If we do not ask “Where is the Lord?” then we, also, will soon become led by presumption and self-reliance; too soon we will be found worshiping the works of our own hands, unashamed!

We often think that we are proceeding in righteousness, presuming blessedness, yet without having actually sought the blessing of the Lord and even without concern for His presence.  The marriage that we once sought becomes quickly buried by self-concern, we adorn ourselves and forget what for; we seek the feast only to be satisfied, we quickly become fornicators passing by the bridal chamber for which we spent so much time in preparation.  Yes, we came to think that we are adorned and worthy to be wed but will yet be found as not having had a wedding garment all along.  

The Bridegroom holds in His hand the robe of incorruption, simple, beautiful, seamless; and I walk by saying to myself:  ”I already have my own.”

Just as our own human nature is given life by three births, that from our mother, that from baptism, and that from the dead, which we hope will happen in the future, so too Christ became the first-born for us in three ways [born of the Father before all ages, Col. 1:15; first born of the Theotokos, Lk. 2:7; first born from the dead, Co. 1:18], so that our own human nature would be given life and deified.

Metropolitain Hierotheos Vlachos, “The Feasts of the Lord” (on the Meeting of Christ in the Temple)

I am amazed at how the days on the calendar change and I, on the other hand, have not. It has been my intention to resume in providing some written offering “eventually,” and have satisfied myself quite well with the intent that feigns at willingness but excuses itself for many reasons–they’re always very good ones…or at least acceptable…or reasonable…or temporary. I have a sense of the fire, shut up in my bones, as described by my patron (Jer. 20:9)–I think that we all have it–but I also see that it can be protected, hidden, stoked, ignored, quenched.

While much time is spent working, being with my family, and serving as a “Reader” (chanter, at St. Paul Orthodox Church); it is clear that more opportunity is postponed, a dilatory strategy that aims at “eventually” getting to what is important while agreeing to do what is urgent and far more temporal than the work that I ultimately set out to do. Then I dwell in the temporal and am made ill by awareness of my own inertia–when does “potential energy” lose its potential?

I have been involved in a small poetry collaboration with a very gifted friend over the past couple of months (so there is a little work being done)–which we may share some of in the days to come, but may also eventually aim to publish. And I, again, express my intention to put my “mind where my mouth is” and provide some offering even if it be brief and a little less infrequent than my previous (some separated by nearly a year’s time).

For the few (one?) who visit this site still–and understand my struggle–please know that you are loved. I hope to have something to offer very soon.

Here is one of my favorite pictures of this year…

This is my friend, the Novice Peter, at St. Tikhon’s Monastery.

A reflection:

This passage addresses that the law (a moral code, as it were) is not for the moral, “righteous,” person, but for the immoral and, therefore, “lawless.” Though the condition of the fallen human person is not only that of a “moral insubordinate” –which naturally presupposes action in opposition to what is right, correct, and good of the human person–the very actions of the fallen human person provide indication of the “condition” of that person. But beyond speaking to the point that law addresses more indicators of, and ontological condition in, humanity, I observe this simple statement: that the law is “for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane…and if there is anything contrary to sound doctrine” (gr. didaskalia, see 1 Tim. 1:9-11). There is an essential link between law (gr. nomos) and doctrine (didaskalia). We often consider that law pertains strictly to the moral disposition of the person, and that doctrine pertains specifically to one’s knowledge about God (as in formal/academic theology); but what we find here is that the law provides proof of our condition by way of our acting in opposition to it (and thus in opposition to what is natural to man) and that any contradiction to “sound doctrine” is also such an indication. How does one contradict “sound doctrine”? Not by proving one’s own lack of knowledge–this is more often self evident in many of us!–but by living in a way that is not in accord with the apostolic teaching, which essentially orients itself to the “glorious gospel” (v. 11). We know that the Gospel is not “a theology” to be held in the mind of the Christian, but an acute awareness of this statement of Christ: “I am the way, the truth, and the life…”

My writing has been sparse but with some regularity, and I do intend to continue to post some reflections on occasion. I have been spending more time on the practical aspects of the Christian life, though the discipline of intellectual formation is still taking place in the form of directed study. If you are among those with whom I maintain some regular (yearly…?) contact, you remain in my prayers! And to any explorere-of-blogs who may have happened upon this page: you are loved! A blessed thanksgiving to you all.

Here’s a recent, brief, reflection…

“The flesh” is the source of certain “fruits” and the Spirit is the source of certain “fruits” [Gal. 5]–the human person lives in accordance with one or the other, and thus “which” among these is proven by the fruit brought forth from the person’s life. Human freedom–that of choice–is present in both dispositions and influence is present in both. Human freedom, in that we have the ability to choose how to act and for what motive (as unto what end), and influence inasmuch as we avail ourselves to either the evil powers or to those of the Spirit by way of choosing one or the other–disposing of the self to one or the other. In disposing ourselves to evil influence we most often lose self-control, to begin with, until developing the natural freedom of the human person to manipulate, deceive, and ultimately to control, yet while never gaining true liberty. In the disposition to evil we are always bound by our own desires and limited influence. In the disposition of the Spirit we become unfettered from personal desires–by acts of love and self-deprivation–this is why the person who is spiritually mature is characterized by sobriety and dispassion, but most ultimately must be defined by the endlessnes and activity of love, as knowing that love is a state of being shared, “the conversation of being.”