(mesótes, the median or the middle path,
in more classical Greek, metriopátheia)
To: Exarchate Clergy, faithful, and friends
From: Archbishop Chrysostomos of Etna
One of our clergyman, a university professor, wrote to me yesterday about the Patristic notion of moderation. He is thinking of writing on this subject after his impending retirement. (I truly hope that he does so.) His insightful comments reminded me, by contrast, of several very crude and unbalanced comments that I have received from several extremist Greek Old Calendarists over the past few months.
I have hesitated even to address the incessant ranting of these several individuals, who frequently assail me with their opinions, since they do not approach matters of disagreement with the understanding that their opinions are open to rational discussion; rather they consider their opinions to be "given truths" and not open to further consideration.
Most of these critics misuse the Fathers, whom they tout as their guides, even if they obviously do not read or know them well. They select from Patristic texts only what supports their views, missing, in most cases, the actual meaning of what they are quoting. More often than not, moreover, they quote material which is, when placed in context, diametrically opposed to the opinions that they champion.
For example, these and other extremist Orthodox advocates inevitably quote St. Mark of Ephesus as having opposed a middle road between false doctrine and error, unintelligently thinking that what he said about truth and falsehood constitutes a rejection of argumentation, discussion, dialogue, and, of course, moderation.
As I said in my introduction to Professor Constantine Cavarnos' excellent book on the life, thought, character, and writings of this great Father (SAINT MARK OF EPHESOS [Brookline, MA: Institute for Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies, 2008]), in fact "...he serves as a perfect model for those who seek the Royal Path, having planted, as he did, the banner of firm fidelity to the Faith in the ground of Patristic moderation" (p. 21).
In the spirit of actually reading and understanding what the Fathers say in context about moderation and the danger of "liberalism" or extremism in approaching ecclesiastical, theological, and spiritual matters, I would like to quote two superb passages, one from St. Gregory of Constantinople (or Nazianzus) and one from St. Gregory of Nyssa, both fourth-century Fathers and close friends. Their words, which I hope will help our extremist critics, will more importantly help us to understand why we, as traditionalists, are only genuinely loyal to Holy Tradition when we are moderate and moved by love.
The first of these quotations, from St. Gregory of Nyssa's "On Virginity" (PATROLOGIA GRAECA, XLVI, cols. 353 B-D) I have translated myself, while the second, St. Gregory of Constantinople's "Oration 32," is from Martha Vinson's ST. GREGORY OF NAZIANZUS; SELECT ORATIONS (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America, 2003).
setting the midpoint between too little and too much, one finds the distinction between virtue and evil
"...[A]ll virtue is reckoned by moderation, any divergence to either side of it being evil; setting the midpoint between too little and too much, one finds the distinction between virtue and evil. The reason for these things is made clearer by examples. We know cowardice and temerity to be two contrasting vices, the one by deficiency, the other by an excess of boldness, courage constituting the midpoint between them. Also, piety is neither atheism nor superstition; it is equally impious to deny the one God and to presume that there are many gods. ...One who flees from stinginess and extravagance, separating himself from both of these contrary passions, will attain the moral quality of liberality (generosity); for this is what liberality is, a disposition neither, on the one hand, to disbursing vast and unavailing funds nor, on the other hand, to meeting needed expenditures in a quibbling manner. ...Surely, then, prudence (sobriety) itself is moderation, obviously entailing deviations to either of its extremes as a vice. In the one instance, one who lacks vigor of soul and is so easily dissuaded from struggle with the passions of sensuality, having never approached the path to a life of virtue and prudence, falls to dishonor; in the other instance, he who goes beyond sound prudence, passing beyond the moderation of this virtue, falls, as it were, into the pit of the 'doctrines of devils,' searing, as the Apostle says, his very 'conscience' [I St. Timothy 4:2]."
II. St. Gregory of Constantinople
"So, with this in mind, my brothers, let us not be slothful in pursuit of the good, but fervent in the spirit, lest by slow degrees we sleep the sleep of death and the Enemy sow his evil seed upon us in our slumber, for sloth is akin to sleep; and let our zeal be untainted by selfishness [better, I think, "by self-centeredness" - AC] and folly lest we be carried away and stray from the royal path and surely stumble in one of two ways: either our slothfulness will need a whip or our fanaticism will hurl us to destruction. Instead, by extracting from both as much as will best serve our purpose, a sense of meekness from the one, impassioned feelings from the other, let us shun the injurious effects of both, the hesitation of the one, the recklessness of the other; in this way we can avoid ineffectual deficiency and the dangers of excess. Unproductive sloth and undisciplined passion are equally useless things; the one, because it does not draw nigh to the good, the other because it overshoots the mark and produces something that is righter than right, as the divine Solomon well understood: Do not swerve, he says, to the right or the left, and do not fall from [the] opposite extremes into an equal evil, namely, sin."
Posts
