How does the EOC deal with this question?

[gurneyhalleck1]

:o

This could almost be interpreted as sarcasm

 

[rusmeister]

Coy? Orthodoxy is Orthodoxy...Russian, Antiochian, Romanian, OCA...take your pick! What you really want to know is what ethnicity of Orthodoxy I adhere to? I served under Met. Theodosius in the OCA and currently under the EP. Good enough for you?

You misunderstand my intent, Yesh.
There ARE such things as schismatics and other people and groups claiming to be Orthodox that are not in communion with the Eastern Orthodox Church.

Two people on the same side in a war might want to know whether they can trust their supposed allies.

I don't give a hoot about ethnicity, but I do care about canonicity.

Now, if you would just name your diocese and bishop, as I did, I'll lower my wand.

And I encourage everyone reading this to do the same, so no one feels picked on.

 

[Gnarwhal]

I guess the better way to ask this is: how can one group of people at a point in time be right and every other group in all other times be wrong? It almost seems cruel for god to reveal himself to that small fragment of humanity. I don't buy the argument that god allowed the human race to develop to a point until they were ready for him. Has the past 2000 years shown that humanity is more ready now than it was before?

Heh, not to hijack your thread RKO, but this reminds me of a thought I had a few days ago: If a Christian were to travel through time and become stuck, say, in 1500 BCE, would that person still in fact be a Christian or would that person essentially follow the faith of the ancient Hebrews? Now I know Christ existed with the Father and Holy Spirit outside of time prior to the incarnation, however since in 1500 BCE He hadn't entered into time and subsequently been crucified and then rose again, does that mean the aforementioned time traveler wouldn't be eligible for the grace that comes through Christ's resurrection because it "hadn't happened yet"?

My brain is weird sometimes.

P.S. I have noted there are quite a few newcomers to TAW that are using the three-bar faith icon, but are not likely Orthodox. I would ask that they change their icon until or unless they are actually made a catechumen of the Church, both out of respect but also so as not to cause confusion among inquirers.

There's definitely a lot of merit to this request. As someone who isn't Orthodox but likes to peruse TAW now and then, I find it a bit confusing when I read the posts of some who claim to be Orthodox but post things that seem to conflict with what I've come to understand as the official, or at least prevailing, views in Orthodoxy.

 

[Emmelia]

I served under Met. Theodosius in the OCA and currently under the EP. Good enough for you?

I'll bite.

Yesh, I have refrained from commenting on most posts you're involved in because I was afraid my frustration with you would cause me to be uncharitable. However, you have in the past responded to inquirers with information decidedly UN-Orthodox. Off the top of my head, the "New Israel" thread comes to mind. There are others where your comments tend to make those believe you disagree with the Church on certain issues. That called into question the legitimacy of your claims to be a part of the canonical Orthodox Church. At least to me.

I felt by saying you were "cradle" was being evasive. For instance Cat Stevens *was* cradle Orthodox, but lets not forget his conversion to Islam. I'm going to take you at your word that you are under the EP. But, I will ask you to PLEASE stick to answering questions with what the Church teaches regardless of your own personal beliefs. At least preface with "I disagree with the official stance because yada yada..." No one here has any kind of authority over your spiritual life, however mixing the messianic flavor into Orthodoxy isn't kosher. I for one would appreciate you leaving it out when speaking to inquirers or others who might misunderstand what is and is not from the Church.

If I have been uncharitable or have offended you, please forgive me. I have seen confusion and felt that maybe I should take this chance to voice my concerns.

 

[Emmelia]

To RKO:
It might help to understand that people can be right in degrees; that most people do have a great deal of truth in their worldviews. A claim to the fullness of the truth, being completely right in terms of worldview, is not due to personal arrogance, but to having the dumb luck to find the organization that really HAS maintained the paradosis most completely. It's in thinking, not that WE are right, but that the CHURCH is right, and we are only accepting or discovering truth we did not make. I see the analogy of a dartboard. Orthodoxy is the bullseye. Heterodox Christian faith is in the near circles, other theistic faiths a little further out, polytheistic still further, atheism in the circle around the nail holding the dartboard up (there IS truth and it CAN be known) and principled agnostics that deny we can ever know, that there is even truth to be known, are totally off the board.

So I can enjoy the company of Catholics or Protestants, knowing that they have an awful lot right, even though I can't join them, as I can see that they have not maintained the paradosis. (History is a huge basis for me here.)

RKO, sorry for adding to the off topic posts. As far as I understood what you were asking, I think Rus summed up my thoughts well. There are degrees of correct thought and practice. The evidence of how correct a particular group is, can be seen from their background and their fruit, imo. If Christ is the Truth, who has the longest and closest ties with Him? They are at the center of that board. Every schism from that original truth pulls a group just a bit further out.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Now, if you would just name your diocese and bishop, as I did, I'll lower my wand.

And I encourage everyone reading this to do the same, so no one feels picked on.

ACROD

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

I'll bite.

However, you have in the past responded to inquirers with information decidedly UN-Orthodox. Off the top of my head, the "New Israel" thread comes to mind. There are others where your comments tend to make those believe you disagree with the Church on certain issues. That called into question the legitimacy of your claims to be a part of the canonical Orthodox Church. At least to me.

I felt by saying you were "cradle" was being evasive. For instance Cat Stevens *was* cradle Orthodox, but lets not forget his conversion to Islam. I'm going to take you at your word that you are under the EP.

No one here has any kind of authority over your spiritual life, however mixing the messianic flavor into Orthodoxy isn't kosher.

What exactly has been "unorthodox" in your opinion? What was unorthodox in the new israel thread? I was not being evasive...I AM cradle. Cat WAS orthodox...if he were on this forum he would have a muslim icon, no? The Orthodox church IS messianic

 

[Kristos]

Is there a canonical bishop in North America?

 

[inconsequential]

Heh, not to hijack your thread RKO, but this reminds me of a thought I had a few days ago: If a Christian were to travel through time and become stuck, say, in 1500 BCE, would that person still in fact be a Christian or would that person essentially follow the faith of the ancient Hebrews? Now I know Christ existed with the Father and Holy Spirit outside of time prior to the incarnation, however since in 1500 BCE He hadn't entered into time and subsequently been crucified and then rose again, does that mean the aforementioned time traveler wouldn't be eligible for the grace that comes through Christ's resurrection because it "hadn't happened yet"?

My brain is weird sometimes.

To confirm your weirdness, I've wondered that very thing myself.

 

[ArmyMatt]

Is there a canonical bishop in North America?

there are several

 

[AV1]

To confirm your weirdness, I've wondered that very thing myself.

The Trinity exists outside of time and space, as it was created by them.

"In the beginning..."

 

[rusmeister]

ACROD

Thx!

 

[inconsequential]

The Trinity exists outside of time and space, as it was created by them.

"In the beginning..."

Then an Orthodox Christian, in good standing, would be able to walk into the Holy of Holies and touch the Ark without any harm?

 

[Shieldmaiden4Christ]

I switched up my icon, and changed my user title to explain what I am. Hope I didn't offend anyone with the Orthodox icon! :o

Enjoying participating as fully as I can an Antiochian church, though!

 

[gracefullamb]

.

 

[ArmyMatt]

bummer graceful, hope you come back soon!

 

[rusmeister]

I'm with GL. It is right to question canonical membership, and to get clear answers. It's NOT Pharisaical. If we DON'T "defend the Chalice", so to speak, then we won't even know who or what is Orthodox any more. It'll mean whatever people want it to mean - become a word without meaning.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

You're right. One thing that impressed me IMMEDIATELY with Orthodoxy was that fierce defense of the chalice and caution to protect the divine gifts unspoiled by schism and deception. There is nothing wrong with asking jurisdictions and allegiances. I don't see the Pharisee angle either...

I'm with GL. It is right to question canonical membership, and to get clear answers. It's NOT Pharisaical. If we DON'T "defend the Chalice", so to speak, then we won't even know who or what is Orthodox any more. It'll mean whatever people want it to mean - become a word without meaning.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

The pharisee comment was kind of a joke (did no one see the "wink")? However, it did seem to me (and others) that some here seem to think they can dictate who THEY think is Orthodox or not. This is a forum people...

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

The pharisee comment was kind of a joke (did no one see the "wink")? However, it did seem to me (and others) that some here seem to think they can dictate who THEY think is Orthodox or not. This is a forum people...