Hi RayK,

Perhaps we can run with this a while. If anybody else wants to join, the more the merrier!


I've almost always, until very recently, associated personal holiness to a Wesleyan tradition.

Though there is some evidence that Wesley had some knowledge of Orthodoxy, beyond the Anglo-catholic sort of 18th century England and Wales (mostly, but Ireland to a degree), he is often thought of as a father of 'holiness' in various protestant groups.

He put a lot of emphasis on Sanctification-- growth in holiness, after Salvation and as a fruit thereof. The state of being saved was a state of perfection into holiness. (paraphrasing is OK, isn't it!)

Is personal holiness something that those in Western/Eastern Catholic traditions are encouraged to do/be... outside of those who are the religious (priests, monks, nuns, etc.)?

We could go several ways with this... have a go! wg

I think the laity is called to personal holiness. Now many of us fall short of that and don't achieve it, but it's still a worthy goal. My understanding is that God wants all of us to be holy.

Please take as an example The Ladder, by St. John Climacus, which, while written for monastics, is equally applicable to the laity. Many other Fathers have written on this call to theosis.

Gaudior, thinking there are no two ways about this...

John and Charles Wesley were indeed champions of holiness. They were a thorn in the flesh to Reform Protestantism and show a distinct love for Eastern Christianity. More specifics as I've time.

Alex is a great lover of the Wesleys, btw.

Dan Lauffer, United Methodist Pastor for 27 years before I came all the way home.

As a prelude to my answer – let me define one term here to make things easier. If I may here, I am going to use the word ‘catholic’ with a small ‘c’ to indicate the combined churches that call themselves catholic. This would include the Byzantine, Latin (Roman), various Eastern including Orthodox, and Oriental etc… each with seven sacraments and common roots of an ordained priesthood.

Answer: Yes. Every catholic is invited to the further spiritual growth of personal holiness – above and beyond just being salvaged from destruction cased by sin.

If I understand you well - the catholic churches believe in the same way as what you describe as the Wesleyan tradition.

One may come - through progress in the spiritual life – to a habitual union with God before physical death (this is called the Mystical Marriage). We are all invited to mystical union (habitual and fully cognitive union with God before death). If we can call being ‘saved’ a basic union of faith that Jesus is God (or at least God’s right-hand-man) – and that faith is the basic essential to be a Christian – we believe there is available a further transformation (verb) of heart and mind – that we are invited to. This daily way of life is called the “spiritual life” or the “mystical life”. It is a further cooperation on our part – with Providence.

God may save us from destruction – but it is then upon us ourselves to further that, to build upon it daily, into even more of a union with God.

You said” “a state of perfection into holiness. “ and I can understand what you are saying. We would use different wording because we usually use ‘perfection’ as a noun to indicate the final results of the actions of sanctification – reached only after years of cooperation with Providence. In our use of the word ‘perfection’ it is usually used as the end result – a further goal to reach.

As regards the priesthood, monks, nuns, etc… for us … marriage is also a sacrament as is also the priesthood (being a monk or nun is not a sacrament) which means that to enter into marriage has the same calling to personal holiness as the priesthood. Not the same function – but the same call to a higher and further personal sanctification to holiness. These dedicated religious (priest, brother, monks, nun) it is their duty to encourage the rest of us to personal holiness. In a great way – it is their duty to serve to us what we need to reach our own personal holiness.

I happened to read Dan’s response and it looks to me that he might be familiar with the ‘translations’ of terminology between yours and ours.

Understanding the terminology of the other takes great patience, understanding, listening, and charity. In the past we have all lacked these virtues – I pray that may we possess them now.

-ray

All the baptised faithful have a call to Holiness no matter what their vocation that was one of the strongest messages of the Second Vatican Council. Indeed, the Council produced a document on the unique apostolate on the layman and included the lay faithful and their role in its Dogmatic Constitution.

Lay people are called to Holiness in the 17th century St Francis de Sales actually wrote a book on the subject called 'The Introduction to the Devout Life', which is a manual for how lay people can go from mortal sin to mysticism. Giving meditations, advice and pointers of how to break with attachment to sin until one finally reaches God going through the purgative, illuminative and unitative stages set out by St Bonaventure.

In recent times this message has been taken up most strongly by John Henry Cardinal Newman whose motto 'heart speaks to heart' comes from one of St Francis de Sales' letters and, of course, Opus Dei. There is no question that the laity are supposed to called to holiness. Jesus' public ministry was just that: public. And the letters of the Apostles encourage personal piety.

Need I mention St Cyril of Jerusalem's advice to the average Christian or St John Chrysostom's encouragement to his audience to pray unceasingly even in the town's and cities?

And the 18th century book Abandonment to Divine Providence by the French priest Jean-Pierre Caussade - my personal favorite. Not a day goes by that I am not mindful of Caussade. My studies on saints have noted that a daily awareness of Providence (as Caussade outlines it) has been the cornerstone to all saints of all times. A 'secret' to holiness - which is not a secret.

And what was the book St. Bonaventure(sp) wrote? I can remember the name of it right now - a short book - perhaps "Conformity To The Will of God" no that was another saint - in any event - of all the books I have ever prized - Caussade - is it. Of all the saint I shall meet face to face after this life - Caussade (not officially declared a saint) shall be the first and receive my thanks the most. For over 10 years I re-read one of his letters - each day - slowly - as water seeps into earth - one each day. I have given so many copies of that book away - that I currently (yet again) do not have one myself.

-ray

Wild Goose..

By the way - if you have come to experience something of the catholic way (Eastern/Latin/Orthodox) you have somehow come exactly to the right board! No one here is out to convert anyone else. We all are spiritually feed by our own tradition and each other's traditions. But we do have a special going on this week if you wish to become an Armenian Catholic (little joke there).

I do not believe that you will find quite the same spirit at other larger boards. And while we all have our varied opinions here - the "tie that binds" us all to Christ is very evident in each participant at this board. We are a mix of Roman Catholic (Latin Church) and a few types of Eastern (Orthodox, and Byzantine), and I think a couple of Protestants, ... now all we need to do is find a Jew (hehe - a joke).

oh wait - Jesus was a Jew.

OK - "jew" is found!



-ray

Dear Wild Goose,

As you are from England, did you know of the connection between John Wycliffe and Jan Hus of Bohemia?

The term "Wild Goose" was used of Hus by his opponents.

But it was Hus himself who wrote to Sigismund while in prison that "your Goose is not cooked yet."

Are you a Hussite sympathiser then?

As you know, John Wesley read the Eastern Fathers rather widely and he himself said he honoured them all.

While it would take a good scholarly paper to properly demonstrate this, the case can be made that Wesley's dedication to holiness was rooted in his reading of Eastern Christian theology.

In the book, "A Rumour of Bishops" it is said that Wesley himself applied to Constantinople to be ordained a bishop by the Patriarch so that he could begin his church in the U.S. - according to the principle of "economia."

I understand that Sergius Bulgakov also once recommended to the various Protestant denominations that they accept the Seven Sacraments from the Orthodox Church on the same principle.

Wesley's rule of life is one that ALL Christians can easily adopt - or not so easily.

He prescribed, as you know, 1-3 hours of prayer, morning and night, the observance of prayer at the Apostolic Hours, bible-reading, fasting etc.

My favourite teaching from him is when he said, in a passage about examining one's conscience, "Do we truly believe we are only on this earth as visitors who will one day return to our Lord to give an account of how we served Him and the cause of His Church?"

Alex

St. Paul stated in his epistle to the Ephesians "But fornication and all uncleaness or covetousness, let it not even be named among you, as is fitting for saints; neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor coarse jesting, which are not fitting but rather giving of thanks."(Eph. 5:3-4)
"Finally, brethren, whatever things are true, whatever things are noble, whatever things are just, whatever things are pure, whatever things are lovely, whatever things are of good report, if there is any virture and if there is anything worthy of praise-meditate on these things."(Philipians 4:8)
Just some passages to ponder. There are many more but I don't have time to write them out now and I'm sure you've all heard them several times previously.
In Christ, Our Risen Lord,
Sarai

A kind of plain statement that - what is good is good - what is bad for us is bad for us. Now this is a spirituality I can understand.



-ray

and recently? where have you turned now?

-ray

I like St. Gregory of Nyssa's book From Glory to Glory wherein he describes the Christian life and the life of holiness as being PROCESS or an ongoing growth in relationship with Christ that begins now and continues into eternity. Even there, he suggests, there will be growth for us but unhampered by the distractions of this present age. St. Gregory says that "perfection" is a pagan idea because it implies a finality that is static whereas Christians should speak of "perfecting," a process that continues, that is living.

"Holiness" has the same root in the language as "wholeness" and seems to imply achieving a right relationship with Christ on all levels. So in our perfecting, we Christians are always a work in progress.

Hi Theophan,

I like the 'process,' the 'pagan' note (I agree*) and the 'wholeness' aspects of what the Saint had to say. Spot on! wg

* even if the cosmos should come to an end, our life in God in Christ would continue, by, in and through faith.

There would be no need for sermons, if our lives were shining; there would be no need for words, if we bore witness with our deeds. There would be no pagans, if we were true Christians.
St. John Chrysostom

Wild Goose:

I think that if we take a look at St. Gregory's thesis, we'd have to look at "perfection" as a "state" and "state" has the same root as "static"--meaning that it "stands," is not moving. Then I'd have to wonder if one were ever to reach such a state if one would then have to look around and ask "Now what?" It seems antithetical to what we know of as life: growth and change. I compare what someone once told me about a real definition of death: that one cannot or will not grow by learning and changing.

St. Gregory sketches his vision as analgous to climbing a mountain. God takes us from one plane to another. When we teach the upper plane, we achieve a better vision of what our relationship with Him ought to be and what we ought to be continuing to do. It gives us a clearer vision of the Gospel itself and how it ought to leaven our lives. At the same time this new plane beckons to another higher plane to which we are invited by the Grace of God to move toward. And each time the vision becomes brighter, clearer, and more expanded while our relationship with the God Who loves us becomes stronger by the effort of "climbing."

St. Gregory goes on to suggest that this "climbing" and growing and learning will continue in eternity as God continues to reveal something more and more to us about Himself, thereby deepening our relationship eternally. Since we are finite, God is infinite, and eternity never ends, we have a lot to learn and a never ending span of existence to do it in.

It seems to me that this dynamic makes "holiness" something exciting--an adventure with a Lover. What could be more exciting?

This book is available in English translation from St. Vladimir's Seminary Press in Crestwood, Tuckahoe, New York, USA. It's been one of those I bought long ago and like to return to once in awhile.

In Christ,

BOB

For the sake of discussion and not to argue or correct anyone...

if were are talking 'perfection' as in Jesus telling us in the gospels "you must be perfect..." then we are talking about something that - we do or is with our part.

In the schema of the mystical or spiritual life... there are three stages...

Purgation
Enlightenment
Union

these three stages take place within us... and so perfection corresponds to the unitive stage.

These stages are codified in the Doctors of the Church. East as well as West.

Consciousness (that which we most often think we are) is just the tip of the iceberg. Our personality includes our deeper subconscious. That subconscious is our psyche (which is Greek for spirit). We must become spiritual (said Paul) which means aware of this level of ourselves, and "our battle is in spiritual places" which again means - in our psychological mind.

Both Eastern and Western mystical theology teach that sanctification takes place - in the memory... the habitual part of our mind. A slow process (slowed by our own free will reluctance) that must be done in a knowing cooperation with Providence. In other words - we can not do it by ourselves. And thell tell us that we can not know God with our senses but that we know God within our spirit (pshyche - mind).

The events of this world - are arranged by Good - as a formative process for us. There are the 'set stage' in which (if we cooperate) our virtues grow ("you shall know them by their fruits").

Therefore - I do see 'perfection' as a condition (not really a state - we enter into). A condition where our free will of choosing to cooperate with God - becomes a habitual tendency of our subconscious... replacing ... the hidden motivations toward sin (self-providence).

Q:Where does purgation take place?
A:The habitual and subconscious layers of our mind (spirit).

Q:Where does enlightenment take place?
A:In the intuitive part of our mind (sublevels).

East and West - the Doctors of the Church teach that enlightenment is an intuition (in-teaching) that takes place within our conscience (together-knowing) and within the imagination (presented in the signs and symbols appropriate to our imaginative faculty).

Certainly the purpose of enlightenment is to give - eyes - to the will - because we can not desire with the will what out intellect can not see.

Therefore - perfection is synonymous with the stage of Union or called 'mystical marriage' and is a condition of our spiritual nature (our mind and psychology) that is now one of habit.

Sin (non-cooperation with Providence) or cooperation (doing the will of God) is an immediate choice it is true - but if we admit that sin becomes a habit (unconscious tendency that sways consciousness) than we must also admit that holiness (doing the will of God) also becomes a habit.

Since Jesus said "you must become perfect as your heavily father is perfect" and we already know he was not talking about intellect but rather selection according to the will ("those who do my fathers will are my brothers... <family> ...") then the perfection spoken of is certainly something that we do our part in - and that perfection spoken of resides - in us (out spiritual nature - our mind - our psyche).

Now (to discuss further) as regards St. Gregory saying that perfection is a pagan concept ...

As most people here know, I do not regard the early fathers as error free at all times (other wise Councils would not have been needed to decide issues and doctrine between their debates and variations of ideas on things). Nor to I think even saint in perfect union (a thing of the will) are intellectually error free - that is not a requirement of sainthood - virtue is the requirement. And I note that even the apostles were sometimes in some degree of error about certain things in their epistles (a few misquotes of scriptures). They were not yet in full union but were in the process themselves.

So as regards Gregory saying that perfection is not a Christian ideal but a pagan concept (if that was indeed his meaning)... I have two problems with his misunderstanding (unless we have misunderstood him). The first I have already dealt with - that there - is - a Christian understanding of a condition of us that is called perfection by Jesus (habitual holiness - mystical union before physical death). And secondly - many of the early fathers used the term pagan in a negative way - and an unfair negative in many situations.

If we call people pagans who had some type of religious beliefs - before Jesus came - they had no way to as yet know - Jesus and Christianity. This is certainly not a fault or sin of theirs. The Jewish covenant of Moses - was restricted - to genetic line - or conversion. Conversions were rare for two reasons 1) Jews did not go out seeking converts 2) the Jewish nation was small in comparison to other kingdoms and so it was not well known.

The word pagan comes from the Greek god - Pan - who was a god of nature - and so it symbolizes - pagan - as those who worships the forces of nature in some way and for some reason - or worshiped god as evidence by the forces of nature. Many of the fathers used the word ‘pagan’ to indicate any one or group who did not believe in Jesus Christ. Yet again I say that those who lived before Jesus came - have no personal fault in not knowing anything about him. They can not know what had not yet been revealed.

I have no problem with a definition of ‘pagan’ for people today who do know enough about Jesus and Christianity - and prefer to reject Jesus in favor of a nature based religion. These seems to me to be some bit of personal fault there - if one knows something of Jesus and rejects that for - nature - alone. But I do have a problems with some of these early fathers who lay a personal fault of sin on those who did not know anything about Jesus (he had not come yet) and worshiped God through evidence of him via nature (and may I remind us that Paul said God is evidenced by the evidence of the natural world) or who worshiped him - short - by worshiping the unknowable God through what he does in nature.

All of us are part “pagan” in that we see the forces of nature and the natural world (and we do not see God) and so - the same as we view a crucifix or icon - these natural things and forces - prompt us to worship the unknowable God who made them. Which Christian does not turn his mind to God when he witnesses some spectacular force of nature? Which Christian can look out over a field at night and see a huge lightening strike - and not think of the God who ‘threw the bolt’ and created the event in the natural world?

And I say this - only - in so much as - we would like to believe that these early fathers were something more than human - but the fact is - they were humans yet still in progress of sanctification. The results of Councils - we can take as pretty concrete if we know the context of the Council - but we must takes the writings of the early church fathers with a gain of salt names “human” and not imagine that everything they said was right on the money.

These are my current thoughts.

-ray

Ray:

I think that your reference to "habitual holiness" is the PROCESS that St. Gregory is speaking about. I don't think the word "condition" is opposed to this idea of PROCESS either. I see "condition" as fluid and St. Gregory seems to be trying to emphasize this living fluidity, for lack of better terminology on my part.

His reference to pagan ideas of perfection seems to have to do with pagan philosphy. And if I'm not mistaken pagan philosophy saw a state of perfection as a finality of sorts where a person or thing stopped because there was nowhere else to go or nothing else to accomplish.

In Christ,

BOB

Oh ... OK

-ray

Many thanks for that information Bob; I'll see if I can get my hands on that one. blessing, wg

Dear theophan:

Yes - it has been years since I read Gregory of Nyssa - I read him over and over for several years when I first found him. I would take him to the woods and read undisturbed. So I have forgotten some of him - consciously - but he remains a sturdy stone in my own spiritual foundation.

If I can sing his praises for a moment…

He was one of the Alexandrian fathers - an off shoot of Clement and Origen and Evagirus (the father of all Christian monastic spirituality). He was one of the early fathers who, still was so close to biblical antiquities (through the catechetical school that Mark founded in Alexandria) who really knew the proper understanding of scriptural allegory and spiritual interpretation. Gregory’s description of the burning bush - remains burned (if you will) into my mind - even today and forever.

While some of the more zealous early fathers dismissed all classical learning and knowledge as pagan and the work of the devil - he believed that classical works and education contained some forms of truth - and were legitimate and worthy.

Zealous Christians were burning classical manuscripts - raiding libraries and making book bonfires of Homer, and Greek mathematicians, and Aristotle, and Jewish works of biblical commentary. Pagan gathers and rituals were being banned under penalty of death. These fundamentalist Christians became a prime reason why so much of biblical antiquities has been lost to us. If one was not Christian one was a ‘pagan’. The Christian persecution of pagans and all non-Christian literature reached it peak about 4th century (Gregory lived to about 394AD). Most modern scholars agreeing that it was the Patriarch Theophilus of Alexandria who was responsible for the last and final burning of the great libraries of Alexandria (complying with an order from Caesar Theodosius who brought about the most ruthless purge of ‘pagans’ across the Roman Empire).

Of course the more ‘level heads’ finally prevailed in the Church and later came to make education in the classics and philosophy (what remained anyway) a required and fundamental part of the seminary formation for the priesthood.

As things would have it - over the last 75 years some of these lost manuscripts have been coming to light - in that paper was a rare thing - and so monks would ‘wash’ the ‘pagan’ manuscripts and re-use them in monastery libraries for Christian works. Such was the case of just recently the discovery of a manuscript of a Greek mathematician found under - the writing of an early monastic manuscript. Through special lighting and computer enhancements - the washed out Greek text was deciphered - and there - among the letters - was a theorem for correctly calculating the absolute volume of a triangle - something modern mathematicians with computers had struggled long on - and could not solved! (thank you Nova TV show).

While perhaps others may not recognize this ‘pivotal point’ in Christianity which Gregory represents to me… I can say that it was Gregory who prevented me from even accidentally stumbling into the path of being a fundamentalist Christian. Like many Saints - when they were alive they were at odd with other ‘church fathers’ - and stood against the tide - and then much later - were recognized for their courage under persecution (that persecution often coming from the powerful Hellenism ‘block’ of church fathers within authorities of the Church itself).

I ‘second’ your recommendation to WG to browse St. Gregory of Nyssa.

http://www.bhsu.edu/artssciences/asfaculty/dsalomon/nyssa/ref.html
But there is nothing quite like a book in the hand J

-ray

ray:

I, too, must admit to having read St. Gregory many years ago. But it seems that like so many other such works it is a good thing to go back after one has a few more years praying and asking God and one's spiritual director for help to more fully understand the thoughts offered. That's why I said that he's one that I go back to once in awhile.

BOB