Posted on 03/19/2006 10:05:40 AM PST by Kolokotronis
Ping
This guy doesn't have a proverbial clue.
He needs to retake his class again, if he thinks we can't enforce our doctrine :)
Frederica's a gal.
I love Frederica: good writer, good thinker, quite knowledgeable on Orthodox subjects. But I've gotta ask: how does this "We never change" perspective fit in with Orthodox approval for divorce/remarriage and contraceptive sex? That seems to be an innovation (not something we can derive from the Nicene Fathers.)
Thank you very much, Mama Fred.
"Orthodoxy is less of an institution (like, say, the Episcopal Church) and more of a spiritual path (like Buddhism)."
Exactly.
Actually, the attitude toward divorce and remarriage is quite old, dating back at least to the novellas of Justinian (which interestingly no one, not even the Pope of Rome, which was inside the Empire at the time, objected to): he gave a number of grounds for divorce beyond adultery, including abandonment, participation of a spouse in a plot to kill the Emperor, and forced prostitution (an interesting take on the dominical exexption for 'pornea').
I think you also misstate the Orthodox position on both issues by characterizing it as 'approval'. Both are a matter of economia, and are tolerated--properly only with the blessing of a spiritual father on a case-by-case basis--rather that offered 'approval'.
“I must speak about the temptation I went through during the bitter days in the Crimea under the Bolsheviks, at the time of the first and the most devastating persecution of the Church in Russia. It played terrible havoc with the church as an institution, and led to its inner disintegration expressed by the appearance of the so called “Living Church”; all this made me feel how dreadfully defenceless and disorganised the church was, how unprepared for the struggle..."
Simplistic and narrow analysis...and one that deserves an honest but aggressive response. First Christian Churches are vitally alive and growing. It is the so-called mainline Protestant churches and the RC Church that have grappled with the attacks that arise from the unbelievers both within and outside the church. But the conservative pentecostal and evangelical church movements stand firmly against these heresies...and these bulwarks against secularism and islamic accomodation are growing everywhere.
Second, to deny that there is flux and distrust in Christian Orthodoxy begs the question of why so many have left the Orthodox Church and have adopted the ways of their more forcefully Christian homes...and thank God for that in these times of Islamic and secular aggression.
Not doing well in the US - more concerned with politics and WCC than salvation
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/25/AR2006022501266.html
The Russians are at least trying to do the right thing.
http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2006/03/8C9A0F76-E2CB-459A-AF8C-9B9CDBA9E563.html
It's a long road from the OCA to the back country of Russia and Georgia, and along the way one goes from those who teach the Orthodox faith to those practising and living it.
I know it's Great Lent and I am not posting this to be unkind, but I shared here once the story of the homeless man turned away while asking for food because our Bishop was coming, with guests, and everything was all too nice to feed the homeless. "Not today" he was told, because we normally do feed the homeless, at least when the right person is outside that morning.
Travel around the world to Georgia or rural Russia, and you see very poor people digging for change to give each beggar on the street, and making daily *difficult* sacrifices while never wavering in their faith.
I am reminded of the news article about the shivering woman in Georgia standing in line for kerosene after their pipeline was blown up. Her given waiting number was over 400. Temperatures were hitting a high of 18 degrees in the daytime. She said to the reporter, "I believe in God".
MarMema: Thank you very much, Mama Fred.
sanormal: Exactly.
There is no God in Buddhism. Any belief in God or concept of God is an illusion that must be renounced. This is quite different from a religion that not only believes in a God but God as Holy Trinity. Buddhism also posits only the great Void--nothingness--as the basis of reality. This again is quite different from an apophatic theology that makes a distinction between the essence of God and the energies of God.
And then there is the question of the body and personal existence. A Buhhhist must renounce the body. It has no real existence. Neither does personal existence or the world of sense, since personal identity and all material existence must be absorbed into the grand nothingness at the center of the Universe. Once again, this is quite different from an ascetical struggle for the sake of the salvation and resurrection of the body along with whole man--and the transformation of the Cosmos at the end of time in the eschaton.
So perhaps you could explain the similarities between Orthodoxy and Buddhism, because the author of the article doesn't explain the analogy--there is only an assertion.
Oh Yes! The Orthodox Christians are alive and well and fulfillng the Lord's demands in many places abroad.
But the fabric of holiness is being torn in many places including in the US and the holy land. It's the "church lite" version of Orthodoxy that I object to.
Fr. Alexander FC Webster, the author of several Regina Press books, says Orthodoxy is not an organized religion, rather it is disorganized one.
I think probably it is the approach, and not the faith itself, which she is using to make the comparison.
Perhaps you would be so kind to explain how the approach of Buddhism is similar to the approach of Orthodoxy.
I realize that you didn't write the article. I am trying to determine the author's meaning. Since you responded to this passage in the essay, I thought perhaps you could explain the analogy to me.
Sorry for the misstatement. I'm sincerely looking for understanding here.
I understand that approval of divorce/remarriage and contraception aren't carte blanche, laissez-faire; but my impression is that "toleration" means "we Orthodox do it, and we don't think it's wrong," whereas amongst the Catholics, it's "we do it, but actually, it's wrong."
Since it's Lent and I'm trying to be good, I don't want to wrangle too much about "issues." But how can I interpret a "blessing" as something other than "approval"? It doesn't look, to me, like disapproval.
Personal note: an Orthodox friend of mine, married 25 years, mother of 5 kids, divorced her (Orthodox) husband, with the approval of her priest, essentially because marriage was rankling her and she felt too conflicted and constrained --- but none of the "big A" issues, no Abortion, Abandonment, Adultery, Abuse. She is now planning a second marriage IN THE ORTHODOX CHURCH to an old flame, and I am in anguish about it. In good conscience, I don't think I can attend the wedding.
It just pains my heart to see either Catholics or Orthodox make this sort of semi-surrender to a sexually disintegrating culture. This Lent: let us pray for each other and draw nearer to Our Lord.
There is an organic unity between understanding of precepts and the quality of practice in Buddhism that serves well when learning about Orthodoxy.
Buddhism has always had some form of ‘iconography’.
Buddhists venerate the lives of ascetics, relics and ‘saints’.
Buddhists (at least the Tibetans) have highly complex and developed forms of liturgical practice, including chanting, incense, etc. (e.g. they aren't intimidated by the typicon :-))
Buddhists understand that it is wise not to live for the present life, but to struggle for the future one.
Buddhists understand the value of dispassion and mental stillness.
Because here in America, we have "life lite". An entire television channel devoted to food, I am told, among other things.
Because that's only an innovation when viewed through a Latin lens. The simple fact is that there is no meaningful difference between a Roman Catholic annulment (which would permit a second marriage) and the Orthodox Christian granting of a second marriage.
On the question of contraception, the Orthodox reject any abortiofacient contraception, they just don't dance on the head of pin to pretend there's a theological difference between certain "artifical" contraception condemned by the Romans and the "natural" variety approved by the Romans.
By the way, did you know that an Orthodox couple can be refused Communion for using contraception?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.