Sin

Every person, every community, every situation has its sins.  This somewhat falls into the “grass is always greener on the other side of the fence” category.  We can live in a particular context and seeing the sin therein be disgruntled and desire after something else.  Seeing the sin and being grieved by it, is a good response. But in doing so, we must realize that all situations and persons after afflicted by sin.  We cannot escape it.  While it is true that some sins are more or less grievous than others (on both a personal level and a corporate level), the sin is still there and is still problematic.

Wisdom requires that we respond rightly to the sin that is in us and surrounds us.  There is something very right about fleeing from the potential influence of sin.  But we should never use the sin of others (either individuals or community) to justify our own sin.

Again, it’s about love for God and love for neighbor.  Our response to sin must be motivated by love.

Interpreting experience

Any experience we experience must be interpreted.  What we perceive and how we define these things are understood within a framework.  The religious, social, economic,  and historic culture in which we live will control how we understand any experience.
This is especially true of mystical experience. Without even going into the details of the experience, the fact of the experience actually taking place is interpreted differently by differing worldviews.  If someone is an atheist, a mystical experience involving a bright light at the end of a tunnel, will be interpreted as a mis-firing of the brain and flooding of chemicals into that brain.  Whereas a Buddhist may interpret this as a preparation for "the clear mind", or a Christian may see this as a transition from this temporal life into eternity with God.

Why am I thinking about this?  It has occurred to me that the use of experience as a tool for "proving" the validity of ones faith is not effective.  The same way that using particular texts from the Bible is not effective either, as differing minds will interpret texts (or even their applicability) in differing ways.  

When Jesus worked through his ministry, his instruction was very clear, "love God and love neighbor".  If we make this the focal point of our efforts in this life, we cannot go wrong.  We don't need to go door to door, we don't need to stand on street corners seeking to convince those passing by (of whatever) and we don't need to engage in intellectual debates and arguments to prove the other guy wrong.  We need to genuinely love other people.  And that means, in large part, to not judge them, condemn them or denigrate them when their current lifestyle is not up to the standard that we think it ought to be.  

We can argue and craft proofs all day long, but if someone does not see our love, we are nothing.  

Goals and the price

I walked past my dining room table and happened to glance down at one of my childrens' "Calvin and Hobbes" books lying open, face up.  I read the comic and therein, Calvin was complaining, out loud that he really did not want to go to school, that he would rather go anywhere else or do anything else than go to school.  His father responded with, "How about you go get a full time job and I'll go to school instead.  Then you can work every day until evening and then come home to a whiny kid."  And that made me think.  Everyone seems to have this built in, without even thinking, mentality of going to school, getting a job and living out the American dream.
My thought is about goals and the price we are willing to pay to achieve them.  Why do we put such a high price on having stuff, when none of it really satisfies, long term.  We all work so hard to get an education, we try to earn lots of money, but are we happy or satisfied?  To aim for anything is so contrary, so unusual, so (almost) unAmerican, no one ever thinks outside of the box.
It comes down to not really thinking for ourselves about what it will take to make us happy, to achieve love of God and love of neighbor and be prepared for eternity.  Those things seem to fall into a secondary, tertiary (or lower) position.  We get to them, if we have the time and energy after work and play.
But what if we hit the reset button and aimed for something more valuable and eternal?

Wisest Approach

I had gone to the local library website and was checking on what books needed to be returned, when I came across the new Ann Coulter book, "Adios, America".  I read the snippet and the reviews and was intrigued.  But then it occurred to me.  What would be the wisest approach to reading this sort of hyper political/cultural commentary?  As is the case with reading, when we read someone who is "inside our circle", we tend to lower our guards and believe what we read, simply because we are reading something with which we probably already agree.
And the opposite is true when we are reading from someone who is "outside our circle".  We are extremely guarded and critical.  The real chore is to be guarded and critical with everything we read.
So what is the best way to approach this sort of reading?  I cannot say to what degree I agree with Ann Coulter.  Since becoming Orthodox, I have found that within the church, there is not political party.  Some of what the Republicans say is correct, some of what the Democrats say is correct, some of the Third party candidates speak the truth.  But none of them can be whole-heartedly embraced as "the answer" to America's problems.
The real answer, I believe, is that faithfulness to Christ, love of God and love of neighbor, in whatever way we can, is the answer to America's problems.  Reading the various political perspectives and opinions may be helpful, may be harmful, but overall should be done carefully and critically, no matter who you read.  Read with an open mind but filter is all through Jesus' words, "love God and love neighbor".

Run away?

In the fourth century, in the face of cultural depravity and religious mediocrity, many Christians fled to the desert, embracing monasticism as a way to draw closer to God. This was their response to a horribly sinful culture.  In addition to cultural sin, was the popularization of Christianity.  A good thing? Not necessarily.  With popularization, came a watering down and simplification of the faith. Quite quickly, it became quite easy and safe to be a Christian.
What is our response to essentially the same set of circumstances? I'm afraid that we have embraced the wave of ease, to the point of not even recognizing it.
Any thoughts?

The controlling factor

If (since) Jesus’ explanation that “love God and love neighbor” is the thing that should define our lives, does it?  If you put this approach for anything else into place and run it to its logical end, are we being faithful?  For example, if you are a basketball coach, your goal is to train your team to win games.  Sure, there are other aspects of the job, keeping your players healthy, strong, in shape, out of trouble, etc. but all of these things are for the purpose of winning games.

If you are a medical doctor, your main job is to address your patients’ health. Again, there are other aspects to the job, but all of them are for the main purpose of addressing your patients’ health.  So, when we look at our own lives, does “love God and love neighbor” act as the controlling factor?  How we spend our time, how we spend our money, how we act towards and respond to, other people.  Are our lives really just focused on making ourselves comfortable, entertained and well-fed, until we retire, when we can focus even more upon comfort and entertainment?  The form of the entertainment really doesn’t matter if that thing is not an exercise in “loving God and loving neighbor”.  Sure there may be other “benefits” to the entertainment (i.e., relaxation, exercise, mental stimulation, etc), but if that thing is not based on “loving God and loving neighbor”, we are missing the point.

Why are people happy?

Why are people happy? Or maybe a better question is, “How are people happy? Is there an objective standard by which we can identify happiness? Is there something built into the soul of man that, when met/fulfilled, will result in happiness? Or is it simply a subjective state based on what each individual decides is the goal? Should happiness even be a goal for the human? Could it be that happiness is simply a subjective state, defined by the individual that is simply a manifestation of selfishness? Are we being self-centered when we strive to be happy, as this state usually has to do with our personal comfort, or content state of mind?

I see people that, judging by the Orthodox standard of truth, should not be happy, but by all general appearances, they are. It cannot be that the presence of sin takes away the possibility of happiness, for we are all sinners, yet some people appear to be happy. It cannot be that our failure to recognize the particular sin is a factor, for there are many people who do not even recognize the reality of sin, i.e., atheists. If the onus falls upon us, that is, if we recognize the sin, we won’t be happy until that sin is dealt with, then every Christian would be perpetually unhappy and, by default, the atheist would be the genuinely happy one.