Two Paths

What to do? There are two paths.  The path of self-service and the Christian path.  One can either follow Jesus Christ or be one’s own god.

But within the Christian path there are two lines, the monastic and the lay.  Obviously, I am not a monastic, but the question of how to apply monastic advice/guidance to the lay life is glaring.  Because I am a layman, I am responsible to care for my family. But at what cost?  Do I really need to immerse myself in earning enough money? Who defines “enough”?  What comfort level is acceptable/appropriate? 

There are questions to answer and decisions to be made that may be irreversible (bridges burned, if you will).  How realistic (Orthodox) is idealism?  Does one pursue the “right thing” even when no one else seems to be doing so?  How does the fact that we, as human, are painfully limited in our knowledge and understanding of reality affect the huge decisions that must be made?  It seems that most follow the “sensible” path (i.e., easy/American).  When one steps back and looks at it all, it seems most likely that one will make the wrong choice.  If there are ten possible good paths to take, but 1000 wrong ones, the odds are against us.  Especially when “the world, the flesh and the devil” are against us, pushing us toward the wrong paths.

Even more so, by what criteria are we to judge the fruit of our actions?  The other thing is to determine if we are even setting good/right/Christian goals.  It’s easy to throw around platitudes and truisms in response, but these are really not that helpful, as they give no specific direction.

The most beautiful day and location mean nothing is someone is punching you in the stomach.

What happens when, looking back, you have formed your psyche and personality, to not fit in or “click” with others?  Built on idealism.

Emulation

Within Eastern Orthodoxy, we believe that there is one path to God, that is, salvation through Jesus Christ alone.  It is the work that Jesus accomplished that brought man out from under the power of death.  It is now our responsibility to use the tools, provided by the church, to attain theosis.  God became man so that man can become God, not in the ontological sense, but in the union sense.  As part of the body of Christ, we come into close, intimate communion/union with God.
With that in mind, we see two possibilities.  There is the monastic path and the lay path.  Both are the same, in that, both are striving after holiness, through love for God and love for neighbor.  One thing that really jumped out at me this morning, as I sat musing while drinking coffee, was the monastic example.
The monastics are those who have devoted their lives to a singular focus on purifying their souls and seeking after God.  The layperson is the one who has (acceptably) chosen to take on the responsibilities of spouse, children and finances.  But we lay people can and should look to the model of the monastic for our own efforts toward holiness.  One thing that is very distinctive of the Orthodox monastic is their insistence upon work.  The monastic is not one who simply does nothing but pray and depend upon others for their livelihood.  No, the monastic, while he is praying, is working with his hands and supporting himself.  We laypeople could take notice and emulate them.
In whatever vocation we have, we can pray.  The Orthodox church has, for centuries, strongly encouraged the "Jesus Prayer", "Lord Jesus Christ, son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner."  This prayer contains it all, recognition of who Jesus is, who we are and our need of God. 
So the question then is, "Who are we emulating?"  Do we look to the world, the successful businessmen, the entertainers, or the athletes for a model of our lives? 
Who forms our lives?