Democracy in the Kingdom of God

TER

Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2008
Messages
17,946
Democracy in the Kingdom of God

by Fr. Stephen Freeman

LINK

Nothing is equal because nothing is the same. All things are unique and unrepeatable. This is especially true of persons. Understanding this helps us deal with reality. But the mindset of our modern world suggests in a very seductive manner that things are quite different. It suggests that all things are indeed equal and that wherever inequality exists, it should be overthrown or corrected. Elsewhere, I have called this the “sin of democracy.” I do not mean that political arrangements that are democratic in nature are wrong. However, certain ideas in our modern world go far beyond political arrangements and suggest things about the nature of how things are. It is in these suggestions (and our accepting them as facts) that the “sin of democracy” can be found.

A quick note on positive aspects of democracy. I have always understood the political advantages of democracy as the ability to vote someone out of office – it is a protection against tyranny. It is not, however, a guarantee of good government, the best government, or wise government. It just means that with the vote, I can organize and vote something out that I want to change (maybe). Having said that, I want to give my attention to the spiritual aspect of what I mean by the “sin of democracy.”

The law wisely treats everyone as equal. Everyone should have equal rights before the law. But that will not make them equal. Medical personnel will likely have more accurate information about health matters than a six-year-old child. They are not equally qualified in medical matters. And that we recognize someone’s expertise does not mean we despise the less-qualified. However, we would be seriously insane if we treated all opinions as having equal weight.

What I mean by the “sin of democracy” is a sort of “interiorizing” of certain cultural assumptions and habits in such a manner that they become the matrix of our spiritual understanding. For example, the Scriptures make clear that not all people are spiritually “equal.” Some in the Kingdom of God are greater than others (which implies that some are less).

There are also celestial bodies and terrestrial bodies; but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another. There is one glory of the sun, another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars; for one star differs from another star in glory. (1Co 15:40-41)

This passage, treating the question of the resurrection of our bodies, has traditionally also been seen as a reference to differences in eternity between one person and another. Christ Himself speaks of some as being “greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven,” or as being “least in the Kingdom of Heaven.” In the same manner, He speaks of some as having a “greater condemnation” than others, implying greater and lesser sufferings in hell.

These distinctions undermine the legal framework of salvation taught by many who hold to a disordered understanding of salvation. There is an extreme version within the legal model that holds that we are saved by grace alone, with no regard whatsoever to our works. If our salvation is truly a legal matter, if God “considers” us righteous simply because we believe (and that’s the end of the matter), then why indeed would He consider one more righteous than another. Thus, a kind of equality of grace is argued because anything else would seem unjust (if there is no merit involved whatsoever). But in the classical model of salvation, “grace” is not God’s “unmerited favor,” (simply a matter of how God thinks about us), it is, quite literally, the Divine Life, the Divine Energies. It is the life and power of God given to us in order to change us and conform us to the Divine Image through our union with the Crucified and Risen Christ. And though no individual can possibly save themselves (because we cannot ourselves manufacture the Divine Energies), nonetheless, for varying reasons, some yield themselves more fully and completely to this work within them. Some, indeed, become great saints.

I say that this is for “varying reasons,” because we really cannot pierce within the mystery of each individual. There is doubtless some role played by the unique intention of God for their lives, but there are other mysteries which we cannot know. However, it is clear that “one star differs from another in glory.” For example, the Church says of the Mother of God that she is “more honorable than the cherubim, more gloroius beyond compare than the seraphim.” This is clearly related both to her unique role in our salvation, as well as to her unique and total yielding of herself to God (“Behold the handmaid of the Lord, be it unto me according to Your word”).

The perversity of the democratic force within the spiritual life, however, reveals itself in our unwillingness to accept that someone might be greater than ourselves or more deserving of honor. Researching this matter, I ran across a question someone posed asking, “How can I be happy if someone receives more reward than I do?” I understand the question, but it is born of the perverse spirituality nurtured in a democracy that seeks to rule heaven itself.

The Kingdom of God (and all of reality) is hierarchical by nature. But its hierarchy is just that – a “sacred” (hieros) “order” (arche). In the case of Mary we can see how this hierarchy is not that of the world with its competition and violence. Mary sings, “You have exalted the humble and meek and the rich you have sent away empty.” The mere “arche” of the world is measured by power (and its frequent abuse). The hierarchy of the world (sacred order), however, is a hierarchy of grace in which self-emptying love is the greatest thing of all.

The devotional habits of the Church seek to inculcate in our hearts a proper regard for this sacred order. The veneration given to the Mother of God, described as “hyperdulia” by the Fathers (“extreme honor”), teaches us not that she is equal to God, but that she is greater than I am. For strangely, when I refuse to grant that any other creature is greater than I am, then I am slowly drawn towards a heart that will not grant that the Creator Himself is greater. This gives us the refusal of the contemporary culture to acknowledge the limits of its own creaturehood. We imagine that we can be anything we want to be and that we are the creators of our own reality. Such a “creator” can only be found in the mirror.

There is a legend, widely cited in the Tradition, that in the great Council of heaven, before the creation of humanity, the archangel Lucifer saw the Theotokos and the dignity to which she would be raised. It is said that this sight stung his pride and provoked his rebellion. He could not bear to think that a creature who was mere dust could be greater than all the hosts of heaven (including himself). In his rebellion, his anger was directed less at God and more at us, for we were the cause of his humiliation. Thus, he became a “murderer from the beginning” (Joh 8:44).

That same spirit, unrecognized, breathes in our culture and its rebellion against the true hierarchy of heaven. The saintless equality of a democratic heaven is, strangely enough, only a colony of hell. There, only the private light of self is allowed to shine, no other being permitted to eclipse it.

I like living in a democracy for certain reasons, but I do not imagine it as the only way to live, nor do I want it to infect my heart such that I cannot bear to be less than another. The Kingdom of heaven calls us to become the least of all. And even that paradoxical excellence escapes me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RJB
Democracy in the Kingdom of God

by Fr. Stephen Freeman

LINK

Nothing is equal because nothing is the same. All things are unique and unrepeatable. This is especially true of persons. Understanding this helps us deal with reality. But the mindset of our modern world suggests in a very seductive manner that things are quite different. It suggests that all things are indeed equal and that wherever inequality exists, it should be overthrown or corrected. Elsewhere, I have called this the “sin of democracy.” I do not mean that political arrangements that are democratic in nature are wrong. However, certain ideas in our modern world go far beyond political arrangements and suggest things about the nature of how things are. It is in these suggestions (and our accepting them as facts) that the “sin of democracy” can be found.

A quick note on positive aspects of democracy. I have always understood the political advantages of democracy as the ability to vote someone out of office – it is a protection against tyranny. It is not, however, a guarantee of good government, the best government, or wise government. It just means that with the vote, I can organize and vote something out that I want to change (maybe). Having said that, I want to give my attention to the spiritual aspect of what I mean by the “sin of democracy.”

The law wisely treats everyone as equal. Everyone should have equal rights before the law. But that will not make them equal. Medical personnel will likely have more accurate information about health matters than a six-year-old child. They are not equally qualified in medical matters. And that we recognize someone’s expertise does not mean we despise the less-qualified. However, we would be seriously insane if we treated all opinions as having equal weight.

What I mean by the “sin of democracy” is a sort of “interiorizing” of certain cultural assumptions and habits in such a manner that they become the matrix of our spiritual understanding. For example, the Scriptures make clear that not all people are spiritually “equal.” Some in the Kingdom of God are greater than others (which implies that some are less).



This passage, treating the question of the resurrection of our bodies, has traditionally also been seen as a reference to differences in eternity between one person and another. Christ Himself speaks of some as being “greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven,” or as being “least in the Kingdom of Heaven.” In the same manner, He speaks of some as having a “greater condemnation” than others, implying greater and lesser sufferings in hell.

These distinctions undermine the legal framework of salvation taught by many who hold to a disordered understanding of salvation. There is an extreme version within the legal model that holds that we are saved by grace alone, with no regard whatsoever to our works. If our salvation is truly a legal matter, if God “considers” us righteous simply because we believe (and that’s the end of the matter), then why indeed would He consider one more righteous than another. Thus, a kind of equality of grace is argued because anything else would seem unjust (if there is no merit involved whatsoever). But in the classical model of salvation, “grace” is not God’s “unmerited favor,” (simply a matter of how God thinks about us), it is, quite literally, the Divine Life, the Divine Energies. It is the life and power of God given to us in order to change us and conform us to the Divine Image through our union with the Crucified and Risen Christ. And though no individual can possibly save themselves (because we cannot ourselves manufacture the Divine Energies), nonetheless, for varying reasons, some yield themselves more fully and completely to this work within them. Some, indeed, become great saints.

I say that this is for “varying reasons,” because we really cannot pierce within the mystery of each individual. There is doubtless some role played by the unique intention of God for their lives, but there are other mysteries which we cannot know. However, it is clear that “one star differs from another in glory.” For example, the Church says of the Mother of God that she is “more honorable than the cherubim, more gloroius beyond compare than the seraphim.” This is clearly related both to her unique role in our salvation, as well as to her unique and total yielding of herself to God (“Behold the handmaid of the Lord, be it unto me according to Your word”).

The perversity of the democratic force within the spiritual life, however, reveals itself in our unwillingness to accept that someone might be greater than ourselves or more deserving of honor. Researching this matter, I ran across a question someone posed asking, “How can I be happy if someone receives more reward than I do?” I understand the question, but it is born of the perverse spirituality nurtured in a democracy that seeks to rule heaven itself.

The Kingdom of God (and all of reality) is hierarchical by nature. But its hierarchy is just that – a “sacred” (hieros) “order” (arche). In the case of Mary we can see how this hierarchy is not that of the world with its competition and violence. Mary sings, “You have exalted the humble and meek and the rich you have sent away empty.” The mere “arche” of the world is measured by power (and its frequent abuse). The hierarchy of the world (sacred order), however, is a hierarchy of grace in which self-emptying love is the greatest thing of all.

The devotional habits of the Church seek to inculcate in our hearts a proper regard for this sacred order. The veneration given to the Mother of God, described as “hyperdulia” by the Fathers (“extreme honor”), teaches us not that she is equal to God, but that she is greater than I am. For strangely, when I refuse to grant that any other creature is greater than I am, then I am slowly drawn towards a heart that will not grant that the Creator Himself is greater. This gives us the refusal of the contemporary culture to acknowledge the limits of its own creaturehood. We imagine that we can be anything we want to be and that we are the creators of our own reality. Such a “creator” can only be found in the mirror.

There is a legend, widely cited in the Tradition, that in the great Council of heaven, before the creation of humanity, the archangel Lucifer saw the Theotokos and the dignity to which she would be raised. It is said that this sight stung his pride and provoked his rebellion. He could not bear to think that a creature who was mere dust could be greater than all the hosts of heaven (including himself). In his rebellion, his anger was directed less at God and more at us, for we were the cause of his humiliation. Thus, he became a “murderer from the beginning” (Joh 8:44).

That same spirit, unrecognized, breathes in our culture and its rebellion against the true hierarchy of heaven. The saintless equality of a democratic heaven is, strangely enough, only a colony of hell. There, only the private light of self is allowed to shine, no other being permitted to eclipse it.

I like living in a democracy for certain reasons, but I do not imagine it as the only way to live, nor do I want it to infect my heart such that I cannot bear to be less than another. The Kingdom of heaven calls us to become the least of all. And even that paradoxical excellence escapes me.
A devious Catholic deception particularly as the "friar" confuses salvation with works. Salvation is through grace and faith in Christ alone scripture is crystal clear on this. On star differs from another in glory but they are equally glorious.
 
A devious Catholic deception particularly as the "friar" confuses salvation with works. Salvation is through grace and faith in Christ alone scripture is crystal clear on this. On star differs from another in glory but they are equally glorious.

Somebody didn't read the whole article^^
 
Somebody didn't read the whole article^^

Nor did I. Only what was posted..

I kind of reject the idea that "Satan" is omniscient. There is no way he "sees the end from the beginning"

He knew nothing of anyone who would ever live on earth when he rebelled and was cast down to this place.

What kind of confusion is this?
 
Nor did I. Only what was posted..

I kind of reject the idea that "Satan" is omniscient. There is no way he "sees the end from the beginning"

He knew nothing of anyone who would ever live on earth when he rebelled and was cast down to this place.

What kind of confusion is this?

The article does not say that Satan is omniscient.

If Satan did see the Theotokos prior to the creation of humanity (according to this pious non-dogmatic tradition), it was because it was revealed to him by God, not because Satan is omniscient.
 

If?

Start with "if so?",, and proceed to create doctrine around a hypothesis.

I have no idea how many times this has happened,, but it seems common.

The article implied that seeing Mary was the cause of rebellion,, Satan was in the Garden,, He had been cast to earth BEFORE THE FIRST CHILD HAD BEEN BORN.

error upon error only increases confusion.
 
If?

Start with "if so?",, and proceed to create doctrine around a hypothesis.

I have no idea how many times this has happened,, but it seems common.

The article implied that seeing Mary was the cause of rebellion,, Satan was in the Garden,, He had been cast to earth BEFORE THE FIRST CHILD HAD BEEN BORN.

error upon error only increases confusion.

I am sorry you are confused. There is no confusion to someone who is an Orthodox Christian reading this article, which I assume is the presumed audience. I apologize for confusing you.
 
I am sorry you are confused.

Thanks,, I was.

But I am also an unorthodox Christian.
Perhaps we understand some things differently.

and perhaps it was the Creation of Man that was the reason for Satan's rebellion (as some propose)

It was not the redemption of man that drove him. nor any particular personage. It was his own pride (superiority) that drove him to sin.
 
Thanks,, I was.

But I am also an unorthodox Christian.
Perhaps we understand some things differently.

and perhaps it was the Creation of Man that was the reason for Satan's rebellion (as some propose)

It was not the redemption of man that drove him. nor any particular personage. It was his own pride (superiority) that drove him to sin.

We most certainly do understand some thing differently. Whether these differences are a matter of life-and-death, God only knows. I make no judgement on that.

I do not disagree that Satan's pride was the major cause of his downfall. What is debatable is whether your opinions of the circumstances and matters above regarding his fall and rebellion are more true or authoratative than the teachings of the ancient Church. As always, I defer to the teachings handed down by the Saints of the Church over what you or I personally think or interpret the truth to be. This is what makes a person an Orthodox Christian.

The legend that God revealed to Satan the future glory of the Theotokos (who is above all Saints in purity and holiness) and which prompted in earnest his rebellion, is neither dogma nor doctrine. In fact, I had never heard it before I read this article! Nevertheless, this legend does not diminish nor contradict any of the other orthodox positions made in this article, nor of the eschatological and soteriological points.

The nice thing about being Orthodox Christian is that I read an article like this above, and I already share in great mutual understanding what this other Orthodox Christian is trying to express and teach. Why? Because we follow not our own wills, or minds, but rather the mind of the Church and teachings handed down by our fathers before us. It is not the whims or opinions of my own mind or this author's own mind, but rather, it is a common faith as handed down through the centuries by God-bearing Saints which have been revealed by the Holy Spirit working within creation. So I can hear about a legend like this and gleam insight from it.

Does it mean this legend is necessarily true? No. Does it mean I need to believe it in order to be an Orthodox Christian in good standing? No. But nevertheless, I can appreciate the deeper and hidden meanings of the faith and our salvation in Christ without having to take a position at all about this legend's historical veracity. And neither would my spiritual father or Bishop force me to make a decision. Much of the faith remains a mystery, and what is dogma is what has been revealed through time and space and in concilliar gatherings of bishops by the work of the Holy Spirit in them, such as in the Ecumenical Councils, as has always been the way which Christ has established such things to be within the life of the Church, starting in the Book of Acts.

It is therefore quite understandable for you to read the article above and have confusion, because you are not within the mind of the Church Fathers or of the Orthodox Church, but rather rely on your own mind to dictate what is truth, what is not, and what is still mystery. You claim to be an unorthodox Christian, but this is a more spiritually dangerous path to take because in it one places their own thoughts and experiences, indeed, one's own mind, to be the deciding factor of what is true and right and what interpretation is the correct one. This was the same error of Satan and Adam which led to their separation and fall because they thought they knew what was right apart from what God had revealed and commanded.

The Christian path is through humility and obedience, and this involves being very careful in proclaiming by one's own thoughts what is truth or not, especially when it goes against what our fathers before us believed through revelation and handed down.
 
Last edited:
Placeholder.

I don't have time at the moment but I want to remember where my thought was in terms of the piece and current discussion before the thread gets a few pages or so long.

This is something I've been thinking about lately anyway.
 
I think the human sense of democracy and fairness stems from being made in the image of God, which includes a sense of justice. In that case, we begin life with an equal standing before God, but that does not make us equal, nor does it mean we will remain equal. the limits of the human heart will try to impose equality on all, and it becomes oppressive, rather than liberating. It is the Truth that sets us free.
 
Everyone, equally, has free will. Unlike the things of this world, God is always fair.

Traditions of men make void the word of God--why so many people are confused.


2 Timothy 2:15 King James Version (KJV)
15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.


John 8:32 King James Version (KJV)
32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.
 
Everyone, equally, has free will. Unlike the things of this world, God is always fair.

Traditions of men make void the word of God--why so many people are confused.


2 Timothy 2:15 King James Version (KJV)
15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.


John 8:32 King James Version (KJV)
32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.


How does one know whch traditions are of men and which are of God?

The word 'paradosis' in the Scriptures is translated as 'traditions' in English. The term means literally 'what is handed down'. Such as in 2 Thessalonians 2:15 "Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.”


Thus, how do we know which are the things handed down by man alone apart from God and which are handed down through the Holy Spirit working in men? Is it not the Church which is the standard, as it has always been from the time of the Apostles (and indeed, before them)? It most certainly is not the Scriptures alone, considering it is the Church which predates the Scriptures and which wrote the Scriptures by the illumination of God for the benefit of mankind. The Scriptures are integral part but is not the whole, and the decay in Western civilization is because the Scriptures have been divorced from the living Church and like a tool, used by men to devise their own interpretations and teachings (which they proceed to hand down) apart from the living witness of the Saints before us.

Those who preach the Solas and 'me and my Bible' theology indeed have created their own traditions or they have adopted these traditions from their own particular teachers. The problem is that many of their teachers which they have made to be their fathers in the faith are not the church fathers which can be traced all the way back to the early Saints, sharing of the one cup in communion of faith and love, and indeed teach things which are completely against the history of the living Church and the teachings handed down from the infant community of baptized believers.
 
Last edited:
How does one know whch traditions are of men and which are of God?

By using the guidance in II Timothy 2:15

The word 'paradosis' in the Scriptures is translated as 'traditions' in English. The term means literally 'what is handed down'. Such as in 2 Thessalonians 2:15 "Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.”


Thus, how do we know which are the things handed down by man alone apart from God and which are handed down through the Holy Spirit working in men? Is it not the Church which is the standard, as it has always been from the time of the Apostles (and indeed, before them)? It most certainly is not the Scriptures alone, considering it is the Church which predates the Scriptures and through which the Scriptures were written by the illumination of God for the benefit of mankind.

Mark 7:13 King James Version (KJV)
Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

THE DANGER OF TRADITIONS OF MEN

A. THEY CAN MAKE VOID THE WORD OF GOD...
1. Jesus gave the example of honoring one's parents - Mt 15:3-6
a. The tradition of the elders taught giving to the temple
freed one from giving to his or her parents
b. Thus rendering the command of God of no effect
2. There are traditions of men today with similar affect
a. Such as the practice of sprinkling for baptism, a tradition
of man
b. When one keeps the tradition of sprinkling, they make the
command of God to be baptized (immersed) of no effect!
3. Through keeping such traditions, one is actually rejecting the
command of God! - cf. Mk 7:8-9

B. THEY CAN LEAD TO VAIN WORSHIP...
1. When traditions of men are taught on the same level as the
commands of God, it leads to vain worship - Mt 15:9
2. Such worship may appear to be impressive, but it in actually
"empty, worthless"
a. First, because God did not command it
b. Second, because it does not accomplish the good we really
need - cf. Col 2:20-23

C. THEY CAN LEAD TO HYPOCRITICAL WORSHIP...
1. Traditions of men tend toward ritualism (just look at the
rituals found in many religions that have no scriptural basis)
2. Such ritualism is often done repeatedly, with little thought
as to its origin and purpose
3. It is easy to go through such rituals, with the heart and mind
on other things
4. Worship without the heart (or mind) of man is hypocritical
worship! - Mt 15:7-8
http://www.ccel.org/contrib/exec_outlines/matt/mt15_1.htm
 
Yet God, in His love, did not leave us alone and without help, but has established a Church comprised of like-minded believers, united in baptism and the Body and Blood of Christ, as a means to guide us and nourish us and strengthen us. Christ did not leave us empty handed and without a roadmap, but rather established a priesthood and Holy Scriptures and life-giving sacraments to bring us closer to Him so that we might find the Kingdom even here on earth. We as Christians are not saved alone, but rather as one body of Christ, united in love, mind, faith and spirit. We will not enter the Kingdom after the Judgment alone, but as one body, one bride, one faithful communion of love in spirit and in truth and sanctified flesh made so by the power and grace of God
 
That does not answer the question.

By your knowledge, did the Church in the book of Acts not start any traditions?

Lot's of churches start traditions.


The only two churches Jesus approved of were Smyrna (Revelation 2:9-11) and Philadelphia (Revelation 3:8). Because they were faithful.
 
Lot's of churches start traditions.


The only two churches Jesus approved of were Smyrna (Revelation 2:9-11) and Philadelphia (Revelation 3:8). Because they were faithful.

The question, which you haven't answered, is, did the Apostles start any traditions? A yes or no answer would be a productive way to continue this dialogue.
 
Lot's of churches start traditions.


The only two churches Jesus approved of were Smyrna (Revelation 2:9-11) and Philadelphia (Revelation 3:8). Because they were faithful.
TER is referring to Big-C Churches. Specifically, those of Apostolic Lineage (Roman Catholic and non-schismatic Eastern Orthodox).
 
Back
Top