From: richarra@gmail.com   
      
   March 27th - St. John Damascene   
      
   St. John Damascene, 8th century, was the grand vizir of the Caliph of   
   Damascus.   
   While he was holding this office, Emperor Leo the Isaurian began a campaign   
   to   
   destroy the Catholic statues, the beginning of the iconoclast heresy. In 726   
   he   
   issued his first edict against the veneration of images.   
      
   John Damascene immediately took up his pen to defend this ancient practice   
   of   
   Catholics, just as before he had attacked the heresies of his time. Because   
   of   
   this defense, the hand that wrote it was chopped off, but the Virgin Mary   
   appeared and reattached the hand.   
      
   He retired to the monastery of St. Sabas southeast of Jerusalem and died   
   there   
   as a monk dedicated to prayer and study. He wrote numerous works and   
   beautiful   
   verses. His style was vigorous and polemic. For example, writing against the   
   Emperor he called him a new Mahomet, an enemy of Christ, and despiser of the   
   Saints. He also attacked the sycophant Bishops, calling them slaves of their   
   stomachs, disposed to compromise and lie.   
      
   Writing about the holy statues, he said:   
      
   "Regarding the Most Holy Mother of God, I confess her holier than the   
   Seraphim   
   and Cherubim, more sublime than Heaven, more elevated than all creatures,   
   for   
   she brought to light of day Christ our God.   
      
   "As for the Saints who combated for Him, I honor and venerate them, kissing   
   their precious relics. In the Bible the sacred writer gives an account of   
   the   
   Incarnation of Christ. The sculptor pictures the glory of the Church from   
   the   
   first Adam to the birth of Christ. The writer and artist concur on the same   
   truth. The Church benefits from both, but you, O heretic, venerate the book   
   and   
   destroy the statue. What an extravagance!   
      
   "If some ignorant person commits some excess in this matter, it is your   
   fault.   
   If someone makes the mistake of taking the image of Christ for Christ   
   Himself,   
   you should instruct him. This is why you are Bishops, priests and deacons.   
   The   
   true Shepherds and Doctors, the shining lights of times past, dedicated   
   themselves to instructing the people for their good and salvation. But the   
   Bishops of this century are preoccupied with horses, cows, sheep, flocks,   
   fields   
   and gold. They care only about accruing and spending money. They are very   
   concerned about the body, but neglect their people and their own souls. It   
   is as   
   Scriptures says: The shepherds became wolves.   
      
   "Who should we follow now, St. Basil the Thaumaturge, or Bastilas the   
   murderer   
   of souls? The doctor of penance and salvation St. John Chrysostom or the   
   doctor   
   of disorder and perdition Tricarcade? Or perhaps Gregory, the profane   
   patriarch   
   of Constantine, plague of the people, who along with the head of the Empire   
   cast   
   out the venerable statues and holy doctrine of the Holy Church?   
      
   "To whom should we listen? The ensemble of venerable Patriarchs who spoke at   
   the   
   first six Councils or these hypocrite prelates who introduced adulterous   
   dogmas   
   in the Church, which were never confirmed by any Patriarch and are   
   proscribed by   
   the Letters of Synods?"   
      
      
   Comments of the late Prof. Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira: (died 1995)   
      
   Some prior observations will help us to better understand this selection. In   
   the   
   Muslim world, the Caliph was a mixture of pope and emperor. He was a   
   religious   
   leader who at the same time exercised temporal power. The grand vizir was   
   the   
   equivalent of a prime minister. He was the man appointed by the caliph to   
   administer the government. Normally the caliphs would not deign to associate   
   with the people, who were considered unworthy to even be in their presence.   
   It   
   was the grand vizirs who represented them; they were the face of the caliph   
   for   
   the public.   
      
   St. John Damascene, then, was the grand vizir of the Caliph of Damascus. At   
   that   
   time the caliphs permitted Catholics to practice their religion and hold   
   important public offices in that Muslim state. There was, therefore, this   
   paradox: a Saint who was protected by a Muslim Caliphate and who attacked a   
   heretic who was head of the Catholic Byzantine Empire.   
      
   Emperor Leo the Isaurian was the one who initiated the campaign against the   
   statues. It was the Iconoclast heresy, which means those who destroy icons   
   and   
   statues. Leo the Isaurian was a pre-figure of the Protestants. Among other   
   errors, he sustained that it was wrong to venerate statues. On his orders,   
   the   
   heretics burned and destroyed countless statues in the Byzantine churches.   
      
   In this most beautiful text of St. John Damascene, you see the indignation   
   of a   
   soul of fire against error. The excerpt demonstrates that the indignation of   
   St.   
   John Damascene was filled with love for the truth. He vigorously proclaims   
   the   
   truths he defends.   
      
   In this text there are some very valuable arguments. For example, when he   
   addresses the Iconoclasts, he points out the inconsistency of their position   
   of   
   destroying the statues but venerating the Bible. The Bible, he argues,   
   describes   
   personages in words, that is, it gives a literary representation of the   
   person.   
   The artist, taking his inspiration from that description, paints a picture   
   or   
   sculpts a statue. Therefore, if one takes a stand against the statues of   
   persons, he should also be against the Bible that describes them. Otherwise   
   his   
   position is contradictory. He would accept the literary description but   
   condemn   
   the artistic figure representing the former. It is a simple but iron-tight   
   argument presented with great literary beauty.   
      
   In another argument against the heretic bishops and clergy, he says: "If an   
   ignorant person commits some excess in this matter, it is your fault. If   
   someone   
   makes the mistake of taking the image of Christ for Christ Himself, you   
   should   
   instruct him. This is why you are bishops, priests and deacons."   
      
   You can see that the heretics of those times used the same sophism of   
   Protestants who would later affirm that Catholics adore statues and Our   
   Lady.   
   When the heretic bishops and clergy asserted that the statues should be   
   destroyed to avoid such excesses, St. John Damascene replied: "You are in   
   charge   
   of the instruction of the people. If there is some excess in the veneration   
   of   
   statues, it is because you did not fulfill your duty. Therefore, to be   
   consistent, if you want to condemn someone, you should condemn yourselves,   
   and   
   instead of censuring and breaking the statues, you should correct   
   yourselves."   
   Again, it is a simple, strong logic that leaves no exit for the adversary.   
      
   We should not be surprised that the heretic Emperor ordered the hand of St.   
   John   
   Damascene to be chopped off. The heretic could not face this iron logic of   
   the   
   Saint, so Leo the Isaurian took this violent measure to stop the Saint from   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)