Now, Steve Forbes seems to suggest this is one of the good things which comes out of right to work laws. Employers now have the option to fire much easier with little to no responsibility to the workers. Indeed, what is not brought up here is the ramification of this: employers will be free to tell employees they will not be rehired unless they take a cut in their wages. Don’t think that won’t happen: if you are reapplying for a job it suggests other applicants will be considered alongside you. Indeed, it might be required. So if you want to keep your job (and health benefits) you must accept lower wages.

It’s been said right to work wages are about breaking unions and making sure there is no protection for employees. Those supporting “term limits for workers” act like there are no other ways to encourage laborers to work for success. If the company doesn’t give merit based raises, perhaps that is true — but is that not a better way to motivate them than to make their very livelihood always at risk?  If someone is really bad, are not annual reviews good enough without having to make someone reapply for their job (and take pay cuts to keep it)? How can you expect loyalty and a desire for the good of one’s employer if there is no sense of loyalty to the worker?

Hopefully this idea will not take off. I fear it will. If it does, we will be one step closer to the servile state.

That’s right. Saint Photius. He’s recognized as a saint in the Catholic Church, and has a feast day on the Byzantine Catholic calendar. For many, this might come as a surprise. St. Photius is remembered by many as being a staunch critic of Roman authority and the filioque. Many think, wrongly, that he died in schism from Rome, and so think he cannot be a saint. But this is not true. At the Fourth Council of Constantinople, Photius reconciled with Rome.

It is true Saint Photius fought against Rome, and that he thought Rome backed the wrong claimant to the See of Constantinople. However, when his rival died, he had his rival canonized. Holiness is spread around, and it often found in people who, for one reason or another, have harsh words of criticism for each other during their temporal lives. One can recognize holiness without having to agree with everything the holy person said.  One can even be wrong about the holiness of others and still be holy oneself: all one has to do is look to the harsh criticism St. Cyril of Alexandria had for St. John Chrysostom and one can see how the saints sometimes behave badly. Holiness is a gift of grace given by God which has been taken in and acted upon by the saint. St. Cyril, like his uncle, Theophilus, fought long and hard for the authority of Alexandria over Constantinople similar to the way St. Photius fought for the autocephalous authority of Constantinople over Rome. Political fights can sometimes lead people away from grace, but it does not always do so. We must not confuse holiness for infallibility, nor expect impeccability for the saints.

Outside of his controversial fight for the See of Constantinople, St. Photius was a great religious scholar. His work and contributions can be seen, in a way, similar to St. Jerome. God allows even grumpy, antagonistic men to be saints. Their work, their contribution, their willingness to follow the direction of God in a way God wanted them to work in this life allows for their holiness to be manifest despite their personal failings. Photius’s scholarship brought a humanistic overtone to theological endeavors. His interests, it is said, were more of practical matters than theory, something which we should remember even today. Theory is important, but prudence is also important. We must strive to find the right praxis, not content on pistis (faith) alone.  But perhaps the greatest lesson is the way God works in the world, the way God promotes people to sainthood: God is full of surprises as he elevates rivals to a common brotherhood. This should help keep our feet firmly on the ground, realizing that many of our debates with one another often are unimportant on a soteriological level. Striving for the truth through a path of love is what is important. We might err, but if we are open to grace, it can and will perfect us.

Follower of the Apostles’ way
And teacher of mankind:
Intercede, O Photius, with the Lord of all,
To grant peace to the world
And to our souls great mercy!  (Troparion of Saint Photius)

Now, this is not to say, how one answers the difficult questions are necessarily wrong. One can be right but have no way to prove one is right. But, through the way we read the world, through the way we have been led to read the world and follow the world through the collective narrative given to us, we find it easier just to confirm a given narrative than it is to understand its faults. If we can provide an explanation, no matter how farfetched that explanation is, we are satisfied. Conspiracy theories are becoming more and more prevalent in our society because they follow the path of narrative; the story can be a story well told and a story which allows all kinds of outs for when the conspiracy theory does not meet reality. It is, indeed, conspiracy theories which are becoming a prominent feature in political discourse today. Blogs promote conspiracies, and political pundits enjoy hinting at them because they know how easily they move the undiscerning mind. Left, right, center, progressive, conservative, liberal – they all have their narratives, and they all people promoting conspiracy theories as a way to understand why their narratives do not meet the world at large.

Sadly, I find this kind of narrative is becoming mainstream within the Catholic Church today.  Now, we must remember, there have been conspiracies and sometimes conspiracy theories ring true because conspiracies exist. Far more often, however, they are not true; people create them through the inclusion of a secondary narrative, one which tries to create patterns where none really exist. Many feel that when Catholics are being mistreated, there must be some grand anti-Catholic conspiracy behind it. If we look at the conflict which is brewing between the Obama Administration and the USCCB, can we not see elements of the conspiracy theory narrative slowly developing and being used to reify positions instead of trying to figure out a way out of the conflict? It’s easier to see anti-Catholic bias instead of looking to the full picture, a picture which extends way beyond the Obama Administration and the way the United States has been set up from the beginning. Religious toleration is always a difficult thing to get right, and in the history of the United States, we can see many religious practices outright prohibited without any concern that religious liberty has been violated. And this is often good: we don’t want to promote human sacrifice.  Sometimes, it has not been so good, as we can see in many of the conflicts against Mormons. Nonetheless, there needs to be religious liberty and freedom of conscience for religious believers to act in accordance with their beliefs. The problem is that this religious liberty, this freedom to follow the conscience, has for a long time been repudiated by the United States. Catholics have freely given it up – indeed, many of the same Catholics now upset with what they see happening today had no problem giving it up in the past when it was their party in charge of the nation. After all, have we not had the US Bishops speaking out for a long time to allow soldiers to have a right to follow their conscience in regards to wars? And have we not seen many Catholic mock such a position and say it was unnecessary and indeed, that it would hurt the military if such was allowed? Should this be seen as an anti-Catholic conspiracy which lay behind this denial, as an assault against the foundation of religious liberty? It is a question of religious liberty and, again, many have given up religious liberty here. When we find soldiers are being commanded to directly act against their conscience, and nothing can be done, and indeed, their questions ridiculed, are we really surprised that remote material connection to evil can be and is enforced as well? Is such, indeed, anything new? Of course it is not. When we look at it only under the political narrative and discuss it as some sort of culture-war or anti-Catholic initiative by one party, we really fail to see the real problem, and how long standing this problem has been in our culture. It is good to have this question brought out, and to work for the right of conscience objection in society; however, we should not just limit it to the question of paying money to insurance which covers contraceptives. Is that really where we want to fight the fight?  Are we not being led into the political narrative instead of keeping to our own Gospel narrative in this process? That, I fear, is a problem we must address if we want to engage the so-called culture war and find a way to “win.” We must look to the fundamental problem. It’s not about contraceptives being paid for by insurance. It is the right of everyone to follow their conscience. This has ramifications way beyond the question of health care and contraceptives.

Are we willing to stand for the whole of religious liberty? We must be. Anything else will allow a new narrative to be imposed on the Catholic Church, one which will make the Catholic Church look ridiculous to outsiders looking in. They don’t want to understand our objections to contraception; they just want a narrative to follow. Our narrative must be religious liberty, and one which does not stay tied to one violation of it.  Yes, we can and should point out such violations, but only when connected to a grand narrative, that of the religious heart of humanity and the need for each person to follow through with their religious quest wherever it takes them. All major political parties have become infested with secularism and use it to denounce the religious narrative when religion desires something contrary to their political agenda. As long as we keep our own debates within the partisan narrative, we will end up defeating ourselves as our party ends up denying our religious liberty in one fashion or another. We must speak beyond the parties, beyond the politics. We must control the narrative and stop being used as a tool by partisan hacks as they take the narrative away from us. If we don’t do this now, everyone loses.

In the original Sherlock Holmes stories, Professor Moriarty represented the mirror image of Sherlock, the criminal mastermind who rivaled Holmes in ability. There is much to this in the new series version of Moriarty. He was not sure, but in the end, both of them realized this is so.

This version of Moriarty has developed into a rather interesting mixture of evils, becoming one of the most compelling presentations of Moriarty put on screen. People will recognize elements of the Joker and the Riddler, but, if they look closer, they can see lying beneath those two figures lay the figure of Pavel Fyodorovich Smerdyakov. He wants to prove himself to the world to be superior to all. He wants to be challenged, and through that challenge come out on top, proving himself above everyone else around him. He saw in Holmes his greatest challenge. It is because Holmes, like him, faces the question of life itself. The angst of existence challenges them both to act. In this way, they share the same problem, the same final problem: staying alive.

Both Holmes and Moriarty are “supermen” living in the world of the ordinary. They both need challenges in order to find their place in life. But there is a difference – Holmes is on the side of the angels while Moriarty is on the side of the devils.

This one difference is major – for being on the side of the devils, no matter what one does, there is no ultimate sense of accomplishment. Evil corrupts, and the meaning of life will evade such a “superman.” Moriarty, in the great tradition of the supermen of Dostoevsky,  can only claim one end, that of death. Evil is self-destructive, and the only way a superman can prove themselves superior, following the path of evil, is through suicide: it’s their ultimate victory as they denounce life itself.  They find out they are their own greatest enemy, the one who is keeping them from their own greatest victory:

While Holmes has difficulty with life, he finds meaning not only in justice, but also in working for and helping his friends. He might not realize how many he has; he might not realize how many people have come to care for him. Indeed, his problem accepting friends means he can hurt them, saying he has none.

Moriarty, in his evil, makes him realize he has them, with the three most important of them being Doctor Watson, Inspector Lestrade, and Mrs. Hudson. Moriarty threatens their lives: Sherlock must die if he wants them to live. He must go down in flames – seen as a fake in the world and then take his life. Only then can Holmes’ friends live.  This leads Sherlock to embrace the common problem he shares with Moriarty, but he comes through it differently. Being on the side of angels, he is on the side of life. If he must, he would sacrifice himself for their lives; but it is not necessary – he only has to make it appear he is dead. He must disappear – die to the world — for their sake. The final solution to the final problem is not suicide, but death to pride, death to the egotistical shell of the self which has created his problems in the first place.

In the end, Moriarty realizes he must die. If he lives, Sherlock is going to live, if he dies, only then does he think he has the power over Holmes, to destroy him, to make sure that death reigns victorious.

Suicide and self-sacrifice, even if they appear to be the same, are fundamentally different, for suicide is about the triumph of death for the sake of pride while self-sacrifice allows for the death of pride and its egotistical shell for the sake of  others. Suicides are done to punish the self and the people around them, while self-sacrifice is not punishment, but the lifting up of the true self as one embraces the value of life. There is every difference in the two despite their accidental similarity.  And this is what we see played out in the first two seasons of Sherlock.  The problem of life and the two alternative solutions. One is mad and crazy and nihilistic, the other, though sometimes tempered with a self-destructive edge, realizes the true superman is the one who embraces the difficult path so that life can thrive. The true superman loves, the fake hates.

This, I believe, is what makes this version of Sherlock shine.  Yes, there is great acting and great scripts being employed and they both are important. But it is the Dostoevsky-like twist which raises the series beyond mere pastiche and into one of the great dramas written for television today.

“The Truth of the Father is the Son, and his shield is the Cross, whereby he surrounds you to protect you against the devil, the world and the flesh. In the Cross is humility against the devil’s pride; there is found Christ’s poverty, against the avarice of the world; there is crucifixion with nails against the lust of the flesh. “[1]

Christ the poor, weak man fights the good fight against the fallen powers of the world. Appearing defeated, he is shown to be victorious through the cross. The truth is beaten down, but cannot be overcome. Christ is resurrected in glory, showing the true wealth of heaven while the unjust rulers of the world find the poverty they have forced upon others becomes their out state in death. Christ demands from the rich all that they have unjustly taken from the poor. They are to give it back – with interest – following the example of Zacchaeus.  They are given the chance in life to repent of their ways, to take up their cross, and follow Christ. But if they are not willing in life to justly treat those who have suffered at their hands, they will find all that they have gained in life is naught as they are spiritually impoverished in the next life, begging for the scraps of the saints to sustain them in their misery (cf. Luke 16:19 -31).

St. Francis represents the rich man who found the value of poverty. Rich in youth, he gave away all he had to become one with the poor. It is the example of Christ which he followed, who, as God, is rich beyond conception, but yet became man, emptied of all that richness so that he could be with the spiritually impoverished humanity and raise it up and to the spiritually rich, heavenly life God desired for it. God redistributes his own wealth in love, and St. Francis represents that it is such redistribution of wealth which leads to the development of the great saint, of the saint who helps preserve the truth of the Christian faith. St. Francis lifted up the Church by pointing out that the Church is for the poor, for the needy, for the oppressed. “Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick” (Luke 5:31 RSV). St. Francis showed the Church the poor who needed the Church’s attention and raised them up, calling into question the corruption of ecclesial and secular authorities because of their treatment of their fellow humanity. Together, with St. Dominic, St. Francis brought the kind of reform the Church needed for it to continue in the world: “Rather than retreat from the world, Francis and Dominic raised their voices in protest against the arbitrariness of lords, the iniquity of judges, the asperity of merchants and speculators, and the animosities that divided families, cities, and nations. The evils that they fought were avarice, pride, and violence, not the world: for the world, after all, was the work of God, a work whose beauty and harmony inspired Saint Francis to lyrical heights.”[2]

St. Francis understood the truth that those who thought themselves rich were really impoverished. While they unjustly took from others, they themselves lost true wealth, while the poor found it amongst themselves. Such spiritual wealth was, as it were, taken from the rich and given to the poor. This certainly explains why St Francis – and his band of merry men – would become so well loved by the people of the world. The ordinary person saw what he did for them. They had their dignity taken away from them by the rich, and Francis found a way to bring it back. The merry men of Francis were hated by those who trusted in their own power and authority, but they found the wisdom of Francis beat them every time they came to a fight. St. Francis, armed with the arrow of love, shot straight to the heart of the problem, hitting the mark right on target: he kissed the lepers showing that they were worthy of more respect and devotion than the petty tyrants which demanded obeisance:

Let the princes of the whole world take note of this,
and let them know:
it is not easy to fight against God,
that is, against the will of the Lord.
Stubborn insolence usually ends in disaster.
It relies on its own strength,
thus forfeiting the help of heaven.
If victory is to be expected from on high
then battles must be entrusted to the divine Spirit.[3]

The oppressed of the world had seen in Francis the way of God. They rejoiced in Francis because they saw in him the sign of God, the sign that God did not stand with their oppressors but with them. They saw Francis as the example of true religious life, and anyone who followed his example, they would esteem. The heroes which would come out of this would ones who resembled Francis in some way, even if they did not always follow through with the holiness of Francis. The Legend of Robin Hood represents how the Franciscan ideal would be taken in the secular world. In the earliest legends, there was no Friar Tuck, but there did not have to be – Robin Hood was Friar Tuck, with his love being not Maid Marion, but the Virgin Mary. Robin did not initially “steal from the rich and give to the poor,” but he did stand up for justice: he was the violent robber who took on the people in charge, demanding retribution from them for their unjust, deceitful ways. Those who acted fairly, Robin would treat in kind, and indeed, he was seen helping the rich if their ways were just and true. The issue was not of class warfare, but justice, and Robin Hood represented the justice the poor felt they lacked in the secular world. He represented, in a way, the underbelly of the Franciscan innovation: Francis tried to raise everyone up and to learn to love each other, but if that did not work, the power of blind justice would rise up, with its own merry band of transients, taking on the powers of artificial law for the sake of the real law. The two go hand in hand, representing the ideal and the consequences when the ideal is rejected.

This is not something which is merely a European phenomena. In  China, one of the great works of literature, Outlaws of the Marsh, presents another group of outlaws striking out against the corruption of the state. It is more violent, the outlaws more questionable in behavior, than what we see in the legends of Robin Hood – and yet, the spirit behind the two remains the same. The general brotherhood of humanity is used in The Outlaws of the Marsh to bring the otherwise criminals together, working for each other, while the powers that be, corrupt as it had become, knew not this brotherhood and so does not have the great heroes of the day. The greatness of the outlaw in times of injustice does not justify all the behavior of the outlaw, but puts it in context, showing why they become the things of legend and remembered beyond the corrupt politicians who turned them into brigands.

Natural law promotes justice, but the abuse of natural law tries to use status to justify injustice. In times of great evil, in times of grave injustice, it is the outlaw who will rise up and create the demand for justice. Such an outlaw will strive for the return of the true law, as Robin Hood stood for the return of King Richard. An unjust law will make those who work for justice outlaws. Christ, the ultimate worker of the law, took the fate of the outlaw as his own. He died outside of the human law, showing the triumph of divine law. Just because something is called the law does not mean it is to be obeyed. When the law is evil, good people will be outlaws. But this does not mean there cannot be mediators. St Francis saved Christian Europe for a time because he was such a mediator; in a way, he lived the path of the outlaw. The people around him treated him with contempt as if he were an outlaw. And yet, his mission became approved by the ultimate law of the land – the Pope. Francis brought the outlaw and put them into the position of the law. This is what we must strive for, even today: reform of the law so the law can be preserved. But if that does not happen, what then should happen? What will we do? Will we work with the apparent authority, King John, or will we fight against such false authority, holding for the return of the once and future King Richard? That is what lies before us today. Which path will we choose? For the Christian there can be only one answer, the answer of Christ. We must be willing to accept earthly defeat if we want the truth to prevail.

Abba Anthony said, ‘I no longer fear God, but I live Him. For love casts out fear’ (John 4.18).[1]

It is not difficult for one to read the biography of St Anthony and to be pulled in to the great, charismatic figure presented. It is clear that those who knew St. Anthony, those who had associated with him, this charisma led them to see in Anthony a great intercessor with God, someone whose very life kept the consequences of social sin at bay. Serapion of Thmuis expresses this with the great sorrow of his time: “See now, brothers! As son as the hold man departed from us – that blessed Anthony, who had been an intercessor for the world – behold we were suddenly thrown down and laid low; and all the elements together were anguished; and the wrath of God from above first consumed Egypt.”[2]

When sin confounds the world, when the cries of the oppressed rise up to God, either a great saint, like Anthony, is going to rise up and help transform the world, finding a way to heal the world and so overcome the consequence of such great sin, or the world suffers as sin produces its terrible fruit.  The evil we suffer will be related to the sins we have done. For example, when the world is polluted, is it any surprise the world strikes back? How can a Christian deny climate change when Scripture itself indicates unseemly disasters comes as a result of sin?  It is not that we need to see God directly making such disasters, but rather, he has created the ecosystem of the world, a system which our sin interferes with and prevents from achieving its intended end. This is true with many other evils which befall us. We must realize our actions have consequences, and great actions have great consequences. We are not in this alone. The saint sees the signs of the time, they see the signs of the sin before them, and work to purge it from their own lives but also from society as a whole. This is exactly what people saw with St. Anthony: he was able to root out the powers of evil, the demonic chaos which thrived in Egypt, and to put them in check. When he died, there were no immediate equals to his greatness, and so those like Serapion saw a great desolation follow.

We see all around us the rise of sin combined with the rise of great suffering in the world. The earth trembles as the sun bears harshly down upon us; the environment has been destroyed due to our selfish exploitation of the earth.  The possibility of a world-wide financial meltdown looms before us as the consequence of social greed.  The rich laugh at the poor, the poor, being deflated, know not what they should do and go forth into the world bringing violence into the equation. Hostilities are increasing as the common, universal human family finds itself split up due the individualistic detestation of communal responsibility. We need a saint, a saint like Anthony, rising up in holiness so as to be able to be with God, interceding for us, so that the consequence of our sin can be put into check and we are given a chance for reformation.

Thou didst follow the ways of zealous Elijah, and the straight path of the Baptist, O Father Anthony. Thou didst become a desert dweller and support the world by thy prayers. Intercede with Christ our God that our souls may be saved. (Troparion of St. Anthony the GreaT).

Introduction and Part II

“Holiness, salvation, and a crown of incorruption are given to the man who bears misfortunes cheerfully and with thankfulness. To control anger, the tongue, the belly and sensual pleasures is of the utmost benefit to the soul.”[1]

One of the most difficult things for any of us to overcome is our egotistical pride. But this is exactly what we are called to do as Christians. We must be humble and not think too highly of ourselves. We must be willing to accept the place we find ourselves in life, even if we think we “deserve better.” As long as we think we “deserve better,” we do not know ourselves and what it is we are called to do. We must learn to accept our lot in life. It is not that we can’t work to better ourselves, but we must not assume what the outcome should be. Hard work does not always mean earthly success, however, hard spiritual work in cooperation with grace does lead to the salvation of our souls, and this is far more valuable than anything which we can receive in the world. “For what does it profit a man, to gain the whole world and forfeit his life?” (Mark 8:36 RSV).  It is not that we cannot find ourselves in a place of prominence, but our joy should be found in the good we do, whether or not the good is appreciated by anyone else in the world. Doing good should be enough to satisfy us. Of course, for most of us, it isn’t. This shouldn’t discourage us: as long as we know the goal and pursue it, grace is more than capable of fulfilling that which we lack and helping us slowly become holy, at which point, such good will be enough.

We should always remember that the good we do might not be something which gets any earthly reward. We shouldn’t be looking for it. We should ignore all the voices around us enticing us to follow foolish goals. They are trying to distract us from our proper goal, God. They want us to be satisfied with something separate from the good God desires for us, something far less than what God will give us if we justly follow him. Of course, when we are weak and fail, God’s gracious love is able to heal us and move us out of the dead-end we have made for ourselves: as long as we shall live, we should never give in to despair. When we see the mess we have made for ourselves, thanks to such grace, we can get out of it and move forward, doing whatever it is we should be doing.

When we are treated unfairly, how we handle such an injustice will show how holy or unholy we have become. If we have our eyes on God, we will know that such treatment purifies our soul and helps bring us closer to God. “Blessed is the man who endures trial, for when he has stood the test he will receive the crown of life which God has promised to those who love him” (James 1:12 RSV). Those who do evil should be given pity, because in the ultimate sense of things, their actions hurt them, not us:

For an impious and wicked person will not go unpunished because his wickedness was unable to harm a righteous person. The long-suffering and virtue of the righteous earn a reward not for the one who has inflicted death and torture but for the one who has patiently endured what was inflicted upon him. Hence the latter will be deservedly punished for his fierce cruelty because he desired to inflict evil, while the former has endured nothing evil because, patiently sustaining trials and sorrows in his strength of soul, he caused the things that we inflicted upon him with bad intent to bring him to a better state and to the blessedness of eternal life.[2]

We should seek to convert those who have done evil, to encourage them away from their evil. Indeed, though we should not approve of their actions, we should love them in the way God loves us, forgiving them as God forgives us for our sins. Hatred and wrath destroy the soul, as St. Caesarius of Arles points out: “If anyone harbors hatred for even one man in this world, no matter what he has offered God in good works, he loses it all.”[3]

We must learn to bear patiently with the trials and tribulations which come before us, knowing if we persevere to the end, we shall find our place with God far outweighs any evil which we have suffered. “He who conquers shall not be hurt by the second death” (Rev. 2:11b RSV). We will be said to be conquerors, not because we have overcome others, but because they have not overcome us and turned us away from the path of virtue unto the trail of vice. The ascetic path, a path everyone is called to in their own way, is the path which helps us transform ourselves so that we do not feel the sting of evil in our lives. We must learn to control our body and not be controlled by it. Discipline is the key. We must know how to control what we say, to think before speaking, so as not to let the heat of the moment make us say something which we will later regret. Indeed, since Jesus, our Lord, is the Word, the Logos, we must recognize the value of the word and realize this is why James tells us true religion is connected to the bridling of the tongue: “If any one thinks he is religious, and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, this man’s religion is vain” (James 1:26 RSV). Likewise, other disciplines, like fasting, help keep the body in check, help us see how the body works, so that we do not find the body controlling us and leading us astray due to its passions. It is for this reason the desert fathers believed if one can control oneself through fasting, other passions such as lust or anger can then be put under control: we will have learned how our impulses work and how to act without being overcome by them.

The message here is typical of a monk living in the Egyptian desert, where the fortitude the martyrs showed in their martyrdom was used to encourage the monks in their daily practice. It could easily be from St. Anthony as it could be from a host of other famous desert monks, and as such, we can believe this reflects teachings Anthony gave, whether or not these words were actually written by him.

We need distractions, we need something to help make us forget we are living in hell. That’s where sports comes into play. It’s certainly a circus, and when the circus comes into town, everything – everything – makes way. This is exactly what is happening in Indianapolis for the Superbowl. The city, the poor people living in it, having to work in the middle of it, are finding out the negative effects the Superbowl will have on them. Street closings will make it impossible for some of them to get out of their home. They might be told they can have shuttles to get them around, but who will be able to go to the grocery store and bring back food in such a crowded shuttle? And how will they get to work – or how will people living in the outskirts of the city get to work? Again, some are being told to pay for parking spots and take shuttles in to the city. Really? Poor workers can afford this extra expense for the sake of the great circus? And, education, what about it? Schools are being affected, classes canceled. Sports, again, are shown to be more important than anything else.

Some people argue that the money collected will validate any difficulty hosting the Superbowl will have on the city. What money? When making deals for the Superbowl, the city gave up all kinds of money, and have given up all kinds of tax collection which they could have had from the Superbowl itself.  Yes, some bars might find they make more money during the Superbowl, but what about other businesses which find they can’t get their workers or clients in to work? What about them? What compensation do they have? History shows, the so-called economic boost of hosting the Superbowl is exaggerated.

We love entertainment, and we let it take over our lives. Sports has become one of the great national idols. We sacrifice so many for the sake of sports. Is it not time we reconsider? Is it not time to take a look to the dark underbelly of the sports industry and what it is doing on our society? It’s not just a one time event. What is taking place in Indianapolis is taking place across the nation all the time. All for the sake of sports. We might be in hell, but we still got to have our football.

The greatest irony behind all of this is that those who argue against “big government” and “government handouts” are among the biggest supporters of all that is given away to the sporting industry. So we can get cooperation after all.  But why is it only for the sake of sports? Isn’t there something better they should be working on?

“The truly devout soul knows the God of all. True devotion is simply to do God’s will. This means to gain knowledge of God by being free from envy, self-restrained, gentle, as generous as possible, kindly, not quarrelsome, and by acquiring whatever else accords with God’s will.”[1]

The “material passions” are overcome by knowledge of God. [2] “As long as ignorance of God is present in the soul, the passions remain incurable and rot the soul away; for evil in the soul is like a festering wound.”[3] We are responsible for this, not God, because God has given humanity “spiritual understanding and knowledge.”[4] “God has filled man with spiritual understanding and knowledge, for He seeks to purify man from his passions and deliberate wickedness; and in His love He desires to transform the mortal into the immortal.”[5] The pure, devout person will see God with their intellect, [for they will find God inside, for] he alone is the “purity in the pure of heart.”[6]

As much as we live with sin, as much as we life for the sake of the self instead of following the dictates of love, that is as far away we are from God. The greater our sin, the greater our unlove, the more distorted our vision of God will be, until, at last, we are so far from God we will not be able to see him. How many of us suffer this already in our lives? How many of us find it difficult to sense the presence of God? It’s because of how far away we have let ourselves drift from him! To see God, we need to cleans our heart, to make it pure. “”Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God” (Matt. 5:8 RSV).

To be pure in heart is to be a person full of love and devotion to God. Through that love and devotion to God, one will have love and devotion to everyone else. What God loves, one will love. God loves the world universally, and so our love will become universal. Indeed, we need to have such universal love if we want to see God, for God is love. The one who holds it will see God in themselves. Holiness, pure holiness, can only be seen in one who has such universal love. And if we live with such love, others will be able to see God, if not in themselves, then in and through the presence of God in us. This is why the saints are so important – even if, in their lives, they have not attained perfection, their closeness to God, their greater purity of heart, gives witness to God. Their self-sacrificial character shows what God would have the world be like if the world would follow God. It would be a world of universal love, where people helped those who needed help, and no one would feel apart from the whole.

Such love, of course, cannot be merely theoretical. It must be practical. It must be put into universal action:

Now if we seek to benefit the world by taking universality as our standard, those with sharp ears and clear eyes will see and hear for others, those with study limbs will work for others, and those with a knowledge of the Way will endeavor to teach others. Those who are old and without wives or children will find means of support and be able to live out their days; the young and orphaned who have no parents will find someone to care for them and look after their needs.[7]

As we put love into action we become more and more like God, for God is, in essence, the activity of love. God’s essence is one with his activity, and his activity is love. To be pure at heart is to make oneself a vessel of love. This is what it means to be a temple of God. As temples of God, we will know God and do God’s will because we will know love and follow through with the expectations of love. We will have become rays of love sent into the world itself. Sin cannot enter such a life. A self-enclosed will cannot be found in one who has turned themselves into the image of love. Matter, and what is in it, will be loved, according to its proper nature, but it will not divert the one full of real, actual love away from God. One united with God will not be distracted by and attached to the lesser, material goods because they will no longer appear greater than they actually are.

But those far from God, those who have yet to quell sin, those who have yet to find universal love, will find that in their lack of love, a lack of any peace. The world, even if it is enjoyed in part, nonetheless contains much which leads such a person to bitterness. Where the lack of love is found, hatred can reside, and such hatred makes sure one will find no satisfaction with what one does in the world. What one hates will eat away at the person, making them act in a way contrary to their own good. “One’s mind finds no peace, neither enjoys pleasure or delight, no goes to sleep, nor feels secure while the dart of hatred is stuck in the heart.” [8]

Those who do not follow the path of love will create their own suffering. God has given us free will, and allows us to turn aside from him, from the path of love which leads to him, but he also has given us the way to return to him if and when we ever seek to do so. We must reject the way of the self. When we are turned inward and desire only the self, we will become jealous of others for what they have which we do not. We will always find something someone else has which we do not and feel dejected from our lack. Without love, envy and hate will slowly rise up in the soul, making us turn away, not just from God, but from everyone around us until we will have made ourselves the lonely rulers of a pathetic kingdom of one.[9] But if we look to God, and seek God out, God’s grace will be able to transform us. Slowly, as we purify ourselves, the sinful habits we have developed will recede, and the temptation that the passions bring will no longer be there. How can we be tempted to follow that which brings us less true happiness than God himself?

To the one who has come to know God, there is nothing which will separate them from God, for they will know everything else pales in comparison. Free will, grace, and love will unite in such a person so that they will freely follow the love which they have attained, and they will find God’s unlimited grace gives them the power to achieve that which they will. Their happiness in God, a happiness which is achieved through their union with God in Christ, will make it so that sin no longer is desired, as St. Bernard makes clear:

And this is where Christ comes in. In him, man possesses the necessary ‘power of God and the wisdom of God,’ who, inasmuch as he is wisdom, pours back into man true wisdom, and so restores to him his free counsel; and, inasmuch as he is power, renews his full power, and so restores to him his free pleasure. As a result, being by the former perfectly good, he may now no longer sin; and being, by the latter, completely happy, may no longer feel its sting.[10]

Devotion unites us with Christ. United with Christ, we find ourselves united with God. In and through our unity with God, we will find love and know the path of love. Nothing but love will satisfy us, nothing but love will motivate us. This is what the Christian life is all about – to turn us into people of love. Grace gives us the power to love. The knowledge of the faith gives us the wisdom and direction needed to find such love. It is not what we have done but what God, who is love, has done which makes this possible. If we have truly found God we will be like Christ. What we do will be for others. Even the sufferings we face in the world, sufferings which are real, will be turned around to a thing of glory by the transforming power of the Holy Spirit, the spirit of love. Love, in the end, will always be victorious.

There is nothing in these passages which would make us doubt an Anthonite attribution. Indeed, there are allusions to Biblical ideas here, allusions which make an Anthonite connection stronger, since they are used to help favor an ascetic approach to life.

If this is not bad enough, the capitalistic ideology, when combined with a drastically increased “working class,” due to the fact that most families feel as if both parents need careers in order to just have enough financial success to live, means children are going to gravitate more and more to consumerism and its lack of any sense of virtue. Children not only will have no guidance from their parents because their parents are working, they will find themselves, as they grow up, having to fight an ever-increasing population for the limited economic resources available to them. Again, when money is the end, when money is turned into the good, then the question of means is easily dismissed: money becomes the means and the end, therefore guaranteeing everything done through money is “good” according to the new way society looks at the world. Over-population and a capitalistic ideology lead only to social self-destruction. Those who scream the most about “culture wars” often do not understand their support of capitalistic ideology without any kind of regulation or restriction to that ideology is what is making for those culture wars and the neglect of morality.

Interestingly enough, voluntary celibacy – such as for priests or for religious life –  was often seen as helping to deal with overpopulation. That is, overpopulation was recognized as a problem and celibacy was one way the problem could be overcome. Matteo Ricci had to explain to Confucians why celibates are not to be discouraged. Confucians believed that children had the duty to their parents to have children of their own. It was a part of their obligation to their parents. Ricci suggests that those who pursue virtue, such as himself, over children are doing society great good, for they can promote virtue in others.  By helping the common good, they are still fulfilling their obligation to their parents:

A father cannot avoid thinking about trade and commerce. Since in these day there are many fathers and sons the number engaged in acquiring wealth is also considerable. As the number of those who seek to acquire wealth grow, it become increasingly difficult for each man to obtain what he wants. If I were to allow myself to be involved in secular affairs I would be unable to detach myself from the mundane, and would be bound to count myself fortunate if I were merely able to remain alive. How could I carry out my ambition to encourage people to live a righteous life? The most important thing in the cultivation of virtue is to despise wealth and goods. How can I persuade others not to concern themselves with wealth and goods if I pay serious attention to, and have an inordinate affection for, such things?[1]

The promotion of life is not the same thing as the promotion of large populations – the promotion of life is the promotion of the dignity of life, which requires the promotion for the common good and the virtues required for social harmony. When populations are low, and in need of more workers to sustain themselves, increasing population sizes can be good. The ancients, because they lived in smaller communities, did not face the problems of over-population and the moral decay which comes from it. “The troubles of today are not due to the smallness of the population, but to the fact that the population has grown large without a corresponding growth in virtue.”[2] Without having a plan to promote the virtue of a growing population, they become like animals.

Again, the so-called culture warrior needs to understand this if they want to get to the root problem in society. As long as they keep promoting an increase in population as if it were in itself always a good and an increase in capitalistic ideology with its inability to see any value to the virtues, the same ones decrying the state of society today are a part of the problem.[3] They must stop, look and think. If they want to be a part of the solution, the real solution, they must stop promoting those things which help cause the problems they detest. Without it, all their hard work, all their screaming and shouting to the world, does no one any good.

“God is good, dispassionate and immutable. Now someone who thinks it reasonable and true to affirm that God does not change, may well ask how, in that case, it is possible to speak of God as rejoicing over those who are good and showing mercy to those who honour Him, while turning away from the wicked and being angry with sinners. To this it must be answered that God neither rejoices nor grows angry, for to rejoice and to be offended are passions; nor is He won over by the gifts of those who honour Him, for that would mean He is swayed by pleasure.”[1] We shouldn’t think of God in human terms, thinking of human passions for him, looking for pleasure the way we do.[2] “He is good, and He only bestows blessings and never does harm, remaining always the same.”[3] When we do good, we become united with God, while when we do evil, we find ourselves away from him.[4] “It is not that He grows angry with us in an arbitrary way, but it is our own sins that prevent God from shining within us, and expose us to the demons who punish us. And if through prayer and acts of compassion we gain release from our sins, this does not mean that we have won God over and made Him change, but that through our actions and our turning to God we have cured our wickedness and so once more have enjoyment of God’s goodness. Thus to say that God turns away from the wicked is like saying that the sun hides itself from the blind.”[5]

The eternal act of God is the unchanging good act of love. As St. Gregory of Nyssa relates, our faith denotes many things about God, including “the idea of His Goodness, His Justice, His Omnipotence: that He admits of no variableness nor alteration, but is always the same; incapable of changing to worse or changing to better, because the first is not His nature, the second He does not admit of; for what can be higher than the Highest, what can be better than the Best?”[6] God does not change, for there is nothing in him which needs changing and any alteration of himself would move him away from the perfection that he already has. His being as well as his act is eternal, and he gives all of himself in that eternal act of love.

While God does not change, we do, and in our changing, our relationship with God changes. In this fashion, it will appear God is changing – but the appearance is really a reflection of our own state and our own change. If we move around a mirror, we will see different images; the mirror is not changing, but our perspective is. It is like this with God. Our shifting perspective of the eternal God changes according to our spiritual position in the world. The closer we move to him, the more we will see the goodness and light, the mercy and grace, the love which he is giving to the whole of creation. The further we move away, the darker the image, the more obscure it will be, and the more frightening it might appear to us as what we see becomes monstrously distorted. If we put something between ourselves and God, if we sin, that will also appear in the reflection, showing its true, dark character as it hinders our vision of God.  The consequences of our action will show up – not because God is changing his action toward us, but rather, because we have changed our action toward him and we see God in that new, distorted perspective. The wrath of God is really the reflection of the evil we create, while the love of God is the undistorted image of God which we experience as we move closer to God and put away anything, any sin, which would hinder our vision of him.

Scripture reflects the real experiences of people with God. However, to understand it, we must understand the shifting nature of the human relationship with God meant that, at an earlier stage of the progression, things will be seen in God which are not God. Scripture speaks truly of encounters with God and the ways people experienced God, but we must understand the nature of the human experience and so not treat the words as literal. They represent spiritual truths, and so are worthy of being preserved. They are indeed inspired. But they are inspired through a human medium and we must not forget this. “For ourselves, however, whenever we read of the anger of God, whether in the Old or the New Testament, we do not take such statements literally, but look for the spiritual meaning in them, endeavouring to understand them in a way that is worthy of God.”[7]  We must remember just as, “all the statements concerning God, that imply body, are symbols, ”[8]   so to when we see God acting in Scripture, it is a reflection of the one eternal act of God and words which indicate change in God are symbolic of our changing experience with him.

We must remember God is love, God is all-merciful, God is all-loving, and God is working for the salvation of everyone. He “makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust” (Matt. 5:45 RSV). But is actions, his act of love, shows that he sides with the poor, the needy, the oppressed. He seeks to lift them up. Those who stand against him will find the consequences of their action, of their sin, as they move further and further away from God and see only the reflection of sin in their lives. The hate, the anger, the wrath they will see is their own. God does not hate or even have anger towards the oppressor. He loves them, but in his love, because he loves all, he rejection their sin, he rejects their unjust treatment of others and requires them to change and purify themselves if they want to see him as he truly is. Their experience will be like that of a young child being sent to their room: they might feel as God does not love them, but God does, and he has given them what they desire, with all the darkness and loneliness that comes from it. They can come back to God, just as children can come out of their room, if they change their ways. They must overcome themselves if they want to see God face to face and know him for the love which he is, but if they get stuck in themselves, they will only see coming from God the visage they put on him, the visage of their own sin.

God does not want fake reverence. False piety might encourage respect among one’s peers, but in one’s relationship with God, it only turns one further and further away from him. The praise given by others is the reward they sought and the reward they get; since they do not seek God, but only appear to seek God, they will be far from God despite their prideful boasts. He is not swayed but rather, waits for the person to be swayed to actually seek him and come to him. The proud sinner will find in God retribution for their pride, while the humble will find in their humility the love of God, as St Caesarius of Alres points out: “Because the proud are stiff-necked. Therefore, realize that only the proud will be struck with this blow. Those who are humble should thank God and remain in humility to the end of their lives. Thus, the blessing of the angels and patriarchs and prophets and apostles and all the Scripture will come upon them, as is given to all who persevere in humility.”[9] To encounter God stiff-necked and proud is to feel as if one is encountering an unbending, unchanging force which repels such pride. To encounter God in humility is to be pliant and so capable of uniting with God, because one is able to be moved according to the good direction of providence instead of demanding and insisting on one’s own limited plans. The harm in the encounter comes from the stance of the one who comes face to face with God, not from God who is attempting to move us for our own good so as to be united in him in a way which brings us the best, most happy outcome possible.

The distinctively Origenist aspect of this passage is exactly the kind of sentiment we should expect from St. Anthony if Samuel Rubenson is correct about the Origenist influence on Anthony. “To Antony, as well as to Origen, it is the spiritual meaning, allegorized in the text, that is of importance. The Bible is the story about how God as Creator cares for man and acts to restore him to his original constitution, how he seek to resurrect man’s spiritual essence, i.e., to restore order and knowledge.”[10] One influenced by Origen for their spirituality is to understand God in this fashion. The immutability of God must be preserved, and the way this is preserved is to highlight the mutability of the human condition. History is the record of humanity as it changes its relationship with God, not about God’s changing ways with humanity. It shows us how and why certain acts lead us closer to or further from God. For this reason, this reads as authentically Anthonite, as long as one understand Anthony as being influenced by Origen and his spirituality being a reworking of Origen’s spiritual principles.

THE ANGEL OF THE LAST JUDGMENT gets up.

Jesus, supreme beauty! have you forgotten
That sinners must be punished at the end? …
Have You forgotten, in Your extreme love
That the number of the impious is countless? ..
At the judgment, I shall punish crime.
I want to wipe out all the ungrateful
My sword is read!… Jesus, sweet victum!…
My sword is ready!! .. I’ll know how to avenge You!!!… (2x)

 

THE CHILD JESUS

O Beautiful angel! lay down your sword.
It is not for you to judge
The nature that I raise up.
And have desired to redeem.[1]

 

Jesus is the prince of peace. In this season of Christmas, let us remember Jesus came to lift us up, not to tear us down and have us taken in by the sword. Those who want to lift up weapons of violence to “avenge” Christ need to remember that Christ says vengeance is his – and his alone. It is not even for angels to bring judgment to the world. We who follow Christ, let us remember the little child, born in a manger, who took the lot of the poor as his own. He did not wish that any should perish. He came to save, not condemn. The sins of the world are taken by him and have been thrown into the depths of hell. He does not seek protection, he seeks love.

Do you know that faithful souls
Will console Me forever
For the blasphemies of the unfaithful
By a simple look of love? … .[2]

Lay down your sword, bow down and adore Christ today! It is love he seeks from you!

Troparion of the Feast    Tone 4

Thy Nativity, O Christ our God,/ has shone to the world as the light of wisdom./ For by it those who worshipped the stars/ were taught by a star to adore Thee,/ the Sun of Righteousness,/ and to know Thee, the Orient from on high./ O Lord, glory to Thee.

Kontakion of the Synaxis    Tone 6

He that was born before the morning star of Father without mother/ is today incarnate on earth of thee without father./ A star tells the glad tidings to the Magi;/ while Angels and Shepherds praise thy seedless childbirth, O thou who art full of grace.