You might get some pushback on this subject from your Eastern Orthodox friends and monastics. You will very rarely hear any Orthodox Christian say there is any such thing as a "right passion." In that mindset, the <i>passions</i>--our passions--are to be brought under subjugation and rooted out, since they originate in our flesh rather than our hearts. The passions take over our hearts and rule our hearts, rather than originate from our hearts. Our passions are rooted in our pride [another fun word to try and pin down its meaning], which again is fleshly not spiritual. If we are talking about <i>the desires of our heart</i> being rightly ordered, then our terminology may have to be negotiated so we all are on the same page. I think that follows what St Augie was getting at and what you are getting at. Anyway, semantics I guess, but it pays to be careful.
Looking at this carefully and in the particular sequence that you’ve presented it, can potentially lead to some spiritual stringency. One certain pastor Online lays out a hierarchical structure and relationship between these [modes of being] in a short video. It is evident in his thinking, that Orthopathy should never come before Orthodoxy and that Orthopraxy should always be an outgrowth of the later. But is life really like that? Sometimes the order gets shuffled and ‘Spiritual formation’ can just as easily work in the opposite direction and the passions that you might have for tranquility, peace and unity, lead back to an Orthodoxia of the mind. Often it’s as if there’s an ardent insistence on starting with the scriptures exclusively, from which then all else grows. But the Living Logos is everywhere outside the printed page and moving mysteriously in men’s hearts
You might get some pushback on this subject from your Eastern Orthodox friends and monastics. You will very rarely hear any Orthodox Christian say there is any such thing as a "right passion." In that mindset, the <i>passions</i>--our passions--are to be brought under subjugation and rooted out, since they originate in our flesh rather than our hearts. The passions take over our hearts and rule our hearts, rather than originate from our hearts. Our passions are rooted in our pride [another fun word to try and pin down its meaning], which again is fleshly not spiritual. If we are talking about <i>the desires of our heart</i> being rightly ordered, then our terminology may have to be negotiated so we all are on the same page. I think that follows what St Augie was getting at and what you are getting at. Anyway, semantics I guess, but it pays to be careful.
Brings to mind the three theological foundations of the Anglican Tradition.
Scripture (Orthodoxy)
Tradition (Orthopraxy)
Reason (Orthopathy)
Looking at this carefully and in the particular sequence that you’ve presented it, can potentially lead to some spiritual stringency. One certain pastor Online lays out a hierarchical structure and relationship between these [modes of being] in a short video. It is evident in his thinking, that Orthopathy should never come before Orthodoxy and that Orthopraxy should always be an outgrowth of the later. But is life really like that? Sometimes the order gets shuffled and ‘Spiritual formation’ can just as easily work in the opposite direction and the passions that you might have for tranquility, peace and unity, lead back to an Orthodoxia of the mind. Often it’s as if there’s an ardent insistence on starting with the scriptures exclusively, from which then all else grows. But the Living Logos is everywhere outside the printed page and moving mysteriously in men’s hearts
Thank you. Sounds about right.