A Dialogue With the Savior

B00K REVIEW

A Dialogue With the Savior
By Lev Gillet

Justin answers his own question about this book on the Euphrosynos Cafe forum [http://euphrosynoscafe.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=1925]. At first he is entralled with the book, but then the "warning bells" go off. Thank God, not everybody is so fortunate to hear those bells. Thank God and thank you, Justin Kissel. -jh


Lev Gillet (A Monk of the Eastern Church)
by Justin Kissel » Mon 16 February 2004 4:16 pm

Has anyone read a number of the works of Lev Gillet? And if so, what do you think of him? I've heard that he carried a lot of Catholic baggage with him and that it came out in his writings, has anyone found this to be true or untrue? The book I have of his was published by the Melkites, and even has ads for other melkite books on the back cover, and has an introduction and preface by Catholics. Yet, I've been reading his Jesus: A Dialogue With the Savior and found it to be very inspiring and insightful. I think perhaps I know what Saint Nikodemus must have felt like when he read Unseen Warfare for the first time.
Myspace
Justin Kissel
Protoposter

Posts: 2688
Joined: Mon 28 October 2002 1:56 am
Location: PA
Top
by Justin Kissel » Fri 20 February 2004 5:59 pm

I'm going to post a sample chapter from the above-mentioned book by Lev Gillet.

"Peace I leave with you; My peace I give unto you." (Jn. 14:27) Jesus gives His peace. He does not loan it; He does not take it back. The peace which is in Jesus, "My peace," becomes the disciples' final possession. At the beginning of each day it is possible for me to be confirmed in the Saviour's peace, no matter what anxieties the day brings.

The Saviour gives His disciples His peace just at the moment when His Passion is about to begin. When He is confronted with the vision of immediate suffering and death, He proclaims and communicates His peace. If at such moments Jesus is the Master of Peace, then the strength of this peace will not abandon the disciple in moments of lesser strife.

"But I say to you not to resist evil." (Matt. 5:39) How scandalous and foolish is this statement in the eyes of men and especially unbelievers. How do we interpret these precepts--about turning the left cheek to the one who struck the right, giving our cloack to the one who took our tunic, walking two miles with the one who forced us to go one, giving a blessing to him who curses us? Have we thoroughly explored the ways and means of loving our enemy--whether he be a personal or public one? "You know not of what spirit you are..." (Lk. 9:55)

No, it is a question of resisting the Gospel. The choice is not between fighting and not fighting, but between fighting and suffering--and by suffering, conquering. Fighting brings about only vain and illusory victories since Jesus is absolute reality. Suffering without resistance proclaims the absolute reality of Jesus. Understood in this light, suffering is then a real victory. Jesus said: "It is enough," (Lk. 22:38 ) when His disciples presented Him two swords. The disciples had not understood the meaning of Christ's statement: "He that hath not [a purse], let him sell his coat and buy a sword." (Lk. 22:36) What Jesus meant was: there are times when we must sacrifice what seems the most ordinary thing, in order to concentrate our attention on the assaults of the evil one. But defense and attack are both spiriual.

Jesus goes out to the front of the troop which, with its torches and arms, wants to lay hands on Him. (Jn. 18:4) He goes freely, spontaneously, to His passion.

Jesus cures the servant whose right ear had been cut off by the sword of a disciple. (Matt. 26:51) Not only is Jesus unwilling that His disciple defend Him by force: "Suffer ye thus far," (Lk. 22:51) He said--but He repairs the damage which the sword had caused. it is the only miracle which Jesus performed during His passion.

The example of non-resistance which Jesus gave does not mean that He consents to evil or that He remains passive. It is a positive reaction. It is a reply of the love which Jesus incarnates--oppsed to the enterprises of the wicked. The immediate result seems to be the victory of evil. In the long run, the power of this love is strongest. The Resurrection followed the Passion. The non-resistance of the martyrs wore out and captivated the persecutors themselves. it is the shedding of blood which has guaranteed the spread of the Gospel. Is this a weak and vague pacifism? No, it is a burning and victorious flame. If Jesus, at Gethsemani, had asked His Father for the help of twelve legions of angels, there would have been no Easter or Pentecost." - A Monk of the Eastern Church (Lev Gillet), Jesus: A Dialogue With the Saviour, Chapter 40


I find a number of the ideas in the above chapter thought-provoking. In particular, his interpretation of Lk. 22:36-38. The idea that we might need to sacrifice common or "neutral" things so that our spiritual life might benefit seems to be a basic concept in Orthodox spirituality... but I've never thought of this passage in quite that way before, and seeing the passage in a new light colors slightly differently the concept which would ordinarly have seemed so "basic" (to me, at least). In other words--and I've found this to be the case often--this fellow brings the words of Scripture to life and makes me want to read the Bible, and makes me feel within my soul that (when I'm reading the Bible) I'm reading the words of someone who infinitely loves me and cares about me. The fellow is able to bust through my prideful shell and penetrate into my egg-head, and make the "wine" of the Gospel seem very new indeed, so that I very much wish to obtain a new wine-skin (purified nous) to put it in.

This is not to say that I take everything said by this fellow uncritically. I'm thinking more along the lines of the advice given by Saint Basil the Great in how one ought to approach pagan literature:

Into the life eternal the Holy Scriptures lead us, which teach us through divine words. But so long as our immaturity forbids our understanding their deep thought, we exercise our spiritual perceptions upon profane writings, which are not altogether different, and in which we perceive the truth as it were in shadows and in mirrors. Thus we imitate those who perform the exercises of military practice, for they acquire skill in gymnastics and in dancing, and then in battle reap the reward of their training. We must needs believe that the greatest of all battles lies before us, in preparation for which we must do and suffer all things to gain power. Consequently we must be conversant with poets, with historians, with orators, indeed with all men who may further our soul's salvation. Just as dyers prepare the cloth before they apply the dye, be it purple or any other color, so indeed must we also, if we would preserve indelible the idea of the true virtue, become first initiated in the pagan lore, then at length give special heed to the sacred and divine teachings, even as we first accustom ourselves to the sun's reflection in the water, and then become able to turn our eyes upon the very sun itself.

If, then, there is any affinity between the two literatures, a knowledge of them should be useful to us in our search for truth; if not, the comparison, by emphasizing the contrast, will be of no small service in strengthening our regard for the better one...

To begin with the poets, since their writings are of all degrees of excellence, you should not study all of their poems without omitting a single word. When they recount the words and deeds of good men, you should both love and imitate them, earnestly emulating such conduct. But when they portray base conduct, you must flee from them and stop up your ears, as Odysseus is said to have fled past the song of the sirens,10 for familiarity with evil writings paves the way for evil deeds. Therefore the soul must be guarded with great care, lest through our love for letters it receive some contamination unawares, as men drink in poison with honey. - Saint Basil the Great, Address to Young Men on the Right Use of Greek Literature, 2-4
Myspace