῖ νὰ ζεῖ καὶ στὸν 20ὸ αἰώνα καὶ στὸν 30ὸ αἰώνα καὶ στὸν 15ο αἰώνα. Μὲ ἄλλα λόγια ἡ πνευματική της διάσταση καὶ ὄχι ἡ κοινωνικὴ ἢ ψυχολογική της κάνει τὴν Ὀρθοδοξία διαχρονική.

Ἐπειδὴ ὅμως ὑπάρχει καὶ ἡ κοινωνικὴ διάσταση, μποροῦμε ἀσφαλῶς κάτι νὰ ποῦμε γιὰ τὴ λειτουργία τῆς Ὀρθοδοξίας μέσα στὸ κλῖμα τῆς σύγχρονης πραγματικότητας, μιὰ ποὺ οἱ μορφές, οἱ προκλήσεις, τὰ ἐρεθίσματα καὶ τὰ προβλήματα ἀλλάζουν ἀνάλογα μὲ τὶς ἐποχές.

Ν.Κ.Σ᾿ αὐτὸ ἀκριβῶς τὸ σημεῖο, πάτερ Νικόλαε, θὰ ἤθελα νὰ διευκρινίσουμε τὸ δεύτερο σκέλος τῆς ἐρώτησής μου. Πόσο συμβατὸ εἶναι αὐτὸ τὸ βίωμα, αὐτὴ ἡ πνευματικὴ διάσταση τῆς Ὀρθοδοξίας ὅπως τὴν περιγράψαμε, μὲ τὴ σύγχρονη καθημερινὴ ζωή; Ἡ ἐποχή μας διαφέρει ῥιζικὰ ἀπὸ ἄλλες ἐποχές. Ζοῦμε σὲ μιὰ ἐκκοσμικευμένη κοινωνία ὅπου ἡ ἔμφαση εἶναι στὴν ὑλικὴ καὶ οἰκονομικὴ διάσταση τῆς ζωῆς. Ἡ ἐποχή μας περιγράφεται ὡς πνευματικῶς πτωχευμένη καὶ στεῖρα. Μ᾿ ἄλλα λόγια πῶς μπορεῖ νὰ εἶναι κανεὶς καλὸς Ὀρθόδοξος, ὄχι κατ᾿ ὄνομα ἀλλὰ ὑπὸ τὴν ἔννοια ποὺ τὸ περιγράψατε τῆς ἐπιδίωξης τῆς πνευματικῆς ζωῆς, μέσα στὶς συνθῆκες τῆς σημερινῆς Ἀθήνας, μέσα στὶς συνθῆκες τῆς σημερινῆς Ῥώμης;

π.Ν.Χ. Εἴπατε ἀκριβῶς τῆς σημερινῆς Ἀθήνας ἢ τῆς σημερινῆς Ῥώμης. Θὰ ἔλεγα ὅτι ὑπὸ τὴν ἠθικὴ ἔννοια, ἡ σημερινὴ Ῥώμη εἶναι ἡ ἴδια μὲ τὴν παλιὰ Ῥώμη. Χωρὶς ἀμφιβολία, τὴν σημερινὴ Ῥώμη τὴν χαρακτηρίζει ὁ ὑλισμὸς καὶ ἡ ἐκκοσμίκευση, στοιχεῖα πολὺ ἀμυδρὰ στὸ παρελθόν, ὡστόσο πίσω ἀπ᾿ αὐτὰ κρύβεται κάτι διαχρονικὰ ἀμετάβλητο· ἡ ἁμαρτία, τῆς ὁποίας ἐνῶ οἱ μορφὲς καὶ οἱ ἐκφράσεις ἀλλάζουν, ἡ οὐσία παραμένει.

Παρὰ ταῦτα θὰ μπορούσαμε νὰ ποῦμε ὅτι αὐτὸ τὸ πνεῦμα ποὺ ἐκφράζει τὴ σημερινὴ ἐποχὴ δὲν μπορεῖ καθόλου νὰ συμβιβασθεῖ μὲ τὰ ὅσα προαναφέραμε. Δὲν ὑπάρχει συγγένεια μεταξύ τους, ὑπάρχει ὅμως συμβατότητα. Τί σημαίνει αὐτό; Σημαίνει ὅτι ὑπάρχει μιὰ σαφὴς διάσταση ἀνάμεσα στὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ Θεοῦ καὶ σ᾿ αὐτὸ τὸ κοινωνικὸ κλῖμα ποὺ κυριαρχεῖ στὴν ἐποχή μας. Καὶ δὲν ἐννοῶ μόνο τὴ νοοτροπία τῶν διχονοιῶν, τῶν διενέξεων, τῶν ἐγωϊσμῶν, τῶν ναρκωτικῶν, τῆς σαρκικῆς ἁμαρτίας ὅπως αὐτὰ κυκλοφοροῦν στὶς μέρες μας, ἀλλὰ κυρίως τὴν ἀλλοίωση τῶν κοινωνικῶν ἠθῶν, τὸν ἐκφυλισμὸ τῶν θεσμῶν, τὸν ἀποπροσανατολισμὸ τῶν ἀρχῶν, τὸν χαρακτήρα τῶν κριτηρίων, πράγματα ποὺ ἔχουν διαποτίσει καὶ τὸν ὀργανισμὸ αὐτῶν τῶν ἐκκλησιαστικῶν σωμάτων ἀκόμη, ὡς ὀργανισμῶν, ἐννοῶ καὶ σωματείων. Ὁπωσδήποτε δὲν ἔχει τίποτα νὰ κάνει ὁ Θεὸς καὶ τὸ Ἅγιο Πνεῦμα μ᾿ αὐτὰ τὰ πράγματα. Αὐτὸς εἶναι ὁ κόσμος τῆς ἀποστασίας. Αὐτὸς ὑπῆρχε καὶ μὲ ἄλλες μορφές, ἁπλὰ σήμερα εἶναι παρὰ πολὺ διαδεδομένος καὶ ἀπρόβλεπτα ἰσχυρός. Ἀλλὰ καὶ ὁ λόγος τοῦ Σταυροῦ καὶ ἡ λογικὴ τῆς Ἀναστάσεως τί σχέση μποροῦν νὰ ἔχουν μὲ τὴ νοοτροπία τοῦ ἐφήμερου, τοῦ συμφέροντος, τοῦ ἐγωϊσμοῦ;

Λέω, λοιπόν, ὅτι μ᾿ αὐτὸ τὸ πνεῦμα δὲν μπορεῖ νὰ συνταιριάσει τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ Θεοῦ καὶ τὸ πνεῦμα τῆς Ὀρθοδοξίας ὡς οὐσίας. Ὑπάρχει ὅμως μιὰ δυνατότητα μέσα ἀπ᾿ αὐτὸ τὸ κλῖμα ἢ μᾶλλον μέσα σ᾿ αὐτὸ τὸν κόσμο νὰ ζήσει κανεὶς τὴ χάρι τοῦ Θεοῦ. Ὄχι, βέβαια, παίρνοντας ἀπὸ τὸν κόσμο ὅλα αὐτὰ τὰ στοιχεῖα τῆς πνευματικῆς διαστροφῆς. Μπορεῖ νὰ ζεῖ τὴν κοινωνικὴ διάσταση τοῦ κόσμου σύμφωνα μὲ τὶς ἀπαιτήσεις τοῦ ἐπαγγέλματὸς του, μπορεῖ νὰ κάνει τὰ ταξείδια ποὺ πρέπει νὰ κάνει, νὰ χρησιμοποιεῖ τὶς μορφὲς καὶ τὰ σχήματα ποὺ κυριαρχοῦν, ἀλλὰ νὰ ἔχει ἄλλο φρόνημα. Στὴν ὑλικότητα δὲν ἀπαντᾶ μὲ ὑλισμό. Οὔτε στὴ λογικὴ μὲ ὀρθολογισμό. Στὴν πρακτικὴ τοῦ ἀνθρώπινου ἐγὼ ἀντιπροτείνει ἀταλάντευτα τὸν ἀληθινὸ Θεό. Εἶναι ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ, ἀλλὰ ὄχι ἐκ τοῦ κόσμου. Τὸ φρόνημά του ἀποῤῥίπτει κάθε τι ἀπὸ τὰ σημερινὰ ποὺ ἔχει ἁμαρτία, κάθε τι ποὺ τὸν ἀποξενώνει ἀπὸ τὸν Θεό. Δὲν ξέρω ἂν ἔγινα σαφὴς στὴν ἀπάντηση. Γιατὶ συνήθως ἡ ἐρώτηση τίθεται σήμερα ὑπὸ κοινωνικὴ μορφή. Δηλαδή, τί θὰ εἶχε νὰ πεῖ ἡ Ὀρθοδοξία σήμερα;

Ἡ Ὀρθοδοξία θὰ εἶχε νὰ πεῖ αὐτὸ ποὺ λέει 2.000 χρόνια. Δηλαδὴ ταπεινώσατε τὸν ἑαυτό σας, δεῖτε τὸν Θεὸ ὡς πραγματικὸ καὶ θὰ Τὸν ζήσετε ἀληθινό. Βέβαια σήμερα ἀλλιῶς λειτουργεῖ ὁ ἐγωϊσμός. Ἐπειδὴ στὴν ἐποχή μας ἔχουμε πολλὴ μόρφωση, ἔχουμε καὶ μεγάλη κοσμικὴ ἔπαρση. Παλιά, ὅταν οἱ ἄνθρωποι ἀῤῥώσταιναν πήγαιναν στὸ καντήλι, βουτοῦσαν τὸ βαμβάκι στὸ λάδι, σταύρωναν τ᾿ αὐτί τους, ἔκαναν τὴν προσευχή τους καὶ περίμεναν τὴ θεραπεία τους. Ἐμᾶς δὲν πάει ὁ νοῦς μας ἐκεῖ· πάει στὸ γιατρό, στὰ φάρμακα, στὰ ἀντιβιοτικά. Ἂν ἀνοίγαμε παλιὰ τὰ ντουλάπια τῶν ἀνθρώπων, θὰ βρίσκαμε ἁγιωτικὰ πράγματα, ἁγιασμούς, φυλακτά, εἰκονοῦλες. Σήμερα καὶ τῶν μοναχῶν ἀκόμα τὰ ντουλάπια ἂν ἀνοίξεις, θὰ βρεῖς φάρμακα, συνταγές, διευθύνσεις καὶ τηλέφωνα γιατρῶν. Ὅταν δὲν ἔβρεχε τὸ μυαλό μας πήγαινε νὰ κάνουμε μιὰ προσευχή, μιὰ λειτανία καὶ ἀπαντοῦσε ὁ Θεός. Τώρα ὅταν δὲν βρέχει προσπαθοῦμε νὰ πληροφορηθοῦμε ἀπὸ τὴ Μετεωρολογικὴ Ὑπηρεσία τί λένε οἱ δορυφόροι. Καὶ δὲν ἀπαντοῦν οἱ δορυφόροι μὲ λύσεις, ἀλλὰ ἀπογοητεύουν μὲ ἐξηγήσεις.

Ἡ ἐλπίδα μας ὅλη ἀλλοῦ εἶναι στραμμένη· πρὸς τὸ ἀνθρώπινο ἐπίτευγμα τὸ ὁποῖο ἔχει μιὰ φοβερὴ ἐντυπωσιακότητα ὅσον ἀφορᾷ τὴν ἐπιῤῥοή του στὰ ἀποτελέσματα τῶν καταστάσεων καὶ τῶν γεγονότων καὶ τὴν ὑλικὴ βελτίωση τῆς ζωῆς, ἀλλὰ παρουσιάζει καὶ μιὰ παταγώδη ἀποτυχία ὅσον ἀφορᾷ τὴν εὐτυχία τοῦ ἀνθρώπου. Ὁ ὑλικὸς πλουτισμὸς καὶ ἡ βιολογικὴ ὑγεία συνοδεύονται ἀπὸ φτώχεια ἀρχῶν καὶ πνευματικὴ νέκρα. Περιφρονώντας τὶς αἰτίες προσπαθοῦμε νὰ βελτιώσουμε τὰ ἀποτελέσματα. Καὶ τὸ ἀποτέλεσμα εἶναι ὅλο καὶ λιγότεροι ἄνθρωποι νὰ ὁμολογοῦν τὴν εὐτυχία τους. Ἡ ζωὴ ἔχει καταντήσει μιὰ ἁλυσίδα ποὺ κάθε κρίκος της λέγεται ἐπιτυχία, ἀλλὰ τὸ γενικό της ὄνομα εἶναι ἀποτυχία. Ἡ κληρονομιὰ τοῦ ἄγχους καὶ ἡ πρωτοφανὴς παθολογία τῶν κοινωνικῶν σχέσεων ἀποτελοῦν ἀναντίλεκτο ἰδίωμα τῶν συγχρόνων κοινωνιῶν.

Ἔρχεται λοιπὸν ἡ Ἐκκλησία καὶ λέει· ἂς βάλουμε τὸ Θεὸ στὴ ζωή μας, ἂς ἔχουμε τὴν ἐμπιστοσύνη μας στὴν παρουσία τῆς ἀγάπης Του, ἂς στηρίξουμε τὴν προσδοκία καὶ τὴν ἐλπίδα μας σ᾿ Αὐτόν, καὶ Ἐκεῖνος θὰ ἀπαντήσει, καὶ στὰ ἐρωτήματα τῶν βαθύτερων ὑπαρξιακῶν μας ἀναζητήσεων καὶ στὰ θέματα τῆς ὑγείας καὶ τῶν σχέσεών μας, καὶ στὰ προβλήματα τῶν παιδιῶν μας, καὶ παντοῦ.

Ν.Κ. Ἐπάνω σ᾿ αὐτὴ τὴν τελευταία σας παρατήρηση, θὰ ἤθελα νὰ πῶ πὼς φαίνεται ὅτι, λόγῳ ἀκριβῶς τῶν συνθηκῶν ποὺ μόλις περιγράψατε, τὸ ἔργο καὶ ἡ ἀποστολὴ τῆς Ὀρθοδοξίας εἶναι δυσκολότερα ὑπὸ τὴν ἔννοιαν ὅτι μοιάζουν «φωνὴ βοῶντος ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ» (Ματθ. γ´ 3). Πῶς βλέπετε ἐσεῖς αὐτὸ τὸ πρᾶγμα ὡς πνευματικός;

π.Ν.Χ. Συμφωνῶ ἀπόλυτα. Εἶναι πολὺ δύσκολος ὁ στόχος μας γιὰ τὰ πνευματικά. Ἀλλὰ καὶ στὰ ἀποστολικὰ χρόνια ὁ λόγος τοῦ Θεοῦ ἦταν φωνὴ βοῶντος ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ τῆς ἀθεΐας, καὶ ἡ φωνὴ τῶν μαρτύρων ἦταν φωνὴ βοῶντος ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ τῆς νοοτροπίας τοῦ εἰδωλολατρικοῦ ἔθνους, καὶ ἡ φωνὴ τῶν ἀσκητῶν ἦταν φωνὴ βοῶντος ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ. Ἡ χάρις ὅμως τοῦ Θεοῦ λειτουργεῖ σ᾿ αὐτὲς τὶς ἐρήμους. Ὅπου πλεονάζει ἡ ἁμαρτία ὑπερπερισσεύει ἡ χάρις (Α´ Τιμ. α´ 14). Ξεχειλίζει ἡ χάρις τοῦ Θεοῦ τὴν ἔρημο τῆς πτώσεως, τῆς ἱστορίας, τοῦ φθαρτοῦ αὐτοῦ κόσμου. Καὶ ἐφ᾿ ὅσον ἐπίκεντρο τοῦ κόσμου καὶ τῶν γεγονότων εἶναι ὁ Θεός, γνώμονας καὶ κριτήριο δὲν εἶναι ἡ ἀνθρώπινη ἀντίληψη τῶν πραγμάτων, ἀλλὰ αὐτὴ ἡ χάρις τοῦ Θεοῦ. Καὶ στὴν ἔρημο τῆς δικῆς μας ἐποχῆς λοιπὸν μπορεῖ νὰ λειτουργήσει ἡ χάρις τοῦ Θεοῦ. Μὲ τὴν λογική μας καταλαβαίνουμε τὴ δυσκολία της, μὲ τὴν πίστη διαπιστώνουμε τὴ λειτουργία της. Καὶ ἡ Ὀρθοδοξία αὐτὸ βασικὰ κάνει. Συντηρεῖ τὴν χάρι τοῦ Θεοῦ σ᾿ αὐτὸ τὸ κόσμο. Μᾶς κάνει ὅλους νὰ προσδοκοῦμε αὐτό. Παραπάνω ἀπὸ τὴ γέννηση τοῦ παιδιοῦ μας, ἢ ἀπὸ τὴν ἱκανοποίηση τῶν ἀκαδημαϊκῶν ἢ οἰκονομικῶν στόχων καὶ ἐπιδιώξεών μας, νὰ προσδοκοῦμε καὶ ν᾿ ἀπολαμβάνουμε τὴν αἴσθηση τῆς χάριτος τοῦ Θεοῦ στὴ ζωή μας.

Ν.Κ. Ἔχετε ἐσεῖς ἐνδείξεις τῆς λειτουργίας αὐτῆς τῆς χάριτος ἀπὸ τὴν ἐμπειρία σας ὡς πνευματικοῦ;

π.Ν.Χ. Ἐγὼ ἐδῶ πέρα ζῶ μιὰ πολὺ συγκινητικὴ πραγματικότητα. Βασικὰ ὁ κόσμος ποὺ ἔρχεται δὲν εἶναι κόσμος τῆς Ἐκκλησίας. Δέχομαι ἀνθρώπους εἴτε γιὰ μιὰ ἐξομολόγηση, εἴτε γιὰ ἕνα πρόβλημα. Αὐτὸ ἔχει ὡς ἀποτέλεσμα νὰ ἔρχονται κάθε φορὰ καὶ διαφορετικοὶ ἄνθρωποι ποὺ στὴ μεγάλη τους πλειοψηφία δὲν εἶναι ἄνθρωποι ποὺ εἴχανε κάποια σχέση μὲ τὴν Ἐκκλησία. Ἦταν μᾶλλον ἀποξενωμένοι. Καὶ ἔφτασε ἡ ζωή τους σὲ κάποιο ἀδιέξοδο τέτοιο ὥστε θὰ ἔπρεπε κάποτε κάτι νὰ γίνει. Ἔρχονται λοιπὸν ἐδῶ εἴτε γιὰ κάποια συμβουλή, εἴτε γιὰ μιὰ συζήτηση, εἴτε, λιγότεροι, μὲ μιὰ ὁλοκληρωμένη κατάσταση μετανοίας στὴν ψυχή τους.

Ἐγώ, τουλάχιστον γιὰ τὸν ἑλλαδικὸ χῶρο, ἔχω τὴν ἐντύπωση ὅτι ὁ σπόρος τῆς πίστεως ὑπάρχει παρὰ πολὺ διαδεδομένος. Ἀκόμη καὶ ὁ ἄθεος καὶ ὁ ἀρνητὴς ἕλληνας ἔχει μέσα του τὸν σπόρο. Καὶ αὐτὸ ποὺ προσπαθῶ κάθε φορὰ ποὺ κάποιος μὲ πλησιάζει νὰ κάνω, εἶναι αὐτὸ τὸν σπόρο λίγο νὰ τὸν φροντίσω νὰ βλαστήσει ὥστε μόνος του ὁ καθένας νὰ βρεῖ τὸν Θεό. Ἐγὼ λέω δυὸ λόγια γιὰ νὰ γίνει ἡ ἀρχή, νὰ δοθεῖ ἡ ἀρχικὴ ὤθηση. Καὶ μοῦ κάνει ἐντύπωση πὼς στὴν ἐποχή μας εἶναι ἀρκετὰ εὔκολο νὰ στραφεῖ κανεὶς πρὸς τὸν Θεό, ἂν καὶ εἶναι πολὺ πιὸ δύσκολο νὰ Τὸν ἀκολουθήσει. Δηλαδή, ἡ πρακτικὴ τῆς χριστιανικῆς ζωῆς ἔχει γίνει πολὺ πιὸ δύσκολη γιατὶ ἡ ἴδια ἡ κοινωνία ἔχει περάσει ὡς νοοτροπία, ὡς συνήθεια, ὡς τρόπο ζωῆς, ὡς περιβάλλον, ἕνα ἐντελῶς διαφορετικὸ κλῖμα ἀπὸ ἐκεῖνο τοῦ Εὐαγγελίου. Ἕνα κλῖμα, βέβαια, ποὺ διαρκῶς διαψεύδει καὶ αὐτοδιαψεύδεται. Φτάνουν λοιπὸν οἱ ἄνθρωποι σὲ ἀπογοήτευση καὶ μὴ ἔχοντας ποῦ ἀλλοῦ νὰ στραφοῦν, στρέφονται εὔκολα πρὸς τὸν Θεό. Κάνουν τὸ πρῶτο βῆμα, δυσκολεύονται ὅμως νὰ κάνουν τὰ ὑπόλοιπα.

Ν.Κ. Δηλαδή, ὑπάρχει ἡ ὑπαρξιακὴ ἀναζήτηση καὶ στροφὴ πρὸς τὴν Ἐκκλησία ὡς ἐνδιαφέρον, ἀλλὰ ἡ ὑλοποίηση εἶναι δύσκολη λόγῳ τῶν πρακτικῶν δυσκολιῶν;

π.Ν.Χ. Οἱ δυσκολίες δὲν ὑπάρχουν ἐξ ἀντικειμένου, ἀλλὰ ἡ λάθος νοοτροπία κάνει τὰ εὔκολα δύσκολα, τὰ αὐτονόητα δυσνόητα, γιατὶ ἔχει ἀλλάξει τὸ κριτήριο σήμερα. Καταλαβαίνουν λοιπὸν οἱ ἄνθρωποι τὴν ἀλήθεια· αὐτὸ σημαίνει ὑπάρχει ὁ σπόρος. Ὅταν ὅμως ἔχουν ζήσει χρόνια διαφορετικά, ὅταν ὅλο τὸ περιβάλλον εἶναι στὴν πρακτική του ἀντίθετο εἶναι πράγματι βασανιστικό, γιατὶ τελικὰ φθάνεις νὰ θέλεις κάτι ποὺ νομίζεις ὅτι δὲν μπορεῖς. Καὶ ἡ λύση σ᾿ αὐτὸ εἶναι νὰ ταπεινωθεῖ κανεὶς γιὰ νὰ κάνει ὁ Θεὸς αὐτὸ ποὺ ἐμεῖς δὲν μποροῦμε.

Καὶ ἐδῶ ὑπάρχει μιὰ διαφορὰ μὲ τὴ Δύση. Ἐμεῖς δὲ γινόμαστε καλοί. Ἡ Ὀρθόδοξη Ἐκκλησία δὲν φτιάχνει καλοὺς ἀνθρώπους. Ὁ σκοπὸς της δὲν εἶναι ἡ ἠθικὴ τελείωση ἀλλὰ εἶναι ἡ φανέρωση τοῦ Θεοῦ στὴ ζωὴ μας. Καρπὸς εἶναι ἡ ἠθικὴ τελείωση, φυσικὸ ἀποτέλεσμα τῆς ἐνέργειας τῆς χάριτος τοῦ Θεοῦ. Ὁ ἀγώνας δὲν ἔχει τὴ νίκη σὰν στόχο του, ἀλλὰ τὴν ταπείνωση, τὸν θάνατο. Δὲν εἶναι ἐπίτευγμα ἡ χάρις τοῦ Θεοῦ, δὲν εἶναι κατόρθωμα. Ἂν ἦταν ἔτσι θὰ μποροῦσε νὰ καυχηθεῖ ὁ ἄνθρωπος. Εἶναι δῶρο, δῶρο ποὺ ἔτι περισσότερο ταπεινώνει τὴν ψυχὴ καὶ τῆς προσφέρεται ὡς ἐμπειρία. Στὸ κλάσμα τῆς ζωῆς τοῦ κάθε ἀνθρώπου εἶναι σὰν νὰ εἶναι ἀριθμητὴς ὁ Θεὸς καὶ παρανομαστὴς ὁ ἄνθρωπος. Ὅσο μικραίνει ὁ παρανομαστὴς καὶ αὐξάνει ὁ ἀριθμητής, τόσο μεγαλώνει τὸ κλάσμα.

Orthodox Worship

N.K. Still within the theme of Orthodoxy as practical life, could you tell us something about Orthodox worship and contemporary social reality. Can Orthodox liturgical life recapture the sense and the reality of community which we seem to have lost? Can the Orthodox Eucharist performed in the Church have a practical impact on the outside world?

Fr. N.H. Holy Eucharist is also called Holy Communion. And communion means exodus from the enslavement of our ego and partaking in the energies of God, in the works of God, and in the images of God. We cannot encounter God in the mystery of Holy Communion, unless we find Him in His images, our fellowmen, our brothers. It is very impressive that, in Greek as well as in the languages of all Orthodox countries, the term communion, used to refer to our mystical and sacramental relationship with God, is the same as the one used for our relationship with people. So, in English the terms communion and society are expressed with two different words, whereas in Greek both are expressed with one word, "koinonia.” This happens because, in the Orthodox Eastern world, communion is a social experience, whereas in the West societies have become communionless. This is becoming apparent in our country as well, as it has started being permeated by the strong anthropocentrism and anthropomonism of Western mentality.

Let me now connect the previous question to this one, since we are talking about society and worship. There is a difference between East and West in both worship and ethos; a difference which is theological, spiritual and practical. The West, in its effort to bridge the gap between God and man, presents God excessively humanized. God appears like a human being. The point of reference is man. On the contrary, the Orthodox East believes in the theosis of man by grace. Man is transformed to a god by God and not by himself. The point of reference is God.

More specifically, we notice in the West that the Renaissance art technique tries to portay divinity in the best possible human way. We will never see such a technique in the Orthodox tradition. Instead, we see St. John the Baptist depicted taller than the mountains, something which has nothing to do with the real world, and the Virgin Mary having a disproportionately small nose. Christ is pictured on the Cross with the same expression on his face as he is pictured in the icons of Resurrection or Transfiguration. He does not have a sad look on one icon and a happy face on the others. There is no apparent effort to bring God closer to us through human descriptions. God comes in our lives as He is, not as we want Him to be; in a divine way, not in a human form. That is why the tradition of the Orthodox Church aims at detaching man from his earthly concerns and transferring him to heavenly realities. Through ways that are not so human it reminds us of God and draws us to Him. This is what I meant by saying that in the relationship of man with God, the center of gravity is God.

The same also applies to music. Our music and, in general, our worship are basically compunctionate; they inspire us to turn inwards. In the West, music is more outwardly and uplifting; it stimulates us to open up. God is met through a “straight movement.” On the contrary, in the Orthodox Church, the main movement through which our soul meets God is the “cyclic movement,” as it is described in the texts of St. Dionysios Areopagite. St. Basil the Great depicts this character of Orthodox tradition by saying: “When the mind is not dispersed outwardly, it returns to itself and through itself to God.”

So, worship does two things. First, it makes man turn inwards, it unites him with himself, his heart. And secondly, through the mystery of Holy Eucharist, it brings God to us and unites us with Him; thus He enters inside us, dwells in us and lives within us. This is the meaning of eucharistic theology which nowadays has been put in words. However, the Church was always eucharistic, both in its tradition and practical life. Eucharistic, not just in the sense of our gratitude towards God, but more in the sense of the fulfilment of God's intense desire to commune with Him through the sacrament of Holy Eucharist. “I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you...” (Luk 22:15). We commune the flesh and blood of Christ ,because He wishes to unite with us; this brings us close to Him. Not because we dare unite with Him; this alienates us from Him. Thus, man becomes more heavenly, more divine, and acquires a godly face, a godly countenance.

We do not achieve these by our own efforts or struggle. The struggle and effort for ethical perfection brings failure and disappointment. We acquire them through our trust in the grace of God which makes man holy. We conscientioulsy and gratefully do whatever we can, in order to offer our own share. However, the outcome is brought by the grace of God; it solely belongs to God.

I would like to add one more thing. The Orthodox Church does not try to transform people into “earthly angels,” because her target is not man, and her hopes are not set on this earth. Orthodoxy projects the vision of “heavenly man,” who is out of flesh by nature, but heavenly by grace and faith; her place is heaven and her center is God.

What the eucharistic and liturgical life has to offer us today is to bring us closer to God and elevate us to heaven and eternity; to remind us that “all our righteous deeds are like a polluted garment” (Is 64:6). Whatever we ourselves do is worthless. However, there is a danger in this. Since our era tends to emphasize the external forms at the expense of the deep essence of everything, the spirit and truth of the Holy Eucharist run the risk to become a mere formality, a habit, a happening.

N.K. Still there is an aspect of my question which remains unanswered. Namely, how is the gap between this theoretical dimension and contemporary reality bridged? You spoke earlier of the difference between Eastern and Western Churches, but today modernity does not make such distinctions. Societal and mechanical communication is everywhere, including the historically Orthodox countries. In what sense is then Athens different today from London?

Fr. N.H. All these occur on the societal level where the technological, economic, scientific and social terms are common. However, on the level of persons and religious traditions, the difference is apparent. The man of the West is more rational. Even his feelings tend to be intellectualized. Instead, the man of the East even thinks with his heart. The concept of God in the East is definitely mystical. God is experienced as a mystery, whereas in the West, He is approached through rational understanding; this is related to the cultural background and historical tradition and constitutes a basic difference between Orthodoxy and the Christian West.

Let me go back to the subject of communion, to say how Eucharistic theology relates communion with God and interpersonal communion. When we go to Church and mystically partake of the Holy Eucharist, we all unite with Christ, we become parts, members of the same body. We feel like brothers and sisters, each one as much as he or she can. This is not only a sentimental feeling, but also a drop of mystical experience coming to us through the mystery of Holy Eucharist. It is a miracle to experience the feeling of brotherhood. The word “brother,” in Greek “adelfos,” is a sacred word and comes from the word “delfida” which means womb. A brother is the one who comes out of the same womb and this womb is the Holy Chalice, the Holy Altar, the Font, God Himself. So, if I feel like a brother, I start behaving as such. I do not love my brothers and sisters because they are good. I love them, along with their faults, because they are my brothers and sisters. Love precedes quality. Respectively, I begin feeling like a brother towards the people to whom I am related through faith, who partake of the same Chalice, who come out of the same Font, the same Womb.

So, when I come out of my blood family and join my spiritual one, I make a step further; my love acquires a universality, a wholeness. Then I can embrace and love all people, if not sacramentally, spiritually; even those people who are not related to the Church, who have a different religion, different traditions and habits, but who are also God's creatures. This universality broadens and expands the soul. When man has a broad and open heart -and this is related to humility- and does not revolve around the axis of his ego, he can automatically become, social, polite, overflowing with love, and not full of rage, anger, criticism and intolerance. Thus, the mystical and spiritual experience gradually produces an ethical and social outcome.

N.K. I would like a little more clarification in regards to the specificity of Orthodoxy on this. All major religions accept that all human beings are children of God. At the same time the concept of brotherhood in faith or “partaking of the same chalice and the same font” creates boundaries between “us” and “others.”

How does Orthodoxy transcend these boundaries especially now that Orthodox and non-Orthodox people are mixed in the same societies? What is the meaning of the Orthodox liturgy as a worldwide offering?

Fr. N.H. Through the mystery of Holy Eucharist, one crosses the boundaries of his self, and enters in the world of God; since God is boundless, he lives in a world without boundaries, in the state of the sonship by grace, the state of “the glorious liberty of the children of God” (Rom 8:21).

N.K. I would like you to elaborate a little bit more on the eschatological dimension of the Holy Eucharist as a universal offering.

Fr. N.H. I would like to note two things: first, we should be careful not to give an ecumenistic interpretation to what we are now discussing, but instead an ecumenical character. We do not feel that God's gift to us, that is Orthodoxy, is a gift that differentiates us from other people, but rather it is a gift that brings us closer both to God and to people. For this reason, Orthodox tradition, never being proselytistic or ecumenistic, was always ecumenical and missionary. One who personally experiences the gift of God, wants to spread it and share it.

The second one is that the best thing we have to do is to trasform what we presently are: instead of arrogantly being correct, become humble and saintly; from a christian club be transformed into the mystical body of the grace of God. God gave us the blessing of being Orthodox and He only knows why. If I were born in Japan, I would have another religion. I wouldn't even know that Orthodoxy exists. When I was in the U.S., at Harvard University, one of my professors asked me if Greeks still believe in Zeus. She didn't know that in Greece we are Christians.

Therefore, when someone experiences the mysteries of his faith as God's gifts and divine grace, he cannot but feel that all people are God's children and the best gift he has to offer them is the witness of his faith. The yearning for their salvation becomes the fruit of his love which gradually acquires a missionary dimension directed towards the others. The rest is left to God.

On the other hand, this does not dispute the absolute character of our relationship with the truth. We cannot doubt the value of the gift of Orthodoxy granted to us by God, and compromise in order to get along with other people. This is ecumenism; it downgrades and weakens the importance of truth and alters its meaning. Truth is not relative; it is absolute. We love the truth being a gift from God and humbly accept all those who have another religious background, a different way of thinking and do not belong to the Church. Certainly, it is not their fault, but rather a consequence of our fallen world. The prayer and hope of the Church is that, when the time comes, everyone will enter Her font, which does not belong to us as Orthodox people, but to God; we found ourselves in there by grace. The Church initiates her own children to the mysteries of God, but prays for the whole world, for the whole creation. This is the Church's universality.

Ὀρθοδοξία καὶ Λατρεία

Ν.Κ. Θὰ ἤθελα τώρα νὰ ἔρθω σὲ μιὰ δεύτερη θεματική, πάλι μέσα στὸν θρησκευτικο-θεολογικὸ χῶρο, καὶ θὰ ἤθελα να ἀναφερθῶ στὴν Ὀρθόδοξη λατρευτικὴ ζωὴ καὶ τὴν σύγχρονη πραγματικότητα. Ὑπάρχει μιὰ θεολογικὴ στροφὴ στὴ λεγομένη εὐχαριστιακὴ θεολογία καὶ τὴ σημασία της στὴ σημερινὴ κοινωνία. Θὰ ἤθελα τὴ γνώμη σας κατὰ πόσο ἡ Ὀρθόδοξη λατρευτικὴ ζωή, κυρίως στὴ λειτουργικὴ εὐχαριστιακή της διάσταση, μπορεῖ νὰ ἀναδημιουργήσει μιὰ ἔννοια ὁριζόντιας κοινωνικῆς διάστασης, δηλαδὴ νὰ λειτουργήσει ὡς κοινωνία, ὅπως αὐτὸ προκύπτει ἀπὸ τὴν Ὀρθόδοξη λειτουργικὴ παράδοση καὶ πρακτική. Κατὰ πόσον δηλαδὴ αὐτὸ ποὺ ἐπιτελεῖται ὡς Θεία Εὐχαριστία, αὐτὸ ἔχει ἢ μπορεῖ νὰ ἔχει μιὰ μεταφορὰ πρὸς τὰ ἔξω πρακτική;

π.Ν.Χ. Ἡ Θεία Εὐχαριστία λέγεται καὶ Θεία Κοινωνία. Καὶ κοινωνία σημαίνει ἔξοδος ἀπὸ τὴ σκλαβιὰ τοῦ ἐγώ μας καὶ μετοχὴ στὶς ἐνέργειες τοῦ Θεοῦ, στὰ ἔργα τοῦ Θεοῦ καὶ στὶς εἰκόνες τοῦ Θεοῦ. Ὁ Θεὸς δὲν συναντᾶται στὸ μυστήριο, ἂν δὲν ἀναγνωρίζεται στὶς εἰκόνες του, στοὺς ἀνθρώπους, στοὺς ἀδελφούς μας. Εἶναι πολὺ ἐντυπωσιακὸ ὅτι στὶς γλῶσσες τῶν Ὀρθοδόξων χωρῶν καὶ στὰ ἑλληνικά, ὁ ὅρος κοινωνία ποὺ χρησιμοποιεῖται γιὰ τὴν σχέση μας μὲ τὸν Θεό, τὴν μυστηριακὴ καὶ τὴν μυστική, εἶναι ὁ ἴδιος μὲ τὸν ὅρο κοινωνία ποὺ χρησιμοποιεῖται γιὰ τὶς σχέσεις τὶς ἀνθρώπινες. Ἔτσι οἱ ὅροι society καὶ communion στὰ ἀγγλικὰ ἐκφράζονται μὲ δύο διαφορετικὲς λέξεις, ἐνῶ στὰ ἑλληνικὰ μὲ μία· τὴ λέξη κοινωνία. Αὐτὸ διότι εἶναι ἐμπειρία τῆς Ἀνατολῆς ἡ κοινωνία (communion) τῶν κοινωνιῶν (society). Ἔχω τὴν ἐντύπωση ὅτι στὴ Δύση φθάσαμε σὲ communionless societies κάτι ποὺ τελευταία συμβαίνει καὶ στὸ δικό μας χῶρο ποὺ μπολιάζεται ἤδη ἀπὸ τὴ νοοτροπία τῆς Δύσεως, τὴ νοοτροπία δηλαδὴ ἑνὸς ἔντονου ἀνθρωποκεντρισμοῦ καὶ ἀνθρωπομονισμοῦ.

Καὶ νὰ συνδέσω τὸ προηγούμενο ἐρώτημα μὲ τὸ παρὸν μιὰ ποὺ μιλᾶμε γιὰ κοινωνία καὶ γιὰ λατρεία. Ὑπάρχει μιὰ διαφορὰ μεταξὺ τῆς Ἀνατολῆς καὶ τῆς Δύσης καὶ στὴ λατρεία καὶ στὸ ἦθος· διαφορὰ θεολογική, πνευματικὴ καὶ πρακτική. Στὴν προσπάθειά της ἡ Δύση νὰ γεφυρώσει τὸ χάσμα Θεοῦ καὶ ἀνθρώπου, παρουσιάζει ἀκόμη καὶ τὸν Θεὸ ἔντονα ἐξανθρωπισμένο. Ὁ Θεὸς ἐμφανίζεται ἀνθρώπινα. Μέτρο εἶναι ὁ ἄνθρωπος. Ἀντίθετα, ἡ Ὀρθόδοξη Ἀνατολὴ πιστεύει στὴν κατὰ χάριν θέωση τοῦ ἀνθρώπου. Ἀκόμη καὶ ὁ ἄνθρωπος μεταμορφώνεται θεϊκὰ καὶ ἀπὸ τὸν Θεό, ὄχι μόνος του. Μέτρο εἶναι ὁ Θεός.

Πιὸ συγκεκριμένα, βλέπουμε ὅτι στὴ Δύση ἡ ἀναγεννησιακὴ τεχνοτροπία εἶναι μιὰ τεχνοτροπία ποὺ προσπαθεῖ μὲ τοὺς καλύτερους ἀνθρώπινους ὅρους νὰ περιγράψει τὴ θεότητα. Δὲν θὰ συναντήσει κανεὶς τέτοια ἔκφραση στοὺς Ὀρθόδοξους ναούς. Ἀπεναντίας θὰ δοῦμε τὸν Τίμιο Πρόδρομο νὰ ἀπεικονίζεται πιὸ μεγάλος ἀπὸ τὰ βουνά· αὐτὸ δὲν ἔχει σχέση μὲ τὸ αἰσθητό. Θὰ δοῦμε τὴν Παναγία νὰ ἔχει πολὺ μικρὴ μύτη. Θὰ δοῦμε στὸ σταυρὸ τὸν Χριστὸ νὰ εἶναι τὸ ἴδιο κυρίαρχος στὴν ἔκφραση ὅπως εἶναι καὶ στὴ Μεταμόρφωση ἢ στὴν Ἀνάσταση. Δὲν εἶναι στὴ μιὰ παράσταση λυπημένος καὶ στὶς ἄλλες χαρούμενος. Δὲν γίνεται μιὰ προσπάθεια μὲ ἀνθρώπινες περιγραφὲς ὁ Θεὸς νὰ πλησιάσει σὲ μᾶς. Ὁ Θεὸς ἔρχεται στὴ ζωή μας ὅπως αὐτὸς εἶναι· ὄχι ὅπως ἐμεῖς τὸν θέλουμε. Γι᾿ αὐτὸ κι ὁλόκληρη ἡ παράδοση τῆς Ὀρθοδόξου Ἐκκλησίας εἶναι προσανατολισμένη στὸ νὰ ξεκολλήσει τὸν ἄνθρωπο ἀπὸ τὰ γήινα καὶ νὰ τὸν μεταφέρει στὰ οὐράνια καὶ μὲ τρόπους ποὺ δὲν εἶναι πολὺ ἀνθρώπινοι νὰ ὑπενθυμίζει τὸ θεϊκὸ καὶ νὰ μᾶς προσελκύει πρὸς αὐτό. Αὐτὸ εἶναι ποὺ εἴπαμε στὴν ἀρχὴ ὅτι ἐδῶ τὸ κέντρο βάρους εἶναι ὁ Θεός.

Στὴ μουσικὴ τὸ ἴδιο. Ἐμᾶς ἡ μουσικὴ καὶ γενικώτερα ἡ λατρεία μας εἶναι κατανυκτική· προτρέπει σὲ στροφὴ πρὸς τὰ μέσα. Στὴ Δύση εἶναι ἀνατασιακή, ὠθεῖ σὲ ἄνοιγμα πρὸς τὰ ἔξω. Ὁ Θεὸς συναντᾶται διὰ τῆς εὐθείας ὁδοῦ. Στὴν Ὀρθόδοξη παράδοση συμβαίνει αὐτὸ ποὺ λέει ὁ Μ. Βασίλειος· «Νοῦς μὴ σκεδαννύμενος ἐπὶ τὰ ἔξω ἐπάνεισι πρὸς ἑαυτὸν καὶ δι᾿ ἑαυτοῦ πρὸς τὸν Θεόν». Ὅταν ὁ νοῦς, δηλαδὴ ἡ καρδιά μας, δὲν διαχέεται πρὸς τὰ ἔξω, ἐπιστρέφει στὸν ἑαυτό της καὶ διὰ τοῦ ἑαυτοῦ της πρὸς τὸν Θεό. Αὐτὴ εἶναι ἡ κατ᾿ ἐξοχὴν κίνηση τῆς ψυχῆς πρὸς συνάντηση τοῦ Θεοῦ. Εἶναι ἡ κυκλικὴ κίνηση τῶν ἀρεοπαγειτικῶν κειμένων.

Ἡ λατρεία λοιπὸν κάνει δύο πράγματα βασικά. Τὸ ἕνα εἶναι ὅτι φέρνει τὸν ἄνθρωπο μέσα του, τὸν ἑνώνει μὲ τὸν ἑαυτό του, τὴν καρδιά του. Καὶ στὴ συνέχεια τὸ δεύτερο, διὰ τοῦ μυστηρίου τῆς Θείας Εὐχαριστίας κατεβάζει τὸν Θεό, μᾶς ἑνώνει μαζί Του καὶ Τὸν ἔχουμε «ἐνοικοῦντα καὶ ἐμπεριπατοῦντα ἐν ἡμῖν». Δηλαδή, εἰσερχόμενο μέσα μας, διαμένοντα μέσα μας καὶ λειτουργοῦντα μέσα μας. Αὐτὴ εἶναι ἡ ἔννοια τῆς εὐχαριστιακῆς θεολογίας ποὺ στὶς μέρες μας ἐμφανίζεται ὡς φραστικὴ διατύπωση, ἀλλὰ ὡς παράδοση καὶ ζωὴ πάντα ἡ Ἐκκλησία ἦταν εὐχαριστιακή. Καὶ εὐχαριστιακὴ ὄχι ἁπλῶς μὲ τὴν ἔννοια τῆς δικῆς μας εὐγνωμοσύνης, ἀλλὰ καὶ μὲ τὴν ἔννοια τῆς θεϊκῆς εὐχαριστίας διότι διὰ τοῦ μυστηρίου τῆς Θείας Εὐχαριστίας ἱκανοποιεῖται αὐτὴ ἡ ἔντονη ἐπιθυμία τῆς ἀγάπης τοῦ Θεοῦ· ἡ ἐπιθυμία τοῦ νὰ Τὸν κοινωνοῦμε. «Ἐπιθυμίᾳ ἐπεθύμησα τοῦτο τὸ Πάσχα φαγεῖν μεθ᾿ ὑμῶν» (Λουκ. κβ´ 15). Ἐμεῖς κοινωνοῦμε τοῦ σώματος καὶ τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐπειδὴ Ἐκεῖνος θέλει νὰ ἑνωθεῖ μαζί μας. Αὐτὸ μᾶς φέρνει κοντά Του. Ὄχι γιατί ἐμεῖς τολμοῦμε νὰ ἑνωθοῦμε μαζὶ Του. Αὐτὸ μᾶς ἀπομακρύνει. Ἔτσι γίνεται πιὸ οὐράνιος ὁ ἄνθρωπος, πιὸ θεϊκός, ἀποκτᾶ θεϊκὸ πρόσωπο, θεϊκὴ φυσιογνωμία.

Δὲν τὰ ἀποκτᾶ αὐτὰ μὲ τὴν προσπάθειά του καὶ τὸν ἀγῶνά του. Ὁ ἀγώνας καὶ ἡ προσπάθεια τῆς ἠθικῆς τελειώσεως ὅλο πτώσεις καὶ ἀπογοητεύσεις ἔχει. Ἀλλὰ τὰ ἀποκτᾶ μὲ τὴν ἐμπιστοσύνη στὴ δική Του χάρι. Αὐτὴ ἐξαγιάζει. Ἐμεῖς κάνουμε ὅ,τι μποροῦμε μὲ τὸν ἀγῶνά μας ἔτσι ἀπὸ φιλότιμο, συνεισφέροντας τὸ μερίδιο τῆς δικῆς μας δυνατότητος. Τὸ ἀποτέλεσμα τὸ ἐνεργεῖ ἡ θεία χάρις. Καὶ κάτι ἄλλο. Ἡ Ὀρθόδοξη Ἐκκλησία δὲν πιστεύει στοὺς ἐπίγειους ἀγγέλους. Γιατὶ στόχος της δὲν εἶναι ὁ ἄνθρωπος, οὔτε ἐλπίδα καὶ προοπτική της ἡ γῆ. Ἡ Ὀρθοδοξία προβάλλει τὸ ὅραμα τοῦ οὐράνιου ἀνθρώπου. Τοῦ ἐνσάρκου στὴ φύση ἀλλὰ οὐράνιου στὸ φρόνημα ἀνθρώπου. Γιατὶ χῶρος της εἶναι ὁ οὐρανὸς καὶ κέντρο της ὁ Θεός.

Μ᾿ αὐτὴ τὴν ἔννοια αὐτὸ ποὺ ἔχει καὶ σήμερα νὰ μᾶς δώσει ἡ εὐχαριστιακὴ καὶ λειτουργικὴ ζωή, ἡ λατρεία, εἶναι τὸ νὰ μᾶς φέρνει τὸν Θεὸ κοντά μας καὶ νὰ ἀνεβάζει ἐμᾶς στὸ χῶρο τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καὶ στὸν χρόνο τῆς αἰωνιότητος. Νὰ μᾶς ὑπενθυμίζει ὅτι «πᾶσα δικαιοσύνη ἀνθρώπου ὡς ῤάκος ἀποκαθημένης» (Ἡσ. ξδ´ 5). Ὅ,τι καὶ νὰ κάνουμε ἐμεῖς δὲν ἔχει καμμιὰ ἀξία, σὰν ἕνα κουρέλι εἶναι. Αὐτὸ μπορεῖ νὰ τὸ πεῖ κανεὶς καὶ στὸν εἰκοστὸ αἰώνα. Ὑπάρχει ὅμως καὶ ἕνας κίνδυνος. Ἐπειδὴ ἡ ἐποχὴ μας τὰ τυποποιεῖ ὅλα, ἀκόμη καὶ τὴν οὐσία, νὰ ἐκφυλισθεῖ τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ ἡ ἀλήθεια τοῦ μυστηρίου σὲ τύπο, συνήθεια, ἐξωτερικὸ σχῆμα.

Ν.Κ. Εκεῖνο ὅμως ποὺ ἀκόμη ἔχει σχέση μὲ τὴν ἐρώτησή μου εἶναι τὸ γεφύρωμα αὐτῆς τῆς θεωρητικῆς διάστασης μὲ τὴν πραγματικότητα, μιὰ καὶ κάνατε καὶ τὴν ἀντιδιαστολὴ μὲ τὴ Δύση καὶ πράγματι εἶναι ἀλήθεια ὅτι ἡ ἔννοια κοινωνία στὴ Δύση ὑπὸ τὴν ἔννοια τῆς ἐπικοινωνίας, τῆς ὁριζόντιας διάστασης σὲ βαθύτερα φιλοσοφικά, ἀνθρωπολογικὰ καὶ θρησκευτικὰ ἐπίπεδα, ὁπώσδήποτε ἔχει ἀτονίσει ἰδιαίτερα στὴ νεώτερη ἐποχὴ καὶ δὲν μιλᾶμε πιὰ γιὰ social, ἀλλὰ sociatal sociatias. Ὑπὸ τὴν ἔννοια τοῦ sociatal ἔγινε μηχανικὴ ἡ ἐπικοινωνία.

Φαίνεται ὅμως ὅτι ἡ σημερινὴ πραγματικότητα, ὅπως εἶναι ἡ κοινωνιολογικὴ πραγματικότητα, ἡ νεωτερικότητα, αὐτὴ ἡ ὁποία σαφῶς πηγάζει ἀπὸ μιὰ κοινωνικο-οικονομικὴ καὶ πολιτισμικὴ ἐξέλιξη ἡ ὁποία ἑδράζεται στὴ Δύση, δηλαδὴ στὴν Εὐρώπη καὶ κατ᾿ ἐπέκταση στὴν Ἀμερική, Καναδᾶ, κ.λπ., ἡ πραγματικότητα αὐτὴ ποὺ ἐμφανίζεται ὡς κοινωνικο-οικονομική, τεχνολογική, ἐπιστημονική, κ.λπ. νεωτερικότητα δὲν κάνει πιὰ διακρίσεις μεταξὺ Ἀνατολῆς καὶ Δύσης. Δὲν μπορῶ νὰ φανταστῶ σὲ τί εἶναι οὐσιαστικὰ διαφορετικὴ ἀπὸ πλευρᾶς κοινωνικῆς, αὐτῆς τοῦ sociatal, ἡ σημερινὴ πραγματικότητα, ἂς ποῦμε τοῦ Λονδίνου, τοῦ Ἄμστερνταμ ἀπὸ τὴ μιὰ πλευρά, καὶ τῆς Ἀθήνας ἴσως τῆς σημερινῆς ἀπὸ τὴν ἄλλη.

π.Ν.Χ. Αὐτὰ συμβαίνουν σὲ ἐπίπεδο sociatal ὅπου οἱ τεχνολογικοί, οἰκονομικοί, ἐπιστημονικοί, κοινωνικοὶ ὅροι εἶναι κοινοί. Σὲ ἐπίπεδο ὅμως προσώπων καὶ θρησκευτικῆς παραδόσεως ἡ διαφορὰ παραμένει σαφής. Ὁ δυτικὸς ἄνθρωπος εἶναι πιὸ ἐκλογικευμένος. Ἀκόμη καὶ τὰ αἰσθήματά του εἶναι διανοητικά. Ἐνῶ ὁ ἀνατολικὸς ἀκόμη καὶ στὶς σκέψεις του εἶναι καρδιακός. Ἡ ἔννοια τοῦ Θεοῦ στὴν Ἀνατολὴ εἶναι σαφῶς μυστική. Ὁ Θεὸς βιοῦται ὡς μυστήριο, ἐνῶ στὴ Δύση προσεγγίζεται ὡς κατανόηση. Καὶ αὐτὸ ἔχει νὰ κάνει καὶ μὲ τὴν ἀγωγὴ καὶ τὴν ἱστορικὴ παράδοση. Αὐτὴ εἶναι μιὰ βασικὴ διαφορὰ Ὀρθοδοξίας καὶ Χριστιανικῆς Δύσεως.

Καὶ γιὰ νὰ ἔρθω στὸ θέμα τῆς κοινωνίας, νὰ πῶ πῶς συνδέεται ἡ Εὐχαριστιακὴ Θεολογία μὲ τὴν πράξη τῆς διαπροσωπικῆς κοινωνίας. Ὅταν πᾶμε στὴν Ἐκκλησία καὶ μετέχουμε στὴ Θεία Εὐχαριστία μυστηριακῶς, ὅλοι ἑνωνόμαστε μὲ τὸν ἴδιο τὸν Χριστό, γινόμαστε κομμάτια, μέλη τοῦ ἰδίου σώματος. Αἰσθανόμαστε λίγο ἀδελφοί, στὸ μέτρο ποὺ μπορεῖ ὁ καθένας μας. Αὐτὸ δὲν εἶναι μόνο τὸ τί αἰσθανόμαστε σὲ συναισθηματικὴ βάση, ἀλλὰ εἶναι καὶ μιὰ σταγόνα μυστικῆς ἐμπειρίας ποὺ προχέεται ὡς χάρις ἀπὸ τὸ μυστήριο τῆς Θείας Εὐχαριστίας. Εἶναι ἕνα θαῦμα, μπορῶ νὰ τὸ πῶ, τὸ νὰ αἰσθανθοῦμε μεταξύ μας ἀδελφοί. Γιατὶ ἡ λέξη «ἀδελφοὶ» εἶναι ἱερὴ λέξη ποὺ σημαίνει στὰ ἐλληνικὰ πὼς προερχόμαστε ἀπὸ τὴν ἴδια δελφίδα, τὴν ἴδια κοιλιά, τὴν ἴδια μήτρα, καὶ αὐτὴ ἡ ἴδια μήτρα εἶναι τὸ Ἅγιο Ποτήριο, τὸ ἱερὸ Θυσιαστήριο, ἡ Κολυμβήθρα, ἡ Ἐκκλησία, ὁ Θεὸς ὁ ἴδιος. Ἐὰν λοιπὸν ἐγὼ νοιώθω ἀδελφός, ἀρχίζω νὰ συμπεριφέρομαι ὡς ἀδελφὸς στοὺς συνανθρώπους μου. Ἐγὼ δὲν ἀγαπῶ τοὺς ἀδελφούς μου ἢ τὶς ἀδελφές μου ἐπειδὴ εἶναι καλοί. Τοὺς ἀγαπῶ ἐπειδὴ εἶναι ἀδέλφια μου μὲ τὰ ἐλαττώματά τους. Ἡ ἀγάπη προηγεῖται τῆς ποιότητός τους. Ἀντίστοιχα, καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους ἀδελφούς, τοὺς συγγενεῖς κατὰ πίστιν ποὺ μετέχουν τοῦ ἰδίου ποτηρίου, ποὺ βγῆκαν ἀπὸ τὴν ἴδια κολυμβήθρα, καὶ ἀπὸ τὴν ἴδια μήτρα, ἀρχίζω νὰ τοὺς αἰσθάνομαι ἀμέσως σὰν ἀδέλφια μου.

Ὅταν, λοιπόν, βγῶ ἀπὸ τὴν κλειστὴ ἐξ αἵματος οἰκογένειά μου καὶ μεταφερθῶ στὴν πνευματική μου οἰκογένεια, μπορῶ μετὰ νὰ κάνω καὶ τὸ ἑπόμενο ἅλμα τὸ ὁποῖο εἶναι ν᾿ ἀποκτήσει μιὰ παγκοσμιότητα, μιὰ καθολικότητα ἡ ἀγάπη μου, καὶ ν᾿ ἀγκαλιάσω, ν᾿ ἀγαπήσω καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους ἀνθρώπους, ὄχι ἴσως μυστηριακὰ ἀλλὰ ὅμως κατὰ πνεῦμα. Τοὺς ἀνθρώπους αὐτοὺς ποὺ δὲν ζοῦν στὴν Ἐκκλησία, ἴσως ἔχουν ἄλλο θρήσκευμα, ἄλλες παραδόσεις, ἄλλες συνήθειες, ἀλλὰ ὅμως εἶναι καὶ αὐτοὶ δημιουργήματα τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἔστω καὶ ἂν ἀκολουθοῦν ἕνα δρόμο ποὺ δὲν εἶναι ὁ δρόμος τῆς Ἐκκλησίας καὶ τῆς Ὀρθοδοξίας. Καὶ αὐτὸ δημιουργεῖ ἀκριβῶς αὐτὴ τὴ διεύρυνση, αὐτὴ τὴν πλάτυνση τῆς ψυχῆς. Ὅταν ὁ ἄνθρωπος εἶναι πλατὺς μέσα του, καὶ αὐτὸ δένει τὴν παροῦσα ἐμπειρία ὅπως σᾶς τὴν μεταφέρω μὲ τὴν ταπείνωση, καὶ δὲν εἶναι γαντζωμένος σὲ μιὰ περιστροφικὴ κίνηση περὶ τὸν ἄξονα τοῦ ἐγώ του, τότε αὐτομάτως ὁ ἄνθρωπος αὐτὸς μπορεῖ νὰ γίνει κοινωνικός, εὐγενής, νὰ ξεχειλίζει ἀπὸ ἀγάπη, κι ὄχι νὰ βγάζει ὀργή, θυμό, ἔλεγχο, μισαλλοδοξία. Ἔτσι, λοιπόν, σιγὰ-σιγὰ ἀρχίζει νὰ μεταφράζεται ἡ μυστική, πνευματικὴ ἐμπειρία σὲ ἠθικό, κοινωνικὸ ἀποτέλεσμα.

π.Ν.Χ. Ὅταν μέσῳ τῆς Θείας Εὐχαριστίας κανεὶς βγεῖ ἀπὸ τὰ ὅρια τοῦ ἑαυτοῦ του καὶ ἀντὶ νὰ μπεῖ σὲ ἄλλα ὅρια εἰσέλθει στὸ χῶρο τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἐπειδὴ ὁ Θεὸς δὲν ἔχει ὅρια, ζεῖ σὲ μιὰ κατάσταση δίχως ὅρια, στὴν κατάσταση τῆς κατὰ χάριν υἱοθεσίας, στὴν κατάσταση «τῆς ἐλευθερίας τῆς δόξης τῶν τέκνων τοῦ Θεοῦ» (Ῥωμ. η´ 21).

π.Ν.Χ. Λίγο θέλω νὰ προσέξω δύο πράγματα. Τὸ ἕνα εἶναι νὰ μὴν δοθεῖ οἰκουμενιστικὴ ἑρμηνεία, ἀλλὰ οἰκουμενικὸς χαρακτήρας σ᾿ αὐτὰ ποὺ λέμε. Δηλαδὴ ἐμεῖς δὲν νοιώθουμε ὅτι τὸ δῶρο τοῦ Θεοῦ σὲ μᾶς, ἡ Ὀρθοδοξία, εἶναι ἕνα δῶρο ποὺ μᾶς διαφοροποιεῖ ἀπὸ τοὺς ἄλλους ἀνθρώπους, ἀλλὰ εἶναι δῶρο ποὺ μᾶς φέρνει κοντὰ στὸ Θεὸ καὶ κοντὰ στοὺς ἀνθρώπους. Γι᾿ αὐτὸ ἡ Ὀρθόδοξη παράδοση πάντα, χωρὶς νὰ εἶναι προσηλυτιστική, χωρὶς νὰ εἶναι, θὰ τὸν πῶ τὸν ὅρο, οἰκουμενιστική, εἶναι οἰκουμενική, ἱεραποστολική. Ὅποιος ζεῖ τὸ δῶρο τοῦ Θεοῦ, θέλει νὰ τὸ πεῖ, νὰ τὸ προσφέρει, νὰ τὸ μοιρασθεῖ.

Τὸ δεύτερο εἶναι ὅτι τὸ καλύτερο ποὺ ἔχουμε νὰ κάνουμε εἶναι νὰ μεταμορφώσουμε αὐτὸ ποὺ εἴμαστε. Ἀπὸ ὑπεροπτικὰ σωστοὶ νὰ γίνουμε ταπεινὰ ἅγιοι καὶ ἀπὸ σωματεῖο χριστιανῶν μυστικὸ σῶμα τῆς χάριτος τοῦ Θεοῦ. Μᾶς ἔδωσε ὁ Θεὸς αὐτὴν τὴν εὐλογία, ἐκεῖνος ξέρει γιατὶ ἐμεῖς γεννηθήκαμε Ὀρθόδοξοι. Ἐγὼ ἂν γεννιόμουν στὴν Ἰαπωνία, ἄλλο θρήσκευμα θὰ εἶχα. Δὲν θὰ ἤξερα κἂν ὅτι ὑπάρχουν Ὀρθόδοξοι. Ὅταν ἤμουν στὴν Ἀμερική, στὸ Harvard, μὲ ῥώτησε μιὰ καθηγήτρια ἂν ἀκόμη στὴν Ἑλλάδα πιστεύουμε στὸ Δία. Δὲν ἐγνώριζε ὅτι στὴν Ἑλλάδα ὑπάρχει μία ἄλλη θρησκευτικὴ ἀντίληψη.

Λέω λοιπὸν ὅτι ὅταν κανεὶς ζεῖ ὡς δῶρο καὶ ὡς χάρι τὴν πίστη καὶ τὰ μυστήρια μέσα του, δὲν μπορεῖ νὰ μὴ δεῖ ὅτι οἱ ἄλλοι ἄνθρωποι εἶναι ὅλοι παιδιὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ, στοὺς ὁποίους ὅμως τὸ καλύτερο δῶρο ποὺ θὰ εἶχε νὰ κάνει εἶναι ἡ μαρτυρία τῆς πίστεως. Δὲν μπορεῖ νὰ μὴν θεωρεῖ χρέος ἀγάπης τὸν πόθο τῆς σωτηρίας τους. Ἔτσι ἀρχίζει νὰ ἀναπτύσσεται μιὰ ἱεραποστολικὴ διάσταση καὶ γιὰ τοὺς ἄλλους ἀνθρώπους καὶ ἔχει ὁ Θεὸς τί θὰ γίνει.

Ἀπὸ τὴν ἄλλη μεριὰ αὐτὸ δὲν σχετικοποιεῖ τὸν ἀπόλυτο χαρακτήρα τῆς σχέσης μας μὲ τὴν ἀλήθεια. Δὲν μποροῦμε ν᾿ ἀμφισβητήσουμε τὸ δῶρο ποὺ μᾶς ἔχει δώσει ὁ Θεὸς ὡς Ὀρθοδόξους καὶ νὰ ποῦμε· ὡραῖα, λίγη ὑποχώρηση ἐμεῖς, λίγη ὑποχώρηση οἱ ἄλλοι, νὰ τὰ βροῦμε. Αὐτὸ εἶναι οἰκουμενισμός. Αὐτὸ ῥευστοποιεῖ, ἐξασθενίζει τὴ βαρύτητα τῆς ἀλήθειας καὶ ἀλλοιώνει τὴν ἔννοιά της. Ἀγαποῦμε τὴν ἀλήθεια ὡς δῶρο τοῦ Θεοῦ καὶ ταπεινὰ βλέπουμε τοὺς ἄλλους ἀνθρώπους ποὺ ἀλλιῶς ἔχουν μάθει, ἀλλιῶς σκέπτονται καὶ βρίσκονται ἐκτὸς τῆς Ἐκκλησίας, βέβαια. Γι᾿ αὐτὸ δὲν φταῖνε φυσικὰ αὐτοί. Αὐτὸ εἶναι ἀποτέλεσμα τοῦ πτωτικοῦ χαρακτήρα τοῦ κόσμου μας, καὶ ὁ σκοπός, ἡ εὐχή, ἡ προσευχή, ἡ ἐλπίδα καὶ ἡ προσδοκία τῆς Ἐκκλησίας εἶναι ὅλοι σιγὰ-σιγὰ ὅταν ὡριμάσει ὁ καιρὸς νὰ μποῦνε σ᾿ αὐτὴ τὴν κολυμβήθρα, ποὺ δὲν εἶναι ἡ δικιά μας, τῶν Ὀρθοδόξων, ἀλλὰ εἶναι τοῦ Θεοῦ, στὴν ὁποία βρεθήκαμε καὶ ἐμεῖς κατὰ χάριν. Ἡ Ἐκκλησία μυσταγωγεῖ τὰ τέκνα της, ἀλλὰ προσεύχεται γιὰ ὅλο τὸν κόσμο, ὅλη τὴν κτίση. Αὐτὴ εἶναι ἡ παγκοσμιότητά της.

Orthodoxy and Nationalism

N.K. From this spiritual and ecumenical dimension of Orthodoxy, I would like us to come to a different one, also real and important. And I mean the connection of Orthodoxy over the last 200 years to the development and morphology of nationalism. I think this has been especially obvious in the Balkans and some consider Orthodoxy as an important factor in the recent conflicts in former Yugoslavia. I would be grateful for your comments.

Fr. N.H. So far, we have talked about the theological and spiritual dimension of Orthodoxy, but the Church has a human side as well. Just as Christ is perfect God and perfect man, respectively man is both divine and human and the Church has a spiritual and human dimension. By human dimension, we mean her social, political and cultural character; we mean the influence of tradition and history. Who can deny that in the schism of the Churches there were no historical coincidences or political factors involved? In this sense, there are no problems of Orthodoxy; Orthodoxy is the optimum of spirituality. If there are any problems, these can be found in the administrations and officials of the Orthodox churches.

For example, in the Balkans, the recent resetting of the borders -due to the fact that people have a different ethnic identity- caused major problems in what we call social and political freedom. The churches' officials got involved in these changes and an unpleasant situation was created. This is connected to the fallen character of the world we live in. It has the seal of sin, distinctions, boundaries, limitations and definitely not the seal of God.

We said earlier that eucharistic life and mystical partaking in the mystery and grace of God abolishes all boundaries, and brings us closer even to people who do not share the same faith. So, Orthodox faith could very well unite people of various traditions, different ethnic identity, diverse mentality and habits.

On the other hand, in the Western world, more in the USA and less in Europe and Australia, there is a growing interest in Orthodoxy. More and more people of a non-Orthodox background convert to Orthodoxy. The nationalistic character, the divisions and discords we have on the human level, do not restrain the yearning of these people to approach the Church. Instead, they listen to God's calling and in a sense they bear with us. Thus, through the ethnic churches of their countries, they enter the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. This demonstrates how the grace of God can always function, even in situations where serious human errors are made or shortcomings and wrongdoings are prevailing.

N.K. From this point, I would like to continue on to the embodiment of Orthodoxy in nationalistic frames due to social and historical conditions.

Fr. N.H. Orthodoxy has a certain flexibility in the “dialect” it uses to spread her message around. I do not only mean the linguistic dialect, but also the way her language adapts to the distinctive peculiarities of each society. A different language is used for the Africans, a different one for the Christians of the Far East, for the Russians, or the Americans. Not only the language is different, but also the method and the way it is expressed. We maintain the essence and adjust the forms. This requires a freedom of ethos and spirit, as well as the ability to discern what is essential and what is formality. The absence of such a distinction may lead to an outburst of passions and provoke tensions in the relations of the local churches.

N.K. But can the Orthodox Church as a religious, cultural factor disengage herself from the nationalistic and ethnic dimension? In my view, in Greece, there is a deep connection of Orthodoxy, not only with the sense of Greek indentity, but even with the interests of Greek society, if you like. We distinguish ourselves from the West, for instance, by saying “we are Greek Orthodox.”

Fr. N.H. I thought you meant something different by the word “nationalistic.” I do not consider that the Greek Church has a nationalistic character. She has generously supported all the suffering churches and selflessly offered her assistance to the sister churches of Russia, Albania, Georgia, Czech Republic, Romania and especially Serbia. This is a demonstration of the positive side of the Greek Church.

Of course, there is a negative side as well which has two dimensions. The first one has to do with our feeling of superiority when we hear others praising something Greek; we foolishly want a primacy of honor due to our tradition and historical past. But this is human, considering also that there is a strong Greek influence in the Church's tradition. On the other hand, the Russians could also feel superior, because they have a larger population. This is the human aspect, human misery; to demand authority through the Church who constantly provokes us to deny all our own rights.

The second one is the identification of the Church with specific policies, either for the benefit of nationalistic interests or interests of certain parties. Thus, in our days, politicians present Orthodoxy as a connecting link among Eastern European countries due to their common sense of tradition. However, Orthodoxy cannot be identified with any human forms no matter how good these are.

The only exception to this is when Orthodoxy is attacked. Then, it is our duty to unite and defend ourselves, expecting at the same time the help and protection of God. He knows how to help us. When Christ was sending out his disciples, He told them not to think how they would defend themselves. He would take care of everything. “Settle it therefore in your minds, not to meditate beforehand how to answer; for I will give you a mouth and wisdom...” (Lk 21:14-15). The excessive human interference in the defense methods and protection of religious interests and goals drives God away, and this is set against the Orthodox ethos and way of thinking.

Presently in Greece, we have a problem with the Turks. Of course, our politicians will follow a certain policy, and we ourselves will react to a possible invasion of Islam in Europe, more specifically in our country. But it is unacceptable to regard the Turks as our personal enemies and start hating them. They, too, are children of God. If we were born in Ankara, we would also be Muslims today. In this sense, the Church must very discreetly express her own views, only within the context of her principles, values and acquisition of the grace of God, and stay away from any politics which serve specific worldly objectives.

Ὀρθοδοξία καὶ Ἐθνικισμός

π.Ν.Χ. Μέχρι τώρα ἀσχοληθήκαμε μὲ τὴν θεολογία καὶ τὴν πνευματικὴ διάσταση τῆς Ὀρθοδοξίας, ἀλλὰ ἡ Ἐκκλησία ἔχει καὶ σχήματα ἀνθρώπινα. Ὅπως ὁ Χριστὸς ἔχει τέλεια θεία καὶ τέλεια ἀνθρώπινη φύση, κατ᾿ ἀνάλογο τρόπο καὶ οἱ ἄνθρωποι ζοῦν καὶ μὲ ὑπόσταση θεϊκὴ καὶ ἀνθρώπινη καὶ ἡ Ἐκκλησία ἔχει πνευματικὴ καὶ ἀνθρώπινη διάσταση. Στὴν ἀνθρώπινή της διάσταση μπαίνει καὶ τὸ κοινωνικὸ χρῶμα, μπαίνει καὶ τὸ πολιτικὸ καὶ τὸ πολιτιστικό, μπαίνει ἡ παράδοση, μπαίνει ἡ ἱστορία. Ποιός μπορεῖ νὰ ἀρνηθεῖ ὅτι στὸ σχῖσμα τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν δὲν ὑπῆρξαν κάποιες ἱστορικὲς συγκυρίες καὶ προεκτάσεις; Δὲν εἶναι θέμα μόνο θεολογίας, εἶναι καὶ θέμα ἀνθρώπων, προσώπων, πολιτικῶν, ἐπιῤῥοῶν, κ.λπ. Μ᾿ αὐτὴ τὴν ἔννοια, ὑπάρχει στὶς μέρες μας, ὄχι ἀκριβῶς πρόβλημα τῆς Ὀρθοδοξίας· ἡ Ὀρθοδοξία, ἡ θεολογία εἶναι τὸ optimum τῆς πνευματικότητος. Ὑπάρχουν προβλήματα στὶς διοικήσεις καὶ τὰ ὄργανα τῶν Ὀρθοδόξων ἐκκλησιῶν.

Ἔτσι στὰ Βαλκάνια, ἐπὶ παραδείγματι, ἡ πρόσφατη ἀναδιαμόρφωση τῶν συνόρων, ἐπειδὴ οἱ ἄνθρωποι ἔχουν διαφορετικὴ ἐθνικὴ ταυτότητα, προκάλεσε ἔντονα προβλήματα σὲ ἀναφορὰ μὲ αὐτὸ ποὺ ὀνομάζεται καὶ κατανοοῦμε ὡς κοινωνικὴ ἐλευθερία καὶ πολιτικὴ ἐλευθερία. Μέσα σ᾿ αὐτὰ μπαίνουν καὶ οἱ φορεῖς τῆς Ἐκκλησίας καὶ ἀρχίζει νὰ δημιουργεῖται μιὰ κατάσταση ἡ ὁποία ὁπωσδήποτε κάθε ἄλλο παρὰ ἐπιθυμητὴ εἶναι. Αὐτὸ λοιπὸν δὲν εἶναι καλὸ ποὺ γίνεται - ποιός θὰ μποροῦσε νὰ ἰσχυρισθεῖ τὸ ἀντίθετο; - ἀλλὰ ὅμως εἶναι κάτι ποὺ δένει περισσότερο μὲ τὸν πτωτικὸ χαρακτήρα τοῦ κόσμου στὸν ὁποῖο ζοῦμε. Αὐτὸ ἔχει τὴν σφραγίδα τῆς πτώσεως, τῶν διακρίσεων, τῶν συνόρων, τῶν περιορισμῶν καὶ ὄχι τὴ σφραγίδα τοῦ Θεοῦ.

Εἴπαμε προηγουμένως ὅτι αὐτὴ ἡ μυστηριακὴ ζωὴ καὶ ἡ μυστικὴ περιχώρηση στὸ μυστήριο καὶ στὴ χάρι τοῦ Θεοῦ καταργεῖ τὰ σύνορα. Καὶ καταργεῖ τὰ σύνορα καὶ γιὰ τοὺς ἀνθρώπους ποὺ δὲν ἔχουν κἂν τὴν ἴδια πίστη. Δὲν θὰ μποροῦσε λοιπὸν τὸ Ὀρθόδοξο φρόνημα νὰ ἑνώνει ἀνθρώπους ποὺ ἔχουν διαφορετικὲς παραδόσεις, διαφορετικὴ ἐθνικὴ ταυτότητα, διαφορετικὴ νοοτροπία καὶ συνήθειες; Ἀσφαλῶς θὰ μποροῦσε, καὶ αὐτὴ εἶναι ἐν πολλοῖς ἡ κατάσταση.

Ἀπὸ τὴν ἄλλη πλευρὰ ὑπάρχει μιὰ καινοφανὴς τάση ποὺ ἐμφανίζεται στὸ Δυτικὸ κόσμο· τάση ἀρκετῆς στροφῆς πρὸς τὴν Ὀρθοδοξία, κυρίως στὴν Ἀμερική, λιγότερο στὴν Εὐρώπη καὶ στὴν Αὐστραλία, ἀνθρώπων ποὺ δὲν ἔχουν Ὀρθόδοξη παράδοση καὶ παρελθόν. Αὐτοὶ δὲν ἐμποδίζονται ἀπὸ τὸν ἐθνικιστικὸ χαρακτήρα, ἀπὸ αὐτὴν τὴν διαίρεση ποὺ ἐμεῖς σὲ ἀνθρώπινο ἐπίπεδο ἔχουμε, ἀλλὰ βλέπουν τὸ πῶς μιλάει ὁ Θεὸς μέσα τους καὶ πῶς τοὺς προσκαλεῖ καὶ στὴν οὐσία μᾶς ἀνέχονται. Καὶ μέσα ἀπὸ τὶς ἐθνικὲς ἐκκλησίες τῶν χωρῶν τους μπαίνουν στὴν μία ἁγία, καθολικὴ καὶ ἀποστολικὴ Ἐκκλησία. Αὐτὸ εἶναι μιὰ ἀπάντηση στὸ πῶς ἡ χάρις τοῦ Θεοῦ μπορεῖ νὰ λειτουργεῖ καὶ ἐκεῖ ποὺ γίνονται τὰ χονδρότερα ἀνθρώπινα λάθη ἢ ὑπάρχει καὶ ἐμπάθεια ἀπὸ τοὺς κεντρικοὺς ἐνδεχομένως φορεῖς τῆς Ἐκκλησίας.

π.Ν.Χ. Ἂν ἐξαιρέσουμε κάποιες ἱστορικὲς παραφωνίες, στὸ ἐπίπεδο ποὺ τὴν προσεγγίζουμε ἐδῶ, ἡ Ὀρθοδοξία παρουσιάζει μιὰ εὐελιξία στὴν διάλεκτο μεταφορᾶς τοῦ μηνύματός της. Καὶ δὲν ἐννοῶ τὴ γλωσσικὴ μόνο διάλεκτο, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸν τρόπο μὲ τὸν ὁποῖο ὁμιλεῖ ὥστε νὰ εἶναι προσηρμοσμένη στὰ κοινωνικὰ δεδομένα τοῦ τόπου στὸν ὁποῖο λειτουργεῖ. Ἀλλιῶς ὁμιλεῖ στοὺς ἀφρικανούς, ἀλλιῶς στοὺς χριστιανοὺς τῆς Ἄπω Ἀνατολῆς, ἀλλιῶς στοὺς Ῥώσους, ἀλλιῶς στοὺς ἀνθρώπους ποὺ γεννήθηκαν στὴν Ἀμερική. Καὶ ἡ γλῶσσα εἶναι διαφορετικὴ καὶ ὁ τρόπος καὶ ἡ μέθοδος. Διατηροῦμε τὴν οὐσία, προσαρμόζουμε τὶς μορφές. Αὐτὸ ὅμως γιὰ νὰ γίνει θέλει μιὰ ἐλευθερία ἤθους καὶ πνεύματος. Προϋποθέτει μιὰ κατάσταση ποὺ νὰ δημιουργεῖ αὐτὴ τὴ διάκριση τοῦ τί εἶναι οὐσία καὶ τί εἶναι τύπος καὶ μορφή. Ὅπου λείπει ἡ διάκριση παρατηρεῖται ἔξαρση τῶν παθῶν καὶ ἔνταση στὶς σχέσεις τῶν κατὰ τόπους Ἐκκλησιῶν.

π.Ν.Χ. Ἐγὼ κατάλαβα προηγουμένως τὸν ὅρο «ἐθνικιστικὸ» ἀρκετὰ διαφορετικά. Ἔτσι δὲν θεωρῶ ὅτι ἡ ἑλληνικὴ Ἐκκλησία ἐδῶ ἔχει στὴν ἀγωγή της ἐθνικιστικὸ χαρακτήρα. Βλέπετε πόσο ἔχει συμπαρασταθεῖ στὶς μέρες μας στὶς ἄλλες Ἐκκλησίες, ἀνιδιοτελῶς νομίζω ἡ ἑλλαδικὴ Ἐκκλησία. Δηλαδὴ ἀκόμη καὶ στὴ Ῥωσικὴ Ἐκκλησία ἐστάλη βοήθεια, στὴν Ἀλβανία, στὴ Γεωργία, στὴν Τσεχία, στὴ Ῥουμανία, στὴ Σερβία κατὰ κόρον. Ἔγινε αὐτὸ ὡς συμπαράσταση πρὸς τὶς ἄλλες Ὀρθόδοξες Ἐκκλησίες ποὺ χειμάζονται κάτω ἀπὸ τὶς παροῦσες συνθῆκες. Αὐτὸ ἦταν ἡ καλὴ διαγωγὴ τῆς Ἐκκλησίας μας.

Ὑπάρχει βέβαια καὶ ἡ κακή. Ἡ κακὴ ἔχει δύο διαστάσεις. Ἡ μία διάσταση εἶναι αὐτὸ τὸ φρόνημα τῆς ὑπεροχῆς ποὺ ὅταν μᾶς ποῦν ὅτι κάτι ἑλληνικὸ εἶναι καλό, λίγο νὰ ἐπαιρόμεθα ἀνοήτως Καὶ ζητοῦμε κάποια ἱστορικὰ καὶ παραδοσιακὰ πρωτεῖα τιμῆς. Ἀλλὰ αὐτό, νομίζω, ὅτι εἶναι πολὺ ἀνθρώπινο. Χώρια τὸ ὅτι τουλάχιστον ὑπάρχει μιὰ ἔντονη ἑλληνικὴ σφραγίδα στὴν παράδοση τῆς Ἐκκλησίας. Βέβαια θὰ μποροῦσαν οἱ Ῥῶσοι νὰ καυχῶνται γιατὶ εἶναι πιὸ πολλοί. Αὐτὰ εἶναι τὰ ἀνθρώπινα, αὐτὴ εἶναι ἡ ἀνθρώπινη μιζέρια, νὰ διεκδικεῖ ὁ καθένας μας δικαιώματα μέσα ἀπὸ αὐτὸ ποὺ μᾶς προκαλεῖ διαρκῶς νὰ ἀποῤῥίψουμε ὅλα μας τὰ δικαιώματα· τὴν Ἐκκλησία. Καὶ αὐτὸ δὲν εἶναι ἡ Ὀρθοδοξία· αὐτὸ εἶναι ἡ ἀνθρώπινη διάσταση.

Ὑπάρχει καὶ μιὰ δεύτερη ἐκτροπή. Εἶναι ἡ συνταύτιση τῆς Ἐκκλησίας μὲ συγκεκριμένες πολιτικὲς ἢ κατευθύνσεις, εἴτε αὐτὸ ἐξυπηρετεῖ ἐθνικὰ συμφέροντα, ἢ συμφέροντα ὁρισμένων ὁμάδων καὶ τάσεων. Ἔτσι οἱ πολιτικοὶ στὶς μέρες μας ἐμφανίζουν τὴν Ὀρθοδοξία ὡς συνδετικὸ κρίκο -καὶ εἶναι συνδετικὸς κρίκος-, λόγῳ τῆς κοινῆς αἴσθησης παράδοσης τῶν χωρῶν τῆς Ἀνατολικῆς Εὐρώπης. Αὐτὸ εἶναι πάλι πολὺ ἀνθρώπινο. Ἀλλὰ ἀποτελεῖ πολιτικὴ καὶ κοινωνιολογικὴ θεώρηση. Ἡ Ὀρθοδοξία δὲν ταυτίζεται μὲ κανένα ἀνθρώπινο σχῆμα ὅσο καλὸ κι ἂν εἶναι.

Ἡ μόνη ἐξαίρεση εἶναι ὅταν κάποιοι μᾶς χτυποῦν στὸ ὄνομα τῆς Ὀρθοδοξίας. Τότε εἶναι ἱερὸ χρέος νὰ ἑνωθοῦμε καὶ νὰ ἀμυνθοῦμε. Καὶ αὐτὸ προσδοκῶντας πάλι τὴ χάρι καὶ τὴν βοήθεια τοῦ Θεοῦ. Ἐκεῖνος ξέρει πῶς νὰ βοηθεῖ. Ἐκεῖνος ὅταν ἔστελνε τοὺς μαθητές Του, τοὺς ἔλεγε νὰ μὴν προμελετοῦν πῶς θὰ ἀπολογηθοῦν, θὰ τοὺς δοθεῖ φωτισμὸς καὶ δύναμη ἄνωθεν (Λουκ. κα´ 14-15). Ἡ πολὺ ἀνθρώπινη φροντίδα στὶς μεθόδους ἀμύνης ἢ προστασίας τῶν λεγομένων θρησκευτικῶν συμφερόντων μας καὶ σκοπῶν καὶ αὐτὴ ἐκτοπίζει τὸ Θεό. Δὲν ἔχει νὰ κάνει μὲ τὸ Ὀρθόδοξο ἦθος καὶ φρόνημα. Κάνουμε ὅ,τι περνάει ἀπὸ τὸ χέρι μας μὲ μιὰ ἀνωτερότητα, ὅμως.

Σήμερα, ἐμεῖς στὸν ἑλλαδικὸ χῶρο, ἔχουμε ἕνα πρόβλημα μὲ τοὺς Τούρκους. Θὰ ὑπάρχει ἀσφαλῶς μιὰ πολιτικὴ τὴν ὁποία θὰ ἀκολουθοῦν οἱ πολιτικοί μας, καὶ στὸ μέτρο ποὺ καταλαβαίνουμε ὅτι χρησιμοποιεῖται ὁ Μουσουλμανισμὸς γιὰ νὰ εἰσχωρήσει, νὰ χτυπήσει τὸν Χριστιανισμὸ στὴν Εὐρώπη, θὰ ἀντιδράσωμε. Ἔτσι πρέπει νὰ κάνουμε. Ἀλλὰ τὸ νὰ ἀρχίσουμε ὅταν δοῦμε ἕνα Τοῦρκο, ποὺ κι αὐτὸς εἶναι παιδὶ τοῦ Θεοῦ, -κι ἐγὼ ἂν γεννιόμουν στὴν Ἄγκυρα μουσουλμᾶνος θὰ ἤμουν σήμερα- ὡς ἐχθρό μας καὶ νὰ τὸν μισήσουμε, αὐτὸ εἶναι ἀπαράδεκτο. Μ᾿ αὐτὴ τὴν ἔννοια ἡ Ἐκκλησία πρέπει πολὺ διακριτικὰ μόνο σὲ ἐπίπεδο ἀρχῶν, ἀξιῶν, ἰδεῶν, προσοικειώσεως τῆς χάριτος τοῦ Θεοῦ νὰ πάρει μιὰ θέση. Ἀλλὰ νὰ ἀναμειχθεῖ σὲ κοσμικὲς πολιτικὲς ποὺ ἔχουν καὶ ὑπηρετοῦν κάποιες σκοπιμότητες, ὄχι.

Church and State

N.K. On this topic, father Nikolaos, there is a specific historical connection between the Church as an institution and the state, which goes back to Emperor Constantine. Despite periodic tensions, this connection is considered so strong, as far as Greece is concerned, that it is almost impossible to differentiate the Church from the state. However, some people believe that it harms the ecumenicity of Orthodoxy. What do you think?

Fr. N.H.No, I do not believe it can harm the ecumenicity of the Orthodox Church. Let me explain it. I feel very happy and proud, in a good sense, that I was born in Greece. This allows me to feel equally happy for the Russian indentity of someone who was born in Russia, and enjoy the warmth of his tradition, which is beautiful but different from mine. Thus, we can feel deeply grateful to God that among His other gifts, He also gave us the gift of our specific nationality The same thing applies for the gratitude we feel towards God for the parents He gave us; this does not prevent us from regarding the parental relationships in other families equally sacred and strong.

In this respect, we wish that a healthy relationship and cooperation between the state and the Church exists in our country. The Church can feed the state with her principles and values and in return, the state may fulfil the human and material needs of the Church, so the latter can unobstructively accomplish her spiritual mission. This is an ideal situation and does not necessarily function in a nationalistic way. Problems arise when the Church gets involved in matters of the state and vice versa.

The state could take care of the religious education of the children. Moreover, the fact that in Greece all holidays, except labor day, are religious ones, facilitates the functioning of the practical aspect of the Church's life.

At the same time, as we previously said, the Church feeds the state with principles. However, when the state offers a secularized religious education, when it uses the Church to accomplish its own interests, or wants to apply the same system to elect bishops as it uses to appoint directors of public firms, then the Church loses her autonomy and freedom and their relationship becomes problematic. In case of a harmonious relationship, the Church could very well interfere in legislative, social, even financial matters, when basic principles and values are affected, without losing her spirituality and ecumenicity.

Unfortunately, this is not happening in our days because the Church lacks power. It seems that modern man and contemporary society have punished God; He is banished from our lives. Instead, money, self-interests, large firms and U.S. aircraft carriers have taken His place. However, the idea and principle of a good cooperation between the state and the Church will always be a wishful thinking for all societies. Perhaps, that is how it also started in Byzantium.

I believe that the Church will always make human mistakes that will remind us of our transcience through a fallen world. In a world, which is dominated by natural weaknesses, death, sin, passions, perversion and the devil, the Church will be continually prophesizing the Kingdom of God. And this is the eschatological meaning of Holy Eucharist: the expectation of and longing for perfectness. A state which is reached through a perfecting mentality and unceasing struggle for perfection.

In our world, the religious leaders will keep on making serious mistakes, the so-called representatives of God will go on betraying the truth and disappointing us. However, holiness will always exist, perhaps in some hermitages, within families or among the Church's officials, to clearly show that the grace of God functions in the best possible ways under the worst circumstances. Man can be deified in the fallen world, just as God was incarnated in the world of sin.

Ἐκκλησία καὶ Πολιτεία

π.Ν.Χ. Ὄχι, ἐγὼ δὲν νομίζω, ὅτι θὰ μποροῦσε νὰ τὴν βλάψει. Ἀλλὰ ἂς μιλήσουμε πάλι μὲ τὰ δικά μας δεδομένα. Δὲν εἶναι οὐδέτερο τὸ ὅτι εἶμαι Ἕλληνας. Χαίρομαι πάρα πολὺ ποὺ γεννήθηκα Ἕλληνας καὶ ἔχω μιὰ καλὴ ὑπερηφάνεια. Νομίζω, ὅμως, ὅτι ἐπειδὴ ἀκριβῶς ἔχω αὐτὴν τὴν εὐαισθησία μπορῶ πάρα πολὺ νὰ χαρῶ τὴν Ῥωσικὴ ταυτότητα ἑνὸς Ῥώσου καὶ νὰ ἀπολαύσω τὴν ζεστασιὰ τῶν βιωμάτων ποὺ ἔχει, προερχόμενος, ὅπως καὶ ἐγώ, ἀπὸ μιὰ ἄλλη παράδοση ἐπίσης ὄμορφη καὶ ὡραία. Θὰ μποροῦσε λοιπὸν ἐμεῖς νὰ νοιώθουμε ἔντονα τὴ χαρὰ ὅτι μέσα στ᾿ ἄλλα δῶρα ποὺ μᾶς ἔδωσε ὁ Θεὸς μᾶς ἔδωσε καὶ τὴν συγκεκριμένη ταυτότητα. Ὅπως τὸ νὰ εὐγνωμονοῦμε τὸ Θεὸ γιὰ τοὺς συγκεκριμένους γονεῖς ποὺ μᾶς ἔδωσε, δὲν σημαίνει ὅτι δὲν δεχόμαστε ὡς ἱερὴ καὶ δυνατὴ τὴν γονική, μητρική, πατρικὴ σχέση στὶς ἄλλες οἰκογένειες.

Ἔτσι κι ἐδῶ χαιρόμαστε γι᾿ αὐτὸ καὶ θὰ θέλαμε πάρα πολὺ ὁ τόπος μας, τὸ κράτος μας νὰ ἔχει αὐτὴ τὴ συνεργασία καὶ τὸν σύνδεσμο Ἐκκλησίας καὶ πολιτείας. Ἡ Ἐκκλησία νὰ μπολιάζει μὲ ἀρχὲς τὴν πολιτεία καὶ ἡ πολιτεία νὰ βοηθάει τὴν Ἐκκλησία στὸ ὑλικό, κοσμικὸ καὶ ἀνθρώπινό της μέρος γιὰ νὰ μπορεῖ ἡ δεύτερη ἀπρόσκοπτα νὰ ἐπιτελεῖ τὸ πνευματικό. Αὐτὴ εἶναι ἡ ἰδεατὴ κατάσταση καὶ δὲν λειτουργεῖ κατ᾿ ἀνάγκην ἐθνικιστικά. Ἔτσι, ἡ πολιτεία μπορεῖ νὰ φροντίσει γιὰ τὴν θρησκευτικὴ ἐκπαίδευση καὶ ἀγωγὴ τῶν παιδιῶν. Ἐπίσης ἐμεῖς στὴν Ἑλλάδα ἔχουμε ὅλες τὶς ἀργίες ἐκτὸς ἀπὸ τὴν πρωτομαγιὰ θρησκευτικές. Αὐτὸ δείχνει αὐτὸ τὸν σύνδεσμο ποὺ εἴπατε καὶ διευκολύνει τὴν ἔκφραση τῆς ἐκκλησιαστικῆς ζωῆς. Τὸ λάθος ἐμφανίζεται ὅταν ἡ ἀνάμειξη τῆς Ἐκκλησίας στὰ τῆς πολιτείας καὶ τῆς πολιτείας στὰ τῆς Ἐκκλησίας καταστρέφει τὸ Ὀρθόδοξο ἦθος.

Ταυτόχρονα, ὅπως εἴπαμε προηγουμένως, καὶ ἡ Ἐκκλησία μπολιάζει τὸ κράτος μὲ ἀρχές. Ἔτσι ὅταν ἡ πολιτεία τυποποιεῖ τὴν θρησκευτικὴ ἐκπαίδευση, ὅταν χρησιμοποιεῖ τὴν Ἐκκλησία σὰν ὑποχείριὸ της καὶ θέλει νὰ διορίζει καὶ τοὺς ἱεράρχες ὅπως διορίζει τοὺς διευθυντὲς τῶν μεγάλων ὑπηρεσιῶν, τότε αὐτὴ χάνει τὴν αὐτονομία καὶ ἐλευθερία της καὶ τότε μιλᾶμε γιὰ προβληματικὴ σχέση. Ἀλλὰ στὴν περίπτωση τῆς ἁρμονικῆς σχέσεως χωρὶς νὰ βλάπτεται ἡ πνευματικότητα καὶ οἰκουμενικότητα τῆς Ἐκκλησίας, θὰ μποροῦσε αὐτὴ νὰ ἔχει λόγο καὶ νὰ ἐπεμβαίνει μὲ τὸ κῦρος της σὲ νομοθετικά, κοινωνικά, ἀκόμη καὶ σὲ οἰκονομικὰ θέματα, ὅταν θίγονται βασικὲς ἀρχὲς καὶ ἀξίες. Βέβαια αὐτὰ δὲν γίνονται σήμερα, γιατὶ ἡ Εκκλησία δὲν ἔχει δύναμη. Ὁ Θεὸς εἶναι ὁ τιμωρημένος τῆς ἐποχῆς μας, ὁ ἐκτοπισμένος. Σήμερα ὑπάρχει τὸ χρῆμα, ὑπάρχει τὸ συμφέρον, ὑπάρχουν οἱ μεγάλες ἑταιρεῖες, ὑπάρχουν τὰ ἀεροπλανοφόρα τῶν Ἀμερικανῶν. Ὡς ἰδέα ὅμως καὶ ὡς ἀρχὴ γενικὴ θὰ ἦταν εὐχῆς ἔργο σ᾿ ὅλες τὶς κοινωνίες νὰ ὑπῆρχε αὐτὴ ἡ διασύνδεση ὅπως τὴν προαναφέραμε. Καὶ ἔτσι ἴσως ξεκίνησε στὸ Βυζάντιο.

Βέβαια νομίζω ὅτι, μέσα στὴν πορεία τῆς ἱστορίας, διαρκῶς ἡ Ἐκκλησία θὰ κάνει λάθη ἀνθρώπινα ποὺ θὰ μᾶς θυμίζουν ὅτι εἴμαστε παροδικοὶ σ᾿ ἕνα πεπτωκότα κόσμο. Σ᾿ ἕνα κόσμο ποὺ κυριαρχεῖ ἡ φυσικὴ ἀδυναμία, ὁ θάνατος, ἡ ἁμαρτία, τὰ πάθη, ἡ διαστροφή, ὁ διάβολος, μέσα σ᾿ ἕνα τέτοιο κόσμο ἡ Ἐκκλησία θὰ ἐπαγγέλεται τὴ βασιλεία τοῦ Θεοῦ. Καὶ αὐτὸ εἶναι ἡ εὐλογία, ἡ σωστὴ ἐσχατολογία ποὺ ῥωτήσατε προηγουμένως, ἡ ἀναμονὴ τοῦ τελείου. Τὸ ἐσχατολογικὸ μήνυμα τῆς Θείας Εὐχαριστίας εἶναι αὐτὴ ἡ προσδοκία τῆς τελειότητος, μέσα ἀπὸ ἕνα φρόνημα τελειώσεως καὶ διαρκοῦς ἀγῶνος πρὸς τελειοποίηση. Ἐρχόμαστε λοιπὸν νὰ ποῦμε ὅτι σ᾿ αὐτὸν τὸν κόσμο θὰ συμβαίνουν αὐτά, θὰ κάνουν λάθη χονδρὰ οἱ θρησκευτικοὶ ἡγέτες, θὰ ἔχουν πάθη οἱ λεγόμενοι ἐκπρόσωποι τοῦ Θεοῦ, θὰ προδίδουν ἐνίοτε τὴν ἀλήθεια καὶ θὰ ἀπογοητεύουν. Ἀλλὰ θὰ ὑπάρχει πάντοτε ἡ ἁγιότητα ἴσως σὲ κάτι σπηλιές, ἐνδεχομένως μέσα στὶς οἰκογένειες ἀλλὰ καὶ μέσα στοὺς ὑπευθύνους τῆς Ἐκκλησίας, γιὰ νὰ φαίνεται ὅτι ἡ χάρις τοῦ Θεοῦ λειτουργεῖ μὲ τὸ καλύτερο τρόπο καὶ μέσα ἀπὸ τὶς χειρότερες προϋποθέσεις. Μέσα λοιπὸν στὸν πτωτικὸ κόσμο μπορεῖ νὰ γεννηθεῖ ὁ θεϊκὸς ἄνθρωπος, ὅπως μέσα στὸν κόσμο τῆς ἁμαρτίας ἐνηνθρώπησε ὁ Θεός.

Orthodoxy and New Religious Phenomena

N.K. Let's close this subject and have a short comment on a topic, which I think, is also important. World-wide and within traditionally Orthodox countries there seems to be a proliferation of new religious phenomena. We observe also a growing cultural and ideological syncretism. How does an Orthodox eye see these phenomena and to what extent do you think Orthodoxy becomes a part of this pluralistic and syncretistic world?

Fr. N.H. There is a threat in what you just mentioned; the threat of impuring the gift of God inside us and add to its absolute meaning a syncretistic interpretation. This is very sad but also inevitable in our country. Personally, I cannot but spiritually regret for all these phenomena. The emergence of cults and syncretistic religion is a spiritual disease that undermines the sense of health springing out of our tradition and heritage, which have given birth to so many saints. Syncretism may harm our nation, but not the Church. Although truth gets more difficult to approach, it remains unaffected.

I believe that this is the result of a universal confusion, a poor quality freedom, human fakeness existing in these cults and people's unhappiness that drives them there for comfort. It will be a great consolation if the Church awakens, and we, the clergy, prophetically offer the truth and clearly spread the witness of God to the people. The Church is not trying to prevent the evil - this will always exist. She struggles to allow the presence of God in our lives - He will always be indispensable. The good that God can do for us is more than the evil the devil can cause. “For he who is in you is greater than he who is in the world” (1Jo 4:4).

There is also another source of consolation. It concerns people who have been involed in these cults, and after a while reject all these unhealthy beliefs and return to God. We could say they find God through the devil. Their repentance adds a new spirit to the spiritual body of our society.

N.K. The subject of cults is a vast one, because it brings forth pluralism. Can Orthodoxy coexist with the increasing pluralism and to what extent?

Fr. N.H. Orthodoxy does not only exist in Orthodox countries, but is growing in other countries as well. For example, there is an Orthodox Church in America functioning despite the existing pluralism. The fact that the Church can exist both in pluralistic and nationalistic societies indicates that the emergence of cults cannot affect faith. Therefore, we sense the problem on the level of our ethnic identity as Greeks and not on the level of our faith as Orthodox.

Ὀρθοδοξία καὶ Σύγχρονος Θρησκευτικὸς Συγκρητισμός

π.Ν.Χ. Μάλιστα. Αὐτὸ τὸ τελευταῖο εἶναι νομίζω ἡ ἀπειλή· νὰ νοθευτεῖ τὸ δῶρο τοῦ Θεοῦ καὶ ν᾿ ἀποκτήσει μιὰ συγκρητιστικὴ ἑρμηνεία μέσα μας καὶ ὄχι μιὰ ἀπόλυτη ἑρμηνεία. Καὶ εἶναι λυπηρὸ γιὰ τὸν τόπο μας, ἂν καὶ ἀναπόφευκτο. Ἐγὼ ὄχι πάλι σὲ κοινωνικὴ βάση, ἀλλὰ σαφῶς σὲ πνευματικὴ βάση, δὲν μπορῶ παρὰ νὰ λυποῦμαι γι᾿ αὐτὰ τὰ φαινόμενα. Διότι ὅλα αὐτὰ τὰ ὁποῖα ἀναφέρατε εἶναι πνευματικὲς ἀῤῥώστειες ποὺ ἔρχονται νὰ ἐξασθενήσουν τὴν αἴσθηση ὑγείας ποὺ ἀποπνέει ἡ παράδοσή μας, αὐτὴ ἡ εὐλογημένη κληρονομιὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ. Καὶ ἐδῶ ὑπῆρχε αὐτὸς ὁ ὑγιεινὸς ἄνεμος. Αὐτὸς ἔκανε τὸν τόπο μας ἁγιοτόκο. Ἐρχόμενος αὐτὸς ὁ συγκρητισμὸς δὲν νομίζω ὅτι θ᾿ ἀφήσει κάτι καλὸ στὸ ἔθνος μας. Μᾶλλον ζημιὰ θὰ κάνει. Ὄχι ὅμως στὴν Ἐκκλησία. Ἡ Ὀρθοδοξία ὡς ἀλήθεια ποὺ εἶναι δὲν ἐπηρεάζεται ἀπὸ τέτοιους παράγοντες. Ἁπλῶς θὰ δυσκολευτεῖ ἡ προσέγγισή μας πρὸς αὐτήν.

Νομίζω ὅτι ὅλο αὐτὸ εἶναι ἀποτέλεσμα τῆς παγκόσμιας συγχύσεως ποὺ ὑπάρχει, τῆς κακῆς ἐλευθερίας ποὺ δὲν εἶναι ἐλευθερία ἐν ἀληθείᾳ, τοῦ ἀνθρώπινου τσαρλατανισμοῦ σὲ πολλὲς ἀπ᾿ αὐτὲς τὶς παραφυάδες καὶ τῆς δυστυχίας τῶν ἀνθρώπων ποὺ δὲν ξέρουν ποῦ νὰ πᾶνε καὶ τρέχουν ἐκεῖ. Τώρα τὸ ἂν ἀφυπνισθεῖ ἡ διοικοῦσα Ἐκκλησία, ἂν ἀνοίξουμε τὰ μάτια μας ἐμεῖς οἱ ἱερεῖς, ἂν προσφέρουμε στὸ λαὸ προφητικὰ τὴν ἀλήθεια καὶ καθαρὰ τὴ μαρτυρία τοῦ Εὐαγγελίου, αὐτὸ εἶναι μιὰ παρηγοριά. Ὄχι γιατὶ θὰ ἀναχαιτίσει τὸ ἔργο τοῦ διαβόλου, ἀλλὰ γιατὶ θὰ δείξει τὴν δύναμη τῆς χάριτος τοῦ Θεοῦ. Ἡ Ἐκκλησία δὲν προσπαθεῖ νὰ ἀποτρέψει τὸ κακὸ - αὐτὸ θὰ ὑπάρχει στὸν κόσμο μας. Ἀγωνίζεται νὰ ἐπιτρέψει τὸν Θεὸ - αὐτὸς εἶναι πιὸ ἀναγκαῖος ἀπὸ ὅσο ἐπικίνδυνος εἶναι ὁ διάβολος. Γιατὶ τὸ καλὸ ποὺ μπορεῖ ὁ Θεὸς εἶναι περισσότερο ἀπὸ τὸ κακὸ ποὺ θέλει ὁ διάβολος. «Μείζων ὁ ἐν ἡμῖν ἢ ὁ ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ» (Α´ Ἰω. δ´ 4).

Ὑπάρχει κι ἄλλη μιὰ παρηγοριά. Εἶναι οἱ περιπτώσεις ἀνθρώπων, ἐγὼ ζῶ πολλὲς τέτοιες, οἱ ὁποῖοι πέφτουν στὰ πλοκάμια αὐτῶν τῶν ὀργανώσεων, μετὰ ἀπὸ λίγο ἀποῤῥίπτουν ἀπὸ τὸν πνευματικό τους ὀργανισμὸ ὡς ξένο σῶμα ὅλο αὐτὸ τὸ ἦθος ποὺ ἔχουνε δεχθεῖ καὶ ἐπιστρέφουν, δηλαδὴ βρίσκουν τὸν Θεὸ μέσα ἀπὸ τὸν διάβολο, ἂν μποροῦμε νὰ ποῦμε. Ἡ μετάνοιά τους μπολιάζει μὲ νέο πνεῦμα τὸν πνευματικὸ ὀργανισμὸ τῆς κοινωνίας μας.

π.Ν.Χ. Πάντως ἡ Ὀρθοδοξία ἀναπτύσσεται ὄχι μόνο στὶς Ὀρθόδοξες χῶρες. Ἔχουμε Ὀρθόδοξη Ἐκκλησία στὴν Ἀμερικὴ καὶ ἐκεῖ ὑπάρχει ἕνας τέτοιος πλουραλισμός. Ἄρα τὸ φαινόμενο δὲν εἶναι θέμα Ὀρθοδοξίας. Ἡ Ἐκκλησία μπορεῖ νὰ ὑπάρχει καὶ σὲ πλουραλιστικὲς καὶ σὲ ἐθνικές, κοινῆς ταυτότητος, κοινωνίες. Ἀλλὰ εἶναι θέμα ἐθνῶν. Γι᾿ αὐτὸ τὸ πρόβλημα τὸ νοιώθουμε περισσότερο ἐμεῖς ὡς Ἕλληνες καὶ ὄχι ὡς Ὀρθόδοξοι.

Orthodox Monasticism

N.K. Now, I would like to come to a theme closer to your own monastic experience and discuss the role and significance of Orthodox monasticism which has always occupied the central place in the history of Orthodoxy. How do you see the development of monasticism today?

Fr. N.H. Monasticism exists in order to show us the criterion of good and evil and maintain it unaltered. St. John of the Ladder writes in his book: “The guiding light of monastics is the angelic state; and the guiding light of laymen is monastic life.” What constantly inspires the life of monks is the heavenly and immaterial conduct of angels who unceasingly glorify God. Respectively, monastic life, in its absolute character, rejects the ideals of the contemporary world: comfort, money, pleasure, glory, and replaces them with ascesis, poverty, temperance and humility. Monasticism projects its message intact to the world .

Once, I told a group of young men and women who visited me: “Forgive me for being a litlle strict and absolute; maybe it would be better if I kept silent.” They answered: “No, father, it does not matter that we do not do what you tell us; live that way and keep on telling us about it. We need so much someone to remind us of the things we ought to do, but deny to. Do not despair.” I believe this is the cry of contemporary man. There is a desperate need for some, who sound more like fools in the midst of this modern world, to preserve these sacred truths and continuously declare them through their lives and voices. We need this blessed “yeast” of people with its uncompromising spirit and high standards that we may never reach. However, they will constantly inspire us towards a transfigured life.

The Church does not call everybody to monasticism and isolation. These constitute the exception. The Church's message is for all people living in this turbulent and corrupted world. On the other hand, monasticism occupies a central position in the life of the Church. Some cannot bear to live in the world as it is and say to themselves: “Either God is true and deserves everything, or He does not exist and that is the end of the story.” And since He is true and alive, they live with a godly monism, that is, with an absolute and uncompromising spirit. Hence, the primary task of monasticism is to preserve the criterion of good and evil, godly and human, natural and spiritual, unchanged; to stress that eternity is more true than historical reality, the soul more alive than the body, God more proximate than our own self.

The second task of monasticism concerns the need to have people around us who can transform their prayer into action and life; people whose only purpose is to communicate with God and keep the channels between earth and heaven open. What a blessing! Then, we, in the world, can collect the drops of God's grace left in there as truth and consolation. I am speaking more as a priest than as a monk, since I live in the center of Athens, however as monastically as possible. For instance, this interview I am giving now, is not something monastic, but rather something social; it is good, but worldly. The monastic thing would be for me to pray in a hermitage, and constantly keep those channels clean. My task, here, is different. I try to “clean” the mind and heart of people.

The ministry of the monks is double; to show us our destination in its absolute form and to pray; in other words, to maintain the communication channels between heaven and earth open. A holy task! Many people come to me and say: “Father, I cannot pray. It is your task to pray, please pray for me.” They leave comforted and this is important.

It is the humble and mystic monk who speaks in our hearts more than the educated, talented or active one. In the first case, we have God's voice in human form; in the second, human talent is presented in a godlike way. In Greece, monasteries exercise a lot of attraction to the outside world. The reason being that people search for the absolute spirit. Even if they do not apply it to their own lives, they want to hear it. Although they are unable to reach the divine truth, they yearn for it. They want to know it's there, even if they avoid it or occasionally oppose to it.

N.K. Are the channels of communication with God which constitute the monastic mission, increasing or decreasing today?

Fr. N.H. I think they are decreasing. There is a revival of monasticism and an increase in the number of monastic vocations because of the existing social fatigue. However, this fatigue finds later on an outlet. Unlike the older times, our era does not easily generate saints. Instead, it produces computers, machines and high technology. We, who become monks, are products of this era and carry on us the dirt of humanity in its perverted form. It is hard to wipe it off. For instance, if you dust yourself, you can clean up with some water. If you drop oil on you, you need soap. If you have a stain of tar, you must rub it hard for days. The contemporary dirt of sin is ineffaceable.

However, divine truth is always present and people of God still exist. It seems that monasticism is going through a spiritual crisis, and so is our Church, her ethos and spiritual values. One thing is not declining and this is the grace of God. It always remains intact. Despite the apparent difficulty in partaking of the divine grace, saints will always be present, men of God will always exist and God's miracles, that is, the revelations of His grace, will always occur in our fallen world.

N.K. Is this holiness, so hard to find in our times, declining then? Is it possible for someone to become a saint in today's Athens, or Patra?

Fr. N.H.Holiness is never declining, because it is not an ethical perfection or quality. Holiness is the grace of God, costantly expressed in the world in various forms. It is not apparent, but it exists. In the early centuries, it was manifested as martyrdom. Later on, it appeared in the form of outstanding ascetic achievements. The poor living conditions of the past prevented the growth of the materialistic spirit, so widespread in our era, thus making spiritual life easier. Today, holiness can be found in the practical aspect of life. To be able to live the longing for God, if not His experience, in a world full of sinful temptations and evil enticements, is holiness.

What is declining today is not holiness but the saints, the partakers of holiness. Perhaps we can make a few steps only towards this level, but these have great value. One step in today's world is of equal significance as ten in the past. Holiness is not the absolute measure, it is the value. It is not the magnitude of human achievement, but the way God reveals Himself to us. Saints are not people whom we admire for their achievements. Instead, they are the ones who glorify God with their love. Today, thank God, holiness has not disappeared; sources of God's consolation as well as reasons to glorify Him are present; saints exist; God is alive.

N.K. What are your views on monastic centers like Mount Athos, of which, of course, you have personal experience? What about the vast number of visitors, what do they get themselves and how do they affect the life of the monks?

Fr. N.H. Certainly, the best motive for someone to visit Mount Athos is not its treasures or historical interest, the beauty of nature or a chance to get away from the world. Although these make good reasons, they may have a negative influence on the life of the monks. Instead of hosting 4-5 people thirsty for the truth, they are obliged to offer hospitality to approximately 100 people daily, who may at times behave strangely. A good number of those visitors, however, is deeply affected by what they experience and return with a completely different mind-set. Many go to confession and change lifestyle. I, too, experience this here in this outpost of Mount Athos.

From a narrow point of view, visitors can harm the life of monks as they disturb the stillness, tranquillity and balance of their monastic routine. However, in a wider sense, such visits may contribute to the salvation of souls. By offering hospitality, a monk expresses his love and goes against his own will; he receives the grace of God, not through his achievements and efforts, but through his self-sacrifice. It is better for paradise to be full than for monasteries to remain undisturbed. On the other hand, the monks must be careful not to lose their spirit, but remain monks; it is the visitors who ought to change, not the monks. They should not become like us. They come from us, but they are not like us. In parallel to hospitality, they should be devoted to their spiritual work, their prayer. A monk must have time to himself.

N.K. From your experience of Mount Athos, would you say that the ethos has changed at all over the last twenty years?

Fr. N.H. I think the answer is both yes and no. First, a period of twenty years is too short for someone to notice any deep changes. These will show up later. Mount Athos is still under the vibrations of a sudden revival caused by the arrival of young monks new to the monastic experience. A weary, declined, yet spiritually alive Mount Athos has been massively inhabited by men tired from the world, inexperienced and not spiritually mature. This is on the human level. Their vocations, however, are from God, who will reveal His will later on. I see all this as a blessing from God to the life of the Church and of the whole world. Human mistakes and shortcomings cannot prevent the grace of God, who constantly reveals Himself humbly.

Ὀρθόδοξος Μοναχισμός

Ν.Κ. Τώρα θὰ ἤθελα νὰ ἔλθω σ᾿ ἕνα θέμα ποὺ εἶναι ἀκόμη πιὸ κοντὰ στὴ δική σας ἐμπειρία καὶ βίωμα καὶ θὰ ἤθελα νὰ ἀναφερθῶ στὸ ῥόλο καὶ στὴ σημασία τοῦ Ὀρθόδοξου μοναχισμοῦ σήμερα. Πῶς βλέπετε ἐσεῖς τὴν ἐξέλιξη τοῦ μοναχισμοῦ ποὺ ὑπῆρξε κεντρικὸς ἄξονας τῆς Ὀρθοδοξίας στὴν ἱστορία της σήμερα; Πῶς μπορεῖ νὰ ἀποτελέσει ἕνα ἐνδεικτικὸ βέλος τῆς μυστικῆς διάστασης ποὺ λείπει ἀπὸ τὴ ζωή μας σήμερα;

π.Ν.Χ. Ὁ μοναχισμὸς ὑπάρχει γιὰ νὰ δείχνει τὸ κριτήριο καὶ νὰ τὸ διατηρεῖ ἀναλλοίωτο. Λέει κάπου στὸ βιβλίο τῆς «Κλίμακος» ὁ Ἰωάννης ὁ συγγραφεύς του «φῶς μὲν μοναχοῖς ἄγγελοι, φῶς δὲ κοσμικοῖς μοναχικὴ πολιτεία». Και ἡ εἰκόνα ποὺ ἐμπνέει συνεχῶς τὴ ζωὴ τῶν μοναχῶν εἶναι τὸ ὅραμα τῆς ἀγγελικῆς πολιτείας ποὺ εἶναι ἐπουράνια, ποὺ εἶναι ἄϋλη, ποὺ εἶναι δοξολογικὴ πρὸς τὸν Θεό. Κατὰ ἀνάλογο τρόπο ἡ μοναχικὴ ζωὴ μὲ τὴν ἀπολυτότητα ποὺ ἔχει ἀποῤῥίπτει ὅλα τὰ ἰδανικὰ τοῦ σύγχρονου κόσμου· τὴν ἄνεση, τὸ χρῆμα, τὶς ἡδονές, τὴ δόξα καὶ στὴ θέση τους ἔχει βάλει τὴν ἄσκηση, τὴν πτωχεία, τὴν ἐγκράτεια καὶ τὴν ταπείνωση. Καὶ αὐτὸ τὸ μήνυμα προβάλλει σὲ ἀπόλυτο βαθμό.

Ἔλεγα κάποτε σὲ κάτι παιδιὰ ποὺ εἶχαν ἔρθει· «Σύγχωρέστε με, παιδιά, ἐγὼ εἶμαι λίγο αὐστηρὸς καὶ ἀπόλυτος ἴσως, καὶ καλύτερα νὰ σιωπῶ». Μοῦ ἀπαντοῦν· «Ὄχι, πάτερ, δὲν ἔχει σημασία ποὺ ἐμεῖς ἐρχόμαστε καὶ αὐτὰ ποὺ μᾶς λὲς δὲν τὰ κάνουμε· ζῆσε ἐσὺ ἔτσι καὶ λέγε τα. Χρειάζεται τόσο πολὺ ἕνας ἄνθρωπος σήμερα νὰ μᾶς λέει αὐτὰ ποὺ θὰ ἔπρεπε νὰ κάνουμε καὶ ἐμεῖς ἀρνούμαστε. Μὴν ἀπογοητεύεσαι». Νομίζω ὅτι αὐτὸ εἶναι μιὰ κραυγὴ τοῦ σύγχρονου ἀνθρώπου. Κάποιοι νὰ κρατήσουν αὐτὰ τὰ ἱερὰ πράγματα καὶ νὰ τὰ ἐπαναλαμβάνουν διαρκῶς μὲ τὴ ζωὴ καὶ τὸ στόμα τους, ἔστω σὰν τρελλοί, στὸ σύγχρονο κόσμο. Ἐδῶ εἶναι ἡ ἀλήθεια. Εἶναι τόσο ἀναγκαία αὐτὴ ἡ εὐλογημένη μειοψηφία ποὺ ἔχει αὐτὸ τὸ ἀπόλυτο κριτήριο καὶ πνεῦμα στὸ ὁποῖο οἱ ὑπόλοιποι ποτὲ δὲν θὰ φθάσουμε, ἀλλὰ θὰ ἐμπνεόμαστε ἀπ᾿ αὐτὸ γιὰ νὰ δοῦμε πόσο μποροῦμε καὶ ἐμεῖς νὰ φθάσουμε. Αὐτὸ θὰ μᾶς συντηρήσει στὴ ζωή.

Ἡ Ἐκκλησία δὲν εἶναι ἡ ἀπομόνωση καὶ ὁ μοναχισμός. Αὐτὸ εἶναι ἐξαίρεση. Ἡ Ἐκκλησία γιὰ τοὺς περισσότερους εἶναι ἐδῶ στὸν κόσμο, μέσα σ᾿ αὐτὴ τὴ φουρτούνα, μὲ τὰ προβλήματα, τὶς δυσκολίες, τὴ γενικευμένη σήψη. Εἶναι Ἐκκλησία ὅμως καὶ ὁ μοναχισμός. Κάποιες ψυχὲς δὲν μποροῦν νὰ βλέπουν αὐτὴ τὴν κατάσταση καὶ λένε μέσα τους τόσο ἁπαλά· «Ἢ ὁ Θεὸς εἶναι ζωντανὸς καὶ τοῦ ἀξίζουν ὅλα, ἢ δὲν ὑπάρχει καὶ τότε νὰ τελειώνει αὐτὴ ἡ ὑπόθεση». Καὶ ἐπειδὴ τοὺς εἶναι ζωντανός, ζοῦν μ᾿ ἕνα μονισμὸ θεϊκό, δηλαδὴ μὲ ἀπολυτότητα. Ἡ πρώτη λοιπὸν ἀποστολὴ τοῦ μοναχισμοῦ εἶναι αὐτή· νὰ διατηρεῖ ἀναλλοίωτο τὸ κριτήριο τοῦ καλοῦ καὶ τοῦ κακοῦ, τοῦ θεϊκοῦ καὶ τοῦ ἀνθρώπινου, τοῦ φυσικοῦ καὶ τοῦ πνευματικοῦ, κ.ο.κ. Νὰ τονίζει ὅτι ἡ αἰωνιότητα εἶναι πιὸ ἀληθινὴ ἀπὸ τὴν ἱστορικὴ πραγματικότητα, ἡ ψυχὴ πιὸ ζωντανὴ ἀπὸ τὸ σῶμα, ὁ Θεὸς πιὸ κοντινὸς κι᾿ ἀπὸ τὸν ἑαυτό μας.

Τὸ δεύτερο εἶναι ὅτι χρειάζονται καὶ κάποιοι ἄνθρωποι νὰ κάνουν τὴν προσευχὴ ἔργο καὶ ζωή. Νὰ ζοῦν μόνο γιὰ νὰ ἐπικοινωνοῦν μὲ τὸν Θεό. Μόνο γιὰ νὰ διατηροῦν αὐτοὺς τοὺς διαύλους ἐπικοινωνίας τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καὶ τῆς γῆς ἀνοικτούς. Νὰ μπαίνουν μέσα στὰ κανάλια αὐτὰ καὶ νὰ τὰ ἀνοίγουν. Τί μεγαλύτερη εὐλογία! Καὶ ὅ,τι στάζει ἀπὸ τὴ θεϊκὴ χάρι ἐκεῖ μέσα νὰ τὸ μαζεύουμε ἐμεῖς ποὺ εἴμαστε στὸν κόσμο ὡς ἀλήθεια καὶ παρηγοριά. Τὸ λέω αὐτὸ περισσότερο ὡς κοσμικὸς παρὰ ὡς μοναχὸς μιὰ ποὺ ζῶ στὸ κέντρο τῆς Ἀθήνας, ὅσο βέβαια πιὸ μοναχικὰ μπορῶ. Αὐτὸ ποὺ κάνουμε αὐτὴ τὴ στιγμὴ δὲν εἶναι κάτι μοναχικό, μιὰ συνέντευξη εἶναι κάτι κοσμικό· καλό, κοινωνικό, πῶς νὰ τὸ πῶ, ἀλλὰ τοῦ κόσμου, ὅμως. Τὸ μοναχικὸ θὰ ἦταν νὰ εἶμαι ἐγὼ σὲ μιὰ σπηλιά, σὲ μιὰ καλύβη, προσευχόμενος. Θὰ ἦταν συνεχῶς νὰ καθαρίζω αὐτὰ τὰ κανάλια, ποὺ σᾶς εἶπα. Ἐδῶ τὸ δικό μου ἔργο εἶναι διαφορετικό. Νὰ καθαρίζω τὸ μυαλὸ τῶν ἀνθρώπων λιγάκι, καὶ τὶς καρδιές τους. Αὐτὴ εἶναι ἡ διπλῆ ἀποστολὴ τῶν μοναχῶν· νὰ μᾶς δείχνουν σὲ ἀπόλυτη μορφὴ τὸ στόχο μας καὶ νὰ προσεύχωνται, νὰ διατηροῦν δηλαδὴ ἀνοικτοὺς αὐτοὺς τοὺς διαύλους ἐποικοινωνίας τοῦ οὐρανοῦ μὲ τὴ γῆ. Ἱερὴ ἀποστολή! Ἔρχονται πολλοὶ καὶ λένε· «πάτερ, μὲ συγχωρεῖς, ἐγὼ δὲν μπορῶ νὰ προσευχηθῶ, ἐσὺ ποὺ εἶναι ἡ δουλειά σου νὰ προσεύχεσαι, κάνε προσευχὴ καὶ γιὰ μένα», καὶ φεύγουν. Καὶ αὐτὸ τοὺς παρηγορεῖ. Εἶναι σημαντικό.

Γι᾿ αὐτὸ καὶ τόσο συγκινεῖ τελικὰ καὶ στὴ δική μας ἐποχή, ὄχι ὁ μορφωμένος κληρικός, ὄχι ὁ ταλαντοῦχος, ὄχι ὁ δραστήριος, ὅσο ὁ ταπεινός, ὁ ἐσωτερικός, ὁ μυστικός. Στὴν πρώτη περίπτωση μιλάει τὸ χάρισμα· στὴ δεύτερη, ἡ χάρις. Τὸ πρῶτο εἶναι ἀνθρώπινο· τὸ δεύτερο θεϊκό. Καὶ τρέχουν οἱ ἄνθρωποι στὰ μοναστήρια. Στὴν Ἑλλάδα τὸ μοναστήρι ἀσκεῖ πολὺ μεγάλη ἕλξη. Κι᾿ αὐτὸ γιατὶ ζητάει ὁ κόσμος τὸ ἀπόλυτο. Ἂς μὴ τὸ ἐφαρμόζει, τὸ θέλει ὅμως, ὅπως εἴπαμε προηγουμένως. Ἐπίσης ζητᾶ τὸ θεϊκό, ἂς μὴ τὸ μπορεῖ. Τὸ θέλει νὰ ὑπάρχει κι᾿ ἂς τὸν ἐλέγχει, κι᾿ ἂς τὸ ἀποφεύγει, κι᾿ ἂς τὸ πολεμᾶ ἐνίοτε.

π.Ν.Χ. Ἐγὼ νομίζω ὅτι συῤῥικνώνεται, δηλαδή, ὑπάρχει μιὰ ἄνθηση τοῦ μοναχισμοῦ καὶ μιὰ ἀριθμητικὴ αὔξηση τῶν μοναχικῶν κλήσεων γιατὶ ὑπάρχει καὶ μία κοινωνικὴ κόπωση. Ἀλλὰ ἡ κόπωση αὐτὴ βγαίνει κατόπιν στὴ μοναχικὴ ζωή. Δὲν γεννᾶ ἡ ἐποχή μας τόσο εὔκολα τοὺς ἁγίους, ὅπως τοὺς γεννοῦσαν οἱ ἄλλες ἐποχές. Τώρα γεννάει computers, μηχανάκια, τεχνολογία. Καὶ ἐμεῖς ποὺ γινόμαστε μοναχοί, εἴμαστε προϊόντα αὐτῆς τῆς ἐποχῆς καὶ ἔχουμε πιάσει ἐπάνω μας αὐτὴ τὴ λέρα τῆς ἀνθρώπινης διάστασης ὑπὸ τὴν διεστραμμένη της μορφή. Εἶναι δύσκολο νὰ φύγει. Ἂν σκονισθεῖς λιγάκι, ῥίχνεις νεράκι καὶ φεύγει. Ἂν πέσει λάδι, θέλεις σαπούνι. Ἂν λερωθεῖς μὲ πίσσα ἢ μελάνη, θέλει πολὺ νὰ μουσκέψεις καὶ νὰ τρίβεσαι γιὰ μέρες. Ἔτσι συμβαίνει καὶ σήμερα. Ἡ σύγχρονη λέρα τῆς ἁμαρτίας εἶναι δυσεξάλειπτη.

Βέβαια ἡ χάρις τοῦ Θεοῦ πάλι λειτουργεῖ. Καὶ σήμερα ὑπάρχουν ἄνθρωποι τοῦ Θεοῦ. Νομίζω ὅμως ὅτι αὐτὸ ποὺ παίρνουμε συνολικὰ ὡς αἴσθηση εἶναι ὅτι εἶναι πεσμένος καὶ ὁ μοναχισμός μας, πεσμένη καὶ ἡ Ἐκκλησία μας, πεσμένο τὸ ἡρωϊκὸ φρόνημα, πεσμένες οἱ πνευματικὲς ἀξίες. Ἕνα πρᾶγμα δὲν εἶναι πεσμένο, ἡ χάρις τοῦ Θεοῦ. Αὐτὴ θὰ μένει ἀμείωτη καὶ ἀναλλοίωτη γιὰ πάντα. Παρὰ τὴ δυσκολία ποὺ παρουσιάζει ἡ μετοχή της, ἅγιοι πάντοτε θὰ ἐμφανίζονται, ἄνθρωποι τοῦ Θεοῦ πάντοτε θὰ ὑπάρχουν καὶ θαύματα τοῦ Θεοῦ, δηλαδὴ φανερώσεις τῆς χάριτος Του, πάντοτε θὰ ἐπιτελοῦνται μέσα στὸν πτωτικό μας κόσμο.

Ν.Κ. Αὐτή, τὴν ἁγιότητα, ἡ ὁποία τόσο σπανίζει τὴν ἐποχή μας, πάλι σὲ σχετικὸ βαθμὸ μὲ ἄλλες ἐποχές, τὴν βλέπετε νὰ εἶναι σὲ μία φθίνουσα κατάσταση; Μιλήσατε γιὰ τὸ μοναχισμὸ ποὺ ἐκεῖ φαίνεται βέβαια νὰ ἐπιβιώνει ἔστω μὲ μιὰ διαφορετικὴ μορφή. Βλέπετε τὴν ἁγιότητα σήμερα καθόλου δυνατὴ μέσα στὸ κόσμο, δηλαδὴ μπορεῖ νὰ εἶναι κανεὶς ἅγιος στὴ σημερινὴ Ἀθήνα, στὴ σημερινὴ Πάτρα;

π.Ν.Χ. Κατ᾿ ἀρχὰς ἡ ἁγιότητα δὲν εἶναι φθίνουσα, διότι ἁγιότητα δὲν εἶναι ἡ ἠθικὴ τελείωση καὶ ποιότητα. Ἀλλὰ ἁγιότητα εἶναι ἡ χάρις τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἡ ὁποία πάντοτε ὑπάρχει, καὶ μέσα στὸν κόσμο μας, μὲ ποικίλες μορφές. Ἄλλες ἐποχὲς ὑπῆρχε μὲ τὴν μορφὴ τῶν σπουδαίων ἀσκητικῶν κατορθωμάτων. Στοὺς πρώτους αἰῶνες μὲ τὴν μορφὴ τῶν μαρτυρίων. Ἄλλοτε βοηθοῦσαν οἱ συνθῆκες τῆς γενικώτερης πτωχείας στὸ νὰ μὴν ὑπάρχει τόσος φιλοϋλισμὸς ποὺ ὑπάρχει στὴν ἐποχή μας. Στὴν ἐποχή μας ἡ ἁγιότητα εἶναι ὁ πρακτικὸς βίος. Τὸ νὰ ζεῖ κανεὶς μέσα ἀπ᾿ τὴν κόπωση τοῦ ἐνορχηστρωμένου αὐτοῦ βομβαρδισμοῦ τῶν ἁμαρτωλῶν ἐρεθισμάτων, τὴν προσδοκία τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἴσως ὄχι τὴν ἐμπειρία, αὐτὸ εἶναι ἁγιότητα.

Αὐτοὶ ποὺ λιγοστεύουν, ἀλλὰ ὑπάρχουν ἀκόμη, εἶναι οἱ μέτοχοι τῆς ἁγιότητος, οἱ ἅγιοι. Ἴσως μποροῦμε ἐμεῖς σὲ λίγα μέτρα νὰ φθάσουμε. Αὐτὰ ὅμως ἔχουν μεγάλη ἀξία. Ἁγιότητα δὲν εἶναι τὸ μέτρο, εἶναι ἡ ἀξία. Δὲν εἶναι τὸ μέγεθος τοῦ ἀνθρώπινου κατορθώματος, εἶναι τὸ πῶς οἰκονομεῖ ὁ Θεὸς νὰ φανερώνεται. Ἅγιοι δὲν εἶναι αὐτοὶ ποὺ τοὺς θαυμάζουμε γιὰ τὰ κατορθώματά τους. Ἅγιοι εἶναι αὐτοὶ ποὺ τὸν Θεὸ δοξάζουνε μὲ τὴν ἀγάπη τους. Ὅταν μέσα στὶς τόσες πολλὲς προκλήσεις, ἕνας λίγο κατορθώνει, αὐτὸ εἶναι τῆς ἰδίας βαρύτητος ὅταν μὲ τὶς μισὲς προκλήσεις κάποιος κάνει τὸ διπλάσιο. Καὶ σήμερα, δόξᾳ τῷ Θεῷ, ὑπάρχει ἁγιότης. Ὑπάρχουν καὶ οἱ ἑστίες τῆς θεϊκῆς παρηγοριᾶς καὶ οἱ ἀφορμὲς τῆς δόξης Του. Ὑπάρχουν ἅγιοι. Ζεῖ ὁ Θεός.

Ν.Κ. Ἀπὸ τὴν ἐμπειρία σας μοναστικῶν κέντρων ὅπως εἶναι τὸ Ἅγιον Ὄρος, βλέπετε τὰ μοναστικὰ αὐτὰ κέντρα σιγὰ-σιγὰ νὰ ἐξελίσσονται σὲ πόλους ὅπου ἀπὸ τὴν μιὰ μεριὰ ὑπάρχουν οἱ θεματοφύλακες τῶν παραδόσεων ἀλλὰ καὶ τῶν θησαυρῶν ὡς τύπου μουσιακοῦ ἂν θέλετε, οἱ μοναχοί, καὶ ἀπὸ τὴν ἄλλη ἄνθρωποι ἐξουθενωμένοι ἀπὸ τὸ βάρος καὶ τὴν κόπωση τῆς ζωῆς ποὺ πᾶνε γιὰ κάποια ἀνάσα τύπου τουριστικῆς ἀναζήτησης, οἱ ἐπισκέπτες; Τί ἐπιπτώσεις ἔχει αὐτὸ πάνω στοὺς μοναχούς, οἱ ὁποῖοι, ὅπως εἴπατε, ἀναζητοῦν μὲ καθαρὲς καὶ ὁπωσδήποτε κατὰ ἕνα μεγάλο βαθμὸ εἰλικρινεῖς ἐπιθυμίες καὶ προθέσεις, νὰ κρατήσουν ἀνοιχτοὺς τοὺς διαύλους ἐπικοινωνίας μεταξὺ Θεοῦ καὶ ἀνθρώπων;

π.Ν.Χ. Ὁπωσδήποτε τὸ καλύτερο κίνητρο γιὰ νὰ ἐπισκεφθεῖ κανεὶς τὸ Ἅγιον Ὄρος, δὲν εἶναι οἱ θησαυροί, ἢ ἡ ὄμορφη φύση, ἢ ἡ ξεκούραση ἀπὸ τὸν κουραστικό μας κόσμο ἢ κάποιο ἱστορικὸ ἐνδιαφέρον. Ὅλα ὅμως αὐτὰ εἶναι δικαιολογημένα, ἀλλὰ ὁπωσδήποτε ἐπηρεάζουν τὴ ζωὴ τῶν μοναχῶν. Ἀναγκάζονται, ἀντὶ νὰ φιλοξενοῦν 4-5 ἀνθρώπους ποὺ διψοῦν γιὰ ἀλήθεια, νὰ φιλοξενοῦν καὶ ἑκατὸ ἀνθρώπους τὴ μέρα ποὺ φέρονται ἴσως καὶ περίεργα. Βέβαια ἕνας σημαντικὸς ἀριθμὸς ἀπὸ αὐτοὺς συγκλονίζονται ἀπὸ αὐτὰ ποὺ βλέπουν, γυρίζουν ἐντελῶς ἀλλαγμένοι, πολλοὶ ἐξομολογοῦνται καὶ μεταστρέφεται ἡ ζωή τους. Αὐτὸ ἐγὼ τὸ ζῶ ἐδῶ, ποὺ εἶναι μετόχι τοῦ Ἁγίου Ὄρους.

Ἂν τὸ δεῖ κανεὶς στενά, αὐτὸ βλάπτει τοὺς μοναχούς. Τοὺς ἐκτρέπει ἀπὸ τὴ μορφὴ τῆς ζωῆς τους. Ἂν τὸ δεῖ εὐρύτερα, αὐτὸ οἰκοδομεῖ τὴ σωτηρία τῶν ψυχῶν. Τελικῶς, ὁ μοναχὸς θυσιάζεται, κάνει τὴ διακονία τῆς ἀγάπης του, ἐκτρέπεται ἀπὸ τὸ πρόγραμμά του καὶ τὸ θέλημά του καὶ ὁ Θεὸς μὲ ἄλλους τρόπους τοῦ δίνει τὴ χάρι Του. Ὄχι μὲ τὰ κατορθώματα καὶ τὶς προσπάθειές του, ἀλλὰ μὲ τὴν ὑπακοὴ στὸ ἔργο τῆς σωτηρίας. Καλύτερα νὰ χαλάσουν τὰ μοναστήρια ἂν εἶναι νὰ γεμίσει ὁ παράδεισος. Ἁπλῶς χρειάζεται νὰ προσέχουν οἱ μοναχοὶ μήπως καὶ αὐτοὶ στὸ τέλος χάσουν τὸ πνεῦμά τους καί, ἀντὶ νὰ ἀλλάζει ὁ κόσμος ἀλλάζουν οἱ ἴδιοι. Δὲν πρέπει νὰ γίνουν σὰν κι ἐμᾶς. Οἱ μοναχοὶ εἶναι ἀπὸ μᾶς, ἀλλὰ δὲν εἶναι σὰν ἐμᾶς. Αὐτὸ πρέπει νὰ μείνει. Καὶ τὸ δεύτερο, θὰ πρέπει τὴν ἐργασία τους τὴν πνευματική, τὴν προσευχή, νὰ τὴν ἐπιτελοῦν. Κάποτε θὰ κλείνει τὴν πόρτα του ὁ μοναχός. Οὔτε τὸ φρόνημα οὔτε ἡ κύρια ἀποστολή του πρέπει νὰ ἀλλοιωθεῖ.

Ν.Κ. Ἀπὸ τὴν πραγματικότητα καὶ τὴν ἐμπειρία σας γιὰ τὸ τί συμβαίνει στὸ Ἅγιον Ὄρος τὰ τελευταῖα εἴκοσι χρόνια, βλέπετε καθόλου τὸ φρόνημα νὰ ἀλλοιώνεται;

π.Ν.Χ. Νομίζω πὼς καὶ ναὶ καὶ ὄχι. Δηλαδὴ κατ᾿ ἀρχὰς ἡ περίοδος τῶν εἴκοσι ἐτῶν εἶναι πολὺ μικρὴ γιὰ νὰ δεῖ κανεὶς τὶς βαθειὲς ἀλλαγές. Θὰ φανοῦν αὐτὲς ἀργότερα. Τὸ Ἅγιον Ὄρος περνάει ἀκόμη τοὺς κραδασμοὺς μιᾶς ἀνανεώσεως ξαφνικῆς μὲ νέους στὴν ἡλικία, μὲ νέους στὴ μοναχικὴ ἐμπειρία. Ἕνα κουρασμένο, παρηκμασμένο, ἀλλὰ πνευματικὸ Ἅγιον Ὄρος δέχθηκε κουρασμένους ἀπὸ τὸν κόσμο, ἄπειρους καὶ μὴ καλλιεργημένους, ὅπως παλιά, ἀνθρώπους. Αὐτὸ σὲ ἀνθρώπινο ἐπίπεδο. Τὶς κλήσεις ὅμως ὁ Θεὸς τὶς ἔβαλε. Γι᾿ αὐτὸ ὁ Θεὸς θὰ δείξει τὰ ἀποτελέσματα. Ἐγὼ τὰ βλέπω ὅλα αὐτὰ ὡς μιὰ εὐλογία ποὺ οἰκονόμησε ὁ Θεὸς ἔτσι νὰ ἔλθει στὴ ζωὴ τῆς Ἐκκλησίας μας καὶ τοῦ κόσμου ὁλόκληρου. Μέσα ἀπὸ τὰ πολλὰ λάθη καὶ τὰ στραβὰ ποὺ ἴσως γίνονται μπορεῖ πάλι ταπεινὰ νὰ ἐμφανίζεται ἡ χάρις τοῦ Θεοῦ.

Orthodoxy and Biomedical Ethics

N.K. Let me now touch a topic which concerns your knowledge and experience as a natural scientist. I would like your views on Orthodoxy and contemporary scientific and technological developments in the biomedical world. I think these developments are staggering and generate a host of very important ethical and social problems as well as high expectations. Has Orthodoxy anything to say about these things?

Fr. N.H. Each subject of bioethics constitutes in itself a separate topic for discussion. It would be a mistake for me to touch on this subject, since the Orthodox Church has not yet expressed an official point of view. And I will not do so. However, I will say a few general things, first on the subject of reproductive technologies and secondly on euthanasia, which has already been legalized in countries such as Australia and the Netherlands.

According to Orthodoxy, biological life is a great gift from God, but not the greatest. The greatest gift is spiritual life. Whether a man lives 50 years or 70 years, it does not make any difference; he is a big nothing in history and a zero through the centuries. Since the center of life is God, biological life being a gift from God is indeed valuable, but true life is the spiritual one. Some Christians, by emphasizing man and present time, make life on this earth disproportionately significant. According to the Orthodox point of view, the center is God and the future, the eternal future. We are more what we will become, gods by grace, than what we now are, human beings; what we have been called to become, saints, than what we are now involved in, sins; what constitutes our life in the Kingdom of God, the eternal future, than what determines our passing through this world, the transient present. Thus, biological life acquires a priceless value due to the existence of spiritual life; and the present becomes equally important due to the future.

In our days, strange things are happening in regards to the subject of life. While we extensively talk about the value of life, we systematically prevent births in our “civilized” world. While we agonizingly spend a lot of money on health and prolongation of our life span, we legalize euthanasia. Thus, a conflict is created in the field of reproductive technologies. One group of technologies says “no,” where nature says “yes,” such as abortion, contraceptive technologies, sterilization. And another group says “yes,” where nature says “no,” i.e. I.V.F, artificial insemination, etc. It seems the struggle of science is not a struggle for life, but a struggle against nature. How can we keep silent and not demand the establishment of certain criteria which will determine the degree of human interference in the beginning of life, in the birth of the soul?

A similar contradiction exists in the subject of the end of life, such as euthanasia, where pain fights against time; pain, which is ours, a consequence of our original sin, against time, which is a gift from God to us. Time is a divine blessing, a lot more than pain is our enemy.

Death as an event, marking the beginning of eternity, is much more important than the way it occurs in this life. The state of the soul in eternity is what finally counts in death, and not the state of our body during the last moments in this transient life. This can generate patience, tolerance and love for the people around us, care and trust in God's will, respect and humility in the acceptance of our trials as His gifts. That is why, euthanasia is the worst spiritual death according to the Orthodox Church.

Of course, there is an opposite side to this. Do these supportive respiratory technologies prolong life or prevent death? And do we have the right to prevent death when it is on its way, and let someone live an ambiguous life? These are matters that need to be discussed.

As you are aware, the Church has a different logic on these subjects; the logic of the salvation of the soul, the logic of God. Hence, the salvation of a sterile couple can emerge from the trial of their sterility. Natural sterility can lead to spiritual fertility. Couples who do not conceive children can conceive God. The Church accepts medical intervention within the spirit of the expectation of God's will, rather than of having a child to whom we will offer the inheritance of our selfish love. Usually, we want a child, and not “children,” for ourselves in this world and not for God in eternity. The heart of the matter is not that a couple wants to have children, but it is why they want to have them. The Church sees children as spiritual extensions of God and not as our own physical products. The beginning of life brings the beginning of the soul. Every single soul is a breath of God. The beginning of life is as sacred as the form of life itself.

And this brings me to the topic of genetic engineering. Today, genetic engineering extensively discusses, but also plays games, with the beginning as well as the form of life. The creation of new forms of life occupies a central position among its interests. The subject of the human genome project as well as of gene therapy have been widely publicized. Scientists hoped that, by 1995, a complete mapping of the human genome would have been accomplished, that is the specific determination of the genes' position inside DNA, as well as the therapy and prevention of diseases through the replacement of the problematic genes. However, things are not so easy.

Suppose, science manages to achieve its goals in the field of genetic engineering. Why should man change the form of life? What is the point of predetermining the color of our child's hair, when we haven't experienced God at all? As I have already said, our life is more what we will become than what we now are. So, we will have spent all our life in this world without the perspective of eternity. The Church does not agree with this, as she believes in the respect of life as a gift from God, not as the source of good. The utmost good is the manifestation of God in our life.

N.K.If technology and science allow a couple to diagnose a life-long handicap at the embryonic stage, what do you think would be best for the couple to do? To prevent that child from being born or proceed to treatment if possible?

Fr. N.H. The possibility of treatment is a good solution, as it would assist the quality of life along with its production. But as you very well know, in all cases of prenatal examination, the question is whether to prevent birth or not, whether to allow a handicapped child to be born or not. Why can't our “civilized” society bear to bring up a handicapped child? To take care of it, to support the parents and spiritually edify the family and friends?

I know a family with a tetraplegic young boy. He is now ten years old and has become very heavy to carry and move around. When you see him, you cannot but feel sorry for him. However, this child has awaken in the hearts of his parents feelings, not only of pain, but of humility, love, unselfishness, self-sacrifice; feelings related to their spiritual growth. The parents do not even want to think that their little boy might soon die. Even if they suffer, they adore him. This is a common experience. I don’t know if there are any parents who wish their handicapped child would rather die. However, if these parents knew of their child's defect through a prenatal examination, most probably they would have prevented this birth, and thus make our world even poorer in love and richer in selfishness. We would have one angel less to remind us that we live in a fallen world anticipating the everlasting and divine world to come.

Death, whether we want it or not, will exist. The only definite inheritance we all carry and pass on to our children is the stigma of death. Which illness or impairment can be worse than death? The Church suggests another kind of prenatal examination. The one that makes couples realize that they do not give birth to a life in this world, but to a soul in the world of eternity. In this sense, a child is a soul, a little angel, a breath of God, which although carries the stigma of sin, yet it generates humility, not despair. We will not prevent a pregnancy, because the abortion of an embryo from its mother's womb, is the abortion of its soul from God's embrace and of our own soul from His will.

N.K. I discern in what you say that Orthodoxy does not hold an anti-scientific position and is not set against research in these fields, but research must know its limits?

Fr. N.H.Who would say the opposite? These limits must be well defined and not negotiable. For instance, the Church cannot accept the fact that in order for a child to be born, we must kill a dozen other fertilized eggs, which are embryos. And it is not only the Orthodox Church that is set against this, but also anyone who believes in any god cannot accept it either.

N.K. But even a completely secular view on these issues, which is not based on any metaphysical considerations, faces severe ethical dilemmas in this area?

Fr. N.H. Certainly. And for this reason most of the existing centers for bioethics are not religious, but academic, secular. People are afraid of these delicate issues. Unfortunately, we realize the consequences of our actions, only when we reach the result. We can neither prevent, nor predict. And we play games. What do we need these games for?

N.K.Is this a progress according to the Orthodox tradition?

Fr. N.H. What, playing games with life?

N.K. Research is always dangerous since the result is unknown as you yourself know.

Fr. N.H. The problem is not research. The problem is the application of research on man and life. I read in a newspaper clipping that a sperm donor has more than 200 living children and God knows how many dead ones. He gave his sperm through which thousands of eggs were fertilized. This man now has 200 children with various women and thousands of dead embryos. What is the use of all this? To get paid for giving out his sperm? To play with nature and life? The sperm is sacred. It has another purpose, which we should respect. There's a lot to be said on this subject.

N.K. First, I would like to ask you if the Orthodox Church has any solutions to suggest? And secondly, you, as an Orhtodox monk, as a priest who has knowledge on the subject, can you detect the ethical consequences of the recent biomedical achievements?

Fr. N.H. The Orthodox Church and tradition do not aim at giving preset solutions to problems, but rather at creating a certain mind-set, a way of thinking out of which the solutions will clearly emerge. On the contrary, the Western world codifies its ethics. The Orthodox tradition is not preocuppied with what we will do, but with how and what we will become, with our inner change. Our specific ethical actions do not necessarily lead to our inner spiritual transformation, but rather they result from it.

Moreover, there is a growing interest on the side of the Church on these matters. The national committees always invite reperesentatives of the Church who are involved in the subject of bioethics. Here in this outpost of Mount Athos, we have established the first center for Biomedical Ethics in Greece. Its intention is to collect related bibliography and create the grounds for academic discussions and understanding of these subjects; hence, an Orthodox point of view may gradually emerge leading the Church to specific positions, if necessary, and assisting society to proceed to relevant legislative regulations. This indicates a particular respect for the seriousness of the existing problems, but also the tremendous possibility for the dogmatic theological truths to be expressed through the channel of this contemporary questioning and language.

Certainly, these are the channels through which we can say a few things; speak about the respect for life, about the soul and life as a breath of God; present ethics as a result of spiritual freedom and not as a recipee. By analyzing the beginning of life, we have a better understanding of its end! There has never been such a conscientious and detailed preoccupation with the phenomenon of life and death so far. Our era gives us the opportunity to spread the everlasting message of God by using a new dialect. After a few years, we can repeat the same message through a different dialect. So, God can pass through the variety of channels we spoke earlier.

Ὀρθοδοξία καὶ Σύγχρονα Βιοηθικὰ διλήμματα

Ν.Κ. Γιὰ νὰ τελειώσουμε, θὰ ἔλθω σ᾿ ἕνα κεφάλαιο ποὺ εἶναι σημαντικὸ καὶ ποὺ εἶναι κοντὰ στὶς γνώσεις καὶ ἐμπειρία σας ὡς θετικοῦ ἐπιστήμονα. Θὰ ἤθελα νὰ μιλήσουμε λίγο γιὰ τὴν Ὀρθοδοξία καὶ τὶς σύγχρονες ἐπιστημονικὲς καὶ τεχνολογικὲς ἐξελίξεις. Ἰδιαίτερα θὰ ἤθελα νὰ ἐπικεντρωθοῦμε κάπως στὶς ἐξελίξεις τοῦ βιοτεχνολογικοῦ καὶ ἰατρικοῦ χώρου. Ἐδῶ νομίζω συντελοῦνται πιὰ ἀξιόλογες ἐξελίξεις ποὺ γεννοῦν σημαντικὰ ἠθικὰ προβλήματα.

Ἀφ᾿ ἑνὸς μὲν γνωρίζουμε ὅτι ἡ τεχνολογικὴ πρόοδος καὶ ἐπιστημονικὴ γνώση στὸ χῶρο αὐτὸ ἔχει παρατείνει τὴ ζωὴ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου. Στατιστικὰ δηλαδή. Ἀπὸ τὴν ἄλλη πλευρὰ διατηροῦνται στὴ ζωὴ ἄνθρωποι, οἱ ὁποῖοι ὑπὸ ἄλλες συνθῆκες θὰ πέθαιναν φυσιολογικά. Γεννᾶται λοιπὸν ἕνα ἠθικὸ πρόβλημα τῆς λειτουργίας καὶ ἐφαρμογῆς τῆς ὅλης βιολογικῆς καὶ ἰατρικῆς ἐπιστημονικῆς τεχνολογίας πάνω στὴ ζωὴ καὶ τὰ ἠθικὰ ζητήματα τὰ ὁποῖα δημιουργεῖ. Καὶ θὰ ἤθελα ἐδῶ τὴ γνώμη σας καθὼς ἐπίσης καὶ σ᾿ αὐτὸ τώρα ποὺ ἔχει τεθεῖ στὶς σύγχρονες κοινωνίες καὶ ὄχι μόνο στὶς δυτικὲς χῶρες, τὸ λεγόμενο πρόβλημα τῆς εὐθανασίας. Θὰ παρακαλοῦσα τὴ γνώμη σας σ᾿ αὐτὰ ἀπὸ μιὰ Ὀρθόδοξη θεώρηση, καὶ κάτα πόσο ἡ ἐξέλιξη αὐτή, σὲ κάποιο σημεῖο βγαίνει ἔξω ἀπὸ τὰ ὅρια καὶ ἔξω ἀπὸ τὸν ἔλεγχο ὁρισμένων καταστάσεων.

π.Ν.Χ. Βέβαια, τὸ θέμα αὐτό, τὸ κάθε θέμα βιοηθικῆς εἶναι θέμα μιᾶς ξεχωριστῆς καὶ πολὺ καλὰ μελετημένης συνεντεύξεως. Θὰ εἶναι πολὺ μεγάλο λάθος νὰ προσπαθήσω νὰ πῶ κάτι σ᾿ αὐτὸ τὸ χῶρο τὴ στιγμὴ ποὺ ἀκόμη ἡ Ὀρθόδοξη Ἐκκλησία δὲν ἔχει διατυπώσει ἐπίσημη ἄποψη. Καὶ δὲν θὰ τὸ κάνω αὐτὸ τὸ πρᾶγμα. Μπορῶ ὅμως νὰ πῶ δυὸ-τρία πράγματα ἔξω-ἔξω καὶ γενικὰ γιὰ τὸ θέμα τῶν ἀναπαραγωγικῶν τεχνολογιῶν ἀφ᾿ ἑνὸς καὶ τῆς εὐθανασίας ἀφ᾿ ἑτέρου, μιὰ ποὺ τὸ πρῶτο κυριαρχεῖ στην ἰατρικὴ πράξη, τὸ δὲ δεύτερο ἤδη νομιμοποιήθηκε στὴν Αὐστραλία, στὴν Ὁλλανδία, κ.λπ.

Κατ᾿ ἀρχὰς στὴν Ὀρθόδοξη ἀντίληψη, ἡ βιολογικὴ ζωὴ εἶναι μεγάλο δῶρο ἀπὸ τὸ Θεό, ἀλλὰ ὄχι τὸ μεγαλύτερο. Τὸ μεγαλύτερο δῶρο εἶναι ἡ πνευματικὴ ζωή. Διότι εἴτε ζήσει ἕνας ἄνθρωπος 50 χρόνια, εἴτε ζήσει 70 χρόνια τὸ ἴδιο εἶναι· ἕνα τίποτε μέσα στὴν ἱστορία καὶ μέσα στοὺς αἰῶνες. Ἂς πάρουμε ἕνα παράδειγμα. Ὁ Κολοκοτρώνης πέθανε τὸ 1843 καὶ ὁ Κανάρης τὸ 1870. Κάνει καμμιὰ διαφορὰ γιὰ σᾶς; Ἐμένα ἡ μία γιαγιὰ μου πέθανε τὸ 1962, ἡ ἄλλη τὸ 1960. Ἂν εἶχαν πεθάνει τὸ 1985, πάλι τὴν ἴδια αἴσθηση θὰ εἶχα, ὅτι φύγανε. Ἐπειδὴ ἀκριβῶς ἐπίκεντρο τῆς ζωῆς εἶναι ὁ Θεὸς κατὰ τὴν Ὀρθόδοξη ἀντίληψη, ἡ βιολογικὴ ζωή, ἔχει τὴν ἀξία της ὡς δῶρο τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἀλλὰ ἡ πνευματικὴ ζωή, εἶναι ἡ ὄντως ζωή. Στὴν ἀντίληψη ἄλλων χριστιανῶν κέντρο εἶναι ὁ ἄνθρωπος καὶ τὸ παρόν. Γι᾿ αὐτὸ ἡ βαρύτητα τῆς παρούσης ζωῆς εἶναι δυσανάλογα μεγάλη. Στὴν Ὀρθόδοξη ἀντίληψη κέντρο εἶναι ὁ Θεὸς καὶ τὸ μέλλον, τὸ αἰώνιο μέλλον. Εἴμαστε πιὸ πολὺ αὐτὸ ποὺ θὰ γίνουμε, θεοὶ κατὰ χάριν, ἀπὸ αὐτὸ ποὺ τώρα εἴμαστε, ἄνθρωποι. Αὐτὸ γιὰ τὸ ὁποῖο εἴμαστε κεκλημένοι, ἁγιότητα, ἀπὸ αὐτὸ ποὺ κάνουμε, ἁμαρτίες. Αὐτὸ ποὺ ἀποτελεῖ τὴ ζωή μας στὴ βασιλεία τοῦ Θεοῦ, τὸ αἰώνιο μέλλον, ἀπὸ αὐτὸ ποὺ προσδιορίζει τὸ πέρασμά μας σ᾿ αὐτὸ τὸν κόσμο, τὸ πρόσκαιρο παρόν. Ἡ βιολογικὴ ζωὴ ἀποκτᾶ ἔτσι ἀνυπολόγιστη ἀξία λόγῳ τῆς πνευματικῆς. Τὸ παρὸν λόγῳ τοῦ μέλλοντος.

Στὶς μέρες μας συμβαίνουν πολλὰ παράξενα στὰ θέματα τῆς ζωῆς. Ἐνῶ μιλᾶμε ἐκτενῶς γιὰ τὴν ἀξία τῆς ζωῆς, συστηματικὰ καὶ μεθοδευμένα παρεμποδίζουμε τὶς γεννήσεις στὸν ...πολιτισμένο κόσμο. Ἐνῶ ἀγωνιωδῶς καταξοδευόμεθα στὰ θέματα ὑγείας καὶ παρατάσεως ζωῆς, νομιμοποιοῦμε τὴν εὐθανασία. Ἔτσι στὶς ἀναπαραγωγικὲς τεχνολογίες ὑπάρχει ἕνας διχασμός. Ἡ μία ὁμάδα τεχνολογιῶν εἶναι ἐκεῖνες οἱ ὁποῖες ἐκεῖ ποὺ ἡ φύση λέει ναί, ἐκεῖνες λένε ὄχι. Τέτοιες εἶναι ἡ ἔκτρωση, οἱ ἀντισυλληπτικὲς τεχνολογίες, ἡ στειροποίηση. Καὶ ἡ ἄλλη οἰκογένεια τεχνολογιῶν εἶναι ἐκεῖνες ποὺ προσπαθοῦν νὰ λένε ναὶ ἐκεῖ ποὺ ἡ φύση λέει ὄχι. Τέτοιες εἶναι ἡ ἐξωσωματικὴ γονιμοποίηση, ἡ ἑτερόλογη ἢ ὁμόλογη σπερματέγχυση, κ.ο.κ. Στὴν οὐσία λοιπὸν ὁ ἀγώνας τῆς ἐπιστήμης δὲν εἶναι ἀγώνας γιὰ τὴ ζωὴ ἀλλὰ εἶναι ἀγώνας κατὰ τῆς φύσεως. Πῶς λοιπὸν νὰ μὴν ζητοῦμε τὸν καθορισμὸ κάποιων κριτηρίων καθοριστικῶν τῆς ἀνθρώπινης παρέμβασης στὴν ἀρχὴ τῆς ζωῆς, στὴ γέννηση τῆς ψυχῆς;

Ἀνάλογη ἀντιφατικότητα ὑπάρχει καὶ στὰ θέματα τοῦ τέλους τῆς ζωῆς, ὅπως αὐτὸ τῆς εὐθανασίας, ἐκεῖ ποὺ παλεύει ὁ πόνος μὲ τὸ χρόνο. Ὁ πόνος ποὺ εἶναι δικός μας, συνέπεια τῆς πτώσεώς μας, μὲ τὸν χρόνο ποὺ εἶναι δῶρο τοῦ Θεοῦ σὲ μᾶς. Εἶναι περισσότερο εὐλογία θεϊκὴ ὁ χρόνος παρὰ ἐχθρὸς ὁ πόνος.

Τὸ γεγονὸς τοῦ θανάτου, ὡς γεγονὸς κυρίως τῆς αἰωνιότητος, εἶναι ἀπείρως μεγαλυτέρας σημασίας τοῦ τρόπου τοῦ θανάτου ποὺ ἐπισυμβαίνει σ᾿ αὐτὴ τὴ ζωή. Τὸ «πῶς» τῆς αἰωνίας καταστάσεως τῆς ψυχῆς εἶναι τελικὰ ποὺ μετράει στὸ θάνατο καὶ ὄχι τὸ «πῶς» τῶν τελευταίων στιγμῶν τοῦ σώματος στὴν πρόσκαιρη ζωή. Αὐτὸ μπορεῖ να γεννήσει ὑπομονή, ἀνοχὴ καὶ ἀγάπη στοὺς γύρω, φροντίδα καὶ ἐμπιστοσύνη στὸ θέλημα τοῦ Θεοῦ, σεβασμὸ καὶ ταπείνωση στὴν ἀποδοχὴ τῶν δώρων Του. Γι᾿ αὐτὸ ἀκριβῶς καὶ γιὰ τὴν Ἐκκλησία ἡ εὐθανασία εἶναι ὁ χειρότερος πνευματικὰ θάνατος.

Βέβαια ὑπάρχει καὶ ἡ ἄλλη πλευρά. Τελικὰ ὅλες αὐτὲς οἱ τεχνολογίες τῆς ὑποβοηθήσεως τοῦ ἀναπνευστικοῦ συστήματος παρατείνουν τὴ ζωὴ ἢ παρεμποδίζουν τὸν θάνατο; Καὶ ἔχουμε τὸ δικαίωμα ἐμεῖς νὰ παρεμποδίσουμε τὸ θάνατο ὅταν ἔρχεται, καὶ ἕναν ἄνθρωπο νὰ τὸν καθιστοῦμε σ᾿ αὐτὴ τὴν κατάσταση τῆς ἀμφίβολης ζωῆς; Εἶναι θέματα ποὺ πρέπει νὰ τὰ συζητήσουμε.

Ὅπως καταλαβαίνετε ἡ Ἐκκλησία ἔχει μιὰ ἄλλη λογικὴ σ᾿ αὐτὰ τὰ θέματα· τὴ λογικὴ τῆς σωτηρίας τῆς ψυχῆς καὶ τοῦ Θεοῦ. Ἔτσι μπορεῖ νὰ προκύψει ἡ σωτηρία ἑνὸς ζευγαριοῦ μέσα ἀπὸ τὴ δοκιμασία τῆς στειρότητος. Ἡ φυσικὴ στειρότητα μπορεῖ νὰ ὁδηγήσει σὲ πνευματικὴ γονιμότητα. Ζευγάρια ποὺ δὲν γεννοῦν παιδιὰ μποροῦν νὰ γεννοῦν τὸν Θεό. Ἡ Ἐκκλησία δέχεται φιλάνθρωπα τὴν ἰατρικὴ παρέμβαση, ἀλλὰ μέσα στὸ πνεῦμα τῆς προσδοκίας τοῦ θελήματος τοῦ Θεοῦ περισσότερο καὶ ὄχι ἑνὸς παιδιοῦ στὸ ὁποῖο θὰ προσφέρουμε τὴν κληρονομιὰ τῆς ἐγωϊστικῆς μας ἀγάπης. Συνήθως τὸ παιδί, καὶ ὄχι «τὰ παιδιά», τὸ θέλουμε γιὰ μᾶς σ᾿ αὐτὸν τὸν κόσμο καὶ ὄχι γιὰ τὸ ἴδιο καὶ τὸν Θεὸ στὴν αἰωνιότητα. Δὲν εἶναι τόσο τὸ ὅτι οἱ γονεῖς θέλουν νὰ κάνουν παιδιά, ἀλλὰ τὸ γιατί θέλουν. Μ᾿ αὐτὸ δὲν ἔχει ἀσχοληθεῖ κανείς. Ἡ Ἐκκλησία βλέπει τὰ παιδιὰ ὄχι ὡς φυσικὲς προεκτάσεις δικές μας, ἀλλὰ ὡς πνευματικὲς προεκτάσεις τοῦ Θεοῦ. Ἔτσι πολλαπλασιάζεται ὁ Θεός. Γιατὶ ὅταν ἀρχίζει ἡ ζωή, ἀρχίζει ἡ ψυχή. Καὶ εἶναι πολὺ ὡραῖο γιατὶ κάθε ψυχὴ εἶναι μιὰ ἀνάσα τοῦ Θεοῦ, μιὰ πνοή Του. Ἔχει ἱερότητα ἡ ἀρχὴ τῆς ζωῆς ὅπως ἔχει ἱερότητα καὶ ἡ μορφὴ τῆς ζωῆς.

Ἂς ἔλθουμε τώρα στὸ θέμα τῆς γενετικῆς μηχανικῆς. Σήμερα ἡ γενετικὴ μηχανικὴ ἀρχίζει πολὺ νὰ συζητάει καὶ ἐνδεχομένως νὰ παίζει ὄχι ἁπλῶς μὲ τὴν ἀρχὴ τῆς ζωῆς, ἀλλὰ καὶ μὲ τὴ μορφὴ τῆς ζωῆς. Κεντρικὴ θέση στὰ ἐνδιαφέροντά της ἡ δημιουργία νέων μορφῶν ζωῆς. Πολυδιατυμπανίστηκε τὸ θέμα αὐτὸ τοῦ ἀνθρωπίνου γονιδιώματος, τὸ human genome project, ὅπως καὶ τὰ θέματα τῆς γονιδιακῆς θεραπείας. Ἔλεγαν ὅτι ἀπὸ τὸ 1990 μέχρι τὸ 1995 θὰ ἔχει γίνει ἡ πλήρης χαρτογράφηση τοῦ ἀνθρώπινου γονιδιώματος, δηλαδὴ ὁ ἀκριβὴς προσδιορισμὸς τῆς θέσεως τῶν γονιδίων μέσα στὸ DNA, κ.λπ. καὶ ἡ θεραπεία ἢ καὶ πρόληψη ἀσθενειῶν μὲ ἀντικατάσταση τῶν προβληματικῶν γονιδίων. Τὰ πράγματα δὲν εἶναι βέβαια τόσο εὔκολα.

Ἂς ὑποθέσουμε ὅμως ὅτι ὅλα πηγαίνουν καλά, ὅτι τελικὰ ἔφθασε ἡ ἐπιστήμη νὰ κάνει ἀξιόλογα ἐπιτεύγματα σ᾿ αὐτὸν τὸν τομέα. Γιατί ν᾿ ἀλλάξει τὴ μορφὴ τῆς ζωῆς ὁ ἄνθρωπος; Τί ἀξία ἔχει νὰ ἔχουμε προκαθορίσει τὸ χρῶμα τῶν μαλλιῶν τοῦ παιδιοῦ μας, ὅταν στὰ 80 χρόνια ποὺ θὰ ἔχουμε ζήσει σ᾿ αὐτὸν τὸν κόσμο δὲν θὰ ἔχουμε πάρει γεύση Θεοῦ. Καὶ ὅπως εἶπα προηγουμένως ἡ ζωή μας εἶναι πιὸ πολὺ αὐτὸ ποὺ θὰ γίνουμε ἀπὸ αὐτὸ ποὺ τώρα εἴμαστε. Συνεπῶς θὰ χάσουμε τὸ ἄλλο καὶ θὰ ἔχουμε περάσει ἐδῶ μιὰ ζωὴ χωρὶς τὴν προοπτικὴ τῆς ἄλλης. Σ᾿ αὐτὸ εἶναι ἀντίθετη ἡ Ἐκκλησία. Αὐτὴ πιστεύει στὸ σεβασμὸ τῆς ζωῆς ὡς δώρου τοῦ Θεοῦ, ὄχι ὅμως ὡς πηγῆς τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ. Τὸ μέγιστο ἀγαθὸ εἶναι ἡ φανέρωση τοῦ Θεοῦ στὴ ζωή μας.

Ν.Κ. Στὴν περίπτωση ὅμως ποὺ μιὰ τέτοια τεχνολογία ἢ μιὰ τέτοιου εἴδους γνώση ἐπιτρέπει π.χ. σ᾿ ἕνα ζευγάρι νὰ διαγνώσει τὴν τυχὸν διὰ βίου ἀναπηρία τοῦ ἐμβρύου καὶ ἀνάλογα νὰ ἀποφύγει αὐτὴ τὴ γέννηση ἤ, ἂν ὑπάρχει περίπτωση θεραπείας, ὄχι, ἐσεῖς τί νομίζετε;

π.Ν.Χ. Αὐτὸ θὰ ἦταν πολὺ καλὸ στὴν περίπτωση τῆς θεραπείας. Τί ὡραῖο πρᾶγμα νὰ βοηθήσουμε τὴν προαγωγὴ τῆς ζωῆς παράλληλα μὲ τὴν παραγωγή της! Ἀλλὰ ὅπως γνωρίζετε σ᾿ ὅλα αὐτὰ τὰ θέματα τοῦ προγεννητικοῦ ἢ περιγεννητικοῦ, ὅπως λέγεται, ἐλέγχου, κυρίως τὸ θέμα τίθεται, ὅπως κι ἐσεῖς τὸ θέσατε, στὸ ἂν γίνει διακοπὴ τῆς κύησεως ἢ ὄχι. Ἂν θὰ γεννηθεῖ ἕνα παιδάκι μὲ μιὰ ἀναπηρία ἢ ὄχι. Γιατὶ ἡ κοινωνία μας δὲν ἀντέχει νὰ μεγαλώσει ἕνα παιδάκι μὲ μιὰ ἀναπηρία; Νὰ τὸ φροντίσει, νὰ ἐνισχύσει τοὺς γονεῖς, νὰ καλλιεργηθεῖ μὲ σπάνιες ἀρετὲς τὸ περιβάλλον;

Γνωρίζω μιὰ οἰκογένεια ποὺ ἔχει ἕνα παιδάκι ποὺ γεννήθηκε τετραπληγικὸ ἀπὸ ἰατρικὸ λάθος μᾶλλον. Τὸ παιδάκι αὐτὸ ὅσο μεγαλώνει τόσο βαρύτερο γίνεται. Τώρα εἶναι δέκα χρονῶν καὶ δὲν μποροῦν πλέον νὰ τὸ σηκώσουν. Μόνο ποὺ τὸ βλέπεις τὸ λυπᾶσαι καὶ εἶναι ἕνα ἀγγελούδι. Αὐτὸ ὅμως τὸ ἴδιο παιδὶ ἔχει βγάλει αἰσθήματα πόνου ναί, ἀλλὰ καὶ ταπεινώσεως, ἀγάπης, ἀνιδιοτέλειας, αὐτοθυσίας στοὺς γονεῖς. Αἰσθήματα ποὺ ἔχουν σχέση μὲ τὴ σωτηρία τους. Αὐτοὶ οἱ ἴδιοι γονεῖς δὲν θέλουν οὔτε ν᾿ ἀκούσουν ὅτι τὸ παιδί τους θὰ πεθάνει. Καὶ ἂς βασανίζονται, τὸ λατρεύουν. Καὶ αὐτὸ εἶναι κοινὴ ἐμπειρία. Δὲν ξέρω ἂν ὑπάρχουν γονεῖς ποὺ ἔχουν ἕνα τέτοιο παιδὶ καὶ εὔχονται νὰ πεθάνει. Καὶ ὅμως καὶ οἱ ἴδιοι γονεῖς ἂν εἶχαν κάνει προγεννητικὸ ἔλεγχο καὶ διαπίστωναν τότε τὴν πάθηση τοῦ παιδιοῦ τους, κατὰ πᾶσα πιθανότητα θὰ ἀρνοῦντο νὰ φέρουν στὸν κόσμο ἕνα τέτοιο παιδάκι και θἄκαναν τὸν φτωχὸ ἀπὸ ἀγάπη κόσμο μας ἀκόμη φτωχότερο καὶ τὸν πλούσιο σὲ φιλαυτία ἀκόμη ἐγωϊστικότερο. Ἔτσι θὰ εἴχαμε ἔναν ἄγγελο λιγότερο ποὺ νὰ μᾶς θυμίζει ὅτι ζοῦμε σ᾿ ἕνα πτωτικὸ κόσμο μὲ ἔντονη τὴν ἐλπίδα τοῦ αἰώνιου θεϊκοῦ κόσμου.

Ὁ θάνατος, εἴτε τὸ θέλουμε εἴτε ὄχι, θὰ ὑπάρχει. Ἡ σιγουρότερη κληρονομιὰ ποὺ ὅλοι μας ἔχουμε καὶ μεταφέρουμε στὰ παιδιά μας εἶναι τὸ στίγμα τοῦ θανάτου. Ποιά ἀῤῥώστεια εἶναι χειρότερη ἀπὸ τὸν θάνατο; Ἡ Ἐκκλησία προτείνει ἕναν ἄλλου εἴδους προγεννητικὸ ἔλεγχο. Αὐτὸν ποὺ κάνει τὰ ζευγάρια νὰ συνειδητοποιοῦν ὅτι δὲν φέρνουν μιὰ ζωὴ σ᾿ αὐτὸν τὸν κόσμο, ἀλλὰ γεννοῦν μιὰ ψυχὴ γιὰ τὴν αἰώνια ζωή. Μὲ αὐτὴ τὴν ἔννοια τὸ κάθε παιδάκι εἶναι μιὰ ψυχούλα, ἕνα ἀγγελούδι, μιὰ πνοὴ τοῦ Θεοῦ μὲ στίγματα πτωτικὰ ποὺ ὅμως ἐνῶ ταπεινώνουν δὲν ἀπογοητεύουν. Δὲν θὰ τὴν διακόψουμε ἐμεῖς αὐτὴν τὴν κύηση. Διότι ἡ ἔκτρωση δὲν εἶναι ἔκτρωση ἑνὸς ἐμβρύου ἀπὸ τὴν κοιλιὰ τῆς μητέρας του, ἀλλὰ εἶναι ἔκτρωση μιᾶς ψυχῆς ἀπὸ τὴν ἀγκαλιὰ τῆς ἀγάπης τοῦ Θεοῦ καὶ τῆς δικῆς μας ψυχῆς ἀπὸ τὸ θέλημά Του.

Ν.Κ. Διακρίνω σ᾿ αὐτὰ ποὺ λέμε ὅτι ἡ θέση τῆς Ὀρθοδόξου Ἐκκλησίας δὲν εἶναι μὲν θέση ἀντιεπιστημονικὴ ἢ θέση ἐναντίον τῆς ἔρευνας, πρέπει ὅμως αὐτὴ ἡ ἔρευνα νὰ γνωρίζει τὰ ὅριά της.

π.Ν.Χ. Ποιός θὰ ἔλεγε τὸ ἀντίθετο; Τὰ ὅρια ὅμως αὐτὰ πρέπει νὰ εἶναι σαφῆ καὶ ἀδιαπραγμάτευτα. Ὅταν, ἂς ποῦμε, γιὰ νὰ γεννηθεῖ ἕνα παιδὶ πρέπει νὰ νεκρώσουμε καμμιὰ δεκαριὰ ἄλλα γονιμοποιημένα ὠάρια, ποὺ εἶναι ἔμβρυα, ἡ Ἐκκλησία δὲν μπορεῖ αὐτὸ νὰ τὸ δεχθεῖ. Ὄχι μόνο ἡ Ὀρθόδοξη. Ἀπ᾿ ὅτι ξέρω κανένας ἄνθρωπος ποὺ πιστεύει σὲ θεὸ δὲν μπορεῖ νὰ τὸ δεχθεῖ.

Ν.Κ. Μὰ καὶ ἡ ἐντελῶς ἐκκοσμικευμένη θεώρηση τοῦ θέματος παραδέχεται ὅτι ὅλη αὐτὴ ἡ ἐξέλιξη καὶ δραστηριότητα ἐνέχει πολλὰ διλήμματα σ᾿ ἐντελῶς ἀνθρωπιστικὸ ἐπίπεδο χωρὶς καμμιὰ μεταφυσικὴ διάσταση.

π.Ν.Χ. Πολὺ σωστά. Καὶ γι᾿ αὐτὸ τὸ λόγο τὰ περισσότερα κέντρα βιοηθικῆς ποὺ ὑπάρχουν δὲν εἶναι κέντρα ἐκκλησιαστικὰ ἀλλὰ ἀκαδημαϊκά. Φοβᾶται ὁ ἴδιος ὁ κόσμος ἀπ᾿ αὐτὰ τὰ πράγματα. Καὶ δυστυχῶς τὸ τρομερὸ εἶναι ὅτι δὲν μποροῦμε νὰ καταλάβουμε τὸ τί ἀκριβῶς κάνουμε πρὶν φθάσουμε στὸ ἀποτέλεσμα. Δὲν μποροῦμε νὰ προλάβουμε οὔτε νὰ προβλέψουμε. Καὶ παίζουμε. Αὐτὰ τὰ παιχνίδια τί τὰ θέλουμε;

Ν.Κ.Δὲν θεωρεῖται πρόοδος αὐτὸ ἀπὸ τὴν Ὀρθόδοξη παράδοση;

π.Ν.Χ. Ποιό, τὸ παιχνίδι μὲ τὴ ζωή;

Ν.Κ. Ναί, γιατί ἡ ἔρευνα ἐνέχει κάποιο κίνδυνο, γιατὶ δὲν ξέρεις τί θὰ βγάλεις, ὅπως ξέρετε ἀπὸ ἐπιστημονικὴ ἐμπειρία.

π.Ν.Χ. Τὸ πρόβλημα δὲν εἶναι ἡ ἔρευνα. Τὸ πρόβλημα εἶναι ἡ ἐφαρμογὴ τῆς ἔρευνας στὸν ἄνθρωπο καὶ τὴ ζωή. Ἐδῶ ἔχουμε τεράστια προβλήματα. Μοῦ ἔφεραν ἀπόκομμα ἀπὸ ἐφημερίδα πρὶν τέσσερες μέρες ὅτι ἕνας δότης σπέρματος ἔχει πάνω ἀπὸ 200 παιδιά. Καὶ δὲν ξέρει ὁ κακομοίρης καὶ πόσα πεθαμένα παιδιὰ ἔχει. Διότι γιὰ νὰ γονιμοποιηθοῦν ὅλα τὰ ὠάρια τὰ ὁποῖα ἐμφυτεύθηκαν στὶς μήτρες τῶν γυναικῶν, αὐτὸς ἔδωσε σπέρμα μὲ τὸ ὁποῖο γονιμοποιήθηκαν χιλιάδες ὠάρια. Ἔχει λοιπὸν αὐτὸς ὁ ἄνθρωπος 200 παιδιὰ μὲ διάφορες γυναῖκες, καὶ ἔχει δύο χιλιάδες, πέντε χιλιάδες πεθαμένα παιδιά. Αὐτὸ τὸ πρᾶγμα σὲ τί βοηθάει; Στὸ νὰ πληρώνεται καὶ νὰ δίνει τὸ σπέρμα του; Τὸ σπέρμα εἶναι ζωή, εἶναι ἱερό. Ἀλλοῦ πρέπει νὰ πηγαίνει. Γι᾿ αὐτὸ σᾶς εἶπα ἂν τὸ ἀναλύσουμε τὸ θέμα προκύπτουν πολλά. Ἐδῶ ἁπλῶς κάνουμε μιὰ νύξη.

Ν.Κ. Εἶναι ὁπωσδήποτε νύξη, γιὰ νὰ ποῦμε ἀφ᾿ ἑνὸς μὲν κατὰ πόσο ἡ σημερινὴ Ὀρθόδοξη Ἐκκλησία ἔχει ἀποκρυσταλλώσει πάνω στὰ θέματα αὐτὰ μιὰ διδασκαλία μέσα ἀπὸ τὴν παράδοσή της. Ἀφ᾿ ἑτέρου δέ, πῶς ἐσεῖς ὡς Ὀρθόδοξος μοναχός, ὡς ἱερεὺς ὁ ὁποῖος ἔχει ἐνδιατρίψει στὰ θέματα αὐτὰ βλέπετε τὶς ἠθικὲς συνέπειες καὶ διαστάσεις τῶν σύγχρονων βιοϊατρικῶν ἐπιτευγμάτων;

π.Ν.Χ. Ἡ Ὀρθόδοξη Ἐκκλησία καὶ παράδοση δὲν ἔχει ὡς στόχο της νὰ δώσει λύσεις στεγνὰ διατυπωμένες ὅσο νὰ δώσει φρόνημα ἀπὸ τὸ ὁποῖο μὲ σαφήνεια θὰ προκύπτουν οἱ λύσεις. Εἶναι μιὰ διαφορὰ μὲ τὴ Δύση, ἡ ὁποία συνηθίζει νὰ κωδικοποιεῖ τὴν ἠθική της. Ἡ Ὀρθόδοξη παράδοση δὲν ἔχει κύριο στόχο της τὸ τί θὰ κάνουμε ἀλλὰ τὸ πῶς θὰ γίνουμε. Τὸ τί θὰ κάνουμε δὲν εἶναι τόσο ὅρος ἐσωτερικῆς πνευματικῆς μεταμορφώσεως ὅσο ἀποτέλεσμά της.

Τὸ δεύτερο εἶναι ὅτι ὑπάρχει ἕνα σχετικὸ ἐνδιαφέρον. Πάντοτε ἐδῶ σ᾿ ὅλες τὶς ἐθνικὲς ἐπιτροπὲς προσκαλοῦνται καὶ ἐκπρόσωποι τῆς Ἐκκλησίας, κάποιοι ἀρχιερεῖς ποὺ ἀσχολοῦνται ἐπιμελῶς μὲ τὰ θέματα αὐτά. Ἐμεῖς δὲ ἐδῶ στὸ Μετόχι μας, παρὰ τὸ ὅτι ἐγὼ εἶμαι μοναχός, ἐπειδὴ μοῦ ἐζητήθη ἱδρύσαμε τὸ πρῶτο ἐν Ἑλλάδι Κέντρο Βιοϊατρικῆς Ἠθικῆς καὶ Δεοντολογίας μὲ σκοπὸ τὴ συλλογὴ τῆς σχετικῆς βιβλιογραφίας, καὶ τὴ δημιουργία προϋποθέσεων ἀκαδημαϊκοῦ προβληματισμοῦ στὰ θέματα αὐτὰ ἀπὸ τὸν ὁποῖο θὰ βγεῖ ἀκριβῶς αὐτὸ τὸ φρόνημα ποὺ θὰ ὁδηγήσει σὲ συγκεκριμένες θέσεις καὶ προτάσεις τὴν Ἐκκλησία καὶ θὰ βοηθήσει τὴν κοινωνία νὰ προβεῖ σὲ σχετικὲς νομοθετικὲς ῥυθμίσεις. Αὐτὸ φανερώνει ἕναν ἰδιαίτερο σεβασμὸ στὸ βάρος τῶν προβλημάτων ποὺ ὑπάρχουν, ἀλλὰ καὶ στὴ φοβερὴ δυνατότητα ποὺ ἔχουν οἱ δογματικὲς θεολογικὲς ἀλήθειες νὰ διατυπωθοῦν μέσα ἀπὸ τὸ κανάλι αὐτῆς τῆς σύγχρονης προβληματικῆς. Καὶ αὐτὸ γίνεται.

Ν.Κ. Δηλαδὴ μέσα ἀπὸ μιὰ θεώρηση τῆς ζωῆς;

π.Ν.Χ. Βεβαίως, εἶναι αὐτὰ κανάλια μέσα ἀπὸ τὰ ὁποῖα μποροῦμε νὰ ποῦμε ἐμεῖς ὁρισμένα πράγματα. Νὰ ἐκφρασθοῦμε γιὰ τὸν σεβασμὸ τῆς ζωῆς. Νὰ μιλήσουμε γιὰ τὴν ψυχὴ καὶ τὴ ζωὴ ὡς ἀνάσας τοῦ Θεοῦ. Νὰ παρουσιάσουμε τὴν ἠθικὴ ὡς πνευματικὴ ἐλευθερία καὶ ὄχι ὡς συνταγή. Τώρα μᾶς δίνεται αὐτὴ ἡ εὐκαιρία. Ἀναλύουμε τὴν ἀρχὴ τῆς ζωῆς. Κατανοοῦμε καλύτερα τὸ τέλος της. Τί ὡραῖο πρᾶγμα! Ποτὲ δὲν ὑπῆρχε τέτοια ἐπιμελὴς καὶ ἐνδελεχὴς ἐνασχόληση μὲ τὸ φαινόμενο τῆς ζωῆς καὶ τοῦ θανάτου ὡς τώρα. Ἡ ἐποχή μας μᾶς δίνει τὴ δυνατότητα. Εὐκαίρια, λοιπόν. Μὲ νέα διάλεκτο, τὸ ἴδιο μήνυμα. Μετὰ ἀπὸ λίγα χρόνια, ἄλλο πρᾶγμα. Ἄλλη διάλεκτος, πάλι τὸ ἴδιο μήνυμα. Καὶ θὰ περνάει ὁ Θεὸς μέσα ἀπὸ τὴν ποικιλία τῶν διαύλων ποὺ μιλήσαμε νωρίτερα.

Orthodoxy and Modern Cosmology

N.K.There is another topic within this dialect of scientific developments and it concerns a possible connection between the Orthodox view of Cosmology and contemporary Physics. Would you like to say something?

Fr. N.H. This topic is less complicated, despite the fact that there is some tension between scientists and Christians regarding the beginning of the world. To start with, the Holy Bible, the book of Genesis, contains in one only chapter simple truths; its purpose is to proclaim that the world was created by God, and not to describe how it was created. It is not a book of Physics, as many Western Christians present it to be by absolutizing certain things. However, there are indications on the way the world was created, which today science confirms. For example, the fact that light was created first and then matter. Physics accepts this which is also in accordance with the modern cosmological theories; they all agree that space began as an electromagnetic radiation, light, that passed on to the stage of matter through the well-known phenomenon of pair production. There is no objection regarding the “how” of the creation; perhaps there is some regarding the “who” of the beginning of the world. However, the “who” is not for science to tell.

While faith talks about the Creator of the world, and gives a few only indications about the way and the procedure of creation, the most science can do is insinuate the Creator, while it basically struggles for the study of the world. Faith is primarily concerned with God as a person, and thus encounters Him everywhere as energies; while science, which studies natural energy, has great difficulty in leading us to the Divine Personhood of the creation, that is God. However, if we combine the two, science and faith, we will inevitably see through the natural beauty of science, the spiritual magnificence of God's presence everywhere and in everything.

N.K. So, in other words, there is no basic conflict between the Orthodox theological view on the creation of the world and the scientific explanation of contemporary cosmology.

Fr. N.H. Within the spirit of Orthodox cosmology, there is no conflict regarding the creation of the world. Things are quite simple. Steven Hawkings expressed certain views on the eternity of time in his book A Brief History of Time, which he himself revoked in his next book Black Holes and Baby Universes.

Science is constantly refuting itself. This is not a negative characteristic, since it makes knowledge progress. However, when one regards theories as laws and man's limitations as perfectness, he will never be able to conceive eternity through time, or comprehend time through eternity. Science will always choke faith; human achievement will constantly push God aside.

Ὀρθοδοξία καὶ Σύγχρονη Κοσμολογία

Ν.Κ. Εἶναι καὶ ἕνα τρίτο θέμα μέσα σὲ ὅλη αὐτὴ τὴν ἐπιστημονικὴ ἐξέλιξη τὸ ὁποῖο εἶναι ἐξ ἴσου μεγάλο καὶ ἐδῶ ἁπλῶς τὸ θίγουμε ἐντελῶς ἀκροθιγῶς. Καὶ αὐτὸ εἶναι οἱ ἐξελίξεις στὴν σύγχρονη φυσικὴ καὶ κοσμολογία.

π.Ν.Χ. Ἐδῶ εἶναι πιὸ ἁπλᾶ τὰ πράγματα παρὰ τὸ ὅτι ἐμφανίζεται κάποια ἔνταση κυρίως στὸ πῶς δημιουργήθηκε ὁ κόσμος. Κατ᾿ ἀρχὰς ἡ Ἁγία Γραφή, τὸ βιβλίο τῆς Γενέσεως, μέσα σ᾿ ἕνα κεφάλαιο περιγράφει ἁπλὲς ἀλήθειες ὄχι γιὰ τὸ πῶς ὅσο γιὰ τὸ ὅτι ὁ Θεὸς δημιούργησε τὸν κόσμο. Δὲν εἶναι ἕνα βιβλίο Φυσικῆς ὅπως πολλοὶ θέλησαν νὰ τὴν παρουσιάσουν ἔτσι ἀπολυτοποιώντας ὁρισμένα πράγματα, κυρίως πάλι στὴ χριστιανικὴ Δύση. Παρὰ ταῦτα ὑπάρχουν καὶ ἐνδείξεις γιὰ τὸ «πῶς» τῆς δημιουργίας ποὺ ἔρχεται σήμερα ἡ Ἐπιστήμη καὶ τὶς ἐπαληθεύει. Παράδειγμα τὸ ὅτι δημιουργήθηκε πρῶτα τὸ φῶς καὶ μετὰ ἡ ὕλη. Αὐτὸ σήμερα τὸ ἀποδέχεται ἡ Φυσικὴ ἐπιστήμη καὶ εἶναι συμβατὸ μὲ τὶς σύγχρονες κοσμολογικὲς θεωρίες, ποὺ ὅλες δέχονται ὅτι τὸ σύμπαν ἄρχισε ὡς ἠλεκτρομαγνητικὴ ἀκτινοβολία, φῶς, καὶ μετὰ μὲ τὸ γνωστὸ φαινόμενο τῆς διδύμου γενέσεως πέρασε στὴ φάση τῆς ὕλης. Καμμία ἀντίφαση στὸ «πῶς». Ἴσως στὸ «ποιός». Τὸ «ποιός» ὅμως δὲν εἶναι τῆς ἐπιστήμης.

Ἐνῶ ἡ Πίστη μιλάει γιὰ τὸν αἴτιο τῆς δημιουργίας καὶ δίνει ἁπλὲς μόνον ἐνδείξεις γιὰ τὸν τρόπο καὶ τὴ διαδικασία της, ἡ Ἐπιστήμη ποὺ παλεύει μὲ τὸ δεύτερο, τὸ περισσότερο ποὺ μπορεῖ νὰ κάνει εἶναι νὰ ὑπαινιχθεῖ τὸ πρῶτο. Ἡ Πίστη ἀσχολεῖται πρωτίστως μὲ τὸν Θεὸ ὡς πρόσωπο γι᾿ αὐτὸ καὶ Τὸν συναντᾶ παντοῦ ὡς ἐνέργεια, ἐνῶ ἡ Ἐπιστήμη ποὺ ἀσχολεῖται -τόσο μπορεῖ- μὲ τὴν ἐνέργεια τῆς φύσεως δύσκολα -ἀπὸ μόνη της- ὁδηγεῖ στὸ Πρόσωπο τῆς δημιουργίας, τὸν Θεό. Ἂν ὅμως συνδυάσει κανεὶς τὰ δύο, δὲν εἶναι δυνατὸν μέσα ἀπὸ τὴν φυσικὴ γοητεία τῆς Ἐπιστήμης νὰ μὴν ἀντικρύζει τὸ πνευματικὸ μεγαλεῖο τῆς πανταχοῦ παρουσίας τοῦ Θεοῦ.

Ν.Κ. Μὲ ἄλλα λόγια, ἐδῶ μᾶλλον ὑπάρχει σύγκλιση παρὰ ἀπόκλιση, μεταξὺ μιᾶς Ὀρθοδόξου θεολογικῆς θεώρησης τοῦ κόσμου καὶ μιᾶς καθαρὰ ἐπιστημονικῆς ἑρμηνείας του ἀπὸ τὴν σύγχρονη κοσμολογία;

π.Ν.Χ. Μέσα σ᾿ αὐτὸ τὸ πνεῦμα τῆς Ὀρθοδόξου κοσμολογίας, περὶ δημιουργίας καὶ ἀντιλήψεως τοῦ κόσμου δὲν ὑπάρχει κανένα ἐρώτημα σχετικό. Πολὺ ἁπλᾶ εἶναι. Ὑπῆρξαν ὁρισμένες θέσεις σχετικὰ μὲ τὴν αἰωνιότητα τοῦ χρόνου ποὺ διετύπωσε ὁ Steven Hawkings στὸ βιβλίο του A Brief History of Time (Τὸ Χρονικὸ τοῦ Χρόνου), θέσεις ποὺ ὁ ἴδιος ἀμφισβήτησε ἀμέσως μετὰ μὲ νέο βιβλίο του Black Holes and Baby Universes (Μαῦρες Τρύπες καὶ Σύμπαντα Βρέφη).

Ὑπάρχει μιὰ ἰδιότητα τῆς ἐπιστήμης, ἡ συνεχὴς αὐτοαναίρεση. Αὐτὸ δὲν εἶναι ἀρνητικό. Ἔτσι προάγεται ἡ γνώση. Ὅταν ὅμως κανεὶς βλέπει τὶς θεωρίες ὡς ἀξιώματα, τὸ πεπερασμένο τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ὡς τελειότητα, ποτὲ δὲν θα μπορέσει νὰ δεῖ τὴν αἰωνιότητα μέσα ἀπὸ τὸ χρόνο οὔτε νὰ κατανοήσει τὸν χρόνο μέσα ἀπὸ τὴν αἰωνιότητα. Πάντα ἡ ἐπιστήμη θὰ τοῦ πνίγει τὴν πίστη· τὸ ἀνθρώπινο ἐπίτευγμα θὰ τοῦ μαραίνει τὸν Θεό.

Orthodoxy and the Environment

N.K. Another contemporary issue of great concern is the ecological problem. I believe that the Orthodox Church holds a certain position on the subject. Would you like to comment on it?

Fr. N.H. Certainly it does. Orthodox theology and the Church have energetically been involved in the study of the ecological problem and expressed their concern in many ways: through the repeated messages of the Ecumenical Patriarch, articles and academic studies carried out by distinguished professors and hierarchs, as for instance, Metropolitan of Pergamos Ioannis Zizioulas, participation in various conferences etc. From an ideological and philosophical point of view, the ecological issue is less complicated compared to the previous ones, as the serious threat of an ecological destruction is obvious to everybody. While we all agree with the theory of its confrontation, unfortunately we contribute to its expansion.

N.K. We know that the deep respect for nature as God's creation and the emphasis on spiritual and ascetic life by the Orhtodox tradition could be good solutions to the problem of the environmental pollution. Can these Orthodox viewpoints change our lifestyle and how realistic are they in a wider social context, in view of the magnitude of the problem?

Fr. N.H. I am not sure I understand the relationship between ascesis and the environmental problem. Ascetic life is entirely natural and instead of spoiling the environment, it purifies it; it shows respect and does not do any harm to it. An ascetic never cooks, his food is vegetarian and limited to the extreme, his body is pure, and he depends entirely on God. Although he uses a small amount of water to cultivate his garden, he completely entrusts the growth of his vegetables to God, and thus provokes God's manifestation which transforms nature. This is ascesis: to limit the material dimension of ourselves and long more for the rebirth of our spiritual one.

The presence of God makes man so gentle with nature that he cannot bend a flower, kill an ant, chase a fly away, harm the environment; instead, he respects a broken branch, the trees, the animals, even the insects. Gradually, he begins to love nature and nature begins to love him in return. If you come across a beast or a snake and you love it, it will not hurt you, for it loves you too. This is verified in a series of incidents in the lives of saints. Isn't this a remarkable ascetic ecology? This is not any more a protection of the environment, but rather a transformation of nature into a temple. Finally, through the environment, we can experience the omnipresence of the Creator.

N.K. Here again is the great problem we come across all along this interview. That is, in order to materialize the theoretic dimension of Orthodoxy, one has to radicallly transform his life. Some people say that the radical transformation of the environment results in a radical transformation of our way of living.

Fr. N.H.It is not only a change of lifestyle, but rather a reorientation of mind-set on life. This brings us to the term “Orthodoxy.” In our days, we hear very often the term “Orthopraxia” instead of “Orthodoxy,” as if this latter one were insufficient. Orthodoxy, however, is the correct term. Orthopraxia has a lot to do with what man does, whereas Orthodoxy deals with what he believes, thinks or stands for. Orthodoxy means exact, correct mind-set, attitude, approach, ethos. Therefore, the transformation of all these will bring forth the transformation of our daily life. It is not just a change of habits, ways or styles, but rather a deeper inner change, our repentance.

Ὀρθοδοξία καὶ τὸ Πρόβλημα τοῦ Περιβάλλοντος

Ν.Κ. Δύο ἀκόμη θέματα θὰ ἤθελα νὰ θίξουμε ἂν καὶ φοβᾶμαι ὅτι κάνω κατάχρηση τῆς καλωσύνης σας. Ὑπάρχει ἕνα σοβαρὸ πρόβλημα σήμερα τὸ ὁποῖο εἶναι τὸ περιβαλλοντολογικό. Ἐδῶ ἡ Ὀρθοδοξία ἔχει κάποιες θέσεις γιὰ τὴ θεώρηση τῆς φύσεως καὶ τοῦ κόσμου, καὶ ἴσως ὑπάρχει κάποια διασύνδεση μέσῳ τῆς ἔννοιας τῆς ἀσκήσεως. Ὑπάρχει οὐσιαστικὴ κριτικὴ διασύνδεση μεταξὺ τῶν Ὀρθοδόξων θέσεων στὸ σημεῖο αὐτὸ καὶ τοῦ οἰκολογικοῦ προβλήματος;

π.Ν.Χ. Βέβαια ὑπάρχει καὶ ἔχει σαφῶς διατυπωθεῖ καὶ σὲ συνέδρια. Αὐτὸς εἶναι ἕνας χῶρος στὸν ὁποῖο ἔχει μπεῖ ἡ Ὀρθόδοξη θεολογία καὶ Ἐκκλησία ἐνεργὰ καὶ μὲ ἀλλεπάλληλα μηνύματα ὅπως τοῦ Οἰκουμενικοῦ Πατριάρχου καὶ μὲ ἐμπεριστατωμένες μελέτες ἀκαδημαϊκῶν ἱεραρχῶν, ὅπως εἶναι ὁ Μητροπολίτης Περγάμου Ἰωάννης Ζηζιούλας καὶ μὲ συνέδρια ποὺ ὀργανώνονται καὶ μὲ ἄρθρα ποὺ κατὰ καιροὺς γράφονται. Ἀλλὰ εἶναι πολὺ πιὸ εὔκολο αὐτὸ τὸ θέμα ἀπ᾿ ὅ,τι εἶναι τὰ θέματα ποὺ προαναφέραμε ἀπὸ ἰδεολογικῆς καὶ φιλοσοφικῆς πλευρᾶς γιατὶ ὅλοι καταλαβαίνουμε ὅτι ἡ οἰκολογικὴ καταστροφὴ εἶναι μιὰ τρομερὴ ἀπειλή. Καὶ ἐνῶ ὅλοι κάπως συμφωνοῦμε στὴ θεωρία τῆς ἀντιμετώπισής της, δυστυχῶς συμπράττουμε καὶ στὴν ἐπιβολὴ της.

Ν.Κ. Τὸ ἐρώτημά μου εἶναι πῶς ἡ ἀσκητικὴ ἔννοια ποὺ γεννᾶται μέσα ἀπὸ τὴν Ὀρθοδοξία, ἡ ἀσκητικὴ ζωὴ ὡς τρόπος ζωῆς, ὡς life style, εἶναι συμβατὴ ἢ μᾶλλον δυνατὴ στὴ σημερινὴ πραγματικότητα. Κατὰ πόσο δηλαδὴ φαίνεται ῥεαλιστική;

π.Ν.Χ. Δὲν εἶμαι βέβαιος ὅτι ἀκριβῶς καταλαβαίνω τὴ σχέση τῆς ἄσκησης μὲ τὸ περιβαλλοντολογικὸ πρόβλημα. Ἡ ἀσκητικὴ ζωὴ εἶναι μιὰ ἔντονα φυσικὴ ζωὴ ποὺ τὸ μόνο ποὺ κάνει εἶναι νὰ καθαρίζει τὸ περιβάλλον, ὄχι νὰ τὸ λερώνει. Νὰ τὸ σέβεται, ὄχι νὰ τὸ προσβάλλει. Διότι ὅταν ἔχουμε ἕναν ἀσκητὴ ποὺ δὲν τρώει τίποτα, δὲν τρώει ποτὲ μαγειρεμένο φαγητό, δὲν ἔχει τοξῖνες ὁ ὀργανισμός του, δὲν ἔχει κονσέρβες νὰ πετάξει, αὐτὸς φυτεύει μερικὲς ντοματοῦλες καὶ προσδοκάει ὁ Θεὸς νὰ τοῦ τὶς μεγαλώσει. Μὲ τὸ ἐλάχιστο νεράκι του ὁ ἴδιος καὶ τὴν πολλή του προσδοκία ὅτι ὁ Θεὸς θὰ φανερωθεῖ καὶ ἀπὸ τὶς ντοματιές του, προκαλεῖ πνευματικὰ τὸν Θεὸ καὶ μεταμορφώνει τὴ φύση. Αὐτὴ εἶναι ἡ ἄσκηση. Ἄσκηση σημαίνει ὅτι μηδενίζω κατὰ τὸ δυνατὸν τὴν ὑλική μου ὑπόσταση καὶ προσδοκῶ περισσότερο τὴν αἴσθηση καὶ τὴν ἀνάσταση τῆς πνευματικῆς μου ὑποστάσεως.

Καὶ ὅταν ἔρχεται ὁ Θεὸς γίνεται ὁ ἄνθρωπος τόσο ἁπαλὸς μὲ τὴ φύση, ποὺ δὲν τὴν πειράζει, δὲν σπάει ἕνα λουλουδάκι, δὲν πατάει μιὰ τσουκνίδα, δὲν σκοτώνει ἕνα μυρμήγκι, δὲν διώχνει ἀπότομα μιὰ μύγα, ἀλλὰ σέβεται τὸ κλαδάκι τὸ σπασμένο, τὸ δένδρο, τὸ ζωΰφιο, τὸ ζῶο. Καὶ ἀρχίζει πλέον κανεὶς ν᾿ ἀγαπᾶ τὴν κτίση καὶ νὰ τὸν ἀγαπᾶ καὶ ἡ κτίση. Ὅταν συναντήσεις ἕνα θηρίο, ἕνα φίδι, ἂν τὸ ἀγαπᾶς ἔτσι δὲν θὰ σὲ πειράξει· σὲ ἀγαπᾶ κι ἐκεῖνο. Ἀναφέρεται σειρὰ περιστατικῶν ἀπὸ τὴν ἐμπειρία τῶν ἁγίων. Αὐτὴ εἶναι μιὰ φοβερὴ ἀσκητικὴ οἰκολογία. Αὐτὸ δὲν εἶναι πλέον προστασία τοῦ περιβάλλοντος, ἀλλὰ εἶναι μιὰ μεταμόρφωση τοῦ περιβάλλοντος σὲ ναό. Καὶ μέσα ἀπὸ τὸ περιβάλλον πλέον ἀκούει κανεὶς τὶς διηγήσεις τοῦ Κτίσαντος.

Ν.Κ. Ἐδῶ βέβαια εἶναι πάλι τὸ μεγάλο πρόβλημα στὸ ὁποῖο διαρκῶς ἀναφερόμαστε κατὰ τὴ διάρκεια αὐτῆς τῆς συνεντεύξεως. Δηλαδὴ παντοῦ συναντᾶμε ὅτι γιὰ νὰ μποῦμε σὲ κάποια ὑλοποίηση τῶν θεωρητικῶν διαστάσεων τῆς Ὀρθοδοξίας, χρειάζεται τουλάχιστον μιὰ ῥιζικὴ μεταστροφὴ τῆς ζωῆς μας. Καὶ νομίζω ὅτι σ᾿ αὐτὸ συμφωνοῦμε, ὅτι λένε πιὰ ὅτι ἡ ἀναστροφὴ τοῦ οἰκολογικοῦ προβλήματος συνεπάγεται μιὰ ἀναστροφὴ τρόπου ζωῆς.

π.Ν.Χ. Καὶ ὄχι μόνον αὐτὸ δηλαδὴ τῶν δομῶν τοῦ συστήματος ζωῆς, ἀλλὰ χρειάζεται μεταστροφὴ φρονήματος ζωῆς. Καὶ ἐρχόμαστε στὸν ὅρο «Ὀρθοδοξία». Διότι τελικὰ τὰ πάντα ἀνάγονται στὸ φρόνημα. Αὐτὸ ὁδηγεῖ στὴ πράξη. Στὶς μέρες μας ἀκούγεται πολὺ ἔντονα καὶ ὁ ὅρος «Ὀρθοπραξία» σὰν νὰ μὴν εἶναι πλήρης καὶ ἐπαρκὴς ὁ πρῶτος. Ὀρθοδοξία ὅμως εἶναι πιὸ σωστὸς ὅρος. Ὀρθοπραξία μοῦ φαίνεται ὅτι ἔχει πολὺ νὰ κάνει μὲ τὴν ἀνθρώπινη ἐνέργεια. Ἐνῶ Ὀρθοδοξία σημαίνει τὸ ἀκριβὲς καὶ ὀρθὸ φρόνημα, τὴν προσέγγιση, τὴν νοοτροπία, τὸ ἦθος. Αὐτὸ πρέπει ν᾿ ἀλλάξει καὶ αὐτὴ ἡ ἀλλαγὴ εἶναι ἡ μετάνοια. Εἶναι ἡ μεταμόρφωση τοῦ ἤθους καὶ τοῦ φρονήματος, ἡ ὁποία θὰ φέρει ὡς ἀποτέλεσμα τὴν μεταμόρφωση τῆς ζωῆς. Δὲν εἶναι μεταμόρφωση συνηθειῶν, τρόπων, μορφῶν. Εἶναι μιὰ βαθύτερη ἐσωτερικὴ μεταστροφή.

Conclusion

N.K. To conclude our discussion, I would like to ask you to become a little of a futurist. Despite secularization and atheism, there is evidence of revival of religion and a return to religious and metaphysical concerns. How do you see the role of Orthodoxy in the 21st century, in context with the revival of other major religions and Islam in particular. Can we foresee any significant religious conflicts?

Fr. N.H. I would like to maintain the spirituality of our discussion and avoid giving any specific solutions, or making sociological predictions in regards to the co-existence and relationship of the various religions today.

As far as the future is concerned, the Church has its own perspective; it is the perspective of the past, the revival of the old beauty inside us. Its eschatology, which sounds a little paradoxical, lies in the return to the past; she has the perspective of the past and the nostalgia of the future. That is, we gradually develop inside us the belief that we have lost what we are, what we have been, what we were created for. What we must do then is revive the old beauty, the beauty before the original sin. The return to what we were and trully are is the repentance we just mentioned earlier.

Religions are just human forms and inventions. After the fall of the Byzantine empire, there was fear among Byzantines for serious trouble of an eschatological dimension due to the dominance of Islam. We can clearly detect this intense worry in the texts of Gennadios Scholarios, especially in the year 1492, which was believed to be the year 7000 since the world's creation and marked the beginning of the 8th millenium. In our days, 500 years later, there is a similar worry. Where are we heading, what will happen? Once again, Islam appears to be a serious threat. Islam, as well as all other religions are products of man, trying to give answers to his metaphysical quests. Orthodoxy is not only a religion as it appears to be. It is the bridge that connects us with God.

Orthodoxy should become missionary and pass on its message as a message of life, not only as a preaching. Message of life, yes. Message of intolerance and argumentative debates, no. She proclaims love to the Muslims and all people. If our politicians have decided the dominance of Islam, we cannot revoke their mistakes or perverted decisions, just as Christ, when He was being led to the cross, did not revoke what the political and religious leaders had decided to do. Through His crucifixion leaped the message of resurrection and through His death sprang forth life. Even if God allows us to be enslaved under the dominance of Islam for thousands of years, then let it be done; truth cannot be enslaved. The message of the Church is to maintain the truth and pass it on to our children, our friends, our enivronment, as an authentic experience of God.

From then on, I cannot predict the future. But I do worry on a human level. I worry because the Orthodox countries are in discord, the Christian ones are disoriented, the West has lost God, the East has Him but cannot see Him, Islam fights against Him and the religious cults are once again used by the devil to destroy the world. That is what I see. I look at the world and despair. I turn to God and eternity and am fascinated. I hope. God always wins...

N.K. To your fullstop, I shall add mine and what it remains then for me to say is thank you very much.

Ἐπίλογος

Ν.Κ.Τὸ τελευταῖο σημεῖο εἶναι νὰ σᾶς ζητήσω νὰ γίνετε λίγο μελλοντολόγος. Ὑπάρχει μιὰ ἐμφανὴς τάση ἀναβίωσης τῆς θρησκείας καὶ ἐπιστροφῆς πρὸς τὰ θρησκευτικὰ καὶ μεταφυσικὰ ἐνδιαφέροντα τοῦ κόσμου σὲ διάφορες μορφὲς συγκεχυμένες καὶ μή. Παρὰ τὴν ἐκκοσμίκευση, παρὰ τὴ γενικὴ ἀθεΐα ποὺ ὑπάρχει, πῶς βλέπετε ἐσεῖς τὸ ῥόλο τῆς Ὀρθοδοξίας στὸν 21ο αἰώνα καὶ μάλιστα σὲ συσχέτιση μὲ τὸ φαινόμενο ὅτι ἄλλα θρησκεύματα, ὅπως τὸ Ἰσλάμ, φαίνεται ὅτι τὴν τελευταία τριακονταετία ἔχουν μιὰ πολὺ ἐμφανῆ ἀναβίωση. Καὶ ὁπωσδήποτε τὰ πράγματα δείχνουν ὅτι οὐσιαστικὰ μία συμβίωση μ᾿ αὐτὴ τὴν ἀναβίωση τῶν μεγάλων θρησκειῶν μεταξύ τους θὰ εἶναι μιὰ οὐσιαστικὴ κατάσταση καὶ διάσταση τοῦ φαινομένου στὸν ἑπόμενο αἰῶνα. Πῶς βλέπετε τὸ ῥόλο τῆς Ὀρθοδοξίας σ᾿ αὐτό;

π.Ν.Χ. Ὅλη ἡ συζήτησή μας εἶχε ἕνα χαρακτήρα ἔντονα πνευματικό, καὶ ὄχι συνταγῶν καὶ λύσεων καὶ ἐδῶ θὰ τὸ διατηρήσω αὐτό. Ἐγὼ δὲν θὰ ἤθελα νὰ κάνω μιὰ κοινωνιολογικὴ πρόβλεψη σχετικὰ μὲ τὴ συμβίωση καὶ τὶς σχέσεις τῶν θρησκειῶν σήμερα.

Ὅσον ἀφορᾶ τὸ μέλλον, ἡ Ἐκκλησία νομίζω ἔχει μία προοπτικὴ καὶ ἡ προοπτική της εἶναι τὸ παρελθόν, ἡ ἀναμόρφωση τοῦ ἀρχαίου κάλλους μέσα μας. Ἡ ἐσχατολογία της εἶναι ἡ ἐπιστροφὴ πρὸς τὰ πίσω καὶ εἶναι λίγο παράδοξη· ἔχει προοπτικὴ παρελθόντος καὶ νοσταλγία μέλλοντος. Δηλαδὴ τὸ φρόνημα ποὺ καλλιεργοῦμε μέσα μας εἶναι ὅτι ἔχουμε χάσει αὐτὸ ποὺ εἴμαστε. Αὐτὸ ποὺ ἤμασταν, αὐτὸ γιὰ τὸ ὁποῖο δημιουργηθήκαμε. Καὶ αὐτὸ ποὺ ἔχουμε νὰ κάνουμε εἶναι νὰ γίνει αὐτὴ ἡ ἀναμόρφωση τοῦ ἀρχαίου κάλλους. Αὐτὴ ἡ ἐπιστροφὴ σ᾿ αὐτὸ ποὺ ὄντως εἴμαστε εἶναι ἡ μετάνοια ποὺ μόλις προαναφέραμε.

Ἀπὸ ἐκεῖ καὶ πέρα οἱ θρησκεῖες εἶναι ἀνθρώπινα σχήματα. Κατ᾿ ἀρχὰς ἕνας φόβος γιὰ τρομερὲς ἐσχατολογικῶν διαστάσεων ἀναστατώσεις ὑπῆρχε καὶ μὲ τὴν κυριαρχία τοῦ Μωαμεθανισμοῦ, τοῦ Ἰσλάμ, ὅταν ὕστερα ἀπὸ 11 αἰῶνες ἔπεφτε ἡ Βυζαντινὴ αὐτοκρατορία. Γι᾿αὐτὸ καὶ στὰ κείμενα τοῦ Γενναδίου τοῦ Σχολαρίου διαφαίνεται αὐτὴ ἡ ἔντονη ἐσχατολογικὴ ἀνησυχία, ἰδίως τὸ ἔτος 1492, τὸ ὁποῖο ἦταν τὸ ἑπτὰ χιλιάδες ἀπὸ κτίσεως κόσμου, καὶ σημάδευε τὴν μετάβαση ἀπὸ τὸν ἕβδομο αἰώνα, τὴν ἕβδομη χιλιετηρίδα, στὸν ὄγδοο. Ἔτσι καὶ στὶς μέρες μας, 500 χρόνια μετά, ὑπάρχει ἀνάλογη ἀνησυχία· ποῦ πᾶμε, τί θὰ γίνει; Πάλι τὸ Ἰσλὰμ ἐμφανίζεται ἐν δυνάμει καὶ ἀπειλεῖ. Ἀλλὰ τὸ Ἰσλάμ, οἱ ἄλλες θρησκεῖες καὶ κάθε θρησκεία εἶναι ἕνα κοσμικὸ πρᾶγμα ποὺ προσπαθεῖ νὰ τακτοποιήσει τὴν μεταφυσικὴ ἀνησυχία. Ἡ Ὀρθοδοξία δὲν εἶναι θρησκεία μόνο, εἶναι ἴσως καὶ θρησκεία, ἐμφανίζεται καὶ ὡς θρησκεία. Κυρίως, ὅμως, εἶναι αὐτὴ ἡ γέφυρα ποὺ προσπαθεῖ νὰ μᾶς συνδέσει μὲ τὸν Θεό.

Αὐτὸ ποὺ ἔχει νὰ κάνει ἡ Ὀρθοδοξία εἶναι νὰ γίνει ἱεραποστολική. Νὰ δώσει τὸ μήνυμά της ὡς ζωὴ ὅμως, ὄχι μόνο ὡς κήρυγμα λόγου. Κήρυγμα ζωῆς, ναί, ἀλλὰ κήρυγμα μισαλλοδοξίας καὶ ἐπιχειρηματολογικῆς ἀντιπαράθεσης, ὄχι. Ἀγάπη καὶ στοὺς Ἰσλαμιστὲς καὶ σ᾿ ὅλους. Ἀλλὰ ἂν οἱ πολιτικοί μας ἔχουν ἀποφασίσει τὴν κυριαρχία τοῦ Ἰσλάμ, μὲ τὰ λάθη ποὺ κάνουν ἢ τὴν διαστροφὴ ποὺ ἔχουν, γιατὶ τυφλωμένοι εἶναι, δὲν προσπαθοῦμε, δὲν μποροῦμε ἐμεῖς νὰ τὸ ἀναιρέσουμε. Ὅπως δὲν προσπάθησε ὁ Χριστὸς καθὼς ἤγετο πρὸς τὸν σταυρὸ ν᾿ ἀναιρέσει αὐτὸ ποὺ πήγαιναν νὰ κάνουν πάλι οἱ θρησκευτικοὶ καὶ πολιτικοὶ ἡγέτες. Ἀλλὰ μέσα ἀπὸ τὴν σταύρωσή Του βγῆκε τὸ μήνυμα τῆς ἀναστάσεως, καὶ μέσα ἀπὸ τὸ θάνατό Του ξεπήδησε ἡ ζωή. Εἴτε κυριαρχήσει τὸ Ἰσλάμ, εἴτε γίνουμε ὑπόδουλοι, ὄχι 400 χρόνια ἀλλὰ 4 χιλιετηρίδες, ἂν ἔτσι οἰκονομήσει ὁ Θεός, πάντα θὰ ὑπάρχει αὐτὴ ἡ ἀλήθεια τοῦ Θεοῦ. Καὶ τὸ μήνυμα τῆς Ἐκκλησίας εἶναι αὐτὴ ἡ ἀλήθεια νὰ παραμένει σὲ μᾶς καὶ ἀπὸ μᾶς νὰ μεταφερθεῖ στὰ παιδιά μας, στοὺς φίλους μας, στὸ περιβάλλον μας, ὡς ζωὴ καὶ ὡς αἴσθηση τοῦ Θεοῦ. Ἀπὸ ἐκεῖ καὶ πέρα ἐγὼ δὲν ἔχω τὴν δυνατότητα νὰ κάνω ὁποιαδήποτε μελλοντολογικὴ ἐκτίμηση τῶν πραγμάτων. Ἂν ὅμως θέλετε, ἀνθρωπίνως ἀνησυχῶ. Ἀνησυχῶ διότι καὶ οἱ Ὀρθόδοξες χῶρες εἶναι διηρημένες, καὶ ὁ χριστιανικὲς εἶναι ἀποπροσανατολισμένες, ἡ Δύση ἔχει χάσει τὸν Θεό, ἡ Ἀνατολὴ Τὸν ἔχει καὶ δὲν Τὸν βλέπει, τὸ Ἰσλὰμ Τὸν πολεμάει καὶ πλέον χρησιμοποιοῦνται οἱ θρησκεῖες καὶ οἱ θρησκευτικὲς διαίρεσεις πάλι ἀπὸ τὸν διάβολο γιὰ νὰ καταστρέφεται ἔτι περισσότερο ὁ κόσμος. Αὐτὸ ἐγὼ βλέπω. Ἀντικρύζω αὐτὸν τὸν κόσμο καὶ ἀπογοητεύομαι. Στρέφομαι πρὸς τὸν Θεὸ καὶ τὴν αἰωνιότητα καὶ μαγεύομαι. Καὶ ἐλπίζω. Ἔχει ὁ Θεός...