Damack and Dyer

[E.C.]

Now, I'm curious. Does this mean the Church is a beautiful, robotic woman?

I laughed a little too much at this

Boy, internet Orthodoxy sure is a bummer sometimes.

Sometimes? It is most of the times. I remember when I first started posting here. We had a lot more regular posters and I think the positive side of internet Orthodoxy was first starting to appear. Then the ugly side came out. The ugly side, and real world obligations, are part of why I stay out of some of it.

 

[rusmeister]

I laughed a little too much at this


Sometimes? It is most of the times. I remember when I first started posting here. We had a lot more regular posters and I think the positive side of internet Orthodoxy was first starting to appear. Then the ugly side came out. The ugly side, and real world obligations, are part of why I stay out of some of it.

I think “Internet Orthodoxy” just reflects Orthodoxy in the real world, with the difference that people usually express what they really think more honestly in formats such as this. The divisions are real, and out there in the real world. But “out there”, if a person rejects a Church teaching, you’re liable to see it only in his actions, which is often pretty hard to see. But here they can and do say it with words, though usually subtly, and not openly. Here, they can promote speakers, including hierarchs, that (more often subtly) deny our teachings in their lives, whether it be teachings on sexuality and the family, or the exclusivity of Christ as the only way to salvation, or whatever, or themselves promote such ideas. In the whole AFR “kerfluffle”, this has come out, and is the reason this thread exists, I think, because of real divisions where one side, or both, pretend that there is nothing wrong, that, in the words of Darth Vader, “There is no conflict”, even though there very much is. And so many of us, while failing to deceive others, wind up deceiving ourselves.