[Open] Non-Christian Sticky

[Xpycoctomos]

Can we have a Sticky where non-Christians can post questions, concerns or comments? not just the Cafe... that's juts for fun babble (Which is a good thing), but for people who have real questions but don't want them to get lost amidst the important discussions on which pie or beer is the best.

Anyway, jst a suggestion.
John

 

[choirfiend]

I think we'l stop talking abotu food when ppl start posting in there...

 

[DonVA]

I think we'l stop talking abotu food when ppl start posting in there...

Wow. Two posts and we're already bringing up the "F" word!

 

[Xpycoctomos]

it jsut doesnt work bery efficiently. We have to jhunt it down everytime we find out a nonchristian has a question bc the non-christians don't even know it exists becuase... you can't see it.

 

[choirfiend]

We also arent publicizing it in the non Christian areas very well, afaik.

Lets just make it more active, and stop talking about all the food.

 

[Orontes]

I'm glad this thread was opened. Thank you.

In the Cafe this was posted by an Orthodox member:

"We hold that we are pre-denominational as the one true Church. We have nothing to do with later denominational splits. So we are neither denominational nor non-denominational (That's splitting a hair, but one that we Orthodox tend to notice)."​

Assuming this is a standard Orthodox view: How would this notion apply to Pre-Chalcedonian faiths i.e. the Copts or other Oriental Orthodox who trace their pedigree back to the same source pool but reject what came later as dyophysitic?

 

[Xpycoctomos]

I don't get it... why not just make it a sticky. It seems worthy to me... or should we have a designated "bumper" whose job it is to bump it up every day? And some of those stickies... I do't even get why they are up there... like the one about the Chosen people that is closed????

Orontes:

For the Orthodox, the basic tenant behind ASpostolic succession is not only a mere laying on of hands thereby creating a lineage that can be traced back to the apostles, but also (and perhaps more importantly) and contiguous line of believers that have held and passed down the teachings of the apostles. Many Eastern Orthdoox would argue that the Oriental Orthodox lost that lineage because of a disagreement on how to express the natures of Christ. Some EOs might disagree and purport that both groups actually hold the same faith but just use different wording to express the same idea. There have been a number of sad threads that always end up closed regarding this issue and no real conclusion ever comes out of them... so for now you will find many (most?) who believe that the OO are in error and therefore not part of the Church where others suggest that this split betweent he OO and the EO is one over a misunderstanding and that while we are split visibly, we are united by the same Faith and that we should come to recognize this soon and come together as the One Body that we already are. But this... is another thread and if you wish you may suggest someone open it up or (Better yet) dig up an old threa... or five, in both TAW nad the OO forums so you can learn... and see how fruitless the threads usually end up being.

John

God bless,

John

 

[MariaRegina]

In Heaven, there will be no ruling patriarchs or popes, just Christ the Lord and King.

And the Church Triumphant is eternally praising and glorifying Christ our King and our God as one of the Holy Trinity.

In Heaven, there is only One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church without division, but here on earth, we are sinners and so we are divided because of our pride.

 

[eoe]

...

 

[Orontes]

Orontes:

For the Orthodox, the basic tenant behind ASpostolic succession is not only a mere laying on of hands thereby creating a lineage that can be traced back to the apostles, but also (and perhaps more importantly) and contiguous line of believers that have held and passed down the teachings of the apostles. Many Eastern Orthdoox would argue that the Oriental Orthodox lost that lineage because of a disagreement on how to express the natures of Christ. Some EOs might disagree and purport that both groups actually hold the same faith but just use different wording to express the same idea. There have been a number of sad threads that always end up closed regarding this issue and no real conclusion ever comes out of them... so for now you will find many (most?) who believe that the OO are in error and therefore not part of the Church where others suggest that this split betweent he OO and the EO is one over a misunderstanding and that while we are split visibly, we are united by the same Faith and that we should come to recognize this soon and come together as the One Body that we already are. But this... is another thread and if you wish you may suggest someone open it up or (Better yet) dig up an old threa... or five, in both TAW nad the OO forums so you can learn... and see how fruitless the threads usually end up being.

John

God bless,

John

Hello,

So would you consider the EO/OO distinction a denominational division or are they heretics? Do you think EO tend to feel are greater kinship to OO than to Roman Catholicism? Have there been any Patriarchical or Councilar moves to mend the fences since the 7th Century?

 

[Xpycoctomos]

Hello,

So would you consider the EO/OO distinction a denominational division or are they heretics?

Well, we as Orthodox (and the same can be said about what the OO Church and the RC Church believe, although about themselves) do not believe that the Church is or can be made up of "denominations". We (as do they) beleive ourselves to be THE One True Church Church given by Christ. Christian denominations are groups like the Lutherans, Baptists and Methodists. We, on the other hand, believe that we are the same Church that the Holy Spirit descended upon on Pentecost. The continuous line of believers holding the same faith. That line will never end. Theoretically my Bishop may fall into heresy and inasmuchas my parish would follow that Bishop, so would we fall into heresy and would no longer be part of that Church no matter how much we claimed it.

So I suppose my answer would be that if I believe that the OO is NOT in error but that it is rather just a big misunderstanding then it's not an issue of denominations or anything like that but it is that we are actually One Church (at least Spiritually and through faith) even though officially we do not recognize eachother. We are not (in such a case) two Churches... there is always only ONE True Church... rather we would be two groups of the Church that are creating much Sadness for Christ and insisting on division where there really is none.

However, if I believe that they are in error, then they are in error and they are not part of the One True Church since they do not share in the fullness of the Truth. Therefore, I suppose I would have to say that they are in heresy and leave it at that.

But quite frankly, I'm not sure where I stand on the issue as it is very complex and I just trust that if our schism (separation) is in error, then the Holy Spiriti will lead us to visibly unite one day and if they do indeed holy a heresy then I have to pray that the Holy Spirit would lead them to the Church. In the end, however, it doesn't matter what i think. God has lead me here. I know the Eastern Orthodox Church to hold the fullness of the Faith as handed down from the Apostles and I will continue to obey my bishop on matters of where i may and may not worship.

Do you think EO tend to feel are greater kinship to OO than to Roman Catholicism?

ti could be argued both ways but I think 99.9% would say the OO... I feel the same way. They are Eastern, we tend to use the same language (except when it comes to the natures of Christ and, it seems perhaps regarding Theosis) so we tend to understand eachothers thewolgoy better.

Have there been any Patriarchical or Councilar moves to mend the fences since the 7th Century?

Yes, I believe there was some very promising dialogue in the... 60s (?) but then it fell apart in the end sadly. Not sure why though.

In the end, while I personally feel a strong kinship (theologically that is) with OOs than with RCCs, I feel an actual personal kinship with the Catholics as I know a lot and I come from a Western Background (lutheran which is an offshoot of Catholicism to put it bluntly). All three of us (RCC, OO, EO) hold a special bond through our beliefs in Apostolic succession, the realness and power of the Sacraments, our Love for the Mother of God, our recognition that even though the faithful leave this Earth, they do not abandon us in thought in prayer (nor do we for them) and smaller issues like our respect and use of celibacy (like with monks and nuns) as one path (of many) to godliness (as St. Paul speaks of), use of images to focus our mind on prayer and the realization that use of our senses (sight through the icons and statues, hearing through our hymns, smell through the incense, touch through the water of baptism, oil for annointing the sick, etc, and taste through the Holy Eucharist) and use of our bodies to worship (prostrations to the ground, crossing ourselves) are all part of the human experience that were MEANT to be used to bring us closer to God nad not ignored as if they were a curse. There are differences and some of these differences are arguably very important, but yes, I think that Many feel a special kinship with the Catholics and OOs... and those who don't are USUALLY quick to prove themselves ignorant of the practices and beliefs of these Churches.

John

 

[Xpycoctomos]

By the way Orontes, I appreciate your coming here and asking questions. I may not always have the answers (or perhaps my answers won't always represent what all orthodox believe if it's a question that's a bit more subjective in nature) but someone will be able to help; if not with an answer, then resources that can lead you to some kind of an answer.

God bless you,

John

 

[Xpycoctomos]

Apparently I am not alone in wanting this forum to be a sticky. Here are the following e-mails I have recieved:

It seems well to me and my fellow brethern that the [Open] Non-Christian thread be given the honorable status of "Sticky"

-Metropolitan HERMAN
Metropolitan of All America and Canada

And this,

You mean it isn't already a sticky?!? I shall make a canon afterwhich if the so-called "Ancietn Way" still refuses to add it to the Stickies list... may they be anathema!

- Patriach BARTHOLOMEW
Ecumenical Patriacrch of Constantinople

Was there being so-called "stickies" in 18th century Russia! Is outrage! No stickies... no TAW! Only stones for breakfast.... and no sugar!

-Patriarch ALEXIS II
Patriarch of Moscow and All of Russia

mmm.. whatever.

No word yet from Metropolitan PHILIP but word on the street is that he is all for it!

And then I got this...

Yes... make it a sticky!

Signed, all of the monks on Mount Athos

If that's not convincing, I don't know what is!

Now c'mon guys... do you really want to go against the will of the your superiors?

 

[rusmeister]

Apparently I am not alone in wanting this forum to be a sticky. Here are the following e-mails I have recieved:

And this,



mmm.. whatever.

No word yet from Metropolitan PHILIP but word on the street is that he is all for it!

And then I got this...

If that's not convincing, I don't know what is!

Now c'mon guys... do you really want to go against the will of the your superiors?

 

[kamikat]

stones for breakfast, again!?!?! I think my dentist will be buying himself a new condo in Aspen if I have to keep this up.

 

[choirfiend]

lol

 

[Orontes]

Xpycoctomos,

Thanks for the response on the RC/OO/EO perception(s). Let me ask you this: given there is no rhetorical appeal like the discredited "Donation of Constantine" in EO history: what is the EO position on the Emperor and/or Imperium of old vis-a-vis Episcopal authority? Does that make sense?

 

[Xpycoctomos]

Xpycoctomos,

Thanks for the response on the RC/OO/EO perception(s). Let me ask you this: given there is no rhetorical appeal like the discredited "Donation of Constantine" in EO history: what is the EO position on the Emperor and/or Imperium of old vis-a-vis Episcopal authority? Does that make sense?

I thnk it makes sense... but I don't really knwo the answer with any certainty. I think someone else will better handle this question.

Anyone?

 

[Orontes]

I thnk it makes sense... but I don't really knwo the answer with any certainty. I think someone else will better handle this question.

Anyone?

OK, let me ask about something else. I noted in the CAFE a few posters said faith is irrational.

Let me ask what you think about the following. First let me couch it in these terms: the traditional Fall of Rome and the ensuing Dark Ages occurred in the West, not the East. The East Roman Empire didn't succumb to the Germanic Hordes. All the knowledge of Antiquity was preserved: from Plato, to Aristotle, to Galen, to Ptolemy. Yet, it was in the West that science would develop, the Industrial Revolution take shape and democracy find a voice. Do you think this may be due to a larger attitude in the Eastern Christian Tradition where rationality and faith are seen as mutually exclusive, as the idea "faith is irrational" or the place of the "holy fool" would suggest? What do you think?

 

[Mary of Bethany]

I sincerely doubt you'll find an Orthodox person to say that the intellect or scientific endeavor isn't avery, very important part of our existence. But we believe that the best ways to know/experience God are not through the intellect, but through the heart.

In Orthodoxy, a theologian is "one who prays", not "one who knows".

What I'm trying to say is we don't think faith is irrational so much as "supra-rational" (is that a word? )

Mary