Mortification of the flesh

[Byron Jack Gaist]

What is Orthodox doctrine on mortification of the flesh? Do Orthodox Christians ever wear "hair shirts" or flagellate themselves?

This is part of a broader question I have concerning pain:

Theologians also explain that the redemptive value of pain makes pain itself lovable, even though by itself pain is a physical evil.

The above quotation is taken from a wikipedia article on mortification of the flesh . Is this a permissible statement to make in Orthodox theology? If not, then do we consider pain to be evil or good? What about pleasure (I'm not talking about sins, but simple pleasures like enjoying a good meal or a glass of wine on a non-fasting day? Are bodily pleasures good or evil in Orthodox theology?

I already have some thoughts on these questions of course, but would be interested in hearing what others think, or what the Church teaches.

In Christ
Byron

[nurse-aid]

Flesh is not physical body, but degree of fall...

We cannot killing flesh itself (body) it will be suduside...it will be agaist GOD's will for us to live...

Yet in order to lower degree of fall, and higher up soul in its original state...we must exspirinece pain when our fleshy fallen state will suffer...

and women gave birth in pain...and child came into this world in pain, and we will die in pain...if not physical, but in pain of separation soul from body....which is pain itself...becuse it is unnatural for us...it is result of the fall...

So the painfull injection give you cahnce to live...so we are choose this...
So the less fleshy (fallen) our nature become the more endure we have to that pain...(martyrs are example)

So not the body guilty of fall, but it is result of fall...so to killing body, means to put others fault on it...and this is not right...

To kill degree of fall, purifying is what make body clean...and not opposit...
becuse many peole destroying own body, by many things and yet it is not make them Saints....

But Saints those who worked hard on fleshy spirutuasl state of own soul...and by the Grace of God...cleanse their hearts...and sanstify their body along with it....

But everyone is different in bodily state...and that is why in nneds of diferent help in order to stive to the spirutual...so in this case it is depends of induviduals how they restain own body in order to help spirit prevaled...

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

Dear Byron,

Our faith is ascetic which means that to have a life in Christ we must always be denying ourselves. But of course what we should be denying in ourselves is what is selfish. Here discernment and spiritual guidance is crucial for it is very easy to step over the line from a struggle against selfishness to a masochistic and misplaced fight against oneself. We also must be aware that our struggle goes one step at a time according to God's judgement- to try to defeat selfishness in total in ourselves at one step is also to invite disaster and delusion. Indeed it is a form of pride. And selfishness!

So to answer your question- yes some saints have had a very severe form of asceticism- St Seraphim of Sarov wore a heavy chain of some sort. He also prayed on a rock for 1000 days. But he could also endure the severe beating of thieves who left him half-dead (the attack left him stooped over for the rest of his life) with forgiveness and love. In other words Orthodox asceticism is always measured according to the actual spiritual state and path of the person.

About the quote above- I'm not sure- it sounds off to me as if pain itself was the means of salvation. If this is what was meant it's definitely wrong.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

[nurse-aid]

Ascetism Mother of God had nothing to do with killing own body and starving and on...outside things...it is MUCH higher state, deeper....were body alredy do not exist...as St.Ksenya...she didn't do to herself those things...she simply didn't not feel cold russian winter and luck of sleep, being in body yet, but beyong it...which of course impossible for us to understnad... but she didn't acuare this things, by killing body...she simply die ones in flesh...not in body..

[Edward Henderson]

Dear Byron,

I think self-flagellation has never been encouraged in the Orthodox. Self-denial, or accepting sufferings and hardships certainly manifest themselves in the lives of the saints. Father Raphael provided a good example. I know that Elder Joseph the Hesychast used to hit himself with a cane when he felt himself tempted by passions, but the "rule" of regular self-flagellation is not part of the Orthodox Ascetic tradition.

[Byron Jack Gaist]

Dear Fr Raphael and Edward,

Thank you for your responses. I also feel that some of the more severe ascetic practises are hard to comprehend, and may sometimes have unhelpful psychological motives. The acceptance of voluntary and involuntary suffering is another matter, and at a stretch of the imagination I can also see how it might be right for a person to discipline their flesh, even quite severely, at a specific and appropriate (Fr Raphael, thank you for clarifying that) stage in spiritual development, something practised in most religions. However, I have a big question mark regarding the right expiation for the right sin. If, for the sake of a hypothetical example, I only eat one meal a day and sleep for 4 hours per night, but then I'm proud and full of contempt for others, am I addressing the right sins through my ascetic labours? Will the fasting and the vigil work on my pride by themselves, if I don't challenge the actual proud thoughts and assumptions? There is an old lady living across the road from my house in Nicosia; she listens to hymns and religious programmes very frequently, so loud we can hear it across the road; and yet she has provoked everyone in the neighbourhood, including myself, into a rage because of her aggressive reproaches for parking outside her house (normal practice in Cyprus, we park according to the available space in the street; nevertheless, she actually put mud on my windscreen and down my car engine); I know its not my business as a Christian to judge her, or to fly into a rage when provoked, but I'm wondering: what is happening to all those hymns and religious programmes she is listening to? Do they ever enter her being in any way? If so, why aren't the fires of her own rage and resentments quenched? More experienced spiritual practitioners may be able to help here.

I've strayed from my original question perhaps. Fr Raphael wrote

About the quote above- I'm not sure- it sounds off to me as if pain itself was the means of salvation. If this is what was meant it's definitely wrong.

The original statement certainly spoke of the "redemptive value of pain". This is why I'm wondering: do we consider pain evil? If so, does evil have "redemptive value"? I suppose my big query behind this is: what is the role of evil in salvation? Does evil help us in any way?

Always back to the old chestnuts!

Thanks again for your responses.

In Christ
Byron

[Byron Jack Gaist]

P.S. Oh, also, the question of physical (or emotional, or whatever) pleasure: presumably if it's not feeding our egotism, there's nothing inherently wrong with it? I can enjoy a good meal, glass of wine, listening to music, watching a good movie etc. without it necessarily being indulgence or sin? Fr Raphael's comment about "always denying ourselves" - isn't all pleasure selfish in a way? Should we ideally not be enjoying anything? Should we be always out trying to help or comfort others (instead of indoors, eating a burger and french fries?!)? And what does that say about matter and the world, or the human senses?

Still perplexed
Byron

[Theopesta]

I learned from all of you but I find this text in ROM 8: 13

(AKJV) For if you live after the flesh, you shall die: but if you through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, you shall live.

the bible learn us to mortify the deeds of the body not the body itself and this mortification by the through spirit

but finall with what aim and to what aim we mortify the deeds of body and how??!! this is the most important questions to our self in each step

forgive me all for my simple words in between yours

in one christ
theopesta

[Theopesta]

what are the deeds of body which should be mortify?
GAL v: 19- 20

[Mr Leandros Papadopoulos]

Dear Byron Jack Gaist,

You submitted a question/quotation, coming from the wikipedia article, which presents the distorted theology of the vatican.

The statement that:

"Theologians also explain that the redemptive value of pain makes pain itself lovable, even though by itself pain is a physical evil. Physical evil though is temporal (not eternal) and limited (not infinite). Thus to undergo pain is "nothing" compared to the eternal and infinite benefits it gains for the person undergoing the self-inflicted suffering. And for those with this supernatural viewpoint, pain is loved relative to the good it produces. Thus, one of the more contemporary saints like Josemaria Escriva said, while consoling a dying lady who was suffering in the hospital, "Blessed be pain! Glorified be pain! Sanctified be pain!"

is a distortion of Christian theology of colossal proportions.

The article comes even to suggest that there is a “Need for suffering” and that “to take up the cross” is to pain and that Christ had asked “follow me” like saying “Come! Take part through your suffering in this work of saving the world, a salvation achieved through my suffering! Through my Cross.” (!)

Brother Byron Jack Gaist, all these are fatal misunderstandings of the genuine Christian life.

Pain is unacceptable for Christian life. Pain has no place in Heaven and it does not have a proper place on earth, it is an intruder. To say that “Pain is an integral part of human nature united to the Person of Christ” in the context of the wikipedia article is blasphemy. Vatican theology, having lost the grace of God as experience of Life, reckons man with created measures. Salvation IS NOT achieved through Christ suffering. It is achieved through HIM.

Pain, as a natural dimension, is corruption, deterioration, offence, a disnatured value. There is no need for suffering and there is no call for suffering, in taking up the Cross to follow Christ. Acceptance of pain is one of the greatest sins.

Asceticism in Orthodoxy has nothing to do with pain. Asceticism is not a methodology, but it is participation to the glory of God, it is a life of love, it is a life in relation with the Father, through Christ, in Spirit. In this context, all virtues and all evils (one of which is pain) are being exceeded. In Orthodox asceticism everything is being linked to Holy Spirit. Only in commune with the Spirit was St Seraphim of Sarov - and every other saint – capable to sustain the ascetic acts with a logical attitude, because he was not insane. An Orthodox ascetic is an exercitant, the ascetic practices Love in communion with the Spirit. The Orthodox ascetic does not seek pain. The experience of Love in Spirit is the existential realization of relation with the Father through Christ. This experience is transforming pain, pleasure, happiness, sorrow and every natural or evil mode of existence into a personal presence in front of Glory of God.

The ascetic acts that are presented in the Ladder (Climax) of St John of Mount Sina, seem painful and repulsive, even irrational, but they are NOT presented as methods of achieving salvation. They are presented as desperate acts of people who have lost the commune with the Spirit. This experience of lost communion with the Spirit brings persons in the despair of realizing hell. The lost of Grace of Christ is a direct experience of hell. In this stage the person lives the absurd experience of being in nothingness and self denial is not an act of self punishment and self pain but it is an ontological realization of being “not in personal commune with God”. This is HELL. This behavior is not a “Christian practice”, but it is practiced by Christians who have in their hearts the LOVE FOR GOD, but they miss the personal relation with Him.

It is false to justify the means and not to take in account the person who performs an act and the relation in which this person is. It is wrong to justify the passions of Christ without taking in account Christ Himself and His relation with the Father in Spirit. Orthodox theology states that Christ was glorified by the Father in the specific passions that He wend through and in them we praise through Christ the Father in Spirit. The pain, the death, the mortification were performed in Christ for the Glorification of the Father in Spirit. For death, pain and mortification were all defeated in Christ.

The victory of Christ over death, pain, mortification is not their acceptance and their restoration but it is their ontological destruction. They may exist as evils but they do not have ontological substance. They can not exist in a relational mode; they vanish as long as personal communion between persons is restored. Love is above all.

May God bless us, all.

[nurse-aid]

againg...St.Mary of Egypt spend 17 years of burned her passion in the dessert...then after her body become almost not exist and she do not eat anymore and walk on water...yet she restrain her body for it...yet it is happend AFTER soul previaled...

St.Nectarious wasn't sever asketic about his body and he sleeped on regular bed...
St.John of Shanhi...never sleep in bed and only sit a liitle...
St.Antony the Great was sever asketic in desret...
St.John of Kronshtad was wearin fine clothes and live with wife and was among peole alll the time...

so we are all different as Saints also different peole...and need diferent methods...

[Fr Dcn Matthew (M.C. Steenberg)]

Dear Byron and others,

My role here in the community varies and shifts routinely. At present it seems that I am primarily disagreeing with other views posted here, in various threads. This is not my modus operandi, but I do feel it at times must be done. So with this new thread as well. Speaking with too much emphatic insistence often mingles dangerous points with the proper. The conversation on 'pain' and 'mortification' brings up some of this. I am troubled by what is implied by some of the following:

Pain is unacceptable for Christian life. Pain has no place in Heaven and it does not have a proper place on earth, it is an intruder. To say that “Pain is an integral part of human nature united to the Person of Christ” in the context of the wikipedia article is blasphemy.

This is the kind of remark that mingles wheat and tares. The quoted comment from Wikipedia can be blasphemous or perfectly orthodox, depending on how one is reading the 'human nature' discussed (is it nature in the ontological sense of full and true human being? or in the existential sense of distorted human reality manifested in the fallenness of sin?). The phrase 'pain has no place in heaven' is perhaps correct (though perhaps not entirely; there is still sorrow and rejoicing in heaven over the state of a sinner); but that pain 'does not have a proper place on earth' is not. Pain, suffering, are part of the bodily nature of human reality created by God. In its distortion it is inimical to Christian life; but as with various passions (e.g. anger, joy, sorrow) it is ascetically purifiable, and can come to the good of holy and true life. A tortured soul or body should feel pain, it is right that it does; and the pain evokes response. A lethargy of false-comfort may find respite through the propulsion forward in repentance and purification offered by pain.

To treat of pain as an end in and of itself is a distortion, but this is true of all things. The concept of taking on excessive acts of pain-orientated mortification (e.g. flagellation, laceration) is to misunderstand pain and its purpose. Pain is not a sacred reality of its own: it is a tool of compunction, when known and embraced properly. We do not strive for pain qua pain, but for repentance, growth and union with God that at times is spurred on by the true pain of rebellion against him. This leads to two other comments that again seem to distort:

Salvation IS NOT achieved through Christ suffering. It is achieved through HIM.

There is no need for suffering and there is no call for suffering, in taking up the Cross to follow Christ. acceptance of pain is one of the greatest sins.

It is of course true that salvation comes through Christ and not through some specific aspect of an act of Christ's; but separation of Christ and his acts is impossible. It is 'through the Cross that joy comes into all the world' through the Son, and Orthodox depictions of the apatheia of the crucifixion are not meant to rid us of a picture of pain. Pain is intrinsic to crucifixion, to the cross, and to Christ's self-offering on the cross. The apatheia of the passion (a wonderful paradox of terms) is precisely that the 'pain', together with the other pathoi both bodily and spiritual of the crucifixion, are transcended in the Son's obedient act of love toward the Father. It is not that the pain is foreign, irrelevant or excluded. Pain is embraced and conquered, itself transfigured. Which leads to a further point:

Asceticism in Orthodoxy has nothing to do with pain. Asceticism is not a methodology, but it is participation to the glory of God, it is a life of love, it is a life in relation with the Father, through Christ, in Spirit. [...] This experience is transforming pain, pleasure, happiness, sorrow and every natural or evil mode of existence into a personal presence in front of Glory of God.

Asceticism is the life of participation in God, but it is also a methodology of entering into and advancing in that life. Asctical practice is part of ascetical life, and this practice is not void of nor dismissive of pain. It does not embrace it as such as a thing of unique merit or purpose; but it understands it as part of the arsenal of created reality that can be and is both used against man by Satan, and, in Christ, against Satan by man.

In a sense this harks back to an earlier conversation in another thread, on the question of 'blessedness' with respect to errors and faults in St Peter (and, by extrapolation, all others). To be blessed does not mean to be free from error, but in Christ to transcend one's shortcomings and faults so that even these faults become 'positive' tools for advancement in Christian life. So here, the life in Christ does not involve and absence of appreciation for pain, but an acknowledgement that, in Christ, pain is transfigured. Its force as acting against God and his creation is destroyed; the weapon turned against man is now turned against the devil.

INXC, Matthew

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

Byron wrote:

However, I have a big question mark regarding the right expiation for the right sin. If, for the sake of a hypothetical example, I only eat one meal a day and sleep for 4 hours per night, but then I'm proud and full of contempt for others, am I addressing the right sins through my ascetic labours?

Asceticism is part of our effort to die to ourselves. But its type & measure must be something that God has directed us to through the advice of our spiritual fathers. Otherwise the danger is that we will be selfishly fighting a battle of our own choosing- like the sins that frustrate us.

Even with specific sins that we are trying to struggle against the measure we use must not be the result of self-direction.

The main point is that we are trying to fight against the force of death and sin- not just change certain types of behaviour. In this sense it is crucial that we understand that our work is spiritual and not psychological. And in this way the measure of asceticism we have been led to by God is the measure needed to reconstruct the house from the foundation up- something which we can partly perhaps see. But it is also something we do not at all see fully. So just like Abraham leaving his own homeland to find the Land of Promise the ascetic tone of our our life is also very much an act of faith.

Along this path there will be many falls due to the fact that sin is still very much present. The danger for us is that every time we sense we have made a step forward we fall into pride. So the road to healing is one of standing and falling, and getting up again. In the midst of this we can also be like your neighbour who does embarrassing things. Sometimes it is only God Who knows whether we act from Pharasaic 'righteousness' or from a thorn in the flesh. At the end of the day it depends on whether the person feels compunction for what they do. But few know this except for God and perhaps a spiritual father. Perhaps these 'ladies' are ascetic blessings in disguise for us!

In Christ- Fr Raphael

[Mr Leandros Papadopoulos]

Dear Dr M.C. Steenberg,

Would you clarify the following sentence for me: "Asctical practice is part of ascetical life, and this practice is not void of nor dismissive of pain".

If you present an example, it would be very helpful to me in order to understand the differences between our points of view.

I apologize for the request.

Leandros

[Mr Leandros Papadopoulos]

There is an old lady living across the road from my house in Nicosia; she listens to hymns and religious programmes very frequently, so loud we can hear it across the road; and yet she has provoked everyone in the neighbourhood, including myself, into a rage because of her aggressive reproaches for parking outside her house (normal practice in Cyprus, we park according to the available space in the street

Brother Byron, I have two neighbours just like yours. Each family has two cars and they fight, each other, at least once per month. They are very protective of their "private" park places, which are actually "virtual places" at the public road in front of their houses.

May be there is an epidemic for protecting non existed virtual parking places!

[Fr Dcn Matthew (M.C. Steenberg)]

Would you clarify the following sentence for me: "Asctical practice is part of ascetical life, and this practice is not void of nor dismissive of pain". If you present an example [...]

I'm not sure how to cite specific examples of this, apart from references to the actual praxis of asceticism in the lives of various saints and fathers. Of these there are a great many.

More important is to clarify the concept. The pain felt by the body, as well as the soul, is part of its created status and not foreign to it. It is not a stranger or an alien to the human condition. Pain which leads to death is that which is alien, that which is to be abhorred as foreign. But pain is itself part of the sensory reality of our body-soul construction. Even basic analogies such as the 'pin-prick of compunction' are grounded in the reality of this aspect of human being.

Asceticism is the life of this reality and no other. Some element of physical and mental pain is present in true ascetical warfare: the body is accustomed to certain ills, to certain tendencies, and the soul accustomed to its own fallen ways of existing. To turn from these is an act of pain. But in the ascetic life, in the life in Christ, the source of the pain changes: pain is not felt in departing from sin, but in the awareness of sin's binding of life to death. This is transfiguring pain, seen in aches of long vigil, the toils of direct labour, the hunger of the prolonged fast.

INXC, Matthew

[Byron Jack Gaist]

Dear All,

Thank you for your many helpful comments.

Matthew wrote

Some element of physical and mental pain is present in true ascetical warfare: the body is accustomed to certain ills, to certain tendencies, and the soul accustomed to its own fallen ways of existing. To turn from these is an act of pain. But in the ascetic life, in the life in Christ, the source of the pain changes: pain is not felt in departing from sin, but in the awareness of sin's binding of life to death. This is transfiguring pain, seen in aches of long vigil, the toils of direct labour, the hunger of the prolonged fast.

This reminds me of St Paul's distiction between godly and ungodly sorrow; might one say that there exists godly and ungodly pain, or perhaps godly and ungodly ways of experiencing pain?

Fr Raphael wrote

Asceticism is part of our effort to die to ourselves. But its type & measure must be something that God has directed us to through the advice of our spiritual fathers. Otherwise the danger is that we will be selfishly fighting a battle of our own choosing- like the sins that frustrate us. Even with specific sins that we are trying to struggle against the measure we use must not be the result of self-direction. The main point is that we are trying to fight against the force of death and sin- not just change certain types of behaviour. In this sense it is crucial that we understand that our work is spiritual and not psychological. And in this way the measure of asceticism we have been led to by God is the measure needed to reconstruct the house from the foundation up- something which we can partly perhaps see. But it is also something we do not at all see fully. So just like Abraham leaving his own homeland to find the Land of Promise the ascetic tone of our our life is also very much an act of faith.

Fr Raphael, thank you for reminding me of the importance of the (long-term) spiritual perspective offered by the spiritual father. Certainly "symptom-oriented" approaches to changing behaviour are, in my own professional opinion, not ultimately successful in psychotherapy either. Mostly another symptom replaces the one that has been eliminated, since the underlying cause of the disorder has not been successfully addressed. It seems to me that this is one of the dangers of purely rationalistic approaches to the complexity of human being. Having faith in the process is also essential.

Nope, no substitute for doing the hard work I'm afraid! No pain, no gain. And may God forgive me for my idling about it - my faith is weak, and I will be needing prayers from my Christian brothers and sisters to make it stronger.

Once again, many thanks to all.

In Christ
Byron

[Fr Dcn Matthew (M.C. Steenberg)]

Dear Byron, you asked:

This reminds me of St Paul's distiction between godly and ungodly sorrow; might one say that there exists godly and ungodly pain, or perhaps godly and ungodly ways of experiencing pain?

I would think the answer is both. There is pain that is part of being a human creature, and as a natural part of that composition is 'godly' inasmuch as it is part of God's handiwork. But there is also inflicted pain, pain unnatural to created reality, wrought at the hands of others - whether spiritual or corporeal foes. This is certainly 'ungodly'.

But there are also godly and ungodly ways of receiving, experiencing and living pain, whether it comes to us naturally or unnaturally. Natural pain, the pain of authentic struggle against accustomisation to the wrong, the pain of body, etc., can be transformed into ungodly realities when taken up in the wrong manner. Conversely, unnatural pain, even demonic pain, can work for good in a person who unites all his experiences to Christ.

INXC, Matthew

[Mr Leandros Papadopoulos]

Dear Dr M.C. Steenberg,

Thank you for your remarks.

My previous message (no 285) in this thread was written in the same spirit with your messages (which still seems to me to be same in substance and different in formation, after having read them many times).

My heart in this matter is expressed in the prayer from the service burial: "...Please Lord repose your servant in a verdurous place, in a refreshing place, where there is no pain, no sorrow and no moan..."

Leandros

[Fr Dcn Matthew (M.C. Steenberg)]

Dear Leandros,

I'm not convinced that we are saying the same thing, though perhaps areas overlap (one would hope so). I do think that several points (those I raised above, in my post no. 763), vis-a-vis the suffering of Christ, the acceptance of pain, the place of pain in asceticism, etc., are not subtle questions of phrasing or perspective, but fundamental issues that are not in harmony with one another.

INXC, Matthew