Whither TAW?

[~Anastasia~]

You can also tell your husband that, thanks to the Orthodox Church we have Trinitarian doctrine, a canon of Scripture, no Arianism or Nestorianism, etc.!

Sounds like you're really getting somewhere with him! Throw some Father Hopko his way! Maybe you could leave Bishop Kallistos's "the Orthodox Church" on his side of the bed 'accidentally!'

I have that book.

I don't want to push him. But the thing is, when in the past months, I have struggled with something, finally decided what I think is true, then find the Orthodox Church teaches it, and then ask his opinion - he very effortlessly tells me that very thing. Just from reading the Bible. Which I think is great, but it's a struggle for me.

(He used to read it through every year, so I don't know how many times he's read it - much more than I have probably.)

And he's so dissatisfied with church right now. He doesn't hold Eucharistic theology (but I did just point out to him the other day - he said to me "Jesus said, 'This represents My body'" and I stopped him and told him no, Jesus never said that. He didn't know where his belief came from, so I need to find out now for him). But he's bothered because the church he was attending only has communion 4 times a year. He holds it in extremely high regard, and has quit going to church over this.

I feel for him though. Church is a foundation of his life, and he needs it, just as I do. And it is failing him right now. I can't push him into the Orthodox Church, and I'm not sure he'd be ready, but I want so badly for him to have what he needs.

I wish I was well-versed in the ECF's so I'd know what to recommend when.

But no, I don't want to push him. I want to help him. It's just hard to know how to do that. But things seem to be going quite well. I'm thankful for that, beyond words.

I will try to find some podcasts he might like. I listen mostly to Orthodoxy Live, but it's a call-in show and ANY topic might come up. I'm not sure that's good at this point, though Fr. Evan's heart shines through in much of what he says, and it has made a great difference for me. But it has taken months of listening to make a cohesive structure for me to set my thinking in and make that change.

A single (wrong) episode might do harm, and not have time to do good.

Then again, I need to not overthink my place in this. I want to help - whatever that looks like. But ultimately, this is in God's hands. I can't be taking over the job of the Holy Spirit. He does it perfectly, and I guarantee I'd mess it up.

Thanks for the encouragement. It means a lot to me.

 

[~Anastasia~]

That's it, but I don't really recommend reading it, as there are far more important issues to think about, like how exactly it works that the world is 4.5 billion years old and life is several hundred million years old.

Too late, I just spent however long reading it.

I must say - not sure what to think. At least I understand the idea much better than I did before. That would certainly get the "works salvation" brought up, but at least it does include grace as well. Even exclusively if done right. It's interesting.

In some senses it seems more juridicial than purgatory though, and I thought that wasn't so much in alignment with Orthodoxy.

As far as the age of the earth and life, I dealt with that extensively academically and theologically. It's not something I care to concern myself with any more than I already have at this point.

Tollhouses I will probably spend some more time on at some point, but I agree that there are far more important things to consider. Personally, I have an affinity for the monastics and desert fathers though. I find their humility, wisdom, and insight to be very refreshing and inspiring.

 

[gzt]

It's an open theological issue - jckstraw, MDiv, himself admits that theologians need to do a lot of work to make the case work right (though I'm sure he'll never be convinced). Getting more people to think about it would certainly speed that along.

It was either that or put "Fr Seraphim Rose is wrong about many things" up there, but that would be too ruffling: it could be seen as a commentary on tollhouses, after all.

 

[Trying_to_be_Orthodox]

@gzt

like how exactly it works that the world is 4.5 billion years old and life is several hundred million years old - is it really important in spirit life?

 

[gzt]

Complex multicellular life is approximately 1 billion years old, give or take a few, so let's just say several hundred million. It is important!

 

[jckstraw72]

It's an open theological issue - jckstraw, MDiv, himself admits that theologians need to do a lot of work to make the case work right (though I'm sure he'll never be convinced). Getting more people to think about it would certainly speed that along.

It was either that or put "Fr Seraphim Rose is wrong about many things" up there, but that would be too ruffling: it could be seen as a commentary on tollhouses, after all.

you're only showing your ignorance. if you would read Fr. Seraphim you would see that he was not particularly concerned about the age of the earth.

 

[Dorothea]

Oh, thanks much for the prayers!

My husband and I have been having very good conversations. Tonight he said something about Greg Laurie having taught about the miracle of Jesus veiling His glory the whole time He was on earth (the veil lifted briefly for the Transfiguration). I'm not sure what Laurie was teaching, but put all together it seemed to deny the human flesh and nature of Christ. So I disagreed, and explained why - that Christ was really born of the Virgin Mary, with human flesh and a human body - though He was of course God incarnate, His body was like ours, and not until after His resurrection did he pass through closed doors and such.

Anyway, we had a good talk about the nature of God, and he agreed with "my view" ... I told him it's not my view, but the Church's. As good as he is at getting the Truth from Scripture, he can still be swayed I guess by a teaching that sounds good. We talked about early heresies - Gnosticism (I am starting to think there are LOTS of Christian gnostics!) and how the Church responded, and I think he appreciated that.

Long story short, (uh-oh, too late! sorry!) I think he appreciated discussing some foundational truth, and I appreciated having it firmly in hand to offer rather than trying to reason my way through it and going down a few blind alleys in the process, which was always what I had to resort to before. Maybe or maybe not ending up at the right conclusion.

So it was a good day. Thank God.

And thanks again for your prayers.

That's really great that your husband and you are having good theological talks. Progress has been made in the past several months in which you two are more in unison on what you believe and there is more peace between you on these issues, it seems. Am I right? yw!

 

[gzt]

Yes, the operative part is "complex multicellular life is several hundred million years old", which means dying for several hundred million years.

 

[~Anastasia~]

That's really great that your husband and you are having good theological talks. Progress has been made in the past several months in which you two are more in unison on what you believe and there is more peace between you on these issues, it seems. Am I right? yw!

Yes, you are right.

There have been various other tensions besides these, but they seem to be resolving (thank God) as well.

It still feels like a day to day thing, but this is so much better than before, in every way. I still ache for him in what he's struggling with, but I am aware that sometimes we simply MUST go through struggles, painful as they can be.

In the end, when God uses them to bring us to where we should be, the suffering is worth it. Glory to God!

Thank you again for the prayers.

I am looking forward to having the help of the Sacraments as well.

 

[Kristos]

I haven't even publicly declared my catechumenate, I don't think. But I might as well. I think it's becoming rather obvious.

Fr. M. is satisfied, I think. He says we can discuss it when classes resume and he returns from vacation - which will be in about two weeks.

Of course, the Dormition starts then. And I have some larger concerns to make sure I am addressing properly, but they relate more to politics than doctrine.

I had considered waiting, but I find there are many challenges associated with the growth Orthodoxy has helped me with, and dealing with them without the Sacraments is ... harder than it is meant to be, I think.

So I suspect soon.

Glad to hear. You are clearly a seeker and lover of Truth. You also seem to have a very kind heart.

 

[Dorothea]

Yes, you are right.

There have been various other tensions besides these, but they seem to be resolving (thank God) as well.

It still feels like a day to day thing, but this is so much better than before, in every way. I still ache for him in what he's struggling with, but I am aware that sometimes we simply MUST go through struggles, painful as they can be.

In the end, when God uses them to bring us to where we should be, the suffering is worth it. Glory to God!

Thank you again for the prayers.

I am looking forward to having the help of the Sacraments as well.

Glory to God, indeed.

 

[ArmyMatt]

It's an open theological issue - jckstraw, MDiv, himself admits that theologians need to do a lot of work to make the case work right (though I'm sure he'll never be convinced). Getting more people to think about it would certainly speed that along.

the problem I think, is the one can never prove, with hard evidence, uniformitarianism, which is needed for the belief that the earth is billions of years old, and that life has been on here for millions. that can no more be proven than the Fall of man. that is why it is not fact. I get that if one accepts the presuppositions (which are unproven), then evolution and an old earth make perfect sense. I don't doubt the logic of your (and others) view gzt. where the disagreement is, is in your starting assumptions.

and no, mine cannot be proven either based on any hard evidence.

 

[Josephus]

Hello Orthodox Christians!

This forum is not administrated by pluralism, at least not pluralism on the essentials of one securing a place in the World to Come. If it is, I'll help turn that around. Neither was it started that way. I should know. I was there. I founded the first community that became Christian Forums.

I understand that you guys feel under attack, on many different fronts. If you feel you need a tighter forum Statement of Purpose, ask. If you want increased moderation, feel free to report posts that violate the SoP.

Better yet, have any of you who claim to be Orthodox, and are recognized by others here as being Orthodox, considered joining CF staff as a moderator so you have a representation on staff? Work with me, work with us. And let's make this place home again for those who have been here since the beginning. It's time to return the atmosphere here back to the original vision of loving God and loving people, of uniting Christians not in pluralism, closed-off-division, or attack, but in love for God, fellowship, and good respectful discussion.

As a side note, my father-in-law is Eastern Orthodox - so this forum and this community is really dear to my heart. I want to help in anyway possible to make this home for you and your brothers and sisters. If you have ideas, we are listening.

blessings in Christ,
Josephus

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I hate to say it, but I'm a bit baffled by what this post is referring to? Is it in response to the recent evolution warfare in that evolution thread that had posters openly rejecting the authority of the Church? I'm confused....completely here...

Hello Orthodox Christians!

This forum is not administrated by pluralism, at least not pluralism on the essentials of one securing a place in the World to Come. If it is, I'll help turn that around. Neither was it started that way. I should know. I was there. I founded the first community that became Christian Forums.

I understand that you guys feel under attack, on many different fronts. If you feel you need a tighter forum Statement of Purpose, ask. If you want increased moderation, feel free to report posts that violate the SoP.

Better yet, have any of you who claim to be Orthodox, and are recognized by others here as being Orthodox, considered joining CF staff as a moderator so you have a representation on staff? Work with me, work with us. And let's make this place home again for those who have been here since the beginning. It's time to return the atmosphere here back to the original vision of loving God and loving people, of uniting Christians not in pluralism, closed-off-division, or attack, but in love for God, fellowship, and good respectful discussion.

As a side note, my father-in-law is Eastern Orthodox - so this forum and this community is really dear to my heart. I want to help in anyway possible to make this home for you and your brothers and sisters. If you have ideas, we are listening.

blessings in Christ,
Josephus

 

[rusmeister]

It's obvious to me. The evolution thread was the beginning, the disagreement that revealed the real conflict over authority.

My thanks to Josephus for a gracious post. But I think the problem is deeper.

I think some Orthodox members ARE promoting pluralism, by which here I mean, not disagreement over the essentials of salvation, but the idea of the authority of the modern (and often intellectual) individual to reject what has been believed consistently by all in the Orthodox Church for two millennia and change our understanding of those teachings because "we know better", and on far more than merely the question of human origins. It means that pretty much any or all doctrine can sooner or later be challenged and discarded at the individual's discretion. In the short run it means swift capitulation on more obvious issues like the ordination of women and tolerance and approval of the sin that the Apostle Paul said was shameful to even speak of, now known by euphemisms such as "gay rights" and "LGBT". In the long run it means going the way of the world in general and ceasing to be part of the Church that the gates of hell shall not prevail against.

I have said that's what they're doing, and then that they appeal to non-Orthodox authority to prevent me from insisting that there is Orthodox authority that can correct both me and them. On the internet they can really do this. We are anonymous, few know real names, let alone jurisdictions and bishops, so we have no genuine Orthodox court of appeal. Anyone who wants can hide their canonicity and canonical relation to us, and some do, and I think, for good reason. Even having a few Orthodox moderators would not change this. They themselves are governed by a man-made system (however otherwise admirable) that is not the Church. And so any conflict among Orthodox here is liable to break down into unresolveable quarreling. Maybe it's inevitable. But until recently, we have been able to maintain a level of consensus achieved by few or none. I sense that has now changed, and think the introduction of heretical ideas (saying the word with all gravity; I'll refer to Belloc's excellent definition if clarity is required there) to be the cause.

That issue cannot be resolved by any external moderation, but only by a consensus of Orthodox members. If we don't gave one on that, then TAW is a dead duck. But I think even most of the people who favor evolution will admit Church authority over them and that it could correct them. But there are a few who have indicated the contrary, who believe that the authority of modern academia equals or exceeds that of a definite (and we believe Holy) Tradition (and see them as separate spheres of influence somehow unrelated and supposedly not impacting each other).

That's why I started the thread on Church authority, looking for that consensus. And it was quickly shut down.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I have only seen a couple of posters who seem rogueish in their views about church authority. Fortunately, the vast majority of posters in TAW are loyal to their bishop, tradition, and the moral boundaries given us by the Church for the last two millennia. I think, perhaps, Rus, you're being a bit naïve about Orthodoxy thinking this a shocking development. There are liberals and rogues in every single branch of Christendom. Yes, it scares us. It should. The thought of Anglican types in Orthodoxy should cause a sort of paralysis, but we live in 2014 where pansexuality, scientism, modernism, etc. are put on such a high pedestal, where people listen to the media and the psychiatric community or atheist science communities and put them on a par with the Fathers and our patriarchs. It's goofy, yes, but it's a sad reality. I don't think you should be so surprised. I don't mean that in an arrogant way, just a dry analysis. I suppose we should be glad TAW is as orthodox in its Orthodoxy as it is! Go to STR or OBOB and look at how many posters have gone off the rails morally and have practically NO boundaries at all! There is a much higher ratio than in our humble area!

It's obvious to me. The evolution thread was the beginning, the disagreement that revealed the real conflict over authority.

My thanks to Josephus for a gracious post. But I think the problem is deeper.

I think some Orthodox members ARE promoting pluralism, by which here I mean, not disagreement over the essentials of salvation, but the idea of the authority of the modern (and often intellectual) individual to reject what has been believed consistently by all in the Orthodox Church for two millennia and change our understanding of those teachings because "we know better", and on far more than merely the question of human origins. It means that pretty much any or all doctrine can sooner or later be challenged and discarded at the individual's discretion. In the short run it means swift capitulation on more obvious issues like the ordination of women and tolerance and approval of the sin that the Apostle Paul said was shameful to even speak of, now known by euphemisms such as "gay rights" and "LGBT". In the long run it means going the way of the world in general and ceasing to be part of the Church that the gates of hell shall not prevail against.

I have said that's what they're doing, and then that they appeal to non-Orthodox authority to prevent me from insisting that there is Orthodox authority that can correct both me and them. On the internet they can really do this. We are anonymous, few know real names, let alone jurisdictions and bishops, so we have no genuine Orthodox court of appeal. Anyone who wants can hide their canonicity and canonical relation to us, and some do, and I think, for good reason. Even having a few Orthodox moderators would not change this. They themselves are governed by a man-made system (however otherwise admirable) that is not the Church. And so any conflict among Orthodox here is liable to break down into unresolveable quarreling. Maybe it's inevitable. But until recently, we have been able to maintain a level of consensus achieved by few or none. I sense that has now changed, and think the introduction of heretical ideas (saying the word with all gravity; I'll refer to Belloc's excellent definition if clarity is required there) to be the cause.

That issue cannot be resolved by any external moderation, but only by a consensus of Orthodox members. If we don't gave one on that, then TAW is a dead duck. But I think even most of the people who favor evolution will admit Church authority over them and that it could correct them. But there are a few who have indicated the contrary, who believe that the authority of modern academia equals or exceeds that of a definite (and we believe Holy) Tradition (and see them as separate spheres of influence somehow unrelated and supposedly not impacting each other).

That's why I started the thread on Church authority, looking for that consensus. And it was quickly shut down.

 

[ArmyMatt]

I have only seen a couple of posters who seem rogueish in their views about church authority. Fortunately, the vast majority of posters in TAW are loyal to their bishop, tradition, and the moral boundaries given us by the Church for the last two millennia.

and I think a lot of things would be clearer if we actually had a sit down with folks instead of on a thread. as an example, I have disagreed with GregConstantine on the evolution thing, but I know he is solidly Orthodox because I know him. I think that if some day down the line, if TAW comes up in conversation, I like to think that the two of us would hash stuff out then far better than we could on here.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I agree. I think that's true in general about forums in general, too, but especially about Orthodox Christians. Posters get bolder, braver, tougher, and nastier about things online than they would at coffee hour after DL! But also I think if you spent enough time with Greg face-to-face, you could convince him that he's dead wrong on evolution!

and I think a lot of things would be clearer if we actually had a sit down with folks instead of on a thread. as an example, I have disagreed with GregConstantine on the evolution thing, but I know he is solidly Orthodox because I know him. I think that if some day down the line, if TAW comes up in conversation, I like to think that the two of us would hash stuff out then far better than we could on here.

 

[gzt]

But it goes both ways, too: the overly strict litmus tests for orthodoxy are also somewhat unpleasant and not Orthodox.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I don't know. I haven't heard an overly strict litmus test for Orthodoxy before? I don't recall any of them in here either?

But it goes both ways, too: the overly strict litmus tests for orthodoxy are also somewhat unpleasant and not Orthodox.