Jack's 1st question! The Lord's Prayer
Jack Riddingplot
You all know the Lord's Prayer, I hope. ;-) (Even I do.)
Maybe you recite it as a kind of rote piece, without any regard for
its meaning (which would be sad, it's a nice prayer). Or maybe you
unite its words and meaning, using them to make the connexion between
the world of the spirit and the world you live in.
Here's my question. There's a phrase in it, "...thy will be done on
earth, as it is in heaven". If I were to ask you how you know what
God's will is, I'd probably get answers like, "It's in the
bible...it's in the fathers...it's in the canons...it's part of holy
tradition". I'd also get, "Jack, it's ineffable!" (but that's a bit of
a cop out). It's also a "dangerous" prayer because it's so open ended,
without any limits or exceptions noted at all. There's no "...except
in my sex life today" (as Augustine found himself secretly praying),
or "...except loving my neighbour as myself". You get the idea.
"...thy will be done on earth, as it is in heaven..." Many of us live
in pluralistic, democratic nations where "thy will" isn't done by any
stretch of the imagination. Abortion, gay marriage, adultery, divorce,
"sexy-fication" of children in advertising, immodesty, glorification
of greed, casual gluttony, blasphemy, fornication, hypocrisy, open
hatred, violence, name-calling; all, and more, present and accounted
for!
What do you EXCLUDE from this prayer? What would you absolutely dread
to see included in "real" life? Where would you draw the line?
If you could voice the "conservative" point of view, that would be
great. The "liberal" point of view would be interesting, too.
Jack
Alexander Arnakis
The Lord's Prayer is neither "liberal" or "conservative." It has to do
with one's personal relationship to God, and what we expect of God.
Nor do I see the phrase "Thy will" as referring to anything
programmatic. Read the entire Matthew 6 chapter to place the Lord's
Prayer in context. What Christ is doing here is condemning the showy
religious practice of the time, exemplified by the Pharisees and
others. The Lord's Prayer is a sort of minimalist counterweight to the
multifarious prayers of the hypocrites who would stand on the street
corners and exhibit their piety for the eyes of the world.
So, instead of a long "laundry list" of desires, reduced to "prayer"
(which we find all too often in Protestant churches today), we simply
turn it over to God by saying "Thy will be done." The implication here
is that we have faith that whatever God does, it's for our long-term
benefit (whether we know it or not).
The *only* tangible thing asked for in the Lord's Prayer is "our daily
bread" -- again, the most minimal and yet the most necessary of
requests.
One other thing to note is that the Lord's Prayer is not really
directed to God (indeed, in the same passage it states that the Father
knows our needs even before we ask Him). Instead, in the Lord's Prayer
we are talking to ourselves, telling ourselves to recognize the
supremacy of God, to forgive our fellow men, and to accept whatever
God has in store for us.
Catherine Jefferson
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 11:51:55 -0800 (PST), Jack Riddingplot
> <jackrid...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Here's my question. There's a phrase in it, "...thy will be done on
>> earth, as it is in heaven". ....
<snipped, but read>
>> What do you EXCLUDE from this prayer? What would you absolutely dread
>> to see included in "real" life? Where would you draw the line?
> The Lord's Prayer is neither "liberal" or "conservative." It has to do
> with one's personal relationship to God, and what we expect of God.
Personal and communal, both by ourselves and as the Church. It
absolutely is not political, however.
> Nor do I see the phrase "Thy will" as referring to anything
> programmatic. Read the entire Matthew 6 chapter to place the Lord's
> Prayer in context. What Christ is doing here is condemning the showy
> religious practice of the time, exemplified by the Pharisees and
> others. The Lord's Prayer is a sort of minimalist counterweight to the
> multifarious prayers of the hypocrites who would stand on the street
> corners and exhibit their piety for the eyes of the world.
>
> So, instead of a long "laundry list" of desires, reduced to "prayer"
> (which we find all too often in Protestant churches today), we simply
> turn it over to God by saying "Thy will be done." The implication here
> is that we have faith that whatever God does, it's for our long-term
> benefit (whether we know it or not).
>
> The *only* tangible thing asked for in the Lord's Prayer is "our daily
> bread" -- again, the most minimal and yet the most necessary of
> requests.
Agreed. Jack, Alex is more a cultural than religious Orthodox
Christian, but he has this odd gift for hitting the nail on the head
when it comes to the basic teachings of the Orthodox Church and
expressing them unusually well. You've seen a lot of people (including
me) disagree with him. On this and similar isues, however, few if any
will disagree with what he says.
> One other thing to note is that the Lord's Prayer is not really
> directed to God (indeed, in the same passage it states that the Father
> knows our needs even before we ask Him). Instead, in the Lord's Prayer
> we are talking to ourselves, telling ourselves to recognize the
> supremacy of God, to forgive our fellow men, and to accept whatever
> God has in store for us.
I don't know whether the Church Fathers would have agreed with this
entirely, but it looks spot on to me. I can and do pray for specific
things, but at the same time am aware that what often needs to change
isn't what will happen, but my attitude towards it.
Under His mercy,
--
Catherine Jefferson <ar...@devsite.org>
Personal Home Page * <http://www.devsite.org/>
The SpamBouncer * <http://www.spambouncer.org/>
Alexander Arnakis
<spam...@spambouncer.org> wrote:
>Alexander Arnakis wrote:
>
>> One other thing to note is that the Lord's Prayer is not really
>> directed to God (indeed, in the same passage it states that the Father
>> knows our needs even before we ask Him). Instead, in the Lord's Prayer
>> we are talking to ourselves, telling ourselves to recognize the
>> supremacy of God, to forgive our fellow men, and to accept whatever
>> God has in store for us.
>
>I don't know whether the Church Fathers would have agreed with this
>entirely, but it looks spot on to me. I can and do pray for specific
>things, but at the same time am aware that what often needs to change
>isn't what will happen, but my attitude towards it.
>
I think that, oddly enough, Orthodox Christianity shares a certain
fatalism with Islam. Both look somewhat suspiciously on the ability of
man to overcome fate ("kismet" to the Moslems), and they turn this
situation into a virtue by citing faith in God's beneficence.
On the other hand, Western Catholicism -- and then, especially,
northern European Protestantism -- sees man as much more in control.
Even Calvinism, with its predestinarian tendencies, sees human
achievement as a sign of God's grace (and therefore encourages it).
(Cf. Weber's "Protestant Ethic.")
This difference in outlook could go a long way in explaining the
"clash of civilizations" cultural divide in Europe, and could also
explain why the Moslem world and Eastern Europe (Orthodox in outlook)
are both more accepting of despotic regimes than is the West.
John Galt
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 15:00:32 -0800, Catherine Jefferson
> <spam...@spambouncer.org> wrote:
>
>> Alexander Arnakis wrote:
>>
>>> One other thing to note is that the Lord's Prayer is not really
>>> directed to God (indeed, in the same passage it states that the Father
>>> knows our needs even before we ask Him). Instead, in the Lord's Prayer
>>> we are talking to ourselves, telling ourselves to recognize the
>>> supremacy of God, to forgive our fellow men, and to accept whatever
>>> God has in store for us.
>> I don't know whether the Church Fathers would have agreed with this
>> entirely, but it looks spot on to me. I can and do pray for specific
>> things, but at the same time am aware that what often needs to change
>> isn't what will happen, but my attitude towards it.
>>
> I think that, oddly enough, Orthodox Christianity shares a certain
> fatalism with Islam.
Agreed. Too much. The juxtaposition of Orthodox and Islamic cultures
led, IMO, to the transmission of some Islamic fatalism to the Greeks and
Middle Easterners.
Both look somewhat suspiciously on the ability of
> man to overcome fate ("kismet" to the Moslems), and they turn this
> situation into a virtue by citing faith in God's beneficence.
>
> On the other hand, Western Catholicism -- and then, especially,
> northern European Protestantism -- sees man as much more in control.
> Even Calvinism, with its predestinarian tendencies, sees human
> achievement as a sign of God's grace (and therefore encourages it).
> (Cf. Weber's "Protestant Ethic.")
Yep.
>
> This difference in outlook could go a long way in explaining the
> "clash of civilizations" cultural divide in Europe, and could also
> explain why the Moslem world and Eastern Europe (Orthodox in outlook)
> are both more accepting of despotic regimes than is the West.
Hm. No way to comment on that one in just a few minutes, but I'm
inclined to agree.
JG
>
vjp...@at.biostrategist.dot.dot.com
death whose title escapes me (But it may be Lenten Covenant) in which
he examined how badly the Lord's Prayer is mistranslated (remit our
obligations vs forgive our transgressions). Reading it, in my 30s, the
words "Thy will be done" finally hit me after decades. Not MY, THY.
I'm sorry, I have some constraints and can't dweel on this right now.
- = -
Vasos Panagiotopoulos, Columbia'81+, Reagan, Mozart, Pindus, BioStrategist
http://www.panix.com/~vjp2/vasos.htm http://www.facebook.com/vasjpan2
---{Nothing herein constitutes advice. Everything fully disclaimed.}---
[Homeland Security means private firearms not lazy obstructive guards]
[Urb sprawl confounds terror] [Phooey on GUI: Windows for subprime Bimbos]
vjp...@at.biostrategist.dot.dot.com
happening and our accepting it. It is that our will isn't what is
being done or what needs to be done. Your view is problematic because
it focuses on YOU deciding. That is the entire problem with western
theology from the eastern view. When my dad died, my cousin the priest
who buried him, kept saying "GOD has his reasons." Our understanding
of this is much closer to the Jews and the Muslims than the West (eg
ins'Allah, which is a phrase repeated by Greek Jews as well).
Massie, Land of Firebird, Touchstone, 1980 ISBN 0-671-46059-5
p175 Russians, continued Kohl [Johann G Kohl, Colburn, London,
1842], could be called "Mohammedans of Christianity" because the
phrases "I can't tell, God knows" and "if it pleases God" that
prefaced and ended their sentences
Alexander Arnakis
vjp...@at.BioStrategist.dot.dot.com wrote:
>Ok, a few more minutes. The point isn't doing His will, it is His will
>happening and our accepting it.
Exactly. That's why I said that the Lord's Prayer is really directed
to us, and not to God. It's addressed to *our* attitude about what we
see happening.
Let's say a major natural disaster takes place, and thousands die. The
natural human tendency would be to rail at God, and ask the classic
question, "How could a just and good God allow such a thing to
happen?" Of course, the implication of the question itself is that
God, by deduction, must *not* be just or good. The Orthodox Christian
(if he takes the Lord's Prayer to heart) doesn't ask this sort of
question. He accepts as a given that God is just and good, and that
therefore the terrible event must have a hidden significance that in
the end will turn out to be a boon for mankind. Remember that, to the
Christian, even death has lost its finality, since God has made
provision for salvation.
> It is that our will isn't what is
>being done or what needs to be done. Your view is problematic because
>it focuses on YOU deciding.
No, that's not what I said (or at least I didn't mean to say that).
> That is the entire problem with western
>theology from the eastern view. When my dad died, my cousin the priest
>who buried him, kept saying "GOD has his reasons." Our understanding
>of this is much closer to the Jews and the Muslims than the West (eg
>ins'Allah, which is a phrase repeated by Greek Jews as well).
>
Exactly what I'm saying.
YeshuatheWay
wrote:
The Truth is The Truth, whether you like it or not. Anything else is
hypocrisy. Yashua and many of the (Naviim) prophets were killed for
pointing that out. Many still seem to want to make God in their own
image, the Truth be damned. Doing this has consequences. It is not the
job of Yeshua or the prophets to make you follow The Truth. You have
free will. Their job is to tell you The Truth. Whether you believe or
follow it is up to you.
vjp...@at.biostrategist.dot.dot.com
broken to the will of GOD to understand why they failed. Yet Torrey saw the
greatness of Dwight Moody in his being "surrendered". THe only way I can
personally reconcile the evnagelicals who say "born again" is if this "born
again" is "surrendered." Almost no one in this group, myself the worst, is
really as communitarian as Orthodox should be, because of the western virus
of individualism.
Bell, D L Moody Collection, Moody Press, 1997, 0-8024-1715-9
p101 [Torrey] The first thing that accounts for God's using D L Moody so
mightily was that he was a fully surrendered man
Podhoretz, Prophets, Free Press, 2002 ISBN 0-7432-1927-9
p357 bowing down to the work of their own hands, what they were
worshiping was themselves; and in worshiping themselves, in trusting
in themselves as though they were gods, they not only failed to
acquire superhuman status, but htey lost even such powers as were
granted to human beings, becoming as dead to the world as the idols
they constructed.. idolatry amounted to self-deification, the
delusion.. [Brown, Mgg Confl, 1983, p54 combining issues increases conflict]
In the Ten Commandments, the primary violation of the law
is idolatry.. cult of self.. delusion that we humans are capable of
creating a perfect world - a delusion out of which in the past century
alone mountains of corpses have been amassed
Faith for a Lifetime, Abp Iakovos ISBN 0-385-19595-8
p18 submission, humility, & dependence.. road to perfection
p40 focusing too much on what _I_ wanted, rather than what God
p135 allow God to conform us gradually, over many years of spiritual
growth, to the image of his Son
p145 Human beings.. need to interact with one another and with God in order
to experience great changes in their lives
pp169+ [political] Avoid Headlines.. Forget liberal-conservative
distinctions.. Be suspicious of trendy issues.. Take time to think.. In most
cases, focus on immediate issues, [Brown, Mgg Confl, 1983, p54 combining
issues increases conflict; Podhoretz, Prophets,2002,p357] rather than those
that are far away.. Follow you own Christian conscience.. To illuminate your
conscience, look to the Bible
Eastern Orthodox Church, Benz 1957/2009 Aldine Transaction Rowohlt
p51 Redemprion, therefore, is not primarily the restitution of a legal
relationship that has been upset by sin. Rather, it is fulfillment,
renewal, transfiguration, perfection, deification of man''s
being.. idea of love rather than of justice dominates Eastern
religiosity.. Awareness of the overflowing fullness of divine love
drives away all thought of any schemes of reckoning and satisfaction
vjp...@at.biostrategist.dot.dot.com
indoctrination of children by Orthodoxy bears fruit even when the
outer garments of the flesh have tried to escape it. I have seen
Catholics as well, wander into various forms of Protestantism but
ultimately die Catholic. This is why the Greek peasants who went to
church no more than four times a year felt compelled to hide Jews and
even Italians from the nazis.
vjp...@at.biostrategist.dot.dot.com
I feel too many of today's "Christians" are blind to the hazard of ego.
In my youth, Iakovos and Billy Graham and Jerry Falwell weren't. I remember
in my jr hi years listening to Billy Graham (whose Asheville Easter lamb and
ice tea were catered by my dad's baby brother and who sent a few respondants
to his local crusade to my GOA parish) talk about the dangers of EGO and
confidence on tv. Many times Falwell walked away from various endeavors to
return to his parish. During the 1990s, a man who I very much consider my
mentor in business would whisper in my ear "Stay away from that guy!" and a
few months later that person would be in the news for misdeeds. Finally, I
freaked out and asked how he knew "Easy! Ego!" He explained that these
individuals felt their activity was so important, no law should stand in
their way. (In some cases, the individuals were involved in medicines to save
members of their own families and felt emboldened by their successes - in one
case, saving the lives of two uncles.) This was the situation ethics of the
Kennedy Era that, in the opinion of Bork-mentor Bickel, culminated in
Watergate. But you also have to understand how people get committed to
corruption by increments until it no longer matters.
Bickel, Morality_of_Consent,Yale,1975
p122 [Watergate] leaf from the Warren Court's book, but the presidency
could undertake to act anti-institutionally in this fashion with
more justification because, unlike the Court, it could claim not
only a constituency but the largest one
Baer See No Evil (Syriana) 3Rivers 2002
p59 Soon recruiting agents became as natural as ordering a pizza on the
telephone. It's all a matter of listening to what people are really
saying. Money problems, an awful boss, secret desires or allegiances can all
be windows into small compromises that grow into larger and larger ones. It
took me a while, but when I finally learned to read the dark forest of other
people's minds and then walk them into espionage smal step by small
step. TOward the end of my career, I never had a pitch rejected
Salancik Commitment is too easy Org Dyn 1977 (6) 62-80
p64 Three characteristics bind an individual to his acts and hence commit
him. They are the visibility, the irrevocability, and the volitionality of
the behavior
p77 only places them in the position of having to justify a position that
is being attacked.. allow a person to become committed to his objections in
the first place
p80 commitment is a strikingly powerful and subtle form of coopting
++
> Berekey Orthodox Dean Leonidas C COntos wrote a book prior to his
> death whose title escapes me (But it may be Lenten Covenant) in which
> he examined how badly the Lord's Prayer is mistranslated (remit our
> obligations vs forgive our transgressions). Reading it, in my 30s, the
> words "Thy will be done" finally hit me after decades. Not MY, THY.
>
> I'm sorry, I have some constraints and can't dweel on this right now.
I heard an interesting talk by Father Thomas Hopko on the topic.
Maybe Nick even had his class on the topic?
That is precisely what he talked about and has continued to ponder,
often looking to various of the foreign Orthodox students for how the
prayer was translated into their lan guage at an early time.
For example, what is normally given as "our daily bread" in the
Slavonic is "na[i]sushtni hleb" which, as I have written on before in
this newsgroup , actually means "that bread which is beyond
sustenance", or, put in a short way, supersubstantial bread, or , in
terms of meaning "bread beyond what we use to live on", i.e. not bread
at all but perhaps communion or some mystical sustenance.
I simply don't know (various biblical mss studies are currently boxed
up in the attic) what the earlier mss in Greek / Aramaic/Syruac/ /
Coptic etc. have for this phrase and whether or not the Slavonic is a
close translation of a religious concept or not. Usually, the
Slavonic will mirror the earliest of any of the other languages.
At any rate, this was his pint, that in much of the Lord's Prayer , we
are dealing with conventions of translation. As far as the original
phrase in the query, on the on earth as it is in heaven, it is hard to
see this phrase as inclusive or exclusive of particular things, but
rather seems more like asking for his, as opposed to another will to
be done on earth. And as we consider God to possess infinite Wisdom,
what's non inclusive in that?
Alexander Arnakis
wrote:
>
>For example, what is normally given as "our daily bread" in the
>Slavonic is "na[i]sushtni hleb" which, as I have written on before in
>this newsgroup , actually means "that bread which is beyond
>sustenance", or, put in a short way, supersubstantial bread, or , in
>terms of meaning "bread beyond what we use to live on", i.e. not bread
>at all but perhaps communion or some mystical sustenance.
>
>I simply don't know (various biblical mss studies are currently boxed
>up in the attic) what the earlier mss in Greek / Aramaic/Syruac/ /
>Coptic etc. have for this phrase and whether or not the Slavonic is a
>close translation of a religious concept or not. Usually, the
>Slavonic will mirror the earliest of any of the other languages.
>
this fairly thorough discussion:
pyotr filipivich
on or about Mon, 23 Nov 2009 16:06:31 -0500 did write/type or cause to
appear in alt.religion.christian.east-orthodox the following:
>
>The *only* tangible thing asked for in the Lord's Prayer is "our daily
>bread" -- again, the most minimal and yet the most necessary of
>requests.
And to be lead not into the way of temptation, and for deliverance
from the Evil One.
-
pyotr filipivich
Monotheism, someone has said, offers two simple axioms:
1) There is a God.
2) It's not you.
++
> On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 18:33:13 -0800 (PST), "++" <galja...@gmail.com>
Hey, thanks for the discussion. This means that this is a direct
Slavonic translation from Slavonic roots of a Greek term meaning
precisely the same thing. The mistranslation of hte word from a mss
in the Beinecke collection was particularly interesting to read since
I used to work in accessioning mss for there and the Sterling library
in my youth
Alexander Arnakis
<ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>Let the Record show that Alexander Arnakis <inv...@invalid.invalid>
>on or about Mon, 23 Nov 2009 16:06:31 -0500 did write/type or cause to
>appear in alt.religion.christian.east-orthodox the following:
>>
>>The *only* tangible thing asked for in the Lord's Prayer is "our daily
>>bread" -- again, the most minimal and yet the most necessary of
>>requests.
>
> And to be lead not into the way of temptation, and for deliverance
>from the Evil One.
>-
Those aren't material (tangible) requests. They're of a spiritual
nature.
Just as an aside, how does it help us grow in moral character if we
are spared entirely from temptation? Moral character is shown by being
able to *resist* temptation. Even Jesus Himself was tempted.
++
> On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 22:51:32 -0800, pyotr filipivich
>
> <ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >on or about Mon, 23 Nov 2009 16:06:31 -0500 did write/type or cause to
> >appear in alt.religion.christian.east-orthodox the following:
>
> >>The *only* tangible thing asked for in the Lord's Prayer is "our daily
> >>bread" -- again, the most minimal and yet the most necessary of
> >>requests.
>
> > And to be lead not into the way of temptation, and for deliverance
> >from the Evil One.
> >-
>
> Those aren't material (tangible) requests. They're of a spiritual
> nature.
Yes. That is the point. This isn't our daily bread from a bakery
>
> Just as an aside, how does it help us grow in moral character if we
> are spared entirely from temptation? Moral character is shown by being
> able to *resist* temptation. Even Jesus Himself was tempted.
Hmm, good question. We need a rest from time to time from the
thought, word and deed struggle bearing the cross . Onward Christians
Soldiers.
Jack Riddingplot
I'd like to clarify my understanding of what your responses mean.
1. Alexander pointed out that the Lord's Prayer is neither
conservative nor liberal, and that it's not really a prayer at all.
Its only purpose is to mold the mind of the one "praying" it. In this
sense, prayer has no purpose relative to God, its sole purpose is to
effect change in the mind of the one performing it, not to effect any
sort of change in the mind of God. Instead of the complex rituals of
temple Judaism, which would effect their own changes on the mind of
those participating in them I suppose, a "shortcut" to personal
transformation is substituted.
2. Anything which happens is God's will, whether it be the violent
assault and rape of my elderly aunts, my father's cancer going into
remission, the 9/11 attacks, or global warming. The Lord's Prayer acts
as a personal "mental reset" button that helps us to accept all these
as being products of God's will being carried out here on earth, as
much as it is in the state of perfection we name "heaven".
3. What we'd like in any situation, i.e. our "will", is limited, even
faulty. I would have "willed" that my aunt not have experienced the
assault and rape, but, since it happened, it must be God's will. The
only thing to do is accept that it was God's will, and that God has
his own reasons for it having happened.
If you can add anything, or clarify my understanding, I'd be most
grateful.
Jack
Alexander Arnakis
<jackrid...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>2. Anything which happens is God's will, whether it be the violent
>assault and rape of my elderly aunts, my father's cancer going into
>remission, the 9/11 attacks, or global warming. The Lord's Prayer acts
>as a personal "mental reset" button that helps us to accept all these
>as being products of God's will being carried out here on earth, as
>much as it is in the state of perfection we name "heaven".
>
the life and death of Jesus. Therefore, these tragic things that
happen must logically have some beneficent purpose that's not readily
apparent to us. Either that, or (a) God is uncaring and callous, or
(b) God is powerless. We don't want to believe either of those things.
>3. What we'd like in any situation, i.e. our "will", is limited, even
>faulty. I would have "willed" that my aunt not have experienced the
>assault and rape, but, since it happened, it must be God's will. The
>only thing to do is accept that it was God's will, and that God has
>his own reasons for it having happened.
>
Yes, and those reasons transcend what we *think* is best for us.
Nevertheless, we have the equipment (Free Will) to help ourselves to
the extent that we can. We're not mere automatons.
v1_0
wrote:
> Thank you all for your replies. You've all been most kind.
>
> I'd like to clarify my understanding of what your responses mean.
You may need to review the concept of "Theosis". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theosis
>
> 1. Alexander pointed out that the Lord's Prayer is neither
> conservative nor liberal, and that it's not really a prayer at all.
The gospel account clearly labels it as a prayer. (Teach us how to
pray... when you pray, say...")
> Its only purpose is to mold the mind of the one "praying" it. In this
> sense, prayer has no purpose relative to God, its sole purpose is to
> effect change in the mind of the one performing it, not to effect any
> sort of change in the mind of God.
No. Parts of the prayer are certainly "acknowledgements to God",
while other parts do ask something of God - so your statement is too
broad. Understanding something about theosis will help understand
some of what is going on here.
> Instead of the complex rituals of temple Judaism, which would effect their own changes on the mind of
> those participating in them I suppose, a "shortcut" to personal
> transformation is substituted.
I think the best analogy is that Judaism works from the outside in,
while Christianity works from the inside out. Consider the
statements "Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth, ..." and "love your
neighbor as yourself". Even though they are stated differently, they
lead to the same conclusion about behavior towards the other.
> 2. Anything which happens is God's will, whether it be the violent
> assault and rape of my elderly aunts, my father's cancer going into
> remission, the 9/11 attacks, or global warming. The Lord's Prayer acts
> as a personal "mental reset" button that helps us to accept all these
> as being products of God's will being carried out here on earth, as
> much as it is in the state of perfection we name "heaven".
I suppose you have come to this conclusion from the "fatalism" post
earlier. This is not the view I would share, both on your statement
and the fatalism thing.
The Orthodox accept that we live in a fallen world. Bad things
happen here, as a result of our fall - these things are permitted by
God, but not the will of God. "Thy will be done/Thy kingdom come" is
a very complex statement. On one hand, we are subborning our will to
Gods - acknowledging that his will/ his kingdom is much better than
anything we could come up with. On the other hand, it is also a
desire for his will to be done, and his kingdom to come - so that all
this evil here can be ended. On the grasping hand, we are also
accepting personal responsibility for doing Gods will (as best we can)
here as it is done in heaven.
So, to say that the bad things you have mentioned are the "will of
God" - no, the Orthodox recognize that these brought forth from the
desires of man. Some things - hurricanes, tornadoes, bad weather,
earthquakes, global warming, etc - are unnatural natural processes.
Unnatural in the sense that they are due to the fall, and the
subsequent change in creation. For the most part. Now and again, we
can see where God has used such things to make a point (one way or
another).
In some cases, following God's will can cause us to come to harm - as
many martyers/confessors are example of. But this is different than
the examples you have given.
>
> 3. What we'd like in any situation, i.e. our "will", is limited, even
> faulty. I would have "willed" that my aunt not have experienced the
> assault and rape, but, since it happened, it must be God's will. The
> only thing to do is accept that it was God's will, and that God has
> his own reasons for it having happened.
This is actually quite a deep topic, that has some serious theological
ramifications. Our will is most certainly limited in numerous ways.
We are constrained, that is the human will has certain limits to it.
We also have "blind spots", mostly in evaluating ourselves, which is
the product of self love, and/or pride. Finally, we are influenced
by things - some internal, and, possibly some external - also known as
'our desires'. It is easier to say we have a "freedom to choose",
rather than "free will".
Saying that evil things are Gods will, basically says that "God wills
evil to happen to us", or even God wants evil to happen. This is NOT
accepted by the Orthodox - we believe God is loving and good. We
say, simply, that God permits evil as he has given us a freedom of
choice. To prevent evil would be to go back on what he has given
us.
One thing that we need keep in mind is that these evil things that we
are talking about are *temporary*.
Even so, we do pray "but deliver us from evil.", for both sorts of
evil (spiritual/temporial). Insomuch as the physical kind that is
avoidable. (as in the martyers point above).
>
> If you can add anything, or clarify my understanding, I'd be most
> grateful.
>
> Jack
Ok, I have understood the "And lead us not into temptation;" as more a
plea not to let us go down the path of temptation, rather than to
insulate us from all temptation altogether. The path of temptation is
"loosing" to the tempation.
"Give us this day our daily bread " - I do not see why this cannot
have multiple meanings at the same time. As we are both spiritual
and physical, and walking on the path of Theosis, we need all three
sorts of 'bread'.
-V
Jack Riddingplot
Jack