My letter to OCAMPR

[rusmeister]

My issue with the letter as presented (outside of its excessive length) is the tone of it. It comes across as belligerent and disrespectful to the organization and the recipient. I understand having strongly held opinions that differ from this organization. I also respect your right to speak your mind. However, consider the effort and energy that numerous people put in to pull off such an event like this. Take a step back and look at the words you employ and the tone of it. Do you really expect to reach into their heart with your words as written to affect change? If you intend to send something to their director, then I encourage you to tone it back, shorten it and frame your concerns in a friendlier tone. These are your brothers and sisters in Christ after all.

Respectfully

I actually agree with you here. I think that people like DH, and M. Kunsch of Pascha Press, are largely right in their complaints, but undercut their cases by speaking harshly and rudely. Anger at falsehood and hypocrisy overpowers love, agape.
it’s actually a tightrope to walk, speaking the truth in love. It’s all too easy to speak truth harshly and angrily, and all too easy to engage in the false compassion of false love that is a cover for indifference, the very opposite of love.

 

[ArmyMatt]

I do have a problem with your saying that the Church has incorporated heretical terms and understandings.

“one nature of God the Word Incarnate” was Apollinarian, but corrected by St Cyril of Alexandria, St John Damascene, and the 5th Ecumenical Council

“homoousios” was started by Sabellius, but corrected by St Athanasius

even “the Filioque” was given a proper understanding by St Maximos the confessor after it was locally condemned.

“Lordly man” was Apollinarian, but was corrected by St Macarius the Great.

My beef here is that the Church is NOT correcting the errors that concern us here in the modern hersies. There are evident errors, and most hierarchs are silent when other hierarchs err. People like the good people at Fordham, the Wheel, Orthodoxy “in Dialog”, Archbishop Elpidophoros are erring openly, and most hierarchs are silent, except for a few like Fr John Whiteford and Fr Josiah Trenham. Respectful correction and rebuking is called for, and it just ain’t happening, I guess perhaps because (for example) of fear of shaking the trees and maybe being ousted oneself.

except they are. Frs Damick and deYoung had a Lord of Spirits podcast from a week ago where they called out DBH as a heretic.

the Fords routinely call it out, as does Fr Chad Hatfield, Fr John Parker, Fr Thomas Soroka, Fr Eric Tosi, Fr Jonathan Ivanoff, Fr Jerome Cwiklinski, Pres Jeannie Constantiniou, Kh Fredericka, Fr Patrick Tischel, etc all with the blessings of their bishops.

Maybe if you spoke out more openly against some of these errors at least here at TAW, I might be convinced that correction will happen.

I call it out personally when I preach during the Liturgy and often after Vespers, and definitely in my Orthodoxy 101 class. I also call it out as I can in the military, as I cannot compromise according to the regs.

By now enough hierarchs could and should have spoken out so that the above-mentioned institutions and publications promoting same-sex sexual relations, female clergy, racial groups that despise our Faith, etc should have been anathematised and disassociated from the Orthodox Church, and the imposition of claims of some medical science being imposed on the faithful in spite of the practices of Holy Tradition condemned as imposition and as practice contrary to our Tradition.

many heresies lived on within the body even long after their condemnation. Origen was condemned in his own lifetime, Constantinople II was 300 years later. Arianism lived on even after the Constantinople I, which was 60 years later.

But the crickets are chirping...

because it’s the only thing you seem to be listening for.

 

[rusmeister]

“one nature of God the Word Incarnate” was Apollinarian, but corrected by St Cyril of Alexandria, St John Damascene, and the 5th Ecumenical Council

“homoousios” was started by Sabellius, but corrected by St Athanasius

even “the Filioque” was given a proper understanding by St Maximos the confessor after it was locally condemned.

“Lordly man” was Apollinarian, but was corrected by St Macarius the Great.


except they are. Frs Damick and deYoung had a Lord of Spirits podcast from a week ago where they called out DBH as a heretic.

the Fords routinely call it out, as does Fr Chad Hatfield, Fr John Parker, Fr Thomas Soroka, Fr Eric Tosi, Fr Jonathan Ivanoff, Fr Jerome Cwiklinski, Pres Jeannie Constantiniou, Kh Fredericka, Fr Patrick Tischel, etc all with the blessings of their bishops.


I call it out personally when I preach during the Liturgy and often after Vespers, and definitely in my Orthodoxy 101 class. I also call it out as I can in the military, as I cannot compromise according to the regs.


many heresies lived on within the body even long after their condemnation. Origen was condemned in his own lifetime, Constantinople II was 300 years later. Arianism lived on even after the Constantinople I, which was 60 years later.


because it’s the only thing you seem to be listening for.

Thanks for troubling to respond.

What you describe as “incorporating”, I see as “correcting”. So I guess we don’t have disagreement here, but refer to the idea differently.

I think you have a slightly better view of the American Orthodox landscape than I do, it’s kind of inevitable, and I grant that I don’t know everything everyone says, but can only an speak to what becomes sufficiently public knowledge. My own view is necessarily slightly more international, encompassing what I see in Russia, Europe, and the Balkans, in addition to my American connections.

When you say that people call things out, I assume you are saying what is true, but either it’s not sufficiently aired, “viral”, enough so that it is discussed here (not my only source by any means, but not an insignificant one), or it is not a central threat. You mention DBH, and I assume you mean Mr Hart, and while I do think universalism is a worthy issue (Steve Robinson, who I admire a lot, seems to have become an adherent), it’s not the clearest and most present danger I see to the Church. Where are the Bishops condemning the Wheel and Inga Leonova’s and others’ support for same-sex marriage in the Church? How is this not anathema to all?
I have said that neo-gnosticism is the greatest threat to the Church in our time. Where are the condemnations of the bishops and hierarchs who support it? It appears in most issues, though in sexual morality it flat-out blazes.

So I accept your words, that some priests are condemning evils and erors of concern, and good for them! But on the issues that strike me as critical, that allow people to make Orthodoxy into whatever they imagine it out to be (including myself), I don’t see it.

We still have a member of TAW promoting AB Elpidophoros and his support of anti-Orthodox groups and individuals, and it goes ignored.

I have seen such insanity inside the Church. Well over a dozen divorces of families with multiple children, the young adult child of one such family marrying the mother of another, with the blessing of the Church. And the people around me think it’s fine, as long as “they love each other”. And that is in the Russian Church. I’m fine with being in a Church where people acknowledge that we don’t live as we should. I’m not so fine in a Church that treats all of this insanity as “not a problem”.

It was a huge mistake on the part of Fr Andrew to not dialog with me. It had major negative repercussions I guess he is unaware of.

 

[ArmyMatt]

What you describe as “incorporating”, I see as “correcting”. So I guess we don’t have disagreement here, but refer to the idea differently.

fair enough

I think you have a slightly better view of the American Orthodox landscape than I do, it’s kind of inevitable, and I grant that I don’t know everything everyone says, but can only an speak to what becomes sufficiently public knowledge. My own view is necessarily slightly more international, encompassing what I see in Russia, Europe, and the Balkans, in addition to my American connections.

well, it’s not that I have a better view, I just know many public folks who call out the heresy that modernists are trying to use to correct the Church.

When you say that people call things out, I assume you are saying what is true, but either it’s not sufficiently aired, “viral”, enough so that it is discussed here (not my only source by any means, but not an insignificant one), or it is not a central threat. You mention DBH, and I assume you mean Mr Hart, and while I do think universalism is a worthy issue (Steve Robinson, who I admire a lot, seems to have become an adherent), it’s not the clearest and most present danger I see to the Church.

yes, I mean Dr Hart. and it’s not just universalism, it’s also that he is pro the sexual confusion nonsense.

Where are the Bishops condemning the Wheel and Inga Leonova’s and others’ support for same-sex marriage in the Church? How is this not anathema to all?

bishops were present at conferences at STOTS, HTS, Greece, and Georgia which condemned them by name.

So I accept your words, that some priests are condemning evils and erors of concern, and good for them! But on the issues that strike me as critical, that allow people to make Orthodoxy into whatever they imagine it out to be (including myself), I don’t see it.

well, I do since I have worked with them.

We still have a member of TAW promoting AB Elpidophoros and his support of anti-Orthodox groups and individuals, and it goes ignored.

yes, and the powers-that-be have heard his reasons for the pic.

I have seen such insanity inside the Church. Well over a dozen divorces of families with multiple children, the young adult child of one such family marrying the mother of another, with the blessing of the Church. And the people around me think it’s fine, as long as “they love each other”. And that is in the Russian Church. I’m fine with being in a Church where people acknowledge that we don’t live as we should. I’m not so fine in a Church that treats all of this insanity as “not a problem”.

not the first time this attitude has happened. it won’t be the last. the Church will endure because Christ is greater than any heresy.

It was a huge mistake on the part of Fr Andrew to not dialog with me. It had major negative repercussions I guess he is unaware of.

no, it wasn’t.

 

[gzt]

yes, I mean Dr Hart. and it’s not just universalism, it’s also that he is pro the sexual confusion nonsense.

Do you know where he talks about this? I'm not a follower of his, but I wasn't aware he had come out with views in opposition to orthodox sexual morality. The last thing of his I remember reading on any related subject was this admittedly rather old piece against inappropriate contentography: https://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/the-inappropriate contentography-culture

 

[gzt]

You will have to make relevant edits to the URL because of the content filter. Let the reader understand.

 

[ArmyMatt]

Do you know where he talks about this? I'm not a follower of his, but I wasn't aware he had come out with views in opposition to orthodox sexual morality. The last thing of his I remember reading on any related subject was this admittedly rather old piece against inappropriate contentography: https://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/the-inappropriate contentography-culture

no hard evidence, just multiple professors of mine across two institutions who attended conferences with him.

 

[gzt]

Okay, that's fair, though I would just say that there's a point that there's some integrity to having a personal thought but not being willing to publicly contradict the Church on something, and we should perhaps have some respect for that.

 

[Justin-H.S.]

the young adult child of one such family marrying the mother of another

Sounds pretty Corinthian.

 

[ArmyMatt]

Okay, that's fair, though I would just say that there's a point that there's some integrity to having a personal thought but not being willing to publicly contradict the Church on something, and we should perhaps have some respect for that.

normally I would agree, but he has done this in front of others. it’s not like a personal opinion or struggle that he only tells close friends.

 

[gzt]

normally I would agree, but he has done this in front of others. it’s not like a personal opinion or struggle that he only tells close friends.

Certainly fair. There's still a difference between this and, say, publicly publishing an article, but it's certainly distinguished from keeping his cards close to his vest.

 

[ArmyMatt]

Certainly fair. There's still a difference between this and, say, publicly publishing an article, but it's certainly distinguished from keeping his cards close to his vest.

it’s not his most well known error to be sure, I was just showing that DBH was brought up because he was related to what rus was saying.

 

[rusmeister]

fair enough


well, it’s not that I have a better view, I just know many public folks who call out the heresy that modernists are trying to use to correct the Church.


yes, I mean Dr Hart. and it’s not just universalism, it’s also that he is pro the sexual confusion nonsense.


bishops were present at conferences at STOTS, HTS, Greece, and Georgia which condemned them by name.


well, I do since I have worked with them.


yes, and the powers-that-be have heard his reasons for the pic.


not the first time this attitude has happened. it won’t be the last. the Church will endure because Christ is greater than any heresy.


no, it wasn’t.

Thanks! While I don’t see it, I’m going to take your word for all that.

But on the last comment, I say it was a mistake to not talk to me, to cut me off, and it led me to agree with Marjorie Kunsch, even though I don’t think her manner of expressing the isssues helpful. I no longer trust or support AFR, I see their effective support as being very much of the Left, I think money talks there (“listener supported”) and if it’s formally under the Antiochians, my strong sense is that sources connected to the Greek Church are funding those leanings. I have to tell people (when the issue comes up) to be careful what they listen to on there, to note the speakers and what particular views they may support or promote, whether they express them on the platform or not. I think Mrs. Kunsch’s complaints justified and have to support them. Some of that might have been mollified or modified had Fr Andrew chosen to talk to me or her. But running/controlling the content that he does, and then refusing to respond to sincere, concerned listener feedback creates mistrust.

You respond to me, and that helps me modify what I think. If you didn’t, I would be left to think what I think. Fr Andrew didn’t do that. Yes, it was a mistake. I might have come to see things a little differently, and that might have made a desirable difference.

 

[ArmyMatt]

Thanks! While I don’t see it, I’m going to take your word for all that.

But on the last comment, I say it was a mistake to not talk to me, to cut me off, and it led me to agree with Marjorie Kunsch, even though I don’t think her manner of expressing the isssues helpful. I no longer trust or support AFR, I see their effective support as being very much of the Left, I think money talks there (“listener supported”) and if it’s formally under the Antiochians, my strong sense is that sources connected to the Greek Church are funding those leanings. I have to tell people (when the issue comes up) to be careful what they listen to on there, to note the speakers and what particular views they may support or promote, whether they express them on the platform or not. I think Mrs. Kunsch’s complaints justified and have to support them. Some of that might have been mollified or modified had Fr Andrew chosen to talk to me or her. But running/controlling the content that he does, and then refusing to respond to sincere, concerned listener feedback creates mistrust.

You respond to me, and that helps me modify what I think. If you didn’t, I would be left to think what I think. Fr Andrew didn’t do that. Yes, it was a mistake. I might have come to see things a little differently, and that might have made a desirable difference.

as the third party in that incident, who also heard the aftermath from both sides, it wasn’t a mistake.

 

[rusmeister]

as the third party in that incident, who also heard the aftermath from both sides, it wasn’t a mistake.

Sure. Because division is better than mutual understanding and unity, right?

 

[ArmyMatt]

Sure. Because division is better than mutual understanding and unity, right?

no, that’s not it. there was no mutual understanding at all. you weren’t looking for mutual understanding. Fr Andrew compared the conversation to talking to a brick wall.

plus, once that conversation ended, you tried to get me to convince Fr Andrew to take down the podcast episode. I was the “key” to the backup plan. the mutual understanding and unity felt like “do exactly what I say.”

 

[rusmeister]

no, that’s not it. there was no mutual understanding at all. you weren’t looking for mutual understanding. Fr Andrew compared the conversation to talking to a brick wall.

plus, once that conversation ended, you tried to get me to convince Fr Andrew to take down the podcast episode. I was the “key” to the backup plan. the mutual understanding and unity felt like “do exactly what I say.”

So do you think it is good for an Orthodox podcast to sell GOT to young Orthodox Christians?
I’m simply amazed that any Orthodox Christian thinks it defensible. The p0r*no*graph*y of sex and violence is overwhelming. It’s a story by an atheist with an atheist worldview. You might as well accuse me of saying “Do exactly what I say” if I were to complain about the promotion of “Lady Chatterley’s Lover” on AFR. It’s NOT “what I say”. It’s what our Holy Tradition requires. I’ll be dead in a few years and what “I” say won’t matter a whit, but right and wrong aren’t going to change. Seeing it as an issue of imposing “my personal tastes” is to not see the issue at all.

I’m in a really bad space again. I don’t want to say any more, but that minimum has to be said. If you’re OK with an Orthodox ministry telling Orthodox teens and young adults that it’s OK to watch graphic depictions of rape, incest, and what not, then I have no idea who I’m talking to. And noting who’s liking your posts here underscores that.

And I can’t believe that the CF system is changing my attempt to say “p0r*no*graph*y to a ridiculous euphemism.

 

[ArmyMatt]

So do you think it is good for an Orthodox podcast to sell GOT to young Orthodox Christians?

absolutely not, personally, I agree with the point that you are making.

I’m simply amazed that any Orthodox Christian thinks it defensible. The p0r*no*graph*y of sex and violence is overwhelming. It’s a story by an atheist with an atheist worldview. You might as well accuse me of saying “Do exactly what I say” if I were to complain about the promotion of “Lady Chatterley’s Lover” on AFR. It’s NOT “what I say”. It’s what our Holy Tradition requires. I’ll be dead in a few years and what “I” say won’t matter a whit, but right and wrong aren’t going to change. Seeing it as an issue of imposing “my personal tastes” is to not see the issue at all.

I know about GOT, I read the book while on deployment. it’s your messaging, not your message as such that Fr Andrew didn’t like (you weren’t the only listener who took issue with that podcast).

If you’re OK with an Orthodox ministry telling Orthodox teens and young adults that it’s OK to watch graphic depictions of rape, incest, and what not, then I have no idea who I’m talking to.

I am not, I personally agree and wish that episodes like that would be taken down. I also have told Fr Andrew that. I can be both against any GOT reference by Orthodox Christians AND disagree with how you handle this issue. those are not mutually exclusive.

And noting who’s liking your posts here underscores that.

I have no say in what gzt likes or doesn’t like in what I post. he and I have butted heads in the past, we’re probably gonna do it again. but that is irrelevant to what I am posting. I was merely saying why I don’t think anything would have happened if you and Fr Andrew would have talked.

And I can’t believe that the CF system is changing my attempt to say “p0r*no*graph*y to a ridiculous euphemism.

agreed.

I am sorry you are in a bad place rus, I don’t want you to be there. but you had a part in why Fr Andrew blocked you. it wasn’t just him being unreasonable. your content is great in my opinion as far being traditional and in the right phronema. I think you contribute greatly here and am glad you are on this forum. I find you very thoughtful with what you post. that’s not the issue. the issue is in the delivery. HOW you engage folks can distract from what you are saying, even if what is being said is gold.

 

[gzt]

Since I'm apparently being dragged into this, I will say that my hitting the "like" button is an appreciation of Fr Matt's handling of this and empathy and respect for Fr Andrew's response. And while I do not hold to DBH's universalist views, I definitely don't want anybody to be in a bad place. Hope that helps. Have a nice day.

 

[rusmeister]

absolutely not, personally, I agree with the point that you are making.


I know about GOT, I read the book while on deployment. it’s your messaging, not your message as such that Fr Andrew didn’t like (you weren’t the only listener who took issue with that podcast).


I am not, I personally agree and wish that episodes like that would be taken down. I also have told Fr Andrew that. I can be both against any GOT reference by Orthodox Christians AND disagree with how you handle this issue. those are not mutually exclusive.


I have no say in what gzt likes or doesn’t like in what I post. he and I have butted heads in the past, we’re probably gonna do it again. but that is irrelevant to what I am posting. I was merely saying why I don’t think anything would have happened if you and Fr Andrew would have talked.


agreed.

I am sorry you are in a bad place rus, I don’t want you to be there. but you had a part in why Fr Andrew blocked you. it wasn’t just him being unreasonable. your content is great in my opinion as far being traditional and in the right phronema. I think you contribute greatly here and am glad you are on this forum. I find you very thoughtful with what you post. that’s not the issue. the issue is in the delivery. HOW you engage folks can distract from what you are saying, even if what is being said is gold.

Thank you. Really.
I simply don’t see it as a “personal” issue. Maybe I was a complete a-hole, but if the podcast is still available, that is highly irrelevant. I understand a person blocking me because they don’t like me personally. I don’t understand a content control officer allowing that kind of promotion to young people. IOW, it’s not about me or my delivery, or how “I” handle the issue. If he had blocked me AND had the podcast taken down, I would at least have thought that he was upholding Orthodox morality. As it is, that is obviously not the case. THAT, and the other content issues pointed out by others which similarly are not acted on, is why I have distanced myself from AFR and feel compelled to criticize the ministry.