Healthy Distance from Sinners

[CRATUS]

We are all in the same boat. I don’t exactly look forward to affliction either and so the only thing to do is pray. Remember, Peter was nervous to get out the boat, but did, and floated for a while, until He began to sink; nevertheless, the Lord lifted Him back up. But He had to get out of the boat to experience this miracle.

I guess so. I like Pope Francis his homilies are easy to understand though. I am just too scared. I do not want to.

 

[Jelrak_TB]

Oops I am sorry. I did not see it that way.

Hey, it’s not your fault…besides, there is no rule that says we have to hang around people we don’t like…

My suggestion is that you primarily surround yourself with the people who give you the best direction, but that you do not openly shun anyone unless they are dangerous or a known liar…

 

[JimR-OCDS]

That is not entirely accurate. Hermits went to fight their demons and to be with our Creator. And hermits often didn’t live with others. And sometimes they left to be away from the noise and hustle and bustle in order to contemplate in silence. And this would have been impossible to do in amongst - let’s say Babylon, as an example - rife sinfulness.

It is not about avoiding but about discerning. It is not about fear but about wisdom. The Bible says quite clearly, that “there is a time and place for all things”.

Yes, our Lord is within. But there was even a time to go and preach. Not all the time. We are told: “Do not put the spirit to the test.”

It’s accurate according to the writings of Thomas Merton and other Monks that I’ve spoken with.

They didn’t move into the desert because they disliked being among men, but because they needed to learn to live with men.

Many of the hermits were not so isolated that they didn’t have contact with human beings, but ended up having novices come to them for instruction.

Abba Isaac, the 4th century father of the desert, taught St John Cassian and others.

People who move out into the desert because they want to get away from people, end up getting what they want, being away from people, but they don’t grow spiritually. In fact, they often die old, bitter, lonely men.

Jim

 

[friardchips]

It’s accurate according to the writings of Thomas Merton and other Monks that I’ve spoken with.

They didn’t move into the desert because they disliked being among men, but because they needed to learn to live with men.

I like Thomas a’ Merton. Or at least, I like one of his books.

Hermit: ‘a person living in solitude as a religious discipline.’

It wasn’t the case of disliking anyone necessarily. Hermits sought solitude because they wanted to learn to live with themselves and their Creator. Call it, a period of discernment. It seems that hermits gathered together and formed groups. But even when together they were isolated a great deal and no doubt maintained silence. Even when they followed a rule.

Many of the hermits were not so isolated that they didn’t have contact with human beings, but ended up having novices come to them for instruction.

Eventually. Living with other people would have been part of the discipline. But the primary reason why people left to become hermits was not because they wanted to live with other men, it was because they wanted to leave their present immediate surroundings, obviously dissatisfied with their current environments; otherwise, they wouldn’t have left in the first place!

Abba Isaac, the 4th century father of the desert, taught St John Cassian and others.

People who move out into the desert because they want to get away from people, end up getting what they want, being away from people, but they don’t grow spiritually. In fact, they often die old, bitter, lonely men. Jim

Maybe. St. Julian of Norwich had a bad time then - but not from what I’ve heard; however, even this mystic had visitors and gave spiritual direction. So, ultimately, you are right. It is not the norm for people to escape other people completely, though it is not obligatory to stay in the world. But this doesn’t really apply to the OP’s situation.

You are talking about hermits in a way to suggest that the OP would be mistaken to leave people because hermits also lived around people; I’d imagine, on the other hand, that hermits aimed for sainthood or had that vision in mind and so when the OP is presumably talking about leaving people who are not concentrated on Heaven, it is these same people-types who could be considered wayward, whom the hermits would have left behind in order to live in caves and then live with other like-minded holiness-seeking people. If they were to encounter everyday people with everyday issues, then these would have been in the form of occasional visitors/guests/weary travellers/passers-by.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

friardchips

Hermit: ‘a person living in solitude as a religious discipline.’

In general, yes, but not absolute solitude.

I had a Trappist monk who lived as a hermit in a cabin on the Abbey grounds, who was our retreat master.

It wasn’t the case of disliking anyone necessarily. Hermits sought solitude because they wanted to learn to live with themselves and their Creator. Call it, a period of discernment. It seems that hermits gathered together and formed groups. But even when together they were isolated a great deal and no doubt maintained silence. Even when they followed a rule.

I think we’re talking past each other here.

They learn to live with men, i.e. love others, as they grew closer to God which was the primary reason for seeking solitude in the desert.

Eventually. Living with other people would have been part of the discipline. But the primary reason why people left to become hermits was not because they wanted to live with other men, it was because they wanted to leave their present immediate surroundings, obviously dissatisfied with their current environments; otherwise, they wouldn’t have left in the first place!

Yes, they didn’t go into the desert in order to learn how to live with men so they could move back to live with them.

This was my own poor way of communicating.

Learning to live with men, meant, learning to love men.

Jim

 

[friardchips]

Sorry Jim, I finalised my previous post after you quoted it. Hopefully it still synchronized.

So to follow on from your words:

I think we agree for the most part. The only part over which we disagree is that I don’t think living with other men was their primary reason for living in caves; rather, living amongst others became part of the life, and later on it came to be expected. Under a rule. I do agree with you that they would have grown in love, to love, and be loved, and yes, around others - in their case, men. Either way, there had to have been a dissatisfaction with their immediate surroundings initially which caused them to seek a deeper and more meaningful contemplative lifestyle, in caves.

I think we’ve got there?!

 

[multitude]

Sometimes you must cut some people out of your life. Sometimes that’s the only way to tell people that you do not tolerate their beliefs, if you’re trying to get closer to God. And for your own salvation.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Sorry Jim, I finalised my previous post after you quoted it. Hopefully it still synchronized.

So to follow on from your words:

I think we agree for the most part. The only part over which we disagree is that I don’t think living with other men was their primary reason for living in caves; rather, living amongst others became part of the life, and later on it came to be expected. Under a rule. I do agree with you that they would have grown in love, to love, and be loved, and yes, around others - in their case, men. Either way, there had to have been a dissatisfaction with their immediate surroundings initially which caused them to seek a deeper and more meaningful contemplative lifestyle, in caves.

I think we’ve got there?!

I’m searching for the exact quote, but right now, can’t remember which book it’s in.

Anyway, it went that men go into the desert not to be away from men, but to learn how to live with men.

This does not mean they learned and went back to live with me, but learned compassion for all men, while they lived in solitude.

If they had failed to do this, the men who sought them out for their wisdom, would’ve been disappointed.

Some hermits did in fact detest being in the presence of other men, and they got their wish living in the desert and many lived bitter lives rather than compassionate lives.

Pope Benedict XVI wrote in Spe Salvi that Salvation was never individualistic, but communal.

In other words we are saved as a community of believers, not as individuals.

Is Christian hope individualistic?

1. In the course of their history, Christians have tried to express this “knowing without knowing” by means of figures that can be represented, and they have developed images of “Heaven” which remain far removed from what, after all, can only be known negatively, via unknowing. All these attempts at the representation of hope have given to many people, down the centuries, the incentive to live by faith and hence also to abandon their hyparchonta, the material substance for their lives. The author of the Letter to the Hebrews, in the eleventh chapter, outlined a kind of history of those who live in hope and of their journeying, a history which stretches from the time of Abel into the author’s own day. This type of hope has been subjected to an increasingly harsh critique in modern times: it is dismissed as pure individualism, a way of abandoning the world to its misery and taking refuge in a private form of eternal salvation. Henri de Lubac, in the introduction to his seminal book Catholicisme. Aspects sociaux du dogme, assembled some characteristic articulations of this viewpoint, one of which is worth quoting: “Should I have found joy? No … only my joy, and that is something wildly different … The joy of Jesus can be personal. It can belong to a single man and he is saved. He is at peace … now and always, but he is alone. The isolation of this joy does not trouble him. On the contrary: he is the chosen one! In his blessedness he passes through the battlefields with a rose in his hand”[10].

1. Against this, drawing upon the vast range of patristic theology, de Lubac was able to demonstrate that salvation has always been considered a “social” reality. Indeed, the Letter to the Hebrews speaks of a “city” (cf. 11:10, 16; 12:22; 13:14) and therefore of communal salvation.

w2.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_ben-xvi_enc_20071130_spe-salvi.html

So this goes back to the meaning behind the original statement, that it would be in error for men to go into the desert to live in solitude, because they detest being among men.

Jim

 

[JimR-OCDS]

I found it, and sure enough it’s from Thomas Merton.

Some men have perhaps become hermits with the thought that sanctity could only be attained by escape from other men. But the only justification for a life of deliberate solitude is the conviction that it will help you to love not only God but also other men. If you go into the desert merely to get away from people you dislike, you will find neither peace nor solitude; you will only isolate yourself with a tribe of devils. “New Seeds of Comteplation,” page 52 “Solitude is Not Separation.”

You can read more on the chapter from the link below.

books.google.com/books?id=MQ_Iej5soXkC&pg=PA52&source=gbs_toc_r&cad=3#v=onepage&q&f=false

Jim

 

[multitude]

You do end up becoming those you surround yourself with. If you’re not careful and don’t have your spiritual guard up, they eventually project their twisted beliefs and morals onto you, and you find yourself on the defensive even though you’re the one in the right.

It’s a matter of balance. And I do agree that you have to be convinced that a life of deliberate solitude will help you learn to love God and other people.