Remember the Church has teachings about these things to serve as a guide to help us live lives connected with God and our neighbor.  It does not condemn people who have tattoos or piercings.  The Church teaches that we shouldn't do anything to "disfigure" our bodies (which technically would include any type of piercing -- including ears as well as tattoos -- since the body is a beautiful thing created by God to help us glorify Him).  Nor, however, should we do anything that draws attention to ourselves and away from God.  Getting parts of our body pierced or getting a tattoo is telling people, "Look at me!" This is one of the reasons it should be somewhere that could be respectfully covered in Church.

This is not to say that we shouldn't try to look nice.  It's true that some people do like the look of tattoos.  They are an all-out fad at the moment.  And in fact, there is often a confused notion that modesty in dress means making yourself look like some type of peasant.  Simply put, we should try to look our natural best and shouldn't do anything to draw attention either for admiration or shock purposes.

Many of the saints told people to stop doing something, not because it was intrinsically wrong, but because it led other people into temptation.  This is hard for us to hear in 1999 America, where everyone does what he/she wants and if someone doesn't like it "it's his/her problem."  The Christian understanding is just the opposite.  We must love our neighbor so much that his/her problem is our problem.  If we are Christians then we believe that, as the Church, we are all connected as one body, and if one part of that body hurts, then the whole body (including us) hurts.

I hope this gives some clarity on the issue.  The truth is that the Church's teaching about this relates to everyone of us who tries to do anything for attention and not just tattoos and piercings.  Flashy jewelry, fancy watches, and expensive clothes can also be very distracting.  We all need to change our perspective, treat our bodies as a gift from God, and worry less about impressing or shocking "the Joneses" and more about how God sees us.

There appears to be no official or set Orthodox viewpoint on this topic that we are aware of.  God has created angelic beings beyond counting -- we can perhaps call them "extraterrestrial" and only God knows the full scope of His awesome creation.  At the same time, many Orthodox Christians have the inner conviction that Earth is in fact the only place in the universe where carbon-based life exists.  On the other hand, some have argued that Earth is the lost sheep that had to be sought after by the Savior...  Some things are truly beyond our knowledge, perhaps even our concern at this time.

For the first thousand years of the history of Christianity, there was basically "one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church."  The word "catholic" means two things: 1) full, complete, integral, lacking nothing; and 2) universal.  The early Church called itself "Catholic" and "Orthodox" (correct believing and correct worshipping).  Over the centuries differences appeared in the one Church -- the Eastern (now Eastern Orthodox) and the Western (now Roman Catholic) Churches.  Many of these differences -- different liturgical customs and different local practices -- were not church-dividing issues or matters of the true faith.  Later there arose two major problems which are at the basis of the division between East (Orthodox) and West (Roman Catholic), even to this day.

1) The role of the Bishop of Rome (pope) in the Church: is he the "first among equals" among the bishops (as the Orthodox maintain he was in the early Church), or is he the head of the whole Church (as Roman Catholics assert)?  Both Orthodox and Roman Catholics agree there was a development in his authority; Catholics say that it is a natural and authentic development over the centuries, Orthodox say this development is a deviation from the authentic life of the early undivided Church.  It became a church-dividing issue in the eleventh century, when the East-West Schism is dated.  Roman Catholics say they are right, because it is a correct development, Orthodox say they are right because it is a distortion of the role of the Bishop of Rome in the early Church and it is they who have maintained the authentic structure of the early Church.

2) In the doctrine of the Holy Trinity, does the Holy Spirit "proceed from the Father" (original Creed and Orthodox teaching), or does He "proceed from the Father and the Son" (later Roman Catholic teaching)?

So, who split from whom?  If the criterion for truth is who better kept intact the structure and teachings of the early Church, then we would say that the Roman Catholic Church "split" from the Orthodox Church, and the Orthodox Church is the continuation of the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church.

To go into further detail about other differences, some more important than others, one would have to write a book.  But we already have the best one available that I strongly suggest for further reading: The Orthodox Church by Kallistos Ware -- a paperback you can find in most bookstores, or ask your parish priest how you can order one.

God’s gift of Free Will is what distinguishes human beings from the animals, who act by instinct.  Left or right, this or that, right or wrong, we, being made in the image and likeness of God, have the ability (and responsibility) to discern what God’s desire is for us at any given moment.  We do this through prayer, that is, by talking with Him, and asking for the guidance of His Holy Spirit.  We read of His Way for us in the Holy Scripture, and through the example of countless saints.  We have a brain to think about things, and a conscience to weigh the benefits and consequences of our actions.  Then, it is ultimately up to us personally to voluntarily choose what we will do.  God doesn’t force himself, His desires, His Way on anyone.  It grieves Him to see us willfully or mistakenly make bad choices that are not for our good.  And still He loves us, even when we forget Him or choose to reject Him.  How much more loving can He be toward us then to give us such freedom?

He will always put in our hearts and minds only what is best for us and, therefore, what we should choose.  But we’re free to say yes or no.  Maybe it seems like we have no choice, as you put it, “It’s his way or the highway” because at times – perhaps more often than we want to admit – we want one thing (that’s popular, more fun, easier, more financially beneficial, etc.) but our conscience – that little voice of God within us – tells us to choose another, and so we feel “pressured” into accepting God’s way.  Yet, the Lord said, "I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse: therefore choose life that you may live." (Deuteronomy 30:19)  He shows us the Way, but lovingly gives us the freedom to make the choice.

Life is a gift from God and we are responsible to protect and preserve it.  Civil Laws and Christian Ethics entitle any individual to self defense.  Yet, self defense, in the Christian perspective, means to eliminate the cause of an unjust attack with no retaliation following.  Sometimes, the life of the attacker might be lost.  This is a tragic situation and needs to be avoided as much as possible.  How far can we go in our defense?  Aren’t we supposed to turn the other cheek, as the Lord commanded?  How do we reconcile love with self defense?  Fr. S. Harakas answers: “cases of unprovoked and otherwise unanswerable physical violence do not provide license for anything more than defense.  Its purpose is to neutralize the attack and no more.  The spirit of Christ’s commandment should always be present.  As soon as the physical danger to oneself from the attacker has ended, no vindictiveness should remain in the Christian’s heart, and no retributive behavior should follow” (Living the Faith –The Praxis of Eastern Orthodox Ethics, Light and Life Publishing Co., Minneapolis MN, 1992, p.117).

Usually, violence breeds violence.  In defending our life or other people’s lives, we ought to accept a level of humility and great love especially when the attack comes from an enemy (Matthew 5:44).  What do we gain if, by defending one life, we waste another?  We Christians have a special call and a different set of morals.  We have higher expectations.

In the case of the clergy, the Church’s standards are the same.  “It is not that the standards are different, it is rather that it is the special role of the clergy to be an example to the laity in the same kind of behavior” (The Orthodox Church: 455 Questions and Answers, Stanley S. Harakas, Light and Life Publishing Co., Minneapolis MN, 1988, p. 73).

This moral issue is another hot topic of discussion in the Orthodox Church worldwide.  Although there is no official consensus regarding it, or a unified official statement, most of the Orthodox Churches have voiced their opinion on the matter.

A growing number of married couples seek medical assistance each year in their effort to achieve pregnancy.  Numerous “medical” conditions are causative agents affecting one in every seven couples.  Unfortunately, corrective procedures will only improve the status of a small percentage of these patients.  The past two decades have provided an expanding spectrum of technologies to assist in conception and delivery of a full-term baby.  The Orthodox Church in America supports the use of in-vitro fertilization by married couples, with two major conditions:
     1.  The husband must be the sperm source
     2.  The wife provides the ova (egg) and she must carry the pregnancy

These conditions dictate that the baby will be genetically linked to the married couple and the wife will deliver the baby.

A complicating limitation of our current technology is the use of fertility medications.  These drugs induce the woman’s ovaries to ripen more than the usual single ova.  Subsequent in-vitro insemination of all ova can then result in many embryos, each of which has the potential of full term development to a healthy baby. Therefore, introduction of multiple embryos can then provide an unacceptable risk of multiple pregnancy and possible complications.  Frequently, embryos are frozen to reduce these risks.

To act in accordance with the teachings of the Church, and since each embryo has the potential for normal full-term development in-utero, couples seeking assistance from in-vitro fertilization must keep in mind and share the following conditions with their physicians:
     1.  They will not consider third-party assistance (e.g., donors or surrogates)
     2.  They do not consider “selective termination” (abortion) within a multiple pregnancy to be acceptable
     3.  All frozen embryos (if any) are destined to be returned to the wife at a later time
     4.  Frozen embryos or cells from their embryos are NOT to be used in research or deemed to be “surplus”

It is the accepted responsibility of the Orthodox couple using IVF to share these conditions with the medical staff and to gain assurances that their wishes will be honored.  Furthermore, the couple must keep the potential development of their frozen embryos (if any) in mind for use at a later time. If the couple has reservations about the concept of frozen embryos and wishes to avoid these deliberations, timely instructions must be given to only inseminate a limited number of ova.

[Source: http://www.oca.org/PDFs/christianwitness/2004-PMConf-LScheean.pdf]

Our very goal in this life is to become holy, to become like God, to become deified (Theosis).  God made us according to His image and likeness (Genesis 1:26).  St. John of Damascus taught that “the image indicates our rationality and freedom of choice while the likeness indicates assimilation to God through virtue“ (On the Orthodox Faith, PG vol.94, 920B).

To sanctify means to set aside, to consecrate, and to make something be special.  We, as humans, are called by God to be different than all the other creatures He made.  Our task is higher.  We are unique.  Our mission is to elevate each of our lives to a life in Christ, the Savior (that is why we are called Christians).  We are called to live according to His teachings.

How to start?  Start by being active in the life of the Church.  The Seven Sacraments are the tools of our salvation.  Baptism introduces each one of us into the body of Christ, which is the Church.  The Eucharist is our full contact with Christ.  Practice the virtues, read the Bible and the lives of the saints that set an example for us.  Everything you do, do with love and compassion, and apply the Golden Rule (Luke 6:31 ).

Certainly our entire life, with its ups and downs, should be a continuous fight to achieve spiritual progress.  The Lord said "Therefore you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect” (Matthew 5:48 ).  There are no manuals or exact rules on how to become a saint.  God fashioned us in His image, which is our spiritual power; we are to achieve the likeness, which is to become gods by grace.

Although there is no official consensus regarding this issue, most of the Orthodox Churches worldwide have addressed it, and many have published official statements on their websites.

In general, the Orthodox Church agrees with organ donation after death, or even during one’s lifetime.  There are some criteria that would justify the moral validity of organ donation:

• First of all, the transplant has to be an act of love with no commercial motivation.

• Donors should give out of free will and/or make proper arrangements if they want to donate after their death.  Organ donation is an expression of love, but not an act of moral obligation.

• The dignity of the human person has to be preserved.  The body is the temple of the Holy Spirit, as was emphasized by Saint Paul in 1 Corinthians 6:19.  This means that it has moral value playing an important role in the mystery of human person and therefore should not be treated as a mere object or tool.

• The transplant has to have a therapeutic purpose only.

The Orthodox Church opposes any abuses such as: illegal trafficking of organs, euthanized donors, medical interventions to speed the process of a donor’s death, etc.

For more details on this issue, please visit following websites:

• The Orthodox Church in America – Guidelines for Clergy Compiled under the guidance of the Holy Synod of the Orthodox Church in America (Section F, pp. 20-21) http://www.oca.org/PDF/official/clergyguidelines.pdf?SID=12&ID=28

• The Romanian Orthodox Patriarchate (in Romanian) – under Opera Social Filantropica/ Bioetica/ Transplantul de organe http://www.patriarhia.ro/ro/opera_social_filantropica/bioetica_3.html

• The Russian Orthodox Church – under Documents/The Basis of the Social Concept/Problems of Bioethics (XII.7) http://www.mospat.ru/index.php?mid=192

• The Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America – under Our Faith/ Ethical and Social Issues/ Pastoral Guidelines: Church Positions Regarding the Sanctity of Human Life - http://www.goarch.org/ourfaith/ourfaith8083

This question indeed seems to challenge God’s justice in this world.  In order to understand why good people still suffer in this world, you need to go to the origins of sin and evil.  We all have free will.  Adam and Eve made a bad choice and disobeyed God, thus separating from Him.  Disease and death entered this world because of their sin.  So, it is not God who created evil!  The consequences of Adam’s sin extended to all his descendants.  We all share the human nature, so we all inherit the consequences of his action.  Note that we are not responsible for his guilt, but because human nature was corrupted by his first sin, and we all share in it, that is why we are all subject to diseases and eventual death.

God is Love, so it is evident He does not want us to suffer.  The root of our suffering is our free will that chose to do evil.

St. John Chrysostom, answering the question of why God allows saints to suffer so much in this world, gives 8 reasons:
1.  So that their virtues will not feed their pride. (2 Corinthians 12:7)
2.  So that they will not be worshipped as gods by other people.
3.  So that God’s glory be manifested in their human weaknesses and suffering. (2 Corinthians 12:9)
4.  To test and show their patience in tribulations.
5.  To make us meditate upon the resurrection and final judgment at the end of times when God will do justice to them.
6.  To ease and comfort those who encounter sorrows when they see that even saints are subject to the same fate or even worse.
7.  So that the sublimity of their deeds will not make you think they were of a different nature than yours and it is impossible to imitate them. (James 5:17)
8.  To teach the difference between real happiness and real sorrow: the real happiness is to be united to God; the real sorrow is to be apart from Him.

Before answering this question, I want to point to the fact that, from a Christian-Orthodox perspective, sexual acts should take place only between married couples, husband and wife, male and female.

God left the sexual act as a means to procreate.  Avoiding pregnancy is definitely not what He intended.  St. John Chrysostom said: The procreation of children is not in itself the sole purpose of marriage, but a marriage without the desire for children, and the prayer to God to bear and nurture them, is contrary to the 'sacrament of love.’ (Homily on Ephesians 20, PG)

There are two major views in our Church today regarding contraception:
1.  The Natural Law view – sees sex only as a biological means to procreate.
2.  The Sacramental view – sexual relations have a twofold purpose: to procreate and to unite.

The purpose of marriage is not solely to procreate but also to spiritualize the natural bond between man and woman, to go beyond the limits of the flesh.  Thus, sexual relations have also the purpose of deepening the mutual love of the spouses.  According to this view, contraception is not condemned (if they already have children) but is rather seen as a means of fulfilling the goals and purposes of Marriage in the Christian tradition.

Note that the early Church has condemned the use of abortion and contraceptives.  The difference between the two terms was ambiguous and therefore they were treated as being identical.  In the latter days, the Church is making a more distinct difference between abortion (which is unequivocally condemned as a murderous act) and contraception.  That is why we have divisions on this subject between those who hold to the traditional teachings and those who are eager to take into account the more advanced knowledge that we have today about the biology of reproduction.

Marriage without the intent of procreation is against God’s will.  Birth control is not accepted in order to avoid having children at all.  Every couple has to be aware of how many children they can responsibly bring into the world.  Thus, if a married couple has children or wants to space their births and wishes to continue their sexual relationship as an expression of their mutual love, then contraception is not condemned.  Still, they should discuss this matter first with their priest confessor since every case is different.

For further reading on this subject, visit:  http://www.oca.org/QA.asp?ID=147&SID=3,  http://www.roca.org/OA/155-156/155h.htm,
http://www.patriarhia.ro/ro/opera_social_filantropica/bioetica_1.html (Romanian).

Yours is an unusual and thought-provoking question.  Without doubt it has to be answered in the framework of our creation in the image and likeness of God.  We know that the mutual attraction, love and joy of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, is a pattern for our own relations with God and with others.  Jesus Himself is frequently described to us as having emotions: He is compassionate (Mark 1:41), loving (John 13:1), resigned (Luke 22:42), sad (John 11:35), and happy (Luke 10:21), among many others.  Were we without emotions, the most precious and most human aspects of our existence would be absent -- we would be cold, mechanical, and largely impersonal -- very much unlike God in whose images we are created, and whole likeness we are called to fulfill in a Christ-like manner.

The Roman Catholic devotion of praying the Rosary is not a part of the Orthodox Christian Tradition, as this devotion in its present form dates from about the 15th century -- hundreds of years after Roman Catholicism separated herself from the Orthodox Church.

In Orthodoxy there is, however, the practice of praying the Jesus Prayer -- "O Lord, Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy upon me, a sinner" -- on a set of prayer beads, generally 100 in number.  This tradition is especially upheld by Orthodox monks and nuns, although a growing number of laypersons also make use of such beads.  This usage, however, is completely unrelated in origin, form, and content to Roman Catholicism's Rosary.

I might add that the original version of the prayer which forms the basis of the Rosary -- the "Hail Mary" -- finds a prominent place in Orthodox Christian liturgical worship and private prayer.  The prayer reads as follows:

"Rejoice, O Virgin Mother of God, Mary, full of grace!  The Lord is with you!  Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb, for you have borne the Savior of our souls."

The Church does not condemn cremation outright, provided that there is a valid reason for it.

In Japan, for example, the state requires cremation, and this extends to Orthodox Christians.  There have also been exceptions made in cases of epidemics or fear of disease, for various reasons.  There can also be reasonable cause for permitting cremation, but in general the image of the body being buried as it awaits the resurrection is more in keeping with the image given to us by Christ, Who likens burial with the planting of seed which later blossoms into a living plant.