Replies

The parable of the Good Samaritan is interpreted by us in this way. The Samaritan is Christ, who arrives to relieve us of our suffering of sin. When the Samaritan tells the innkeeper to spend whatever is needed to bring the wounded man back to health, and promises to pay for it, we consider that to be a parallel to Christ giving whatever is needed for our sins, so that we may be brought to "health".

This is a nice teaching. I think it may have limits though.

"Suffering cleanses the soul infected with the filth of sensual pleasure and detaches it completely from material things by showing it the penalty incurred as a result of its affection for them. This is why God in His justice allows the devil to afflict men with torments." - St. Maximos the Confessor (+ 662)

I think Western Christians would not agree much with this teaching.

"If you are not willing to repent through freely choosing to suffer, unsought sufferings will providentially be imposed on you." - St. Thalassios (7th c.)

I believe that Western Christians would vehemently object to this teaching. Seeking suffering is not a virtue. The wicked are not always punished (in this life). Perhaps the most disturbing portion of this to American Christians is the idea that Christians should "repent through freely choosing to suffer". Unless Thalassios was simply speaking of renouncing our sins (a mild suffering and we would not use that term), few of us could agree with this statement. If he was referring to anything that resembled the ascetic orders of monks of the Roman church, we would most certainly not agree. Suffering, of itself, is not holy. Renouncing sin and embracing freedom in Christ, as the doctor in our story did, is the end of suffering and the beginning of eternal life in Christ.

Perhaps there is a broader cultural context within which some of these Orthodox statements should be understood. I've often recognized that each church denomination has a distinctive culture and history and that outsiders never truly grasp the meanings that members take for granted. There is, within scriptural limits, always room for charity between Christians of differing language and backgrounds. When we look at our missionaries' work around the world, we know this to be true.

I believe that Western Christians would vehemently object to this teaching.

Yes and I am not surprised. My point was not to sell the idea, but to show that the statement in the story is consistent with Russian Orthodox ascetic beliefs. Self-chastisement, for instance, is considered a virtue.

Actually here is a fairly good overview if you are interested in our "take" on these things.
God does not manifest Himself to an impure heart.