05.23.09
Voluntarism 2
Apparently there is also a school of thought attributing voluntarism to God. I get uncomfortable in these types of formulations. I don’t know if God’s will is the source of His goodness, for example. It may be, but God is the source of His own will. It starts to sound weird if you say God willed Himself into eternal existence at whatever state His existence is. It reminds me of an animated show I saw as a little girl. I can’t remember what show it was. I’ve had the assumption it was The Little Prince, but I’ve seen a live action version recently and that wasn’t it. Maybe the animated version was different. In this snippet I remember a little boy grabbing the waist of his trousers in the back and lifting himself up into the air. As a little girl I thought that was pretty special, but now I just find it confusing.
When people in theosis levitate, it is God’s energies that are lifting them up. As far as Christ’s Resurrection and Ascension, was it His own divinity raising Him up, or the Father and the Spirit’s action? I have been recently struck by the idea that Christ “floats” on the praises of angels and people. I can’t remember the phrase in the services that sparked that idea. If He is dependent to some extent on the worship of others, whom He created to benefit from worshiping Him, and whom He endows with grace to worship Him… now I’m getting uncomfortable with a controlling view of His will again. I have to stay on the human side, and still need clarification on how Christ’s humanity was raised, I can’t comprehend the divine part of it.
05.22.09
Voluntarism
According to Wikipedia, “Voluntarism is a descriptive term for a school of thought that regards the will as superior to the intellect and to emotion. This description has been applied to various points of view, from different cultural eras, in the areas of metaphysics, psychology, sociology, and theology.”
From what I can tell, they are putting the will, the intellect, and emotion into three different categories. By superior, I think voluntarists mean that it is more involved in determining reality than the other two. You can will that something exists even if it is irrational or psychologically uncomfortable to you at the same time. To me though, not having read Schopenhauer at all, but having liked his name since I watched most of My Dinner with Andre, it is placing the human will, in addition to being too compartmentalized from the intellect and emotions/heart, in the role of the source of reality. Perhaps this is what Dr. Hart was against in Christ and Nothing. It is very relativistic, making anyone able to invent their own reality. If they are doing this without their intellect or heart, then they must be completely random and haphazard. Surely they are being influenced by something, and not just choosing what to believe or do willy nilly.
To me, (if that’s not too relativistic, actually it is to the extent that I am not purified, and am governed by my ignorance and passions, which could be categorized under the intellect and the heart respectively, but I will to be influenced by obedience to God’s revelation, even if I sometimes defy myself, but that’s giving too much away in a parenthetical.) To me, according to my memory and understanding of St. Maximus the Confessor, our will is more ontological than that. I wont go into the gnomic will and the mature will in detail as I have already done on this blog, but our wills are made by God to choose God freely. A will that doesn’t choose God is acting against nature and is deluded by sin. Delusion involves the intellect and sin involves rationalization which covers up dark desires, which again, are foreign to our nature, but captivating none-the-less. Therefore, if our minds and emotions are darkened by passions, we often choose, or will, incorrectly, against our predestined nature in Christ. So the choice is, recognize that things aren’t right and will to turn to God to be illumined by grace, which will ultimately lead one to the Orthodox Church and theosis/union with God, if we stay on that path. Or we can choose to invent our own reality based on our darkened demon-influenced intellect and passions, or seemingly random willi-nilliness.
Back to the source of reality. God is ontologically real, whether we choose to believe so or not. Our wills are ontologically made to choose His life and to know Him in purity and blessedness. But we are free to choose otherwise, and I believe that this happens when people love their dark delusions more than they love God. This also has to do with not wanting to face the hell of humiliation that comes when our sins are illumined. Though the deluded state is also hell. Its delights are ontologically temporary and the hangover becomes more intensely painful than the pleasure was. Humility and love for God helps one bear the humiliation. As St. Silouan said, “keep your mind in hell and do not despair”. This is a choice. But it doesn’t have to stay painful. The three youths didn’t feel the flames, and they, like Peter in the water, had the choice to concentrate on Christ instead.
Skirt Shopping
Levi definitely does not understand what I have in mind.
I have an 8 year old who might could get by with that.
This from LL Bean is better, but it’s linen and high maintenance. The others are too short or too fitted.
This from TravelSmith is a little frumpy, but it looks comfortable and is loose and long. I’ve gotten stuff from them before. They’re a bit pricey, but the quality’s pretty good. I just wish it were brighter blue; the brown one’s just as dull.
Now this Travel Smith is quite cute, but of course it’s on clearance and is only available for tiny people. Tiny people don’t need a skirt like this, hence why tiny’s all that’s left.
05.20.09
Western Orthodox Saints
It had been Archbishop [St.] John’s [Maximovich of San Francisco] work with the Orthodox Church of France that had originally evoked the fathers’ interest in ancient Gaul. After the Archbishop’s repose, the fathers remembered his love for Western Orthodox Saints, his work to spread their veneration among Orthodox Christians and his last words to them about the veneration of St. Alban of Britain – and they saw this as his testament to their Brotherhood: a call to honor and make known the Saints of the West. In fulfillment of this testament, they published material about Gallic Saints in The Orthodox Word as early as 1969: a Life of St. John Cassian by Ivan Kontzevitch, followed by an article on “The Foundation of Orthodox Monasticism in the West by Fr. Seraphim. This was a subject which until that time had not been broached by Orthodox writers in the English language. As a result, the fathers’ efforts did not go without some surprised and even indignant response. When they were working in their bookstore only a few months before their move to the wilderness, a young “traditionalist” Orthodox scholar came in and began disparaging the new issue of The Orthodox Word. On the cover of this issue was a photograph of the monastic isle of Lerins and the words “St. John Cassian and Western Orthodox Monasticism.”
“There is no such thing as ‘Western Orthodox Monasticism,’” the college student objected vehemently, and began expounding his “traditionalist” Eastern Orthodox point of view. Fr. Seraphim listened politely to the arguments, but they appeared rather adolescent in his eyes. He had no part in such an anti-Western bias – the same bias which provoked others to disparage Blessed Augustine at every opportunity. It was spiritually debilitating, he knew, for Westerners to cut off their native roots for the sake of an artificial “Eastern” purism. From Archbishop John he had been given the task of restoring Western Christians to their own Orthodox heritage, and this he intended to do whatever his detractors might say. (Father Seraphim Rose, His Life and Works by Hieromonk Damascene p. 703,4)
I have not read many Saints, eastern or western, except for little excerpts, mostly of their lives, available here and there. I know that there are legitimately Orthodox Saints in the west, such as St. Patrick of Ireland, and other popular ones like St. Brigidh of Kildaire, but I am still worried about Blessed Augustine. Mostly what I’ve read is secondary reviews about his Platonism and speculations, but the snippets I’ve read from him personally bother me, and I don’t think it’s just because I’m biased against Calvinism. I can’t dig up the passages I’m remembering right now, and I do intend to read more for myself, as well as Fr. Seraphim’s more specific review on him in another book, but he seems to have a punishing view of sin, and too much of a distinction between righteous people and unrighteous ones that seems too black and white and condemning. Nothing I’ve read draws me to read more. I have the same feeling about Dante and Milton. The little bits I know of bother me concerning misogyny, courtly love, and punishment rather than self-imposed consequences. But every educated person needs to read them and that is my main motivation. Meanwhile though, Dostoevsky is higher on my list. And Bleak House by Charles Dickens.
05.19.09
On a different note
When thou, O Lord, wast baptized in the Jordan,
The worship of the Trinity was made manifest!
For the voice of the Father bear witness to thee
and called Thee his beloved son!
And the Spirit, in the form of a dove,
confirmed the truthfulness of his word.
Oh Christ, our God who hast revealed thyself
and hast enlightened the world,
Glory to Thee.
(for some reason new widgets appeared in my sidebar, including duplication of my categories. WordPress must be doing maintenance.)
05.17.09
A form of Godliness
This passage gives me peace about how everyone is made in the image of God, while maintaining the distinction that we do not worship the same God as other religions.
Having presented [in Fr. Seraphim's book, Orthodoxy and the Religion of the Future] the testimony of three Orthodox Christians confirming that the Orthodox do not at all have the same God as the “monotheists who deny the Holy Trinity, and that the experiences and powers provided by the pagan “gods” are satanic in nature, Fr. Seraphim wrote by way of disclaimer: “All this in no way contradicts the words of St. Peter, that God is no respecter of persons; but in every nation he that feareth Him and worketh righteousness is acceptable to Him (Acts 10:34-35)…. Those who live in the bondage of Satan, the prince of this world (John 12:31), in darkness which is unenlightened by the Christian Gospel- are judged in the light of the natural testimony of God which every man may have, despite this bondage.” (Father Seraphim Rose, His Life and Works p. 677)
But let not peace be my only guide,
In Chapter Four, “Eastern Meditation Invades Christianity,” Fr. Seraphim examined various attempts to develop a syncretism of Christianity and Eastern religions, particularly in the area of “spiritual practices.” He began by looking at the books Christian Yoga and Christian Zen. In the former, the author described how the “Christian Yogi” becomes relaxed and “ready to tremble at the touch of the Holy Ghost… ready to be taken, to be seized.” From his knowledge of Patristic sources, Fr. Seraphim identified this state as a form of spiritual deception, characterized by a striving for “holy and divine feelings,” a mistaking of self-intoxication for a “state of grace,” and an incredible ease in becoming “contemplative” and “mystical.” (p.678)
“Zen is probably the most sophisticated intellectually, and the most sober spiritually. With its teaching of compassion and a loving ‘Cosmic Buddha,’ it is perhaps as high a religious ideal as the human mind can attain – without Christ. Its tragedy is precisely that it has no Christ in it, and thus no salvation, and its very sophistication and sobriety effectively prevent its followers from seeking salvation in Christ. In its quiet, compassionate way it is perhaps the saddest of all the reminders of the ‘post-Christian’ times in which we live.”
[...] In connection with Zen, Fr. Seraphim spoke of the “pragmatic fallacy” which had been mentioned earlier by the Orthodox convert from Hinduism. This was the non sequitur, found in many Eastern religions, that “if the practices work, they must be true and good”; that is, nothing need be taken on faith – experience is the criterion. “Without any theology,” Fr. Seraphim wrote, “Zen is no more able than Hinduism to distinguish between good and evil spiritual experiences; it can ony state what seems to be good because it brings ‘peace’ and ‘harmony,’ as judged by the natural powers of the mind and not by any revelation – everything else it rejects as more or less illusory.”
These comments are reminiscent of what Fr. Seraphim had written over a decade earlier on the “cult of experience.” Now, however, he was speaking openly about the danger of demonic manipulation. “When experience is emphasized over doctrine,” he observed, “the normal Christian safeguards which protect one against the attacks of the fallen spirits are removed or neutralized, and the passiveness and ‘openness’ which characterize the new cults literally open one up to be used by the demons.” (p. 679, 80)
05.16.09
What’s wrong with enjoying a home-grown carrot?
(from this conversation.)
People who lived at the skete noticed that Fr. Seraphim paid no attention to the taste of food. As Thomas Anderson later recalled: “Fr. Seraphim didn’t enjoy food or care what it tasted like. He just ate to get enough energy to keep going, like fueling up a car. He ate whatever was put in front of him, without putting anything else on it, not even salt and pepper. And when it was his turn to cook, he prepared the most simple and basic food possible. When he cooked spaghetti, for example, it was just tomato paste and pasta, with no spices in the tomato paste. (FSR,HLaW, p. 635)
This asceticism is consistent with their choosing not to have electricity, except for the generator that ran the print shop, or running water,
Alexey Young recalls being present at some of these translating sessions, “Fr. Seraphim was a good linguist. Often when I would come to the monastery, he would be simultaneously translating while reading aloud into a tape recorder at the trapeza. It is an amazing thing to be able to do this. I know that conscious choices had been made not to have electricity, a telephone and such things at the monastery, so I couldn’t resist teasing him about the tape recorder after one of the meals. I went up to him and said, ‘Fr. Seraphim, I don’t think they had any battery-run tape recorders at Optina.’ He looked first at me and then at the tape recorder, and said, ‘Well, God has sent it to us, so we’ll make use of it until it breaks.’”24 (p.642)
I know a person can go too far in their asceticism if they form a gnostic view that all creation is evil. Origen seems to have gone too far in this way. I think it is important to appreciate and gratefully accept what God has given us and to offer it back in thanksgiving. As a lover of nature, I have enjoyed, and have sought to acquire beautiful surroundings. I also enjoy good-tasting food. Too much so. Fr. Seraphim very much appreciated the beauty of Platina, but his eye was on the work of the Lord, not on earthly comforts. He accepted the tape recorder and enough food to further the Kingdom of God, but I don’t think he would have accepted a comfy mattress. He slept on boards. He was not as strict an ascetic as St. John (Maximovich), mainly because he required more sleep and food to be able to work. This shows that one size does not fit all. God’s will for some may be to have a nice, comfy bed and tasty food, but I don’t think we should so require these things that we are devastated, lost, or bitter if we don’t have them.
05.15.09
Prayer and Communion
If a person belonged to a non-canonical church but was humbly searching for the right way, Fr. Seraphim generally saw more hope in him than he did in a person who belonged to a canonical body but was self-righteous about his jurisdictional membership. Regarding a pilgrim who was preparing to become a seminarian, he wrote: “After years in the Metropolia and its mentality, he has become zealous for the Synod,* ["*I.e., the Russian Church Abroad."] but we found him rather full of himself and not too aware of the more sensitive problems in our Church today.”13 (FSR,HLaW, p. 589)
Given Fr. Seraphim Rose’s prejudice against the Metropolia, at first I thought he was talking about the Synod of Bishops in the OCA, but the notes say RCA. I’m tying the above with other attitudes Fr. Seraphim had about Bishops in general. He seemed to take them with a grain of salt and did not believe in absolute mindless subjection to them. Examples include his choosing not to be ordained as a Priest (up to this point in my reading anyway), even at the suggestion of Archbishop John and his successor Archbishop Anthony, and the entire Synod of Bishops. He instead sought their blessing for his vision, which he received. I think similarly, he did not see the need for frequent Communion, citing how many desert hermit Saints did not partake frequently. Communion is indeed pretty tied to the hierarchy of the Church. He was very grateful however when Bishop Nektary or Archbishop Anthony served Communion at the Skete.
He instead seemed more concerned about a daily continuance of the life of the Optina Monastery in Russia with its cycle of prayer. He energetically sought out its direct spiritual inheritors and the recorded teachings of the Elders. I have not really studied the issues surrounding the debate over frequent or infrequent communion, but I think Fr. Seraphim is right to stress our being characterized by our prayer lives and deeds, which will also hopefully develop in us the proper sensitivities.
05.14.09
“I have no psychology, no control”
(from a Charlie Chaplin movie that I don’t recall the title of. [I have no prepositional skills] He and the guy were in a shack that was falling off a hill I think.)
There was a danger, Fr. Seraphim realized, of being harmed by contact with the sick ["people seeking sanity: drug addicts, people with criminal records and serious emotional problems, confused youth who had no idea what to do in the world or how to adjust to it."], and therefore he believed the Brotherhood should do nothing to openly attract them. “But if they come,” he affirmed, “we are obligated to help as we can. Perhaps even our Brotherhood – through no doing of our own, for we have no talent in this line – may become a kind of last recourse for such people, who cannot thrive in a more ‘normal’ environment such as Holy Trinity Monastery in Jordanville.”
“We have no talent for healing,” he continued, “no psychology, no spiritual power and insight. All we can offer is work in Christ’s vineyard, and the Truth of Orthodoxy to all who will recieve it. Work and prayer (the monastic cycle of services) to exhaustion will give the devil little chance to attack through the mind and may make him use cruder methods (fire, loss of property, etc.) which can be more directly fought.” (p. 615,6)
I am coming to believe that instead of trying to figure everything out, just giving up and repairing to prayer and simple obedience provides the most peace.
05.13.09
Classical Music and Church Music
According to the Holy Fathers, music is the form of communication closest to the soul, and thus the first thing that the soul perceives upon entering Paradise. The most spiritual music, of course, is that of the Church. As Fr. Herman told the brothers, “The most refined classical music leads the soul to prayer, but the music of the Church is the music of prayer itself.” It was for this reason that Fr. Seraphim did not seek to listen to classical music during his years as a monk, even though this music had once had such a profound formative influence in leading him to God. In his first years at the skete he listened to classical music not at all. It was ony later, when the children and young monastic aspirants came, that classical music tapes were played in order to refine the souls of the younger generation, many of whom had been corrupted by the carnal rhythms of contemporary cacophony.
(Father Seraphim Rose, His Life and Works p. 604,5)
