Apparently according to that site Lancelot Andrewes for me, with my wider constellation including:

William Laud
1573–1645 · England 65% resonance
Caroline Archbishop · the Beauty of Holiness.
Thomas Cranmer
1489–1556 · Tudor England 65% resonance
English Reformation · Architect of the Book of Common Prayer.
George Herbert
1593–1633 · England 52% resonance
Caroline · Poet-Priest.
John Keble
1792–1866 · England 51% resonance
The Oxford Movement.

Regarding this the only surprising answer for me was Cranmer. I suspect it was because I answered several of the questions in a manner that could be called liturgical.

Thank you for sharing this interesting examination with us @Paidiske !

Cabinets as well. Lol! I got one!

Hentenza said:

I’ve had good relationships with MJs here except for one that continually tries to debate me quite forcefully. Back when I was an advisor in this website (from 2008 to 2015) I had a fellow advisor that was MJ and she was one of the most loving and Christian people that I’ve ever met. I still think about her and pray for her every now and then. This website was extremely busy back then and required constant maintenance and tweaking so we used to have voice conferences by phone. We had staff from just about every very denomination including SDAs, Catholic, EO, Lutheran, etc. and never questioned or debated each other denominational preferences but encouraged one another instead. Ask @MarkRohfrietsch, he was part of this group. You would have loved it.

Click to expand...

Yes, Mark has told me about that era. It sounds like it was a good and interesting era. It’s a pity the impact big tech has had on forums, but I’m grateful for what we have now, very grateful.

reddogs said:

How many people were saved at the Flood.... Salvation is not universal,

Click to expand...

Red herring fallacy, I never endorsed Universalism. Universalism from an Orthodox perspective was anathematized at the Fifth Ecumenical Synod around 500 AD.

Please retract that statement and refrain from accusing me of doctrines my church explicitly rejects.

only those who choose Christ, turn to Him and repent from sin, and allow the transformation through the Holy Spirit, so they can have Christ in them and them in Christ so they truly know Him will Christ say "Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world".

Click to expand...

Indeed, but the issue is that this transformation can take an entire lifetime to accomplish; it is not instantaneous. St. Sisoes the Great on his deathbed said “Truly I cannot know if I have even begun to repent!” when his followers said “Surely you are sinless, you don’t need to repent” (he was praying for more time for repentence). After declaring that, his eyes lit up, and he said “My savior has come!” and he reposed, his face aglow.

Like Metropolitan Kallistos Ware, memory eternal, I hope to die as Abba Sisoes did.

rusmeister said:

Well, I saw my wife and younger daughter off to the airport yesterday (my wife’s brothers do pay for big expenses connected to their mother, and that includes transporting the three of them to Russia every summer). Now I am all alone for the next three months. If any of you happens to be near Montenegro, I could put people up for a few nights, right smack in the middle of a tourist resort area.

Click to expand...

Prayers continued!

jas3 said:

The WCC doesn't have anything to do with Orthodox Church structure. From my understanding, the Moscow Patriarchate's participation in the WCC is mostly to act as a check on the Ecumenical Patriarchate's representation of Orthodoxy to the organization; ideally, the Orthodox would not participate at all, because there are not actually a multitude of "churches" that need to have a council, there's only one Church and the only "dialogue" it should hold with those outside it should be direct, tangible, realistic efforts to resolve schisms, not affirming their errors and promoting religious indifferentism, which is what the WCC actually does. This is why Rome isn't technically a member of the WCC, although they do have a "joint working group" that acts as a means of participating in it.

If the WCC did kick out the Moscow Patriarchate, the result could be that the MP just wouldn't participate in WCC activities anymore, or maybe they'd set up a joint working group like the RC one.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the response! God bless!

Hentenza said:

Because they are women not men.

Click to expand...

Agreed. But some want to put “father” on the birth certificate instead of “mother.”

Nithavela said:

When I was in school, sex ed focused on contraception, healthy sexual expression (including masturbation), the value of being able to say no if you don't give consent, as well as relationships and the nitty gritty of anatomy.

Don't know how it was for you guys.

Click to expand...

When I was in school, sex education in elementary school was about, separately for girls, menstruation. I have no idea what the boys were taught. The physical differences between girls and boys were explained by line illustrations of internal parts and cross sections - we were not taught what anything actually looked like. The [ladies' main pleasure button] was never, ever mentioned and, apparently, not to be named here either.

In high school, sex education was mostly what bacteria and viruses caused which diseases with very brief, vague descriptions of what the effects are. Birth control was discussed with failure rates emphasized. Consent was not discussed - whatever happened was your own fault with non-virginity being read as auto-consent and virginity as non-consent (for girls, boys were presumed to be always consenting). Male rape was never discussed as it was just too shameful.

Our Surgeon General, Joyce Elders, was forced to resign for saying that masturbation was a suitable sexual release and a good alternative to sexual intercourse.

This was the 70s.

Amid ongoing discussions about religious participation among younger generations, a new study has found that children whose parents attended church weekly were more than twice as likely to attend church regularly as adults.

The study, “Passing the Torch: How Faith Moves Across Generations,” released in June by the Institute for Family Studies and Communio, draws on data from four national studies involving thousands of Americans raised in religious households. Researchers examined which factors most effectively help children retain their faith into adulthood.

“[P]arents play the single most important role in passing on faith to the next generation,” researchers said.

According to the report, when parents reported attending church weekly while raising their children, “a predicted 26% of their children did the same in their 30s and 40s, compared to only 12% whose parents were not weekly attenders.”

When parents identified religion as being “very important in their lives,” nearly two-thirds of their children were predicted to say the same thing as adults, the study found. Parents who prayed daily also had a 47% chance of having children who maintained a prayer life in adulthood, compared to less than one-third whose parents did not pray daily.

Continued below.

recent article in the Daily Mail covering Turning Point USA's Women’s Leadership Summit portrayed the event as nothing more than a gathering of aspiring “tradwives,” a sort of beauty pageant for young conservative women longing for marriage, motherhood, and a life of submission.

Reading the piece, I found myself wondering whether the author attended the same conference as my wife and daughters. Because the women who came home to my house had a very different experience; they came home energized. They came home encouraged. They came home with a renewed sense of purpose and confidence. Most importantly, they came home knowing they were not alone.

As a husband and father of four children, including two daughters, I often feel like I am raising my family against the current of modern culture. The messages my wife and I teach at home are routinely challenged by a cultural narrative that insists fulfillment can only be found through personal autonomy, career achievement, and the rejection of traditional distinctions between men and women.

My daughters are constantly told that strength looks a certain way. Success looks a certain way. Empowerment looks a certain way.

The message is clear: If you want to be taken seriously, you must become a version of the modern “girl boss” archetype. You must view dependence as weakness, motherhood as a limitation, marriage as optional, and traditional femininity as something to be overcome rather than celebrated.

What my wife and daughters encountered at the TPUSA summit was something radically different. They heard that women are uniquely and gloriously created by God. They heard that the differences between men and women are not flaws to be erased but gifts to be embraced.

They heard that fulfillment can take many forms. A woman may choose to build a career, start a business, enter public service, raise children, or do some combination of all three. But a woman should never feel compelled to apologize for wanting a husband, a family, or a life centered on the people she loves.

That is not oppression.

That is freedom.

The conference presented a vision of womanhood grounded in biblical truth and conservative first principles. It affirmed something increasingly controversial in modern America: Men and women are equal in dignity, value, and worth before God, but they are not interchangeable.

Continued below.

Michie said:

Vice President JD Vance said earlier this week that he wandered from the Christian faith of his youth in part because he lacked a strong network of Christian friends.

Speaking during a Monday interviewwith Fox News host Jesse Watters about his upcoming memoir Communion: Finding My Way Back to Faith, Vance said part of what initially led him away from Christianity was "the fact that I wasn't properly formed in my faith," despite going to church "off and on" growing up.

“My grandmother, who raised me, she was a person who prayed, she was a person of very deep faith," he said. "But I was never actually that rooted in any particular church, in any particular community of members."

Recalling when a pastor involved in prison ministry told him that the friendships one cultivates can determine a person's spiritual trajectory, Vance said he strayed as he found himself surrounded by friends who didn't take religion seriously.

"I, unfortunately, had a lot of friends who were not people of faith," he said. "I had a lot of people who just did not, I think, properly support me in my own faith journey, and so ... I kind of just lost it."

Continued below.

JD Vance says lack of Christian friendships drew him away from faith: 'I kind of just lost it'

Vice President JD Vance said earlier this week that he wandered from the Christian faith of his youth in part because he lacked a strong network of Christian friends

www.christianpost.com

Click to expand...

Yes, the friends, the community are helpful. But one should be aware, that some folks in one church or another just because of frienships, and family ties, and so they are not interested much in the truth, or the true charity, that is, learing how to shun evils as sins, and so the friendships for them are just like the ties of some local golf club or a family hobby. So, while being in the church, then are not necessarily in the good and truth of the Word. Or they do not even care if the church is truly based on the Word, and its genuine explanation.
It also seems that if one is not seaching the truth in the church, in the Word, then he drifts away, or find the appropriate circle of fiends according to this worldly interests. But if he is searching for the truth, and the true instructions, the friends who are truly Christians are of great help, but they can also be a great obstacle, if a man is attached rather to their persons, than to the true and good from the Word, for then the tight friendship and its pleasures does not allow to have a more objective view of the Word of the Lord.

This is one of those times when I don't envy the Pope. rimshot

The Liturgist said:

My post is directly topical - I am asking why we are using Karaite sources to try to prove the Investigative Judgement, which is a doctrine the Karaites don’t believe, while at the same time rejecting Orthodox, Catholic and other Patristic sources.

I feel as though words are being put in the mouth of Karaite Jews in an attempt to prop up a doctrine that is entirely alien to them (since Karaites do not even believe in the devil, and are also a severely persecuted minority population).

Arguments that appeal to Karaite theology in relation to the Investigative Judgement are fallacious on multiple levels since Karaite theology denies the Incarnation of Christ, denies the existence of the devil, denies that the Messiah has come, denies the Nicene Creed and all other tenets of Christianity, even heterodox Christianity, and the essential truths as believed by Karaites are fundamentally different from those of any pre-tribulationist Christians including those who believe in the Investigative Judgement, therefore, citing them is an appeal to unqualified authority and is also an imposition upon their religion in the same way that if a Karaite quoted our Scriptures in an attempt to prove one of their doctrines it would be an imposition against our faith.

The issue is one of logic, and logical fallacies, and specifically the appeal to unqualified authority fallacy, which we have also seen vis a vis Josephus, another non-Christian Jew, albeit of the Pharisaical persuasion, whose views differ from the known beliefs of Sadducees and other contemporary Jews and from those of the Christians of that era.

It is extremely important to avoid logical fallacies when trying to make a theological point, because Christ is the Logos. Now, an argument that contains a fallacy is not inherently incorrect in its conclusions, but because its methodology is flawed it becomes impossible to reasonably assess the legitimacy of the argument, since the argument is by definition Alogoi (illogical or unreasonable) and this is why I’m objecting to the use of Karaite beliefs as a source in supporting the Investigative Judgement.

If Christ is the Logos then we must be logical in approaching theological issues.

Click to expand...

As I said, lets keep this thread clear for the explanation and keep the discussion/debate and the questions in The Investigative Judgment or Pre-Advent Judgement.

THE NINTH DAY

With the Blessed Virgin,
the Angels, and the unknown Saints of all States.

Adore the Sacred Heart of Jesus, who complains of the coldness and indifference of the lukewarm, and who promises so much to fervent souls, who have generosity to relinquish all, in order to love Him without reserve.

Practice--Endeavour to discover the cause of your want of devotion and of your tepidity; adopt such measures as will enable you to arise from this state, and embrace every means which may contribute to render you more agreeable in the eyes of Jesus Christ.

Prayer of St. Alphonsus Liguori to the Sacred Heart

O Adorable heart of my Jesus, heart created expressly for the love of men! Until now I have shown towards Thee only ingratitude. Pardon me, O my Jesus. Heart of my Jesus, abyss of love and of mercy, how is it possible that I do not die of sorrow when I reflect on Thy goodness to me and my ingratitude to Thee? Thou, my Creator, after having created me, hast given Thy blood and Thy life for me; and, not content with this, Thou hast invented a means of offering Thyself up every day for me in the holy Eucharist, exposing Thyself to a thousand insults and outrages. Ah, Jesus, do Thou wound my heart with a great contrition for my sins, and a lively love for Thee. Through Thy tears and Thy blood give me the grace of perseverance in Thy fervent love until I breathe my last sigh. Amen.

joechristianwarrior said:

Jesus told His disciples to leave everything and follow Him. When we look at how Peter, James, John, and Levi responded, we see that they didn't merely agree with Jesus intellectually — they took concrete action. They left behind careers, possessions, and security to follow Him.

How should Christians understand these passages today? Are these examples only descriptive of the first disciples, or do they reveal something about the level of commitment Jesus expects from all of His followers?

I've been studying this topic recently and put together a short video exploring it. I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on the question itself, whether or not you watch the video.

Login to view embedded media

Click to expand...

When Jesus truly reigns as Lord of our lives, we relinquish all ownership of our time, possessions, loved ones and future hopes to Him.

Christian Gedge said:

I think I see what you mean. The answer is probably to be found in modern church history. When the protestant reformation began in 1517 AD eschatology was basically amillennial, although the term wasn’t used. Protestants never took issue with eschatology at that time. It was one of the doctrines they never felt needed reform.

However, in 1820 AD a powerful revival - the second awakening - came on to the scene with a new emphasis on premillennial eschatology. I don’t think that Charles Finney was premillennial, but simultaneous to this revival came a spate of borderline Christian end time theories. The classic examples were the Dispensationalists (1830 AD) and the Adventists. (1844 AD) These two movements have had a disproportionate influence on modern eschatology.

When the Fundamentalist movement developed in the early 20th century, they adopted dispensationalism as an article of faith, and branded it into the doctrinal statements of numerous modern Evangelical and Pentecostal denomination
Hence the antipathy toward Amil that you are asking about. Fortunately, many are beginning to find their way back to a sounder eschatology.

Click to expand...

Charles Finney said this: "There are two opinions held in the church. One is that Christ will eventually come and build a physical kingdom on the earth. The other is that he will never do that. But both opinions agree on this point. that he will transform the earth in this present age we are living."

That was not an exact quote. That is from my memory. But he often said: "When the millennium fully arrives. " Meaning, I take it. The millennium is that transformation we are now living out. It is not a time period but an illustration of the kingdom of God filling the earth after the Roman Empire fell according to Daniel 2 & 7. The world will be a completely different place morally as the influence of that kingdom grows.

One might point out how drastically it has been transformed just since that second great awakening. Even with all the evil that arose. It was not able to stop billions coming to Christ and the transformation of the world that outside of a couple nations, was totally run by the despotism of kings, emperors and warlords. The oppressors, if measured by what was, in comparison to today, are truly coming to nothing. Many people now a days can't even wrap their heads around how death and hell ruled over the ancient world.

Isaiah 29:18 And in that day shall the deaf hear the words of the book, and the eyes of the blind shall see out of obscurity, and out of darkness.
19 The meek also shall increase their joy in the LORD, and the poor among men shall rejoice in the Holy One of Israel. 20 For the tyrannical oppressor is brought to nothing.....

essentialsaltes said:

Suspect in Minnesota political killings will not face death penalty: DOJ​

Prosecutors declined to pursue the ultimate punishment against 58-year-old Boelter because a federal judge ruled earlier this year in an unrelated murder case that interstate stalking charges do not rise to the level to support a capital crime, officials said.

The decision by federal prosecutors not to seek the death penalty stems from a Jan. 30 ruling by New York U.S. District Court Judge Margaret Garnett in the federal murder case against Luigi Mangione, the suspect charged in the December 2024 killing of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson in Midtown Manhattan. Mangione has pleaded not guilty to the charges. Garrett ruled that stalking is not a crime of violence and, therefore, not a predicate to make the killing of Thompson a capital crime.

[For the legal beagles, does that control (or reasonably influence) what happens in Minnesota?]

Boelter has pleaded not guilty to six federal counts, including murder, attempted murder, stalking and other firearms-related charges. He has also pleaded not guilty to murder and attempted murder in state court, where he faces life in prison if convicted.

Click to expand...

Federal prosecution just means a Trump pardon.

Has the criminal been tried in state court?

Good job. Hopefully, they'll get the one in Florida, too.

It being leaned up against a tree instead of planted in the soil like most are, is an indication it was done by a lone person.

Glory to God in all things!

Michie said:

Allie Beth Stuckey Tells Sen. Mike Lee: ‘Mormonism Rejects the Triune God’​

When Sen. Mike Lee asked why his church was initially left off the list of Christian faiths, numerous people responded with theological explanations. “That’s because Mormons aren’t Christian,” someone replied, adding:

You believe god was once a man who became god, and that you can become a god if you do good enough. You believe you are saved by grace after all the works you do. The Bible teaches the exact opposite. God (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) have ALWAYS been and ALWAYS will be.

That person also shared a video about Mormonism from Jeremiah Films, creator of the 1982 documentary “The God Maker.”

Conservative commentator Allie Beth Stuckey also engaged in back-and-forth debate on X with Lee. To his request for an explanation of the slight, she posted, “Because, unlike every Christian denomination, Mormonism rejects the triune God.”

Continued below.

Why Latter-day Saints Aren’t Christians: Allie Beth Stuckey Responds to Sen. Mike Lee

Allie Beth Stuckey addressed Sen. Mike Lee’s question on the Pentagon’s exclusion of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints from a recent list of Christian denominations.

churchleaders.com

Click to expand...

The same can be said about Jehovah witnesses since they also reject the Holy Trinity.

rebornfree said:

No, I'm not saying that you can prove God's existence mathematically. My point is that someone, like John Lennox, who has a personal relationship with Jesus yet who is an eminent mathematician, is likely to carry more weight with atheists, especially those who look to science for their answers, than a theologian would. Their response to the latter is usually "I trust science", but when someone with John Lennox's credentials, in a scientific subject, says that he believes in God they are more likely to listen.

Click to expand...

That hasn't been my experience. IME, that's the sort of thing that sounds good to Christians, but doesn't really pan out in real life.

From what I've seen, the "I trust science" crowd is more likely to listen to you if you acknowledge that it's all based on faith and focus your attention on the metaphysical aspects of life that science can't answer.

johnnypapa said:

Funny to see the different liberal headlines...PBS - lol

Pope's historic speech to Spain's parliament demands respect for migrants, gets 7-minute ovation​

Click to expand...

Thank you for sharing. May God have mercy on the Spanish people.