40 Questions Answered Part 1- Mar Osthathios

The Bible is only a part of the Holy Tradition of the Church. Hence the commandment of St. Paul to "stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us either by word of mouth or by letter" (2 Thes. 2:15). The Christian Church came into existence at least thirty years before the first book of the N.T. was written. Our Lord Himself showed in the Sermon on the Mount with His frequent 'But I say unto you' that His authority was greater than that of Moses who gave the Hebrews the Ten Commandments. Our Lord also knew that there ought to be a greater authority than any written book or time-bound teachings and so He said, "I have yet many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth...." (Jn. 16: 12-15). This maybe the reason for nut revealing the Mystery of Trinity fully in the Holy Bible. Even the word 'Trinity' does not appear in the Scriptures. The Holy Bible gives only the data of Trinity and not the full theology of Trinity. Those who hold on to the obsolete theory called 'sola scriptura' (only the 'Scripture' are legion and their interpretations are legion. A proof text can be found in the Bible for heretical sects like 'Sabbath Mission' who teach that Saturday is to be observed as Sabbath and not Sunday or Jehovah's witnesse's who deny the doctrine of Trinity, or the Pentecostal groups who war between themselves on minor issues like speaking in tongues or millennium as post or pre and so on. The Bible is quoted by heretics and the orthodox from the time of Arius and St. Athanasius. We must not fall a prey to those who want proof-texts for all the teachings of the Church. Theology is based on the Bible, but not limited by the Bible. Bible and Tradition are together the primary source of theology. (Gal. 1: 8; Col. 4:16; Heb. 2:1; Jn 21: 25; Trent Council, Sess. IV, 8 Apr. 1546).

'The Bible to teach, the Church to interpret' is a good dictum. St. Peter has clearly pointed out how ignorant men twist the scripture to their own destruction (Read II Pet. 3: 15-17). In the same passage St. Peter adds, 'You therefore, beloved, knowing this before hand, beware lest you be carried away with the error of lawless men and lose your own stability.' The historic churches have a stability which sectarian groups want to shake by their unwarranted interpretations of certain scriptural passages. The reality of the Holy Spirit as a dependable Guide of the Church against which the Gates of hell shall not prevail is not taken seriously by the new sects which regard the Church since Constantine as in 'Babylonia captivity.' The correctives that come through individualistic interpretations will be slowly absorbed into the Church by the guidance of the Holy Spirit, if they are real correctives. The mistakes in the interpretation of the Scriptures as those of Arius will be rejected by the Church under the same Holy Spirit. In fact, the Johannine tradition in the Orthodox. ethics, the Petrine tradition in the Roman Catholic substance and the Pauline stress in the Protestant principle are three interpretations of the one church, maintained in three dimensions, but they will be integrated in the one ecumenical church in the making by the person and work of the Holy Spirit. Sectarian groups have only a corrective role and they should beware of rejecting the age old traditional interpretations of the Bible. After all, the Bible is that of the Church primarily and it belongs to the Christian on the authority the church has given to it in and through the canonization of the Scriptures. The Bible must be read in the context of the Church and within the theological circle of the church and not individualistically.

What the Protestants call the Apocrypha is Canonical books for the Orthodox churches and so we have more than 66 books in the Bible. Even the 0. T. Canon was closed only in 100 A. D. in the Council of Jamnia, 13 miles south of Jaffa. The Jews of the Dispersion regarded the Apocryphal books also as Scriptures. During the first three centuries these books were regularly used in the Christian Churches also. St. Athanasius was one of the first fathers of the church who limited the list of scriptural books into 66 in his list. Jerome of the Western Church (342-420) had a tremendous influence in limiting the canonical books as 72. In accordance with the Hebrew Canon only 66 books. The Trent Council declared the Vulgate as the authoritative Latin Scripture of the Roman Catholic Church. Whether canonical or Deutero canonical, the apocrypha has great value. The so-called Apocryphal books, the Books of Maccabees contain prayers for the departed more unambiguously than the prayer of St. Paul in II Tim. 1: 18 for the departed Onesiphorus. The Fathers of the Church have quoted from these books which are not regarded Canonical by the Protestants. To the Orthodox Churches, therefore, there are more than 66 books which are canonical.

None of the ancient churches questions the rightness of the practice of infant baptism. It was the Anabaptists of the sixteenth century who started re-baptizing those who had received infant baptism and the church catholic has rejected their doctrinal deviations. We can show that infant baptism is right in many ways.

(a) Mk. 16: 16 is not in all ancient manuscripts. Mk. 16: 9-19 is a later interpolation. (See brackets or the RSV small scripts). Even if it was said by Our Lord, He did not think of infants when He said it as the verse says that he who does not believe will be condemned. Was He saying that infants will be condemned? No. Mk. 16; 16 is only about the converts from outside the Church and not about the second generation Christians. The Bible does not have a single reference to show that the children of certain families remained un-baptized till they became grown-ups and then get baptized.

(b) There are about five families mentioned as baptized in the Acts and Corinthians (Acts. 10:48; 16: 15, 38; 18: 8 and 1 Cor. 1: 16) and it is unimaginable that only the adults of those families were baptized. It is unthinkable from the Jewish practice of regarding the family as unit and not the individual. {When Achan sinned, the whole family was stoned to death Josh. 7). So infants were baptized in N. T. times.

(c) Children can receive blessing without believing. (See John the Baptist leaping in the womb filled with the Holy Spirit Lk. 1: 41; Jesus blessing the infants brought to Him by the mothers Mk. 10:13, 16 etc.) If infants can receive the blessings of laying of hands by the Lord, they can also receive baptismal grace of regeneration. The theology behind this is that grace precedes faith (Eph. 2: 8) and prevenial grace is a reality. The initiative is from God always. If God takes the first step in dying for us, He also takes the first step in saving through the free gift of regeneration without the precondition of faith. Our duty is only to respond and to reciprocate by faith and obedient life.

(d) The analogy of Circumcision: When Circumcision was started in the Jewish Community through Abraham and Ismael, both were grown ups, 99 and 13 years each (Gen. 17: 12, 24-27). From the time of Isaac it is in the eight day that circumcision is given (21: 4; Lev. 12: 3). Our Lord was also circumcised on the eighth day (Lk. 2: 21). As the connecting link between Judaism the Old Israel and Christianity the New Israel, He submitted Himself both to Circumcision and Baptism. To the Christian, however. Baptism is Circumcision (Col. 2: 11). The Jerusalem Council decided that the Jews and the Gentiles needed only baptism to be incorporated to the Body of Christ (Acts. 15). Unlike circumcision, baptism is given to the women also as in Christ man and woman are equal in status as Jew and Gentile (Gal. 3: 27)

(e) Other arguments in favor of infant baptism include inherent holiness of the children of Christian parents (I Cor. 7: 14), justification by grace as a gift which does not regard age-bar for salvation (Rom 3: 24), the presence of little children in the early church (I. Jn. 2: 1, 12, 13, 18), the tradition of church's practice, the example of Polycarp and others who were baptized as infants.., (See 3 Doctrinal Truths by the author in Malayalam). It is clear that God wills infants' baptism.

The Apostles Creed says, "We believe in the Communion of Saints." It means that we are in communion with the saints living and departed as both belonging to one body of Christ, the Church. Any perfect prayers includes the whole church here and beyond.

(a) The Believers in Christ have had the eternal life here itself (Jn. 3. 16) and they have no death (Jn. 11:26). We are not praying for the dead, but for the departed ones.

(b) The departed are with the Lord (Col. 3: 1) and around us as a cloud of witnesses and so they can hear our prayers (Heb. 12: 1, 22). We are seated in heaven (Eph. 2:6).

(c) The church, being the one and only body of Christ, has the blood circulation of prayer from which no part of the body is excluded (Rom. 12: 4-5; I Cor.12: 12 etc).

(d) Ps. 115: 17 must be read with the following verse which says, "but we will bless the Lord from this time forth and for evermore." In Rev. 7: 13-17 we see the saints praying to God day and night in their departed status.

(e) Even the wicked rich man in Hades prayed for his five brothers (Lk. 16: 28). The gulf between Hades and Paradise was bridged by the descent of Christ to Hades soon after His crucifixion (I Pet. 3: 18; 4: 6),.Christ preached to the disobedient souls.

(f) In the 0. T. period prayers for the departed was a common practice. (Dt. 34: 8). There are clear prayers for the departed souls in II Maccabees 12: 44-46.

(g) "Blessed be he by the Lord, whose kindness. has not forsaken the living or the dead" (Ruth 2: 20).The Love of God is everlasting and knows no limits. (I Cor. 13: 8, 13)

(h) St. Paul prayed for the departed Onesiphorus (II Tim 1:18, 4: 19). The New English Bible adds "I pray" in this verse. The form itself is that of the usual prayer for the departed. See Dummalow Commentary on this text.

(i) Can the children forget their parents when they are buried? (I Tim. 5: 4). Is it possible not to pray for the loving departed? Love demands that we pray for them and leave the result to Him.

The Holy Trinity is not the discovery of human reason, but the self-revelation of God through the Jewish monotheism, Christian experience of Jesus Christ as the very God of very God and the Holy Spirit as True God. The Holy Trinity is neither Tritheism nor exclusive monotheism, but the fullness of the Godhead as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, One in Three and Three in One. Any understanding of God as other than Trinity is only a partial understanding of God, partially discovered by the devotee and not fully disclosed by God Himself. There is no Truth more ultimate than the Trinity as it is the final truth about God disclosed by God Himself through the Incarnation, the Pentecost and the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

(a) Though the word Trinity does not appear in the Bible, all the data of the Trinity such as God's unity (Dt. 6: 4; Mk. 12: 29), the Fatherhood of God (Mt 5: 48; 6: 26; Mk. 13: 32; Lk. 10: 22; Jn. 1: 14 etc..), the Godhead of the Son (Jn. 1:1-18; 20:28; Act. 20:28; Phil 2-5; Col. 1:15-20; Heb. 1:3; Col. 2:9; Jn. 10:30; 1 Jn 5:20; Tit. 2:13; 22:13) and the Godhead of the Holy Spirit (Lk. 1: 35; Act.2: 17; 5: 3-5; Jn. 5: 5-8 ; 16: 7-15) are clearly seen in .the Holy Writings. Furthermore, there are Trinitarian passages such as the Baptismal formula (Mt. 28: 19) and the Benediction (II Cor. l3: l4) in which the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are equated.

(b) There is no way of explaining the central Christian teaching 'God is love' (I Jn. 4: 8) without the doctrine of Trinity. God has to be Trinity if He is Eternal God in eternal action of love as a Monad cannot be love in action, a Diad in love is not sharing their love on a third point, but only giving and receiving love. All the elements of love are present in 360 degrees of Trinity. The love of a nuclear family makes the family three and one at the same time.

(c) The Cappadocian Fathers explained the Trinity as one essence or substance and three hypostases or persons. This is too philosophical to understand and so we may say that God is one Eternal Nuclear Family with God the Eternal Father, Christ the Eternal Son and Holy Spirit the Eternal Mother. These three have a deep solidarity and unity in the unity of the Family. God is one Person with the Conation of the Father, the Cognition of the Son and the Affection of the Holy Spirit. God is one Mind, with the Father as the Unconscious Mind, the Son as the Conscious Mind and the Holy Spirit as the Subconscious Mind. Hegelian dialectics of Thesis, Antithesis and Synthesis is found in the One Godhead.

(d) God does not lack unity or plurality as He is the Trinity. If He is not Trinity, there was a time when His love was not in action, but only potential as Monad has nothing to love. God is not a growing God whose potentiality was once without actuality, and then grew into actuality with the creation of angels or man. Furthermore, the command "be ye therefore perfect even as your Heavenly Father is perfect", is the command to grow to the unity and solidarity of the Family hood of God. God is a Co-Being, Being and not an exclusive person. The command to become perfect is both personal and social as God Himself. If God is Nirguna Brahma of Kevaladvaita, He is not Love. If He is Love, He is Trinity. There is no uniqueness in Christian theology without the uniqueness and centrality of the doctrine of Trinity. It is the only all-inclusive teaching about God.

The Holy Trinity is not the discovery of human reason, but the self-revelation of God through the Jewish monotheism, Christian experience of Jesus Christ as the very God of very God and the Holy Spirit as True God. The Holy Trinity is neither Tritheism nor exclusive monotheism, but the fullness of the Godhead as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, One in Three and Three in One. Any understanding of God as other than Trinity is only a partial understanding of God, partially discovered by the devotee and not fully disclosed by God Himself. There is no Truth more ultimate than the Trinity as it is the final truth about God disclosed by God Himself through the Incarnation, the Pentecost and the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

(a) Though the word Trinity does not appear in the Bible, all the data of the Trinity such as God's unity (Dt. 6: 4; Mk. 12: 29), the Fatherhood of God (Mt 5: 48; 6: 26; Mk. 13: 32; Lk. 10: 22; Jn. 1: 14 etc..), the Godhead of the Son (Jn. 1:1-18; 20:28; Act. 20:28; Phil 2-5; Col. 1:15-20; Heb. 1:3; Col. 2:9; Jn. 10:30; 1 Jn 5:20; Tit. 2:13; 22:13) and the Godhead of the Holy Spirit (Lk. 1: 35; Act.2: 17; 5: 3-5; Jn. 5: 5-8 ; 16: 7-15) are clearly seen in .the Holy Writings. Furthermore, there are Trinitarian passages such as the Baptismal formula (Mt. 28: 19) and the Benediction (II Cor. l3: l4) in which the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are equated.

There is no way of explaining the central Christian teaching 'God is love' (I Jn. 4: 8) without the doctrine of Trinity. God has to be Trinity if He is Eternal God in eternal action of love as a Monad cannot be love in action, a Diad in love is not sharing their love on a third point, but only giving and receiving love. All the elements of love are present in 360 degrees of Trinity. The love of a nuclear family makes the family three and one at the same time.

The Cappadocian Fathers explained the Trinity as one essence or substance and three hypostases or persons. This is too philosophical to understand and so we may say that God is one Eternal Nuclear Family with God the Eternal Father, Christ the Eternal Son and Holy Spirit the Eternal Mother. These three have a deep solidarity and unity in the unity of the Family. God is one Person with the Conation of the Father, the Cognition of the Son and the Affection of the Holy Spirit. God is one Mind, with the Father as the Unconscious Mind, the Son as the Conscious Mind and the Holy Spirit as the Subconscious Mind. Hegelian dialectics of Thesis, Antithesis and Synthesis is found in the One Godhead.

God does not lack unity or plurality as He is the Trinity. If He is not Trinity, there was a time when His love was not in action, but only potential as Monad has nothing to love. God is not a growing God whose potentiality was once without actuality, and then grew into actuality with the creation of angels or man. Furthermore, the command "be ye therefore perfect even as your Heavenly Father is perfect", is the command to grow to the unity and solidarity of the Family hood of God. God is a Co-Being, Being and not an exclusive person. The command to become perfect is both personal and social as God Himself. If God is Nirguna Brahma of Kevaladvaita, He is not Love. If He is Love, He is Trinity. There is no uniqueness in Christian theology without the uniqueness and centrality of the doctrine of Trinity. It is the only all-inclusive teaching about God.

According to the Bible there is no other name under the heavens except the name of Jesus for the salvation of man (Act. 4: 12). Christ Himself said, "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life and no man cometh unto the Father, but by me" (Jn. 14: 6). Jesus Christ is not a local Savior, but the Savior of the world (Lk. 2:11; Jn. 4:42). The prologue of the fourth Gospel equates the incarnate Savior with the eternal Word (Logos) who was in the world even before the Incarnation (Jn. 1: 10). Therefore, wherever there is salvation, the Logos is at work. The Incarnation is the clear yardstick with which God and man is to be measured. Salvation of those who act according to the conscience or according to their knowledge of truth will be perfected beyond history by the same Logos-Christ (I Pet. 3: 19; 4: 6).

The teaching of the Fathers, "outside the Church there is no salvation" has also to be understood as outside the invisible Church known to the Trinity alone. The preaching of Christ is the God-given task of the Church to make Christ known to the whole of humanity that through Him all may have abundant life (Jn. 10: 10). Concerning the salvation of non-Christians read Rom. 2: 25-29; Mt. 25: 31-46; Phil. 2: 10. 'The scandal of particularity of Christianity, that in Jesus of Nazareth alone dwelt the fullness of Godhead bodily is not something about which we have to be apologetic. It is the real strength of the Christian doctrine that God has entered history and divided it into B. C. and Anno Domini (in the year of our Lord) and has the one necessary dependable criterion about perfect God and perfect man. Jesus Christ is the proper name of God. He is the fulcrum on which the lever of the Church has to lift the fallen world by the power of the Holy Spirit. He is the Sun of Righteousness whose light is being reflected by all saints of all religions of all time. He is the richest God who became the poorest Man on earth and is now adored as the richest and the poorest at the same time as the God-Man. Any impartial onlooker of the march of history can easily discern that history is His Story and that there is hardly any good in the world which is not related to Him, directly as Christ or indirectly as the Logos. Inspire of the wars that have been waged in the name of the Church, His healing touch seen in all the continents and islands of the world as schools, colleges, hospitals etc.

Not at all. Even in the time of St. Paul all did not speak with tongues (I Cor. 12: 30). We have no record of Christ Jesus speaking in tongues when the Holy Spirit descended on Him at the time of His baptism. The Blessed Virgin Mary received the Holy Spirit at the time of the Annunciation (Lk. 1: 35), but she did not speak with tongues. When Elizabeth was "filled with the Holy Spirit" she did not speak in tongues. Tongues is found only in the three beginnings namely Pentecost when the Person of the Spirit took charge of the Church (Acts 2), in the household of Cornelius, the beginning of the Gentile conversion (Acts 10: 46) and in Ephesus the beginning of Jewish converts outside Jerusalem (Acts 19: 6). The Samaritan converts received the Holy Spirit when Peter and John laid their hands on them, but did not speak with tongues (Acts 8: 17). The bible clearly say, "as for tongues, they will cease." (I Cor. 13: 8). We know that the earthquake, the mighty wind, 'tongues as of fire' etc. that accompanied the Pentecost event ceased. I Cor. 14 is a chapter which is written in answer to the question what is superior, tongues or prophecy and the answer is that prophecy is better than tongues and love is "a still more excellent way." (I Cor. 12: 3). We need not pass judgment on the charismatic groups of people today who speak with tongues as time will show whether it is from God or not. When certain Pentecostal sects quote isolated texts and teach that Tongues is the one sure sign of the anointment of the Spirit, there are sects among them who deny their claim and refute their teachings. We who ought to know the tradition as well as the scriptures, must realize that: there were innumerable saints in the history of the Church who were full of the Spirit, but did not speak with tongues. Hence, we need not be carried away by sectarian movements.

Christos means the 'anointed one' and it is the Greek form of Hebrew Messiah, which meant the same thing. Anointment with oil was the usual custom in the N. T. period (Lk. 7: 38; 46). Perhaps oil was used in the laying on of hands by the apostles to confer the gift of the Holy Spirit and heal. (Acts 6: 14-17; 9: 12, 17; 28: 8). The surety that we are anointed with the Holy Spirit is not a psychological emotional experience as ecstatic utterances with tongues, but an objective anointment of the Holy Muron (oil) by the valid ministry of the Church. The Holy Spirit, freely given to us at the Confirmation which goes with baptism, has to be rekindled in us by our prayerful waiting upon the Lord, holy life, prayer and fasting etc. (II Tim. 1: 6). Just as some people who speak with tongues become backsliders, some of the Christians who were anointed with Holy Oil also will become back-sliders. The Holy Spirit, freely given to the Church, is at work on all who are grafted to the Church in baptism and confirmation, without distinction of age, but the responsibility to bear the fruit of the Spirit (Gal. 5: 22) remains with them. The tree is known by the fruit and not by the leaves of gifts or charisma. The assurance of the anointment of the Holy Spirit is neither subjective alone, nor objective alone, but both. Our own experience of new life and sanctification must be noted by others also, though their objective judgment alone is not final. Two or more witnesses including ourselves and others must be amazed at the overflow of agape, heavenly love in us as the fruit of the Spirit. The sign of tongues or healing gift without agape is not a sure sign of the Spirit's anointment. If any one is full of the Spirit, he is a new creation with a new relationship with the Triune God and a new relation with others and a new joy of personal assurance of having been accepted by God in the power of the Spirit.

The 0. T. priesthood with bloody sacrifice ended with Jesus Christ and became the New Testament priesthood without bloody sacrifice. Christ is the end of the Law and the beginning of the Gospel. His own sacrifice with His own blood was accepted by the Father as the one and only sacrifice for the sins of the whole world and the same sacrifice of Calvary is perpetuated and continued in the Holy Eucharist in the Church. The Holy Eucharist is not any new sacrifice, nor the repetition of the sacrifice of Calvary, but the continuation of the Unique sacrifice of the eternal Son of God. The Epistle to the Hebrews develops this theme of the eternal priesthood of Christ according to the order of Melchizedec and the all sufficiency of His Sacrifice. St. Paul says that Christ our paschal Lamb has been sacrificed. (I Cor. 5: 7). Those who agree that Christ is priest, prophet, and king will have to agree that when the Holy Spirit was breathed on the apostles with the words, "As my Father has sent me, even so I send you" (Jn. 20: 22), He sent His apostles as priests, prophets, and kings. The Paschal Lamb slain once for all must be eaten till He comes again and so the same sacrifice must continue till His parousia. To St. Paul, even mission to the Gentiles was 'the priestly service of the Gospel of God, so that the offering of the Gentiles may be acceptable, sanctified by the Holy Spirit' (I Cor. 1: 16). The Didache, the teaching of the Twelve Apostles, (2nd century A. D.) makes special mention of the 'high priests.' It is strange to think that Christ the Head is the High priest and that the Church the body has no priesthood. The Church which is called by St. Peter, 'the royal priesthood' (I Pet. 2: 9) is the continuation of the Old Israel with new meaning put into the concept of priesthood by the Lord of the Church. The general priesthood of the faithful will be lost if there is no special priesthood in the church as it has happened to the fundamental groups and sects. Priesthood in the Church is meaningful as the Holy Eucharist is a continuing sacrifice because there is no priesthood if there is no sacrifice. The priesthood of Christ is interceding before the Father in heaven and the priesthood in the Church is interceding to the Father on earth for the members of the church and the whole world. The crucified and risen Christ is manifesting His own priesthood through the apostles just as the brain is functioning through the Central Nervous System. The Holy Spirit is the chief functionary of priesthood in the Church as the Heart in the Body. If this analogy is taken seriously, the special priesthood is like the arteries and the veins for the purification of the body and the life of the body. Jesus Christ has not ended with death and priesthood did not end with the historic Jesus. (Read Hebrews 5 - 7; Jn. 17; Rev. 13: 8; St. Cyprian's Epistle 61)

Private or auricular confession before a priest a sacrament of great benefit if rightly conducted. Christ has given the authority of remitting or forgiving the sins to the apostles (Mt.18: 18, Jn. 20: 22; James 5: 16). Aachan had to confess before Joshua as confession before God (Josh. 7:19) though it was not sufficient to save him from punishment as it was before the atoning death of Christ for the sins of the whole of humanity. True confession is also a pastoral counseling. Absolution by the priest gives the assurance. Expression prevents suppression and the consequent repression of pardon and a new song in the heart. Genuine confession must be with full confidence in the father confessor, with utter frankness and a sincere desire to forsake the sins confessed and to start a new life of purity and usefulness. Authentic confession ends with unconditional surrender to Christ. There are many who think that in stopping the practice of private confession the Protestant brethren were throwing away the baby with the bath-water. No doubt medieval practice of confession and the sale of indulgences needed to be reformed. Even today, there are many formal and routine practices of confession which need to be reformed, but confession as such is very useful and must be preserved for all those who have some guilty feeling to be shared and absolved. Self-examination asked for in I Cor. 11:27 would make us realize that there are hidden sins in us to be confessed. The best proof for the need of confession would be a trial of making a sincere and outspoken confession before a priest in whom one has full confidence. That would convince one of its efficacy. There is no other sacrament which gives so much of relief of the heart and the joy of forgiveness (Read Ps. 32; Prov. 28: 13; Lk. 15: 20-24).

The uniqueness of orthodoxy is that it includes what Paul Tillich calls the catholic substance and the protestant principle. If ecclesiology is both hierarchical. and democratic as the rule is synodical and not either Papal with the power of the Pope to veto the decision of the synod, nor mere democratic wherein the majority decides everything. The word and the sacraments, the preaching and the celebration of the Eucharist, the married priests with the celibate priests, the solidarity of the bishop with the laity, the infallibility of the whole church instead of either that of papacy or of the bible, the due place of the bible with the tradition, the historic episcopate with the necessary 'oxios' (he is worthy) response of the laity in the ordination service, the belief in the real presence of Christ in the eucharistic elements without the elimination of the mystery concept in any transubstantiation or consubstantiation theory of the eucharist, the discipline of the Nicene Creed's binding character without any ex-cathedra statement, the continuing practice of long services in the church and of strict fasts as prescribed by the church etc., are parts of what we call the 'orthodox ethos.' If orthodoxy regains its stress on mission which it once had but gradually lost due to various vicissitudes of history, orthodoxy will be used by the Holy Spirit to show to the rest of Christendom what the reunited church should be. The faith of the undivided Church is still discernible more clearly in the orthodox churches than in the Roman Catholic or the Protestant traditions. Hence the orthodox churches have a unique contribution to make for the reunion of Christendom in its historical continuity. But for the vitality of orthodox worship and the monastic movement, the church in the Soviet Union would have been swept away by Communism. The uniqueness of orthodoxy is a phenomenon for which orthodoxy cannot be proud of, but must humbly praise the Triune God, in Whose mercy alone is her existence.

The canonical prayers are written down in all the ancient churches, but silent prayers and extemporaneous prayers have also their place in the orthodox traditions. Prayer is communion with God alone or in communion with the church. Written prayers are an aid to prayer as they are very rich in their contents and were written down by people of greater spirituality than ourselves. Mechanical repetition or parrot-like recitation of written prayers are not what is expected of the faithful, but slow praying with real concentration. Prayers are in the mother tongue in the major Orthodox churches. Written prayers prevent us from our natural tendency to be selfish in submitting our own needs before God without a penitential heart. We are allowed to write down our own prayers for our on discipline and spiritual growth. The written prayers are full of contrition, praise, intercession and invocation of the Blessed Virgin Mary and the saints. They have many allusions to the Holy Spirit. They give us a sense of the unity of the church. While we pray the written canonical prayers we are in solidarity with the saints of all time and all places who have prayed the same prayers. There are also written prayers for special occasions like visitation of the sick, house visitation, birthday celebration, wedding anniversary etc. Those who have the ability and grace to offer brief and appropriate extemporaneous prayers are not forbidden from doing so. We must cultivate the habit of both canonical and extemporaneous prayers in in addition to silent meditation which is of ultimate Importance. In all our prayers there must be adoration of the Holy Trinity, the overflowing love towards Jesus Christ our Savior, the power of the Holy Spirit, Who teaches us to pray. It is better to use written prayers when large number of people are worshipping and extemporaneous prayers in small groups in small fellowship meetings. As St. Paul says, 'all things must be done decently and in order' (I Cor. 14: 39).

Certain Pentecostal sects forbid their members from using medicines and condemn others who use medicines as of inferior faith. This is definitely unwise and unscriptural. "And God saw everything that he had made, and behold it was very good." (Gen. 1: 31). All the various medicines have been made from the herbs or other materials God has created for the good of man. Any ayurvedic eye doctor would say that when Jesus 'spat on the ground and made clay of the spittle and anointed the man's eyes with the clay' {Jn. 9: 6), he was using medicine for healing of the eyes. The mission hospitals around the world are in obedience of the Lord's command, 'heal the sick' (Mt. 10: 8). The Good Samaritan who had compassion on the wounded traveler did not offer a prayer for healing and pass along, but 'Bound up his wounds pouring oil and wine' (Lk. 10: 34), and entrusted him to the inn, which was a hospital of those days. Our Lord Himself has said, that it is the sick who need the doctor. (Mk. 2: 17; Lk. 5:31). Both prayer and medicines are powerful for healing and both should be used with no prejudice against one or the other. Even if healing comes through the use of medicine, the source of all healing is God Himself. (Jer. 30: 17). Hezekiah the king was sick unto death, but healing came through the application of the cake of figs to the boil as commissioned by God through Isaiah (38: 1-22). It is therefore, wrong to test the Lord by refusing to use His gift of medicines. Our only trust must be in the Lord even while going to the doctor and acting as wise as a serpent. 'It is better to trust in the Lord than to put confidence in man' (Ps. 118:8). The only prayer of the patient must be 'Thy will be done.'

The right type of Mariology is to give her the due place of the God-bearer (Theotokos) and to exalt her as the early church and the Scriptures have exalted her. The Roman Catholic practice of praying ten 'Hail Mary... ' for each Lord's prayer seems to be too much and the Protestant refusal to pray that prayer is giving her too little a place. Similarly, the doctrine of Immaculate conception is unscriptural and the bodily assumption of the BVM (Blessed Virgin Mary) is not a dogma in the Orthodox Churches. The prayer, 'Hail Mary....' is taken from the invocation of Gabriel at the time of the Annunciation (Lk. 1:28), from the greeting of Elizabeth when Mary visited her in her home (Lk. l: 42), and the exclamation of a woman in the crowd when Our Lord was preaching (Lk. 11: 28). There is nothing wrong in the petition at the end to 'pray for us sinners, now and the time of our death.' (See answer to question number 6). The Scriptural basis for the efficacy of the intercession of the BVM is the incident of the intercession at the wedding in Cana (Jn. 2). Although Our Lord said that his time for performing miracles had not come, he performed his first miracle in response to the request of His mother. The tradition of the church is also very strong that the earliest churches of Christendom have been in the name of the BVM. She is the queen of saints and so her invocation is made before that of any other saint in the liturgy of all the ancient churches. The fact that Jesus loved her till His last breath is evident in His thoughtfulness to commit her to the care of John the apostle (Jn. 19: 25-27). If the so-called brothers of Jesus (Mt. 13:55) were the children of BVM herself, they would have taken her to their house when Jesus breathed His last. They were, according to one tradition, the children of Joseph in a previous marriage. The BVM bad a unique place in the life of Jesus and so her intercession has a unique power. Hence it is perfectly in order to pray "Hail Mary, full of grace..."

All speculations and laboratory tests for proving God, soul, and immortality objectively are futile as God and soul are not objects to be tested by objective tests. Faith in the risen Christ is the basis for our faith in the resurrection of the body and the life everlasting. No one has come to us from God except Jesus Christ and so He alone can tell us anything authentic about God and eternity. We have to believe what He said, "I go to prepare a place for you and if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you unto myself that where I am, you may also be." (Jn. 14: 1; 3). Christian do not believe in the transmigration of the soul as Hinduism does. Christian escatology is based on the resurrection of Christ as first fruit from among the dead. I Cor.15 gives clear description of the nature of resurrection body. 'What is sown is perishable, and what is raised is imperishable. It is sown in dishonor, it is raised in power. It is sown a physical body, it is raised a spiritual body.. .." (42). There is continuity of life and personality, but discontinuity of the body in the world to come. The child in the womb has physical organs not used in the womb, Similarly we have spiritual organs not fully used in history. The worm that becomes a butterfly has the same life but a new body. In the same manner, the worm-like individual buried, rises up as a butterfly like person with organs fit for eternity. When Jesus rose again from the dead on the third day he assumed a glorious body which could enter the room when the room was shut. (Jn. 20: 26). In the same manner, we will rise again at the the end of history when Christ would come again, with the glorious bodies fit for life in the new heaven and the new earth. Hence we are not afraid of death. Death is the last enemy already conquered by the crucified and risen Christ. "Death is swallowed in victory." "O death, where is thy victory? O death, where is thy sting?....Thanks be to God who gives us victory through our Lord Jesus Christ." (I Cor. 15; 54). The resurrection of Christ has removed the venomous sting from the serpent of death. The return of Christ is to judge the living and the departed, according to the Nicene Creed, which is the one creed of the one church universal. Our hope is based on our faith in the Incarnate Son of God. He Who is eternal, Who entered history at the center of it and divided it into B.C. and A.D. has gone ahead of us to prepare many mansions for us and so we need not doubt life after death. The mystery of gaining our life is in our readiness to lose our life for Him and the Gospel. (Mt. 1: 39). If we live a natural life, we are mortal, but if we live a supernatural life we become immortal. Our self-surrender to Christ is a pre-requisite for eternal life here and now and finally in the world to come.

This question is frequently asked as the students are not taught that Gen. 1-11 are pre-historical. Any one who compares Gen. 1: 1-2: 3 with Gen. 2: 4-24 can easily recognize that there are two distinct stories of creation and none is to be taken literally as the answer to the question how the world was created. The creation story in Gen. 1 is 'P' Document and God is called Elohim in it. Its date is around 450 B.C. and whoever wrote it did not compare the earlier story found in the second chapter where God is called Jehovah. This second chapter called 'J' Document is dated around 750 B.C. In the creation story in the first chapter, creation takes place in six days, humanity is created male and female in the image of God on the sixth day, the sun and moon are created on the fourth day and water covered the land before land and water were separated. In the earlier story found in the second chapter there is no mention of creation on each day, Adam is created before the animals are created and Eve is created from the rib of Adam after the creation of animals and the plants grew due to the mist that went up and watered the whole earth. Those who believe that the Bible gives the answer to the question 'how' the world was created will have to choose one of these stories and leave the other as myth. Those who have taken the pain to study the Bible critically would agree that the creation story is a saga to answer certain theological questions such as who created the earth and all things visible and invisible and not the biological questions about the age of the earth and the plants and life on earth. The theological answer regarding the image of God in man is also of immense significance concerning the questions related to the nature and destiny of man. In both the creation stories, it is God who created, whether Elohim or Jehovah. It is very unfortunate that the Fundamentalist brethren degrade the Holy Bible of eternal value to the level of time-bound and changing values of scientific truths. We ought to leave to science to answer the question how the world was created, by slow evolution or by sudden creation. The Holy Bible is not a text-book of Physics or Chemistry or Geography or Zoology or Biology. It is the basic text book on theology and must be kept in that level. Let the Bible answer the fundamental questions about God, the salvation of man, the life after death etc., and let us allow science to answer all physiological questions that can be verified by objective tests in the laboratory or outside.

The question 'whom did Cain marry ?' is raised out of the misunderstanding about the word 'Adam.' Adam in Hebrew is not a proper name, but it just means 'man or humanity.' The presence or absence of other human beings at the time of Adam does not change the theological truths about the first Adam, the representative fallen man taken as the head of the fallen humanity. The Second Adam, Jesus Christ is, the representative and the Head of the redeemed humanity in spite of the fact that other human beings lived at the time of the economy of salvation in the life of Jesus of Nazareth. Just as the defeat of Goliath meant the defeat of all the Philistines (I Sam. 17), the fall of Adam meant the fall of the whole of humanity. We must move from the Second Adam to the first and not vice versa.

The story of Cain in Gen. 4 makes it clear that there were other human beings in the land of Nod where Cain fled and found a girl whom he took to wife. "Then Cain went away from the presence of the Lord, and dwelt in the land of Nod, east of Eden" (16). Nod was a place of so many people that Cain built a city there for the inhabitants in honor of his son Enoch (17). Some of the fathers thought that Cain married his sister, but it seems very unlikely. If there were no other people, why did Cain say, "whoever finds me will slay me" (4: 14) ? The point is that even if creation was evolutionary, there is no problem as far as the theology of the creation story is concerned. It is alright to teach creation story as it is recorded in the Bible in the primary class in the Sunday School when evolutionary creation is understandable to the kids. But a little later the students will ask, "How were the first three days of creation calculated with the words, 'and there was evening and there was morning,' when the sun, the moon and the stars were created only on the fourth day ?" When the students are able to ask such questions, the truth of creation should be explained as theological and not biological or zoological. Thus the question, 'whom did, Cain, marry ?' is a good opportunity to explain the fact that, first two chapters of Genesis belong to pre-historic narrative and also the documentary theory that in the days of Ezra, the Jehovistic. Elohistic, Deuteronomic, and priestly codes were amalgamated into one volume for the first time and the reasons for the discrepancy in the two creation stories, two flood narratives etc. The fundamentalists are not doing full justice to the Bible itself as they are not open-minded to confess that the Bible is a divine human book with the unchanging truths of God are recorded in the changing and even fallible words of man. The Bible interpreted in such a way that there is no conflict between the Bible and science. "The letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life."

"But when Pharoah saw that there was a respite, he hardened his heart and would not listen to them: as the Lord had said," (Ex. 8: 15), "and the Lord hardened the heart of Pharoah, as he did not listen to them; as the Lord had spoken to Moses," (9:12). To the writer of Exodus, both these verses meant the same thing. Whatever happens in history, it is Jehovah who acts. "The Lord will have war with Amalek from generation to generation (17: 16); "and the Lord sent thunder and hail and fire ran down to the earth and the Lord rained hail upon the land" (9: 23). The Hebrews were extremely religious people to whom the Lord God was behind every natural phenomenon. They did not raise the modern question, 'would a good God do evil ?' It is in the face of Jesus Christ that we see God as He is. The O. T. revelation of God was partial and fragmentary (Heb. 1: 1). Our Lord used to point out the sin hidden in the disbelief of hardened hearts (Mb. 6. 52; 8; 17). The Islamic faith in predestination of everything by Allah (kismet) was the faith of the Hebrews in the time of Exodus and so even the hardening of the heart of Pharoah was the doing of God. St. James makes it clear that God does not tempt any one. "Let no one say when he is tempted, 'I am tempted by God'; for God cannot be tempted with evil and he himself tempts no one: but each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire." (1: 3) Sin would harden our hearts and we are asked to be vigilant. "Exhort one another everyday, as long as it is called, 'today', that none of you may be hardened by the deceitfulness of sins." (Heb.3: 13) Many such passages like the hardening of the heart of Pharoah in the O. T. then must be interpreted as the faith of that particular time of the writing of that particular book and not as the eternal truth revealed in the N. T. by Jesus Christ, the only Son of God.

The word 'selah' appears frequently in the Psalms (4: 2, 4; 7; 5; 9: 16 etc.) When the psalm is read, this word need not be read as it is only a musical notation intended to give direction to the singers of the Hebrew psaltery. It is a liturgical or musical direction probably given by the leader of the Choir to raise to the voice or perhaps to indicate a pause. Scholars are not agreed to the literal meaning of it. The word appears outside the Psalter also: (See Heb. 3: 3, 9, 13). It does not appear in any of the prose narratives in the Bible. Even if we put the psalm into music, the word 'selah" need not be taken into the new musical notations as its real meaning and relevance is not yet clear from the various contexts in which it is found.