Dobri Dobrev and Other Peasants

[Nick T]

All this has proven my OP- no one can become a saint in all this bs

This is a tempting thought certainly, especially in these times. But ultimately its a dangerous one. God is the same today as he was 2000 years ago, as is his grace and his power. If we turn from our sins and trust in him follow him then we can be made holy, not by our own power, but by his grace and through his Church.

I know this is something of a platitude but it is true nevertheless. I'm not a spiritual father do be able to help you specifically workout how to overcome modern challenges. But in no age or era is sanctity impossible because no age or era is not governed ultimately by God.

Father Matt... I read some of the info on Elder Ephraim Vatopedi and technology. I don't think he's wrong on it. He had very strong warnings about the use of technology as you grow. My point is that at some point in our walk I believe that the road divides from modernity on the path to theosis. I'm glad tech has helped many of us get to Orthodoxy BUT tech has also been a major player in the attacks on Orthodoxy. What kind of voice would the pro-gay, pro-ecumenical, and pro-revisonists have without tech. Many are coming to Orthodoxy with the idea they can continue their Protestant protests after chrismation. The path to sainthood is not a digital one. That was the point. I struggle with this. I love the internet and that is a problem. At this point it does more harm that good for most of us.

No doubt technology can be very dangerous. IMO less so merely because it can be a vehicle of false teaching (the printing press beat it to it!) and more because of the negative effects it can have on our spiritual lives when he (ab)use it. But to construct an absolute dichotomy between modernity and theosis is to unintentionally ignore Christ's promise that not even the gates of Hell will prevail against his Church. There is no arbitrary level of advancement in which theosis becomes impossible- in every age Christians have been called to "be in the world and not of the world" which means to yes, reject what is wicked in the world, but also not to go to the other extreme and declare the world God created to be a lost cause. God is still in charge and that which can be used for good should be, otherwise we just become a modern version of the gnostics. I think Fr. Matt has given plenty of examples of how technology can and is used positively as well as negatively, and so we should not reject the good just because the potential of evil exists also. Though of course individually we all need to discern the level of technology that we personally can use without falling into danger (something I feely admit I struggle with a lot, especially with the internet).

 

[Ezana]

My point is that at some point in our walk . . . the road divides from modernity on the path to theosis . . . The path to sainthood is not a digital one . . . At this point [the internet] does more harm than good for most of us.

If this is the point in contention, I agree and don't see why it would be controversial. Certainly, there are positive things that modern technology offers us that we might otherwise be unable to acquire. Sure, God in His boundless grace and omnipotence could preserve one of His saints in the midst of temptation and corruption. But are we to forget how the disobedient consumption of the fruit of a single tree in a garden of thousands was the means by which we originally fell? Was not the fruit of the tree itself pure? And yet, being tempted, did we not consume what was pure in an impure manner? It's not that modern technology is inherently evil; rather, its users and their inclinations are. In a way, our modernity sort of reverses the situation in the garden; these days, the trees of knowledge vastly outnumber the trees whose fruit is meet and right for us to eat. And boy, are they ever appealing.

If a lifestyle with fewer distractions and tempting opportunities is more conducive to life of holiness than a life with more of them (and one could very easily argue that our present age can be defined by its obsession with distraction), and if the means to achieve distraction today is by and large with the products of our modern technology, does it not follow that "dividing from modernity on the path to theosis" is, though not necessarily, pretty darn close to an inevitability? And to the point about Elder Ephraim: all the monastics and elders I can think of that use technology in a manner visible to us do so for the sake of others—not for personal gain or recreation. How much of our use of technology and consumption of media is explicitly for the sake of others? And how much more sinful and easily-tempted are we than they?

I think that's the essence of Hermit's point (and please correct me if this is a misinterpretation). Yes, our technology can be used for good (many of us are indebted to online resources and connections for bringing us to or deepening our knowledge and experience of Orthodoxy, for example), but in terms of genuine sainthood or theosis? Indeed, a saint would he be who could faithfully resist the near-infinite amount of highly-accessible trees and their seemingly unforbidden and most-enticing fruit for the sake of the kingdom of heaven.

 

[prodromos]

Saint Porphyrios served in the heart of Athens, with all its vice, noise and secularism, yet he was able to overcome all the temptations and distractions around him to become holy.

 

[Ezana]

Saint Porphyrios served in the heart of Athens, with all its vice, noise and secularism, yet he was able to overcome all the temptations and distractions around him to become holy.

True, and he held favourable opinions as regards technological exploration. But he also grew up in a poor, remote village where donkeys were technological advantages, and spent the days of his youth tending to sheep while stumbling over letters in a book about the life of a tremendous saint whom he loved dearly, slowly teaching himself how to read; he then spent the formative years of his adolescence (an exception to the rule) under the direct care of two righteous elders in what might be the single holiest place on the face of the earth. He received the gift of clear sight during this time, which confirms that he was holy long before he reached Athens, where he would only continue to increase in sanctity. He is surely a great help for us who are also surrounded by vice, noise and secularism, but there isn't really any comparison to be made between his upbringing and the way he navigated it, and ours (which affects how we currently interact with the world). That is to say, St. Porphyrios in Omonoia isn't quite the same as any one of us (well, certainly myself) in Omonoia.

 

[ArmyMatt]

Saint Porphyrios served in the heart of Athens, with all its vice, noise and secularism, yet he was able to overcome all the temptations and distractions around him to become holy.

don't forget St Luke of Crimea, one of the most prominent surgeons under the Soviets.

 

[Dewi Sant]

.

 

[Hermit76]

ah okay.
it just doesn't seem to be going anywhere, but I guess this is the sort of thing America stands for.

As a Briton, I wouldn't understand these things.

So you shut down anything that makes you feel uneasy.

 

[Dewi Sant]

.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Even the Garden of Eden had a snake...

 

[SalemsConcordance]

Do not bear false witness, I have never done such a thing.

Forgive me, Lord bless you Tapi. I fell for my own passions.

 

[tapi]

Forgive me, Lord bless you Tapi. I fell for my own passions.

As the Lord forgives! Forgive me, as well.