Return to the Blog

We just wanted to let our readers know that having finished our project we are back on the blog.

Someone has submitted a comment to Medical Aspects of the Monastic Vocation. We do not wish to publish it in full. In part it reads:

The late … in … suffered from bi-polar disorder. Much of her … [work was] produced during her manic periods, because she either did not or could not take the proper medication. And don't forget St. Pimen the Sickly of the Kievan Caves, a bed-bound invalid, who was miraculously tonsured by the Holy Angels themselves. The State Church of Greece, unless I am mistaken, has provision for women to be tonsured as nuns and maintain their own residences and livings. …

We will comment on this in a separate post.

In addition we would like to ask how many of our readers would be interested in a full, formatted print-out of the blog. Please let us know in a comment.

—Orthodox Monk

The Mission of the Church

The mission of the Church. We all know that Christ sent the Apostles to preach to all nations, baptizing in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit:

All authority in Heaven and on earth has been given to me. Going, make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to keep all that I have commanded you. And behold I am with you (plural) all the days up to the consummation of the Age. Amen. (Mat. 28, 18–20.)

Of course the history of Christianity is intimately connected to the missionary activity of the various Christian denominations. What we would like to reflect on, however, is the nature of this mission of the Church.

Let us suppose that the Church is inserted into a city in the modern West the population of which is in part de-churched and in part dispersed among the various Protestant, largely, churches but also the Roman Catholic church. What is the mission of the Orthodox Church?

To a large extent, the various jurisdictions of the Orthodox Church view their mission as a ministry to the members of their ‘ethnic group of origin’. If it’s the Greeks, then they worry about the Greeks; if it’s the Russians, they worry about the Russians. If you’re not part of the ‘ethnic group of origin’ then we’re not interested. And to a large extent the mission is seen in ethnic terms: the Church is seen as a bearer of ethnic identity, even ethnic political identity. The church can even be seen as the bearer of a nationalist political ideal. Of course there are two major exceptions: the Orthodox Church in America and the Church of Antioch both have a consciously missionary orientation, largely Protestant influenced.

The Roman Catholic church on the other hand largely views itself in universalistic, transnational terms—although it is certainly not above getting mixed up in national or nationalist politics. It largely sees its missionary work in terms of developing an educational and/or health system that will bring unchurched locals into contact with the Catholic church in a positive way. In this model of evangelization, the long view is taken: the culture is to be Catholicized by the interaction of locals with the Roman Catholic services provided: the children who attend the Catholic school grow up with, hopefully, a positive view of the Roman Catholic church so that while those children might not themselves convert, the Roman Catholic church establishes a presence in the local society and eventually begins to make converts.

So far we have said nothing new, although some people might dispute our characterization of one or another Christian group’s practices.

What we would like to reflect on here, however, is the substance of St Paul’s remark in 2 Corinthians 5, 17-21:

If one is in Christ he is a new creation. The ancient things have passed; behold all things have become new. All things are from God who has reconciled us to himself through Jesus Christ, giving us the ministry of reconciliation. So that God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself, not reckoning to them their sins and establishing in us the word of reconciliation. Therefore we speak on behalf of Christ, as interceding with God on your behalf. We beseech on behalf of Christ: be reconciled to God. For he made him who did not know sin to be sin on our behalf so that we might become the righteousness of God in him.

It is perhaps not accidental that this message is at the core of those Protestant denominations that preach a born-again experience. And it is also true that as we have occasionally remarked that this Protestant born-again Christianity can be quite authoritarian, doing psychological violence to its converts.

It seems to us that the ministry of reconciliation of the Orthodox Church, which includes both its mission ad extra and its mission ad intra, is one of love. And the key to this love is not a sentimental love—a love which passes away—but the love given by the Holy Spirit. How is this love given? First of all this love is encountered as the presence of the Holy Spirit in the person preaching the Gospel. In the Orthodox Church, the transforming effect of the staretz or Elder is well known and well attested. In the West St Seraphim of Sarov is perhaps the best-known such staretz, although Elder Paisios of more recent times was very well known for the transforming effect of his love on his interlocutor. Although such startsy or Elders may perform miracles, it is their love which captivates and transforms the sinner, a love which is not judgemental nor of the flesh—a love which Elder Paisios himself called a Gospel love. This Gospel love is clearly the operation of the Holy Spirit in the staretz or Elder.

Now how do we appropriate that love for ourselves? Through Baptism. As we have been taught by the Fathers, it is baptism which grants us the forgiveness of sins, cleanses our soul and puts into our soul the Holy Spirit so that we are transformed. It is Baptism which makes us a new creation. It is baptism which reconciles us to God. However, as we have been taught, while Baptism grants us the forgiveness of sins, the restoration of the image of God in us and the pledge of the Holy Spirit, it is up to us to put into practice the word of the Gospel that the Kingdom of God is taken by violence: after baptism we must make an effort to restore our likeness to God by an essentially ascetical endeavour. This is true for all Orthodox Christians, not only monastics.

Moreover, since we are human and fallible, there is the ministry of reconciliation after our baptism through repentance, tears and the priest.

Although most Christian denominations maintain the same structure of belief as outlined here (except among Protestants concerning personal ascetical endeavour after Baptism), there is a quite different ‘flavour’ among various Christian groups as regards how this structure is actualized. The Roman Catholic church has historically been very rationalistic and legalistic; the various Protestant groups can be very sentimental or authoritarian. Here we want to emphasize the role of spiritual love in the Orthodox Church. Since this love is an operation of the Holy Spirit, it is not emotional but spiritual. Moreover, in the Orthodox Church, the encounter with Truth is neither humanly rationalistic nor humanly emotional. It is the encounter of the person with the Holy Spirit within. It is the Holy Spirit within us which bears witness to the truth of Orthodoxy, not the rational arguments of the Roman Catholic nor the emotional or authoritarian fixations of the born-again Protestant. Although love can perhaps be over-emphasized—sometimes the sinner should be reminded of the Judgement—in a healthy conversion or repentance it is ultimately the warmth of spiritual love which converts the sinner to Christ. For Christ is calling the sinner not to an authoritarian, emotionally violent and conflicted life but to participation in the inner life of the Holy Trinity through the Holy Spirit. Ultimately God is a God of love. It is for love that we were created. Our reconciliation to God is a reconciliation of the sinner to the love of God, to the love of the Father, so that the reconciled sinner loves God in return. And this love is a love to the Ages. A little earlier in 2 Corinthians 5, St Paul writes:

For we know that if our earthly dwelling of the tent [i.e. body] is dissolved we have a building from God, an eternal dwelling in the Heavens not made with hands. And for that reason we sigh in this dwelling, greatly desiring to be clothed with our dwelling which is from Heaven; and if clothed then we will not be found naked. And we who are in the body sigh, weighed down since we do not wish to be unclothed but to be clothed, so that what is mortal be swallowed up by Life. God is he who works us to this very thing, he who has also given us the pledge of the Spirit. Therefore seeing that sojourning in the body we are absent from the Lord we always take courage. For we walk by faith not by sight. But we take courage and rather look forward to departing from the body to sojourn with the Lord. And so whether sojourning or departing we act with a sense of honour so as to be pleasing to him. For we must all appear before the judgement seat of Christ, each to obtain that which is appropriate to what he has done, whether good or bad.

Medical Aspects of the Monastic Vocation

We have received a very interesting email from a woman we shall call ‘Sarah Jean’. Here is the email, with some of the details altered:

Dear Orthodox Monk:

I just started reading your blog, and have enjoyed it immensely. I was just writing because I have a question.

I am interested in becoming an Orthodox nun one day, but I have a health condition. This condition does not keep me from leading a normal life, but I have to take medication for it. Because of this, I am going to have to have health insurance. I was just wondering if I even have a chance of being considered for the monastic life.

Thank you for everything.

Sincerely,

Sarah

The issue here is whether a pre-existing medical condition might prevent Sarah or anyone else from joining an Orthodox monastery.

There are a number of aspects to this question. The first is the economic issue of whether Sarah Jean can expect to be accepted into an Orthodox monastery in the United States when she has a pre-existing condition that requires medical insurance—obviously because someone has to pay for the medication that she will have to take for the rest of her life.

This is part of a broader issue. Let us suppose that we screen random young men or women in the population for pre-existing ailments, removing those who have them so that we are left with 100 healthy young men or women. Now let us put them into a monastery of monks or nuns as the case may be for the rest of their lives. Obviously some of these healthy young men and women are going to fall sick over their lifetimes. They might have dental problems. They might have a hidden ailment that is genetically based that comes to light after 20 years in the monastery. They might get cancer. They might have an accident in a workshop or in a car. They might get mentally ill. Any number of things can and might happen. So what then?

Should the monastery accept postulants and make them monks or nuns for only as long as they are healthy, expelling them if they get sick? Should the monastery demand that each postulant have enough money to purchase medical insurance for the rest of their life before they enter the monastery? Obviously not. Clearly the monastery has to make some provision for the medical and dental care of its monks or nuns. This can range from private medical insurance to self-insurance (i.e. the monastery is wealthy enough to pay its monastics’ medical bills out of pocket) to government medical insurance in those countries that have such a thing. So the clever postulant would inquire what the policy is of the monastery that they are thinking of entering concerning medical issues.

Now we can see that Sarah Jean must necessarily ask about such a thing even if she isn’t clever at all—she needs medication every day and someone has to pay for it.

Now every monastery is different and every monastery will have a formal or informal policy on the matter. It seems to us that just as the monastery will want to know about each postulant’s medical history each postulant will want to know about the monastery’s policy on medical and dental treatment. Only the foolish, naïve postulant will accept an answer that God provides or similar handwaving.

Now, as far as we know Sarah Jean is thinking of joining a monastery in the United States. We frankly don’t understand Obamacare and its ramifications for the medical treatment of monks or nuns on a lifetime basis. This is not because we have a political position. Rather, just as a practical matter we don’t know what the implications of Obamacare are on this point. We do know that some countries have cradle-to-grave medical care for citizens and perhaps even for legal residents of the country who are not citizens. Certainly Sarah Jean could join a monastery in a country in which the state would cover her medical expenses for the rest of her life, assuming that Sarah Jean was happy with the country and the monastery and could integrate into the culture of the country; and both the monastery and the country were happy with Sarah Jean. St John of Sinai recommends ‘exile’—living in a foreign country as part of the monastic vocation—but not everyone is capable of doing that or even willing to do it.

This is something that Sarah Jean will have to discuss with the monastery she is thinking of joining. For to become a nun, Sarah Jean will have to join a specific monastery; there’s no other way to become a nun.  Same for becoming a monk.

So this is the economic dimension.

Now there is another dimension. That is the impact of a pre-existing medical condition on the potential monastic vocation. This is a delicate matter and we do not want to offend anyone. There is a broad spectrum of pre-existing conditions that a person might have. Some of them are purely physical but some of them involve genetically-based emotional disorders. In general, a medical condition that allows a person to live normally if the proper medication is taken should not affect a monastic vocation. However, it should be understood that the monastic vocation is a struggle towards perfection and therefore inherently more stressful than married life in the world. Hence given the specific medical condition that Sarah Jean has (and we have no idea what it is) one would have to assess the effect of the monastic life on the potential evolution of the condition.

One can see that simple physical problems—let us say that the body does not produce a certain enzyme and the person has to take the enzyme orally—should have minimal effect on the vocation.

However, because of the stress inherent in the monastic vocation complex emotional problems might have a very serious evolution were the person to become a monastic, so much so that major mental illness is normally considered to be a natural impediment to the monastic vocation.

In the middle are more complex physical ailments such as type 1 diabetes, which requires constant medical monitoring and which has serious ramifications both for the physical and for the mental wellbeing of the person suffering from it. That is, while the person suffering from type 1 diabetes might well be able to carry on a successful professional career, their lives are by no means simple and it is not at all obvious that they would be able to become a monastic. In these middle cases, the monastery would have to make a discernment whether it was the will of God for the person to undertake a monastic vocation and whether it was the will of God for the person to undertake the monastic vocation in that monastery. Two different questions. In our example of type 1 diabetes, it might be that the person has a vocation but to a specific monastery where their condition can for some reason easily be monitored—maybe the monastery is next door to the local diabetes clinic.

Also in the middle are complex neurological conditions.

In thinking about this issue of pre-existing conditions, one should also consider the following. Going back to our hypothetical example of 100 postulants who are perfectly healthy, assuming that they were all to become monastics in our hypothetical monastery, some of them will develop a condition where they no longer produce a certain enzyme and have to take the enzyme the rest of their lives; some of them will develop major mental illness; and some of them will develop if not type 1 diabetes, then type 2 diabetes, which can be just as difficult to manage as type 1 diabetes. Moreover, some of the 100 postulants will ultimately develop neurological illness, whether Alzheimer’s or multiple sclerosis or whatever.

So from the point of view of the monastery there has to be the possibility of caring for these people who started off healthy but no longer are healthy across the full spectrum of possible medical conditions. This is both economic and spiritual. In other words it’s not just a matter of paying for these persons’ medical care, but of being able to care for these people emotionally and spiritually within the confines of the monastery.

Finally, in considering a vocation the monastery has to consider the following. What is going to be the effect on the rest of the monastic community if the person under consideration is accepted? Let us take the obvious case to see what we mean. Let us suppose that we accept someone who is medicated for serious mental illness into the monastery. Is the monastery resilient enough to accept the stress of the entry of that person into the monastery without excessive distortion of the monastery’s social system? A monastery is not a refuge; it is a wrestling arena for healthy people to strive for perfection. Hence if the monastery is large and robust, it might conceivably be able to accept such a person into the monastery without a distortion of its fundamental purpose. However, if the monastery is not so large or not so robust, acceptance of such a person might distort the social system of the monastery so much that the monastery no longer meets its primary objective of providing a wrestling arena for healthy people to achieve spiritual perfection. In such a case, there is going to be a crisis in the monastery because the serious spiritual seekers will be disappointed and leave. This model analysis applies to all medical conditions from the simplest and mildest to the most extreme.

So to summarize:

1. There is an economic issue which has to be discussed with the monastery.

2. There is the issue that the monastery has to care both economically and spiritually for its members who fall ill on the road of life. A monastery which didn’t wouldn’t be worth joining.

3. There is the issue of whether the person entering with a pre-existing medical condition can reasonably be expected to live a serious monastic life given the particular stresses of such a life.

4. There is the issue of whether the monastery is resilient enough to accept the person with their medical condition without excessive distortion of the monastery’s primary goal of seeking after spiritual perfection.

We would suggest that Sarah Jean discuss the above with her doctor, her confessor and any monastery she is considering joining. As we said, we have absolutely no idea what Sarah Jean’s condition is; we are just trying to give a comprehensive analysis of the issues. We wish Sarah Jean well.

Honour Your Father and Mother

We have received a very interesting email from a woman we shall call ‘Martha Simms’. Here is the email, with some of the details altered:

What exactly does it mean to ‘honour your mother and father?’ I was raised in a Protestant home. At the age of 50, I converted to the Eastern Orthodox faith. In doing so, I went against what my parents expected of me. My choice, also went against the wishes of my husband. Sometimes I still feel a ‘faded guilt’. Two of these dear ones, even yet, do not support my decision. Where have I done wrong?

Have I dishonoured my parents? What about my husband? I have been converted these past 10 years. I wish that I could get over these nagging thoughts.

Thank you,

Martha Simms

There are several reasons why we, Orthodox Monk, are so slow to reply to emails:

1. We are busy.

2. The emails ask difficult questions.

The issue here is the thought that “I have done wrong” in going against the wishes of my parents (and husband) in becoming a member of the Orthodox Church.

This is a temptation. Before we discuss how to respond to this type of temptation, first let us look at the objective situation.

Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee. (Exodus 20, 12, KJV.)

This is one of the ten commandments. It is one of the pillars of Judaism and Christianity. Although we do not know any specific reference we would also imagine that some form of it is important in Islam, and indeed in every other major religion. That is because it is part of the natural law—the law put into human nature by God when he created us—for us to respect our parents, just as it is part of the natural law for parents to love their children.

The issue of course is what it means for us to honour our father and mother: what is the scope of the commandment? Can our parents tell us who to marry? Can they force us to worship God according to their own beliefs? Can they tell us what to study in school to prepare for our life? Can they insist that they live with us? Can they tell us what job to take and what job not to take? What is legitimate for parents to demand of us and what is beyond the scope of the commandment?

There is also a similar issue here concerning one’s husband, since Paul is clear that the husband is head of the wife.

Let us look at how Our Lord answers this question:

Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven. But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven. Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man’s foes [shall be] they of his own household. He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me. He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it. (Matthew 10, 33 – 39 KJV.)

It is clear that the commandment to love God and to confess Jesus Christ his Son takes precedence over the commandment to honour one’s father and mother: there is a limit to the scope of the commandment to honour one’s father and mother. The Gospel passage is clear that we must put our faith in Jesus Christ over honour for our parents—or even for our husband.

We enter the Orthodox Church because we believe that it is the truth; that in entering the Orthodox Church we confess Jesus Christ in fullness. Indeed the Rite of the Catechumen before Baptism is clear that in entering the Orthodox Church we are renouncing Satan and confessing the Lordship of Jesus Christ. A proper conversion to Orthodoxy is therefore a confession of Jesus Christ and covered by the Gospel passage.

Let us now look at some historical and cultural background.

Honour shown to parents was very important in the Hebrew tribal society apart from any moral issue of a direct commandment of God. The interpretation of the nature of that honour has changed over the centuries in Judaism. One need only reflect on the interpretation of the commandment among ultra-Orthodox Jews today in comparison to reformed Jews.

It is the same thing in Christianity. Interpretation of the commandment has always been affected by the cultural conditions of the time and place where the family was that is the subject of the commandment. This includes other aspects of the commandment, whether for example our parents can tell us what job to take.

Now Martha says she comes out of a Protestant background. We personally think that Martha has these thoughts because of how she was brought up as a child—her relations with her parents in infancy. Now Protestantism is very broad and child-rearing practices within Protestantism today vary from the very authoritarian to the very permissive. This is further complicated by the fact that child-rearing practices and the interpretation of the commandment also vary according to social class, culture (ethnic group) and type of Protestant group that one might have belonged to. For although Protestantism is largely a matter of spiritual individualism, some strands of it have been very authoritarian.

Hence the historical background for understanding this commandment begins with an understanding of Hebrew tribal society and continues through the centuries with the nature of paternal authority in the Israel of Jesus’ time and continues through the Protestant Reformation to today. Similarly in traditionally Orthodox countries this commandment might be understood in different ways depending on class, culture and historical period.

Now depending on how much of a problem these thoughts are, Martha might simply employ a strategy of deflecting the thoughts in a way we will explain, or she might find it necessary to consult with a therapist. However, given her age we think that she just has to accept that the thoughts are going to bother her until they get fed up and leave her alone.

This is how Martha can deflect the thoughts. She should write the Gospel passage down on a piece of paper. She should put it in her pocket. Then when the thoughts bother her, she should pull the piece of paper out of her pocket and read it. Preferably out loud but if she is somewhere where that isn’t possible, then silently. She should repeat reading the passage until the thoughts get fed up and go. Of course if Martha is driving on the free-way or piloting an aeroplane at 30,000 feet she’ll just have to ignore the thoughts and get on with business until she gets to where she’s going. Now this might seem simple-minded, but it is actually the application of an ancient Orthodox practice.

Question Time

Someone has sent us a question. In full the email reads: 

Where ru a monk 

Answer in full: 

Here