God called me to Hesychasm, although I did not know what it was at the time. I was 17. It has been a very moving mystical experience. I highly recommend it
@infamoussero Perhaps you are talking to the wrong religion. I doubt if any CEOs would dine with an Orthodox bishop. I believe they are all occupied with Roman Catholic hierarchs, but that is their business, not ours.
Sir im a coptic orhtodox. Unworthy ofcourse , I have a question for you father.
In our church, You know the ammoutn of saints we had around the first 5 centuries before introduction of islam...we had saints that were able to travel , Such As SAINT PAUL THE HERMIT! what's this terminology in our orthodox church in english? The ability to travel other palces.
@joeylerouso The Church is not a rib, but a bride, and fully the bride of Christ. The Orthodox Church does feast together with prostitutes who pose as the bride but are not. The Orthodox Church alone is the Bride and Body of Christ; all others are prostitutes posing as a bride.
@EndureTemptation Intrinsically, one cannot separate the value from the content. Any separation is artificial. Silver quarters in Canada became worth more than their face value when the price of silver went up, and the coins had to be taken out of circulation because their value become lower than their content. The were still valued at .25 although their content was worth $1.
Interesting. Nevertheless, value, be it .25 or $1, is associated with just one physical coin. We may think of value and silver as separate things, however it is not very useful if general understanding is ought after. In some instances of our life, professional life in particular, breaking down of things is necessitated in order to work with them. The problem is when this professional insularity becomes general in all aspects of human life.
Thank you! Can you expand more on the body not being tempted but rather being called to become sanctified Temple of The Holy Spirit?
Thank God the warnings against gnostic beliefs of the body being evil needing out of body experiences. It seems we should heed the warning of the Living Fathers of The Body of Christ & not go into yoga.
Can hesychasm be practiced by nonascetics? If yes, how does one find a good spiritual father on this that is not taken over by toll house doctrines?
Vladiko or is it Vladika, I come across a lot of terms in various books. Before being Orthodox I did believe we shed our body and got a subtle body for our soul and that is how we existed after death. Now, I understand that we are persons; made up of body and soul. If I got it right ,our soul is like the Angels having no substance subtle or otherwise; really just thought energy. Our bodies provide us feedback in the material creation and allow us to manipulate material creation. See cont.
Cont. Is spirit (sometimes called anima Latin?) the same as soul or does it refer to energy we get from food that helps sustain the body? Is there a difference between heart and soul? Is psychi the same as intellect?
There is a chapter on this in my book THE SOUL, THE BODY AND DEATH which takes the teaching directly from the holy fathers. A great problem in the early Church was the influx of non-Christian influences following the 3rd century. Several fathers wrote against the teaching of a dualism between soul and body. The idea of a "subtle body" seems to be a confusion with the reality that we are created being and so material in our nature. But then, energy is also created and thus "material."
Could you please elaborate a bit on how energy is created? There is after all, a widely agreed-upon law of physics that says energy cannot be neither created nor destroyed.
As Dick Feynman points out, "of course, we do not actually know what energy is." Created energy refers to that which came into presence at the birth of the universe. Uncreated "energy" is a property by which God reveals Himself to man. Of course, for our atheist viewers, this has no meaning. For others, it might.
OK, now I understand your point. But your answer leads to more questions. Can this uncreated energy be experienced directly? If yes, then what does this experience consist of? And how one knows that such experience is valid and not just some sort of delusion?
What does the Orthodox church teach about the state of a man's "soul" after death prior to bodily resurrection? If man is a union of soul and body, then in what sense does a person exist when the two are separated?
There is an interesting concept I picked up from Sufism. It is that all the world including the body is a gift from God. To reject this world, it pleasures, wonders and splendor is to reject God's gift.but in accepting this gift we must also be also respect its awesome power. Those who allow this gift to master them, lose their connection with their true master God. It seems to me that this philosophy has some resemblance to yours.
I am aware of the Sufi concept. There was some intercourse between Sufism as it took formal shape, and Orthodox Monasticism. Sufism was an attempt to return to the spiritual from the scholasticism and Aristotelian rationalism with a bit of Platonism that had entered Islam and took a dominate role in the era of the "falsafah" or "faylasufs."
I am wondering about how Hesychasm can be understood to the Christological questions of the 3rd Ecumenical Council?
Is wholeness not merely a recognition of the body and the soul (two natures seen as one)?
I ask becaues I am very involved in exploring the (mia)monophysite/diaphysite question from a historical point of view, bu the theology seems much more necessary.
I supposed one might explore that question. In short, though, Christ could not have been only "half human." He had a fully human body, thus also a fully human soul and will. He was God, so he had also a fully divine will. The will of the human being is expressed in the soul, not the body. Christ was both God and man, uncomingled and complete.
Does this mean that Hesychasm regarded the soul and body as two halves of a whole? If so, then I can understand how it can't fit into the Christological questions I am exploring.
As always, thank you for the explanations and videos you provide. They are truly great.
The holy fathers, and particularly the ones who wrote against Manichaeism, tell us that the soul is a part of man, but not "the man," and the body is a part of a man, but not "the man." As St Photios the Great says, "Man is most truly defines as a union of soul and body, united into one form of the beautiful."
I apologize. I assumed your priests were celibate like the RCC. Mea culpa.
I would be interested to know how this split in doctrine occurred between you and the RCC.
I think sometimes celibacy is used as a coping mechanism for people who hate their own sexuality because it takes some perverse form. If those people are then put in power of vulnerable people like children or even adult parishioners, you have created trouble.
Celibacy (when it is actually practised) creates psychological, even psychiatric problems, when it is observed by compulsion. A lot of men and women do enter monasticism because they have neurotic problems with sex. This is not healthy, but they have not been placed in situations of temptation as unmarried parish priests are. It is really inhuman. It stems from Augustine's notion that marriage is a "venial" sin, and Aug. has great authority in the West.
Speaking only from my limited personal experience after having lived alongside fellow Latin-rite Catholic priests in rectories, and having witnessed many of them adopting a "don't ask, don't tell" duplicity about their vow of celibacy, I have seen the grave spiritual and psychological harm done to men who are called to ordained ministry but not given the charism of celibacy by the Holy Spirit.
Further to my reply: I have observed over my 70 years that relgion can and is far too often used as a cloak for real wickedness and abuse. The Orthodox Church is certainly not immune to this. We, too, have had our share of Gnostic infiltrations, complete with the notions of "white marriage" and hatred and fear even of marital sexual relations.
I think Shakespeare had a wonderful insight into human nature when he said (in hamlet?) "Me thinks the lady protest to loudly" That is, those who condemn the most are often the most guilty.
And Lord Acton also found truth when he said "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men."
All institutions and leaders including religious ones must be judged according to these aphorisms.
Also, there is a difference between moral grief and moral outrage. Moral outrage is usually a form of confession, because we hate most in others what we fear most in ourselves. If patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel, then moralism is the last refuge of the pervert. Morality and moralism are not the same thing. The Paedophilia in the RC is a creation of the system, and often the priests who fall into this are themselves victims of the institution.
Oh I agree. I think it is very appropriate that we all be part of the moral dialogue of our society. That is how we grow and it grows. I just mistrust people who claim to have all the answers because of a document they interpret for the rest of us or some personal revelation,
I generally find your discourse moderate and thoughtful which is why I check up on what you have to say, even though I operate with a different set of working assumptions than you do.
When one experiences compassion, it resembles what loving parents feel about their own children, at least in one sense of the analogy. First, compassion resembles sympathy. When the children hurt, the parents hurt with them. When children are pleased, the parents share in that, too. Second, compassion extends the limitations of sympathy by seeing hurts and joys of children in a bigger picture of what would be good for them. In that way, compassion does not rob another of learning from mistakes.
Hi ioannismiami; i often reflect on compassion. Your post got me back into my persistant thought loop of compassion and reason. the;"what would be good for them" idea; above. As far as I have gotten in my thought process is to keep in mind the idea of correction and punishment. correction being applied when learning seems possible and punishment (something which should not be done) when no learning seems possible. Corrections are in the least uncomfortable and take away from the compassion cont.
cont. I am learning that it is best just to set a good example by my actions, but having children often requires intervention. Sometimes natural consequences can be played out, but other times; parental intervention is necessary (done with forthought and love and not in anger) I am left with the idea that when compassion lacks reason it can be harmful. It can teach dependancy; as the welfare system in the US has a tendency to do, but not to provide for those in need is wrong; thoughts?
I like your train of thought about compassion. If I may keep the focus on rearing children and to teach children compassion, parents must determine whether a child's safety requires direct intervention to cut off a threat or curb a threat. In other words, parents teach compassion by deciding when to intervene and how to do it without robbing a child of participation in the intervention, depending on age of the child and other factors. [I will add another comment, labeled # 2].
The key ingredient about teaching compassion in an Orthodox home is acknowledging that children are persons, both connected with others to whom God ordains, and separate as well. Parents need to identify ways for children to learn compassion by keeping both dimensions of person in mind. My point is to teach children how to make decisions pleasing to God by helping them see themselves as connected yet separate. Both dimensions convey responsibility.
Safety, is the definately important and each child is different. I focus on the fruits of the Spirit; at bed time we talk when they where patient and kind and when they where not. It is more involved, but that is it in a nut shell. Info from this sight and the books I have bought have added much to this. Cell phones, TV, video games, sleep overs, other influences; get complicated. All things they want, but all have their safety concerns. It would feel good to say yes see cont
cont. kids can get distressed and feel genuine pain over desires to fit in; maintain friendships. It would seem compassionate to give them what they ask for to alleviate their distress/pain. But that is where I see the need for reason. I do try and keep both the body and the soul in mind; kids now adays have so many temptations and are constantly faced with provocative ideas and images. The challenge; I see, is to help them discern the things that are fun and pleasing, but are really harmful.
Hi ioannismiami; I thought I should clarify my comment about reason. I mean it to include our reason illumined by the the Wisdom of God; to the extent that we are able to possess that Wisdom. This; ofcourse, means our reason will be to one degree or another imperfect; which is why when I think on compassion I have a mental loop which comes back to compassion. If I ever get to perfect Love; I wonder if it will still be a mental loop?
Moral grief is a powerful experience of cleaning the house of conscience. Would you let me know, Vladyka, if the following reflects an accurate definition for moral grief? Moral grief combines a disposing attitude of sorrow for wrong(s) committed, and resolve to not do the same wrong(s) again with God's help.
Queen: "The lady doth protest too much, methinks."
Those who speak solemnly and effusively, lose credibility. "Protest" in this sentence refers to excessive affirmation. The sense that we might take from this oft-quoted ironic exchange in Hamlet (III, 2), as far the Church goes, is to speak less and love more with actions. No doubt the Church should speak, I just wonder if the Church should speak about every news item in a secular age.
I was not aware that there was actually a name for the practice of souls, detachment from the body other that the secular practice of "out of body" experiences, (OBE's). I wanted to add, individuals who have been traumatized and abused have reported leaving their body "spontaneously". in order to detach from the offending experience. Apparently, a survival mechanism. Thankh you
This is especially true of those who develop "multiple personalities." So far as we know, "mutiple personalities" is caused only by severe childhood abuse. It does consist it "taking refuge" in a manner that seems to the person to be "hiding" outside the body.
Yep. MPD, dissociative disorder, OBE's, emotional numbing, body dysmorphic disorder, fugue states and hysterical amnesia are all related to eachother and ways that people psychologically protect themselves in extreme situations. That does not necessarily mean that they are always pathological, but they should not be assumed to be mystical either.
Taking a slightly alternative view to trauma preceding feelings and ideas of detachment, I suggest that trauma need not cause a disorder in personality. MPD might well come from sustained early childhood trauma. However, trauma such as receiving news of a sudden and unexpected death of a loved one can cause loss of consciousness, reaction formation, persistent inattentiveness likened to being someplace other than in consensual events, and thoughts that seem to come from an autonomous source.
Dualism between soul and body really is ingrained in our culture, and it is difficult to maintain an Orthodox perspective. I remember studying The Merchant of Venice in high school, where Shakespeare refers to the body as a "muddy vesture of decay"! I'm not sure what his religion was.
Lorenzo's speech in Act V may well illustrate dualism, as the Bard recited nostrums about dualism acquired by his self-made education as an Anglican Christian in Elizabethan England. On the other hand, the context for this remark pertains to beauty shared with his love, and to the transformation of Nature by supernal Beauty. If the context holds as to mercy in the play, then the remark about the body may well mean that Lorenzo was uninterested in anything sensible that might ignite his passions.
God called me to Hesychasm, although I did not know what it was at the time. I was 17. It has been a very moving mystical experience. I highly recommend it
1too3fore 2 months ago
@infamoussero Hahahahahahahahaha, that was funny.
JohnDaCajun 4 months ago
@infamoussero You are obviously highly educated.
MinDsc2 5 months ago
@infamoussero Perhaps you are talking to the wrong religion. I doubt if any CEOs would dine with an Orthodox bishop. I believe they are all occupied with Roman Catholic hierarchs, but that is their business, not ours.
allsaintsmonastery 5 months ago
Sir im a coptic orhtodox. Unworthy ofcourse , I have a question for you father.
In our church, You know the ammoutn of saints we had around the first 5 centuries before introduction of islam...we had saints that were able to travel , Such As SAINT PAUL THE HERMIT! what's this terminology in our orthodox church in english? The ability to travel other palces.
KimoLovesJesusLoves 6 months ago
@joeylerouso The Church is not a rib, but a bride, and fully the bride of Christ. The Orthodox Church does feast together with prostitutes who pose as the bride but are not. The Orthodox Church alone is the Bride and Body of Christ; all others are prostitutes posing as a bride.
allsaintsmonastery 6 months ago
Hesychastic practice seems quite promising. I guess i'll reasearch it more.
Person is like silver coin - one aspect of it is silver, but other is it's value. Nevertheless it's value can not be devided from silver, or can it?
EndureTemptation 1 year ago
@EndureTemptation Intrinsically, one cannot separate the value from the content. Any separation is artificial. Silver quarters in Canada became worth more than their face value when the price of silver went up, and the coins had to be taken out of circulation because their value become lower than their content. The were still valued at .25 although their content was worth $1.
allsaintsmonastery 1 year ago
@allsaintsmonastery
Interesting. Nevertheless, value, be it .25 or $1, is associated with just one physical coin. We may think of value and silver as separate things, however it is not very useful if general understanding is ought after. In some instances of our life, professional life in particular, breaking down of things is necessitated in order to work with them. The problem is when this professional insularity becomes general in all aspects of human life.
EndureTemptation 11 months ago
Thank you! Can you expand more on the body not being tempted but rather being called to become sanctified Temple of The Holy Spirit?
Thank God the warnings against gnostic beliefs of the body being evil needing out of body experiences. It seems we should heed the warning of the Living Fathers of The Body of Christ & not go into yoga.
Can hesychasm be practiced by nonascetics? If yes, how does one find a good spiritual father on this that is not taken over by toll house doctrines?
1integrity 1 year ago
Vladiko or is it Vladika, I come across a lot of terms in various books. Before being Orthodox I did believe we shed our body and got a subtle body for our soul and that is how we existed after death. Now, I understand that we are persons; made up of body and soul. If I got it right ,our soul is like the Angels having no substance subtle or otherwise; really just thought energy. Our bodies provide us feedback in the material creation and allow us to manipulate material creation. See cont.
Larryinct 2 years ago
Cont. Is spirit (sometimes called anima Latin?) the same as soul or does it refer to energy we get from food that helps sustain the body? Is there a difference between heart and soul? Is psychi the same as intellect?
Larryinct 2 years ago
There is a chapter on this in my book THE SOUL, THE BODY AND DEATH which takes the teaching directly from the holy fathers. A great problem in the early Church was the influx of non-Christian influences following the 3rd century. Several fathers wrote against the teaching of a dualism between soul and body. The idea of a "subtle body" seems to be a confusion with the reality that we are created being and so material in our nature. But then, energy is also created and thus "material."
allsaintsmonastery 2 years ago
Could you please elaborate a bit on how energy is created? There is after all, a widely agreed-upon law of physics that says energy cannot be neither created nor destroyed.
TheTerente 2 years ago
As Dick Feynman points out, "of course, we do not actually know what energy is." Created energy refers to that which came into presence at the birth of the universe. Uncreated "energy" is a property by which God reveals Himself to man. Of course, for our atheist viewers, this has no meaning. For others, it might.
allsaintsmonastery 2 years ago
OK, now I understand your point. But your answer leads to more questions. Can this uncreated energy be experienced directly? If yes, then what does this experience consist of? And how one knows that such experience is valid and not just some sort of delusion?
TheTerente 2 years ago
Father,
What does the Orthodox church teach about the state of a man's "soul" after death prior to bodily resurrection? If man is a union of soul and body, then in what sense does a person exist when the two are separated?
Thank you.
00Caleb 2 years ago
There is an interesting concept I picked up from Sufism. It is that all the world including the body is a gift from God. To reject this world, it pleasures, wonders and splendor is to reject God's gift.but in accepting this gift we must also be also respect its awesome power. Those who allow this gift to master them, lose their connection with their true master God. It seems to me that this philosophy has some resemblance to yours.
michalchik 2 years ago
I am aware of the Sufi concept. There was some intercourse between Sufism as it took formal shape, and Orthodox Monasticism. Sufism was an attempt to return to the spiritual from the scholasticism and Aristotelian rationalism with a bit of Platonism that had entered Islam and took a dominate role in the era of the "falsafah" or "faylasufs."
allsaintsmonastery 2 years ago
I am wondering about how Hesychasm can be understood to the Christological questions of the 3rd Ecumenical Council?
Is wholeness not merely a recognition of the body and the soul (two natures seen as one)?
I ask becaues I am very involved in exploring the (mia)monophysite/diaphysite question from a historical point of view, bu the theology seems much more necessary.
MrGriegos 2 years ago
I supposed one might explore that question. In short, though, Christ could not have been only "half human." He had a fully human body, thus also a fully human soul and will. He was God, so he had also a fully divine will. The will of the human being is expressed in the soul, not the body. Christ was both God and man, uncomingled and complete.
allsaintsmonastery 2 years ago
Does this mean that Hesychasm regarded the soul and body as two halves of a whole? If so, then I can understand how it can't fit into the Christological questions I am exploring.
As always, thank you for the explanations and videos you provide. They are truly great.
In Christ, God bless you.
MrGriegos 2 years ago
The holy fathers, and particularly the ones who wrote against Manichaeism, tell us that the soul is a part of man, but not "the man," and the body is a part of a man, but not "the man." As St Photios the Great says, "Man is most truly defines as a union of soul and body, united into one form of the beautiful."
allsaintsmonastery 2 years ago
I apologize. I assumed your priests were celibate like the RCC. Mea culpa.
I would be interested to know how this split in doctrine occurred between you and the RCC.
I think sometimes celibacy is used as a coping mechanism for people who hate their own sexuality because it takes some perverse form. If those people are then put in power of vulnerable people like children or even adult parishioners, you have created trouble.
michalchik 2 years ago
Celibacy (when it is actually practised) creates psychological, even psychiatric problems, when it is observed by compulsion. A lot of men and women do enter monasticism because they have neurotic problems with sex. This is not healthy, but they have not been placed in situations of temptation as unmarried parish priests are. It is really inhuman. It stems from Augustine's notion that marriage is a "venial" sin, and Aug. has great authority in the West.
allsaintsmonastery 2 years ago
Speaking only from my limited personal experience after having lived alongside fellow Latin-rite Catholic priests in rectories, and having witnessed many of them adopting a "don't ask, don't tell" duplicity about their vow of celibacy, I have seen the grave spiritual and psychological harm done to men who are called to ordained ministry but not given the charism of celibacy by the Holy Spirit.
ioannismiami 2 years ago
Further to my reply: I have observed over my 70 years that relgion can and is far too often used as a cloak for real wickedness and abuse. The Orthodox Church is certainly not immune to this. We, too, have had our share of Gnostic infiltrations, complete with the notions of "white marriage" and hatred and fear even of marital sexual relations.
allsaintsmonastery 2 years ago
I think Shakespeare had a wonderful insight into human nature when he said (in hamlet?) "Me thinks the lady protest to loudly" That is, those who condemn the most are often the most guilty.
And Lord Acton also found truth when he said "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men."
All institutions and leaders including religious ones must be judged according to these aphorisms.
michalchik 2 years ago
Also, there is a difference between moral grief and moral outrage. Moral outrage is usually a form of confession, because we hate most in others what we fear most in ourselves. If patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel, then moralism is the last refuge of the pervert. Morality and moralism are not the same thing. The Paedophilia in the RC is a creation of the system, and often the priests who fall into this are themselves victims of the institution.
allsaintsmonastery 2 years ago
Oh I agree. I think it is very appropriate that we all be part of the moral dialogue of our society. That is how we grow and it grows. I just mistrust people who claim to have all the answers because of a document they interpret for the rest of us or some personal revelation,
I generally find your discourse moderate and thoughtful which is why I check up on what you have to say, even though I operate with a different set of working assumptions than you do.
michalchik 2 years ago
When one experiences compassion, it resembles what loving parents feel about their own children, at least in one sense of the analogy. First, compassion resembles sympathy. When the children hurt, the parents hurt with them. When children are pleased, the parents share in that, too. Second, compassion extends the limitations of sympathy by seeing hurts and joys of children in a bigger picture of what would be good for them. In that way, compassion does not rob another of learning from mistakes.
ioannismiami 2 years ago
Hi ioannismiami; i often reflect on compassion. Your post got me back into my persistant thought loop of compassion and reason. the;"what would be good for them" idea; above. As far as I have gotten in my thought process is to keep in mind the idea of correction and punishment. correction being applied when learning seems possible and punishment (something which should not be done) when no learning seems possible. Corrections are in the least uncomfortable and take away from the compassion cont.
Larryinct 2 years ago
cont. I am learning that it is best just to set a good example by my actions, but having children often requires intervention. Sometimes natural consequences can be played out, but other times; parental intervention is necessary (done with forthought and love and not in anger) I am left with the idea that when compassion lacks reason it can be harmful. It can teach dependancy; as the welfare system in the US has a tendency to do, but not to provide for those in need is wrong; thoughts?
Larryinct 2 years ago
TO: -->Larryinct
I like your train of thought about compassion. If I may keep the focus on rearing children and to teach children compassion, parents must determine whether a child's safety requires direct intervention to cut off a threat or curb a threat. In other words, parents teach compassion by deciding when to intervene and how to do it without robbing a child of participation in the intervention, depending on age of the child and other factors. [I will add another comment, labeled # 2].
ioannismiami 2 years ago
# 2...to:--> Larryinct [regarding compassion]
The key ingredient about teaching compassion in an Orthodox home is acknowledging that children are persons, both connected with others to whom God ordains, and separate as well. Parents need to identify ways for children to learn compassion by keeping both dimensions of person in mind. My point is to teach children how to make decisions pleasing to God by helping them see themselves as connected yet separate. Both dimensions convey responsibility.
ioannismiami 2 years ago
Safety, is the definately important and each child is different. I focus on the fruits of the Spirit; at bed time we talk when they where patient and kind and when they where not. It is more involved, but that is it in a nut shell. Info from this sight and the books I have bought have added much to this. Cell phones, TV, video games, sleep overs, other influences; get complicated. All things they want, but all have their safety concerns. It would feel good to say yes see cont
Larryinct 2 years ago
cont. kids can get distressed and feel genuine pain over desires to fit in; maintain friendships. It would seem compassionate to give them what they ask for to alleviate their distress/pain. But that is where I see the need for reason. I do try and keep both the body and the soul in mind; kids now adays have so many temptations and are constantly faced with provocative ideas and images. The challenge; I see, is to help them discern the things that are fun and pleasing, but are really harmful.
Larryinct 2 years ago
Hi ioannismiami; I thought I should clarify my comment about reason. I mean it to include our reason illumined by the the Wisdom of God; to the extent that we are able to possess that Wisdom. This; ofcourse, means our reason will be to one degree or another imperfect; which is why when I think on compassion I have a mental loop which comes back to compassion. If I ever get to perfect Love; I wonder if it will still be a mental loop?
Larryinct 2 years ago
Moral grief is a powerful experience of cleaning the house of conscience. Would you let me know, Vladyka, if the following reflects an accurate definition for moral grief? Moral grief combines a disposing attitude of sorrow for wrong(s) committed, and resolve to not do the same wrong(s) again with God's help.
ioannismiami 2 years ago
Hamlet: "Madam, how like you this play?"
Queen: "The lady doth protest too much, methinks."
Those who speak solemnly and effusively, lose credibility. "Protest" in this sentence refers to excessive affirmation. The sense that we might take from this oft-quoted ironic exchange in Hamlet (III, 2), as far the Church goes, is to speak less and love more with actions. No doubt the Church should speak, I just wonder if the Church should speak about every news item in a secular age.
ioannismiami 2 years ago
Yes! "wholeness" I had once heard..."the longest journey one can take is connecting their heart to their head". Thankh you again.
phfrankh 2 years ago
I was not aware that there was actually a name for the practice of souls, detachment from the body other that the secular practice of "out of body" experiences, (OBE's). I wanted to add, individuals who have been traumatized and abused have reported leaving their body "spontaneously". in order to detach from the offending experience. Apparently, a survival mechanism. Thankh you
phfrankh 2 years ago
This is especially true of those who develop "multiple personalities." So far as we know, "mutiple personalities" is caused only by severe childhood abuse. It does consist it "taking refuge" in a manner that seems to the person to be "hiding" outside the body.
allsaintsmonastery 2 years ago
Yep. MPD, dissociative disorder, OBE's, emotional numbing, body dysmorphic disorder, fugue states and hysterical amnesia are all related to eachother and ways that people psychologically protect themselves in extreme situations. That does not necessarily mean that they are always pathological, but they should not be assumed to be mystical either.
michalchik 2 years ago
Taking a slightly alternative view to trauma preceding feelings and ideas of detachment, I suggest that trauma need not cause a disorder in personality. MPD might well come from sustained early childhood trauma. However, trauma such as receiving news of a sudden and unexpected death of a loved one can cause loss of consciousness, reaction formation, persistent inattentiveness likened to being someplace other than in consensual events, and thoughts that seem to come from an autonomous source.
ioannismiami 2 years ago
Great video... God Bless...
DivineNewsNetwork 2 years ago
Dualism between soul and body really is ingrained in our culture, and it is difficult to maintain an Orthodox perspective. I remember studying The Merchant of Venice in high school, where Shakespeare refers to the body as a "muddy vesture of decay"! I'm not sure what his religion was.
lilygrower1 2 years ago
Lorenzo's speech in Act V may well illustrate dualism, as the Bard recited nostrums about dualism acquired by his self-made education as an Anglican Christian in Elizabethan England. On the other hand, the context for this remark pertains to beauty shared with his love, and to the transformation of Nature by supernal Beauty. If the context holds as to mercy in the play, then the remark about the body may well mean that Lorenzo was uninterested in anything sensible that might ignite his passions.
ioannismiami 2 years ago
Really deep Father! Thank you for doing this video!
USSRangel85 2 years ago