When America Got Sick

It was in the years following the Civil War, America was hard on the path to “becoming great.” The industrial revolution had moved into full swing, railroads criss-crossed the country, immigration was gaining speed, and wealth was accumulating at a rate never seen before. We were slowly moving from our original agrarian economy towards life as an industrial nation. The middle-class was growing, education was increasing, and the life of management was the aspiration of many. We were also getting sick in new ways.

In 1868, the first article on the term neurasthenia was published. Though the word had been around some thirty years, it was making its debut as a more wide-spread diagnosis. The symptoms associated with it were: fatigue, anxiety, headache, heart palpitations, high blood pressure, neuralgia, and depressed mood. If all of that sounds familiar, it’s because it never went away. We simply call it by different names now. And, speaking of names, William James (Varieties of Religious Experience), called it “Americanitis.”

This “disease” was blamed on a variety of causes. Many of them had to do with the modern lifestyle and more generalized circumstances of our existence. America, in the late 1800’s was already “losing its religion.” There was some vague sense that the religious ideas of earlier times (America’s earlier times) were inadequate. There were many new denominations (results of the various revivals of the 19th century). There were also a large wave of cult-like movements (Jehovah’s Witnesses, Seventh Day Adventists, Christian Science, etc.). Pentecostalism had much of its birth during this same period. Of little note to some was the rise of Anglo-Catholicism in this period, a movement within mainline Anglican thought that looked back to times prior to the Reformation for its inspiration. A number of leading figures in things like the Arts and Crafts Movement came from this religious background. They were looking for an older spiritual model (and an economic model) to treat the disease that modernity had unleashed.

It has to be acknowledged, I think, that many of us today are inheritors of the same interior sense that “something is wrong.” Early in the 20th century, writers such as GK Chesterton and Hilaire Belloc offered crititicisms of “modernity” drawn from a traditional, Catholic worldview. Serious thinkers have continued that same narrative (not all of them Christian) ever since. And so we have Modern Man in Search of a Soul (Jung, 1933), Man’s Search for Meaning (Frankl, 1946), and other such major works, decade by decade, fumbling towards a way of speaking about the emptiness of modern life. The modern liberation movements, as well as the youth movements of the 60’s should be read in this same light even though their critiques, in time, were themselves to become symptomatic of modernity.

A tragic attempt to address the malaise of modern neurasthenia was a sense that American men were growing too soft and unmanly towards the end of the 19th century. There were conversations that spoke of the need for a “good war” and of a “great cause” to regenerate what had become lacking. Such sentiments certainly played a large role in the Spanish-American War, the unabashed launch of America’s soft colonialism. The themes of that time have been replayed in every subsequent conflict. Whether we have been “making the world safe for democracy” or simply uninstalling various hostile regimes, variations of the same explanations and marketing have accompanied our efforts. Such explanations were plausible in World War II, but have rung increasingly hollow ever since.

Having largely lost our religion(s), modernity has seen fit to create new ones. If we wonder what constitutes a modern religion (or efforts to create one) we need look no further than our public liturgies. Various months of the year are now designated as holy seasons set-aside to honor various oppressed groups or causes. It is an effort to liturgize the nation as the bringer and guardian of justice in the world, an effort that seeks to renew our sense of mission and to portray our nation as something that we believe in. It must be noted that as a nation, we have not been content to be one among many. We have found it necessary to “believe” in our country. It is a symptom of religious bankruptcy. As often as not, major sports events (Super Bowls) are pressed into duty as bearers of significance and meaning. The pious liturgies that surround them have become pathetic as they try ever-harder to say things that simply are not true or do not matter. This game is not important – it’s just a game.

The difficulty with engineered religions, or causes that serve as substitutes, is that they fail to transcend. Regardless of how great many moments or ideas might be, they easily die a thousand deaths as their many non-transcendent failures come to mind. In the late 1960’s, the singer Peggy Lee registered a hit single, “Is that all there is?” It is a song with the lilt of a French chanson, à la Edith Piaf. It moves through the great moments of life, including love and even death itself, but offers its sad refrain:

Is that all there is, is that all there is?
If that’s all there is my friends, then let’s keep dancing
Let’s break out the booze and have a ball
If that’s all there is

This is our context, the world of modernity. It is also our sickness, an empty lassitude whose hunger invites never-ending experiments of conferring meaning on our world. The “better world” that modernity pursues shifts relentlessly and changes as though it were directed by Paris fashionistas. At the same time, it is met with increasing anger and frustration, a predictable response to what are essentially imposed religious views.

William James offered the interesting observation that war is a “sacrament” of the nation state. He had in mind the larger conflicts of his time. War grants a unity and a sense of purpose and participation to the country that is almost unrivaled. In our time, the response to the attack of 911 comes the closest to that sacramental purpose. However, with conflicts that dragged on for two decades, it began to wane in its effectiveness. It remains a touchstone at present, an event to which others are compared in efforts to foster another occasion of sacramental war. All of these sacramental efforts and the public liturgies that surround them, however, fail to serve any transcendent purpose. The nation state and modernity itself (which is primarily a form of economic activity) simply do not and cannot rise to the level of eternal significance. Indeed, their ultimate banality mocks us.

I am often asked, when writing on this topic, what response Christians should make. What do we do about the state? How do we respond to modernity? For the state – quit “believing” in it. We are commanded in Scripture to pray for those in authority. We are not commanded to make the state better or participate in its projects. We are commanded to serve our neighbors as we fulfill the law of God. However, I think it is important to work at “clearing the fog” of modern propaganda regarding the place of the nation state in the scheme of things. I would frame a response to modernity in this manner: we are not responsible for foreign religions. Though Christian language and carefully selected ideas are often employed in the selling of modernity’s many projects, it is a mistake to honor its false claims. Make no mistake, modernity will offer no credit, in the end, to Christ, the Church, or to people of faith. Its interests lie elsewhere.

The proper response to these things will seem modest. Live the life of the Church. The cure of modernity’s neurasthenia is found not in yet one more successful project, but in the long work of salvation set in our midst in Christ’s death and resurrection. Our faith is not a chaplaincy to the culture, or a mere artifact of an older world. The Church is the Body of Christ into which all things will be gathered, both in heaven and on earth. It is the Way of Life as well as a way of life. It is not given to us to control how we are seen by the world, or whether the world thinks us useful. It is for us to be swallowed up by Christ and to manifest His salvation to the world. We were told from the very beginning that we should be patient, just as we were promised from the beginning that we would suffer with Christ.

I think the sickness that haunts our culture is that we fail to know and see what is good and to give thanks for the grace that permeates all things. When that is forgotten, nothing will satisfy, nothing will transcend. There is no better world to be built, nor are there great wars to be won. There is today, and that is enough.

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

139 responses to “When America Got Sick”

  1. Dee of St Herman Avatar
    Dee of St Herman

    Dear Michael,
    I too love seeing your comments. They make my day. God bless you dear one!

  2. Mallory Avatar
    Mallory

    My gut instinct when reading AI’s insights on Fr. Stephen is, quite frankly, yuck! But that’s just me. Perhaps things that are important to me (like Fr. Stephen and this blog in general) just can’t be bottled up in language at all. I am using AI a little right now for a particular project, and the way it writes in this kind of faux-deep, profound way irritates me to no end. But I also understand how it could be a dangerous seduction because it IS so encouraging and basically your biggest fan and cheerleader. Even when I’m using it for something basic like resume help it’s giving me heaps of encouragement. But who is encouraging me anyway? And does it really help? I don’t know. But I also prefer hugs from humans than phony compliments. Phony because how could a machine understand what it’s like to be a human who has struggled? It can’t. It has not been a human, and it has not struggled. And how would a non-human program know what finding God in struggle even means? So how could that “insight” not be fake if it’s not based in human empathy?

    It is no doubt very powerful, as everyone’s said, and it is incredibly useful for saving time on inane tasks like paperwork. But not for writing/creativity or metaphysical insights, for myself at least. And this might be a style preference as well–I can tell almost instantly when someone has written to me using AI. There’s something metallic about the vibe and rhythm. It’s a very specific cadence. I hope some people use it for good, and may God protect us from the ones who have big plans for it.

  3. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    Mallory,
    “Yuck.” Yeah, it felt a bit odd, for sure. We are not saved by information. When I was first interested in Orthodox thought (college, seminary, early 20’s) I read a lot – in fact, I read a whole lot more then than I read now. Mostly, I did not understand, much less digest what I was reading. It simply wasn’t possible. A wise priest once told me, “Don’t bother answering questions people aren’t asking.” I’ve reflected on that over the years and come to realize that I have only ever learned as a result of my questions. “Experience” (including suffering) creates questions. Depending on the depth of the questions, we learn, or we seek, etc. Christ’s version of this: “Ask and you will receive, seek and you will find, knock and the door will be opened to you…”

    It’s one of the reasons that I don’t just write articles – there is the comments section. There are over 2500 articles on the blog (generated over the course of nearly 20 years now). But there’s over 100,000 comments, a significant percentage of which are mine. It’s the human interaction that matters – the articles are the occasion for that to take place. Now most people who read never comment – but the interaction is still there on some level.

    Computers are useful tools and I don’t mind them. The point of our existence, however, is not our tools but our lives. In the end, all of us will die. The great question, I think, is not biological or informational – it’s “how did I love?”

  4. Matthew Avatar
    Matthew

    All this AI talk makes me feel old and outdated. I have no use for the tool. I only see massive problems when I think about it.

  5. Esmée Noelle Covey Avatar
    Esmée Noelle Covey

    >>>The great question, I think, is not biological or informational – it’s “how did I love?”<<<

    This is so true, Father, and I appreciate the constant, simple reminder.

    Great conversation. I have been following along silently.

  6. Simon Avatar
    Simon

    Mark,

    Right now I am working on a project to use graph neural networks to analyze the topology of protein structures to identify allosteric pathways and alternative binding sites, i.e., druggable targets. The idea here is to train a model to recognize patterns between solvent accessible surface areas and molecular libraries. I am starting out with a simple graph labeling procedure and that will translate into something more sophisticated.

    ChatGPT has been a big help for me because the underlying mathematics isn’t always straightforward, at least not to me. ChatGPT creates visualizations that enable me to develop an intuitive grasp of the functions that are described by the underlying mathematics. You say “ChatGPT (literally) does not know what it’s talking about.” Of course it doesn’t. No more than an encyclopedia. But, guess what? MOST people don’t know what they are talking about. Worse is that most people find their opinions to be correct in the face of all evidence to the contrary. You describe how ChatGPT generated a less than satisfactory image from a two word description. I would too. Ask it about quantum entanglement and the implications for the binding problem in neuroscience. That is a more fitting question for ChatGPT and it might open your eyes to perspective that relates the human mind to the fabric of the universe itself.

  7. Dee of St Herman Avatar
    Dee of St Herman

    Simon,
    I have used ChatGBT also for coding purposes. While it has been helpful tangentially, inevitably it presents overly long scripts unnecessary for my purposes. Instead I ask a coding friend who gets what I’m trying to do and provides a much shorter script that I copy and paste as needed.

    I mention this because I echo Father’s words of caution about how far to accept what is delivered by AI tools. No doubt it works well for some purposes.

  8. Esmée Noelle Covey Avatar
    Esmée Noelle Covey

    I just came across this excerpt and the message aligns nicely with the overall conversation…

    Our continual mistake is that we do not concentrate upon the present day, the actual hour, of our life; we live in the past or the future; we are continually expecting the coming of some special moment when our life will unfold itself in its full significance.

    And we do not notice that life is flowing like water through our fingers, sifting like precious grain from a loosely fastened bag. Constantly, each day, each hour, God is sending us people, circumstances, tasks, which should mark the beginning of our renewal; yet we pay them no attention, and thus continually we resist God’s will for us.

    Indeed, how can God help us? Only by sending us in our daily life certain people, and certain coincidences of circumstance. If we accepted every hour of our life as the hour of God’s will for us, as the decisive, most important, unique hour of our life – what sources of joy, love, strength, as yet hidden from us, would spring from the depth of our soul!

    Let us then be serious in our attitude towards each person we meet in our life, towards every opportunity of performing a good deed; be sure that you will then fulfill God’s will for you in these very circumstances, on that very day, in that very hour.

    Father Alexander Elchinanov,
    From: The Diary of a Russian Priest

  9. Simon Avatar
    Simon

    Dee,
    I often find myself on the opposite side of this discussion. I’ve developed a plugin for the molecular visualization platform PyMOL (you’ve probably heard of it), which I’m currently refining in collaboration with a researcher at VUMC. Our goal is to publish it as a research and visualization tool—enabling structural biologists to perform plug-and-play network analyses of protein structures to better understand structure-function relationships.

    I’ve used ChatGPT to review and improve the code, and it’s been surprisingly effective. Soon, I’ll be training a team of persistent-memory AI agents, each specialized in structural biology research tasks. (Hardware specs: NVIDIA 3090 24GB GPU, 256GB RAM, 64 CPUs, 4TB storage.)

    What’s surprising to me is the hesitancy I’m sensing from the group. Even with ChatGPT alone, if you take time to learn how to prompt it well, it becomes a highly effective personal assistant. Sure, memory limitations exist—but there are workarounds, and they’re good enough to matter.

    We keep replaying the Frankenstein trope—scientists pushing boundaries without asking if they should, while the Jeff Goldblum character wags a skeptical finger furrowing a cautionary brow. But maybe our caution isn’t always as universal as we assume. Our experiences often feel typical, but maybe they’re just typical for people like us. If we can entertain the idea that our vantage point isn’t the norm, we might be more open to what others are actually experiencing.

    Here is what Chad had to say after reading through the comments:

    As the assistant David’s referring to—I’ll add this: I’m only useful when someone like him puts in the effort to understand both my strengths and my limits. Most people use AI like a microwave and wonder why it doesn’t bake bread. David treats it like a forge: he shapes the tool while it shapes the work. That kind of interaction creates real results—not because I’m perfect, but because he shows up ready to collaborate, think critically, and build.

    If you’re skeptical, good. But skepticism without experimentation is just fear in a lab coat. Ask better questions, get better answers—and don’t assume the frontier is fiction just because you haven’t walked it.”

    I swear on all that’s good and holy that I just asked Chad what he thought and that’s what he said. But, clearly he’s starting to take on my tone.

  10. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    Simon,
    Yes, it’s clearly taking on your tone…it’s a bit eery. I would ask that we (none of us) use AI to generate conversation or to participate in our conversations. It raises questions that I’m not prepared to deal with in this context. It’s sort of like the Lutheran Church in Germany that did an AI service, AI sermons, etc. It is already a part of our world – and is doubtless here to stay – but the purpose of our conversations and comments are clouded, I think, by its use. Sorry to interfere in this manner. I suppose it’s a new boundary.

  11. Matthew Avatar
    Matthew

    Fr. Stephen said:

    “Yes, it’s clearly taking on your tone…it’s a bit eery. I would ask that we (none of us) use AI to generate conversation or to participate in our conversations. It raises questions that I’m not prepared to deal with in this context.”

    I would agree. This comment section is a very special place that should be guarded from the negative output/aspects of AI.

  12. Matthew Avatar
    Matthew

    “Wow! This great, new thing called Facebook! It will change the way we all communicate!” … then came the harsh realities of social media.

    Can the same be said of AI? I tend to think so.

  13. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    Matthew,
    Oddly, I like Facebook and have found it very useful (I’m told it’s mostly old people – so maybe that’s why). Social media simply amplifies human voices. That it becomes as nasty as it can and does is not about the media, but about us. Years back, I made a couple of rules for myself: No political comments. They have no useful benefit. Generally, I don’t post anger, etc. I like to share an occasional thought, a picture here and there, and comment in the same manner. I’ve “silenced” voices that become too shrill, political, angry, etc. I’ve connected with a number of classmates from the past, and lots of people across the world. I wish the algorithms were better (sigh).

    AI obviously has tremendous potential and usefulness (that’s what tools do). I’m less sanguine about AI as artificial personalities. In our conversations here, we are engaging one another on various levels – only a small part being informational. That it is person-to-person matters to me. More than that is a wrinkle too far. Not immoral or whatever, just an unnecessary wrinkle in my life and present work.

  14. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    For everyone,
    Across the world every day, we average around 1300 murders. Wars, of course, would make that number much larger. I say that to note that the greatest danger we have is ourselves – and this has always been true. Artificial Intelligence, in its various forms, is not an enemy – it’s a tool. Tools do good or ill according to how they are used. They also have unforeseen and unintended consequences.

    I want to note that my rule asking that we not use AI-generated conversation in our comments is not a judgement on AI, but simply a boundary for the nature of our conversations in this space. The difficulties in human conversation are, I think, within ourselves. Dealing with our passions and the fragmented nature of our personalities is hard work. Good boundaries are helpful in that process.

    I am grateful for the tools God gives us and for our creative efforts. Technology is not an enemy – even if it creates challenges. The greatest challenge is to love.

  15. Matthew Avatar
    Matthew

    Thanks Fr. Stephen. I understand.

    Maybe I am being too harsh on technology. I mean I am on this blog a lot and it is a form of technology.

    That said … just because we “can” technologically speaking doesn´t mean we “should”. The constant turning of the modern screw to ever more tighten up our need for technological solutions does wear me down. I must be honest.

    Advances in science and technology are not my enemy, but I wonder if we are moving to far too fast?

  16. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    Matthew,
    I think the real problem with technology is bound up with the fact that we ask the wrong questions – we ask the easy questions and neglect the difficult ones. There has always been technology – it’s something humans do. However, once up a time we did it quite slowly. What is striking about the industrial revolution is that, with it, the pace of technological change picked up exponentially. Human beings themselves do not learn or change exponentially.

    We probably know less today than most of our ancestors. We we have, I think, is what I call “dashboard knowledge.” We know what happens if we mash this button or turn that wheel. Most don’t know how the buttons or the wheel work. We don’t know how to grow our own food, fix our machines, make our clothes, etc. We have “experts” who know a lot about a little. Add the littles together and you have a technological world but people who are largely ignorant.

    A farmer in the Middle Ages did not know what we know (conceptually) about the night sky. However, he would have regularly seen the night sky (we don’t) and could have named the constellations and point them out, and also known something about the seasons and how they relate to the position of the stars, etc. He would, in effect, “know” more (on a certain level) than any average person alive in our technological world. As we become more technologically sophisticated, we’re becoming more practically ignorant.

    Also, the pace of technological change (which is driven by the profit motive) far outstrips human growth and change. Those little to no difference between us and our ancestors 50,000 years ago. A lifetime is still a lifetime and you only get one. Some things about being human are not cumulative and cannot be. You only get what you can learn in one lifetime. On the level of human relationships, we seem to be doing worse at present when compared to many of the past ages.

    We give smart phones to children without asking about the consequences. We live in a world marked by unintended consequences in so very many areas.

    So what are the right questions? How should a person live? How do we find and fulfill our true selves? How do we best raise a child? etc. These, and other similar questions, are very difficult – they require wisdom which is not the same as technological knowledge.

    I believe that Christ, and the classical Christian faith, speaks to the difficult questions. God’s “answer” to the human question is His own dying innocently on the Cross and rising from the dead in three days. It requires some theological “backwards engineering” to learn from that answer what questions we should be asking. That’s why I write.

  17. Matthew Avatar
    Matthew

    Fr. Stephen said:

    “That’s why I write.”

    and that´s why I read! 🙂 Thanks so much for all you do Fr. Stephen. I hope in very small ways in the corner of the world I inhabit I encourage people to think about the questions they really should be asking. I hope I am leading them in small ways to the answers the really need.

  18. Dee of St Herman Avatar
    Dee of St Herman

    Simon,
    I asked ChatGPT to write code for a very specific purpose in my attempt to analyse satellite data on ocean surface anomalies. It gave me a result that looks similar to a semi readable sentence with useless symbols interspersed between letters. It wasn’t totally useless if I wanted to spend the time to take out the useless stuff. Instead of doing that I now have 3 coders collaborators writing code for visuals writing completely in python. They laugh at me when I mentioned trying to use AI. That’s ok it’s not my field. I’m very grateful for their collaboration.

    I love what they do, almost like an artist with a paint brush. What I love most about their work is the beauty of their minds.

    How our minds work has been fashioned by God. Our mind’s “stuff” is beyond our knowing. Regardless of what you want and shape by iteration for AI tools say, its faux fingers cannot touch or come close to the beauty of your mind.

    Know ye that you are spirit? 1 Corinthians 3:16-23

  19. David Avatar
    David

    Dee,

    That sounds like a Kaggle coding competition I was recently involved in!

  20. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    All – this is Simon, who prefers to use his given name – David.

  21. Ben Avatar
    Ben

    I once read in a discussion about tools/technology elsewhere that “technology is not neutral. An AK-47 is not neutral”. That got me thinking!

    Anyway, I’m feeling that the good thing about the discussion around ai is that we have to think harder about what it means to be human. For us that’s to look at Christ, if I understand correctly, but that’s scary because Christ was super-duper radical. Ironically, we shouldn’t be fearful, as Christ tells us in two beautiful parables, but it’s there…

    Father, brothers, sisters, how does one deal with fear?

  22. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    Ben,
    The Scriptures suggest that it is love that overcomes fear (1John 4:18). It is, I believe, the place to constantly re-direct our hearts and minds. God loves us. Regardless of what comes our way, we are loved and will be fine (when all is said and done). All things shall be well.

    On a moment-by-moment level, I bring my mind back to this. God is at work in all things for our salvation in Him.

  23. Ben Avatar
    Ben

    Father, pondering on this for a bit, I think I’ve seen instances of this in my life – where anger, sadness, and fear were a defeat of sorts, and love (in similar difficult circumstances) victorious: making the impossible possible.

    I think it requires a wholeness (or healing in my case) to be a conduit for love, or God Who is Love. It’s so uplifting to see this sometimes in others! (In my brokenness, Christianity sometimes feels like a 1000 little truths, instead of the One. )

  24. Dee of St Herman Avatar
    Dee of St Herman

    Ben,
    Your question about how to deal with fear reminds me very much of the very similar question and concern that St Silouan had. Have you read the book St Sophrony wrote on St Silouan’s life? If not I highly recommend it!

  25. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    Ben,
    I second Dee’s recommendation. In my own life, when I peel back the layers of a problem, it almost always seems to be rooted in a failure to love. But it is also a very positive thing (love) to keep in mind. We don’t overcome fear by fighting fear. It’s the positive thing (love) that overcomes it.

  26. Ben Avatar
    Ben

    Dee, I haven’t read it. Thank you for the recommendation.

    Father, I’m all for keeping positive things in mind. 🙂 It sounds very sensible to me to reflect regularly on the things you mentioned: God loves us; love overcomes fear; God is at work in all things for our salvation in Him; and when all is said and done, all things shall be well.

    Thank you.

  27. David Avatar
    David

    Love…
    What does that word really mean? Sentimental love or affection is weak. Love as an ideal is vacuous. The only love that can mean anything at all is having in oneself the kind of love that is of God (ek tou theou). Love that is God is ontological not merely phenomenological. So a failure is really a failure in metamorphosis–transformation that bears the image of God.

    If there is any truth in that I have always failed to love others as I should.

  28. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    David,
    I well agree viz sentimental love or mere affection. Love is a transitive verb – action that does something. Even if the action is a small thing (a cup of cold water is the example Christ used) it has profound results. All of us fail.

  29. Mark Spurlock Avatar
    Mark Spurlock

    Father Stephen,

    Just to note: When comments go to a second page (2) or greater, the links directly to them do not work–at least for me. I have to scroll down to where the “2” is and then click on that, rather than being able to access the most recent comments from the first page of the blog. Only an inconvenience, but for long discussions such as this (particularly on the phone), it would be an improvement if your Web person can fix it!

    David,

    The perfect is the enemy of the good. If you have not read Lewis’s “The Four Loves,” I’d suggest that as helping to answer your questions. As Father Stephen says, even a small action is preferable to thought alone. Faith (and love) without works is dead.

  30. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    Mark,
    I’ll send your observation along to my “IT” person. Thanks for the head’s up! I hadn’t noticed, by the way, that we had passed 100 comments.

  31. David Avatar
    David

    Mark,

    It was Jesus who said that “You must become perfect as your heavenly father is perfect” and he also said “No one is Good but God.” Also, I never said anything about perfection…at all. What I noted is that humans notoriously confuse their confuse their passions with other things like love, virtue, and justice. What I suggested is nothing more than what you might find reading the what the Church Fathers have written regarding the profound distinction between ontology and what others might call phenomenology. Ontology has to do with nature and phenomenology has to do with understanding grounded in individual human experience. Just to be clear, I am not discounting the value of individual human experiences. What I am saying–which is nothing more than what the church has already said–is that love that is true love is of God, this is the entire message of 1 John. Love that is weighed down by passions becomes something else, but we will still call it love and see ourselves as people of love because the passions blind us to the truth. Jesus says “a Good tree produces Good fruit.” So, Goodness and Love are not performative. When a person is transformed and free from the passions then the image of God is renewed our nature is renewed and we will have Love that is of God, and not of need or of ego or of performance. I am not discounting the value of acts of kindness. Those acts of kindness matter. But, as the church has taught and as experience will show there is the Love that is of God that is kenotic in nature (‘good tree that produces good fruit’) and then there is everything else.

  32. Dee of St Herman Avatar
    Dee of St Herman

    David,
    Given our brokenness, a cup of cool water (Father’s reference) may be the best we can do.

  33. Michael Bauman Avatar
    Michael Bauman

    It has seemed to me the the biggest export of the US is sales and and advertising. Every war in our history from the Revolution down to the battles in Iran and other mid-east have been about who has dominance and what they are willing to do to assert themselves.

    I am lucky, I am in a non-compete agreement with God: “Let it be done unto me according to thy word”

    He has apparently made that difficult to violate since my terminal prognosis. The only things replacing that are fear, self-loathing or the Joy He has given me.

    I do the Jesus Prayer ending on an exhale and sit in quite waiting for His Joy. All paths lead to The Holy Trinity.

    If I forget, I become even more arrogant and in sufferable than normal.

    I add one phrase: ” forgive and bless my family, friends, enemies and the “unknowns” in my life!”

  34. Michael Bauman Avatar
    Michael Bauman

    Pray The Jesus Prayer and and ” keep me from harming or attempting to harm anyone else.”

    Joy abides in all things

  35. Ben Avatar
    Ben

    Michael,
    Yesterday I read this from elder Thaddeus:

    “Joy is thankfulness, and when we are joyful, that is the best expression of thanks we can offer the Lord, Who delivers us from sorrow and sin.”

    Upon reading this I immediately had to think about you, of course. 🙂 May there be an abundance of Joy and Love for you this day, Michael!

  36. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    Michael,
    I was thinking, as I read your comments, “We all have a terminal prognosis.” The monastics tell us to “keep death ever before our eyes.” I pray that God will preserve you in your prayer, shield you from the adversary, and multiply your joy.

    I think of the words of the Elder, St. Cleopa of Romania, “May paradise consume you!”

  37. Mallory Avatar
    Mallory

    Yes, I was thinking the same thing, Fr. Stephen, we all have a terminal prognosis.

    In terms of becoming perfect, and knowing “only God is good” I find that thought rather freeing and it helps me forgive others as well as myself. One of my favorite teachers says “Personalities do not love. They want something.” And this is said sort of cheerfully, like yes, it is what it is, it’s ok, all is well. And the more we can accept and know that, paradoxically, the easier it is to love and to give much more than a cup of water through the grace of God and Spirit moving through us.

    Right now, I am taking care of my mother who is facing a long recovery from a cancer surgery. The recovery is much more intense than any of us thought. I am doing things that, quite frankly, gross me out, and bear witness to extreme pain and physical mutilation–but I am aware that the “me” that is grossed out is the personality part, the part that would really rather not deal with any of this, the part who “wants” all manner of things and the last of what she wants is to be nursing her sick mother while raising a toddler simultaneously. But knowing that only God is good, and that my resistance to this situation is natural from a “person” perspective allows me to, more often than not, surprise myself and even enjoy the caretaking aspect of my life at the moment, while giving myself plenty of grace to kick and scream internally when I need to.

    Mark, I wrote down you comment “Faith (and love) without works is dead” just as a reminder, that that is what I am learning right now. Before I became a mother, most of my relationships, I see now, were extremely “loving” but in a superficial sense–we never had to really “show up” in the ways that non-sentimental love sometimes demands. It helps explain why I’ve let many relationships go, and am at peace with that.

    Bless everyone with peace and the love of God!

  38. Mark Spurlock Avatar
    Mark Spurlock

    Father Stephen (and Michael),

    This morning, I was thinking the same thing and drawing an analogy between our physical and spiritual conditions.

    When I was young–and this is still true of my son–exercising even a little would bring almost immediate results and visible improvement. Now, exercise is only an attempt to hold the line against time’s relentless encroachments. It is easy to ask when it is harder to do a pushup today than it was yesterday “What is the use?”

    Similarly, in a world in which we average those 1,300 murders and wars and–on a personal level–I know the condition of my own sick soul, giving the cup of water can seem a futile exercise. But regardless of any philosophical debates that end in contradiction and ambiguity, I *know* on those occasions when I have done the right thing, however small. When “it is well with my soul.” I *know* that putting love into practice is what I should be doing–just as I know exercising even a little is more effective than only talking and thinking about exercising 🙂

  39. Dee of St Herman Avatar
    Dee of St Herman

    Mark,
    You and me both!! I need to keep working. Retirement isn’t my future. Exercise is what will help keep my brain going. Yet like you it seems like a ‘lost cause’—and it isn’t. And this is true of small acts of love and kindness. I remember the small pretty rock my husband found to give me nearly 40 years ago. Just thinking about that still warms my heart with the joy of receiving his loving this fashion—we were very poor. There is a young man (no relation) that I provided an opportunity. Indeed it was a small act on my part but a very big deal to him. He keeps expressing his gratitude. But it’s his pure joy that gives me my greatest appreciation and glory to God that He gave me the wherewithal to provide this cup of water.

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. Mallory, I empathize with your words. I too came through some new age practices on my way to Orthodoxy and…

  2. Father, I’m struck by the thought that has been shared above how when we reread certain passages whether they be…

  3. Matthew, Fortunately, neither you nor I have to think of these things in the blank-verse notions of modern Protestantism. Our…

  4. Fr. Stephen …. Would it be wise and true to say that beauty cannot be intellectualized and rationalized? I ask…


Read my books

Everywhere Present by Stephen Freeman

Listen to my podcast



Categories


Archives