"Obedience" in Orthodoxy

[~Anastasia~]

I'm curious about something. I think the best way to ask is for comments in general, but also specifically on the role (or lack of it) of obedience in Orthodoxy in general.

(Let me preface this to say that I'm not looking for instances of abuse of authority, which I'm sure has happened - sadly - but I'm interested in the normal, healthy function of the Church.)

I know monastics take vows of obedience, and there is a specific purpose in that, for their spiritual development. And that priests owe pretty strict obedience to their bishops in any matter that concerns the Church. But what about the matter of laity?

I know (I have heard of at any rate - not any I know) of priests who would seem to expect "obedience" to a high degree from their flock. But from what I've read, that really isn't a proper role. What I have seen is the priest functioning in the role of spiritual advisor, and in many cases leaving the decision entirely up to their parishioner. The exception perhaps being that access to the Sacraments might not be allowed if the priest determines it is not in a person's best interest or they are spiritually unprepared to receive them.

On the other hand, it might be a step further to engage the guidance of a Spiritual Father. Not that one would be "punished" or expect sanctions (except correction, perhaps) for failing to follow his directives, but the relationship basically isn't functioning and is worthless if one consistently fails to even plan to follow his advice.

That's about as far as I've gotten. Any comments on these roles? Or perhaps on other scenarios I haven't mentioned? Wisdom from the Saints on the subject?

I'm interested in a general sense, not having specific questions, so any discussion would be appreciated.

 

[truefiction1]

I think this might be a rather delicate subject. We'll likely see a few different philosophies being used to justify opinions regarding the value of obedience or of disobedience. I recommend looking for the answer in Scripture and in the Life of perpetual prayer.

 

[gzt]

Laity essentially don't exist in Orthodox literature, so discussion will be sparse. Almost all discussion of obedience in the literature will be either in a monastic context or the context of clergy obeying their bishop.

If you're talking about, say, in a parish setting, the relation of a parish council to a priest or the various ministries to the priest (eg, choir), it's going to be different, too, from a layman getting advice from their parish priest or getting direction from a spiritual father. I would just say that obedience can't be something imposed, it's something you have to agree to get into.

 

[~Anastasia~]

Laity essentially don't exist in Orthodox literature, so discussion will be sparse. Almost all discussion of obedience in the literature will be either in a monastic context or the context of clergy obeying their bishop.

You have a good point there ... I understand now (and have for a while) why priests are concerned with possible misunderstandings when laity read certain writings, when there really is nothing to balance things out and put certain topics in perspective for laity. But I never thought about the fact that there isn't much written for laity. I read The Ladder in a form adapted for laity, but offhand that's the only thing I can recall.

If you're talking about, say, in a parish setting, the relation of a parish council to a priest or the various ministries to the priest (eg, choir), it's going to be different, too, from a layman getting advice from their parish priest or getting direction from a spiritual father.

Actually, I had nothing particular in mind, but you bring up some other points. Those are essentially matters of administration within a parish, and they should function in particular ways. But those might be the more problematic and less fruitful areas to discuss, so I think I'd rather leave those out of it for the most part.

I would just say that obedience can't be something imposed, it's something you have to agree to get into.

And that's a very good point. Maybe the best one that could be made.

In any context I can think of, such as monastic vows, or obedience to a spiritual father, it certainly something entered into by choice - otherwise it's something else, and not useful for the same reasons.

 

[~Anastasia~]

I think this might be a rather delicate subject. We'll likely see a few different philosophies being used to justify opinions regarding the value of obedience or of disobedience. I recommend looking for the answer in Scripture and in the Life of perpetual prayer.

Ah, True, I had hoped you might have something to say about this. But I also fear you may be right - maybe I should not have asked this here. It really is something I'd like to discuss and maybe get more insight about, but ... it certainly could be problematic.

I'm debating if it would be better to close the thread. I don't want to cause dissension, or create bad (especially incorrect) impressions of the Church.

There is much in Scripture that could be discussed on this topic, I'm sure. As far as "the Life of perpetual prayer" ... if you mean what I think you mean ... that may be closely related to the reasons I have for hoping to discuss it in the first place ...


I sometimes sincerely wish my parish was a bit more eclectic in makeup. I sincerely love the people there but ... I don't think I'd get anywhere with certain topics there either.

 

[ArmyMatt]

I think it's a fine topic, but I think the answer lies between you and your priest. it's not something you can get from the Net, because only your parish priest really knows you.

 

[~Anastasia~]

I think it's a fine topic, but I think the answer lies between you and your priest. it's not something you can get from the Net, because only your parish priest really knows you.

Thank you, Matt.

But what I'm getting at is not advice or guidelines for myself to follow. Indeed, that is between myself and my priest. Matters concerning myself are really very simple.

But I am interested in a broader context, maybe more of a philosophical or spiritual understanding. That's why I can't ask a specific question. Which makes it difficult for anyone to respond, I know.

 

[Ignatius21]

My priest has long pointed out some of the pitfalls of monastic literature being read by laity, especially by new converts. In this matter he's often had people coming to him asking for the spiritual father they read about, seeking an almost slavish obedience in every matter.

 

[~Anastasia~]

My priest has long pointed out some of the pitfalls of monastic literature being read by laity, especially by new converts. In this matter he's often had people coming to him asking for the spiritual father they read about, seeking an almost slavish obedience in every matter.

Hmmmmm. I guess I can see where one could let their understanding lead them there.

Monastic obedience has a particular purpose, in a particular context. I don't know a great deal about it. I suspect the greatest value is probably in developing humility? But parish life, people living in the world - no, I can't see that being suitable.

I'm reading "Everyday Saints" right now, which talks some about that. But I'm pretty sure it was in that book where the writer has made the point very strongly, more than once, that it is completely wrong for a spiritual father (not necessarily a monk's abbot) to take away a person's freedom through such demands ...

Thank you, that is a good point as well.

Father did restrict my reading for a while, and hearing from you such things as this help me see some of the reasons why. (I know there were many reasons, actually - I'm thankful to have had such guidance. Though after plenty of conversations, Father has given his blessing for the things I had previously asked to read and been told not to at the time.)

Thanks so much for your post - that's a helpful point to flesh out the topic.

 

[gzt]

One of the things I would definitely take seriously is being told not to read something. I mean, I'm a big academic freedom type guy, and anybody I take orders from would know that, but I also understand that sometimes being exposed to ideas can activate the crazy part of one's mind. I'm not especially prone to that, but I know for sure that some are, and some of the results are not so good.

 

[~Anastasia~]

One of the things I would definitely take seriously is being told not to read something. I mean, I'm a big academic freedom type guy, and anybody I take orders from would know that, but I also understand that sometimes being exposed to ideas can activate the crazy part of one's mind. I'm not especially prone to that, but I know for sure that some are, and some of the results are not so good.

I have taken it seriously. Even though Father made a blanket recommendation to ALL catechumens, I complied because I figured what would be the point of becoming Orthodox if I had no intention of taking my priest's advice? We have since had many talks, and upon someone else's suggestion, I asked him about six weeks ago about reading the things he had formerly forbidden me to read. He told me some things to be cautious about, but he gave me a blessing with those caveats to read basically anything I want from the Church's writings.

So, considering he is very careful, and he now knows me pretty well, I think I am ok.

Not that I want to make this thread about me, but ... Father did ask me to be under someone else's guidance for particular areas. And I've finally started to develop that relationship - but I think I'm also starting over in terms of what I'm allowed to read. I won't even ask about the things Fr. M just gave me permission to read, because I know at this point Fr. C will say no. Not that I mind overmuch - he's given me a list of things he wants me to read, and it is different from what I already know, so I'm enjoying it, as well as finding his guidance very helpful.

 

[truefiction1]

Ah, True, I had hoped you might have something to say about this. But I also fear you may be right - maybe I should not have asked this here. It really is something I'd like to discuss and maybe get more insight about, but ... it certainly could be problematic.

I'm debating if it would be better to close the thread. I don't want to cause dissension, or create bad (especially incorrect) impressions of the Church.

There is much in Scripture that could be discussed on this topic, I'm sure. As far as "the Life of perpetual prayer" ... if you mean what I think you mean ... that may be closely related to the reasons I have for hoping to discuss it in the first place ...


I sometimes sincerely wish my parish was a bit more eclectic in makeup. I sincerely love the people there but ... I don't think I'd get anywhere with certain topics there either.

I didn't mean to suggest that this topic shouldn't be discussed. I think that it should be discussed. I feel, however, that there is no clear "rule" in existence that will direct one into right behaviors within one's relationships with authoritative others, yet Scripture offers some guidelines. Also, the gifts of humility and of spiritual discernment may help guide us in these relationships. Much direct (hands-on, trial and error) experience in socialization may also be of great practical service to us in this regard.

I believe that my experience has shown me that our Traditional spiritual life of perpetually praying, whereby we allow God to help our spirit to effectively guard the door of our hearts against improper sensations and their corresponding thoughts, can eventually lead us into a personal condition wherein the Spirit can communicate the gifts pointed to above. By virtue of these gifts we can discern how we should respond to any person with whom we are in relationship. Yet, we must never pursue the "gifts" because we desire them for ourselves. Rather only because God wills that we receive them. The only acceptable attitude from us, no matter how saintly we may be, is the attitude that acknowledges our own deeply regrettable sinfulness and dire need for repentance and healing by the power of God. We are worthy only of repentance. Gifts are exactly "gifts".

If you need a tentative rule of thumb though, It might be of some value to remember that as a group we can successfully accomplish more when we are working in a social atmosphere of minimal conflict, contentiousness and negative feelings. Community rules exist for the exact purpose of creating such an environment. Rulers generally create such rules specifically for that reason and rulers enforce them for that reason. If the authority of the rulers (in our case bishops, their representative priests, deacons, etc...) is not recognized then we'll not do well. That being said, however, it should also be remembered that our rulers are also the mouthpieces of the Church, who speak Her mind. Our own ideas about things can influence the necessary, dynamic movement of organizational rules toward changes which might optimize our effectiveness in the world. As a general rule then, It is best if we honor the authority and word of our leaders, while respectfully sharing our own reasonable thoughts, feelings, and ideas with them. Humility could help us to do this more openly and with more positive results. Sometimes we get ourselves very strongly emotionally attached to our own ideas and opinions and it's real hard to not be overwhelmed by negativity when these meet with resistance and even overt rejection. Having ideas and opinions is unavoidable. These are good things. Being able to submit your ideas and opinions and having the humility and patience to let the Mind of the Church analyze them is probably best. None of us has all the answers. We should all be doing our best to discover the best ones, within the Divinely established order of the Church.

 

[~Anastasia~]

Thank you, True. I wanted to let you know, I've read this post a couple of times. It's interesting, because you touch on some things my SF is directing me toward learning about, but I know just enough to know that there's a lot more to know. Today was a long day for me, and I don't want to just fire off a quick reply without taking time to think about it. But I wanted to thank you, and let you know I'm not ignoring your post.

 

[E.C.]

This has been an interesting topic.

As the laity, part of our job is to follow the spiritual direction given by one's confessor, spiritual father, local priest, etc. At the same time we need to be discerning enough to know when the source is not right as has been seen in abuse cases that, sadly, do exist. There have been times in history when the Church was corrected by the laity, most notably in the aftermath of the Council in Florence, and there shall be many more. Heck, even when my own old home parish was in her infant days in the early 1900s, there's a story of a priest being tied to a lamppost by his stole for charging $5 for baptisms, when the Byzantine Catholic priest across town only charged $2

As said before we do need to follow the spiritual direction given to us, but we're also not monastics. It is reasonable to expect a high degree of obedience from a monastic because that's part of what comes with being a monastic, but from the laity? That's a separate degree of obedience-expecting.

My priest has long pointed out some of the pitfalls of monastic literature being read by laity, especially by new converts. In this matter he's often had people coming to him asking for the spiritual father they read about, seeking an almost slavish obedience in every matter.

A priest friend of the family calls this the "Spiritual Father Syndrome" and is quite a deadly illness.

 

[GregConstantine]

obedience plays a important role, but each of us also have to be responsible for ourselves as well. Obedience does not absolves us of personal responsibility.

@gzt, I agree with you about the not reading thing, but what about saying to someone that perhaps a certain book may not be very helpful to that person if they were to read it at some point in their catechumate?

 

[gzt]

Like I said, I definitely take seriously and would recommend to take seriously suggestions that certain literature isn't helpful. I think some people new to the faith definitely read too much and get weird ideas.

 

[GregConstantine]

I always advise people not to rely on the internet for all their information. Too many people do that and really get wacked out ideas.

 

[GregConstantine]

After re-reading your comment gzt I see that what you said about how everything is not helpful. I think what contributes to this problem is Individualism, especially for Americans. We like to think we can have our very own personal take on religion.

 

[gzt]

Yes, the internet is definitely a bad place. Normal, well-balanced people don't comment on web-logs.

 

[~Anastasia~]

I didn't mean to suggest that this topic shouldn't be discussed. I think that it should be discussed. I feel, however, that there is no clear "rule" in existence that will direct one into right behaviors within one's relationships with authoritative others, yet Scripture offers some guidelines. Also, the gifts of humility and of spiritual discernment may help guide us in these relationships. Much direct (hands-on, trial and error) experience in socialization may also be of great practical service to us in this regard.

I agree that there isn't a single "rule" ... I'm glad so many things have been brought up here. I see it is a very broad topic indeed and some things I would not have thought of.

I'm sure there is much to be gleaned from Scripture, and I have not yet done that in an Orthodox context. I'm not sure I can devote the time to it right now - well, really I know I can't. If I can find an article or teaching, maybe ...

I believe that my experience has shown me that our Traditional spiritual life of perpetually praying, whereby we allow God to help our spirit to effectively guard the door of our hearts against improper sensations and their corresponding thoughts, can eventually lead us into a personal condition wherein the Spirit can communicate the gifts pointed to above. By virtue of these gifts we can discern how we should respond to any person with whom we are in relationship.

humility and spiritual discernment - makes perfect sense both on the cultivation and uses of those gifts in this context ...

Yet, we must never pursue the "gifts" because we desire them for ourselves. Rather only because God wills that we receive them.

I guess that is always true. Though (you may not mean this, given your next sentence) ... St. Theophan the Recluse advises to ask for repentance, and pure prayer. Sorry, really I'm just thinking out loud and making sure I consider all that you've said. It fits a little differently in my structure than I've been shown, but it does fit.

The only acceptable attitude from us, no matter how saintly we may be, is the attitude that acknowledges our own deeply regrettable sinfulness and dire need for repentance and healing by the power of God. We are worthy only of repentance. Gifts are exactly "gifts".

If you need a tentative rule of thumb though, It might be of some value to remember that as a group we can successfully accomplish more when we are working in a social atmosphere of minimal conflict, contentiousness and negative feelings. Community rules exist for the exact purpose of creating such an environment. Rulers generally create such rules specifically for that reason and rulers enforce them for that reason. If the authority of the rulers (in our case bishops, their representative priests, deacons, etc...) is not recognized then we'll not do well. That being said, however, it should also be remembered that our rulers are also the mouthpieces of the Church, who speak Her mind. Our own ideas about things can influence the necessary, dynamic movement of organizational rules toward changes which might optimize our effectiveness in the world. As a general rule then, It is best if we honor the authority and word of our leaders, while respectfully sharing our own reasonable thoughts, feelings, and ideas with them.

This makes sense. Though I've usually considered the role of laity, etc. of maintaining the Church "in her right mind" in a sense (when necessary) ... not in the sense of developing new thoughts. I guess it depends on what those thoughts are. Obviously when we enter a new country, a new culture, for example, for the purpose of evangelizing, certain changes are going to be necessary to bring the Gospel to the people. But then again, other things will not change just to please the wishes of the new culture/younger generation/etc.

Humility could help us to do this more openly and with more positive results. Sometimes we get ourselves very strongly emotionally attached to our own ideas and opinions and it's real hard to not be overwhelmed by negativity when these meet with resistance and even overt rejection. Having ideas and opinions is unavoidable. These are good things. Being able to submit your ideas and opinions and having the humility and patience to let the Mind of the Church analyze them is probably best. None of us has all the answers. We should all be doing our best to discover the best ones, within the Divinely established order of the Church.

I see what you are saying. I wasn't even thinking of these contexts, so I'm glad you mentioned it. It's not something I've thought much about. Father did ask for suggestions a year ago for the sake of reaching others for the Church, interesting outsiders, welcoming them, etc. So I've given that some thought. I have a few ideas. I do suspect the likelihood is that most or all of them may be rejected, and I haven't put any forth just yet. But simply our parish, like the Church, is probably slow to change in certain areas, and in others it might just be too difficult/expensive. But thanks for bringing that up - it wasn't even on my radar on this topic.