There you go again jumping to conclusions based on your preconceived beliefs of the person. Stop! No where did I write that. I made a joke at gzt's posting of the picture, there is nothing more to my post than that, just a joke about the picture being posted, not agreement nor disagreement with it and no hidden deep meaning to my joke, not even in some invisible font, so quit reading more into it than that. I AM ORTHODOX, IN GOOD STANDING AND I DO SUBMIT TO CHURCH AUTHORITY! *note: in caps in hopes you will actually read what I write for once and nothing more, not cause I'm shouting.*
"There you go again jumping to conclusions based on your preconceived beliefs of the person. Stop! No where did I write that. I made a joke at gzt's posting of the picture, there is nothing more to my post than that, just a joke about the picture being posted, not agreement nor disagreement with it and no hidden deep meaning to my joke, not even in some invisible font, so quit reading more into it than that. I AM ORTHODOX, IN GOOD STANDING AND I DO SUBMIT TO CHURCH AUTHORITY! *note: in caps in hopes you will actually read what I write for once and nothing more, not cause I'm shouting.*"
I second that! The same assumptions and judgments were made about me as well!
Thanks, guys.
I accept that about you. Could you consider the possibility that I feel pretty much the same way?
Part of the thing here is that any sort of disagreement has to constantly be couched with "I SUBMIT TO CHURCH AUTHORITY AND AM ORTHODOX IN GOOD STANDING (NO, DO NOT CALL MY BISHOP)." And then: are you sure you're not a secularist? Are you sure you're not an Episcopalian (again: get over it)? Are you sure you're not under the influence of the LGBT Agenda? Are you sure what you used isn't really a codeword for LGBT Episcopalianism? (seriously, again, get over it) There's something that defines what Orthodoxy is, and I'm sure it's not the same as what's going on in the message baord.
I never suggested calling anyone's bishop, though I can see how you might have read that into my request to confirm canonic membership (something I still think an entirely reasonable request), and this is the general practice, certainly in Russia, if you want to commune and a priest wants to defend the Chalice. I remember that the Russian priest that chrismated me in California (OCA) gave me an official letter affirmng my legitimate Chrismation (his initiative, not mine) to take with me to Russia to present upon request.
I do think it odd if a person conceals his jurisdiction, and suspicious should contention arise, as it has. It doesn't say anything good about the concealer. In the US, jurisdictions are widespread, and saying that you are in the OCA, or Antiochian archdiocese tells nothing about your specific location.
FWIW, gz, I don't doubt ANYONE's sincerity. I believe and accept that everyone writing here is face-value in terms of intentions. All want to be in communion with the Church. One thing that I think possible, though, and would warn against, if any would hear the warning, is that it IS possible to believe things, or come to believe things, that could in effect break communion, whether we realize it or not. Leo Tolstoy came to very sincerely believe in his Gospel of non-resistance, to the point where he denied that Jesus was the divine Son of God, and as he was a public figure publishing his own gospel, the Russian Church had to eventually publicly state that he was no longer in communion, that he was excommunicant.
That ought to stand as a warning to us. And I think it not impossible in our time. I sure don't want to go there.