A Particular Scandal

A character in a Peanuts cartoon once declared, “I love mankind! It’s people I can’t stand!”

The statement accurately describes our problems with the particular. It is easy to love almost anything in general – it is the particular that brings problems.

Nowhere could this be more true than with God. Speaking about God in the abstract is extremely common – after all – He is “everywhere present, filling all things.” He is all-powerful, all-knowing, all-good-  all, all, all. The very nature of such speech is generalized and generic.

However, it is impossible to experience anything in general. For the great scandal or stumbling block of particularity is not so much God but us. We are inescapably particular – it is an inherent part of being human. We are circumscribable; we are limited; we are local. And we chafe at such limits. We prefer that the ego of modern man become the measure of the world itself. That which does not interest me does not exist.

The abstract, generalized God is the god of modernity. The generalized God cannot offend – there is nothing offensive about Him. But just as He cannot offend, neither can He be known because there is nothing there to be known. We only know particulars.

Everything by which we know God is particular. The ultimate particularity is Christ Himself – the God who can be circumscribed, drawn, pictured, nailed, spat upon and crucified. 

The same is true of our ongoing relationship with God. One aspect of classical Christianity is its interest in icons, shrines, oil, bread, holy places, bones, etc. For modern people all of these things are confusing and even offensive. 

At the very least, “holy objects” seem superstitious. But holy objects and holy places are deeply part of the particularity of human existence. For example, we do not love “food in general.” We have a favorite food. And our favorite is very likely far more specific. We have a favorite food cooked specifically by someone we know, perhaps even associated with a place and time we ate it. All of the memories we have in our lives are most often tied to specific people, places and things. We rarely remember simply that “I felt great then.” Our lives are extremely concrete.

The God whom we know – gives Himself to us in the particular. In classical Christianity that particularity is the very heart of the faith. For Christ is not merely God-become-man. He is God-who-became-aman

This particularity, according to the fathers, is the precise reason for making icons, because it is the property of a man that he may be depicted. An icon of Christ is proof and witness of His incarnation and particularity. We make icons in order to proclaim that God became a man.

But the Orthodox know that even an icon can become yet more particular. There are not just icons of the Mother of God, but the Vladimir Mother of God; the Iveron Mother of God; the Kazan Mother of God; the Tikhvin Mother of God, and so on. And each icon, though depicting the same Mother of God has its own unique story. And those unique stories continue as believers encounter that icon. It was the Vladimir Icon of the Mother of God that protected Moscow from Tamerlane in 1395, etc.

And, of course, all of this seems like so much fuss over something that should be more general more generic

I have, from time to time, been invited to pray at certain public events. It has become common in America to be given “guidelines” for such prayers, often requesting the minister to be “generic” in his prayer (not proselytizing, or speaking of “the deity” in a manner that might give offense). Such guidelines were recently ruled unconstitutional though they’ve been around now for several decades.

It is, of course, the height of modernism – the desire for a God who gives no offense – the generic god. 

God is transcendently particular. He is the ultimate particular. For God alone is alone. He is not one of something of which there are two. He is the only God and thus the Transcendent Particular. 

And He leads us to Him (in His condescension) through particular places, things, words, people. But He does not condescend to become generic, for the generic cannot be the bearer of the Particular. An icon can be holy, but Art can never be. A man can be holy, but humanity can never be. 

And the Particular Who invades our lives through the particularities that we encounter is never generic. For the generic is no-thing – it is nothing. There is no generic, only the comfortable imaginations born of our desire to avoid the discomforts of the particular.

The more God is devoid of the particular, the more we reduce Him to a concept – even reducing Him to something like a natural resource: water, light, air, God. In such a position, God remains available (everywhere), inert and ready to be ignored or accessed, depending on our own requirements. The generic God is thus the ultimate consumer product. In a consumerist culture, there will always be pressure to move God towards the mode of “available resource,” a mere symbol for our own selfish desire for transcendence. Such a God underwrites and validates my “spirituality,” but makes no demands that might be occasioned by His own particularity.

The particularity of God will be seen as an increasingly offensive reality within a consumerist culture. Such a Particularity too easily assaults the universal claims of all consumers. So-called “non-denominationalism” is simply an ecclesiological expression of a generalized God in which nearly all particularities are seen as “man-made,” and merely reflect consumer desires. Any elevation of the Particular in religious terms is easily seen as an effort to control access to a generalized God (“You’re trying to put God in a box”). 

Conversion to classical Christianity requires the difficult acceptance of the Particular God (and thus a particular Church). That acceptance includes the rejection of the etiquette of the generic. You will offend your friends and family – for the acceptance of the Particular casts judgment on the general whether it is uttered or not. 

But this difficult acceptance is a necessary thing – for the generic God is – ultimately – no God at all. It is merely a god, a cipher for a cultural notion. The generic god cannot save for it can only offer something in general. 

Eternal life is an invitation into ultimate Particularity. Accept it, and you will become a Person, a true human being.

About Fr. Stephen Freeman

Fr. Stephen is a retired Archpriest of the Orthodox Church in America. 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

121 responses to “A Particular Scandal”

  1. Dino Avatar
    Dino

    Matthew,
    The classic Orthodox (patristic) counsel is to: “be united to all while being fully detached from all”.
    Such healthy detachment is proof of union to God, evidence of humility, confirmation of His Grace being the actual source fuelling one’s authentic love for neighbour (and not some latent manifestation of our ego).
    And it’s not just others we “need to take a break from in order to focus on self”, but our very self too. The right focus on self -we could say– is focusing on Christ knocking on my heart’s door.
    Attachments (to self and to others) are all part of the same problem – i.e.: that we are not “Christ-centered” but self-centered (the quintessence of the fall) –, all our attachments and idols have usurped the centre of joyous attention within our self where God’s throne ought to be.

  2. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    Matthew,
    These issues (how to love, whom to love, how to repent, etc.) vary a great deal depending on personality, experience, etc. It’s why the spiritual life cannot be lived from books (or even blogs!) but in a parish context, with a priest, communion, confession, etc. There are neurotic components to most personalities – the trauma we may have experienced – which makes certain topics (like sin) to be almost toxic to deal with at first.

    On Hopko’s Maxim’s – I’d never noticed the absence of forgiveness of others. That’s a good catch. What I would describe as my “takeaway” from that massive list, is a theme of simplicity and patience – doing little things, day to day.

    The Orthodox life is not “hard” or “complicated.” Peasants have done it for 2,000 years. I think it’s difficult, in some ways, in that it frequently contradicts many modern habits of thoughts and practicies.

  3. Matthew Avatar
    Matthew

    Thanks so much Dino and Fr. Stephen.

  4. Simon Avatar
    Simon

    Such healthy detachment is proof of union to God, evidence of humility, confirmation of His Grace being the actual source fueling one’s authentic love for neighbour (and not some latent manifestation of our ego).

    I have never really understood this idea of detachment. Frankly, when I hear Athonites talk about detachment, it is extremely analogous to Buddhist and Hindu speech about detachment.

    I love my son. And I am extremely attached to my son. The other day he day he broke something of mine that I had told him to leave alone. I went over to where he was and I asked, like parents will, “What did you do? Didn’t I tell you to leave that alone.” He immediately responded with tears and shrugged shoulders. Of course, that breaks your heart, so I said to him “Listen, it’s okay. You are much more important to me than that. I just need you to listen to me.” And he came back later after thinking about it and he asked “Am I more important than your computer?” Yes. “Am I more important than Marvel and Daisy (our dogs)?” Yep. “What about you?” Definitely. “Mommy?” I think so. “What about Jesus?” Oh, boy…then there was this whole other discussion.

    Within myself I distinguish between the idea of Jesus and Jesus as he is. No idea I have about God is more important than my son. That would be narcissistic. Neither do I believe that there is an in principle clause that says “Well, you have to say it is true because it is true in principle.” I think if you are a monastic and you have left everything behind–all family, friends, village folks, desires to marry and have a family, then you have to be utterly detached otherwise you might not stay in the monastery. Under the rigors of monastic life and being under the obedience of an Abbot, one might start longing for home. In that case the only way to succeed is a radical detachment.

    However, if someone were to insist that my love for my son is coming between me and God. Then God will have to exercise some understanding. Honestly, I don’t know who God is (Keep in mind I am saying this in the spirit of St. Chrysostom). I can’t tell if I know God or if I only know my own ideas about God. And frankly my ideas about God are pretty shoddy.

    I will continue to be a savage servant to my son until God makes it possible for me to do otherwise.

    I say that with the deepest respect and I am open to being corrected.

  5. Dee of St Herman Avatar
    Dee of St Herman

    Forgiveness is somewhat buried in Fr Thomas Hopko’s 55 maxims. He recommends saying the Lord’s prayer several times a day. Within it is the asking for forgiveness and forgiving others.

  6. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    Simon,
    I think of Abraham and the sacrifice of Isaac – and I think of my own children and grandchildren, whom I love fiercely. Abraham’s story is written in crayon – it too easily passes into the theoretical. But I think of one of the modern translations of the Lord’s prayer (quite accurate, I believe) that says, “Save us from the time of trial” – as a rendering of “Lead us not into temptation.”

    I could not “sacrifice” any of my children or grandchildren. But, I have had to give a child to God here and there – letting them go because it was something beyond my hands that belonged in His.

    These are the most frightful sort of things we can imagine – and I don’t think they’re very healthy for us. At some point, my children will be the ones who have to let me go – and to allow our relationship to become what it must be. I pray to make that easier for them in various ways.

    I know that my Father took care to deal with things that needed to be forgiven before he left this world – and as the years pass (it’s now 12 years) – it becomes easier – the burden of his absence becomes easier to bear – and his love for me becomes ever clearer. I am deeply grateful that I have been blessed in my life to love a number of souls fiercely – desperately. It makes life a bit messy but I would not want it otherwise.

    I have great regard for monastics. However, I believe that life with a family and all that comes with it is at least as hard, if not harder. But the monastics pray for us and many of them understand that we are all on the frontlines. It’s a single battle. What difference does it make where you are in the trenches?

  7. Simon Avatar
    Simon

    It was not my intention to disparage the monastics. Not at all. Only to say that some of the direction regarding attachment seems more poignant there than elsewhere. Monastics literally leave all attachments behind. Isn’t that right?

  8. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    Simon,
    Yes, they do, after a fashion. Ideally, “attached” to God. But, at is purest expression (I think of St. Sophrony or St. Silouan), there is an attachment to the whole world that is a truly hypostatic existence. I think that we have in them a true union even with the souls in hell (and with Christ who is there among them). They “lose their life to save it.” They lose a merely psychological/emotional existence and gain a hypostatic existence. This is love in its highest form. Christ on the Cross says, “Father, forgive them” and, I believe, is speaking of the whole world (from beginning to end). He has gathered all of us into Himself and takes us with Him – into hell and heaven.

    “I will never leave you nor forsake you.”

  9. Holly Avatar
    Holly

    Matthew,

    I don’t know if this is accurate for you as well, but I realized that in my Protestant upbringing, “sin” was essentially “something someone else didn’t like”. It was a wrong or perceived wrong against another human.

    In my growing understanding of what is meant by “sin” in the Orthodox context, it isn’t so much the action – the proverbial bite of the apple — but what comes before the action. In essence, it is the act of forgetting that God is always there and always loving.

    If I were to posit what it meant by death to the self, I’d say the “self” is the part of us that forgets.

  10. Matthew Avatar
    Matthew

    Hello Holly.

    Both times you have posted something about the Orthodox understanding of sin I have smiled. Your understanding makes sense and warms my heart. That said, I think Fr. Stephen is correct when he says that the trauma we have experienced can make “sin” very toxic to deal with. I know I have been through trauma in my personal life as well as in my spiritual life. I see Orthodoxy on one side saying “Here I am … this is what I am … this is what you should understand and experience … I am good.”, but then on the other side are my former theological paradigms and my personal sufferings which I run the Orthodox understanding through which of course makes problems. I know my “grid”, so to speak, confuses things … but then I am a work in progress like everyone else. I am simply trying to come to God and have union with God through Jesus Christ without having to feel so much guilt and without always having to say “Oh woe is me!”. I know I need to step more regularly into an Orthodox Church, but as I have posted before the bishop/priest at my Greek Orthodox Church is not very open to me converting for some reason. So … I carry on.

  11. Dee of St Herman Avatar
    Dee of St Herman

    Matthew,
    While I don’t know the particular circumstances involving the priest you refer to. I am familiar with the various circumstances that inquirers and catechumens have as they adjust to Orthodoxy. The words you used to say that the priest doesn’t want you to convert doesn’t seem complete or it is more complicated than you present.

    Most often the conflict arises when the inquirer has expectations, often from experience in a Protestant background, that they can tell the priest they are ready to convert but on their own terms.

    This approach, of letting an inquirer decide when they are ready, is not part of the Orthodox ethos anywhere as far as I know. I would not ascribe to it as a decision against you but rather expression of an understanding of what is involved in an authentic conversion. The process is indeed slow, which is why Fr Stephen encourages patience with yourself and I would suggest with the priest, also.

    In your shoes, I was told an indefinite period for my catechism and eventual Baptism another person was Chrismated relatively quickly. I trusted the priest’s decision. I trusted the that the process of conversion was in the hands of God whom I trusted and love.

    I want to encourage you to go to the Orthodox services, if you have the heart to do so. That is how conversion begins—just being there.

  12. Matthew Avatar
    Matthew

    Thanks Dee.

  13. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    Matthew,
    You are in Germany – which is an area within Orthodoxy of which I have no experience. Many of the Churches in Europe are quite ethnic and homogenous. Some have almost no experience with converts. It’s just a matter of history. That, of course, is quite foreign to the American ethos – where conversions have been a commonplace throughout our history. Attend Church, be patient, go slow. There are some within the Orthodox ethnic world who actually have no idea what Protestants think or believe. It’s a learning experience for them as well.

  14. Dee of St Herman Avatar
    Dee of St Herman

    Matthew,
    Following up with what Father said, please recognize you are welcome here on this blog, a ministry of the Orthodox Church in the US extending outward to the world.

    Your questions and concerns are edifying and helpful to all of us. Please be patient with us (and me!).

  15. Matthew Avatar
    Matthew

    Fr. Stephen – You are correct about Orthodox Churches in Europe, at least as I have experienced them.

    Dee – Be patient with ME! 🙂

  16. Owen Kelly Avatar
    Owen Kelly

    Fr. Stephen,
    I’ve heard you mention a few times “a truly hypostatic existence,” normally in relation to Sts. Sophrony and Silouan. Could you explain this further or point me to an article where you do? It seems to be a recurring theme, and I’d like to learn more. Thank you.

  17. Dino Avatar
    Dino

    Simon,
    I have inquired for years, and to the most authoritative living, contemporary saints (in Athos) I could get access to (this was 30 years ago now) in person, about clarifying this very matter of attachment vs love, of the need to healthily “hate” [Luke 14:26] in order to healthily love.
    In a nutshell, the most common enemy of love, is indeed ego-driven attachment. This is not just because the first tends to say: “i love YOU” whereas the 2nd says “I love you”.
    The deeper reason is that authentic love, the love that God is and which His grace can move human hearts to also have, is not to be found in ‘humans’ of themselves, but in God.
    This means that my love towards neighbour can never be but a “direct line from me to them”. (My love towards God needs to be such a direct line however).
    Love towards neighbour must be a “two way line”, one that first goes ‘upwards’ towards God and then goes ‘downwards’ (from Him) towards neighbour.
    I remember being shown this little upwards and then downwards vector outlining the two lines of a triangle whose base-line (the direct line) is not used.
    This two-way line, means that the union with neighbour is also like the horizontal shaft of the Cross – representing authentic union with creation –, that is attached upon the longer, vertical shaft of the Cross (representing union with the Creator).
    This mystery of the shape of the Cross (a vertical line that holds the entire structure upon which a horizontal line rests) depicts the proper love of both first and second commandment, which ought to always be in this very hierarchy, which explains the difficult to understand ‘warning’ of Christ “If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple” [Luke 14:26].
    This way, our ‘love of neighbour as ourself’, is proof of our love of God with all our being – it is in fact, the most tangible of all proofs…!
    At the same time, our so called simultaneous “hate” (ie: lack of toxic attachment) of neighbour, is also proof of our first love of God. It is also proof of a far deeper love of neighbour than what is to be found in ‘natural relationships’.
    I actually remember how overwhelmed I was at receiving this ‘detached’ love from a saint, and how all ‘natural’ loves I had experienced all my life before, paled in comparison.

  18. Simon Avatar
    Simon

    Dino, thank you for the response. I think every healthy parent-child relationship is focused on the well-being of the child in the manner of “i love YOU” as you put it. I seems very natural. Thanks, again

  19. Michael Bauman Avatar
    Michael Bauman

    Matthew, I reviewed J. B. Bury and found my remembrance of him was quite different that reality. My fondness for what he wrote is because his writings and approach were some of my first forays into the nature of history and time.

    He is a “rational-progress” person rejecting God and the Incarnation. The value he would bring is clearing up the confusion that has since accumulated around such views. He was a Greek scholar and, in other work, looked at Byzantium. He is generally accurate in his facts, but leaves a lot out and his interpretation is missing much. So forget my recommendation.

  20. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    Owen,
    The best resource on this is Christ, Our Way, and Our Life, by Archimandrite Zacharias. It’s a wonderful window into St. Sophrony’s teachings.

  21. Owen Kelly Avatar
    Owen Kelly

    Fr. Stephen, thank you!

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

  1. Dear Father, Thank you for these beautiful words. I dare say someone can’t write beauty unless they have seen it,…

  2. I agree with your words here in comments about the Silver Chair Fr Stephen!

  3. ”More than that, every heart should beg to see the Beauty, to read the Icon of the Gospel of the…

  4. Margaret, I sometimes think of the scene in The Silver Chair (CS Lewis, Chronicles of Narnia), where the children have…


Read my books

Everywhere Present by Stephen Freeman

Listen to my podcast



Categories


Archives