ROMANI

DES,
THECYPRI
ANI
TES,
HEAVENANDHel
l

Vl
adi
mirMoss

Themar asmicf ami l

yofher esiest hatIwi llcal l“Romani deanism”af terits
mostf amousexponent ,t henewcal endaristFr .JohnRomani des,appear st o
beeat ing itswayi nt ot hef l
esh oft heTr ueOr thodoxand Tr adit
ionalist
Chur ches.The l atestv ictim,t oj udge f rom a r ecenti ssue ofOr thodox
Traditi
on( vol.XXVII,3,2010, pp.12- 19)
, i
st hear chdioceseofEt na,Cali
fornia,
whichi spar toftheso- cal l
ed“ Sy nodofResi st ance”,ot herwiseknownast he
“Cypr i
anites”.Her e,sev eralmont hs aftert he publ icati
on ofa gener ally
approbat oryar ti
cleont hel ifeofRomani des,weseeaRomani deanarticleby
thenewcal endar i
stFr .Geor geMet alli
nosonheav enandhel lrepri
ntedi nfull
withnocomment ary–whi chwoul dseem t oi mpl yappr ov alofitscont ent.
Similarly,theMar ch,2009 i ssueoft heCy pr i
anitej ournal,TheShepher d,
reproducesanar ti
clebyRomani des.Arewewi tnessingagr adualaccept ance
byt heCy priani
tesoft hi sar ch-hereti
cand hi sser i
ousdi storti
onsoft he
Orthodoxt eachingonsal vation?

Letusl ookmor ecloselyatt hear ti

clebyMet all
inos,anar dentadmi rerof
Romani des.Af terv ari
ous scr ipt uraland l i
t urgi
calr eferences,Met all
inos
presentshi smaj ort hesisasf ol lows:“ Par adiseandhel lar enott wodi ff
er ent
places.( Thi sv ersioni sani dol atrousconcept .
)Theysi gnifyt wodi ff
er ent
situati
ons( way s),whi chor iginat ef r
om t hesameuncr eatedsour ce,andar e
per cei
vedbymanast wo,di fferentexper i
ences.Or ,mor epr ecisely,theyar e
the same exper ience,exceptt hatt heyar e per ceived di f
ferentlybyman,
dependi ngonman’ sinternal stat e.Thi sexper iencei sthesi ghtofChr i
stinsi de
theuncr eatedl ightofHi sdi vini t
y ,ofHi s‘ glor y’
.From t hemomentofHi s
SecondComi ng,t hrought oal let ernity,allpeopl ewi l
lbeseei ngChr i
stinHi s
uncr eat
edl i
ght .Thati swhen‘ thosewhowor kedev i
lint heirlifeti
mewi llgo
towar dst heresur rectionoft hei rl i
fe, whilethosewhohav ewor kedev ili
nt heir
l
ifetimewi llgot owar dst her esur r
ectionofj udgement ’( John5. 29).Int he
presenceofChr i
st,manki ndwi llbesepar ated( ‘sheep’and‘ goat s’,toHisr i
ght
andHi sl eft
).Inot herwor ds,t heywi llbedi scer nedi ntwosepar ategr oups:
thosewhowi llbel ookinguponChr i
staspar adise( t
he‘exceedi nggood,t he
radiant’
)andt hosewhowi llbel ooki nguponChr i
stashel l(‘t
heal l
-consumi ng
fi
re’,Hebr ews12. 29) .

“
Par
adi
seandhel
lar
ethesamer
eal
i
ty…”

IfMet al
li
noswr otethesewordsi nor derto shock,hesucceeded.The
common- sensereacti
ontothesewor dsis:“Howcani tbetruet
hatparadi
se
and hellar ethe same experience,the same r eal
i
ty?
!Surely no two
exper
iencesorreali
ti
escouldbemor edif
ferent
!”
 Ofcour se,t
hereisapur posetothis“shock-t
herapy”
.Metal
li
nosi stryi
ng, i
n
typicall
yRomani deanf ashi
on,t
oshockusoutofourt radi
ti
onalunderstanding
ofheav enandhell,whichheconsiderstober ootedinawestern,“scholasti
c”
mi nd-set.Andhet hinkshehast heHol yScr i
ptur
esandt heHolyFat herson
hissi de.Butperhapshi sideashavemor eincommonwi thmoder nwest ern
thinkers,especi
all
yt heexist
enti
ali
sts,andlesswiththeHolyFathers,thanhe
thinks…

Letusbegi nwitht hestat

ementt hatparadi
seandhel larenott wodiffer
ent
pl
aces,butt wodi ff
erentexperi
ences.Now i fhehadsai dthatPar adi
seand
hel
l arenotonlyplaces,butal
soexper i
ences,orspiri
tualcondit
ions,wewoul d
nothav e obj
ected.ButMet all
inos seems t o giv e a purely subj
ective,
psychologi
calor“ noeti
c”int
erpr
etationofheav enandhel lthatiscompl etel
y
abstract
edf r
om any t
hingspati
o-t
empor alormat er
ial
.

Thisi scl earl

yf alse.Godpl antedpar adise,orEden,“ towar dt heeast ”ina
definitepar tofpl anetear t
hwhi cht r
aditi
onassoci ateswi thwhati snow t he
neighbour hoodoft heci tyofTabr i
zi nNor th-West er nIran,and“ placedt her e
themant hatHehadf ormed”( Genesi s2.8).Par adisehad( andhas)ear th, and
plants,andr i
vers,andbi r
dsandt r
ees.Af tert hef allofman,t heent rancet o
paradisewasbl ockedbyt heswor doft heSer aphim,andt henpar adisei tself
wasr emov edf rom t heear t
h,i nor derthati tshoul dnotbecor rupt ed.Buti t
hasonl ychangedpl ace;ithasnotceasedt obewhati twasi nt hebegi nni ng.
TheApost lePaulwast akenupt opar adise,whi chi sal socal ledt heThi rd
Heav en( IICor i
nthi ans12. 1-4)–andheadmi t
st hepossi bil
ityt hathewas
therei nbodyaswel lassoul ,whi chi mpliest hatpar adisei sphy si cal,aswel l
asaspi ri
tualr eal it
y .Again,St .I r
enaeuswr i
test hat“ Enochofol d,hav i
ng
pleasedGod,wast ranslatedi nt hebody ,f oreshowi ngt het ransl ati
onoft he
ri
ght eous…TheEl der s…sayt hatt hosewhohav ebeent ransl atedar et akent o
paradise, andr emai nt hereunt i
ltheconsummat ionofal lthings, bei ngt hef irst
toent eri ntoi ncor rupt i
on.”IfEnoch,whohasnotdi ed,i si npar adisei nt he
body ,thenpar adisei saphy sicalplaceev ennow, afteritst ransl ationf rom t he
earth–al thoughi tsphy si
cali
tyi sani ncorruptphy sicali
t y,notl ikeourcor rupt
earth.

Ofcour se,t
heFat her sal sounder st
andpar adisei
not herway s:ast hemind
i
nwhi chGoddwel lsnoet i
cal l
y ,
andasat y
peoff utur
e,eschat ol
ogical r
eali
ti
es.
Butt hesespi r
itualinterpr etationsshouldnotbeseenascont radicti
ngt he
physicalreali
ty.Eveni nSt .John’ svisi
onoft heHeavenlyJer usalem, aft
er“the
fi
rstheav enandt hefirstear thhav epassedaway ”(Revelati
on21. 1),ther
ei s
sti
llaplace“ i
nt hemi ddleofi tsstr
eet”forthetreeofli
fe,foritsl
eav esandf or
theriverofparadise( Rev elation22.2).

Simi
lar
ly,hel
lhasalwaysbeenunder
stoodtobeaplace,al
bei
tnotan
or
dinar
yplace.Andj
ustasheav
enandparadi
sehav
eal
way
sbeenunderst
ood
tobe“ up”,aboveus,sohellhasal
way sbeenunder st
oodtobebel ow us,i
n
the bowels ofthe eart
h.Thus St.Paul’s words have a defi
nit
e spati
al
connotati
on:“AtthenameofJesusev erykneeshallbow,ofthoseinheaven,
andthoseonear th,
andthoseundert
heear t
h”(Phil
i
ppians2.9).

Asophi sti
catedrat i
onal i
stwi llmocki nglyr eply:“Doy oumeant osayt hatif
yougof arenoughupf r om ear thi naspaceshi py ouwi llsomedayr each
heav en,ori fyoudi gahol ef arenoughi ntot heear thyouwi lleventuall
yreach
hell?
!”No,wedonotmeant hat.Cl early
,whenChr i
stdescendedi ntohelland
thenascendedi ntoheav en, heent eredar egi ont hatisi nsomesensebey ond
ournor malspace- t
imecont inuum.Ofcour se,moder nphy sicshasr eveal
ed
thatspace- t
ime i sv eryf arf rom whati tseems t o be t o ournor mal,
unsophi st i
catedsense- per cept i
on.Weexper iencei tinf ourdimensi ons,but
moder nst ri
ng-t
heor yphy sici st
sbel ieveithasel ev en!Sot hequest i
onar i
ses:
couldpar adiseandhel lbei noneoft hesev endi mensi onst hatwedonot
normal lyexper i
ence?Orev eni nat welft
hdi mensi onnoty etdi scover
edby
scientists?Ev enifwegi venegat iv
eanswer stot hesequest ions, andconclude
thatheav enandhel lexisti nsomecompl et elydi f
ferentki ndofr eali
ty,we
mustnev erthel
essacceptt hef actt hatheav enandhel lmusti nsomeway
i
nteractwi thourf ami l
i
arf ourdi mensi onsofspaceandt ime.ForwhenChr ist
ascended i nto heaven,hedef ini
telywentup i nr elationt otheobser vi
ng
Apost l
es, andnotdown, ort other ightorl eft.Andagai n, whenHedescended
i
ntohel l
,hedef i
nitelywentdown, andnoti nanyot herdirect i
on.

AsC. S.Lewi swr ites,referr

ingt othe“NewNat ure”ofChrist
’sresurr
ection
Body ,“theNew Nat urei s,int hemostt roublesomeway[ f
orsophi sti
cated
rati
onalist
s],interlockedatsomepoi ntswi t
ht heOl d.Becauseofi tsnov elt
y
wehav et othinkofi t,forthemostpar t
,met aphor i
call
y;butbecauseoft he
partiali
nterl
ocki ng,somef actsabouti t[t
hel ocalappearances,theeat i
ng,the
touching,thecl aimt obecor poreal]comet hroughi ntoourpresentexperience
i
nal ltheirlit
er alfact hood– j ustassomef actsaboutanor ganism ar e
i
nor ganicf acts,and some f act s abouta sol i
d bodyar ef acts ofl i
near
geomet ry.”

Again,Fr.Ser aphi m Rosewr i

test hat,i nr eact
ingt oanov er-materi
ali
st
understanding ofheav en and hell,“manyChr i
sti
ans… hav e gone t ot he
opposite extreme and decl aret hatheav en is‘nowhere’.Among Roman
Catholi
csandPr otestantstherear esophi sti
catedanalogieswhi chpr ocl
aim
thatheav enis‘astat e,notaplace’,that‘up’ isonlyamet aphor,theAscension
ofChr i
st…wasnotr eallyan‘ascension’,butonl yachangeofst ate.Theresult
ofsuchapol ogiesi sthatheav enandhel lbecomev er
yv agueandi ndefi
nite
concept i
ons,and t he sense oft heirr ealitybegins to disappear– wi th
disast
rousr esult
sf orChr i
sti
an life,because t hese arethe v eryreali
ties
towardwhi chourwhol eeart
hlyli
feisdi r
ect ed.

“
Allsuch apol
ogi
es,accor
ding t
othe t
eachi
ng of Bi
shop I
gnat
ius
Brianchaninov ,ar e based on t he f alse idea oft he moder n phi l
osopher
Descar t
esthatev erythingt hatisnotmat eri
ali s‘purespi ri
t’andi snotl i
mi ted
byt imeandspace.Thi si snott het eachi ngoft heOr thodoxChur ch.Bishop
Ignatiuswr ites:‘Thef antasyofDescar tesconcer ningt hei ndependenceof
spiri
tsi nspaceandt imei sadeci si
v eabsur dity.Everythingt hatisl i
mitedi s
necessar il
ydependentonspace’( vol.III,p.312) .‘
Thenumer ousquot ati
ons
from t heDiv i
neser vicebooksandt hewor ksoft heFat her soft heOr thodox
Chur chdeci dedwi thcompl etesat i
sfactiont hequest i
onast owher epar adise
andhel larelocated…Wi t
hwhatcl aritythet eachi ngoft heOr thodoxEast ern
Chur chi ndicatest hatt hel ocationofpar adi sei sint heheav ens and t he
l
ocat ionofhel lisinthebowel soft heear th’(v ol.I
II,
pp.308- 9; theemphasi sis
his).Her eweshal l
onl yindicatejusthowt hi
st eachingist obei nt
erpreted.

“I
tiscertai
nlyt
rue,asBishopIgnati
us’numerouscitati
onsindi
cate,
thatall
Ort
hodoxsour ces – the HolyScript
ure,Divi
ne services,Li
ves ofSaints,
wri
ti
ngsofHol yFathers–speakofpar adi
seandheav enas‘up’andhellas
‘
down’,undertheearth.Andi tisalsotruethatsinceangelsandsoul sare
l
imit
edinspace…,theymustal waysbeinonedef i
niepl
t ace–whet herheaven,
hel
l,
orearth…

“Heaven,therefore,i
scer tai
nlyaplace,anditi
scer t
ai yupf
nl rom anypoi nt
ont heearth,andhel li
scer tai
nlydown,inthebowel soft heear t
h;butt hese
placesandt heirinhabi t
antscannotbeseenbymenunt i
lthei
rspi ri
tualeyes
areopened… Fur ther,thesepl acesar enotwi t
hinthe‘ coordinates’ofour
space-ti
mesy stem:ai r
li
nerdoesnotpass‘ inv
isi
bly
’throughpar adise,noran
earthsatell
it
et hrought het hir
dheaven,norcant hesoul swai t
ingi nhellfor
theLastJudgementber eachedbydr il
li
ngforthem intheear t
h.Theyar enot
there,butinadi ff
erentki ndofspacet hatbeginsri
ghther ebutext ends,asit
wer e,i
nadi f
ferentdi r
ecti
on…”

Returningt o Metall
inos,wecanagr eet hatheav eni s“ noeti
c”;butwe
cannotdenyt hatiti
sal soinsomer ealsenseapl ace,becausewehumans, i
n
bot h oursoul s and ourbodi es,ar elocated i
n space and t i
me;we ar e
ci
r cumscr i
bed.Ev ent heangel sar ecircumscr i
bed;theycannotbei nt wo
placesatonce.Onl yGodandHi sGr acearecompl etel
yunci rcumscribed,not
boundedbyspaceandt ime.Sowhenoursoul saresentbyGodt oheav enand
hell,t
heyar esenttopl aces,becauset heycannotbei nanon- place,sot o
speak.Tr ue,thespaceandt i
meoft heotherwor l
d,asFr .Seraphim says,are
differ
entinsomeway sf rom thespaceandt imeweknow.Thati s,theimages
ofheav enandhel lthatwef orm i
nourear th-boundimagi nationaremor eor
l
essi nadequat et ot
her eal
ity
.Andy etbotht heparableoft heRichManand
Laz ar
us,andt heexperiencesofmanywhohav ebeent otheot herwor l
dand
comeback,agr eethatt heyar eplaces,eveni ftheyar emuchmor et han
mer el
ypl aces...

Letust
urnt
oMet
all
i
nos’st
atementt
hatheav
enandhel
l“ar
ethesame
experi
ence,exceptt hattheyar eperceiveddi f
ferentl
ybyman” .Asi tst ands,
thi
sstatementmakesnol ogical,l
etalonetheologicalsense.Anexper ienceis
anev entinoneman’ ssubj ecti
veconsciousness.I fi tisanexper i
encei n
heavenorofheav en, t
henitmustbej oyful
;ifi
tisinhel lorofhell
, t
heni tmust
bepainful
.Butaj oyf
ul experi
encecannotbet hesameasapai nfulexper i
ence:
theymustbedi ffer
entexper iences.Theexper ienceofUncr eatedGr aceas
descri
bedbyt hesai ntscouldbecal ledanexper i
enceofheav enonear th.I
n
anycase,itcannotbedescr ibedasanexper i
enceofhel l
…

Asf oroneandt hesameexper iencebei ng" per

ceiveddi ffer
ently"
,thi
si s
possible,butonl yl ater ,inr ecoll
ection.Butt hi
sisnotwhatMet al
li
nosi s
saying.Hei ssay ingt hatatt heSecondComi ngofChr i
st,therighteouswi l
l
l
ookupont heUncr eat edLi ght–t heDi v
ineFirethatwi l
lsweept hrought he
whol euni verse– andr ejoice,bei ngenl i
ghtenedbutnotbur ned,whi l
et he
si
nner swi l
ll ookuponI tandgr i
eve,bei ngburnedbutnotenl ight
ened.Thi sis
tr
ue, ast hepat ri
sticref erencesci t
edbyMet all
i
nospr ove.Butt hetruthofthis
statementbynomeanspr ovest hatheav enandhel lare oneexper i
ence.
Rather,i tdemonst rates t hatt he r ighteous and t he sinners hav et wo,
compl etelydi f
ferentexper iencesi nr elati
ont ooneandt hesameev ent–t he
Appear anceofChr istinal lHi sMaj estyatt heSecondComi ng.

Al lspi ri
tualexperiences, i
nsof arast heyi nvolveani nter acti
onbet weent he
uncreat edGodandcr eatedman,hav eadualnat ure.I
ti sachar act
erist
icof
Romani desandhi sf oll
ower st hatt heytendt oemphasi zet heuncr eated,
Divi
neaspectoft heseexper i
encesatt heexpenseoft hei rcreated,human
aspect .Thi s“ eschat ologicalmonophy ti
sm”hast heeffect ,asFr .Seraphim
Rosenot ed,ofmaki ngouri deasaboutheav enandhel lv agueandi ndefini
te,
withdi sast rousconsequencesf ort hespiri
t uall
ife.Inviewoft his,i
twoul dbe
advisabl ef ort he Cy prianites nott o publ i
sh t he wor ks ofRomani des,
Metal l
inosandot hernewcal endar istheretics,oratanyr atepubl ishthem wi t
h
aspi ri
tualheal thwar ningandwi thcl earrefutati
onsoft hei rlessr eli
ableparts.
Other wise,wemi ghtbegi nt ot hi
nkt hattheyact ual l
ybeliev ethesameast he
moder nists…

Vladi
mirMoss.
Sept
ember17/30,
2010.