"How Powerless are you Willing to Be?"

 A friend recently sent me this essay, "How Powerless are you Willing to Be?"

https://blogs.ancientfaith.com/glory2godforallthings/2022/03/16/how-powerless-are-you-willing-to-be/

This is my response:
______________________________________

Thanks for this essay.  I've been mulling it over for quite some time. It is a very Eastern Orthodox perspective. The Orthodox have a deep respect and understanding of the Trinity, which I admire and agree with.  But Eastern Christians tend to take a mystical and contemplative road to truth, rather than the  philosophical and analytic one that Western Christians take. IMO neither one alone is sufficient.  

I think the Trinity teaches us that we are not "individuals," who exist in "collections," but "persons" who participate in "communities." Freeman rightly criticizes individuals and collections/states, but IMO he fails to develop the fact that we are persons who participate in communities. Let me define these terms:  

1) INDIVIDUALS  are discrete, atomistic, autonomous particular human beings. The modernist Myth of the State of Nature (which inspired Hobbes and Locke) holds that individuals are autonomous-- literally, "laws unto themselves-- until such time as *they themselves* choose to gather together in a collection: a society/system/structure/state. Their relationships are only a matter of their individual wills, until such time as they themselves choose to create a society/system/structure/state, and are liable to change as individuals’ wills change.  

2) PERSONS are indeed particular; they are also unique and valuable. However, they are more than simply individuals. They *participate* in realities beyond themselves-- systems/ structures/ institutions/bodies. Genesis is the premodernist myth, holding that human society is a gift from God, and a reflection of the society that is the Trinity. God is not three individual Gods, but three Persons who participate in one Substance, the Godhead. The relationship of Persons is not a product of their wills, but a result of participating in something which is the ground of their wills.

2) A COLLECTION is a set of individuals, each with their own will which determines . The collection is external to their identities. In the end, whoever has the strongest will determines what the collection will be about, and decide who gets to be in the collection.

3) A COLLECTIVE  is a group where neither individuals nor persons are permitted: Groupthink is the ultimate reality.

4) A COMMUNITY is a body of persons who share/relate to each other with some kind of intellectual, volitional and/or spiritual end which is essential to their identity.

Individuals are able to exist --and if Rousseau is correct, thrive-- apart from other individuals; persons are not.

Historically, here in the U.S., a nation born of the Enlightenment, the idea of "rugged individualism" has been an ideal. Our motto is "e pluribus unum," out of many, one. In the past we have imagined ourselves as a collection of individuals, bound together by the social contract which is the Constitution. (This concept is graphically portrayed by the 13 arrows in the claw of the eagle, in the Great Seal of the United States.)

But lately there have been competing wills, with different visions of what this collection of individuals should be like. Ayn Rand's objectivist philosophy has apotheosized the individual. It naively assumes that the goals of individuals will not conflict, but in reality her thought has pitted individual against individual, and taught that selfishness is good. Republicans have latched onto that for many years now; but since 2016 a new vision has overtaken them: that America is the collection of white "Christian" citizens who celebrate and support the will of Donald Trump. Anyone who disagrees with that vision is not a good American--indeed, they are the Other, a threat to be dealt with.

Freeman writes,
<Attending to the evil within my own heart (as well as attending to the good) is castigated by some as “Quietism.” There are, instead, impassioned proposals that call us to action (write your congressman and save the world). Moral sentiments and moral actions come to us with the promise of their effectiveness. If enough of us act, we will change the world. This is not true now nor has it ever been.>

I disagree with Freeman here. IMO it IS true that “if enough of us act, we will change the world.”  In fact, individuals acting in collections HAVE changed the world, and are continuing to do so. Consider what the world would be like if our nation had never existed.  Consider what would have happened if women had not banded together to demand the vote. Consider what would have happened if individual Germans had refused to submit their wills to the will of Hitler. Today the world has been so polarized that only collections and collectives exist. Currently, Russia seems to be the ultimate embodiment of a collection, manifesting the will of Vladimir Putin; and China seems to be the ultimate embodiment of a collective, manifesting the will of Xi Jinping. I fear we are about to see how the world will change as a result of individual Russians acting as a collection/society/system/structure/state that has submitted to Putin’s will, and his moral sentiments and actions. Every human will is sinful and finite, and as a result our moral sentiments and actions are corrupted, leading to destruction.  

IMO, because Freeman has not distinguished between individuals and persons, collections and communities, he has thrown a baby out with the bathwater. It is also true that Christians acting in communities have changed the world. Christians are persons who participate in community—that community that is the Body of Christ. Christians are called on to align their moral sentiments and actions—indeed, their minds and wills and hearts—with those of Jesus Christ. “You are not your own, you were bought with a price.” (I Cor. 6:19-20)   “Therefore be imitators of God, as beloved children. And walk in love, as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us, a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God.’ (Eph. 5:1-2)  In doing so we submit our wills not to any sinful, finite human being, but to God, and this is what makes it possible for us to change the world for good. Let us be encouraged by the examples we have already seen, given to us by the confessors and martyrs of the Church. When enough of them displayed the moral sentiments and actions of Christ, they gave us glimpses of the Kingdom to come.

So the question is, are we willing to submit our particular wills, and our power, to the only One who Good? (Luke 18:19)  Are we willing then to be filled with the Spirit’s moral sentiments, and do the work of Christ?  God help me to do so, and forgive me when I don’t.