The influence of humanity upon God

[M.C. Steenberg]

Sinjin wrote:


Matthew, are you saying that since the Holy Trinity acts in accordance with human free will that it does things that God would not do if there was no human free will?

Of course we are unable to know the inner mystery of God's will and activities -- God acts as God will act, and the relationship of those actions to the will of humanity (or other 'natural' happenings in the created world) ultimately goes beyond our understanding.

Yet God has revealed to the Church that, in a relationship of great mystery, He is 'moved' by the will and actions of man. As examples of this we have Abraham, whose fervent intercessions caused God, according to the text of the Septuagint, to 'change His mind' with regard to the response He would meet out on Sodom and Gomorrah. God caused gourds to grow and great fish to act in ways that they might otherwise not, specifically in response to the actions and spirit of Jonas. Elias prayed for God to alter the ways rain might fall upon the earth, and so God made it come to pass. Perhaps most pointedly, God destroyed His initial creation in a great flood due to the rampant sinfulness of man, which caused God to be 'sorry that He had made man upon the earth'. This was an action which Scripture itself professes to be profoundly counter to the desire of God, but which He in His mercy knew to be the best course of action in response to mans growing epidemic of sin.

At the end of the day, it is always possible to suggest that these things happened 'the way God intended' from the outset: that if God could 'do it all over again', history would follow the same course as being the perfect model of His design. But Scripture and the Fathers present a God who, in a mystery beyond logic and certainly in a profound paradox, allows His created man to have a very real stake in the flow of history. God Himself hears and acts upon the prayers of men. Humanity's actions can --and do-- effect God's actions; it is a part (a very mysterious part) of the divine dispensation of true freedom. Even God Himself will not force His will upon humanity; and if this means that humanity's obstinance sets up walls around which God must move in order to reach out to it, then this does God. 'And so the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us'.

I hope this might be of some assistance.

INXC, Matthew

[Owen Jones]

Very nicely put, Mathew, although one wonders how we could think otherwise. Why, pray, afterall, if we are not in some sense trying to and assuming that we can direct God's will in some way. The Church simply says that we cannot buy ourselves into His good graces through superstitious incantations or sacrifices serving as bribes. But that is a distinction that ought to be clear on the face of it (while much more opague in practice).

[sinjin smithe]

As I am starting to learn in Orthodoxy, there are more questions than answers it seems. Matthew I want to reply to what you said and perhaps change the subject a bit. I understand that you are saying that man has been given a role in history by God out of his love for us.

Yet God has revealed to the Church that, in a relationship of great mystery, He is 'moved' by the will and actions of man. As examples of this we have Abraham, whose fervent intercessions caused God, according to the text of the Septuagint, to 'change His mind' with regard to the response He would meet out on Sodom and Gomorrah. God caused gourds to grow and great fish to act in ways that they might otherwise not, specifically in response to the actions and spirit of Jonas. Elias prayed for God to alter the ways rain might fall upon the earth, and so God made it come to pass.

This response got me thinking and brought a question to my mind. You are saying that it is possible for mind to influence God via prayer. Yet God does not always answer our prayers? Why is that? Many of my evangelical friends say that God knows what is best for us and that he wants the best for us, in other words if it is in God's will then he will do it. Is there any truth in this statement?

Perhaps most pointedly, God destroyed His initial creation in a great flood due to the rampant sinfulness of man, which caused God to be 'sorry that He had made man upon the earth'. This was an action which Scripture itself professes to be profoundly counter to the desire of God, but which He in His mercy knew to be the best course of action in response to mans growing epidemic of sin.

This statement here is curious to me, wasn't Christ the remedy for our sin and the epidemic of sin? If God sent his son as the cure to the epidemic of sin why then did God act in the manner that he did?

[M.C. Steenberg]

In his above post, Sinjin wrote:


This response got me thinking and brought a question to my mind. You are saying that it is possible for mind to influence God via prayer. Yet God does not always answer our prayers? Why is that? Many of my evangelical friends say that God knows what is best for us and that he wants the best for us, in other words if it is in God's will then he will do it. Is there any truth in this statement?

This is a good question, Sinjin. It is also one that reveals a strong difference between Orthodoxy and some types of Protestantism with regard to the understanding of God's will.

Some Protestant traditions proclaim that God's will is always dominant and perfectly expressed in every activity that happens in the world. Everything that happens is 'God's will', or 'part of God's plan'. This is certainly born of a desire to recognise God's power in the universe and to stand in recognition of the revealed fact that nothing in the world happens apart from God's presence and power.

Yet in Orthodox theology, much is understood as happening that is decidedly not 'part of God's plan'. This tends to make some Protestants nervous, as it goes against much of the teaching in their various traditions; but for the Orthodox there is no question that the realised economy of human and cosmic history is filled with events that are counter to God's plan. These are all the result of the great gift of God in creating humanity: the freedom of the human will. A will is not truly free if it can only do that which God desires: it is free only if it is able also to do that which God does not desire. St Irenaeus of Lyon once wrote: 'Man, being endowed with reason and in this respect like unto God, having been created free with respect to his will and with power over himself, therefore has control over himself, and as such sometimes he becomes wheat, and other times chaff'.

Humanity's freedom, which Scripture and the Fathers proclaim as a central gift of God to man and one which God is unwilling to deny, means that humanity has the ability and power to act against God's will. And it is 'cheating', if you will, to soften such a mysterious concept by suggesting that these contraventions of the divine will are actually in accordance with that will -- that humanity's sins and mistakes are actually 'part of God's plan'. Orthodox theology plainly teaches that all sin, all wrongdoing, all action that does not lead to the perfection of the likeness and the Kingdom, goes against God's will.

God of course has the power to 'stop' such contraventions of His will, but he has committed Himself not to do so as part of the convenant relationship He has formed with man in creation. God's love for humanity is so great that the wise Father is willing to allow man the freedom to depart from His way, even when such departure is descructive (which it always is), for He knows that only if humanity retains its freedom in its fullness can it ever truly attain to pure union with Him.

Thus Orthodox theology teaches, with perhaps more pronounced emphasis than many other christian churches and religions, that God has willingly 'entered in' to the economy He has formed. He does allow humanity to influence His actions (a strange mystery indeed!) and He does allow humanity to contravene His perfect will. Neither aspect of His relationship here is understandable to the perfect mind -- we simply cannot comprehend the notion of a perfect and all-knowing God being 'influenced' by a finite and limited creature. Yet God has plainly revealed that His love works in this way.

I hope this might be useful in your reflections.

INXC, Matthew

[Owen Jones]

Regarding the above, Mathew, I like to refer to concrete cases. The people of the Confederacy believed that God had blessed and favored the confederacy early in the war because the South was winning all of its battles (according to the theology that everything that happens has to be in accord with God's will). Later in the war, as the military tied turned, the South lost the will to fight because they believed that God's will had turned against them.

It's quite possible that God was detached from the whole thing. God's detachment and impassiveness is an even harder concept for some Protestants to grasp, who often appear to wish for a God who is a puppet master.

[Moses Anthony]

In reading the above posts the question came to mind, What then is the reason for prayer?, which itself dovetails into The Prayer of The Heart. I intended to reply, but continued checking my e-mail, and thereupon found the article Which Fredrica Mathews-Green wrote for Belief Net.com. I therefore direct you to that web page and her article, which I hope will be of some help in the current discussion.

tus
Moses

[sinjin smithe]

Thank you Matthew for your explanation. Your explanation makes sense to me both on the basis of reason and from personal experience.

God of course has the power to 'stop' such contraventions of His will, but he has committed Himself not to do so as part of the convenant relationship He has formed with man in creation.

I want to react to what you said here. You are saying that God will not impose his will even in events that are contrary to it, my question is what if we(humans) pray to God to stop these contraventions of his will, does he intercede for us? If we petition God via prayer in those situations, will he respond? Correct me if I am wrong but what you are saying is that God will not interfere in the events of humans unless we petition him to do so, right? So God has given man total(in the true meaning of the word) free will. This thought is different from what one hears from many protestants including evangelicals.

Another thing I hear from the evangelical camp is that they God has a 'plan' for our lives, i.e. that God has given us certain gifts and 'calls' us to different areas. My question is, is there any truth to this assertion put forth by the evangelicals and what does Orthodoxy have to say about this?

Since this topic deals with humanity's influence upon God, I have a question in regards to prayer. Sometimes God does not respond to our prayers, my question is why? I know this is difficult to answer and perhaps only God can, but let me add this to it: I have a friend who is an evangelical christian and maintains that when God does not answer our prayers in essence it is because he wants the 'best' for us in our lives.

It seems like I am asking a lot of questions here that seem to compare evangelical christianity and Orthodoxy, but there is a lot I question in evangelical belief, and having many evangelical friends, I want to know what Orthodoxy believes on these issues made by them. Many of them become confuse when I try to explain Orthodoxy to them. Again, I want to thank you for answering my questions.

[sinjin smithe]

In reading the above posts the question came to mind, What then is the reason for prayer?, which itself dovetails into The Prayer of The Heart. I intended to reply, but continued checking my e-mail, and thereupon found the article Which Fredrica Mathews-Green wrote for Belief Net.com. I therefore direct you to that web page and her article, which I hope will be of some help in the current discussion.

tus
Moses

James I went to the site but I could not find the article, could you please link it.

[Owen Jones]

Dear Sinjin (St. John?),

You'll get a much better answer to your questions from Mathew, so forgive me for butting in. I've always felt that contemporary Protestantism exemplifies a kind of infantilism, and your questions reflect that as well. YOu'll probably take this as a personal slur, but the problem is not you, but contemporary protestant culture. It almost seems as if it wants us to remain in an infantile state, bound by infantile questions. These are indeed the questions of a little child, but without the child's innocence, so when as adults we ask these kinds of questions, it typically means that we've led a pretty deprived life and never really grown up intellectually and spiritually.

Part of the problem is the philosophical crisis of modernity which is at root a spiritual problem. There is a tendency to want to see things in totalistic terms and express them in totalistic terminologies. I don't think you will see this in the Christian tradition (by which, I refer to the Biblical and theological record and customs). This is different than the problem of what to take literally. Even literal commandments are not totalistic statements. A child thinks in very totalistic terms. A spiritually mature adult does not. When I make statements like this to conservative evangelicals, they immediately denounce Orthodoxy as being relativistic. Again, the result of their totalistic thinking, their resort to sloganeering, etc.

Orthodox Christianity is an Exodus of the soul and the cosmos. The inner man comprises the greater cosmos in which all of creation is manifest and represented. It is never static. IT is always moving toward something and away from something. Truth is the realm inbetween this world (the passions, material nature, etc.) and heavenly reality. It has its apodictic character, but propositions are not the truth.

This is a philosophical insight that is carried over into Christian theology for obvious reasons, because there is always a tension in Christ's life between this world and the realm of the Father which is beyond this world.

To summarize, modern Christianity, but especially evangelical Protestantism, has immantized reality, whereas Orthodoxy, at least in theory, has maintained the essential transcendent character of reality, of which life is a tension toward.

That protestantism is fundamentally anti-philosophical (and anti-mystical) is part of the problem.

So what are we to do? Just attending liturgy or reading the Fathers will not suffice, if we continue to think in totalistic terms that are anti-philosophical and anti-theological. One thing we need to realize is that prayer and all other aspects of the Christian regime are designed to put us into physical contact with God and His world, to taste and see. Not to comprehend Him. That is impossible, wrong in principle, and deadening to the spirit.

Protestantism goes overboard in saying that we are TOTALLY cut off from God and heaven and heavenly things (we are not permitted to even pray for the dead, for God's sake!). This is the root of secularism, which is a polite word for the destruction of culture.

Orthodoxy offers us a culture. But it's not something that can be manufactured through sloganeering, or any one thing. It's everything. It touches everything.

[M.C. Steenberg]

Sinjin wrote:


I want to react to what you said here. You are saying that God will not impose his will even in events that are contrary to it, my question is what if we (humans) pray to God to stop these contraventions of his will, does he intercede for us? If we petition God via prayer in those situations, will he respond? Correct me if I am wrong but what you are saying is that God will not interfere in the events of humans unless we petition him to do so, right? So God has given man total (in the true meaning of the word) free will. This thought is different from what one hears from many protestants including evangelicals.

Yes, the true doctrine of human freedom is indeed different from such interpretations of 'free will' as one might encounter in many Protestant churches (though there are some Protestant groups who come close to Orthodoxy on this matter; but they are in the minority).

However, I think your above interpretation must be qualified somewhat. I have highlighted in boldface a sentence in your comment that must be specially addressed. While God has made clear His 'integrity' (I hesitate to use such a term in relation to God, but I think my intended meaning here is clear) with respect to the full and genuine freedom of will and action that He has given to humankind, God has also made equally clear that He is not a passive bystander to the course of human life and history. God allows humanity's free will to influence its course and development, but He does not wholly detach Himself from this process.

The cardinal truth to remember in these types of considerations is that put forth by Saint John, who wrote quite simply and succinctly that 'God is love'. God's respect for the freedom of His creation is not bound by some law of philosophical requirement, but by His pure and limitless love for man. God loves humanity, and in love knows that man's proper growth into the Kingdom requires a purification of will that can only come about if it is freely willed by the human subject. Thus does God 'stand back' quite often in the course of human events -- not because He is detached or (God forbid) uncaring towards His creation; but because He is supremely caring and ultimately loving, and in His perfect love knows that choices made freely, even if they are wrong and of sinful heart, have the ability to teach and instruct man to purity in a way that forced actions do not.

But God's love also defines the 'limits' of His 'parental distance'. There have been (and continue to be) many occasions when God has 'stepped in' to a situation that might otherwise have been given over wholly to human freedom, because in His parental love for man He has stood in awareness of man's limitations and proffered necessary assistance. Rarely has such assistance negated human freedom in any absolute sense; but God often teaches and directs the free human subject toward His will.

This concept of God's relationship to human freedom becomes tricky and difficult only when one attempts to bind it to strict philosophical rules or logical principles which have little to do with God Himself. When one remembers that 'God is love' and that all His interactions with humanity are founded in His love, things become much simpler indeed. The parents who loves her child knows that the child must be allows to exercise his or her freedom if that freedom is ever to be perfected and used for positive rather than negative ends. But the same parent also knows when to guide her child's freedom, with varying degrees of firmness and directness, since the child is but a child and does not fully understand the world. So it is with God and man.

INXC, Matthew

[sinjin smithe]

I would like to respond to the comments of Owen. I am 23 years old, I am very sorry if my questions seem 'childish' to you. To make the story short, most of my life I did not attend church and for a good part of it I was god-hater. I did not go to sunday school. However, I felt an emptiness in my soul and I soon found my way back to the church. I do not know much about theology/bible, I would like to learn about it more. The reason why I post here is because this is one of the very few Orthodox message boards on the internet where one can have intelligent discussions. I live in the US and where I live, there are very few Orthodox christians, it is mainly Catholics and Lutherans with some evangelicals. My church started out as a mission and only recently became a parish. My point being that I am only learning about Orthodoxy and because protestant christianity is so pervasive, I would like to know the Orthodox point of view. Is there anything wrong with that? Again, I apologize if my questions seems childish but to be honest, spiritually I am a child and growing...people do not become orthodox christians over night or know everything coming out of the womb. I am not ashamed to admit that is where I am, and if you do not like my questions then do not read my posts.

[Owen Jones]

Please do not apologize. You just didn't read what I said. the problem is that contemporary protestant theology is childish, and those who know nothing different, or not exposed to anything different, get stuck in a childish approach. I made a point that I did not intend it to be a slur against you personally. But please learn from the point instead of being even more childish about it and taking it as a personal criticism. Nor do I imply that I am more of an adult. I just have learned the hard way that most of my questions about God in the past were just self-oriented. Orthodox theology is designed to teach and transform as well, and part of that transformation is to realize that there is much that we will never know and are not supposed to know. This concept is anathema within most of contemporary protestantism, in which "knowing God" is a virtual fixation. We cannot know God. That is a very basic premise of Christian theology from which all else flows.

[sinjin smithe]

Owen I am sorry, I misread your posts. Please forgive me.

Matthew, thank you for clarifying this, the example of parent/child helped me to understand how God is love.

[Moses Anthony]

Sinjin(Ilove your name),

Pardon for me for being the chattterbox today.You can find the aforementioned article at www.Beliefnet.com (http://www.Beliefnet.com). It is on their home page, and is titled "Ancient Faith Modern Life". It's sub titled, "Did God Really Save The Miners"

On the left side of their homepage you will fimd a box titled Search Beliefnet. If you type in "God As Suffering Parent"(minus the quotation marks) you will archive that article Khouria Green wrote Dec.5th, 1999.

tus
M.

[M.C. Steenberg]

Dear all,

This thread is proving quite interesting. Thanks to all who are participating; and especially to those who have shown their willingness to understand (and forgive) some of the misinterpretations of tone that are an inherent part of internet communication! This medium presents challenges all its own.http://www.monachos.net/mb/clipart/happy.gif

Regarding the above discussion on basing one's understanding of the human will and God's activity upon the principle of His transcendent love for humanity and not on any absract philosophical or logical 'rule', one finds in that same idea an answer to some of the other questions that have arisen here, eg:


Sometimes God does not respond to our prayers, my question is why? I know this is difficult to answer and perhaps only God can, but let me add this to it: I have a friend who is an evangelical christian and maintains that when God does not answer our prayers in essence it is because he wants the 'best' for us in our lives.

This is an extremely important question. I don't think I am overstepping reality when I suggest that a large percentage of people who have 'fallen away' from Christianity have done so due, at least in part, to failed reflections upon this question.

But it goes back, again, to the question of the relationship between the human will (here expressed in the supreme act of prayer) and the activity of God. If God actively influences/controls all aspects of the universe at all times (the 'puppet master' concept), then prayer ultimately has no relationship to God's activity at all. If one 'gets' what he or she asks for in prayer, it is only because the prayer happened to coincide with the intended action of God; but that action would just as readily have happened without the prayer.

But, as this conversation has already shown, this is not the kind of relationship which Orthodoxy teaches that God has with the world, or that man has with God in prayer. Goes is always 'in control', in that there is nothing in the universe which can or could happen beyond God's ability to stop it, should that be His desire. But His control is not of the sort that 'dictates' in all instances what will occur in the world. God allows the human will, and by consequence its influence upon the whole natural order, a remarkable amount of 'control' over the events of history -- both for good and for bad. It is a part of the freedom that God has given humanity as the creation in His image, and it is part of the process of purification and sanctification that He has granted as the human economy. And this reality is true not only in its positive sense (i.e. that God has given man the freedom and ability to actively and personally do good), but also in the negative. God's gift of freedom to humanity means that mankind has a fearful power to do wrong; God's love in honouring this gift of freedom means that He will allow such wrong to occur, even though the specific wrongs are against His will. When a murderer kills an innocent person, Orthodoxy will never say 'This was part of God's plan'. Such things are wholly against God's plan. True human freedom means this kind of deviation is possible.

Yet the principle underlying all this, underlying the whole gift of true freedom, is God's love for humanity and His supreme wisdom in bringing humanity to perfection. God lets evil happen, but only because He has defeated the ultimate power of evil. All the wrong that can happen in the world is ultimately of a perfective kind: God can make good of it. There is no power in the world, no misinformed action of the human will, that can overpower God's ability to heal and correct. Since the Incarnation, no action of human freedom can ultimately cause an irreparable separation of God and man, unless the man so desires it always to be. The love of God allows a remarkable freedom to exist in humankind; but this same love also goes beyond humanity's ability to destroy itself eternally. God, just as a parent, allows His children to make mistakes; but He always provides the means for such mistakes to lead to greater perfection.

In prayer, God does listen to the heart of man - always. Part of true human freedom is that humanity is free, too, to turn to God in supplication. And God always answers prayer. What frustrates us is that oftentimes He does not do so in the way we expect or desire, and we thus equate this with His not answering at all. But the paradigm here, too, is love: God's responses to prayer are based on and out of His love. If we pray for that which is not ultimately for our best good, then God's love means that He does not grant what is lesser, but what is better. Sometimes God grants precisely that which we ask, if we ask 'in His name' -- i.e., according to His proper will for our lives. Sometimes God may even grant the particular requests of our prayers when the immediate effects of these requests are not for our good, if ultimately they may help us grow into greater purity. Always and everytime, God's specific actions towards humankind are based out of His supreme love and desire for human perfection.

This means, somewhat paradoxically, that by your prayer you can move mountains; but you may not. God can teach us, through our prayers, much about that for which we pray. Prayer requires that we listen as much as God listens, for in the manner of His response (even if, perhaps especially if in those responses He seems 'inactive') we can learn a great deal about the divine will to which we are called to conform ourselves.

I hope this helps.

INXC, Matthew

[M.C. Steenberg]

Just as a postscript to my too-lengthy post, above, here is a short and perfectly concise word on the subject by the divine Father Isaac of Syria:

'If God is slow in answering your request, or if you ask but do not promptly receive anything, do not be upset, for you are not wiser than God.'

INXC, Matthew

[sinjin smithe]

Matthew you stated a lot but I thank you for explaining and answering my questions. Most of what you said about God and human free will makes sense to me both on reason and experience.

God, just as a parent, allows His children to make mistakes; but He always provides the means for such mistakes to lead to greater perfection.

That is, if we choose to turn to God in our mistakes, correct? If we don't turn to God, then no greater perfection will occur. Am I stating that correctly?

But His control is not of the sort that 'dictates' in all instances what will occur in the world. God allows the human will, and by consequence its influence upon the whole natural order, a remarkable amount of 'control' over the events of history -- both for good and for bad.

But we can turn to God for anything that we want him to intervene or do. That is if we choose in our free will to have God be involved with whatever we want him to be involved in, then he will respond in some manner. If in our free will we choose not to, then God will not be involved. Are interpreting what you stated correctly? I guess what you stating is that God is not a pupper master and has given humans free will to choose to follow him or not to follow him, and that we can have him involved in our lives if we choose in our free will.

However, an interesting question arises. In the bible, we hear of how the apostle Paul was converted from persecuting Christians to being a Christian by God intervening without Paul choosing in his free will to follow God. This does not make sense when you contrast with what you have stated about human free will. But I guess this all goes back to statement, "God is love." I think I have to remember and understand this statement because it does explain a lot.


So God always answers our prayers-This is the first time in my life I have heard of anyone saying this. I have prayed many times to God and it frustrates me because I did not get a response from him in any discernible way. My question is, how do we listen to God? How do we know that God is speaking to us and not satan or our own desires? I realize these questions are difficult to answer here on a message board.

[Richard McBride]

Recalling recent messages on prayer, I do not recall that these thoughts from Evagrios the Solitary have been posted:

On Prayer
One hundred and fifty three texts

Evagrios says:

32. Often when I have prayed I have asked for what I thought was good, and persisted in my petition, stupidly importuning the will of God, and not leaving it to Him to arrange things as He knows is best for me. But when I have obtained what I asked for, I have been very sorry that I did not ask for the will of God to be done; because the thing turned out not to be as I had thought.

33. What is good, except God? Then let us leave to Him everything that concerns us and all will be well. For He who is good is naturally also a giver of good gifts.

34. Do not be distressed if you do not at once receive from God what you ask. He wishes to give you something better -- to make you persevere in your prayer. For what is better than to enjoy the love of God and to be in communion with Him?

The Philokalia; Volume One; p.60

****************************************

Then, at one time Father Justin shortened the above to:

“Be careful of that for which you pray. It may be granted.”

***************************************

richard

[Chad Duskin]

I have often been told that when we ask God for something and it doesn't come to pass that it isn't that God didn't hear us it is just that sometimes the answer is "no" and we refuse to hear it.

[sinjin smithe]

Then, at one time Father Justin shortened the above to:

“Be careful of that for which you pray. It may be granted.”

This is the first time in my life that anyone has ever said something like this in my life. Of course my prayers are never answered so I don't have to worry about this.

[Moses Anthony]

Dear Sinjin, Matthew,

I have been in several Protestant denominations on my way to Orthodoxy; Assembly of God, Presbyterian (charismatic), Southern Baptist, Methodist. Prayer has been of great importance to me wherever I have been. Leaders in each of these religious groups stressed the importance of conversation
(prayer) WITH God. We cannot grow without it! I have also heard it said that "...sometimes His answer is no". God answering our prayers also brings up the point; In what ways does God speak to us? I myself heard a former S.B. say to a gathering of Charismatics, "We are so preoccupied with the miraculous, that we sometimes don't recognize it when God supernaturally answers through the natural".

We ask ourselves about the validity of making requests to God, trying to in some sense of humility to chastise ourselves, bowing to the greater will of God. And yet the Psalmist tells us "...pour out your hearts to God, for God is a refuge for us". Sinjin's last post reminds me of how I felt when seaching for a home for my family when I first arrived here, and constantly came up empty, even when praying. Actually I cried; and in tears I remembered the line of a contemporary song which came from the Psalmists pen, "...and when my heart is overwhelmed, please me to the Rock that is higher than I". For something so personal, so pivotal to the Christian life as prayer, in the silence, and admist the den of so many voices, lead me to the Rock that is higher than I.

The above is more personal experience than the teaching of Orthodoxy, therefore where correction is needed, please do.

tus
M.

[Moses Anthony]

Please forgive, I should have included this in the above post, but alas I forgot.

We do not deny that prayer is above all, a matter of union, i,e; spending time with God. The more time we spend with anyone -in this instance God- the more intimate we become; the easier it becomes to recognize our lovers voice, whenever, wherever and however it is heard. This is why I chose Moses prophet and God-seer of Israel, and so I pursue our Lord and our God.

tus
M.

[Richard McBride]

Saint Macarius of Egypt (300-390) seemed to be speaking (a bit obliquely) to the point of certain recently expressed concerns on the list: “...my prayers are never answered so I don't have to worry about this.”

It was this comment of which I thought on reading Macarius’ words. Macarius was saying what everyone knows, that a person does not have a certainty of salvation. But, “if [anyone] does consider himself definitively saved, this will only be to his perdition.”

From that I was reminded of Billy Graham being interviewed on television several years ago. When asked if he felt that he were saved, Graham very confidently said he was certain that he was. Wow, I thought to myself at the time. Would it not be wonderful to go through life feeling such blessed certainty?

Since that time I have become Orthodox and discovered there is no such certainty -- especially among the Saints. So what, I am wondering, was the source of Graham’s faulty feeling of certainty. Was it similar to what Martin Luther King was saying, in that great speech spoken over the heads of the multitude, on the Mall of the Capitol? Was Graham’s situation anything like King’s, in the extremely ironic moment of King saying, “I have been to the mountain.” The people, heard only a portion of what King was saying at the time. God, or someone, really did take King up to the mountain top. King was shown many things, and among them was his impending death. So, when he told the people that, as with Moses, he would not be with them when they crossed over the Jordan, the people thought he was joking. Watching King from the closeness of the TV camera, it was clear that he was startled over the laughter which greeted this revelation of his impending demise. But he quickly recovered and went on, knowing in himself that they did not hear what he had said, knowing that they thought it was a certainty that he should be with them, that together they would all Overcome.

I wondered if Billy Graham had been taken up that same mountain? For in reading Macarius we must assume that Graham’s visit to the top was with the enemy; it was similar to Christ’s transportation by the devil, perhaps even an offer similar that following Jesus’ baptism in the Jordan.

It is a real problem for religious. Who is it that is inviting them to take the trip? Is it One who believes that Christ is Saviour, or is it one who is a sham and who dreads and hates God? This sort of decision could even be a problem for any of us one day. Macarius also pointed out, “...the spiritual creature [the human] is called by grace to the vision of God and as therefore having a choice ONLY between [1] dwelling in the sphere of God, or [2] in the sphere of godlessness, which is demonic.”

All of this circumvented and rambling trail of words, which is my unavoidable means of thinking, is spurred because of an inherent error in thinking that, “my prayers are never answered”. For indeed, to say this after much that has been said already to this point on the list -- to fall into this despondent way of thinking after reading so much to the contrary, shows that like the people on the Mall of the Capitol, who did not have ears to hear what Martin Luther King was telling them, one is here not paying attention what has been said.

So, since one does not read thoroughly anyway, I feel justified in offering my hopelessly tangled lesson. It too may be tossed out with no effect. But there is one small lesson which may help in deciding who is inviting one up the mountain. It is to ponder Macarius’ words above which warn that in every complex situation, no matter how convoluted its points may seem, there is a simple basis to it. It is always a problem offered either by demons, or it is one offered by God. There is no middle ground of complexity, for such illusions too are a sham. So the solution should be similarly simplified to fit the basis.

...................

In an afterthought, I realize that also what struck me was the double mindedness of thinking that one’s prayers are not being answered. I believe someone has already said that all prayers are answered. What is missing is one’s ability to read the answer.

richard

[sinjin smithe]

How does one read the answer to their prayers? How does one know that they are doing what God wants them to do in their life?

[Richard McBride]

A parable on, “How does one read the answer to their prayers?”

Lest we fall into the idea that literal reading (as in reading the words of scripture) is tantamount to comprehension (much less to discernment in the heart) of that which lies behind the insuppressible meanings of the Word -- lest we imagine that simply reading the Bible is a sufficient end in itself, there is this little story which has long been told about an Episcopalian priest, Homer Rodgers, who, nevertheless, found favour with God.

He had been quite successful in furthering rapprochement between his congregation and the Holy Spirit, and due to that success, he was offered a new post in another city. But he was of two minds about accepting/rejecting the offer. So, he prayed fervently, putting the decision on the Lord’s back. He prayed and prayed, sweating and weeping over the decision. But no answer came. In great exasperation he finally asked,. “What, O Lord, do You want me to do?”

Perhaps the fever of the petition moved the Lord, for finally, an answer did come. The answer was, “Homer, I don’t care which job you take.”

(Father Bill, who served under Father Homer at the time, told me this parable as the truth.)

**************

“How does one know that they are doing what God wants them to do in their life?”

The quick answer is, That only which you may know is: It is certain that you are NOT “doing what God wants”;

And if you are trying to be perfect as the saints, or even as the religious, then the more you struggle under your spiritual advisor’s eye, the more you will discover your own unworthiness: Patch one hole, and three more are discovered; and very importantly, for the religious, it is at this point that the spiritual advisor is necessity itself; for by his wise observance he may guide you away from the resulting despondency of failing even small goals -- despondency itself being a greater sin.

For myself, the life of a religious is yet too burdensome. I am too settled into loving my beautiful family -- provided entirely by the Grace of God; I am too settled in learning through them, to love all God’s children equally. Thank God for these great lessons For my heart is yet too hard to be called into greater service. I learned this tiny bit, not by an email from God, but by what would have seemed (a couple of decades ago) to be a great amount of praying. Of course, the truth is that I pray a minimal amount; hardly enough to get by.

That would be two answers to the second question. A third answer (of many possible answers) to knowing what God wants one to do devolves from what Christ told the lawyer: Love the Lord your God with all your heart and all your soul and all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And the second is like unto it, You shall love your neighbour as yourself.

These two commandments are themselves the answer to, How do you Know? For, in struggling to establish communication with God, one must struggle to do His bidding on earth. It is the complex of issues which mix and match to create each person’s answer to this same question. So, how does one know whether one is doing His bidding? This is a linear question which leads to a closed loop. The answer is at the start.

My own experience is that just as reading is a linear process, speaking requires more than a linear dimension. And being attuned to the quiet intonations from God requires more dimensions than I am able to understand. In any event, the real question is not How do I know? It should rather be, Am I working, struggling, in a direction which will encourage God to open up that channel of communication? You have heard it said, Everything is by His Grace. But did you really hear it? The creature must work at this “hearing”, and work productively (whatever that may mean in the eye of God, I haven’t a clue). Yet, I thank God that none of it is dependent upon that which I know, for I truly know nothing.

Again, what “I know” is never the critical issue. Instead of such wasted imaginings, say this prayer every time you feel called upon to act:

Almighty God, our Help and Refuge, Fountain of wisdom and Tower of strength, who knowest that I can do nothing without thy help and guidance; assist me to divine wisdom and power, that I may accomplish this task faithfully and diligently, according to Thy will (not my own), so that it be profitable to those with whom I deal, and that it work to the Glory of thy Holy Name.
For thine is the kingdom and the power and glory of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, now and forever and unto ages of ages.
Amen.
O Lord Jesus Christ, enkindle the hearts of Thy faithful, I humbly pray, with the fire of zealous love for Thee, that they may ever seek Thy Glory. Amen.


richard

[M.C. Steenberg]

How does one read the answer to their prayers? How does one know that they are doing what God wants them to do in their life?

Richard has already posted a message in response to this question (as usual with Richard's posts, his latest requires to be read through more than once, enjoyably packed full of thoughts as it is). I hope others will as well. Quotations from the holy Fathers and the divine Services would be especially welcome.

But one comment here: the great virtue of 'discernment', of being graced by God to know His voice from the demons', to discern His will from one's own, to know the response to prayer from the delusion of sin -- this is one of the most exalted virtues of the Christian faith. Who among us has grown so close to God that we know Him this intimately? That we are able, with any manner of consistency, to speak with Him as a friend and accurately discern His will in all things? There are very few such people in our day. And yet they do live and are present in this world.

But we are so accustomed to thinking that we either 'do' or 'don't' hear God's answers to our prayers; we have lost sight of the idea that we are drawing closer to God, and in this pursuit we come to know Him more fully. Our discernment grows as we advance along this divine path. It is not an ability with which we start our journey, but one into which we progress in its course.

Especially at the beginning of one's devoted, ascetic life, discernment is at a minimum. This is one of the principal reasons that the Church commands the 'immature' (and we are all immature) to be placed under the yoke and counsel of a wise spiritual father or mother. From the heart and purified mind of the elder comes the discernment that we lack in ourselves, helping us along as we develop such virtue in our own beings. From his guidance one is often able to determine God's promptings and nudgings in a way that he or she would not be able to do alone. The Church offers counsel.

INXC, Matthew

[M.C. Steenberg]

I was reminded earlier today of a quotation that has a bearing upon this thread, since the issue of the free will of humanity was part of our earlier discussion. Regarding that freedom of the will, St Justin the Martyr writes:


'But lest some suppose, from what has been said by us [earlier in the text], that we say that whatever happens, happens by a fatal necessity, because it is foretold as known beforehand, we shall explain this also.

'We have learned from the prophets, and we hold it to be true, that punishments, chastisements and good rewards are rendered according to the merit of each man's actions. Since if it were not so, but all things happened by fate, neither would anything at all be in our own power. For if it is fated that one man, for example, be good, but another evil, then neither is the former meritorious nor the latter to be blamed. And again, unless the human race has the power of avoiding evil and choosing good by free choice, it is not accountable for its actions, of whatever kind they be. But that it is by free choice that men both walk uprightly and stumble, we may thus demonstrate: we see the same man making a transition to opposite things. If it had been fated that he were to be either good or bad, then he could never have been capable of both these opposites nor of so many transitions. But in this case not even would some be good and others bad, since we thus make fate the cause of evil and exhibit her as acting in opposition to herself [...].

'But we rather assert that the following is inevitable fate: that they who choose the good have worthy rewards, and they who choose the opposite have their merited awards. For God did not make man not like other things, for example trees and quadrupeds, which cannot act by choice. Man would be worthy neither of reward nor praise if he did not of himself choose the good but was rather created for this end. Nor, if he were evil, would he be worthy of punishment, since he would thus be evil not of himself, but as one being able to be nothing other than what he was made.'

(Justin, First Apology (http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-01/anf01-46.htm#P3593_620967), ch. 43; my translation)

The martyr writes similarly in his second Apology:

'But we do not affirm that it is by fate that men do what they do, or suffer what they suffer; but that each man, by his own free choice, either acts rightly or sins. [...]

'Since God, in the beginning, made the race of angels and men with free will, they will justly suffer in eternal fire the punishment of whatever sins they have committed. For this is the nature of all that is made: to be capable both of vice and virtue.'

(Justin, Second Apology (http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-01/anf01-47.htm#P3966_758753), ch. 7; my translation)
INXC, Matthew

[sinjin smithe]

I guess to my own question of learning to read one's prayers and doing the will of God in their lives is a metaxy, something that cannot be ascertained within a short period of time.