St. Augustine with catechumens
Last week one of my readers asked me to comment on the year-long process to become Orthodox and be allowed to participate in the sacraments. Let me begin with a bit of contrast. Recently, an evangelical who worked on the Mike Huckabee presidential campaign, and is a blogger, wrote a posting listing ten problems with evangelicalism. Let me pick up on just one of them as an introduction to this topic.
#1 The Sinner’s Prayer – The gates of hell have a special entrance reserved for people who thought that they had a ticket into heaven because someone told them all they needed to do was recite the “sinner’s prayer.” I’ve searched through the entire New Testament and can’t find an example of anyone who was “saved” after reciting such a prayer. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying that such prayer is worthless or that it can’t be used by the Holy Spirit. But salvation is not obtained by reciting a magical incantation as many, many, “Christians” will discover after it’s far, far, too late.
The Orthodox are seriously into turning out disciples. Conversion is not merely the recital of a one-time prayer but a turning from one way of life to another way of life. Mind you, we have enough stories of martyrs who converted and were just about instantly martyred, with no chance to show a change in their lives. But, that is not the normal and common Christian process. In other words, for us conversion is a life-long process.
We are also against leaving someone alone to figure out how to live the Christian life. Think of sin not only as a violation of God’s law–which it clearly is–but also a terrible addiction. We often do not take seriously enough St. Paul’s struggle with sin in Romans 7. In that chapter, he points to sin as something which he cannot seem to be able to control. That is as good a definition of an addiction as any that I can think of. If you read on in Romans, this does not mean that it is an uncontrollable addiction, but it is an addiction against which we must guard our entire life.
No addict is expected to get their addiction under some sort of control without outside help. That outside help begins for the new believer in the catechumenal process. This is a process of between six months to a year when the new Christian is guided in his/her Christian life both by the Church through the worship and catechism, by a spiritual father who is normally the local parish priest, and by a set of sponsors. What is the role of the sponsors? Well, if all goes well, it is the same role that a buddy has in Alcoholics Anonymous. He is the person who is to answer all questions, to be available in the middle of the night when the craving strikes, and to generally guide the addict through the Twelve Stepsâ„¢.
In other words, we are not satisfied with having a person come to our Lord Jesus Christ, and then be left alone to figure it all out for themselves. Neither are we satisfied with some simple classes that give people head knowledge. No, we want our process of bringing someone in to also help teach and guide that person, in very practical ways, in how to live a Christian life. We know that they will not be perfect–there is a reason why we have a sacrament of confession–, but we also will not be satisfied with a simple welcome or a simple welcome with some teaching. We want to end up with a genuine Christian believer.
I am also aware how, sadly, many times that process has not been carried out in our own Church history. But our faults will not keep us from giving up on the ideal. It is that for which we aim, that which we believe is the best process for turning out reliable Christians.
Your blessing, Fr. Ernesto. And God bless your work.
I wish there was more jurisdictional consistency here. The timeline for OCA, Greek, Antiochian (those I have personal experience with) parishes accepting people into the Church is quite uneven. As short as three classes and as long as a year and a half.
Joseph, I am fairly sure that the two extremes you mention are precisely that, two extremes. I, too, have known priests who are either too quick or too slow to bring someone in. But, I will say that I could much more easily justify bringing them in too quickly than keeping them out too long.
You see, my impression of those who bring them in too quickly is that their mistake is often based on a strong belief on God’s grace and the Holy Spirit’s power, and an under-estimation of the addicting power of sin. But, God bless them, their reliance on the Holy Spirit and God’s grace is often proven reliable.
Meanwhile, those who take too long are all too often touched with a bit of legalism and wish to ensure very proper outward behavior before they will “allow” the inquirer to “become” a Christian. That is a very bad foundation for the future Christian life of the catechumen.
There is a reason why the traditional period of up to a year developed. That is just about right to develop some reasonable Christian habits without keeping people out for the sake of “protecting” the Church. It ensures discipleship without falling into Phariseeism.
Excellent and clear explanation Fr. Ernesto. I’ve been reading The History of Christianity by Justo Gonzalez, and in it he states that before the era of Constantine, the common practice was to instruct the catechumenate for 3 years prior to baptism and admittance into the church and the partaking of the sacrament.
Gonzalez explains that Jews had been admitted more quickly, because they had the background. However, pagans had to go through a much more lengthy procedure because they were starting from scratch. No doubt, the Church at that time also wanted to make sure who their friends really were, given the persecutions.
As an evangelical, raised on the “Roman Road to Salvation” and the Sinners Prayer, this makes much more sense. It can be very difficult to get even mature Christians to answer questions and to help you get started.
Hey Dave, there was a tendency in the Early Church to lengthen everything, not just the length of the catechumenate. Thus, Church discipline slowly grew to the point that there were sins for which one could be punished with 20 years without being able to receive the Lord’s Supper. There were even one or two sins for which one could not receive the Lord’s Supper from the time they committed their sin until the moment of their death. That is, only as they were dying were they allowed to receive their one and final communion.
However, neither the three year catechumenate nor the lifetime bans lasted in Church history. Rather, they seem to be a pendulum swing in an overly strict and legalistic direction. Having said that, we are currently in a swing to an overly loose and antinomian direction. That is, we now have people who call themselves Christian seriously arguing that the Church itself is mistaken in applying any discipline. Anything other than instant forgiveness with no repercussions is thought to be wrong. This is the other extreme.
Nevertheless, though there are those who advocate a return to a second to their century discipline, a return to that type of discipline would be as wrong as today’s attitudes are. Many make the mistake of arguing that every event in Church history is somehow Holy Tradition. That is not true. And, there are those who argue that every change in practice is a violation in Holy Tradition. That is clearly not true also.
I was chrismated very recently and I am thrilled to be “home” in the Holy Orthodox faith. However, I had no formal classes with our priest during the catechumen process. We talked a few times and covered a very limited number of topics. I have done and am still doing extensive reading of some of the more popular Orthodox literature. I believe that our priest thought that this reading was sufficient for me.
To be honest, I wish that the process had been much more organized and thorough. Don’t get me wrong, I dearly love our priest. But I feel a bit “green” and unsure about how to do the daily spiritual disciplines that I know that I need to do (especially with Lent coming soon). I do not have a spiritual father who is proactively engaged in helping me. My sponsor is a wonderful person, but also not interested or able to guide me.
Do you have any suggestions?
For doing some self-training, I would actually suggest some booklets that are available from Conciliar Press that are designed to answer the type of questions asked by people who do not have a background in Orthodoxy. Go to http://www.conciliarpress.com/booklets-brochures?order=name&dir=asc and see what they have. I prefer the booklets because, while the books are better, they often assume that you already know something of Orthodoxy. The booklets assume nothing.
Begin a simple pattern of daily prayer in your life. Do not try to do all the Liturgical Hours! Go to the Greek Orthdox Archdiocese’s web chapel at http://www.goarch.org/chapel where you will find a the New Testament and Gospel readings as well as the saints of the day, some with their history, and a simple prayer for the morning. This will start to get you in touch with the spiritual history of Orthodoxy.
Since Lent is here, begin to attend the Presanctified Liturgy and the Akathist, as you can.
Finally, check and see what Orthodox works of mercy may be being done in the area. As you can, volunteer to help out in practical ways. The object is not money; the object is getting hands-on with helping others.
As you do this, your life will begin to change. And, this will give you the knowledgeable openings to ask questions of your priest. Any priest who sees a person who is learning, praying, and working quickly realizes that he has a jewel.
“…so hard to become Orthodox”
Fr. Ernesto,
I have a question of clarification. In general would what you describe here apply to only new converts to “Christianity”, or to ALL converts to EO? As one who was “raised” as a Calvinist who believs in “perseverance of the saints”, I was “discipled” for two years by my church and we believe in a continual discipleship process, as it appears you do too. We also have theological problems with evangelicalism’s easy believism and sinner’s prayer mentality. Protestants too often confuse the theological ideas of “salvation” (ongoing process, and indeed eternal) with our own doctrine of “justification.” (a point in time)
If I were to join an (i.e. your) Orthodox church as a previously baptized Christian of 15 years, what should I expect from the church? The same year long discipleship process prior to participating in the sacraments? There are an increasing number of evangelicals that have left and are coming your way. How has your tradition changed it’s methodology in light of this, if at all? Thanks in advance!
All persons entering Orthodoxy go through the same catechumenate process. However, only those who have not been baptized in water by a Christian group in the name of the Trinity are baptized. As with everything in Orthodoxy, there are some exceptions. For instance, the Oriental Orthodox and Byzantine Rite Roman Catholics are handled a little differently.
Remember, the process of training is what is important. And training into new habits is not done overnight. Also, remember that the Orthodox think differently than the West–whether Roman or Protestant. It takes a bit to see the differences in thinking, which are deeper than simply some doctrinal reading.
Nevertheless, the wise priest adjusts the catechumenate to the catechumen. No, not by shortening the time. Rather, the more knowledgeable the catechumen, the more the priest may be able to delve into theology. However, sometimes the more knowledgeable the catechumen, the more the priest may need to involve him in practical works of mercy. Do you see what I mean when I say that the catechumenate is a period of training and not just knowledge?
“But our faults will not keep us from giving up on the ideal. It is that for which we aim, that which we believe is the best process for turning out reliable Christians.”
We (Lutherans) do it the opposite way. We strive to turn out unreliable Christians.
That way, when push comes to shove, they can put their trust in someone who is totally reliable and not think too highly of themselves.
Do you not think it important to have an ideal towards which to aim? If nothing else, Scripture calls us to look upon the Author of our salvation and to imitate Him.
“Love God and your neighboe as yourself.”
That’s our ideal.
And the question is…”How are you doing?”
Welllll…you’d better strive harder, read more bible, volunteer more..and then where is the heart? The motives are shot to hell.
We use the law (the ideal) to kill. To knock the person off of the ‘holiness project’…that Christ might raise Him.
Trying to become more ‘Christlike’, will produce three types of people…Sel-righteous (those that feel that they are doing a pretty good job of it) Phonies (those that don’t want to look like less than they really are) and Despairing (those that give up and just chuck the whole thing).
Law to kill (not make better) Gospel to raise the killed person.
Then!!…the holy Spirit will INSPIRE to good works aoart from the goading of the law.
That’s Lutheran theology 101.
that’s ‘APART’
I’m just a protestant dropping in here. I thought the sinner’s prayer was just a way of expressing repentence and a belief in Jesus as Lord and Savior. I thought that it was the beginning of a life with a new purpose.
I’ve heard of so-called evangelists preaching that no change was needed following “salvation.” These would be the people who deserve special punishment.
I would like to know, where do cradle Orthodox fit into this picture?
I don’t think it makes sense that a Christian who was born into the church should have it so easy while someone who wants to convert has to go through a catechumenate. Granted, I do agree with you that the chatecumenate is necessary to train devoted Christians. Furthermore, a cradle Orthodox would take for granted the wonder of his faith.
In both Orthodox and Roman Catholic churches, all children had and have to go through a catechism. Again, there are too many parishes where that may be ignored, but that is neither responsible nor sound. Interestingly enough, the Greek Orthodox, with their ethnic dance groups do some of the best jobs of involving children in activities they find interesting. As I commented earlier, teaching is not just a matter of intellectual learning. By involving them in physical activities, the Greeks ensure that the children will be more willing to listen to catechism. In fact, many Greek parishes get quite a bit of catechism in while working with that type of group. For boys, being an altar server was always a way to teach the faith, while girls were often involved in other church activities.
So, though catechism is also important for cradles, there are ways to teach children that go beyond boring them.
I think what bothers me, as a 60 year old catechumen in the Eastern Orthodox church, is the seeming double standard. I recognize I am viewing this as an outsider, and there are things I don’t yet understand. BUT, it bothers me that I have to acquire so much knowledge, be quizzed on the seven ecumenical councils, asked if I agree with all those beliefs, prove I’ll attend all the variety of services, engage in some ministry, etc, etc, before I can be accepted as a member. Yet, I see babies accepted who have yet to prove anything about their character, and I see women dressed like street walkers going up to receive the bread and wine.
I thought baptism and chrismation was the gateway; the right to BEGIN the journey on the narrow path. But, you seem to treat it, for adult converts, as a gateway you’re allowed to pass through only after traveling a ways down the narrow path first. For infants, the gateway is at the beginning of the journey; for adults it’s somewhere in the middle of the journey. First. walk the path and we’ll judge when you’re ready to enter the gate. Somehow, I don’t think Jesus described it that way, and we seem to be putting the cart before the horse.
I don’t remember Jesus or the apostles preaching the word and then saying, “believe and be baptized, but only after you’ve gone through catechumen classes that only start in September. Then you can be baptized sometime in late Spring, if we judge your walk is Christlike enough.” Oddly enough, to walk like a Christian, you need the gift of the Holy Spirit. So, you’re basically saying show us you can walk like a Christian without the gift of the Holy Spirit. Aren’t you really then saying, the Holy Spirit is superfluous to the being an Orthodox Christian?
I thought you hear the Word, receive a witness that it is true, you believe, repent, are baptized and receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. THEN, and only then, are you equipped to show a transformation because it is the Spirit that sanctifies and transforms. If I have to transform before I receive that gift, what have I truly proven? That I am a good Pharisee, able to adhere to a set of rules and be a good moral person without God? How does that prove I’ll be a good Orthodox Christian?