The Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America Thread

[rusmeister]

I don't know if there would be "essentially no divorces," because church teaching on marriage is not the only factor on the topic.

Imagine that EOs were as strict on divorce as the Catholic church, yet all other factors in terms of Christian doctrinal compliance remained the same. You could get a "young Stalin childhood" situation where a kid grows up in a family so abusive that 19th century Georgians would agree that it's wrong, yet Keke isn't allowed to divorce "Beso". In that case, there be very few divorces, but it would be a very bad situation nonetheless.

So simply dedication to EO teaching on marriage, which is not as strict as in the RC Church, would not by itself necessarily entail "essentially no divorces."

Hi again! Yes, I get all that. There has always been abuse, abandonment, etc. I’m not some Neanderthal in the evolutionist’s narrative who says, “Me Zog! No divorce! I say so!”, nor do I think there was some “Golden Age” of marriage. And I DON’T want to derail this particular thread on that topic. Here I would only note that, like everyone else, here you do not reference Church teaching, but only hard situations that appeal to our sympathy and immediately bypass the question of what the Church teaching is. In addition, alternatives to divorce are never considered. The idea of, say, factually separating from an insane, axe-wielding spouse while continuing to hold him or her as one’s spouse (perhaps in a monastery, who knows?) never occurs to anyone.

I’d be happy to continue this on the divorce thread (scroll back to Christmas); I really want to wade through the commentary of the fathers that are never raised in this issue; like I said, modern worldly psychology guides many in the Church, rather than the actual historical Church guiding us.

So I’ll double down on my point that many Orthodox Christians reject actual Church teaching, replace it with worldly teaching, and put the “Orthodox” stamp on it. Even in pastoral guidance. And in other matters, too. Marriage, the family, and sex is a pretty “in-your-face” one.

 

[rakovsky]

Here I would only note that, like everyone else, here you do not reference Church teaching, but only hard situations that appeal to our sympathy and immediately bypass the question of what the Church teaching is.

I did not simply bypass Church teaching. I said that EO tradition against divorce is less strict than in the RC Church.
Your contention is that if we followed the EO teaching on marriage, "there would be essentially no divorces." I am not disputing what the EO teaching on marriage is. EOs teach against divorce, but allow it in bad cases, especially with ekonomia.

My dispute is that even if we followed the EO teaching, trying hard to avoid divorce except for bad cases, then we still do not have "essentially no" divorces. This is because if you just impose commitment to marriage, without fixing the rest of people's spiritual life, legitimate reasons for divorce, like protecting families, still happen and such cases are not "essentially" none.

If we follow the teaching on divorce, divorces would become significantly less, and it would be good, because divorces are so common today. People should try to fix marriages and cooperate unless there is an actually bad situation, but there are a lot of those.

The idea of, say, factually separating from an insane, axe-wielding spouse while continuing to hold him or her as one’s spouse (perhaps in a monastery, who knows?) never occurs to anyone.

Such nondivorce "separations" sometimes occur... Yes, some spouses stay married when the other spouse is risky and in prison... This is starting to feel weird...

 

[rusmeister]

I did not simply bypass Church teaching. I said that EO tradition against divorce is less strict than in the RC Church.
Your contention is that if we followed the EO teaching on marriage, "there would be essentially no divorces." I am not disputing what the EO teaching on marriage is. EOs teach against divorce, but allow it in bad cases, especially with ekonomia.

My dispute is that even if we followed the EO teaching, trying hard to avoid divorce except for bad cases, then we still do not have "essentially no" divorces. This is because if you just impose commitment to marriage, without fixing the rest of people's spiritual life, legitimate reasons for divorce, like protecting families, still happen and such cases are not "essentially" none.

If we follow the teaching on divorce, divorces would become significantly less, and it would be good, because divorces are so common today. People should try to fix marriages and cooperate unless there is an actually bad situation, but there are a lot of those.


Such nondivorce "separations" sometimes occur... Yes, some spouses stay married when the other spouse is risky and in prison... This is starting to feel weird...

This needs to move to the other thread. I understand your position. It is the modern one, and takes no account of what marriage is or is supposed to be. It assumes that everyone knows and agrees, when in fact neither is the case.

 

[Justin-H.S.]

No one is forcing you to stay an official member of a parish or jurisdiction in the US where you are unhappy for a legitimate, canonical reason. The Quran asserts that "There is no compulsion in religion." Isn't Church life supposed to be even better?

You should avoid church-hopping over something minor. Imagine that you change your membership to someplace new and something else minor crops up. But EO Churches have no requirement to instruct people that they have to stay in a parish where they are hurting for a legitimate reason.

I admire Abp. Elpidophoros for marching against police killings, but "First Without Equals", which he formulated in an article years ago, is not something I can get right in my brain. If "First Without Equals" is true and canonical, then who is ideally supposed to be supreme, the Bishop of Rome or the Bishop of Constantinople?

Due to this current unfortunate MP-CP conflict, if I moved to an area where there was a CP church and a non-CP Church, I would typically want to pick the latter to belong to.

It's weird because in my parish, there is a grown up PK (whose father is a priest in the GOA), but the PK (who is also studying to become a priest) will be a priest in the Antiochian Church. So, we both see what is going wrong within the GOA hierarchy, but I just haven't pulled the trigger to be fully Antiochian, yet.

 

[rakovsky]

So, we both see what is going wrong within the GOA hierarchy, but I just haven't pulled the trigger to be fully Antiochian, yet.

OCA considers GOARCH to still be canonical.

Trying to address the problem by talking with your parishioners, clergy, and hierarchs, is good advice.

The CP's supremacy doctrine problem feels hard for a regular person to fix. There are so many problems in the world, and GOARCH people don't seem to care very much on average about the CP's supremacy doctrine. The CP and GOARCH have a very top-down decisionmaking structure, with the Patriarchal synod being the highest body and having unilateral real and formal authority on appointing the head of GOARCH. The CP's Supremacy doctrine doesn't seem even a simple result of geopolitics, since the CP has used it for the last 100 years to some extent, apparently.

But the issue that I am objecting about is: If you are unhappy about this situation and it is hurting you spiritually, then should you feel stuck there? And I don't agree if people here are telling you to stay in that situation. Don't look at changing parishes to avoid something real and legitimate as "pulling a trigger."

Fr. Hopko told a story where a Russian "White" (like Tsarist or anti-Bolshevik) emigre, who served in WW2 Germany and then came to the West after the war, attended an Orthodox Church. The emigre heard the Church teaching about the prophet Daniel, and complained "They are teaching Judaism here." He left and didn't come back. This is obviously a great example of the opposite of a good reason to leave a Church. IMO, leaving GOARCH because its Archbishop marches against police killings would be like the White emigre rejecting the Orthodox parish.

However, unfortunately, GOARCH is not just doing positive things like human rights marches and environmentalism. CP Supremacy is something that I can't make work, and it's a big deal for inner-Orthodox relations.

 

[rusmeister]

OCA considers GOARCH to still be canonical.

Trying to address the problem by talking with your parishioners, clergy, and hierarchs, is good advice.

The CP's supremacy doctrine problem feels hard for a regular person to fix. There are so many problems in the world, and GOARCH people don't seem to care very much on average about the CP's supremacy doctrine. The CP and GOARCH have a very top-down decisionmaking structure, with the Patriarchal synod being the highest body and having unilateral real and formal authority on appointing the head of GOARCH. The CP's Supremacy doctrine doesn't seem even a simple result of geopolitics, since the CP has used it for the last 100 years to some extent, apparently.

But the issue that I am objecting about is: If you are unhappy about this situation and it is hurting you spiritually, then should you feel stuck there? And I don't agree if people here are telling you to stay in that situation. Don't look at changing parishes to avoid something real and legitimate as "pulling a trigger."

Fr. Hopko told a story where a Russian "White" (like Tsarist or anti-Bolshevik) emigre, who served in WW2 Germany and then came to the West after the war, attended an Orthodox Church. The emigre heard the Church teaching about the prophet Daniel, and complained "They are teaching Judaism here." He left and didn't come back. This is obviously a great example of the opposite of a good reason to leave a Church. IMO, leaving GOARCH because its Archbishop marches against police killings would be like the White emigre rejecting the Orthodox parish.

However, unfortunately, GOARCH is not just doing positive things like human rights marches and environmentalism. CP Supremacy is something that I can't make work, and it's a big deal for inner-Orthodox relations.

I agree on quite a bit here. I don’t agree that anyone at all opposes efforts to reduce unlawful killings by police; they oppose BLM because they see it to be an organization that itself promotes racism. If anyone left GOARCH because AB Elp. marched with BLM, they would be doing it (arguably wrongly) because of their own objection to the effective promotion of racism. You disagree with their (and my) perception as we disagree with yours. And with Fr Tom’s story, the obvious question would be, who correctly understands what the Church’s teaching is? As far as I’m concerned, the emigre could have been right and the priest speaking on Daniel wrong; I don’t know the facts of the matter.

But yes on your advice, yes on the CP.

 

[rakovsky]

I agree on quite a bit here. I don’t agree that anyone at all opposes efforts to reduce unlawful killings by police; they oppose BLM because they see it to be an organization that itself promotes racism.

The march that Abp. Elpidophoros participated in was against police killings of blacks. I admire him for that.
The organizer was Black Lives Matter, dedicated to opposing police killings of blacks.

And with Fr Tom’s story, the obvious question would be, who correctly understands what the Church’s teaching is? As far as I’m concerned, the emigre could have been right and the priest speaking on Daniel wrong; I don’t know the facts of the matter.

As Fr. Hopko told the story, the emigre was upset that the parish was simply teaching the prophet Daniel and his book, in a typical Orthodox way. In Orthodox tradition, Daniel, a Jewish prophet, is a saint.

I want to envision a way out of the CP-MP impasse, but it looks pretty tough because the CP is dedicated to its supremacy teaching, perhaps even more so than it is dedicated to the OCU.

 

[rusmeister]

The march that Abp. Elpidophoros participated in was against police killings of blacks. I admire him for that.
The organizer was Black Lives Matter, dedicated to opposing police killings of blacks.

As Fr. Hopko told the story, the emigre was upset that the parish was simply teaching the prophet Daniel and his book, in a typical Orthodox way. In Orthodox tradition, Daniel, a Jewish prophet, is a saint.

I want to envision a way out of the CP-MP impasse, but it looks pretty tough because the CP is dedicated to its supremacy teaching, perhaps even more so than it is dedicated to the OCU.

On the first, BLM, we disagree. I, and many others, think it has been funded to serve a larger and evil purpose, with the ostensible (and quite selective) opposition to police abuse (which I also suffered, and ALL of us condemn) as a cover in order to accomplish the division of the nation and end E pluribus unum and change it to E unibus plurum. Divide and conquer. You believe their official narrative. Many of us don't. We aren't going to convince each other, so it's best to accept that we do not share a consensus on the topic.

On the latter (Daniel), if that's the case, then I agree with you completely.

 

[E.C.]

I really don’t think it’s wise to have an entire thread dedicated to when a jurisdiction messes up.

As one whose faith survived the Catholic sex abuse scandals and the OCA's financial scandals (as well as our Jonah induced Time of Troubles) I have to concur.

I've been a part of this forum since 2007 with varying degrees of activity. And I remember during the OCA financial scandal days we had an understanding among the members here not to bring it up too much beyond "what's the latest news". Similarly, I know that the Orthodox on the staff at Georgetown University (including at least one priest and deacon of different jurisdictions) have an agreement not to comment too much on the Ukrainian Crisis. I'll admit that I too have my own axe to grind with the GOA and am all for holding jurisdictions/leadership accountable, but even I know where to toe the line.


I think we need to adopt a similar rule here. Yes, that has been the longstanding practice, but clearly somehow the memo got missed. I'm all for discussing problems within jurisdictions and the Orthodox Church at large in hopes that greater understanding can lead to greater deterrence of further scandals and also clear up misconceptions, prejudices, and half-truths. However, there are people here in this website where TAW is their very first exposure to Orthodoxy. Some have converted because of it. When CF had almost 1 million members before the Wikonian Reforms of 2007 some of us were more active in the Theology Forums and were again those peoples' first exposure to Orthodoxy. While we do have our problems there are places in North America, and other parts of the world, where the only Orthodox parish in a given geographic area will be of the GOA or one of their counterparts. I hope that no one who is first exposed to Orthodoxy here and lives in one of those areas is discouraged from going there and becoming Orthodox because the GOA leadership has problems.

 

[rakovsky]

And I remember during the OCA financial scandal days we had an understanding among the members here not to bring it up too much beyond "what's the latest news". Similarly, I know that the Orthodox on the staff at Georgetown University (including at least one priest and deacon of different jurisdictions) have an agreement not to comment too much on the Ukrainian Crisis. I'll admit that I too have my own axe to grind with the GOA and am all for holding jurisdictions/leadership accountable, but even I know where to toe the line.

You are bringing up a few issues. One is whether something is a key issue that needs to be openly discussed. If we are talking about the Catholic sex abuse scandal that you mentioned, then the danger in not talking about it, is that it becomes a conspiracy of silence that allows it to continue, since it is unrecognized.

If we are talking about something less important, like financial scandals, then there is also a cost/benefit to talking about it. In the OCA, talking about the scandal played a big role in bringing it out and addressing it successfully. If our attitude among OCA people had been that we need to be worried about talking about this because it makes us look bad, then the silence makes it less likely that the problem would get addressed.

So part of the issue is intent. Henry VIII investigated the monasteries' abuses with his goal being to make the monasteries look bad enough that it served as a pretext for him to confiscate their assets and close them forcefully. If someone is criticising Black Lives Matter, then is it just because they don't like one of the alleged major donors, George Soros because he is NeoLiberal economically? Or do the critics find it troubling enough that thousands of Black and White people would march strongly on the open streets exposing and protesting police killings of blacks? One opponent of BLM told me in person that police kill so many more blacks "because they do all the crime."

 

[prodromos]

The march that Abp. Elpidophoros participated in was against police killings of blacks. I admire him for that.
The organizer was Black Lives Matter, dedicated to opposing police killings of blacks.

Abp. Elpidophoros marched with Andrew Gounardes who funded abortion clinics and fought hard for legalising late term abortions. BLM supports abortion which kills more black lives than any other cause. It also supports breaking up families. We dealt with this a while back in a few other threads. You were wrong then and you are still wrong now.

 

[rakovsky]

Abp. Elpidophoros marched with Andrew Gounardes who funded abortion clinics and fought hard for legalising late term abortions.

The issue is not who else was marching in the protest per se, but what they were marching for and what the march's slogans are. I saw a photo of protestors holding a confederate flag in the antivaccine mandate protest in Canada. This does not stop the protest from being for freedom from harmful vaccine requirements. If Abp. Elpidophoros gives a keynote speech at an anti-abortion march in DC, it doesn't mean that OCA people at the march support Abp. Elpidophoros' thesis that Constantinople rules all EOs.

 

[prodromos]

The issue is not who else was marching in the protest per se

My understanding is that he marched at the invitation of Andrew Gounardes. Also, if the organisers of the event are evil, then the Church hierarchy should distance themselves from such events

 

[Justin-H.S.]

The hierarchy’s ‘discernment’ around certain issues fell squarely on the wrong side of church teachings more times than it could be called a mistake. It’s more than likely intentional demoralization in the Soviet sense.

Since 2020...
-closed churches: fail
-canceled pascha: fail
-canceled Eucharist: fail
-canceled baptisms: fail
-canceled mysteries in general: fail
-multiple spoons: fail
-iconoclasm: fail
-masks: fail
-waiting list to attend church: fail
-supporting Ukrainian schizos: fail
-pushing vaccines: fail
-no religious exemptions: fail
-BLM support: fail
-pro-choice: fail


There’s probably more, but that’s all I could think of so far.

 

[rakovsky]

My understanding is that he marched at the invitation of Andrew Gounardes. Also, if the organisers of the event are evil, then the Church hierarchy should distance themselves from such events

Where does Black Lives Matter make abortion part of their platform?

If our houses are on fire, are we supposed to reject help from firefighters who get funds from George Soros? A big portion of our tax dollars come from rich people whose beliefs we don't share, and they have lots of government influence. But if the rich people give to a good cause like the Red Cross or YMCA (two historic examples of major Christian international organizations), does that make the Red Cross and YMCA bad, and thus everything good that they do bad? That does not make sense.

 

[rakovsky]

-supporting Ukrainian schizos: fail

This is the only crucial one in your list.
Why didn't you include the new supremacy teaching.
If you are really that unhappy, talk to your priest or leave for another jurisdiction.

 

[prodromos]

Where does Black Lives Matter make abortion part of their platform?

It is no longer on their webste, but it used to state the following:

"We deserve and thus we demand reproductive justice that gives us autonomy over our bodies and our identities."​

If our houses are on fire, are we supposed to reject help from firefighters who get funds from George Soros?

Such firefighters would have fuel, not water in their hoses. BLM are Marxist at their core. They are anti christian and anti family. The Church has the means to do plenty of good work in the Black community without compromising, and should be actively involved. But it cannot be done in cooperation with those who oppose everything we stand for.

A big portion of our tax dollars come from rich people whose beliefs we don't share, and they have lots of government influence. But if the rich people give to a good cause like the Red Cross or YMCA (two historic examples of major Christian international organizations), does that make the Red Cross and YMCA bad, and thus everything good that they do bad? That does not make sense.

Your argument is silly. The Red Cross and YMCA are not run by antichristian Marxists, and AFAIK are transparent in how their funding is used. Contrast that with BLM where the founders have grown very wealthy. Forgive me, but I fail to see any relevance in your argument.

 

[All4Christ]

Where does Black Lives Matter make abortion part of their platform?

Here is a recent example from their blog on their website: #AllHandsOnDeckTX! - Black Lives Matter

“Black women already face significant barriers to obtaining quality reproductive healthcare. And what we know is true is that abortion care is healthcare.”

“We need #AllHandsOnDeckTX if we’re going to be there for the countless Black women and girls in Texas. Did you know that Black women account for about 25% of all abortions performed in Texas, but only make up for 13% of the state’s population? Plus, Black women are the same demographic that are disproportionately uninsured — which makes their reliance on public clinics that perform abortions even more crucial to their reproductive health.”

“It’s on us to do all we can to get the resources that Black women need so their reproductive rights are protected. Donate to The Afiya Center now to help support their efforts in transforming the lives of Black women and girls through reproductive justice.”

Full quote below:

#AllHandsOnDeckTX!
September 3, 2021


Earlier this week, we saw far-right extremism at play: The conservative majority of the Supreme Court allowed a near-total abortion ban that will disproportionately impact Black women in Texas.

Clinics are already turning people away who want to have an abortion, and those who work in reproductive justice in Texas are worried that they might be sued for helping people obtain abortions out of the state.

Black women already face significant barriers to obtaining quality reproductive healthcare. And what we know is true is that abortion care is healthcare.

That’s why we’re raising money for The Afiya Center in Texas — and we need #AllHandsOnDeckTX!

The Afiya Center needs support now more than ever to make sure that Black women seeking abortions and practical support can receive help with a wide range of services — from full-spectrum doula services, hotels, child care, and transportation without shame, unnecessary restrictions, or outside interference. The Afiya Center is doing critical work — and it’s on us and our people-power to fuel their efforts.

The Afiya Center is an advocacy organization dedicated to transforming the lives of Black women and girls through reproductive justice in Texas. There’s never been a more crucial time to act — can you chip in $5 or whatever you can spare to help Black folks get the reproductive resources they need?

<button requesting donation>

This damning legislation is already in effect. It allows private citizens to sue abortion providers and anyone else who helps a woman obtain an abortion, including those who give someone a ride to a clinic or provide financial assistance in obtaining an abortion.

It even bars abortions after 6 weeks of pregnancy, before many people even know they are pregnant. Horrifyingly, the law makes no exceptions for pregnancies resulting from incest or rape.

We need #AllHandsOnDeckTX if we’re going to be there for the countless Black women and girls in Texas. Did you know that Black women account for about 25% of all abortions performed in Texas, but only make up for 13% of the state’s population? Plus, Black women are the same demographic that are disproportionately uninsured — which makes their reliance on public clinics that perform abortions even more crucial to their reproductive health.

The Afiya Center is counting on us to use our grassroots, people-power to fuel their efforts. We need to make sure they have all the resources to sustain their work. They’re working on a birthing and healing space, need to build a reliable team of volunteers to help do the work, and they’re working on materials so that folks have all they need to educate their friends and family members on what’s really at stake.

It’s on us to do all we can to get the resources that Black women need so their reproductive rights are protected. Donate to The Afiya Center now to help support their efforts in transforming the lives of Black women and girls through reproductive justice.

ETA: This article on their blog includes text similar to what @prodromos shared: https://blacklivesmatter.com/responsestate-of-the-union/

 

[Justin-H.S.]

Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras, CIA and State Dept.: New Documents UnclassifiedSouth Front

"As the Ecumenical Patriarch, Athenagoras first of all is remembered for his contribution to lifting the mutual anathemas of the Roman Catholic Church and Constantinople in 1964. He also contested the autocephaly of the Orthodox Church of America granted by Moscow arguing that autocephaly cannot be granted unilaterally but must have the consent of all the Orthodox Churches..."

This playbook looks familiar. I think it's foolish to believe that the relationship between the USG and Phanar is broken today.

 

[rakovsky]

Here is a recent example from their blog on their website: #AllHandsOnDeckTX! - Black Lives Matter
ETA: This article on their blog includes text similar to what @prodromos shared: https://blacklivesmatter.com/responsestate-of-the-union/

Sounds like something in two of their articles, not a major platform issue. It seems common for people in human rights NGOs to agree with access to abortion. If people get out of poverty, they are less likely to have abortions.