Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
You missed Bishop Draperod? It wasn't that long ago I learned about him.
Read his full title on the ordination papers.
Lord have mercy!There are people in TAW, thankfully few, who probably would like to see that "guy" installed as a real bishop! LOL
all right, I'm back and can address this more - slow your roll, Jimmy.jckstraw's and Nutroll's statements are identical -- contraception is not the "standard" or not the "ideal," but there can be a conversation with a spiritual father. They are saying the exact same thing.
You're willing to call one extreme and not the other because of who posted them, not because of what they say.
Saying that something is "not ideal" is not the same as saying we are "against" it. The OCA statement says it's "acceptable", which much less gentle than "against". We can never allow something that is per se wrong. Further, Trenham is on the record as saying far more than the bare bones of jack's phrasing, which could describe a wide range of positions (... of which his is one extreme).I haven't seen any statements that indicate that all uses of contraception are hunky dory. I see exactly these kind of statements that show it is not the ideal but that a conversation can be had with one's priest if someone is struggling.
Because he was a member of this board far before you, when we were making jokes about the guy.I have to admit I'm curious - why would an Orthodox Christian use the name of "Swift Eagle Justice" as his personal tag?
Not to mention I think it's a tad reaching to say "every single Orthodox Church everywhere" promotes contraception.
We do not edify by goading - surely that's not what you want people to think?
View attachment 237568 View attachment 237569
This is just slander.The funny thing about contraception is that those who support it outright, no spiritual counsel needed, like to make it seem like they have a higher, more positive view of sex - like they really get how important it is ... but, in reality, they are the ones denigrating sex. Saying that the issue should just be up to the couple's conscience and no spiritual counsel is needed at least implicitly betrays the belief that sex has nothing to do with salvation. If you believed there was anything spiritual about it and that it plays into your salvation, you would seek spiritual counsel about this issue.
Otherwise, you admit the salvific aspect but just think yourself worthy of being your own spiritual guide.
Or, you fully realize the danger of this attitude, but just don't care.
Forgive me for being a newcomer.Because he was a member of this board far before you, when we were making jokes about the guy.
While I am no one's spiritual father, so that I cannot speak of personal circumstances, I can speak more generally as some random guy on the internet.
I cannot think of any father of the Church ever who cited economic reasons to not have children. We don't see this until after the industrial revolution when the economic advantage of having children evaporated in urban centers.
So, while I may sinfully feel the tug to limit my family (and I have), I cannot in good faith say this is not sinful (i.e. missing the mark of Godliness) and this is something must work out with one's spiritual father.
just because the Church is against something, that doesn't mean it's banned by the Church. the Church is against killing (even the guilty) yet the military and law enforcement are not banned from our service (no, I am not saying these are morally equivalent).
and it's Fr Josiah, not just Trenhem. just because you might not like what he says, you aren't on a last name basis with a priest.
Who are you talking to in this post, Father?
Well, let me put it like this: we're referring to a lot of people's works and it's common to do so by last name. There are a lot of Frs. John. Hope that helps. Have a nice day.that's true, and something should have been said earlier. but I just checked and saw only one, jckstraw should have said Fr Stanley Harakas.
but you don't justify wrong
behavior just because others did it
And the other malefactor(s).
Well, let me put it like this: we're referring to a lot of people's works and it's common to do so by last name. There are a lot of Frs. John. Hope that helps. Have a nice day.
and it's Fr Josiah, not just Trenhem. just because you might not like what he says, you aren't on a last name basis with a priest.
The same consideration should of course be extended to comments about Met. Kallistos.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?