10 Ways Orthodox Parents Set Children Up for Moral Failure

Life gets busy and we don’t step back enough to see what we might be doing as parents to hurt our children’s spiritual growth. Being an intentional Orthodox Christian parent is hard work…but it’s worth it. We have a legacy of faith, wisdom and experience we can pass on to our kids if we pay attention. But if we don’t—we could cause more harm than good.

1. Buying them smartphones. 

People look at us like we’re freaks, but my husband and I refuse to buy smartphones for our kids. Not only are they expensive, but they allow unsupervised access to the internet, among many other faults. Some parents trick themselves into believing their kids will use internet on their smartphones for “educational” purposes. Yeah right. Don’t fool yourself. The internet, like the TV, is the devil’s playground when it’s not properly supervised. Your job as a parent is to protect your child’s innocence as long as possible. There’s a whole lot of nasty garbage out there that puts thoughts and ideas into their heads that they don’t need. Right now, their souls are like flowers just barely beginning to bloom. Don’t kill that spiritual growth with the world’s evils. And texting? Really, why do kids need texting? Have you looked around lately at all the kids glued to their phones because they’re so hooked on them they can’t put them down. Geez, don’t assist them in losing their childhood. Let kids be kids. Unplug them now because they don’t know how and they need your help.

2. Unsupervised computer use without parental controls.  

As with smartphones, the internet is full of temptations kids don’t have the ability to deal with. Statistics show the average nine year old has already been exposed to porn on the net.

Do not put a computer in their room. And if there already is one in there, take it out and put it in a prominent area of your home. Seriously, this is their innocence and their soul we’re talking about here. Our kids work on the computer in our family room where the screen is in our view. They can’t log in without our passwords, and we also have them keep to a two-hour computer time limit (which the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends) with breaks in between. Then, we send them outside to get fresh air and to do what kids are supposed to do—play.

3. Encouraging dating in early teen years.

  We’re pushing off dating as long as possible. Why? I don’t believe putting kids in tempting situations is good for them. Just because you may have dated at an early age and survived doesn’t mean they will. STD’s are at an all-time high. Early intimate relationships also increase risk of depression and suicide. They are still growing and learning about life. Doing things adults do in relationships is not only dangerous, but it’s a heck of an emotional load to put on a kid. They’ve got enough to worry about with homework, sports and college. You might think it’s cute, but when your child ends up telling you they’re pregnant or they have Herpes—it’s not so cute.

4. Being lax about prayer and going to church. In a world where the word religion is looked at as a bad word, and kids are being told rules don’t matter anymore—church is desperately needed. We do not pray enough. Our kids need to see us pray, and they need to see us make church a priority. And what if they tell you they don’t want to go? Go anyway. You’re the parent. Kids need structure, and they need to see you as an example of someone who strives to put God first, before everything else.

5. Not talking about the issues they face. 

Just because they act like everything is okay doesn’t mean it is. It’s crucial to connect with your kids every day. Show you care by asking about their day and actually listening to them. Take them out for dessert or to a coffee shop for one-on-one time. Ask their opinion on things with school, their teachers, friends, church—whatever. Help them by offering a non-judgmental, loving example of the Church’s viewpoint on current issues. Kids are confused today because the world is telling them so many things are okay that the church is saying are not. You can be the voice of reason and sanity for them, and by showing them respect and listening—they’re more likely to hear you.

6. Paganizing Christianity. 

Some things just aren’t Christian, no matter how you try to make them that way. While it’s great to have healthier alternatives, we can’t Christianize everything. Sadly, public school dances in many schools have now become a showcase of blatant immorality. My jaw almost dropped to the floor when my teenage daughter told me her junior high school’s dance last year included lap dancing and pole dancing. Then she mentioned later that “grinding” was rampant, and the punch got spiked. Huh? Yes, that’s right. Because the parent chaperones were afraid to say something, the kids got away with it. Throw in oversexualized lyrics, peer pressure, hormones and brains that haven’t grown completely—and you get a recipe for disaster. Come up with your own ways to celebrate that don’t include being immoral. This year, to substitute for a school dance, we’re looking at renting a boat and having our kids invite a friend to come along. We don’t mind spending a little money to give our kids a fun time with friends. Why waste a miserable night chaperoning a dance when our kids could have a better, cleaner time doing something fun with friends?

7. Too much freedom. 

It blows me away how many parents don’t know where their kids are these days. First of all, friends are important, but it’s the family that sticks around for the long haul. Parents should not feel embarrassed to require their kids to be home for dinner and to know their whereabouts. And no, I don’t drop my kids off at the mall. What good things happen at the mall anyway? Involve them in church youth groups and volunteer organizations and sports, but be careful how much time they spend wandering aimlessly with friends who might not always be the best influence. Don’t let them back you in a corner. It’s okay to put your foot down and say no on some of their activities. As long as they know you love and respect them, they will eventually understand ( it might be when they’re 30, but they will thank you later).

8. Ignoring the value of hard work. 

Do your kids do regular chores? If not, why not? You are robbing them of valuable opportunities that will raise their self-esteem and help them learn skills they will use all their life. Aside from that, they live in your house, and you are not a maid. Enough said.

9. Not teaching them manners. 

The other day, two teenage boys walked into a door in front of me and let the door swing back in my face. They just kept talking and didn’t even look back. I can hold a door open myself just fine, but I think it’s a good thing to teach teen boys and girls to look out for the person behind them. Teach them to say excuse me when they bump into someone or walk in front of them. Kids today could really use a lesson in manners. You will do the world a lot of good to teach them to respect and honor others like our faith teaches.

10. Money doesn’t grow on trees. 

One day, they will be on their own and will need to know how to pay bills. Teach them at an early age that doing work is how they get money. Have them do jobs to earn their spending money. Teach them to tithe 10% to charity, like the Bible teaches, and show them how to invest. Proverbs has a lot of great verses to show kids the importance of being wise with finances and planning ahead. There is a time to give money to kids, but be careful. Many kids are getting money way too easily, without understanding its value.

There isn’t a blueprint out there for how to raise morally aware kids, in an increasingly immoral world. But there is hope. We have more power than we realize.

Remembering that we have the church to guide us, and Orthodox Christian friends and family who are going through the same thing, helps.

It’s so important that we do the hard things sometimes, and step up to the plate. Our kids need us to be strong and guide them to the right thing.

Science and Religion ( St. Luke the Surgeon )

"When we examine contemporary science as developed by scientists such as Lamark and Darwin, we see the antithesis and I would say the complete disagreement that exists between science and religion, on topics that concern the more basic problems of existence and knowledge. For this, an enlightened mind cannot accept at the same time both one and the other and must choose between religion and science."

A well known German Zoologist, Ernst Haeckel (1834-1919), who was a good follower of Darwin, wrote these words some 65 years ago, in his book, “The Riddle of the Universe” that was very successful and as it seemed, had proved that faith is absurd. So says Haeckel that every enlightened man must choose between science and religion and should follow either one or the other. He considered it necessary that such men should deny religion because a logical man cannot deny science.

Truly, is this necessary? No, not at all, for we know that many and great scientists were at the same time great believers. For example, such was the Polish astronomer Copernicus who laid the foundation of all contemporary astronomy. Copernicus was not only a believer but was also a cleric. Another great scientist, Newton, whenever he mentioned the word God, he removed his hat. He was a great believer. A great bacteriologist of our time and almost a contemporary, Pasteur, who laid the basis of contemporary bacteriology, he would start every scientific work with a prayer to God. Some ten years ago a great scientist passed away, who was our countryman, physiologist Pavlov, who was the creator of the new physiology of the brain. He too was a great believer. Would Haeckel therefore dare say that these men did not have enlightened minds because they believed in God?

So what happens now? Why even today there are some scientists, professors at Universities whom I personally know and are great believers. Why don’t all the scientists deny religion but only those who think the same as Haeckel? Because these people believe only in the material and deny the spiritual world, they do not believe in life after death, they do not accept the immortality of the soul and of course they do not accept the resurrection of the dead. They say that science is capable of everything, that there is no secret in nature that science cannot discover. What can we answer to these?

We shall respond to them this way. You are totally right. We cannot limit the human mind that searches nature. We know that today, science knows only a part of the things we have of nature. We also understand that the possibilities of science are great. In this they are right and we don’t doubt it. What then do we doubt? Why don’t we deny religion like them and consider it contrary to scientific knowledge?

Because we believe wholeheartedly that there is a spiritual world. We are certain that apart from the material world there is an infinite and incomparably superior spiritual world. We believe in the existence of spiritual beings that have higher intellects than us humans. We believe wholeheartedly that above this spiritual and material world there is the Great and Almighty God.

What we doubt is the right of science to research with its methods the spiritual world. Because the spiritual world cannot be researched with the methods used to research the material world. Such methods are totally inappropriate to research the spiritual world.

How do we know that there is a spiritual world? Who told us that it exists? If we are asked by people who do not believe in Divine Revelation, we shall answer them thus: “Our heart tells us." For there are two ways for one to know something, the first being that which is spoken by Haeckel, which is used by science to learn of the material world. There is however another way that is unknown to science, and does not wish to know it. It is the knowledge through the heart. Our heart is not only the central organ of the circulation system, it is an organ with which we know the other world and receive the highest knowledge. It is the organ that gives us the capability to communicate with God and the world above. Only in this we disagree with science.

Praising the great successes and achievements of science, we do not doubt at all its great importance and we do not confine scientific knowledge. We only tell the scientists: “You do not have the capability with your methods to research the spiritual world, we however can with our heart."

There are many unexplainable phenomena which concern the spiritual world that are real (as are some type of material phenomena). There are therefore phenomena that science will never be able to explain because it does not use the appropriate methods.

Let science explain how the prophecies appeared on the coming of the Messiah, which were all fulfilled. Could science tell us how the great prophet Isaiah, some 700 years before the birth of Christ, foretold the most important events in His life and for which he was named the evangelist of the Old Testament? Could it explain the prophetic grace possessed by the saints and tell us with which physical methods the saints inherited this grace and how they could understand the heart and read the thoughts of a person they had just met for the first time? They would see a person for the first time and they will call him by his name. Without waiting for the visitor to ask, they would answer in regards to what troubled him.

If they can, let them explain it to us. Let them explain with what method the saints foretold the great historical events which were accurately fulfilled as they were prophesied. Let them explain the visitation from the other world and the appearance of the dead to the living.

They shall never explain it to us because they are too far from the basis of religion - from faith. If you read the books of the scientists who try to reconstruct religion, you will see how superficially they look at things. They do not understand the essence of religion, yet they criticize it. Their criticism does not touch the essence of faith, since they are unable to understand the types and the expressions of religious feeling. The essence of religion they do not understand. Why not? Because the Lord Jesus Christ says: "No one can come to me unless My Father who sent Me draws him to Me" (John 6:44).

So it is necessary that we be drawn by the Heavenly Father, and it is necessary that the grace of the Holy Spirit enlighten our heart and our mind. To dwell in our heart and mind through this enlightenment, the Holy Spirit and the ones who were found worthy to receive the gift of the Holy Spirit, those in whose heart lives Christ and His Father, know the essence of faith. The others, those outside the faith, cannot understand anything.

Let us hear the criticism against Haeckel from a French philosopher Emile Boutroux (1845-1921). So says Boutroux: “The criticisms of Haeckel concern much more the ways, than the essence, which he observes with such a materialistic and narrow view, that they cannot be accepted by religious people. Thus the criticism of religion by Haeckel is not referred to, not even in one of the principles that constitutes religion."

This is therefore our opinion regarding Haeckel’s book “The Riddle of the Universe” which up to day is considered the “Bible” for all those who criticize religion, which they deny and find it contrary to science. Do you see how poor and tasteless arguments they use? Don’t become scandalized when you hear what they say about religion, since they themselves cannot understand its essence. You people, who may not have much of a relationship with science and do not know much about philosophy, remember always the most basic beginning, which was well known by the early Christians. They considered poor the person who knew all the sciences yet he knew not God. On the other hand, they considered blessed the person who knew God, even if he knew absolutely nothing about worldly things.

Guard this truth like the best treasure of the heart, walk straight without looking right or left. Let us not bother with what we hear against religion, losing our bearings. Let us hold on to our faith which is the eternal indisputable truth. Amen.


St. Luke the Surgeon, Archbishop of Simferopol (1877-1961)

Saint Luke the Surgeon, Archbishop of the Crimea

In 1932, a tumor appeared and he went to Leningrad to be operated on by an oncologist. Fortunately, it turned out to be benign. In Leningrad, he was called to meet Kirov, a high-ranking member of the Party. The latter offered the bishop the largest surgical research facility in the country, provided he would remove his monastic habit and renounce Christ. He refused and returned to his place of exile. In 1933 his famous book was published: “Essays on the Surgery of Pyogenic Infections”, signed “Bishop Luke”. The book was very well received and ran into a number of editions. Professor Polianov declared that: “Our country does not have any other such book with so much knowledge of surgery and so much love for people”.

He lived in Tashkent from 1933 to 1937. He experienced peaceful family times with his children, something he had missed greatly. He worked mainly on scientific research, which consumed him. He wanted to understand the pus mechanism in the greatest detail, and wrote to his son: “I’m making astounding discoveries. I work all the time. I want to write a lot. I’m afraid I won’t have time. I’m at the height of my powers. I must make time…”.

He was one step away from the discovery of penicillin. But he did not make it…

The 1930s were the era when Stalin was all-powerful. The gulag archipelago was at its height. Millions of people were in the camps and worked at forced labour. More than 300,000 people worked on the White Sea Canal, digging their way thorough granite rock with primitive implements to create a stretch of waterway 280 kilometres long. At least 100,000 died and others had their health ruined. In 1936, the terror reached its peak. In Moscow, the famous trials took place, at which the leading figures from the revolution were eliminated. Arrests of innocent citizens assumed epidemic proportions. And naturally Bishop Luke was under suspicion.

One evening in 1937, commissars entered his house and arrested him. Outside waited the Black Raven which took him to Tashkent Prison. The charges were that as a doctor he had killed people, that he was organizing a counter-revolution and a plot to kill Stalin. Many of his colleagues were also arrested and they gave way under duress and testified against him. They tried to make him sign a confession and subjected him to a chain of terrible, cruel cross-examination. Fixed on a chair under the glare of a powerful lamp, various interrogators cross-examined him ceaselessly, day in, day out, for thirteen days.

They would not let him eat nor sleep. He often passed out and suffered from hallucinations and then they threw buckets of ice-cold water over him to bring him round. Because he refused to sign the charges, he was again subjected to a chain of cross-examinations, for another 13 days and nights. His body was covered in sores from the blows. They kept him in Tashkent Prison for two years, under constant threat and torture.

In 1939 they sentenced him again to exile in Siberia, this time for three years. Another grievous train journey to Krasnoyarsk and then by river boat to the town of Bolshaya Murta. Here he presented himself at the hospital and asked to be allowed to operate. They engaged him, but since there was no other position available they gave him the job of washerwoman for the hospital. They gave him a small room in the hospital building and he lived in great poverty. Here, too, he was very active in the operating theatre, even though working conditions were very bad.

There was no church in the village. Every morning Bishop Luke would go into a nearby forest to pray. He would set up a little icon on a log, kneel in the mud or the snow and pray. But even there the young members of Komsomol would desecrate his prayer. God had been exiled from everywhere.

There are still people living in Murta to this day who remember him with great affection. There still is no church there, but one is being built by the residents and it will be dedicated to Saint Luke. Indeed, on the day that the foundation stone was laid, a sick woman was miraculously healed by the saint. The cross was erected there to commemorate the miraculous intervention of the saint and in front they have set the stone on which the lady had been sitting.

At that time the world scene was dominated by war. The German hordes invaded Russia, causing enormous damage and leaving countless victims. The whole country underwent a dreadful trial.

In Krasnoyarsk, trains would arrive full of wounded soldiers with infected wounds. Many died without care, because there were hardly any doctors. Bishop Luke was moved by this state of affairs and sent a telegram to Kalinin, President of the Supreme Soviet, asking to be allowed to return and operate on the soldiers. The answer came immediately. He was returned to Krasnoyarsk, appointed head physician of Military Hospital 1515 and advisor to all the military hospitals in the region.

Here, too, he was met with mistrust by his colleagues and was constantly under the surveillance of the KGB. His living quarters were a narrow, damp room at the hospital. He was also subjected to the scorn of those in higher positions. They considered him a second-class citizen and forbade him to eat in the canteen at the military hospital. Often he went without food. Some nurses felt sorry for him and would take him a little food on the quiet. He was never heard to complain, and persisted in his great faith in God. In one of his letters to his son, he writes: “I have come to love the trial, which, strangely, purifies the soul”.

Every now and again he would go to the train station to pick out the worst of the wounded in order to operate on them. All of these soldiers loved him greatly, because they felt that he had saved their lives. But the intensive work schedule affected his health. He was overcome with exhaustion. Nevertheless, he continued, as ever, to think of those who were suffering and served them with incredible self-denial.

There was no church anywhere. All of them were closed. But now Stalin needed the Church and in 1943, he gave it a modicum of freedom. He freed many of the imprisoned clergy and allowed some churches to re-open. Bishop Luke was appointed Archbishop of Krasnoyarsk. In the city, permission was given for the opening of a small church, Saint Nicholas’, in a suburb 7 kilometres from the centre. On 28 February, the Archbishop celebrated the first Divine Liturgy. Ecclesiastical life in Siberia began again from this humble church. But to get there, he had to trudge 7 kilometres through mud or snow. Often he was snowbound and unable to go on.

Today in Krasnoyarsk, a church dedicated to Saint Luke is being built in the grounds of the General Hospital. The doctors there now are grateful to him and feel blessed by the tradition he left them. At a central point in the city there is a large statue of the saint and there are always passers-by who will stop, say a few words of prayer or leave a few flowers.

In 1944 he was transferred to Tambov as head physician and Archbishop. Here, too, everything had fallen apart. With great effort, he managed to repair the ruined church of the Holy Protecting Veil and he began to celebrate the Liturgy and to preach with great joy, because, as he said in his first sermon: “for fifteen years, my lips have been sealed”. At the same time he worked at two hospitals in the town, the General and the Military, whilst also giving lessons at the Medical School and speaking at medical conferences.

In the ecclesiastical sphere, he made tremendous efforts to reorganize his province. In churches he preached the word of God. People flocked to hear him and were profoundly influenced.

The authorities were in a cleft stick. They recognized his enormous scientific, social and patriotic contribution, but could not tolerate his sermons and pastoral work. They often invited him to scientific conferences or the university, but asked that he come without his cassock and pectoral icon. He would not give way and indicated that he was not afraid of anything. In two years, the people of Tambov came to love him very much and the traces of his residence here, too, have proved indelible.

Today, the General Hospital in the city bears his name. In the courtyard there is a bust of him and nearby, in the Museum of Medical History, a large section is dedicated to Saint Luke.

Despite his work load, he took part in the synods of the Moscow Patriarchate. In 1946, recognition came at last. Some members of the party slandered Archbishop Luke to Stalin and demanded he be executed. Stalin became furious and cursed them roundly and ended by saying: “We cannot execute those people any more; we have to honour them”. And, indeed, Archbishop Luke would be honoured by the greatest State medal, the 1st Stalin prize among 15 scientists. The ceremony took place in Moscow. Everyone was present. The only one missing was Archbishop Luke, who did not have the money for a train ticket. The prize was accompanied by 200,000 roubles. He sent a telegram to Stalin asking that the money be distributed to war orphans.

In the same year, on Stalin’s orders, a bust was made of him, which is now in the Klenisovsky Museum in Moscow, among the busts of great scientists. Many foreign journalists came to him for interviews and special broadcasts were made. His health worsened, however, and in 1946 he would lose the sight in one eye. The Church transferred him as Archbishop to the see of Simferopol and Crimea.

The Crimea is a beautiful region, with shades of Greece, but has suffered much. The destruction left by the war was very great here, too. The Church had been completely broken up and the Archbishop had to make Herculean efforts in order to restore it. In his efforts, he came up against the resistance of the authorities, who continually opposed him and undermined his work. There were very many poor people, and he organized a soup kitchen at his home. He often went without food himself, so as not to deprive some poor person of it. Here, too, he was invited to conferences or to give lessons at the School of Medicine. Sometimes the authorities would demand that he should not appear in his cassock, but he would not agree and so some conferences were cancelled.

His everyday life was full. He woke early and performed a service for two to three hours, after which he read a portion of the Old and New Testaments. He would then go to his office and deal with the affairs of his see. In the afternoon, he would receive patients, always without a fee.

A variety of people would come to his surgery: atheists, heathens, foreign nationals. He offered his services without discrimination.

In 1956, he lost the sight in his other eye, too. Although he was now blind, he continued to work tirelessly, to preach and to celebrate the Liturgy. In 1957, he celebrated his 80th birthday in Simferopol.

After Stalin died in 1953, Khrushchev attempted to introduce de-Stalinization. Most prisoners were released and the camps were closed. This positive development, however, was overshadowed by renewed attacks on the Church, with Khrushchev re-opening the anti-Church front. Churches were seized, closed and blown up, while priests were persecuted. Archbishop Luke faced a lot of problems and struggled to keep his churches open. In an anxious letter he wrote to his children: “It is increasingly difficult to direct the affairs of the Church. It’s a great trial. I can’t bear this in my eightieth year. Yet, with the Lord’s help, I’m continuing my difficult task”.

The authorities sought to make an example of him, because he resisted the closure of churches, but they did not dare imprison or exile him.

In another letter to his son, he wrote: “I have more worries than you and they’re hastening my end… In general, the situation in the sphere of the Church is becoming unbearable”.

Archbishop Luke’s life on earth was drawing to a close. At Christmas, 1960, he celebrated the liturgy for the last time, and on Cheese-Fare Sunday he gave his last sermon. Thereafter he remained at home. He prepared for the great journey by praying. Just before his repose, he baptized his great-grand-daughter, Tatiana, now a doctor in Odessa.

One day he turned to his niece and said: “Do you suppose they’ll let you sing Holy God for me at my funeral?”. The niece did not understand what he meant at the time, but she did on the day of the funeral.

It was 11 June 1961, the day of All the Saints of Russia. At four minutes to seven in the morning, Archbishop Luke breathed his last and his soul winged its way up to the heavens. He left to be in time to celebrate the liturgy on that great day at the altar in the sky. The sad tidings spread like wildfire. For three days, people came from all over and by any possible means to venerate his body. Before the coffin, they burst into hot tears and cried aloud: “Our father has left us, our saint”, and they recounted to each other his blessings and miracles.

All that crowd of people turned out to make a magnificent funeral and to bear his body through the main street of Simferopol. On the day of the funeral, however, there came an urgent telegram from Moscow, forbidding the cortège from passing along the central streets.

Anyone wanting to take part would be bussed, free, via side-streets as far as the cemetery. There was to be no singing. Everything was to be over in three minutes, with the body in the grave.

The funeral was attended by a large force of police to implement the order. But after the funeral service, the people revolted. There were scuffles and fights with the police. At some point, the road became open and the hearse started to leave. Some women broke through the police cordon and attached themselves to the hearse, while three heroic women threw themselves in font of the wheels of the vehicle and stopped it, shouting: “You’ll go the way you want only over our dead bodies”.

At that moment a large flock of pigeons appeared in the sky, circled, and followed the procession. Finally, the police gave way. The procession passed along the main boulevard which was packed with people and strewn with roses for a distance of some two kilometres. All those people, with one voice, for three and a half hours, sang “Holy God”.

He was buried in the cemetery of All Saints and since then his grave has become another pool of Siloam. His miracles are countless. And so, in 1966, the Russian Church announced his official canonization. In March, 1966, his relics were translated by Archbishop Lazar of the Crimea and his priests. At the time of the lifting of the relics a sweet perfume pervaded the area. Among his relics, his heart, brain, eyes and lungs were found intact.

On 20 March, 1996, his relics were taken to the church of the Holy Trinity in Simferopol in the presence of thousands of people. In 2001, they were placed in a beautiful silver casket, a present from Greece.

In 1997, a statue was unveiled by Archbishop Lazar in front of the Simferopol hospital, while in 2005 a bust was erected at the Medical School, where the church of Saint Luke is being built.

His memory is kept on June 11. Every year, thousands of people come for the feast from all over the Ukraine, Russia and abroad.

On the eve of the feast, the Medical School, headed by the Dean, sing the Salutations to the Saint and lay their doctor’s coats before his casket to be blessed by him.

On the day of the feast itself, there is a festal Divine Liturgy and a procession with the relics.

His miracles are countless, not only in the Crimea but also in Greece, with many appearances and interventions. He has appeared to many people in their sleep, in either his prelate’s vestments or physician’s clothes. He holds surgical implements, gauzes, syringes and so on. After introducing himself to the patients, he says he has come to operate on them. Many of them, when they wake next morning, find they have an incision or blood on their bodies.

In truth, what was it that glorified and endowed Saint Luke with grace? His virtues were many. But I believe that what distinguished him most was love, the crown of the virtues. Love for God and for people. Genuine love, comprising service, sacrifice and self-denial.

In the land of Palestine, there are two rivers and a lake. The first lake, Tiberias (the Sea of Galilee), is small. Despite this, it is alive with fish, and it was there that Christ’s disciples cast their nets. The second lake is to the south, the Dead Sea, and it is four times as large as the former. But it is dead. There is no trace of life. The two lakes are linked by the River Jordan, which starts from Lake Tiberias and ends in the Dead Sea. And here is the strange thing. For centuries now, the small Sea of Galilee has been giving its waters, letting them flow all the time, and it remains alive. It never empties. The Dead Sea can never get enough of gulping in these waters, but never comes to life. It takes the waters and stays dead. This is the nature of love. We do not ask for love or demand it from others. We simply receive it, without conditions, without calculations and it is only then that we are alive. People who have learned from childhood to take all the time, without giving anything back are crippled, dead, unhappy. People who have learned to love, to sacrifice themselves and to offer themselves are alive and happy.

Such was Saint Luke. A man of love, service, sacrifice, self-denial. This is why he was blessed with grace from God and continues to live, to work wonders, to be so close to us and to comfort us.

May we be inspired by his life and have his blessing…