Reading the Bible

The technical term for what i am going to talk about is hermeneutics.  I want to first emphasize the importance of reading the Bible, both Old Testament and New Testament.  As Orthodox, we believe that God's Word, as recognized as the Old Testament and New Testament is central and foundational to the Christian life.  The Bible, within the context of the historic Christian church, is THE Word of God.  Because of this fact, we must learn to rightly handle God's Word.  One of the major problems within Christendom today is the inappropriate or faulty handling of Scripture.  Too many people, who don't have the right understanding or the ability to rightly grasp and handle God's Word are doing so. 
This is not a Pharisaical matter of "you don't have the right education, so you shouldn't preach".  This is about authority and context. 
There are two sides to this matter.  One has to do with the appropriate handling of literature.  This means reading poetry as poetry, history as history, biography as biography, and apocalyptic as apocalyptic.  Try reading a cookbook to your wife like it's poetry.  I don't think you'll get very far.
A good place to start in regards to this first point is with the theologian Anthony Thiselton.  This scholar provides an incredibly astute and thorough analysis and grounding in the proper recognition of the text.  He is truly unsurpassed in his field.
The second side is learning to read Scripture as the apostles read Scripture.  Using the text as they used it.  Recognizing typology, symbolism, and imagery when it is in the text and rejecting it when it's not there.
We will learn to do this second point as we immerse ourselves in the history of the Church and the lives of the saints.  Building our hermeneutical skills from the tools of liberal modernity will not lead to success.  Reading and understanding the Word of God as the Church has always understood it will lead us into the deeper faith and a closer relationship with God and man.

The Dominant Culture

We ignore the controlling power of the culture most dominant around us to our own demise.  We rarely acknowledge the air around us.  The same can be said of our culture.  Having grown up in our particular culture, having everyone around us living by the same standards and rarely having those standards questioned by anyone whose opinion we value, makes an escape or critique of that culture highly unlikely. 
Everyone lives within a particular culture that is based upon a certain worldview and certain presuppositions.  Because these things are foundational to our thinking and stem from religious opinion and culture, a change away from these things to another set of views is rare.  This is rare due to the major cultural rupture that will occur within our circle of influence. A major change of this sort will usually really in a fracture of existing relationships, which most people highly value.
All of this leads us to some observations.  The beliefs we hold and the faith we practice will be controlled by our culture.  This says nothing about the truth or falsehood of that belief system.  What then is the answer to finding and determining the "truth"?  There are two extremes which may be avoided.  First is the "Joseph Smith" syndrome, that is, rejecting all authority outside of oneself and making oneself the final authority.  The second error, on the extreme other end of the spectrum is that of the Roman Catholic church, that is, question nothing of the authority of those over you, simply believe and do what they tell you.
So what is the middle ground? One had to decide where to begin.  Do you trust your senses? Or do you believe that what we receive from our senses is merely illusion (ie Hinduism)?  An understanding of history will help one move in the right direction.  If one starts from the position that God communicated to Abraham and up through the history of Israel, was leading his people in truth, culminating in the birth, life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ, as the answer to the Old Testament, then one will embrace the Eastern Orthodox Church as "the" church.  One will be able to critique all other belief systems, see their internal inconsistencies and reject them as false.
What this really all comes down to is the responsibility each one of has to understand history, think clearly, and provide an answer for what he believes.  Everything else is likely to be built on sinking sand.

Objectification

One of the major points in the argument against pornography is its objectifying of women. Women are presented as an object to view rather than as a whole person created in the image of God.  When people become an object to be used and discarded or forgotten, things have gone seriously wrong.
But a second side to this needs to be considered.  Obviously, the women that get caught up in porn are victims, even those that "freely choose" to begin that path.  But what about the mentality, the thinking, behind attention-getting?  Since it is wrong for a woman to degrade herself by making herself an object to be looked upon, would it not be wrong for any woman to present herself as an object even outside of the porn industry? What then are the reasons for why people dress the way they do, apply makeup, or keep their hair?  What is the motivating drive behind the efforts put into appearance?
When it comes down to it, a woman uses her appearance to gain attention.  She will work according to the whims of current culture to attract attention.  Clearly there are other sins involved in porn, but the "attention" principle is underneath it all.  Even if the attention being sought is not lewd or vulgar, it is still attention being drawn to the physical with complete disregard to the rest of the person. 
Do we seek to draw the attention of others by adorning ourselves in a certain way?  Do we look upon the appearance of others with total disregard to the rest of the person?  In short, is our thinking based upon the physical and not the eternal?  We must assess ourselves and ask ourselves what it is that we genuinely think is important.  Do we put a great emphasis upon our physical appearance or do we take great joy in the appearance of others?  How does this compare with our thinking about other peoples souls?  The emphasis we put upon our own appearance communicates to others what we think is important and it also draws their attention to the temporal and not the eternal.  If we love others like we are supposed to love, we will help them toward godliness, not the flesh.  The emphasis we put upon the way others appear communicates a belief in the importance of the temporal and not the eternal. 
The short of it is this: the emphasis we place upon things physical tells the truth about what we truly believe about the importance of things eternal.

Indifference

An attitude of indifference is not compatible with the Christian life.  No matter what situation we find ourselves in, no matter who we are around, the idea of loving God and loving neighbor makes an attitude of indifference impossible.  We cannot look upon someone else's suffering or error with an uncaring attitude. 
The key though, to communicating with someone regarding their situation, and actually being able to help, is often difficult to engage.  We must determine how to communicate love and compassion without being bossy or nosy.  This means establishing a relationship with someone before trying to help.  Oftentimes, merely being someone who listens will go a long way to help. Loving without judgment is a goal to drive after. Learning to recognize the needs of those whom we come across, whom God brings into our path, is a habit to form. 
Learning to love unconditionally is the majority of the battle.  Pray for the means and the opportunity to practice loving your neighbor.

Our use of time

As i get older (I'm middle age now), the concept of limited time keeps coming back to me.  As mortal we only have so much time, and it seems like we have so much to do.  One very important thing to learn is analyzing and prioritizing (I guess that's two things).  We have to question the true value of a thing or activity by considering it in light of eternity.  A week from now, a month from now, a year from now, on the new earth, will this thing still be important? If not, we shouldn't necessarily not do it, but at least consider it and give serious thought to something else that is truly important. 
This is not about things that are sinful or not, that's pretty obvious, but the multitude of inconsequential things in our life.
How are we using our time? Do our actions exhibit a love for God and neighbor, or are they strictly self centered? Do they lead to a fruitful positive end, or are they disposable, merely forgotten in a week?
In general, this seems to fall into the typical theme for me.  Giving things done thought and acting on the results.

Who is responsible?

I, for the most part, agree with the economic theories of the Austrian School, as propounded by Mises, Rothbard and Hayek, among others. A great source for this economic thought is found at www.mises.org.  Anyway, recently I was reading a post discussing the place of government controls over the consumption of alcohol.  I commented on this post with something about the government's responsibility to protect the innocent.  Another commentator balked at this and called my comment absurd.
This got me thinking.  Is it the responsibility of the state or federal government to protect the innocent or is it merely to punish the guilty? Should the government step in and protect people from their own foolishness?  What if that foolishness has serious adverse effects upon extended family or the community at large?  Who then decides what is adverse? Should we leave protection up to private organizations? If we look at a strongly patriarchal society, husbands and fathers protect their women and children.  But what about a seriously liberal society when the men have become effeminate and self centered?  I really hesitate to give the federal government any power other than the authority of representation.  But I also cannot see just leaving the weak to fend for themselves.
We could talk about the actions and responsibilities of individuals but one person can only do so much.  One person can only expend so much time and money, regardless of desire to do much more.  There must be something here about the strong protecting the weak. 
Ultimately this is about love for neighbor.  What are we responsible to do in order to be obedient to this command?

Fathers to Sons

What are we doing wrong?  It seems to be a pretty wide spread problem that children are not following the faith of their fathers.  The truly scary alternative to this interpretation of the facts is that children actually are following their fathers, very consistently, in fact.  What this would then mean is that fathers profess one thing but live another.  What is it that children are seeing on their fathers?  Granted, it must be recognized that children do have free will that they may choose to sin regardless of the good example they see in their parents, but I would venture to guess that in most situations this is not the case. 
What are we communicating to our sons that they grow up to reject our faith?  What is it in our words and actions that turns them away? Is there an inconsistency?
Probably the best place to start figuring out this problem is to seek input from trusted advisers. We cannot see the back of our own head, so wisdom requires that we seek input from those who can.  Our wives and our pastors are a good place to start.  What are they seeing in us that ought to be addressed? A really interesting point to consider is the response of children.  Kids seem to take the example before them and live it out more consistently than their example.  That puts a pretty scary spin on our situations. It's worth considering anyway.
Look at the details, consider where they may lead and consider the possible sources. And don't hesitate to act, you may miss an opportunity.

Love is the answer

It may come as a surprise to those who know me, but i am becoming more and more saddened by the fallen state of men.  I see so much that is so messed up, there is so much grief and suffering that simply does not need to be. 
It seems that the older i get, the more i know and understand and the more i see that is wrong.  Along with this is the ever broadening view that there is so little i can do. Obviously, the most straightforward answer is that if everyone did just a little bit, very much could be accomplished.  But the big problem is that everyone, myself included, is terribly self centered and short sighted.  We are too selfish to see the needs and hurts of others.  We are too focused on ourselves and our entertainments to address anyone else's pain.
Ultimately, the answer is love.  The Beatles had it right, U2 has it right, Orthodox monks and nuns have it right.  Loving men as God has loved us is what we are supposed to do.  And this will solve all the problems in the world around us.  This is not bright eyed idealism, this is an attempt to live as Jesus has commanded us to live.
This is not romantic, warm feelings either.  To love as God has loved us means to strive to help others grow in holiness.  It's not about nice, warm thoughts, is not about romance. It's about focusing on others instead of ourselves, regardless of their sin or impression upon us. To gain our life we must lose it. To receive we must give. Love is the answer and we must learn to live the answer. Love for neighbor built upon a genuine love for God, as he has revealed himself in the body of Christ is the final answer.

The fruit of Protestant thought

As they say in science, every action has a reaction.  This is true in worldview/philosophical thought as well.  With the start of the Protestant Reformation, a new worldview was created that has taken the world by storm, even creating a new nation, America.  This worldview is that of individualistic final authority. Martin Luther saw serious errors in the Roman Catholic Church and wanted to make changes to be more faithful to Scripture.  The Roman Catholic authority responded by telling him to repent and not question their ideas.  Luther responded by refusing to do so.  The authorities then kicked him out of the church. Luther was then in a difficult position.  Does he submit to church authority even though he strongly disagree with what was being taught or does he go with what he believes to be true, in essence making himself the final authority?  It's important to remember that Luther never wanted to leave and many of the doctrines that Protestant disagree with, he was okay with.  He was forced to leave.  Once that decision was made, the religious world was never the same.  Luther introduced the idea of self authority.  This concept has morphed into a completely different monster than Luther ever imagined. 
So looking at the United States today, we can see the fruit of this decision within Christendom.  The concept of choosing for oneself instead of appealing to a higher authority has brought about a radical change in our culture.  This thinking has filtered into all areas of life.  Address such as economic policy, sexual orientation, modesty, diet, the use of time, war, and many others are now driven by self authority instead of the church.  Many of the problems in our culture today have come about because people don't want to look to the church for answers but instead look to themselves.  Homosexuality is now seen as acceptable by many Protestant denominations because words, ideas and concepts have been redefined instead of following the historic church.  So long as we are making ourselves the authority in these many decisions before us, we will continue down this path of destruction.  Our culture in America is coming to an end.  We will only reverse this terrible trend if we return to the authority structure that God has established in the body of Christ.  As long as we continue to look to ourselves, we will continue to fail.

If God....

My place of employment is Christian owned and operated, which is really nice.  We actually have a chaplain that helps alot of people and leads a bi-weekly chapel service. While not Orthodox it is still leading people in the right direction. In the hallway leading up to the lunchroom is a small library containing all Christian books, one of these caught my eye, it was called "If God is good, why is there suffering?" As i pondered this title, something occurred to me. As Christians, the statement should be "Since God is good, why is there suffering?" This is a huge difference. As Christians, we certainly believe that God is good.  This is not a question in our worldview.  If it is a question, that is a serious problem that must be addressed and answered.  The question of suffering is answered by considering man's freedom and God's nature as not a tyrant.  There is suffering because man chooses to sin and those decisions affect others.  Someone who balks at the idea of God not intervening and stopping evil needs to be asked if they want God stopping them from doing something God calls evil.  I don't suppose that they do. Do i claim to have all the answers as to why God doesn't interact with various situations to protect the innocent? Absolutely not. There are some things beyond us. What I do understand though is that we as people have the responsibility to protect the innocent, whenever and wherever we can.  it really comes down to three things: God is sovereign, God is good, and there are some things we don't understand.  As humans we have limitations to our abilities.  To argue otherwise is pride and foolishness.

A Comprehensive Faith

The inconsistency currently present in the American Orthodox Church makes the pursuit and application of a comprehensive faith difficult.  We must be aware of and address any presuppositions foreign to Orthodoxy.  This would be those beliefs held prior to our baptism into the Church or those things taught to us by those who are inconsistent in their beliefs, holding to things incompatible with Orthodoxy.  This is especially a problem in America, as America began and has progressed and grown as a predominantly Protestant and Evangelical nation.  The introduction of the Orthodox Church into this culture has found a serious amount of work to transform the thinking of her converts into a truly biblical mindset.  Unfortunately, no one is tabula rasa.  All men have some sort of belief system, which in most cases is contrary to biblical belief, which must be overcome.  It is bad enough that men hold to false beliefs, men also have corrupted and darkened hearts that must be sanctified as well.  Really, the work that all men have before them is that of changing their beliefs (to be consistent with the Christian faith), to sanctify their hearts (to love God and neighbor and hate evil) and to change their practices (acting in love and not in selfishness).  This is three fold: minds, hearts and hands.

This is one reason the Orthodox Church appeals to tradition.  Any one man will be influenced and distracted by his prior beliefs, by those things falsely taught to him by others and by the culture around him.  The concept of tradition is that of those things held, taught and practiced by the Church since its apostolic beginnings.  We can appeal to tradition, which includes Scripture), because we believe that God has been leading his Church from the very beginning. 

So instead of appealing to common sense, logic or philosophy, we realize that all of these are influenced and controlled by the culture in which they are conceived, so we must trust in the guidance of the Holy Spirit on the Church as a whole.

Returning to the opening statement in this post, inconsistency comes from the influence upon us from outside of the apostolic faith.  We must work to overcome these falsities and strive towards truth and love.  Our work is that much more difficult when the inconsistencies are not recognized as false but are instead identified as Christian faith.  The problem comes from being American, not from being Orthodox.  Let us seek to understand and live out the apostolic faith, regardless of how foreign it may seem to us and to those around us.  The Christian faith is present before us in the life of the Church.  Let us strive toward this example.

The Easy Life

There is a cycle that has been going on in American history for the last many generations.  The first generation in this consideration passes through a very difficult period in which they suffer to a high degree on many fronts: hunger, exposure, poverty, or enslavement.  Moving past the kind of situation, they start families of their own, wanting their own children to have a better life.  These children grow up seeing their parents work very hard and sacrifice greatly for them.  They in turn work hard, but not having the experience of personal suffering themselves, don't pass on the same work ethic or sacrifice to their children. And it is at this point that things go bad.  These children tend to go in the direction of ease.  These are the children that have their own bedrooms, computers, smart phones, cars, closets full of clothes, etc., etc.  These children develop a sense of entitlement and have no sense of personal discomfort.  A life of comfort and ease does not fit with the Christian life.  To train up a child with no sense of sacrifice and to focus solely on their own comfort, is to raise a pagan, at least a pagan in thinking. 

The Christian life is one of denying oneself, taking up ones cross and following Christ.  It's about focusing on and seeing things eternal.  It's about seeing things temporal as insignificant, living in the world but not loving the things of the world. Can we look at our kids and honestly say that we have trained them in this manner?  One major point of trouble for us in this is the example we set by the things we love.  Our example is a huge factor in this. 

Unfortunately, too often these things are unconsciously communicated.  Our first step is to examine ourselves and honestly assess what we love.  Then we need to examine what we have consciously communicated to our children.  Have we set them up to love and be distracted by the things of the world?  I am not talking about things necessarily sinful, but merely worldly and distracting.  Have we trained them to love the things of God and seek after them?  Or have we merely directed them towards ease and comfort, being distracted and titillated by entertainment?