The Deceptive Notion of Self-Reliance: A Spiritual Critique

This blog critiques the modern concept of ‘self’ which has created a misleading sense of assurance for success. The popular motivational slogan, “Believe in yourself”, has attempted to capture the minds of the present generation to believe in individualistic pursuit as the primary pathway to success. This perspective has been widely propagated by the secular motivational school of thought, resulting in a proliferation of audiovisual and printed materials as a source of discouragement for people from depending on the grace of God. 

Distractions from divine grace and agape-oriented fellowship have driven people towards individualistic self-oriented philosophies. This trend manifests in the popularisation of self-help ideologies and the emphasis on personal affirmations like “I can”. The “Golden Rule” as stated in (Matthew 7:12) In everything, do to others as you would have them do to you has been reinterpreted to focus inward: ‘Do to yourself as others would do to themselves’. This reinterpretation alienates individuals from Christ-centered fellowship, placing the responsibility of personal growth and success solely on the individual. Consequently, many find themselves compelled to emulate the worldly definition of success and those who embody it. 

The protestant work ethic heavily influenced by the Calvinist doctrine of ‘predestination’, has significantly impacted Western civilization’s understanding of salvation and success. This interpretation diverges from the Christian teaching of “salvation to all” through Jesus Christ. The Biblical teaching of the oneness of humanity in Christ Jesus (Galatians 3:28) was obscured by the creation of two distinct classes: those predestined for salvation and those required to earn it through diligent effort. This doctrine was subsequently used to promote the idea that success is directly and exclusively correlated with individual effort and self-improvement. The protestant work ethic became a powerful motivator for individuals to pursue material success. Consequently, salvation for the less privileged was reframed as a human endeavour, diminishing the significance of the grace of God. The doctrine of predestination shares some similarities with the Buddhist doctrine of Nirvana, which requires individuals to work tirelessly towards personal salvation through cycles of rebirth. 

Both Calvinist and Buddhist ideologies emphasise individual effort in achieving spiritual or material success, albeit through different doctrinal frameworks. These teachings contrast with the Biblical teaching of salvation as a gift of God (Romans 3:24). Saint Paul further elaborates this in  Ephesians 2: 8-9 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God – not the result of works, so that no one may boast. This spiritual discourse challenges the notion of self-glorification and self-reliance often promoted in contemporary culture. Further, it should be discerned as a deceptive attempt to capture the minds, by the powers of darkness (see Ephesians 6:12). Thus there is a constant tension in the realm of mind between worldly reasoning and faith in Christ Jesus who has already won this battle on the Cross. Hence, the only one on whom humankind can confidently depend is not the self, but the winner, Jesus Christ. Saint Paul acknowledged this human limitation and the necessity of Christ’s help to win the battle (Romans 7:25). This underscores the Christian belief that ultimate reliance should be on Jesus Christ rather than individual capabilities. 

This said, while acknowledging the importance of humility and faith, it is crucial to maintain a balanced perspective on self-worth and avoid falling into destructive patterns of guilt and low self-esteem. “Lest we forget”, human beings are created in the image of God, and the image of God cannot be imperfect. However, imperfections were introduced by sin. Hence the challenge lies in reconciling the inherent worth (image of God) with the reality of human fallibility. The understanding of the ‘self’ detached from a spiritual foundation is misleading and harmful. Instead, a more nuanced understanding of self-worth, grounded in faith and balanced self-reflection is advisable. Hence, Saint Paul exhorts not to think beyond the fact: For by the grace given to me I say to everyone among you not to think of yourself more highly than you ought to think, but to think with sober judgement, each according to the measure of faith that God has assigned (Romans 12:3). 

The concept of an independent (of God) self is misleading and limited in scope. This narrow perspective, confined to worldly parameters, fails to encompass the broader spiritual dimensions of human existence. This shortfall is evident in the history of human failures, and as pointed out by Saint Paul: None of the rulers of this age understood this; for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory (1 Corinthians 2:8). Saint Paul’s statement illustrates the limitations of human wisdom and self-sufficiency when divorced from spiritual insight. 

The pursuit of worldly self-actualisation, as often promoted by motivational speakers and self-help advocates, may lead to financial success for these proponents. However, their followers, in their quest to establish their own sense of self, might ultimately find themselves disillusioned and abandoned. In contrast, those who choose to follow a spiritual path discover the amazing and profound grace of God. Consider the example of Saint Thomas Aquinas, one of the most influential theologians. During the final days of his life on earth, when his companion Father Reginald, urged him to complete his magnum opus, “Summa Theologica”, Aquinas responded, “I can do no more; such mysteries have been revealed to me that all that I have written seems to me as so much a straw”. This statement demonstrates Aquinas’ willingness to set aside his life’s work and personal achievements in humble submission to the grace of God. Similarly, In Philippians 3:8-9 Saint Paul declared….I regard everything as loss because of the surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For His sake I have suffered the loss of all things, and I regard them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ and be found in Him, not having a righteous of my own that comes from the law, but one that comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God based on faith. Both Saint Paul and Saint Aquinas exemplify a profound reliance on God’s grace through faith in Jesus Christ, rather than on personal accomplishment and worldly success could be witnessed. Their experiences highlight the potential spiritual fulfillment found in surrendering one’s ego and embracing a higher purpose. 

In contrast to Saint Paul and Saint Thomas Aquinas, who placed their trust in the grace of God, adherents of the ‘believe in the human self’ philosophy often find themselves ensnared in a cyclical pattern of biological birth and rebirth (Buddhist doctrine of Nirvana). Many followers of this self-centric ideology may experience feelings of inadequacy and self-reproach when their efforts to achieve personal growth and success fall short, despite the guidance of self-help proponents. Noteworthy here is Saint Peter’s counterpoint: I have no silver or gold, but what I have I give you (Acts 3:6). Saint Peter did not advise the crippled person self-belief as a means of healing. Instead, he introduced the grace of God through Jesus Christ as the sole dependable and trustworthy path to salvation and transformation. 

Grace is not merely an option for salvation; it is the sole means by which one can succeed and be saved. Grace manifests when human attempts at self-actualisation reach an impasse. It involves a complete submission and surrender to the divine, acknowledging one’s complete helplessness while simultaneously hoping for the grace of God. The body of Christ (the Church) experiences the grace of God through the holy sacraments. Some may argue that physical participation in the holy sacraments aligns with the ‘you can do it’ mentality. Saint John Chrysostom’s explanation of the sacrament dispels this potential misconception. He advocated for the Orthodox Church’s understanding of sacraments as a mystery, stating,  ‘What we see is inferior or less comprehending in comparison to the invaluable internalised spiritual experience’. This Orthodox teaching on the mystery of sacraments is rooted in Romans 8:24 which clearly distinguishes between visible and invisible hope. The realisation of the unseen is experienced through faith in God’s grace, setting it apart from a worldly perspective that relies solely on physical and mental strength and effort. 

A rational mindset can often lead individuals to develop an inflated sense of worth and independence, only to subsequently experience failure or setbacks. When such events occur, these individuals may find themselves confronting an existential void, accompanied by profound feelings of isolation. For example, prophet Elijah, when fleeing from the death snares of Jezebel, maintained a strong sense of self-importance, asserting that he alone remained faithful to God while all others had abandoned their faith (1 Kings 19:14). However, in the following verses we read that God corrected Elijah’s overestimation stating, Yet I will leave seven thousand in Israel, whose knees have not bowed to Baal, and every mouth that has not kissed him. (1 Kings 19:18). 

Elijah’s feeling of profound isolation and loneliness led to his encounter with God in the gentle whisper of a breeze. Similar to Saint Aquinas, Elijah’s preconceived notions about God were challenged and dismantled when he failed to see God in the great wind, earthquake and fire (1 Kings 19:11-12). This narrative illustrates how the inflated sense of self often crumbles, leading individuals to the humbling realisation of their dependence on divine grace. Jesus Himself cautioned against self-reliance, stating …Apart from me you can do nothing (John 15:5). The experience of inner void and solitude often marks the nadir of those who have lived with excessive self-confidence, pomposity and arrogance. These moments of vulnerability can serve as critical junctures for spiritual growth and self-reflection. Saint Paul, recognising the dangers of such overt self-assurance, found solace in God’s assurance that God’s assurance of grace was more than sufficient to be powered in his weakness (2 Corinthians 12: 9). 

The preceding discussion leads us to recognise the limitations of our self-worth without falling into self-condemnation. The prevalent messages encouraging self-belief, asserting “you can do it” and “nothing is impossible with willpower”, echo the temptation Eve faced in the Garden of Eden. Post-fall, humanity’s only source of pride lies in the Cross of Jesus Christ (Galatians 6:14). Saint Paul delineates the spiritual mind from a worldly, animalistic mindset in 1 Corinthians 2:14-15. As we read, only a spiritually-oriented individual can truly yearn for God’s grace whereas the carnal mind pursues sensual pleasures, self-gratification, and self-glorification. 

In conclusion, the question “Can I do it?: can be answered affirmatively, but with the crucial caveat: not without the grace of God. Similarly, self-belief is valid but must be grounded in the recognition that What I am is the grace of God (1 Corinthians 15:10). The carnal mind prompts decisions that disregard the grace of God, leading to isolation. However, the Holy Spirit intervenes and rescues me from it. Our spiritual journey could be likened to the “highway to Zion” (Psalm 84:5), representing a path of spiritual growth and divine connection. Therefore, committing one’s life to the love of God, as experienced through Christ Jesus and His atoning sacrifice on the Cross, becomes a profound spiritual experience. 

…since I am a virgin

Mary said to the angel, How can this be, since I am a virgin (Luke 1:34)

Day one of the Advent Lent marks the beginning of a 25 days journey culminating in the Nativity of our Lord Jesus Christ. Mother Mary was the entry point of the saviour to this world. As such, reception of the Lord at this entry point draws great significance. God has made human beings with a free-will. It means human beings have the freedom of choice to make decisions that they deem right or wrong. Mother Mary as a human being was not an exception to this. She could outrightly reject the announcement of a pregnancy outside the wedlock. Apparently, Mother Mary did not do so but wholeheartedly submitted herself to the will of God to be accepted and conceived in her womb. 

Though the spiritual discourse about faith is conviction of things not seen (Hebrews 11:1), Mother Mary could not accept what angel Gabriel communicated to her about the spiritual conception, and hence sought further clarification. There is a prima facie double standard exhibited by angel Gabriel in a similar situation as we read in Luke 1: 20, when Zechariah the priest asked how will I know that this is so? (Luke 1:18). One may ask why Zechariah the priest was punished whereas Mother Mary was extended a patient hearing. The answer to this question could be found in angel Gabriel’s statement. He said, I am Gabriel. I stand in the presence of God (Luke 1:19). The expansion of this statement leads us to look into Zechariah’s position. He was the priest of God, and, like angel Gabriel, he also stood in the presence of God. Hence, Zechariah should have known that as a priest, he is a responsible receptor of God’s message and shall convey it to the people of God. It could then be genuinely asked, if the representative of God is unable to believe in God’s promises, how would he be able to carry and deliver the same to the people of God.  

As Zechariah stood in the presence of God, he did not need a confirmation of God’s voice. As an honest and committed priest, Zechariah could have easily discerned the angel as his co or fellow being in the service of God. The doubt expressed by the priest of God unveils his inability to feel the presence of God as well as see his fellow beings who also stood in God’s presence. 

The punishment awarded by angel Gabriel was an eye opener for Zechariah. He possibly learned for the first time in his life that priesthood is not just inherited but a profession called by name (Isaiah 43:1). The words and deeds of a priest need to be aligned to his spiritual discernment received as a grace when he stands in the presence of God. Jesus said Let your words be Yes, Yes or No, No; anything more than this comes from the evil one (Matthew 5:37). On the contrary, Zechariah is seen applying his rationalist mind and questioning his fellow servant in Lord, angel Gabriel. The overwhelming of one’s spirit by his/her mind could result in a random and thoughtless response than a spiritually guided one. Hence, Saint Paul exhorts the faithful en-masse to redirect their tongue to thanksgiving: Entirely out of place is obscene, silly, and vulgar talk; but instead, let there be thanksgiving (Ephesians 5:4). Zechariah could better make use of the situation to thank God when he received the most precious gift that he was actually seeking ever since his marriage with Elizabeth.

Mother Mary’s question, how can this be, since I am a virgin is not just an innocent question but a cautious response. Unlike Zechariah who had the privilege to stand in the presence of the Lord, Mother Mary was a layperson. However, her status in the lower hierarchy of ranks was not an excuse for abstaining from the discernment of the scripture, as evident from the below paragraph. Saint Paul later cautioned in Galatians 1:8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should proclaim to you a gospel contrary to what we proclaimed to you, let that one be accursed. 

There is  insufficient ground to blame Mother Mary for not outrightly accepting the message conveyed through angel Gabriel. Neither can she be blamed for asking a question in this case. The justification for the Mother’s question could be found in an incident that provoked God to anger- When people began to multiply on the face of the ground, and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that they were fair; and they took wives for themselves of all that they chose Genesis 6:1-2. Please note, the Hebrew tradition identifies the sons of God as angels (also see Job 1:6; 2:1 & 38:7). 

If Mother Mary had suspected the intention of the angel or tried to confirm that the message was true indeed, it only confirms her familiarity with the scripture. Moreover, the Mother’s query could be accepted as something that could be emulated in a world struggling to distinguish between true and fake messages. In a world where the preference is for leadership over followership, there is increased competition among the corporate churches to attract followers in quantity over quality. The tactic used to multiply is unfortunately faked messages that feed itching ears (2 Timothy 4:3). As a result, the discourse has vastly shifted from a ‘witnessing’ church to a balance-sheet based church, thus nullifying the “Great Commission” – Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything that I have commanded you (Matthew 28:19-20). 

Mother Mary’s question to angel Gabriel represents the witnessing church needing confirmation- that the message is truly from God. Saint John exhorts, Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God…..(1 John 4:1). In line with the Genesis 6:1-2 tragedy, Saint Paul further cautions, even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light (2 Corinthians 11:14). 

Unlike the way how angel Gabriel dealt with Zechariah, Mother Mary was treated with compassion. We read the detailed explanation of the angel, ….the Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you…(Luke 1;35). The true body of Christ (the church) should experience and witness the shadow of the Most High and the brooding of the Holy Spirit, both undoubtedly absent from a balance-sheet oriented church. Unlike the latter, a witnessing church will be devoid of marketing gimmicks, beats of heavy metals (music), las-vegas style lightings, and demonstration of human powers. Instead, there will only be a sound of sheer silence (1 Kings 19:12). In fact, Mount Horeb could be interpreted as a shadow or prototype of a true church. Prophet Elijah misunderstood the strong mountain splitting and rock shattering wind as the arrival of God (1 Kings 19:11), but was proved wrong. He was again wrong interpreting the earthquake and fire as the Lord’s arrival (1 Kings 19;11-12).

The arrival of Messiah was awaiting a heroic welcome from the people of God. The latter wanted their national and community pride kindled with an earth shattering entry mode of the Messiah as is stated in Isaiah 64: 1-2 O that you would tear open the heavens and come down, so that the mountains would quake at your presence- as when fire kindles brushwood and the fire causes water to boil- to make your name known to your adversaries, so that the nations might tremble at your presence! 

To the disappointment of many, none of those things happened. Instead a trusted lieutenant was sent to an innocent virgin. Unlike a pompous summit or a red carpet visit to the hall of fame, the entire meeting took just a few minutes which silently marked the end of an age and the beginning of a new era for the world. Interesting and noteworthy is the brief exchange between the angel and Mother Mary that encompassed the greatest question ever asked (how can this be, since I am a virgin) and the answer to it which communicated the most powerful of all the words (Holy Spirit and Most High).  

May God bless you. Amen.