An "Apology" from P and P

[dzheremi]

My favorite part of the article, as an OO Christian, is that the writer claims that the Eastern Orthodox Church has declared Protestants "damned for trusting only in Jesus" (where? when?), and to support that wrong idea he links directly to the notes for a soteriological lecture given by my bishop, HG Bishop Youssef of the Southern United States diocese of the Coptic Orthodox Church, which is (1) obviously not an Eastern Orthodox jurisdiction (does this guy not have Google? How do you miss that but by willful ignorance?), and (2) is only making the point that the Protestants cannot use the salvation of the right-hand thief to deny the normative practice of baptism as the means of formal entrance into the Church. Just as you would expect to find in any EO Church document on this matter, had the author taken the minimal steps to actually link to one, it in no place says that Protestants are "damned for trusting only in Jesus" (they'd know that we do the same if they knew who we were to begin with, which they clearly don't; I'm beginning to think that this is not such a terrible state of affairs, if articles like this 'apology' are the result of things being otherwise ), or really anything like that. It does call their beliefs heresy in many places (both because they are, and because it is adapted from an earlier work by HH Pope Shenouda III called "The Heresy of Salvation in a Moment", so you'd expect that kind of language to be in there), but we too know better than to damn anyone. That's entirely up to God, Who is the One that the author of the article should really be apologizing to.

What a terrible article in basically every way. May God have mercy upon the author and the audience alike.

 

[GregConstantine]

I believe that one or more of the authors at P and P are suffering from Narcissistic Personality Disorder.

Nonetheless, I think the best thing to do at this time is to completely, totally 100% ignore P and P. Just as if they didn't even exists. Instead, be sure to follow up with any non Orthodox persons responding to these atrocious, evil articles and stay in communication with them, in order to share and present what Orthodoxy really is about with them.

An unwanted side affect from this may be people who never heard of Orthodoxy now have heard of it, and may be asking questions and beginning to search. It is imperative that if we do talk to anyone, that we keep in contact with them.

 

[~Anastasia~]

I finally felt up to readin it. If that's his idea of a cordial apology, I'd hate to hear a condemnation from him.

On the one hand, I find it almost comical - at least with that part of me that might be justifiably offended. Rather than offense, I do find it almost funny.

But at the same time, it is of course NOT funny, the effects on the soul of the one writing it, to hold such apparent venom in his heart? I pity him, in fact, deeply. I do pray his objections come from a real desire to be true to his faith, which I generally ascribe to Protestants. But I worry that he might know a bit better ... a pretended effort at apology and concern cloaked with such obvious despising of fellow Christians is a big red flag that he may be in trouble in his heart, in fact. My prayers for him.

As for the things he addressed, of course it is a mishmash of misunderstandings, wrong facts, misinterpretations, and much else, for the most part, so I have no real concern for that. In a way I hope he believes everything he said, so that is conscience might perhaps excuse him somewhat, at least, before God, Who thankfully is merciful.

May God have mercy on all who read his article and think on it.

 

[Antony in Tx]

I would approach this as I do much of what I deal with on a day to day basis in this world. I simply remember to "Attain a peaceful spirit and thousands around you will be saved." I have the task of counseling many people on troubles they face in their life, and often I resort to explaining simple matters of faith for EOs to them as practical advice for living. I don't couch it in theology or dogmatically, just as simple practical advice for living. This quite often, several times a week, leads to them asking me what church I belong to. This then leads to me disclosing the EO views about sin as a disease and not crime, and salvation as healing and not ransom/punishment. This usually concludes with them asking where they can find out more, and I refer them to books like the ones by +Kallistos Ware. I find that by displaying a gracious attitude and peaceful spirit, they are drawn to ask, as opposed to leading with telling them how to live. This is how I would approach the author of this article, by quietly ignoring his invitation to engage in conflict and instead simply praying for his eventual enlightenment and salvation. I would guess that it falls under an old southern saying, "Never try to teach a pig to sing...it wastes your time and annoys the pig!"

 

[GregConstantine]

I would approach this as I do much of what I deal with on a day to day basis in this world. I simply remember to "Attain a peaceful spirit and thousands around you will be saved." I have the task of counseling many people on troubles they face in their life, and often I resort to explaining simple matters of faith for EOs to them as practical advice for living. I don't couch it in theology or dogmatically, just as simple practical advice for living. This quite often, several times a week, leads to them asking me what church I belong to. This then leads to me disclosing the EO views about sin as a disease and not crime, and salvation as healing and not ransom/punishment. This usually concludes with them asking where they can find out more, and I refer them to books like the ones by +Kallistos Ware. I find that by displaying a gracious attitude and peaceful spirit, they are drawn to ask, as opposed to leading with telling them how to live. This is how I would approach the author of this article, by quietly ignoring his invitation to engage in conflict and instead simply praying for his eventual enlightenment and salvation. I would guess that it falls under an old southern saying, "Never try to teach a pig to sing...it wastes your time and annoys the pig!"

I agree. However, I believe that one or more of the people at P and P are suffering from Narcissistic Personality Disorder. If that is the case, even being gracious to them may not work. We don't know for sure if they do have NPD, but many of the signs are present.

Nonetheless, that is wonderful advice, that's something I try to do as well. Are you working as a counselor? If so, I have a psychology background. You're probably familiar with NPD if that's the case.

 

[Antony in Tx]

Actually Greg, I'm a Family Physician. We end up doing a lot of supportive counseling when patients come to us with life drama. Very familiar with NPD, and yes, it can be trying. All the more reason to simply pray for yourself and for them and not let them disturb your peaceful place in the Grace of God.

 

[ZaidaBoBaida]

I looked at their FB today and even though they've posted some stuff that's clearly an attempt to bait Orthodox Christians they number of responses has dwindled significantly. It is heartening to see the majority seem to have decided to walk away from this dumpster fire.

 

[ArmyMatt]

yeah, I looked there too. they are a pretty pathetic crew, Lord have mercy on them

 

[Jack Isaacks]

An Apology to the Eastern Orthodox Community


Warning, this may make some of you very angry.

As our Lord, God, and Savior Jesus Christ said, "Blessed are you when men revile you and reproach you and say all manner of evil against you falsely for My sake. Rejoice and be exceedingly glad, for great is your reward in heaven."

Lord, we bless and thank J. D. Hall for making another deposit into our heavenly bank accounts.

Christ is risen!

 

[All4Christ]

This debacle has given me a chance to explain more of our beliefs to some family members. God works through everything - good and bad.

 

[Monk Brendan]

Warning, this may make some of you very angry.

I am very angry, as the Melkites follow the beliefs and practices of the Orthodox.

Here is a letter that I wrote to him, and posted on P&P's website:

Re: apologies to Orthodox, I have an apology as well. I apologize for not denouncing you as the bigoted heretic you are. NO F-bombs. Just a clear denunciation of your heresy of "imputed righteousness."

Righteousness comes from God, not man. But it is not imputed. That is like wearing a hair shirt matted with feces under a white tuxedo. It is just as nasty. With God to help you, you must FIRST remove the hair shirt and be washed yourself BEFORE you can put on your white tuxedo. Substituting Jesus' righteousness for your own smelly hair shirt is the only way to be pure. Otherwise the hair shirt is still just as smelly, and you are just as impure, even though you're covered in the Blood of Jesus.

God will not allow any impure thing into heaven. Lev 20:7 . Therefore, God cannot allow that smelly hair shirt into heaven, and if you cling to it by believing in "Imputed Righteousness" you, yourself will not be allowed into heaven. At the end of things, when there is only heaven and hell, if you don't end up in heaven, where will you end up?
Christ is risen!

 

[Constantine the Sinner]

Our saints have been just as vicious in engaging heretics. The Protestants here are wrong, but it is preferable to some of the more civil Protestants who want to sing kumbaya with us while preaching abortion and gay marriage. Christianity is not innocuous, it is better to be hot or cold than lukewarm.

I am very angry, as the Melkites follow the beliefs and practices of the Orthodox.

Ah, no. You're Papists. You also don't consider the doctrine of essential procession to be heretical.

 

[Monk Brendan]

Ah, no. You're Papists. You also don't consider the doctrine of essential procession to be heretical.

HONK! Your wrong! We follow the beliefs and practices of Eastern Orthodoxy. It is just a matter of where we get our bishops. We could make a metania to the Patriarch of Constantinople (or Archbishop of Athens of whoever) and receive Greek bishops.

Or we can make a metania to Rome, and get Arab bishops.

I however, am American, and Bishop Nicholas of the Eparchy of Newton is an American too!

But I have been to many Greek, Ukrainian, OCA, and Russian Orthodox Divine Liturgies, and there is no difference in the Nicene Creed at all. True, the Roman Church, and her daughters, the Protestants use fiioque, we do not.

Now, what were you saying about Papist? Please define, from your elegant, elite and theological correct viewpoint what makes a Melkite Catholic a Papist, (and don't tell me it is because we follow Rome.) I have just explained the only difference between Antiochian Orthodox and Melkite Catholics.

Christ is risen!

 

[Monk Brendan]

I agree. Disagreeing with our doctrine in a respectful way is completely different than what P&P is doing with this series of articles. I personally don't see what benefit they expect to get out of these articles...it certainly isn't the way Christ lived or taught us to live.

It is probably going to have just as much impact as when John Michael Talbot became a Catholic, and then a Third Order Fransiscan. Keith Green wrote a bunch of very hateful Anti-Catholic articles, and lost most of his followers. Then he did something VERY stupid, he went up to fly with an inexperienced pilot in an overloaded plane. The plane crashed, and all of the people inside were killed. May God have mercy on their souls.

 

[ArmyMatt]

HONK! Your wrong! We follow the beliefs and practices of Eastern Orthodoxy. It is just a matter of where we get our bishops. We could make a metania to the Patriarch of Constantinople (or Archbishop of Athens of whoever) and receive Greek bishops.

Or we can make a metania to Rome, and get Arab bishops.

I however, am American, and Bishop Nicholas of the Eparchy of Newton is an American too!

But I have been to many Greek, Ukrainian, OCA, and Russian Orthodox Divine Liturgies, and there is no difference in the Nicene Creed at all. True, the Roman Church, and her daughters, the Protestants use fiioque, we do not.

Now, what were you saying about Papist? Please define, from your elegant, elite and theological correct viewpoint what makes a Melkite Catholic a Papist, (and don't tell me it is because we follow Rome.) I have just explained the only difference between Antiochian Orthodox and Melkite Catholics.

Christ is risen!

Papist means in commotion with and under Rome. anyone, who fits that description is a Papist no matter how Orthodox they look.

that being said, thanks for sticking up for us.

 

[Monk Brendan]

Papist means in commotion with and under Rome. anyone, who fits that description is a Papist no matter how Orthodox they look.

Let's learn how to spell, okay? We are talking about being in Communion with Rome, not believing every single thing the Pope says. In reality, it means that Patriarch Gregory III Laham sent a letter to Pope Benedict XVI notifying the Pope of his election to the Patriarchate, and saying that he will continue the Melkite practice of continuing Communion with the Pope, being friends, brothers in the Lord, blah blah blah, but He is going to run the Melkite Church as he wishes to, according to Orthodox beliefs and practices. At no time does Gregory mention to the Pope submission to his will in anything.

So, as I am in Communion with Bishop Nicholas Samra of the Eparchy of Newton, MA, and am known by him, and he is in Communion with Patriarch Gregory III Laham, who is in Communion with BUT NOT UNDER Pope Francis, I am in communion with Pope Francis, but I don't have to be in submission to him.

 

[All4Christ]

Let's learn how to spell, okay? We are talking about being in Communion with Rome, not believing every single thing the Pope says. In reality, it means that Patriarch Gregory III Laham sent a letter to Pope Benedict XVI notifying the Pope of his election to the Patriarchate, and saying that he will continue the Melkite practice of continuing Communion with the Pope, being friends, brothers in the Lord, blah blah blah, but He is going to run the Melkite Church as he wishes to, according to Orthodox beliefs and practices. At no time does Gregory mention to the Pope submission to his will in anything.

So, as I am in Communion with Bishop Nicholas Samra of the Eparchy of Newton, MA, and am known by him, and he is in Communion with Patriarch Gregory III Laham, who is in Communion with BUT NOT UNDER Pope Francis, I am in communion with Pope Francis, but I don't have to be in submission to him.

If Pope Francis makes a statement in Ex Cathedra, do you need to accept it in some form? Or at least accept that it can be interpreted in an "orthodox" way?

 

[ArmyMatt]

Let's learn how to spell, okay?

thanks for that, twas autocorrect.

We are talking about being in Communion with Rome, not believing every single thing the Pope says.

right, being in communion means Papist. many Latin rite Catholics don't believe everything the Pope says, same with the Ukrainian Greek Catholics and Maronites. still Papists because of who they are in communion with.

In reality, it means that Patriarch Gregory III Laham sent a letter to Pope Benedict XVI notifying the Pope of his election to the Patriarchate, and saying that he will continue the Melkite practice of continuing Communion with the Pope, being friends, brothers in the Lord, blah blah blah, but He is going to run the Melkite Church as he wishes to, according to Orthodox beliefs and practices. At no time does Gregory mention to the Pope submission to his will in anything.

doesn't matter that you have self rule, you are in communion with a heretic, and not in communion with the Orthodox.

So, as I am in Communion with Bishop Nicholas Samra of the Eparchy of Newton, MA, and am known by him, and he is in Communion with Patriarch Gregory III Laham, who is in Communion with BUT NOT UNDER Pope Francis, I am in communion with Pope Francis, but I don't have to be in submission to him.

which is the definition of being a Papist, since it is about being in communion with Rome. whether or not you agree with the Roman Pope is a moot point.

 

[Jack Isaacks]

If Pope Francis makes a statement in Ex Cathedra, do you need to accept it in some form? Or at least accept that it can be interpreted in an "orthodox" way?

Good question.

As I understand it there have been only TWO ex-cathedra definitions since Vatican I: the dogmatizing of the bodily Assumption of the Theotokos, which we already knew, and the declaration by John Paul II that women could not be ordained to the presbyterate or episcopate, which we also already knew.

As a matter of history, the Chalcedonian Patriarchate of Antioch was for centuries in a state of double communion with both Old and New Romes. This continued until the 17th century when both Romes made an issue of it.

Keep in mind that contrary to Protestant polemicists, papal infallibility is so carefully defined and limited as to make its exercise impossible in quotidian or even frivolous matters.

Christ is risen!

 

[ArmyMatt]

As I understand it there have been only TWO ex-cathedra definitions since Vatican I: the dogmatizing of the bodily Assumption of the Theotokos, which we already knew, and the declaration by John Paul II that women could not be ordained to the presbyterate or episcopate, which we also already knew.

I actually heard that the first ex cathedra statement was that they could make ex cathedra statements, and the second was concerning Mary's Immaculate Conception. could be wrong on those, though.