The problem of Orthodox zealotry on CF

[All4Christ]

Late to the party lol - it's been and will continue to be a pretty intense couple of weeks for me.

I don't know what threads are being talked about. I DO think we need to always be aware of how we come off to others. I know sometimes I post thinking I have an Orthodox audience (forgetting anyone can read) and I try to be extra-careful when I'm talking to others. But it's still hard. Sometimes (often) I have to dial back my enthusiasm for how much the Church has benefited me, because seeing it with outsider's eyes it probably comes off as nothing but triumphalism. And HOW can I be prideful about the Church? It's not like *I* started it, or wrote all those pieces full of deep wisdom, or am in any responsible for any good of it. The best I can say is that I finally found it, but even that took me almost 50 years so it hardly seems like something to brag about. More like it took God a long time to shave off my rough edges so I could fit and not mess everything up when I did come in, more likely.

Anyway. Why am I even talking? I don't know what's been said in those threads, lol. I guess I've missed you all.

I don't like the term "convertitis" used broadly. But there is a HUGE temptation, I suppose especially maybe among those who are formerly already taught to want to share their faith, to naturally want to share Orthodoxy when it has made such an impact on us and answered so many questions and improved our whole relationship with God.

Maybe we should leave out the historic parts when talking with people who are already disinclined to trust that - and there are many. I was one once. But the evidence is overwhelming when you really dig into it, so that temptation is naturally there also. But that seems to be the source of more difficulties for me in sharing than not, unless the person is already asking what has Christianity done, why, and how, since the early days. Most probably already have a picture of that in their minds that isn't easily dislodged anyway. Again - I did.

God be with us all. We certainly SHOULD care about how people perceive us. Especially since we could one day find out we might have been responsible for driving someone away - Lord have mercy!!!

It seems to me that the biggest problems occur when people are very jaded about past experiences. Many people have tough experiences in the past, but if there is still respect - or at least charity and understanding - it comes off as “less” triumphant.

Lord have mercy on us for any time we drive people away from His mercy and love and truth.

 

[rusmeister]

Yeah, driving people away is a definite danger. At the same time, "resistance is not futile". I remember a number of years back, there was a member here who said she had discovered the Church because of my activity on a CS Lewis forum. So it's really hard to say, except that rudeness, a lack of consideration for others, etc, is likely to drive people away, and the reverse has a chance of encouraging them to listen, think, and find truth.

 

[dzheremi]

God be with us all. We certainly SHOULD care about how people perceive us. Especially since we could one day find out we might have been responsible for driving someone away - Lord have mercy!!!

I have been told exactly that, not on this board but in another subforum here. The user was a Mormon and said something like "You know, the more you post about your 'church fathers', the more I am convinced that the church went into total apostasy and that they are all false." (Note for any who don't know: Mormonism is a restorationist religion that believes that the Church was 'taken from the earth' or some such, only to be restored with Joseph Smith Jr.'s revelations in 1830.) Somebody else (a Catholic, if I remember correctly) replied something like "Yeah, well, the more he posts them, the more I am convinced that the Church has stood throughout history and never apostasized."

Ughhh...what do you even do with that? It didn't feel good in the slightest, but I'm not going to deny our common fathers like HH St. Athanasius the Apostolic, HH St. Cyril, HG St. Basil, etc., and these are after all our witnesses to the historical continuity of the Christian faith (well, even before these, but I try to stick to uncontroversially known saints in the cross-communal areas of the site). Sometimes all you can really do is pray, y'know? It is most definitely a big problem. Often we are dealing with people who won't accept a historical narrative of any kind, because they have other, later revelations to adhere to, as is the case with Muslims, Mormons, or any other restorationists. And even those who are not explicitly restorationist may still be so wedded to their "big bad medieval Church forced everyone to believe X" or "X was invented by Constantine" alternate histories (fed by Hollywood movies, Dan Brown books, and God knows what else) that they confuse these for the documented history of the Church (as in Eusebius, Sozomen, et al.), or will not drop them even when presented with these and a million other actual period appropriate sources. I've found this in almost every single thread I've ever started or participated in in the "Outreach" section of these forums (where Christians can interact with Mormons and others who are not allowed to post in other parts of the website), and even a few in "Traditional Theology" and the congregational forums. It's tough! I guess all you can really do is keep repeating "This is what we have received" in as neutral a tone as you can convey, while praying with recognition that it is not you who opens the ears, eyes, and hearts of anyone, but the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Life-Giver. For me, I am just sorry for having apparently given our fathers a bad name before a Mormon. Lord have mercy.

 

[All4Christ]

There also is a different between stating what we believe without compromise, and attacking others without any consideration, with rudeness and at times just having an argument for the sake of argument.

 

[All4Christ]

"If you cannot be merciful, at least speak as though you are a sinner. If you are not a peacemaker, at least do not be a troublemaker. If you cannot be assiduous, at least in your thought be unlike a sluggard. If you are not victorious, do not exalt yourself over the vanquished. If you cannot close the mouth of a man who disparages his companion, at least refrain from joining him in this."

- St. Isaac the Syrian

Lord have mercy on me for some of these as well. Especially the last one...

 

[ArmyMatt]

I have been told exactly that, not on this board but in another subforum here. The user was a Mormon and said something like "You know, the more you post about your 'church fathers', the more I am convinced that the church went into total apostasy and that they are all false." (Note for any who don't know: Mormonism is a restorationist religion that believes that the Church was 'taken from the earth' or some such, only to be restored with Joseph Smith Jr.'s revelations in 1830.) Somebody else (a Catholic, if I remember correctly) replied something like "Yeah, well, the more he posts them, the more I am convinced that the Church has stood throughout history and never apostasized."

Ughhh...what do you even do with that? It didn't feel good in the slightest, but I'm not going to deny our common fathers like HH St. Athanasius the Apostolic, HH St. Cyril, HG St. Basil, etc., and these are after all our witnesses to the historical continuity of the Christian faith (well, even before these, but I try to stick to uncontroversially known saints in the cross-communal areas of the site). Sometimes all you can really do is pray, y'know? It is most definitely a big problem. Often we are dealing with people who won't accept a historical narrative of any kind, because they have other, later revelations to adhere to, as is the case with Muslims, Mormons, or any other restorationists. And even those who are not explicitly restorationist may still be so wedded to their "big bad medieval Church forced everyone to believe X" or "X was invented by Constantine" alternate histories (fed by Hollywood movies, Dan Brown books, and God knows what else) that they confuse these for the documented history of the Church (as in Eusebius, Sozomen, et al.), or will not drop them even when presented with these and a million other actual period appropriate sources. I've found this in almost every single thread I've ever started or participated in in the "Outreach" section of these forums (where Christians can interact with Mormons and others who are not allowed to post in other parts of the website), and even a few in "Traditional Theology" and the congregational forums. It's tough! I guess all you can really do is keep repeating "This is what we have received" in as neutral a tone as you can convey, while praying with recognition that it is not you who opens the ears, eyes, and hearts of anyone, but the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Life-Giver. For me, I am just sorry for having apparently given our fathers a bad name before a Mormon. Lord have mercy.

yep, if we are going to follow the Lord, we must remember that He both said that He desires all men to be saved, but also that He came not to bring peace but a sword. it's a delicate tightrope to be sure.

 

[dzheremi]

"If you cannot be merciful, at least speak as though you are a sinner. If you are not a peacemaker, at least do not be a troublemaker. If you cannot be assiduous, at least in your thought be like a sluggard. If you are not victorious, do not exalt yourself over the vanquished. If you cannot close the mouth of a man who disparages his companion, at least refrain from joining him in this."

- St. Isaac the Syrian

Lord have mercy on me for some of these as well. Especially the last one...

Profound words. Thank you for sharing them.

Through the prayers of St. Isaac the Syrian, O Lord, grant us the forgiveness of our sins.

 

[Not David]

I have been told exactly that, not on this board but in another subforum here. The user was a Mormon and said something like "You know, the more you post about your 'church fathers', the more I am convinced that the church went into total apostasy and that they are all false." (Note for any who don't know: Mormonism is a restorationist religion that believes that the Church was 'taken from the earth' or some such, only to be restored with Joseph Smith Jr.'s revelations in 1830.) Somebody else (a Catholic, if I remember correctly) replied something like "Yeah, well, the more he posts them, the more I am convinced that the Church has stood throughout history and never apostasized."

Ughhh...what do you even do with that? It didn't feel good in the slightest, but I'm not going to deny our common fathers like HH St. Athanasius the Apostolic, HH St. Cyril, HG St. Basil, etc., and these are after all our witnesses to the historical continuity of the Christian faith (well, even before these, but I try to stick to uncontroversially known saints in the cross-communal areas of the site). Sometimes all you can really do is pray, y'know? It is most definitely a big problem. Often we are dealing with people who won't accept a historical narrative of any kind, because they have other, later revelations to adhere to, as is the case with Muslims, Mormons, or any other restorationists. And even those who are not explicitly restorationist may still be so wedded to their "big bad medieval Church forced everyone to believe X" or "X was invented by Constantine" alternate histories (fed by Hollywood movies, Dan Brown books, and God knows what else) that they confuse these for the documented history of the Church (as in Eusebius, Sozomen, et al.), or will not drop them even when presented with these and a million other actual period appropriate sources. I've found this in almost every single thread I've ever started or participated in in the "Outreach" section of these forums (where Christians can interact with Mormons and others who are not allowed to post in other parts of the website), and even a few in "Traditional Theology" and the congregational forums. It's tough! I guess all you can really do is keep repeating "This is what we have received" in as neutral a tone as you can convey, while praying with recognition that it is not you who opens the ears, eyes, and hearts of anyone, but the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Life-Giver. For me, I am just sorry for having apparently given our fathers a bad name before a Mormon. Lord have mercy.

I don't know, Christ never thought if he was being nice while he was preaching or acting. I know we could try to avoid flaming or avoid situations when we know will affect us more than it will help others.

So I don't think you do wrong with the Mormons, if they want to keep believing in an American guy from the 19th century whose work looks more like fanfiction, then bad for them.

 

[~Anastasia~]

"If you cannot be merciful, at least speak as though you are a sinner. If you are not a peacemaker, at least do not be a troublemaker. If you cannot be assiduous, at least in your thought be unlike a sluggard. If you are not victorious, do not exalt yourself over the vanquished. If you cannot close the mouth of a man who disparages his companion, at least refrain from joining him in this."

- St. Isaac the Syrian

Lord have mercy on me for some of these as well. Especially the last one...

I need that quote engraved somewhere ...

 

[All4Christ]

Yes, Christ said he came not to bring peace, but to bring a sword, yet he also said blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the sons of God. Definitely a tight line to follow.

I think uncompromising beliefs and willingness to share - along with mercy and peace in attitude is a good path to follow.

 

[ArmyMatt]

it's also the difference between calling out a false belief, and attacking the person who holds that belief. we far too often confuse the two.

 

[Jude1:3Contendforthefaith]

I started a thread about The Seventh Ecumenical Council and I've received a bunch of unwarranted snarky replies in that thread.

I have thick skin so it's all good.

.... Contend Earnestly for The Faith which was once for all delivered to the saints.
• Jude 1:3


.

 

[RobNJ]

I started a thread about The Seventh Ecumenical Council and I've received a bunch of unwarranted snarky replies in that thread.



.

Where?

 

[Jude1:3Contendforthefaith]

Where?

Here :

The Anathemas against The Image Breakers from The Seventh Ecumenical Council in 787 A.D.



.

 

[dzheremi]

Starting a thread on General Theology about anything related to Traditional Christianity (Orthodoxy, Catholicism, or even high-church Protestantism, to the extent that some of them have saints and images) is really not a great idea if you don't want to deal with a bunch of snide comments. I've only been there a few times, but each time it has been absolutely terrible, with Christians of various kinds arguing against St. Mary being the Theotokos, arguing against the Nicene Creed, and all kinds of other things I'd expect more of an Islamic forum than a Christian one. This is the world we are in. Lord have mercy.

 

[RobNJ]

Here :

The Anathemas against The Image Breakers from The Seventh Ecumenical Council in 787 A.D.
.

IN GENERAL HERESIES??? You should KNOW better, than to swim in that open-air cesspool, by now!!

Didjya at least remember to wipe your feet off, before tracking any of that place into TAW?

 

[Jude1:3Contendforthefaith]

IN GENERAL HERESIES??? You should KNOW better, than to swim in that open-air cesspool, by now!!

Didjya at least remember to wipe your feet off, before tracking any of that place into TAW?

You're Right.

I'm going to try and stick to TAW Forum

Here's another thread I posted about The Fifth Ecumenical Council because I was so tired of seeing Universalism continually being pushed and going unchallenged on the forum. :

Universalism Was Condemned and Defeated In 553 A.D. At The The Fifth Ecumenical Council



.

 

[prodromos]

I don't know, Christ never thought if he was being nice while he was preaching or acting.

In every case, Christ loved with a perfect love, and as the Good Physician treated each person He encountered with exactly what they needed for the condition of their hearts.

 

[dzheremi]

You're Right.

I'm going to try and stick to TAW Forum

Here's another thread I posted about The Fifth Ecumenical Council because I was so tired of seeing Universalism continually being pushed and going unchallenged on the forum. :

Universalism Was Condemned and Defeated In 553 A.D. At The The Fifth Ecumenical Council



.

The individual faith forms and maybe Traditional Theology (though even there I've occasionally encountered some people spoiling for an argument) are the only places where you can post anything about the councils or anything else that you probably assume to be universally accepted without receiving blowback, though it is also often enough that people will post objections without realizing where they are, or in the case of my own communion because they realize where they are. (I would imagine TAW to be less subject to that, or perhaps just attracting a different type of critic.)

 

[Not David]

it's also the difference between calling out a false belief, and attacking the person who holds that belief. we far too often confuse the two.

I don't know Father, sometimes they two cannot be distinguished because nobody wants to admit they believe a heresy.