The Splintered Orthodox Church

Epistemes · Apr 1, 2012

In continuing to read Fr. David Cownie's "Guide for Orthodox Living," I cannot help but take note at how easily Orthodoxy splinters into traditionalist vs. genuine churches, Old vs. New Calendarist churches, and at the number of churches and monasteries which are not in communion with other churches. Then there are accusations of modernism and ecumenism being leveled against the Ecumenical Patriarchate and his sympathizers. Is it true that some of the Fathers on Mt. Athos refuse to audibly pray for HAH Batholomew I?

With so many different splinter groups all claiming to be the "true" or the "traditionalist" or the "genuine" Orthodox Church, the landscape of Orthodoxy looks more and more like splintered Protestantism. As an outsider looking in, I don't know how you'd ever tell which one was right much less which one represented the apostolic church.

ProScribe · Apr 1, 2012

If that is true - on the other side of the coin you could say that Catholicism and the Pope is a large bureaucracy of organized religion.

Incariol · Apr 1, 2012

Epistemes said:
In continuing to read Fr. David Cownie's "Guide for Orthodox Living," I cannot help but take note at how easily Orthodoxy splinters into traditionalist vs. genuine churches, Old vs. New Calendarist churches, and at the number of churches and monasteries which are not in communion with other churches. Then there are accusations of modernism and ecumenism being leveled against the Ecumenical Patriarchate and his sympathizers. Is it true that some of the Fathers on Mt. Athos refuse to audibly pray for HAH Batholomew I?

With so many different splinter groups all claiming to be the "true" or the "traditionalist" or the "genuine" Orthodox Church, the landscape of Orthodoxy looks more and more like splintered Protestantism. As an outsider looking in, I don't know how you'd ever tell which one was right much less which one represented the apostolic church.

By the same logic, I would have no idea who the real Pope is. Benedict XVI or David Bawden - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ?

It's fairly obvious... You have a bunch of tiny groups that are wildly insular and define their entire existence in the context of being against the perceived fault of the parent organization they schismed from, or, well, the actual Orthodox Church.

gzt · Apr 1, 2012

I would estimate that the number of schismatics in America is about 10,000 if the number of total Orthodox are about 700,000. For the most part, it's not "easy" for them to form. They're more akin to SSPX, sedevacantists, and other such irrelevant noise in Catholicism. Hope that helps. Have a nice day.

Joseph Hazen · Apr 1, 2012

In continuing to read online I cannot help but take note at how easily Roman Catholicism splinters into traditionalist vs. genuine churches, Protestant vs. "Catholic" churches, and at the number of churches and monasteries which are not in communion with other churches. Then there are accusations of modernism and ecumenism being leveled against the Magesterium, the Pope, and his sympathizers. Is it true that some of the Fathers, nuns, and laity in North America refuse to audibly pray for Pope Benedict XVI?

With so many different splinter groups all claiming to be the "true" or the "traditionalist" or the "genuine" Catholic Church, the landscape of Catholicism looks more and more like any organization in which human beings are members. As an outsider in, I don't know how you'd ever tell which one was right much less which one represented the apostolic church.

gurneyhalleck1 · Apr 1, 2012

I wouldn't say the Catholic situation is that grave. Sedevacantists and SSPX old-schoolers are an ultra ultra minority. In our area, Joseph, we have one SSPX in Bakersfield with a piddly attendance. Yet how many mainstream Catholic parishes are there? And parishes that are disloyal to the Holy Father are not exactly large in statistics either. I don't see there being a power vacuum or confusion as to who is in charge or the viable, legitimate leader in the CC. Is there confusion with the Mass and some real abuses? Oh yeahhhhh, but authority or legitimacy issues I don't see. There are plenty of drama kings in Orthodoxy with patriarchs and bishops trying to hose each other. Father George has told me about plenty of 'em and I've read about several online. There is always episcopal drama and nonsense in any communion. Currently the Anglicans are in the lead!

Ann_of_Love · Apr 1, 2012

My first thought was, "See? There are Eastern Protestants!"

gzt · Apr 1, 2012

gurneyhalleck1 said:
I wouldn't say the Catholic situation is that grave. Sedevacantists and SSPX old-schoolers are an ultra ultra minority. In our area, Joseph, we have one SSPX in Bakersfield with a piddly attendance. Yet how many mainstream Catholic parishes are there? And parishes that are disloyal to the Holy Father are not exactly large in statistics either. I don't see there being a power vacuum or confusion as to who is in charge or the viable, legitimate leader in the CC. Is there confusion with the Mass and some real abuses? Oh yeahhhhh, but authority or legitimacy issues I don't see. There are plenty of drama kings in Orthodoxy with patriarchs and bishops trying to hose each other. Father George has told me about plenty of 'em and I've read about several online. There is always episcopal drama and nonsense in any communion.

Most of the drama is within canonical Orthodoxy (just as it is in Catholicism). I'd say the Catholic situation is roughly on par with Orthodoxy: the schismatics are mostly irrelevant.

gurneyhalleck1 · Apr 1, 2012

Bottom line is that every single communion of Christianity has rebels and loudmouths and mainliners and other types of folks. Catholicism has always had anti-popes or rebels and then the Contarini and Kallistos Ware types of folks who yearn for reunion and ecumenism who get bashed as sell-outs. There are always bad bishops and patriarchs as well. St. John Chrysostom once said, "the road to hell is paved with the skulls of the bishops." That says it all. It is naivete to jump from Anglicanism to Catholicism or Catholicism to Orthodoxy or the reverse, etc. thinking that you'll find the perfect Church that has total uniformity and singularity of purpose. Where men are involved, expect things to be muffed up!

Ann_of_Love said:
My first thought was, "See? There are Eastern Protestants!"

gurneyhalleck1 · Apr 1, 2012

Well-stated, gzt

gzt said:
Most of the drama is within canonical Orthodoxy (just as it is in Catholicism). I'd say the Catholic situation is roughly on par with Orthodoxy: the schismatics are mostly irrelevant.

Joseph Hazen · Apr 1, 2012

gurneyhalleck1 said:
I wouldn't say the Catholic situation is that grave. Sedevacantists and SSPX old-schoolers are an ultra ultra minority. In our area, Joseph, we have one SSPX in Bakersfield with a piddly attendance. Yet how many mainstream Catholic parishes are there? And parishes that are disloyal to the Holy Father are not exactly large in statistics either. I don't see there being a power vacuum or confusion as to who is in charge or the viable, legitimate leader in the CC. Is there confusion with the Mass and some real abuses? Oh yeahhhhh, but authority or legitimacy issues I don't see. There are plenty of drama kings in Orthodoxy with patriarchs and bishops trying to hose each other. Father George has told me about plenty of 'em and I've read about several online. There is always episcopal drama and nonsense in any communion. Currently the Anglicans are in the lead!

My point was basically what you've agreed to in gzt's comment, particularly when I said the part about "any organization with humans." The Sedevacantists are about as relevant as the Old Calendarists. *shrug* It's dishonest, however, to hold up Orthodoxy as an example of "splintered" in contrast to one's own communion, which based upon recent posts from this OP, is what I believe his intention ultimately was. There's no church where one can say "This is the ultimate authority, undisputed from everyone, and we're completely united." We're still all human and still in a fallen world.

gurneyhalleck1 · Apr 1, 2012

The word "all" doesn't apply anywhere in the known universe when people are involved LOL So you're right. But I would say the overwhelming population of the practicing Catholic Church respect the papal claims and authority.

I see problems in every church. But, like you said, when one communion uses another as a splintered comparison to its own, it's pretty worthless most of the time. The Catholics online usually criticize the Orthodox regarding birth control. I think some of their criticism is valid. The bishops almost overwhelmingly condemn it yet the priests all over the place allow it as spiritual fathers. That being said, the Catholic Church may have a unified, coherent message, but at the local grassroots level, the priests either permit birth control or at best, turn a blind eye to it. So, in the end, with an issue like that, neither side is very consistent IMHO.

Joseph Hazen said:
My point was basically what you've agreed to in gzt's comment, particularly when I said the part about "any organization with humans." The Sedevacantists are about as relevant as the Old Calendarists. *shrug* It's dishonest, however, to hold up Orthodoxy as an example of "splintered" in contrast to one's own communion, which based upon recent posts from this OP, is what I believe his intention ultimately was. There's no church where one can say "This is the ultimate authority, undisputed from everyone, and we're completely united." We're still all human and still in a fallen world.

Ortho_Cat · Apr 1, 2012

Joseph Hazen said:
In continuing to read online I cannot help but take note at how easily Roman Catholicism splinters into traditionalist vs. genuine churches, Protestant vs. "Catholic" churches, and at the number of churches and monasteries which are not in communion with other churches. Then there are accusations of modernism and ecumenism being leveled against the Magesterium, the Pope, and his sympathizers. Is it true that some of the Fathers, nuns, and laity in North America refuse to audibly pray for Pope Benedict XVI?

With so many different splinter groups all claiming to be the "true" or the "traditionalist" or the "genuine" Catholic Church, the landscape of Catholicism looks more and more like any organization in which human beings are members. As an outsider in, I don't know how you'd ever tell which one was right much less which one represented the apostolic church.

Let's not even get into the disjointedness that exists between the Latin and Eastern Catholic Churches in worship and belief. How about the differences between so-called "Liberal" Catholics and the traditional ones? Sedavacantists? Contemporary mass vs. traditional? Talk about worlds of difference. I'd be willing to bet that if you took an early Church father and set him down in one of these "modern" masses you see today, he would more than likely cross himself and swiftly proceed to nearest exit. Indeed, we should take notice of the log(s) in our own eye before casting stones (i combined metaphors for emphasis

).

Dorothea · Apr 1, 2012

And I'm sure there will be more schismatic churches in the future, and if Orthdoxy catches on with non Orthodox, we'll probably have a lot of communities pretending to be or like the Orthodox Church. What we need to remember and care about is there will always be His true Orthodox Church because He promised the gates of Hell will not prevail against it.

gurneyhalleck1 · Apr 1, 2012

Or have an early church father appear and tell him that people can use birth control and have just two kids and see what they'd say! Or tell St. John Chrysostom and St. Basil that the Divine Liturgy is 1:30 minutes long! It used to be waaaaayyy longer than that! Or tell St. Gregory of Nyssa and St. Gregory Palamas that the churches have pews! LOL My guess is that the ECF's wouldn't be happy with a lot of things! LOL You're right about the modern Mass; they wouldn't be happy at all I'd venture to say.

Ortho_Cat said:
Let's not even get into the disjointedness that exists between the Latin and Eastern Catholic Churches in worship and belief. How about the differences between so-called "Liberal" Catholics and the traditional ones? Sedavacantists? Contemporary mass vs. traditional? Talk about worlds of difference. I'd be willing to bet that if you took an early Church father and set him down in one of these "modern" masses you see today, he would more than likely cross himself and swiftly proceed to nearest exit. Indeed, we should take notice of the log(s) in our own eye before casting stones (i combined metaphors for emphasis ).

ArmyMatt · Apr 1, 2012

I think you will always find these folks in the Church no matter where you go. Elder Ephraim is a cultist, Fr Seraphim Rose is a slobbering fundie, Fr Alexander Schmemann is a modernist liberal, etc. it's silly, it never stays around long, so I tend not to worry about how the schismatics look or make canonical orthodoxy look.

gurneyhalleck1 · Apr 1, 2012

A lot of Orthodox, like I said, bash Kallistos Ware as some kind of ecumenist sell-out liberal, but for me "The Orthodox Church" was one of the earliest books I read that piqued my interest and got me really curious. I find him to be a compelling, caring, insightful bishop and I can't think of many Orthodox in the last 100 years who have brought more people to Orthodoxy through such simple, concise, relevent, wonderful writing. He's by far not Schmemann or Meyendorff or Rose, but he's a gem in my book.

ArmyMatt said:
I think you will always find these folks in the Church no matter where you go. Elder Ephraim is a cultist, Fr Seraphim Rose is a slobbering fundie, Fr Alexander Schmemann is a modernist liberal, etc. it's silly, it never stays around long, so I tend not to worry about how the schismatics look or make canonical orthodoxy look.

-Kyriaki- · Apr 1, 2012

gurneyhalleck1 said:
A lot of Orthodox, that are loud and almost entirely online like I said, bash Kallistos Ware as some kind of ecumenist sell-out liberal

Bolding added by me. Internetdoxy is a weird place and tends to attract extremes, sadly. That is an *excellent* book and it was the first book ever given to me by my Orthodox priest to read - I devoured it in days. His opinions are not liked by conservative-dox, but I've only really noticed the rants about him in the last few years. Before that, it was live and let live, and everyone has some writer or heirarch that they don't like for whatever reason. Sadly everyone feels that they need (as a single layperson!) to condemn that person as a heretic. It would be nice if we calmed down and learned humility online, but I know we're humans so I'm not holding my breath.

rusmeister · Apr 1, 2012

gurneyhalleck1 said:
The word "all" doesn't apply anywhere in the known universe when people are involved LOL So you're right. But I would say the overwhelming population of the practicing Catholic Church respect the papal claims and authority.

I see problems in every church. But, like you said, when one communion uses another as a splintered comparison to its own, it's pretty worthless most of the time. The Catholics online usually criticize the Orthodox regarding birth control. I think some of their criticism is valid. The bishops almost overwhelmingly condemn it yet the priests all over the place allow it as spiritual fathers. That being said, the Catholic Church may have a unified, coherent message, but at the local grassroots level, the priests either permit birth control or at best, turn a blind eye to it. So, in the end, with an issue like that, neither side is very consistent IMHO.

I'd add to this that all American Catholics in my experience formally respect the Pope, but do not in fact take Catholic teaching seriously as something to be applied to their lives. My father's side of the family is pretty much all that lapsed sort of Catholic. I've only encountered "churched" Catholics - those that DO take it seriously - online.

Right now an Orthodox priest I know personally has gone off the rails and is railing at the entire hierarchy for "ecumenism", for not calling all heterodox heretics and actively condemning their teachings. He has been forbidden to serve for seven years so is unemployed now. His wife got a full-page article in the local newspaper airing his side of complaints to the general public.

Epistemes · Apr 1, 2012

Joseph Hazen said:
In continuing to read online I cannot help but take note at how easily Roman Catholicism splinters into traditionalist vs. genuine churches, Protestant vs. "Catholic" churches, and at the number of churches and monasteries which are not in communion with other churches. Then there are accusations of modernism and ecumenism being leveled against the Magesterium, the Pope, and his sympathizers. Is it true that some of the Fathers, nuns, and laity in North America refuse to audibly pray for Pope Benedict XVI?

With so many different splinter groups all claiming to be the "true" or the "traditionalist" or the "genuine" Catholic Church, the landscape of Catholicism looks more and more like any organization in which human beings are members. As an outsider in, I don't know how you'd ever tell which one was right much less which one represented the apostolic church.

I think you are actually comparing apples to oranges, though I understand the nature and spirit of what you say.

All of the various factions that exist within Catholicism, but I must exclude the actual schismatic groups here, represent the multifaceted modus operandi that is the Roman Catholic Church. Traditionalists can and do worship side by side with modernists; liberals worship side by side with conservatives. You don't have liberal bishops going off on a whim and creating their own "Genuine Catholic Church of America": there remains one Roman Catholic Church so that when you walk into your neighborhood Catholic Church you can be 99.9% certain that it is in communion with Rome and that, yes, Pope Benedict XVI will be prayed for audibly as part of the communion prayers.

The same does not seem to be guaranteed within Orthodoxy. The percentage of certainty of whom a particular parish is in communion with seems to drop, even if slightly. Just think: There are unsuspecting laypersons in Colorado who were received as catechumens into Holy Orthodoxy by the Genuine Orthodox Church of America and are led to believe that the remainder of the OCA is heretical and lacks authentic apostolic succession, that they are the only true Orthodox Christians in the country. This is simply incomparable to any factions within Catholicism because, despite any quarreling amongst conservatives and liberals, they still remain united under one church, receiving one Eucharist; something like the Genuine Orthodox Church of America pits itself against the communion of other Orthodox Church, claiming other communions as invalid, and claims that it is the only True Church in North America. And this is only one example of how and where Christians can and are being mislead. I think something could be said about the so-called "Cyprianites."

Oh, and your estimation of me is wrong: I'm not here to hold Orthodoxy up as the example of a splintered church. I've said many times that I think that the Orthodox Church is the one, holy, catholic and apostolic church: you must have missed those posts.

The Splintered Orthodox Church

Junior Member

Well-Known Member

Newbie

The age of the Earth is 4.54 ± 0.07 billion years

The Religious Loudmouth

Reader

Regular Member

The age of the Earth is 4.54 ± 0.07 billion years

Reader

Reader

The Religious Loudmouth

Reader

Orthodox Christian

One of God's handmaidens

Reader

Regular Member

Reader

seeking answers in stillness

A Russified American Orthodox Chestertonian

Junior Member

Similar threads