Modern Loneliness and Staying Put

IMG_0809

This article is among the first written for the blog. There is something to be said for the blog itself  having “stayed put.” The internet is an ephemeral creation. I hope to be providing a stable platform for learning, for questioning, for conversation. With a few emendations, I offer this reprint. That the article is still useful after an entire 6 years is astonishing!

In monastic tradition, a monk makes four vows: poverty, chastity, obedience and stability. Most people are familiar with the first three but not with the fourth. In classical monastic practice it meant that a monk stayed put: he did not move from monastery to monastery. It was not a new idea. Before this vow was formalized in various Rules, there was already the saying from the Desert: “Stay in your cell and your cell will teach you everything.”

Staying put or stability doesn’t sound all that difficult – certainly easier than poverty, chastity and obedience. But it may indeed be the hardest thing of all. The “noonday devil” which tended to afflict monks from the beginning, was especially known as the temptation at some point to leave your cell and just go visiting, where gossip and many far worse temptations could make themselves manifest. Staying put was the hardest battle of all. In its most extreme form in the the East we see the Stylites, the monks who lived on the tops of pillars (St. Simeon’s was over 300 feet tall!)

In our modern world stability is an extremely rare commodity. The average American moves once every five years. When I first came to Oak Ridge (Tennessee), I was constantly told by the old-timers, “People in Oak Ridge are from everywhere!” In 1943 when this city was founded as part of the Manhattan Project, that statement was truly unusual. Americans rarely relocated. But I had to break the sad news to my new co-citizens, “Everywhere you go, people are from everywhere!”

There was a time in my hometown in South Carolina that a trip to the store or Mall would bring a dozen casual meetings with friends and acquaintances. Now they are all strangers when I visit – or rather I am the stranger. I do not live there anymore.

All of this would just be sociologically interesting if it had no effect on our lives. But it has a profound effect.

In 1950 (to pick a date), the most common pattern in our country was for a local boy to meet and marry a local girl and to settle down and raise their children in the community in which they themselves were born, with relatives and friends forming a network of relationships that surrounded and nurtured (or harrassed) them. Divorce rates and crime rates were relatively low in most places. Stable communities tend to have stable families. The network of relationships promotes this. We have lived in these relatively stable forms for most of human history. Even the great nomadic tribes traveled as tribes.

In 2013 (to pick another date), the more common pattern is for a boy to meet a girl in college or later – he is from Virginia (say) and she is from Ohio (say). They marry, move to Oregon and begin their careers, or they met there and married. Family is the stuff you negotiate as in “whose parents do we visit at Thanksgiving this year, etc.?” The network of friends is often his friends from work and her friends from work, and frequently not much more.

In 1980, living in Columbia, S.C., I attended a conference in which the lecturer asked an auditorium of about 400 to raise their hands if they new 5 people on their city block. A few hands went up. I wound up in the last group. I knew no one in the Apartment Complex where we lived. Most of us did not know a single neighbor. And that is not an unusal modern pattern.

This brings us to the loneliness of modern man. The internet has probably made us more connected, in a virtual sense, than we have been in a generation. But, of course, their is an extreme level of volunteerism in this virtual community. If I don’t want to post today there is nothing you can do about it. We are not a natural community.

I cannot touch you or hear you laugh. I share a photo so you know something of what I look like. But how do I sound? How much of my native Appalachian dialect still clings to my tongue (not much, but some).

And we only know what we choose to share. It makes for a very thin village indeed.

As modern man has lost his stability (I blame our economic structures largely for this phenomenon – moving expenses are tax-deductible, for example) so we have lost the fruit of stability. Crime, divorce, the simple consensus that makes a culture a culture disappears. The 1950’s three channel television and white-bread families were probably the last cultural manifestation of an earlier consensus that will not return. It cannot return without stability.

I have lived in this small city since 1989, the longest I have ever lived anywhere. I have come to know many people in this town of 25,000 and I know my parish of 100+ souls quite well. Stability for me means I have a child buried here, and I will be buried here as well. It is a goal I have – a very long term one.

For all of us, some form of stability is necessary, even if it is one we must largely create ourselves.

I would point to the Orthodox Church as an example of stability. I can read from centuries of writings and recognize and understand what is said. St. Athanasius is as interesting to me on a daily basis as, say, Fr. John Behr. The “latest thing” in Orthodoxy just isn’t very late. There is a stability that comes within that part of life – a stability I cannot create but to which I can submit. I am Orthodox and I can daily seek to imbibe more fully what that means. It can create me (which is probably much to be preferred).

I cannot leave the modern world (or post-modern if you prefer). I was born in 1953 and there’s is nothing to be done about it. But there are commitments that I can make – that any of us can make. I am married. I do not take a vow of poverty, but everything I own is owned by my wife as well (no private property). If you have children, you will learn a certain form of poverty no matter what. For the married, faithfulness is the form of chastity. I do not take a vow of obedience (nor did my wife for that matter), but we have a life of mutual submission – my will is not my own. We are not here because I alone wanted to be here. We are here because we wanted to be here (ultimately, I suppose there is obedience – to my Bishop, and to my God – but on a daily basis His Eminence does not interfere. God can also be strangely silent).

But stability is more fleeting. I think that only by becoming part of a larger community, even larger than the present and reaching into the past, do we begin to find stability. Many Christians today live, at best, as part of a movement. It is an interesting word – incompatible with stability. Nothing in my life compares with the stability of 2,000 years of living Tradition. Stability means to live my life in the neighborhood of the Kingdom of God where the saints know my name and encourage or harrass me if necessary.

God give us the grace to come to the place of stability in you. Put me some place where I can stay put.

About Fr. Stephen Freeman

Fr. Stephen is a retired Archpriest of the Orthodox Church in America, Pastor Emeritus of St. Anne Orthodox Church in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. He is also author of Everywhere Present: Christianity in a One-Storey Universe, and Face to Face: Knowing God Beyond Our Shame, as well as the Glory to God podcast series on Ancient Faith Radio.



Posted

in

, ,

by

Comments

203 responses to “Modern Loneliness and Staying Put”

  1. Dino Avatar
    Dino

    Here is Archimandrite Zacharias of Essex using the term freely and in the right context (translated from Greek):

    “my dear sisters, forgive my boldness. If we had this thought, if we had this sole purpose in our lives: to ‘hate’ ourselves (which is the reason we came to the monastery), nothing would have the power to shake our foundations. Nothing would take away our Pease. Nought could separate our breath from the Lord. But because we have not made this our sole intent, namely, to hate self on behalf of God’s commandment, we are annoyed with the humble task we are given, vexed because we desire more attention, we assume ourselves entitled to special recognition, we want whatever is best for none other than us! (…) love for our brother and the Holy Spirit do not enter a heart of such self-centredness..

  2. Dino Avatar
    Dino

    Sorry, I meant to write :

    Nothing would take away our peace.

  3. Dino Avatar
    Dino

    To be more ‘academic’, the quote is from page 222 in
    “Γυναικεῖος Ὀρθόδοξος μοναχισμός”
    Κατά τά Πατερικά Κείμενα
    ISBN 978-960-88-540-6-2
    🙂

  4. Dino Avatar
    Dino

    Another illuminating quote from the same book – Elder Sophrony this time (interestingly they feel the need to explain the usage of his word ‘se;f-hate’ with a detailed clarification in the footnotes…

    The Angels, led by the Archangel Michael, resisted Satan with such self-hatred, that Satan was cast out of the Heavens. So, if we love one another the way Christ explains this, and agree on the ultimate final purpose, we will be fearless and invincible

  5. mary benton Avatar
    mary benton

    “Man ends up ‘hating/renouncing’ the old individualistic selfish ‘Adam’ in order to put on Christ…”

    Dino – do you consider to “hate” and to “renounce” as equivalent in your usage? As indicated above, I find some difficulty with the word “hate” whereas “renounce” seems more true to the meaning. Also, I think that to hate/renounce the old/selfish/sinful/false self is more clear in meaning than to say speak simply of “self-hatred”.

  6. mary benton Avatar
    mary benton

    “The ‘psychological’ perception of “self-hate” happens to also be the secular understanding of the term. It is based on the egotistically motivated dissatisfaction of what I perceive as ‘me’.”

    I feel a need to comment here, Dino. Part of this has (again) to do with the use of words like “self”, “ego” and “egotistical”. The latter, a lay person’s term, is generally defined as an over-inflated view of one’s self, something most would agree is not desirable.

    “Ego”, on the other hand, from a psychological perspective, is a necessary ingredient for healthy living. The ego is what enables the person to manage their innate instinctive impulses (“passions”, in a sense, though some instinctive impulses are necessary), in light of the values of the super-ego (essentially, the conscience). Someone lacking “ego-strength” is likely going to tyrannized by their passions or to be bound to rigid and unhealthy rules, because they do not know how to integrate these aspects of experience.

    It is often the lack of healthy ego or self that leads people to pathological self-hate.

    It has been said that one must first have a self in order to renounce one’s self. For some people whose upbringing has left them with no sense of self or a very damaged one, the first spiritual task may be one of learning to embrace self as beloved of God, despite sin. For a damaged self, self and sin are often seen as the same thing, leaving the person feeling essentially unlovable and unable to approach God.

    I realize that you may already understand this but I think it is an important point to make. Often people, in the hunger to make spiritual progress, want to skip steps. I would not want someone suffering in the manner I describe to think that it is wrong to seek a healthy self under the guidance of a spiritual and well-trained therapist.

    Once there is a healthy self, paradoxically, the spiritual process of renouncing self can proceed. (This is, of course, my opinion and quite subject to imperfection.)

  7. Dino Avatar
    Dino

    Mary,
    one does indeed need to first become what -psychologically- might be termed a ‘balanced’ human being, before they become a saint.
    Jumping stages rarely, if ever, works
    (unless you are Saint Mary the Egyptian perhaps)…
    However, we tend to avoid this modern “psychological language” quite strictly, (especially having knowledge of man’s falleness in all his endeavours) in favour of the traditional patristic expressions in “general speech” (as opposed to personal counsel that is).
    And as you can see from the striking example of Elder Sophrony:

    The Angels, led by the Archangel Michael, resisted Satan with such self-hatred, that Satan was cast out of the Heavens.

    he doesn’t shy away from using the word, even though it is obviously used in an almost otherwordly context….
    He later goes on to say that we must pray personally, as a pan-human union when we use: “I’, or “me”, or “ego”. If I/me does not mean far more than “I/me” means in secular understanding we are still in the psychological state, if not the carnal, the spiritual states start after that. It is fascinating that an unlettered granny in Greece or Russia, might sometimes have greater ease in accomplishing this than many a well-trained philosophical mind does in the modern west!
    It is evident from the above quote of the Elder that self-hate is that kenosis from all selfish attachments which allow true love to flourish.
    In another speech he says that for love (towards God) to reach the highest grade, as well as love for others to reach the point where I, in fact, ‘see others as me‘, “self-hate” needs to also reach its ultimate level.
    Ok. It is a different kind of hate to a different kind of self than what you keep going back to perhaps (it’s unavoidable in your field – there is nothing wrong with such usage…!), but we need to move ahead and get to the land of traditional use of language in Spiritual life. There are, in fact, far more challenging expressions that Persons steeped in Church language would normally be using (think of some Psalms…). They mustn’t ‘adapt’ to modernity. If anything, we should educate towards that understanding…! Where we to be immersed in Tradition as the saints, at every encounter of the need to ‘adapt’ down our language to modernity, we would consider it a necessary compromise, an “economia”
    Of course there is a time and a place for everything 🙂

  8. Mary Lanser Avatar

    Dear Mary B,

    There are times in spiritual writing where the language is, shall we say, roughly used. For example, St. Louis de Montfort speaks of being a “slave” to the mother of God, indication a level of devotion that is fixed and adamant in its fidelity…so strong that it appears that we are chained to her…though it is all devotion that is freely chosen.

    I had hoped not to get too involved in this and I know that you are active on monk Alexis Trader’s blog, so I think you are getting some pretty solid treatment of some of these things there: all to say that I want to be brief here and simply say that “slavery” and “self-hatred” or “self-loathing” is not something that dominates the counsels and teachings of the holy fathers of the desert. And in general they, in their wisdom, have many ways of speaking of the same thing, thereby helping to insure that there are ears to hear and words to suit the moment, the soul, the need. Once in a while there is a need to use the language roughly or a purpose served in so doing.

    Also it is pretty axiomatic among the holy fathers that we don’t spend a great load of time staring at our own understandings and preferences.

    In Christ,

    Mary L

  9. fatherstephen Avatar
    fatherstephen

    A short note on the language of self hate. It is Christ Himself who first uses the word “hate” in the spiritual vocabulary. The “self” that we hate is the false self, the narrative and identity that we manufacture ourselves and treasure above all else.

  10. Mary Lanser Avatar

    As soon as I saw your note, I remembered why I wasn’t racing to go down this road.

    At some level, I only feel safe with that language in His mouth…The Lord who reads my heart, who knows my false self better than I do. We know that the testing of spirits and reading of hearts are gifts given to his disciples, yet that takes a fair gift of discernment to know whether or not we are being deceived and manipulated by our brothers or sisters in Christ.

    If we are to be brought to compunction then it really ought to be true compunction, and not something that we’ve been directed to by someone else who may truly not know my false self if he or she fell over it.

    So your comment raises all the questions concerning hard sayings and spiritual discipleship.

    I am not say we ought not grapple with them. Indeed we must! It is not an easy path to walk in any event.

    In Christ,

    M.

  11. Dino Avatar
    Dino

    Indeed Mary L, discernment is needed, (but mainly by the teacher) as well as obedience (mainly by the disciple) that is why, as said earlier, “one who is not in obedience and is simply experimenting with what he reads will surely delude themselves”. But a disciple’s “discernment” in eloquent (as well as more ‘blunt’) patristic anthropology is more often than not, simply called ‘obedience’, and the fuel of that obedience is (particularly at the start) the knowledge that: my worst enemy is ‘me’…
    When Saint Augustine says “prima humilitas; secunda, humilitas; tertia, humilitas” he implies that pride lurks at every step and we must, at the very very least, always hate it. I think that St Silouan’s preoccupation with ‘Christ like humility’ goes even further into an ontological understanding of God’s love as humility (and fascination thereof), a Self-effacement on His behalf that will always continue to pass all understanding, even of angels.

    However, the truly spiritual person, even with the aid of a still small measure of humility, will be driven to compunction, even without the need of a discerning teacher who verges on the clairvoyant, even by the carnal language of a pop song!, or the hard sayings contained in a general homily;
    all is interpreted ‘allegorically’ if you like and produces yet more compunction.

  12. Dino Avatar
    Dino

    Elder Sophrony’s (contemporary) words (to a mainly Western audience):

    “Such love puts to death any feeling of self-love[…] so that God may live in him and be increasingly glorified in him. Prayer, accompanied by kenotic self-abhorrence, and inflamed with the fire of humble love for Christ, takes place face to Face with the unoriginate God. During such prayer the state of Christ Himself is conveyed to man. Man becomes a true and fulfilled hypostasis through the grace of God. Bearing within himself the Holy Spirit he too can cry out with holy boldness: ‘Now, my Christ, in Thee and through Thee I too, am.’

    go even further towards understanding the profundity of this vocabulary…

  13. Mary Lanser Avatar

    I have no intention of arguing with you Dino.

    I will say this much: What you are speaking of in terms of obedience to another person is not so easy for a lay man or woman to discern as you may try to make it seem here.

    If I enter a monastic house, then yes, the line of legitimate authority is set and there is nothing to discern, at least not for some time to come.

    If you are speaking of the legitimate authority of God’s law, then yes, we must do our best to obey.

    Obedience is always to some legitimate authorial voice.

    When it comes to a confessor, unless there is some agreed upon relationship of obedience, the line of authority blurs and in fact discernment is necessary for all involved.

    M.

  14. Dino Avatar
    Dino

    I see what you are saying here Mary L. I fully agree with the difficulty of applying ‘obedience’ -as the safest of all methods forwards- by one who is not a monastic. The trenchant clarity of patristic advise concerning its superiority (obedience’s) is often perplexing and it’s application feels far more counterintuitive to a lay person. But if asking one’s spiritual Father “exactly how can I apply obedience (or any other such notion etc) in my context, in my 24 hours -as I have become blessed, I think, to become enamoured by it?” is not the one satisfying answer, I don’t know what else could answer it….

  15. Mary Lanser Avatar

    Obedience is the most sure and quickest route, but not the only route to humility, Dino. As one who has had the same spiritual father for 17 years, I am painfully aware of how many Catholic and Orthodox lay men and women have not been so blessed, and of the struggles of many who are visible within my own personal orbit. Some of those people appear to be and are some of the most still, peaceful, humble people that I have ever met.

    Mary L

  16. Mary Lanser Avatar

    By “still” I mean that they have been blessed with an unusual interior depth of dispassion and recollection and custody of the senses, mind and heart.

    In Christ,

    M.

  17. Dino Avatar
    Dino

    I do agree in every respect that it is not the only route (obedience). Of course! Besides, there are many virtues, such as “trusting, grateful acceptance of what comes”, (seeing God’s good providence in all that befalls me) which are truly, nothing other than ‘a form’ of the highest possible obedience -without ever been termed that.
    The need for one to be ‘in obedience’ was used above solely as another way to ensure one is ‘exposing their thoughts’ to a spiritual guide, because capricious experimentation with spiritual practices is in danger of delusion without it. I hope that clarifies it.

  18. Mary Lanser Avatar

    Agreed in full: as long as we can always remember that it is God who chooses and God who works, not us. That is why the cardinal rule of the monastic life is “do not compare”…do not compare yourself to your brothers and sisters, ever!

    And it would be exceptionally useful if those among the laity were to learn the same lesson as forcefully! because then we would not be in a position of wondering how it is that we are doing all the right things and are in a spiritual desert while our far less experienced and docile brothers and sisters appear to be far more blessed with good things…do you think so too?

    In Christ,

    M.

  19. Dino Avatar
    Dino

    I don’t know about doing all the right things just yet…! Far, very far from it. 🙂
    Comparison does ferment all sorts of trouble indeed!

    The only true blessing I guess is reaching true humility and love, so, although we might all have constant moving examples of humility and love, I wouldn’t say I have seen this (‘truest’ from of it) in any other than: either the
    1) most “Neptic” (watchfull and vigilant) of people I have been blessed to meet or
    2) the most contrite, or
    3) the most accepting of their heavy illnesses.
    And what otherwordly joy those all had!
    Some like elder Ephraim had all three (hidden)

  20. Dino Avatar
    Dino

    I meant the Elder Ephraim of Katounakia above – a radiant giant of the Spirit.
    His mother apparently (a laywoman up until her deathbed where she received the schema) was also of equal stature.
    Her “self-hate” (with the meaning assignment of self neglect -out of an all consuming yet courteous love for her neighbour, a discerningly and respectfully applied love in it’s complete purity from self – something somewhat rare in a traditional Mediterranean lady) was such, that she had magnetically enchanted the entire hospital staff…

  21. Mary Lanser Avatar

    Dino: I don’t know if you can see it but you’ve done nothing in the two posts above, but compare Elder Ephraim with all others and his mother with all other Mediterranean ladies…by which I hope you mean just plain women…or you’d be excluding whole classes of women from the race entirely.

    My point was that it is good to love all souls and see or pray to see Christ in all souls…and let God take care of the exceptional: since the way to the exceptional is His only!

    In Christ,

    Mary

  22. fatherstephen Avatar
    fatherstephen

    Mary L.
    This is just using rhetorical devices to make a point. Let Dino make a point, perhaps, and then let it rest. The last word becomes annoying after a point. And the don’t compare…is, frankly, over the top.

  23. Mary Lanser Avatar

    Apologies to all. I over-reached.

    Had a feeling I might, so I was wrong to continue.

    In Christ,

    Mary

  24. Dino Avatar
    Dino

    Oops sorry for mediterenean generalisation- there certainly surfaced a bit of the Greek {force-fed (continually in my recollection!) by mother, grandmother, auntie, etc.}, child in me there, you know the type I guess…! 🙂

  25. Photini Avatar
    Photini

    In my family of 15 first cousins, the ones who went to college, left our hometown. Those who only went to high school stayed. It seemed natural to me that I would move away someday being one of the youngest.

    We moved 19 times in my husband’s 30 year Army career. I am an expert at moving. In each place we made close friends, figuratively planted olive trees we knew we’d never see produce. We have friends all over the world.

    He has retired from the Army, taken on a second career, and we have been in the same house for 11 years. It is about 20 miles from where he grew up but parents and siblings have died or left so we began once again.

    I have belonged to the same church for 11 years – a feat I barely attained in childhood. I have watched children grow up. I see an altar boy who I prayed for when his mother was pregnant and was having severe problems. I see children born to parents whose weddings I remember.

    Recently I have reconnected with high school classmates (class of over 300) for our 45th reunion. I am astonished at how many are living within 50 miles of our hometown.

    I love Henry’s comment (way above) of the “Cheers” theme song. It is something we longed for with each move as we struggled to develop a feeling of belonging in the places we were sent.

    We are at an age where we’d like to move to a more quiet place – far from the madding crowd. But we have grandchildren in the area, and I can’t bear the thought of leaving them and my church. I think I’m too old to give up the “stability” we finally found.

  26. TLO Avatar
    TLO

    It seems to me that one has a greater opportunity to remain impoverished, chaste and obedient one is also immobile. 🙂

    The whole notion of monastic life seems at odds with the life of Christ who put many leagues under his feet, kicked it with the non-boring people, knew how to improve an already great party, had a tendency to tell the professional religious people to bugger off and get a grip, and who ordered his disciples to get off their keisters and go anywhere and everywhere spreading the gospel.

    I’ve never understood the idea of Christians in cloisters. I mean, wasn’t Jesus always bagging on the hyper-religious people of his day? Then why would you want to create a community of people based on a religious concept when you know that the end-result will be that they will bicker points of theology and potentially become just like the blighters that Jesus spoke loudest against? To my mind, creating cloisters is a disservice to the people who populate them.

    It seems to me that if someone wants a real test of faith they should live and work around people without faith. Hanging out with agnostics will force you to evaluate your faith on a level that can never be reached by hanging out with people who think like you do. You know? And I don’t think that faith is worth a whole lot if it cannot be truly demonstrated to the non-believer. Wasn’t Jesus’ miracle-working primarily to help sinners to believe what he was saying? Perhaps if his followers forced themselves to be around sinners, they would grow enough in their faith to “do the works I have been doing, and they will do even greater things than these.”

  27. Dino Avatar
    Dino

    You cast yourself ‘the loyal opposition’ but those arguments are lacking.
    Take St Anthony (one of the first) or Elder Joseph the Cave-dweller (a contemporary), – for the idea you never understood of “Christians in cloisters”.
    They changed more people than those who went out to do just that, and with furthest reaching effects (in time).
    No question about it!
    They also did not shy away from agnostics, (they did not even shy away from demons !!), ‘hanging out’ is a different kettle of fish though…
    I suspect your knowledge of Christianity (I wouldn’t be sure if I would even call it that in such a limited ‘worldly’ cloak as the one you suggest) comes out as extremely lopsided in those words – it would be without a good knowledge of the above examples.
    You are talking of night and we of day here
    🙂

  28. Dino Avatar
    Dino

    Let me write the last sentence more clearly:

    I suspect your knowledge of Christianity (I wouldn’t be sure if I would even call it Christianity when in such a limited ‘worldly cloak’ as the one you suggest) comes across as extremely lopsided – it would, in fact, be lopsided without a good knowledge of the above examples of St Anthony and Elder Joseph and their influential aftermath.

    We verify a great deal more than you think from the “fruits” (which you seem to ignore) about the “tree”. I am very sorry but, what I see in those tired arguments you put across is a short-circuiting between the wrong fruits and the wrong trees.

  29. mary benton Avatar
    mary benton

    Dino – You seem a little harsh here.

    TLO – I understand what you mean to some extent. For most people in today’s world, monastic life doesn’t seem to make a lot of sense.

    True monastic life doesn’t make a lot of sense to me for MY life, though I have been working more to incorporate monastic values into my life of active service.

    However, simply because I do not feel called to a certain way of life – or do not understand it – doesn’t mean that it has no value. Perhaps asking questions would lead to greater wisdom than throwing out provocative statements. (Though I sense you like to be provocative now and then :-).)

  30. PJ Avatar
    PJ

    John,

    Seems to me that Jesus was concerned not so much with religious people, but with religious hypocrites. “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cumin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness. These you ought to have done, without neglecting the others.”

  31. Mary Lanser Avatar

    TLO: You don’t see to know much of the history of monastic life or even contemporary life in a cloister. You should do a bit of work before you express yourself in such a way that makes it clear that you really do not understand. I say this in all good will.

    In Christ,

    Mary

  32. Mary Lanser Avatar

    Dino: TLO’s tone makes what he says…in part…to sound worse than it is. I know that I reacted to that initially.

    I don’t want us to miss the opportunity to say to him directly, and not just with reference, that east and west, in the monastic life, there have always been individual monks, and sometimes houses who responded quite openly and actively to the world and missed very little except for the sin.

  33. Mary Lanser Avatar

    PS: Don’t mean to suggest that monks are not sinners…Simply saying that monks tend not to rush out to take part in the sinfulness of the world, flesh and devil…

    M.

  34. Dino Avatar
    Dino

    I think that it is evident that the position accused (in TLO’s statement) is a completely different one to the position defended. Night and day.
    That should be clarified I guess first.
    Sorry to come across harsh! I just had that same argument (about the value of monasticism) recently – it is always due to a misunderstanding of what true ‘seeking God to the exclusion of all else’ (first steps) and ‘changing the world covertly through that mystery’ (Further steps) actually is, by those who’s complete lack of interest in the matter might be expressed as actual disdain -of something they know not.

  35. Mary Lanser Avatar

    Dino: Your first sentence above made me laugh out loud. I don’t think you were harsh. Just reacting to tone, I think.

    M.

  36. Mary Lanser Avatar

    Dino: Since I am relatively new here I wanted to ask you if you are in a monastic setting or do you have a vocation?

    M.

  37. Dino Avatar
    Dino

    Oh no Mary!, I found it curious when drewster asked me this once before…
    I do have extremely close links I guess. I was blessed to find myself in the rare situation to experience that life (many years ago) for a long time on a famous Athos Monastery.
    Nothing compares to life staying put in such a context, in all honesty, not even meeting with those rare Saintly Sages on Athos which is in itself invaluable…

  38. Mary Lanser Avatar

    Thanks, Dino. You seemed to have had some experience or aspiration to same.

    M.

  39. Dino Avatar
    Dino

    Here is a didactic image of “Christians in cloisters”, which is easy to commit to memory– it was a favourite of Elder Joseph the Hesychast when advising his disciples:

    If you crave honey (the sweet honey of Grace), remember that bees invariably create honey in darkness. And if you take a bee and place it in a glass bowl it will promptly darken its interior too…

    And one from Elder Paisios:

    A traffic light in the busy city can never ‘say’ to a lighthouse out in the sea: “what is the point of living out there? Come and be another traffic light here in the metropolis”…

  40. Fr Raphael Johnston Avatar

    Father Stephen,

    Thank you for posting this again. I read it six years ago on its first go-round at a time when I was severely tempted to pull up tent pegs and move on. Again today, at a time when staying put has lost some of its brightness, I read it and am again moved to greater stability. I especially appreciate your “long-term goal” to be buried where you are. I share the same goal – to be buried in this community and from this parish – but find it too easy to lose sight of it. Thanks again for sharing your heart.

    You are on my Discos during this time of recovery from your heart attack. May the Lord have mercy on you and grant you every petition which is unto salvation and eternal life.

    Glory to God for all things!

  41. TLO Avatar
    TLO

    Dino and Mary L – My word! Awfully defensive responses. Let me iterate this again:

    I’ve never understood the idea of Christians in cloisters…

    Much of my questioning is due to the fact that I have seen so much badness in Christian institutions that I tend to think that the more exclusionary a group is the greater opportunity there is for really bad things to result.

    Dino cited two examples. I’m curious if they were so simple to cite because they are the exception to the rule though. Said another way, no one has to cite an individual scientist to support how valuable science is to humanity. The benefits are ubiquitous. I don’t know that the same can be said of monasticism as an institution.

    I have always admired J. Hudson Taylor for his faith and actions but he is a rare exception among protestants. Does his life justify Protestantism? It seems to me that Protestant Christianity would be better served if he was the norm and not the exception.

    Is monasticism in and of itself a good thing? Why mention St Anthony or Elder Joseph the Cave-dweller and not the Dalai Lama (who seems to have been a powerful force for good)?

    More to the point, can one say in all honesty that the monastic order has never devolved into becoming like the blighters that Jesus spoke harshly to? If it has, has that been the norm or the exception? It seems to me that Protestantism is a direct result of cloisters gone awry. But is that the exception? I don’t know the answers. I am simply asking questions.

  42. Mary Lanser Avatar

    TLO: I would not presume to defend an ascetic practice that is 2000 years old and flourishing. Perhaps we also have differing understandings of what it is to defend. And more than that I would never try to turn someone as convinced as you are of your own position, which I must also say remains unclear. Perhaps if you did not clutter your statements so thoroughly with attitude, they would be more clear.

    M.

  43. Mary Lanser Avatar

    TLO: Forgive me. I was too short. What is it really that you are after here? And how does it relate to the topic at hand? It seems as though you are posturing a bit in your notes: maybe I am wrong, but if you are could you just cut to the chase and let us see what concerns you?

    M.

  44. TLO Avatar
    TLO

    I would never try to turn someone as convinced as you are of your own position, which I must also say remains unclear.

    I’m afraid I have no position to defend. I find that starting off with a position tends to erode thoughtful discourse. I began with a comment that I do not understand a concept. How that got turned into an aggressive denouncement in your mind is baffling.

    I am most wary of people whose whole life and purpose is defined by a belief system. It doesn’t matter if we are talking about professional religious people, communists, fascists, or modern “conservatives” or “liberals.”

    For example, the Rush Limbaugh crowd has an agenda and they take everything that the Bill Maher crowd says and does as wrong, by default.

    Those who are outside of both worldviews listen with much patience to both sides and try to find slivers of truth. But those firmly ensconced within those camps cannot hear any truth that may be coming from the other side because they are defending a position. Often it never even occurs to them to question their own position.

    In the context of this article, I am curious how much value faith has if it is insulated from anything but itself. Can a faith that grows anywhere outside the field of common humanity have any real value? I struggle with understanding how someone who takes a vow of poverty can relate to those of us who don’t have that luxury. If being poor, chaste, immobile and obedient are virtuous, why isn’t there a deluge of people beating down the doors to the convent?

    IMHO, men who live and thrive in the world by the work of their hands (Jesus, the Apostles, Fr. Stephen, (other names may be added…)) must demonstrate a greater faith than those who don’t mind missing meals and aren’t brave enough to navigate through the hazardous jungles of a marriage. But that’s simply an observation.

    Perhaps if you did not clutter your statements so thoroughly with attitude, they would be more clear.

    This format is perhaps the worst form of communication possible. It’s interesting to me that you are reading “attitude” into it. Coupled with your previous responses, I would venture to guess that you are accustomed more to people criticizing in the negative way than you are to someone simply asking questions. I have no agenda. Just chatting.

  45. Dino Avatar
    Dino

    TLO,
    we have had this conversation about monasticism here a little while ago. I cannot recall if you took part though… It is always a scandalous path to the outsider, but, as I stated above: “A traffic light in the busy city (married layperson who is perhaps more outwardly ‘active’ in his religion) can never ‘say’ to a lighthouse out in the sea (a somewhat “hesychastic” monk spending far more time talking to God directly rather than to other people): “what is the point of living out there? Come and be another traffic light here in the metropolis”…
    However, only someone who believes in prayer, who knows its power, who believes in Christ’s words on total renouncement of Father. Mother, sons etc, stands any chance of understanding this truth. You sai in the past that you were de-converted so I fail to see how you could be convinced that those whose mode of life you doubt (80% to 90% of all Saints in the history of the Church BTW) actually have such merit as Orthodoxy bestows on them.
    You say “I do not understand a concept”, but how can you ever understand it, if you cannot be convinced of the truth of what it is based on unless -as you have stated in the past- God does not appear to you in person…. So that is an unconscious position you are unconsciously defending. There is no human who claims to be impartial that (or not) that actually is. The issue is what are we partial towards.

  46. Dino Avatar
    Dino

    Sorry, for all the rushed typos (it’s the multitasking of married life 🙂 )
    I meant: “There isn’t human (whether they claim to be impartial or not) that actually is impartial. The issue is what are we partial towards…

  47. Dino Avatar
    Dino

    I am evidently still plagued by typos even when correcting them! sorry again!

  48. Mary Lanser Avatar

    Dear TLO: Thank you so much for your kind and measured response. It helps me a great deal in adjusting my “hearing” with your posts!

    I think if you go back and examine yourself a bit more clearly you’ll see that you do indeed have a position and it is a strong one…

    “I am most wary of people whose whole life and purpose is defined by a belief system. It doesn’t matter if we are talking about professional religious people, communists, fascists, or modern “conservatives” or “liberals.””

    Most wary is your position: So what I was seeing was not aggressive rejection but incredulity and hesitation to embrace and a bit of rejection salted in to your comments.

    Let me ask you: In your estimation of yourself, how open are you to hearing good things about the religious life?

    M.

  49. Mary Lanser Avatar

    PS: To your comment on what I am accustomed to: In actual fact I am much more accustomed to interacting with people who have an excellent regard for the ascetic life and the religious life, so to be confronted with a challenger is not the norm for me.

    I have a high regard for the religious life but I don’t want to extol the things that I see that are virtuous about it till I hear back from you.

    By the way: I do agree that we all cannot leave the world for a cloister, but we all can practice the presence of God wherever we are in the world, whatever we are doing. That by its very definition is what you are wary of: It is people living as Christians in the world, defining themselves by a relationship to a living God.

    M.

  50. Mary Lanser Avatar

    TLO: Gracious! After all that I’d think you’d be eager to go behind a monastic wall or door, or maybe even a hermitage somewhere.[smile]

    There’s no place where one can go to avoid the world though, and all of the dangers and temptations that lie in wait therein…not even a hermitage on a very high hill: for there is always someone on the way up that hill, even though you cannot see them, coming to draw you out to fulfill a need or a desire for someone else.

    Perhaps we should add “wistful” to your list of positions. I think that may be more accurate that jealousy…eh?

    I am very glad to be having a chance to know you a little better. I too have stood in the dark shadows of the institution called Church. It is, and I do not exaggerate, terrifying. You stand and watch people whom you love and admire, and perhaps depend upon at some level, being destroyed, and to realize that they have no recourse but to exercise the greatest of all virtues: charity, prudence and patience: and they do so willingly and without complaint: when all of my own responses were to go to war with the established dis-order: which I did to my own detriment. I hit the wall of “mother” Church and bounced…hard.

    So I do understand your recoil…but I am not sure if I have anything that would help you get beyond it. By the time all of that hit for me, I’d been some years in spiritual formation, formally, first with a religious order and then with a spiritual father in the erimetic life.

    That did not mean that I didn’t struggle with serious anger and fear and distrust of men [human beings], but it did mean that I trusted God to bring great good out of all of it, and had a few tools in my kit to get me started on the road to forgiveness: I was still pretty self-willed back then, and kept sticking my nose in God’s business for a while. But I kept trying and keep working to get out of the way and let God work, in me, and in those around me.

    A life dedicated to spiritual work, a consecrated or religious life, to me is a way of being that fully depends on the teaching of the very institutional mess that I have run up against more than once. So there has to be some sense that the teaching is not spoiled by the sins, faults and errors of the teachers. Till you have that settled sense of it, then it may be difficult or impossible to proceed.

    That’s not much help is it?

    In Christ,

    M.

  51. drewster2000 Avatar
    drewster2000

    TLO,

    What happened with Dino is that you stepped into his patch of prize-winning flowers: monastics. He has a very high regard for them, to put it mildly.

    But you on the other hand have a method of asking questions that I would call “stirring the pot”, exaggerating to get reaction and start a conversation. So I’m never quite sure where your actual question stops and the hyperbole takes over.

    Your method can be very useful (AND entertaining) but I submit to you that in a good-hearted crowd like this, it’s important to remember when to “come clean” and relent a bit. In this context that would mean admitting that you do in fact see some value in the monastic ideal and just wanted to hear someone expound more fully on the merits of such a life.

    If on the other hand you don’t see any such merit, then I suggest you would have more success among candid folk like these if you would change your tact from “Monastics are in-bred and out-of-touch jokes” to something like “I don’t understand; it would seem to me that cloisters of people must inevitably end up like (fill in your opinion) but I could be wrong. Could someone please talk about that?”

    If you’re ignorant of a certain situation (monasticism in this case), speak in questions and tentative ideas, not declarative statements.

    By the way, good to “see” you again. And I agree with you that the written word is not the best medium for some of these discussions. I have to take the mindset that “now we see as in a mirror dimly, but one day we shall be face to face…”

  52. dino Avatar
    dino

    drewster2000,
    I guess it would be better for someone else to make this clarification so that it is not mistaken as some personal reaction…:
    You need to be aware that monasticism in the Church (Orthodoxy) is NOT anybody’s in particular “patch of prize-winning flowers”…
    I know TLO is not Orthodox and assume the same concerning yourself, but our Church Hymnography, our Patristic tradition from the most ancient to the most recent is as clear as can be: monasticism is the Church’s “patch of prize-winning flowers”.
    I could go on to present a thousand incontestable quotes from Chrysostom to Maximus to Palamas (they all had this same arguments with their contemporaries, especially St Gregory Palalmas in a time when Western monasticism had abandoned hesuchasm for ‘activism’ and ‘scholasticism’) etc, but they are frankly not even necessary if you consider that the heart of Orthodoxy is Hesychasm.
    So remember this is Orthodoxy we are talking about -not mine or someone else’s personal taste of course- and, as is often said, monasticism is its lifeblood…

  53. Michael Bauman Avatar
    Michael Bauman

    Dino you allude to an important point: monasticism is not likely to be understood or appreciated outside the Church where the blasphemy “I think, therefore I am” tends to rule.

    In much of the modern world it has descended to even more venal and disgusting expressions, but the principle is the same: the human defines the divine by ideas and feelings alone.

    The Christian must allow himself to be transformed by obedience and his encounter with the living God in prayer, in worship, in others.

    The monastic witness is consistently one of greater expression of our humanity through spiritual discipline that allows God’s personal presence with us in His creation to be manifest.

    We lay people get glimpses from time to time, but without the monastic “extremes” those glimpses are all too easy to rationalize or pietize into ideas and feelings so that the transformative power is squandered.

    We are all prize winning flowers in God’s garden. The monastics are the skilled gardeners who allow the Master Gardener to prune, chastize and make glorious by His grace as examples of who we really are as human beings.

  54. Dino Avatar
    Dino

    Michael,
    good point. The “I think, therefore I am” spirit could never understand such depth with its “organ” of understanding. It is part and parcel of the reasons why the Protestant-influenced world often ridicules monastic life.

    However, I simply go by the basics here. The tradition, the history (from Saint John the Forerunner -who prepared the way for a King whose Kingdom is not of this world- to the present). We follow the Fathers (it is virtually impossible to name a single one of the Fathers or Mothers who was not a monastic! try it!), the overwhelming majority of the Saints (who were monastics), the Church hymnography (written by monastics almost exclusively), the “thought” of the Orhtodox Church which has always considered Monastic life as the closest possible emulation of the life of Jesus and the apostles, lived in obedience to his commandments and the highest of his teaching (renouncing all), seeking to hear and do the will of God…
    It isn’t difficult to see this in St Paul’s words: “I wish that all were as I myself am [unmarried]. But each has his own special gift from God, one of one kind and one of another … To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is well for them to remain single as I do” (1 Cor. 7:1-40).”
    Periods of vibrant monastic presence are invariably periods of spiritual maturity of the faithful. Without monastic communities, spiritual and ascetical direction depends solely upon the bishops, but bishops come from monasticism! (“catch22”) 🙂

  55. TLO Avatar
    TLO

    Hi Mary L

    After all that I’d think you’d be eager to go behind a monastic wall or door, or maybe even a hermitage somewhere.

    Oddly, just leaving the church was enough for me. But that brings up the idea of escapism which is another aspect of monastic life that fits with my original suggestion that true faith is better cultivated where there is manure. But perhaps I am completely off-base.

    That did not mean that I didn’t struggle with serious anger and fear and distrust of [human beings]…

    This is one of the key facets of my leaving the faith. People within the church are as human as people outside of it. I rather fail to see the point of a faith that claims to make people into a “new creation” but actually doesn’t change them so much as place constraints around them so they are forced to behave more appropriately. No Christian can become in a vacuum what they become by pledging to a clan. Hence I wonder what impact god really has on a person (as opposed to the impact that the community has on a person).

    there has to be some sense that the teaching is not spoiled by the sins, faults and errors of the teachers.

    I agree but the same could be said of communism or indeed of democracy. The theory rarely matches the reality.

    “We take our loftiest intentions and engrave them all neatly in stone, and once they’re safely up there we prefer that they just leave us alone…” (Randy Stonehill – Stop the world I wanna get off)

    Drewster:

    you have a method of asking questions that I would call “stirring the pot”, exaggerating to get reaction and start a conversation. So I’m never quite sure where your actual question stops and the hyperbole takes over.

    Comfort the disturbed and disturb the comfortable. 🙂

    admitting that you do in fact see some value in the monastic ideal and just wanted to hear someone expound more fully on the merits of such a life.

    I wouldn’t say that. Not by a long shot. It seems to me that simple human nature precludes the possibility that cloistered individuals won’t end up bickering or falling to the petty vices that are common to us all, whether the group is religious or scientific in nature. (Perhaps that this is one reason behind vows of silence?)

    It’s just my opinion but I think that any pettiness or bickering or outright fighting that is centered on or a result of religious belief is far worse than, say, a San Diego Chargers fan (the poor fool) quarrelling with a Raiders fan (die evil scumhead!). Does that make sense?

    I grew up attending Christian schools until I reached 9th grade. My first year at a public school was a joy to me because no one was trying to fake out everyone around them (which is also common on Sunday mornings in many many churches). I far preferred to be around people who were honest about who they were. I am, perhaps, clouding my view of cloisters with my experiences of having been somewhat cloistered with religious people night and day for the first thirteen years of my life.

    I have higher expectations for Christians than I do for gentiles and having seen how institutionalism in general tends to cause problems for those who involved with the institution, I am naturally concerned for those who join religious institutions. Hence my original statement that the idea of cloisters is baffling to me and my follow-up that, from a purely humanistic point of view, such institutions seem to be a bit of a disservice to the participants.

    Michael or Dino: when you talk of monasticism, do you speak of it as an entity that is good and which the church employs? Said another way, is monasticism in the Buddhist tradition of similar or equal value to the Christian tradition? Or would you say that, like sacramental prayers that make the wine (which is already good in and of itself) something better than it would be without divine intervention, monasticism as an institution is sanctified by Christ?

  56. Michael Bauman Avatar
    Michael Bauman

    Buddhist monasticism is of a different quality than Christian monasticism. Just as Buddhism is of a different quality than Christianity. I refer you to an interview with a former Buddhist who is now an Athonite monk on the Journey to Orthodoxy site for support of my statement.

    Traditional Christianity is all about union with Jesus Christ and the community that creates. There are degrees of union. The monastics practice a discipline that takes that union to a degree that most lay people are unable to experience because of the myriad of distractions with which we live. The unity that the monastics experience strengthens the entire community of Christ and enables everyone to go more deeply into our communion because their union with Christ is also a union with us.

    You are familiar with the saying that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. In our case it is not a chain but a vine. The monastic life allows the entire Church to be more fully and strongly rooted in the life of God so that better fruit can be produced.

    As the life of the Church is from the life giving Holy Spirit, it is not just for us but it spills over for all. Thus we pray and affirm in the Divine Liturgy that Jesus “gave himself up for the life of the world”.

    I would say that it is Christian monasticism that allows the Buddhists to participate in any life at all.

    The Incarnation (Nativity, mission, Crucifixion, Resurrection, Ascension and return) alters everything. Most of us are unable to enter into or partake of the radical existence the Incarnation calls forth for us. Monks are.

    None of this is in any way a slight of the life we laity live as it is both necessary and proper too. It is just that the monastic life is both a reminder of the centrality and living presence of the Kingdom as “Christ is in our midst” and a palpable demonstration of the reality of that Kingdom that transcends ideas and feelings. The power of the I AM.

    Monks are sinners too as they will be quick to acknowledge, so sinfulness is also on display in the monastic life as it is in the lay life, but that is only to be expected.

    Sin does not invalidate the Truth.

  57. Michael Bauman Avatar
    Michael Bauman

    Monasticism is not an institution. It is a way of life that is uniquely Christian and that all who are in the Church partake of to some degree.

  58. Dino Avatar
    Dino

    Michael,
    good point. The “I think, therefore I am” spirit could never understand such depth with its “organ” of understanding. It is part and parcel of the reasons why the Protestant-influenced world often ridicules monastic life.

    However, I simply go by the basics here. The tradition, the history (from Saint John the Forerunner -who prepared the way for a King whose Kingdom is not of this world- to the present). We follow the Fathers (it is virtually impossible to name a single one of the Fathers or Mothers who was not a monastic! try it!), the overwhelming majority of the Saints (who were monastics), the Church hymnography (written by monastics almost exclusively), the “thought” of the Orhtodox Church which has always considered Monastic life as the closest possible emulation of the life of Jesus and the apostles, lived in obedience to his commandments and the highest of his teaching (renouncing all), seeking to hear and do the will of God…
    It isn’t difficult to see this in St Paul’s words: “I wish that all were as I myself am [unmarried]. But each has his own special gift from God, one of one kind and one of another … To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is well for them to remain single as I do” (1 Cor. 7:1-40).”
    Periods of vibrant monastic presence are invariably periods of spiritual maturity of the faithful. Without monastic communities, spiritual and ascetical direction depends solely upon the bishops, but bishops come from monasticism! (“catch22″)

  59. Rhonda Avatar

    TLO,

    I will let Michael or Dino further comment on monasticism. My only comment to your question of Buddhist vs. Christian monasticism. Many religions have monasticism. The monasticism of Buddhism & Christianity are two different animals so to speak because Buddhism & Christianity are vastly different religions with different goals & ends. Buddhism’s nirvana is not the same as Christianity’s salvation.

    Those sects of Buddhism that posit a god (most do not) do not posit the same God as Christianity, but rather at most an impersonal universal force instead of the personal God. In Buddhism, individual consciousness ceases when nirvana is attained whereas in Christianity (EO) our personal identity is not lost in our union with God…i.e., we do not cease to be nor do we cease to be us. One last important point is that in Buddhism, this attainment of nirvana is purely accomplished by the individual’s own efforts. In Christianity no person can attain salvation solely through their own efforts…it is by the grace of God (God’s love) in synergy with man’s faith & love given in return.

  60. Dino Avatar
    Dino

    TLO (&drewster2000),
    (I am encountering some difficulty commenting)
    speaking of monasticism in the Orthodox Church in particular, I repeat, consider how central to Her it must be when all Her hymnography is written almost exclusively by monastics, it is virtually impossible to name a single one of the Fathers or Mothers who was not a monastic! (try it!), the overwhelming majority of Her Saints were monastics and ithout monastic communities, spiritual and ascetical direction depends solely upon the bishops, but …bishops come from monasticism!

  61. Dino Avatar
    Dino

    I am encountering some difficulty commenting, so this little comment might suddenly appear (along with a few longer versions of the same, or not at all…

    To re-attempt a few words on monasticism in the Orthodox Church in particular,( I repeat):
    please consider how central to the Church it must be, when all Her hymnography/Services are written virtually exclusively by monastics, it is almost impossible to name a single one of the Fathers or Mothers who was not a monastic. (give it a try…!)

  62. Dino Avatar
    Dino

    drewster2000 & TLO,
    Simply going with the basics here: The Church tradition, (from Saint John the Forerunner -who prepared the way for a King whose Kingdom is not of this world- to the present), the “mind” of the Orhtodox Church, has always considered Monastic life (in all its Orthodox varieties – coenobite to anchorite) as the closest possible imitation of the consecrated life of Christ and the apostles, lived in obedience to his commandments and His highest of ‘callings’ (renouncing all), seeking to hear and do nothing but the will of God…
    It isn’t difficult to see this in St Paul’s words: “I wish that all were as I myself am [unmarried].… To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is well for them to remain single as I do” (1 Cor. 7:1-40).”
    Periods of vibrant monastic presence are invariably periods of spiritual maturity of the faithful. Without monastic communities, general spiritual and ascetical direction depends solely upon the bishops, but (catch22), bishops come from monasticism!

  63. mary benton Avatar
    mary benton

    I do not fully understand the life of monasticism because I have not been called to that life. We are one body, but not all hands or eyes or feet. The monastics are an immensely important part of the body – but those raising families or living lives of service in the world are immensely important to the body as well. God has made it so.

    While I agree that there are some very fundamental differences between Christian monasticism and Buddhist monasticism, I would also make the point that the latter offer a great deal to the body as well. They are a strong witness to peace in our troubled world – more so (sadly) than some Christians. Their practices and way of life teach much to those alienated from “religion” about meditation, kindness and unselfishness. May our lives in Christ do the same – and more.

    The experience of a life dedicated to Truth and the practice of holy virtues is something to which we are all invited. Some find this in the setting of community, simplicity and silence – while others may find it as teachers, parents or ministers to the ill or disadvantaged. One body, many members.

  64. Dino Avatar
    Dino

    Mary,
    the immense value Orthodoxy bestows on Monasticism stands on its own. There is never a need to shift the argument (towards a comparison and defence of us married laity).
    That is often a telltale sign of RC’s (and the entire post-Renaissance Western-influenced mind’s) unconscious distrust of “mystical” Hesychasm (‘being still to know God’ at the expense of absolutely all else) and belief in some sort of more “pragmatic” worldly ‘activism’…
    Mary’s ‘activism’ has her place, but Martha’s ‘hesychasm’ is higher (according to our Lord’s word)

  65. Dino Avatar
    Dino

    Other way around of course….! 🙂

    Martha‘s ‘activism’ has her place, but Mary’s ‘hesychasm’ is higher (according to our Lord’s word)

  66. mary benton Avatar
    mary benton

    Dino,

    I think you have perhaps misread me (or perhaps I misread you).

    I wasn’t “shifting the argument” nor was I trying to “defend” the laity (married or otherwise). Nor do I think I have an “unconscious distrust of ‘mystical’ Hesychasm” (though if it were unconscious, I wouldn’t know it, of course. :-)).

    I was referencing scripture, that the body has many parts. Not all are called to be living in monasteries. I believe all are called to be both Martha and Mary in some sense, though the amount of time dedicated to “work” and “prayer” as observable activities will vary.

    I say observable, because for the monk, prayer is their primary work, and for the lay person, their work is often their primary prayer, is it not? The monk may do some “work” of the physical sense (sweep his cell?) and the lay person will do some “prayer” (in formal sense), but in different proportions. All are called to both work and pray.

    Union with with God is not a calling for monks alone, though I say this with great reverence for those who give their lives to God in this manner. We are all called to give our lives completely to God and to value the “Mary” part of our lives over the “Martha” part. (For me, I consider myself blessed to be psychologist but that is but a temporary vocation; I consider myself even more blessed to be invited to sit at the feet of Jesus – which is eternal way of being.)

  67. TLO Avatar
    TLO

    Hi Mary B

    I believe all are called to be both Martha and Mary in some sense…

    This is well stated.

    I say this with great reverence for those who give their lives to God in this manner.

    Can you expound on the reason for this reverence? Patriots have a certain reverence for soldiers (at least nowadays) but I don’t know any soldiers who feel that reverence is due them. They volunteered to do a job and they do it. Is this also true of monastics? Do you think that the laity have a perception of monastics that those within the convent do not have of themselves?

    Dino: Jesus said that the greatest among you will be the least. How does this fit in with the monastic life. Do these folks join the monastery in an effort to become “the least”?

  68. Dino Avatar
    Dino

    Mary,
    your comment made me laugh! especially: “(though if it were unconscious, I wouldn’t know it, of course.)”
    I do agree with what you are saying there of course.

    TLO,
    (it would be good to remember that just as there is an immense difference in the outward life setting of one in the world and one in a monastery, there is a similarly vast difference between one in a monastery and a true hesychast living as an anchorite)
    Humility is the sine qua non of success in all walks of life, even more so in monasticism… So, whether the initial call to renounce “all” for that exclusive “specialisation” is done for good, not so good or bad reasons makes less of a difference than achieving humility somewhere along the way…
    A discerning Christian would know the paramount importance of “being the least” when entering monasticism, however, many might enter with a different enthusiasm and little such discernment. That does not mean they will not learn that paramount importance… They are in an ideal setting to learn such things -that are far harder to clearly comprehend ‘outside’.

  69. Dino Avatar
    Dino

    sorry, forgot an important comma:
    So, whether the initial call to renounce “all” for that exclusive “specialisation” is done for good, not so good or for bad reasons , makes less of a difference than achieving humility somewhere along the way…

  70. drewster2000 Avatar
    drewster2000

    Dino,

    I have no basis for arguing with you about the importance of monasticism; I was just making a point: on this site you are the champion of monastics and of course all the church fathers coming out of it. While many of us agree with its importance, you are the local keeper of this particular flower bed. And of course you won’t hold this to be a slight or criticism. In fact it should make you even a bit proud! (wink)

    TLO,

    You conveniently did not respond to the second half of my comment to you, which you can go up and reread. Paraphrasing it briefly, if you are ignorant of something, find out. From all I’ve read about your past experience of church, you were horribly slandered and misled, putting it mildly. This is a tragedy…but all the more reason not to turn around and treat anyone else in the same way.

  71. fatherstephen Avatar
    fatherstephen

    I have remained relatively silent on the discussion viz. monasticism. I’ll say definitively (!) Orthodox is not comprehensible apart from monasticism. It’s not just an interesting devotional option – it is – in the mind of the Church – an essential expression of the gospel (Mt. 19:12). And Christ in this verse acknowledges that is a saying hard to be received – it is something of a “higher calling.” It does not diminish the married state in any respect – but it has a unique eschatological dimension in the life of the Church. It is, indeed, a sacrament (as is marriage).
    Wherever Orthodoxy has existed without monasticism, or with weakened monasticism (much of American Orthodox history was like this), the Church has been endangered and weakened. The flourishing of monasticism is an essential sign of health in the Church. We will not have strong and healthy marriages and families without strong monasticism.

  72. Michael Bauman Avatar
    Michael Bauman

    I have personally met only a handful of Orthodox monastics in my life before recently. Now, my bishop is in the process of establishing a monastery here in Wichita. St. Silouan the Athonite Monastery. It has been in the works for some time

    Right now they have three monks: Bp Basil, Heirodeacon Benedict and newly tonsured Fr. Philip Vreeland, widowed a year ago. Near the end of her life, Fr. Philip’s wife blessed his desire to enter the monastic life with a hug and a smile. He continues to serve the tiny mission parish in Garden City, Ks.

    In a sense this shows to me the essential link between marriage and monasticism although I am not able to articulate it well.

    Bp. Basil is building an complete Orthodox community here centered on the Cathedral parish and the other two Antiochian parishes in Wichita (one of which is western rite). The Cathedral is the center for outreach in our support of missionaries in the U.S and abroad (mission parishes as well), in the work of the Treehouse to mothers in crisis so that they can keep their babies; our school and the monastery that is forming as well as plans to establish a regional retreat center and youth camp. I am blessed to be even a small part of all of that. Our parish has long been a supporter of the monastic life and many have take pilgrimages to Athos and monasteries in Lebanon.

    There have been 8 missions established and thriving in Kansas alone. Considering the population of the state that is a lot. Many more in other parts of the diocese, especially Texas.

    The monastery will be the anchor and the heavenly root from which we will draw life and strength. It is essential for the continued growth and strength of all that we do.

    Pray for us.

  73. drewster2000 Avatar
    drewster2000

    Concerning monasticism being a higher calling…

    I speculate that “this is a hard saying” in our culture because we are so numbers-based, so ready to put our lives on the scale and decide our worth based on how much we make or have – and probably also from an abuse of the sentiment that I’ll refer to as clericalism, the idea in the minds of some that clergy are closer to God and He therefore loves them best.

    While I realize that the whole premise is flawed, it nonetheless has had its effect in the West and, along with other forces, has caused more of a competition in the Church rather than cooperation.

    So to Western ears, “monastics have a higher calling” sounds a lot like “they’re better than you and will get more good stuff – and you may not make it in at all if there’s any kind of cutoff”. While I realize some people don’t mean it this way because they have a mindset which is inclusive, others do in fact mean it this way. In either case, that’s often how it comes off sounding.

    I don’t suggest that the solution to this is to stop calling monasticism a higher calling, just that clarifying dialogue following such statements is often healthy and inevitable, given the audience.

  74. drewster2000 Avatar
    drewster2000

    Michael,

    What’s happening in Witchita sounds like a wonderful thing. I’ll keep you/them in my prayers.

  75. fatherstephen Avatar
    fatherstephen

    Drewster,
    Perhaps “higher” is the wrong word. “Harder” is correct. In Orthodoxy, very few monastics are clergy. All nuns are non-clergy, of course, and monasteries only have as many priests as they actually need for the services (generally). Most are not ordained.

    The modern “democratic” spirit has a hard time with the idea that anybody is “better” “more well off” or superior to me in any way. Orthodoxy (and the Scripture) is inherently hierarchical. But “the greatest among you must be your servant.” So, monastics take on their way of life in order to be the least and to be the servant of all. Those monastics who have any other attitude are likely to fail.

    My experience of monastics has been very much that of ‘being served.’ Last year I visited at a monastery that does not have a priest. I was so pleased with having a “job” while I was there. I did services, served a feast day liturgy, blessed holy water, etc. I felt quite at home. Indeed, I have been treated as an honored guest whenever I go to a monastery – as are the laymen I’ve seen who are visiting as well. I’ve been waited on hand and foot in hospitality, etc.

  76. drewster2000 Avatar
    drewster2000

    Fr. Stephen,

    I have absolutely no doubt that it is just as you have said and that monastics as a whole do not think of themselves as better than laity. I also agree with the idea that just because the modern democratic spirit has a problem with an inferiority complex doesn’t not mean the rest of the world should lay down in the dust to prove our equality with God.

    Generally speaking we are on the same page. It is usually not monastics that should be addressed and moderated on this topic, but the naysayers(even if that sometimes includes me). However, because of this weakness/roadblock in the other, it is sometimes helpful to reiterate certain truths, like all being loved of God and that being infinitely sufficient for us to allow some to be higher than us without feeling threatened.

    Thanks for the honor of your reply.

  77. TLO Avatar
    TLO

    Drewster:

    You conveniently did not respond to the second half of my comment to you

    Did you mean this?

    If on the other hand you don’t see any such merit, then I suggest you would have more success among candid folk like these if you would change your tact from “Monastics are in-bred and out-of-touch jokes” to something like “I don’t understand…”

    I did not respond to this because it is tiresome and incorrect and to respond fully would be without any possible positive outcome. I can foresee that this could quickly devolve into a conflict and I have no desire to be at odds with you.

    Nowhere did I state or remotely imply that “Monastics are in-bred and out-of-touch jokes.” Nor would I. Ever.

    I’ll leave it at that. Let’s move on.

  78. drewster2000 Avatar
    drewster2000

    TLO,

    I’ll honor that request.

  79. TLO Avatar
    TLO

    Fr. Stephen

    …it has a unique eschatological dimension in the life of the Church.

    I believe you. Thank you for the succinct statement.

    When I was first introduced to Orthodoxy, one of the first things I read was Martin Luther’s view about the need for the sacraments, particularly the sacrament of confession. And I was completely thrown. Any Protestant today would write it off as a weakness in Luther due to overexposure to RC teachings. But as soon as I read it I began to see how barren and destitute the Protestant faith actually is.

    Perhaps it is so weak and feeble because there is no concept of monasticism within Protestant thinking. The best they can manage is occasional prayer groups. Through this discussion, I am beginning to have the idea that the monastics are somewhat like the liver or perhaps the digestive system. One cannot survive (let alone be healthy) without these.

    Would that be a somewhat correct assessment?

  80. TLO Avatar
    TLO

    And thanks to all who have responded. Education is rough on a seeker of wisdom but you have taught gently and well.

  81. Dino Avatar
    Dino

    TLO,
    that is a most astute observation that few would reach from just an online discussion – there must be something more behind..
    In fact, it is also a ‘classic’ saying in Orthodoxy that monasticism is (not just the liver but) the heart of the Church. Even its enemies quickly realise this -if they are discerning-, and fight monasticism first, knowing that without a heart the whole body will quickly be affected.

  82. Michael Bauman Avatar
    Michael Bauman

    Also TLO, you asked up stream if monks became monks seeking to be the least. Yes, they do. That is exactly what they do.

  83. Mary Lanser Avatar

    Dear TLO,

    Because I am a papal Catholic, I’ve been somewhat reserved in my responses to you and also because I was waiting for Father Stephen to weigh on any one of your comments so that I could follow his lead, since I do not know you or about you really.

    The small part that I can bring to this, with regard to your concerns is a lifetime lived in the discernment of a religious vocation, a good bit of exposure in both the Catholic Church and in Orthodoxy, through family and through friends, to those in the monastic life, and as I noted earlier, I have struggled with the institution called Church.

    So one of the first things that comes to mind in listening to you is that one of the most important aspects of discernment in faith is to be settled in a regular prayer discipline and a regular habit of reading Scripture. What that looks like of course changes from person to person. The amount of time you have to devote daily to prayer and to being consciously aware of the presence of God helps to proportionally increase our ability to see things clearly and act prudentially. The more time we have to listen to God the more we will hear. The more quiet the mind and spirit, the stronger His movement in us, if we are patient and do not meddle or push for something that we want. In other words, there comes a time in every seeker’s life to stop seeking and simply begin to be in His presence.

    How does that comport with your experiences?

    In Christ,

    M.

  84. TLO Avatar
    TLO

    Hi Mary,

    Thanks. As far as reading the Bible, I’m probably better off not. My upbringing included daily family Bible study (my earliest recollection of this was at the age of 4). My dad was a pastor-wanna-be in my early years, and associate pastor at a couple large churches from when I was 12 onward. He later became a full pastor and much later became an Orthodox priest, but that was when I was already beyond recall.

    We were at the church whenever the doors were open and when they weren’t there were always church people at our house. I do not mean this figuratively. We had an “open door” policy. People were expected to just walk in whenever whether they were invited over or not. And they did.

    My Bible exposure would qualify as super-saturated.

    Also, I was raised with literal interpretations of everything in the Bible. I have learned in recent years that some parts are supposed to be allegorical but I honestly cannot tell if that is true or not. I see no point, for example, in mentioning the ages of Adam, Seth, Enosh etc if they were not actual literal people. And since it is not readily obvious what is literal and what is not, I find it impossible to take seriously. Add to this the thousands of sermons that contain the phrase “What he really meant…” and you can see my disinclination to try to tackle it.

    As for prayer, I kinda fail to see the point. I spent 43 years praying, begging god to speak to me, to change me etc. Niente.

    So, after the shipwreck I found myself on this island. It’s quite nice and peaceful, for the most part, but I wouldn’t complain if god actually showed up, even in a canoe.

  85. Dino Avatar
    Dino

    TLO,
    I am sure I have said this before, but once more wont hurt:
    God always shows up. Dependant on a myriad factors, it could be tonight, next Easter, every single night, or just on my death-bed…
    It shouldn’t make a difference! What I do when I do not see Him, not even with a “canoe”, is what really matters… I won’t go into the consequences of our response to that singularly important encounter of one’s life here, I just simply say that along the road of this life, we can only prepare for it while not seeing Him. This preparation of course is what enables us to see Him in all things, especially our brothers and sisters, prior to seeing Him face to face. But let’s remind ourselves of the mystagogy:
    Those who have not seen and yet believe are the blessed ones…

    He certainly does make Himself known through His Spirit in the Orthodox Church in a measure according to one’s humility and purity (far exceeding it in actual fact)…

  86. dino Avatar
    dino

    I would also come clean by adding that THAT encounter, even though it is what the soul desires the most, must not ever be demanded. This is clear patristsic teaching – there is a time and a place which we do not know and He certainly does… In fact nothing must be demanded. We pray not to ask or demand but to be in the presence of Him who is already the fulfillment of all our requests.

  87. Mary Lanser Avatar

    Dear TLO,

    Our conversation has hurt in it but it’s also a bit like a rose budding and starting to unfold. If you don’t mind, I’ll keep asking a bit more. Can we know a first name for you? No matter if you don’t want to do that.

    What about the gospels? Can you see them just as stories. I would never say that the gospel of Luke is my favorite. When asked I always say Matthew but when I open the book, I always reach for Luke. It’s odd. I have spent most of my life poor and I don’t know if I could have made it without Luke’s lilies and ravens. I love the letter to Hebrews too…the part where he talks about faith. I love poetry.

    What about the psalms? What about the story of Elijah…not the history, just the parts where he talks to God…what about Job talking to God?…Moses talking to God?…

    What about the story of the Cross or Acts?…Don’t you miss any of it? I’m not doubting the harm that’s been done in your life, but it seems to me that once those stories find a home inside of you, it would be hard to dig it all out. Isn’t it possible to build new memories in a new man? 43 years is a long time but I was only a few years younger when I began to make my way back.

    What are your experiences with Orthodoxy?

    In Christ,

    M.

  88. mary benton Avatar
    mary benton

    Hi TLO (John)

    In response to your way earlier question to me “having great reverence” for monastics is because I believe they are indeed the heart of the Church, as Dino noted.

    A beautiful expression of this in the RC tradition came from St. Therese of the Child Jesus (she entered the Carmelites at age 15 and died at the age of 24). She wrote:

    “When I had looked upon the mystical body of the Church, I recognised myself in none of the members which Saint Paul described, and what is more, I desired to distinguish myself more favorably within the whole body. Love appeared to me to be the hinge for my vocation. Indeed I knew that the Church had a body composed of various members, but in this body the necessary and more noble member was not lacking; I knew that the Church had a heart and that such a heart appeared to be aflame with love. I knew that one love drove the members of the Church to action, that if this love were extinguished, the Apostles would have proclaimed the Gospel no longer, the martyrs would have shed their blood no more. I saw and realized that love sets off the bounds of all vocations, that love is everything, that this same love embraces every time and every place. In one word, that love is everlasting.

    Then, nearly ecstatic with the supreme joy in my soul, I proclaimed: O Jesus, my love, at last I have found my calling: my call is love. Certainly I have found my place in the Church, and You gave me that very place, my God. In the heart of the Church, my mother, I will be love, and thus I will be all things, as my desire finds its direction.”

    And so “the great reverence”. (I am called to view all of God’s creatures and creation with great reverence, of course, but my ability to see is quite limited. A heart “aflame with love” I can glimpse more readily perhaps.)

  89. mary benton Avatar
    mary benton

    An additional note about God “showing up”:

    Many of those considered closest to God, including Therese above, experienced significant and painful periods where God seemed absent.

    Monasticism is indeed a “harder” calling (thank you, Fr. Stephen, for that well-phrased clarification). When God seems absent to me, painful though that is, I have many other ways to distract myself. I can manage to throw myself a bit more into my job, hobbies, etc. without abandoning my overall commitment to God.

    However, one who has given up everything this world offers to be with God must suffer horribly when they cannot sense God’s presence. Yet, they continue to love and pray. A harder calling indeed. And their response to the absence experience is, IMHO, a major part of what makes them the “heart”. Their love for God is not based on a high from experiencing His presence. It is a trek through the desert on which they continue, presence felt or not.

    Their prayers and embrace of this suffering strengthens the rest of us, modeling the Way of the Savior.

  90. dino Avatar
    dino

    Mary Benton,
    that is an excellent point I am glad you made! It is something that those lacking all experience of staying put in a setting of no distraction for God, know nothing off. The experience of absence in SUCH a setting and with such a vocation is unimaginably more difficult.
    The advise though (as I have mentioned here before – by Elder Aimilianos)is: you must live his absence, like his presence. You cannot see Him, but know that He see You…

  91. TLO Avatar
    TLO

    Mary L – I don’t want to bore the rest of the community with stuff that I have explained to them in the past but I would welcome a dialogue via email if you wish. The address is slave2six [at] gmail.com. (the “slave2six” is because I have a wife and five daughters…)

    Mary B – Thanks. I am beginning to get a better understanding of monasticism and I can see your point. Albeit, there are many times I wish I could take a vow of poverty and bail on all these responsibilities. Heck, solitary confinement is sometimes attractive. (Although, if I had my druthers, I’d love to go live in a cabin in the woods and get supplies in town maybe once a month.)

  92. Dino Avatar
    Dino

    TLO,
    another important aspect of Orthodoxy (and certainly of its monasticism) is that of noble respect for one’s freedom – well beyond what most people imagine. It is rare even in these circles due to our apostasy, but it is a telltale sign of a true application of Orthodox tradition.
    I have been amazed at the ‘scandalous’ respect of my freedom -even to sin- by those I consider to be the most formidable examples of living Orthodoxy (e.g. Elder Porphyrios, Elder Aimilianos and his disciples who have become Spiritual Fathers…)
    This is rooted in a knowledge that our motives (our inner motives) need to become pure and free. If they are not, it will obviously, be pointed out to us when -needed.
    In fact what you just mentioned -solitary confinement as an ‘attractive’ bail out from responsibility- is a classic one which would be given attention since the motives there are so suspect.
    However, if our motives to resist sin are not “free”, (e.g. we ‘self-oppress’ without having yet understood that our own deepest desire is to not sin) then we might be shocked to hear the advise ‘go and sin – do what you desire freely’ (when the discerning Elder knows there is NO OTHER WAY for us to comprehend that we actually WANT NOT TO SIN, than to taste of its emptiness…
    it’s a tricky point to explain without misunderstanding it, (especially since its total application by a Spiritual Father would require a ‘clairvoyant trust’ in God’s providence for one’s spiritual children) and it is a valuable one we rarely see in the Western application of the Gospel…
    There is no other way to ascend to that stature, dignity, nobility that this most profound sense of freedom bestows!
    I have witnessed these men who are “entirely liberated, with all the nuances that this word can carry” (as they said about Elder Aimilianos for instance – “a man who has found freedom by drinking from the refreshing fount of faith, living the love of God)!

  93. Michael Bauman Avatar
    Michael Bauman

    Dino it has been my observation that most people don’t want freedom. We want someone else to do it for us. That is one of the tricky things about obedience. It is not the act of a slave but one that comes from real freedom or at least a desire to be free and taking responsibility for or own sins not out of guilt or pride but because we want to be free.

  94. TLO Avatar
    TLO

    Michael – It can be clearly demonstrated that people are much happier when they have fewer choices. From a neuro-psychological standpoint, when one is offered more than a few choices (of anything) the brain immediately goes into “regret” mode as it mulls over the choices that it could have made but did not. Likewise, complete freedom to do whatever one wants is completely overrated.

    Sometimes I miss Mayberry, you know?

  95. Michael Bauman Avatar
    Michael Bauman

    The freedom is not one of choices. It is in knowing that the choice on makes is in accord with God. What St. Paul and St Gregory of Nyssa called moving from glory to glory.

    The anxiety of modern times is one of too many choices all virtually assured to be wrong. Thus the “flee to the woods” desire.

    It is also why the Orthodox Church with its time tested spiritual method makes saints.

    Man is in rebellion so obedience is difficult. Even doing the right thing the right way has consequences. But the more one can learn to give glory to God, the less bumpy the ride.

  96. TLO Avatar
    TLO

    The anxiety of modern times is one of too many choices all virtually assured to be wrong. Thus the “flee to the woods” desire.

    Unless you believe that being constantly accessible (e.g. via cell phone), communicating through social networks and being bombarded with varying religious and political worldviews is morally incorrect or that simply tiring of being financially responsible for 5-8 other human beings is “wrong” in some way, I tend to disagree. The “flee to the woods” is a desire to simplify life. It is not a desire to escape a life of crime or some such.

    …the more one can learn to give glory to God, the less bumpy the ride.

    I don’t know that is a correct statement. Nor is it really a desired mode of living for the Christian, is it? Which of the Saints had “less of a bumpy ride” as a result of their choices? Seems to me that the opposite would be true.

    Perhaps I am misunderstanding what you are saying.

  97. Dino Avatar
    Dino

    I think “being constantly accessible (e.g. via cell phone), communicating through social networks and being bombarded with varying religious and political worldviews….. being financially responsible for 5-8 other human beings is not ” isn’t ‘morally incorrect’ – far from it. It is just that if I have chosen to be a plain soldier, I need to be prepared to do all these (more “mundane” if you like) jobs at the back. Whereas, if I had chosen to be in the elite special forces, I would be fighting at the frontline.
    The first is ‘harder’ because it’s more of an effort to become zealous and all-consumingly driven amongst so many distractions and so much lukewarm babble, and easier because of the lack of imminent danger. The second is harder fro the obvious intensity of the front-line, and easier due to the fervent patriotic zeal that such a position might bestow?
    If the whole point is not just MY pleasure, but my entire nation’s liberation from a tyrannical oppressor, St Paul’s words start making more sense here: “I wish that all were as I myself am [unmarried].… To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is well for them to remain single as I do” (1 Cor. 7:1-40).”
    Of course there is no denying that modern city life -especially the very intense sort- of itself makes one, one day say, I need to simplify my life, to flee to the woods…!
    But the fact that upon encountering God’s Grace, even to a quite small degree, a person invariably wants to ‘hide away’ and enjoy Him (even if he then -in his hideout- encounters his own darkness fro a period) is just as natural as two lovers wanting to leave the distracting crowds and enjoy looking into each other eyes in privacy…

  98. drewster2000 Avatar
    drewster2000

    Dino,

    “It is just that if I have chosen to be a plain soldier, I need to be prepared to do all these (more “mundane” if you like) jobs at the back. Whereas, if I had chosen to be in the elite special forces, I would be fighting at the frontline.

    The first [in the world] is ‘harder’ because it’s more of an effort to become zealous and all-consumingly driven amongst so many distractions and so much lukewarm babble, and easier because of the lack of imminent danger. The second [monastic] is harder fro the obvious intensity of the front-line, and easier due to the fervent patriotic zeal that such a position might bestow…”

    Thanks for this. A very good picture for looking at their differences.

  99. TLO Avatar
    TLO

    Dino – Are you a monk?

    The second is harder from the obvious intensity of the front-line, and easier due to the fervent patriotic zeal that such a position might bestow

    I think you are saying the same thing regarding a “bumpy ride” that I was trying to say.

    upon encountering God’s Grace a person invariably wants to ‘hide away’ …

    I’ll have to take your word for that. Your words make me think of “Till We Have Faces” and I am Orual or perhaps the Fox.

  100. Dino Avatar
    Dino

    Hanen’t read “Till We Have Faces”, my wife loved it, i should ask her about the characters you mention 😉

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Subscribe to blog via email

Support the work

Your generous support for Glory to God for All Things will help maintain and expand the work of Fr. Stephen. This ministry continues to grow and your help is important. Thank you for your prayers and encouragement!


Latest Comments


Read my books

Everywhere Present by Stephen Freeman

Listen to my podcast



Categories


Archives