OrthodoxChristianity.net

Moderated Forums => Free-For-All => Religious Topics => Topic started by: TomS on April 27, 2004, 06:01:59 PM

Title: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: TomS on April 27, 2004, 06:01:59 PM
I was just wondering --

At services this week a Priest (not going to say who or where) was talking about abortion ('cause of the march here in DC last weekend) and said that it is not a "black and white issue".

That in certain cases, such as when a pregnancy could be harmful to the mother or even for PSYCHOLOGICAL reasons (i.e. rape, incest) that economy could be granted if it was first discussed with the Priest.

Have any of your heard this position espoused by any other Orthodox Priest?  ???
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Anastasios on April 27, 2004, 06:09:03 PM
Abortion is always murder. Period.  If an operation is taken that will result in the death of the baby is needed to save the mother's life, then it is acceptable to do so because the intent is not to kill the baby but to save the mother.

An abortion for rape or incest is unacceptable but he might have meant that economy can be applied to the penance associated with an abortion (traditionally seven years without communion) if these circumstances were there.  Such would be consistent with Trullo canon 102.

However, to suggest that abortion might be "the best possible choice" in a case of rape or incest is ludicrous and is based on false reasoning and false thinking, especially because in my experience (my former parish church works with Project Rachel, post-abortion reconciliation ministry) when a woman has an abortion for rape thinking it will make things better it usually tends to end up causing her a double pain because the baby--part of her and her life--is now gone (again, I am basing this on personal experience with women in this program and what they said).

anastasios
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: TomS on April 27, 2004, 06:15:52 PM
Well, he did not say that it was NOT murder.

I also forgot to mention that he said use Birth control:

"Do what you need to do to NOT get pregnant in the first place. There are so many methods available nowadays to help you not get pregnant".



Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Anastasios on April 27, 2004, 06:32:05 PM
Ha, that priest really is confused.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Αριστοκλής on April 27, 2004, 06:53:13 PM
Well, he did not say that it was NOT murder.

I also forgot to mention that he said use Birth control:

"Do what you need to do to NOT get pregnant in the first place. There are so many methods available nowadays to help you not get pregnant".

IF he was my priest, I would ask for confirmation of this from my bishop.

Demetri
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: MsGuided on April 27, 2004, 07:14:10 PM
Well, he did not say that it was NOT murder.

I also forgot to mention that he said use Birth control:

"Do what you need to do to NOT get pregnant in the first place. There are so many methods available nowadays to help you not get pregnant".

Committing a lesser evil (contraception) to avoid a greater evil (abortion)? Obviously the ideal would be to NOT do the sinning (any of the sins possible in this scenario) in the first place. Not that this is a good reasoning, but the only reasoning I can come up with for why he'd say such a thing.

K
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Oblio on April 27, 2004, 07:45:29 PM
Quote
Committing a lesser evil (contraception) to avoid a greater evil (abortion)?

For an odd twist, there is a thread over on CF (IIRC in the RC forum) where it is asked if it would be OK to take contaceptives because you were at high risk for rape ?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Ben on April 27, 2004, 08:29:05 PM
I met with a GOA priest to discuss my interest in Orthodoxy, and when I asked him about the Orthodox teaching on abortion and birth control, he made it very clear that Abortion is murder and is a serious sin, but he said the Orthodox Church has no problem if a couple does not want to have a baby, and chooses to use a preventative method of birth control.

I was surprised, but a OCA priest told me the same thing, and if I might add , the Coptic Church also holds this view: that there is nothing wrong with preventative methods of birth control. Even the ROAC priest I spoke with at Dormition Skete didn't seem all that against birth control. The only Orthodox priest I have heard clearly condemn birth control was a ROCOR one.

But thank God, I have never run into an Orthodox priest that didn't clearly condemn abortion, as murder.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Anastasios on April 27, 2004, 08:45:58 PM
For an odd twist, there is a thread over on CF (IIRC in the RC forum) where it is asked if it would be OK to take contaceptives because you were at high risk for rape ?

The RC's used to let nuns in Africa take birth control pills for this reason.  When they found out that birth control pills can (could) cause abortions*, however, they stopped the practice.

anastasios

*in a small number of cases the pill can (could) lead the already-fertilized fetus to not implant.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Anastasios on April 27, 2004, 08:47:54 PM
I met with a GOA priest to discuss my interest in Orthodoxy, and when I asked him about the Orthodox teaching on abortion and birth control, he made it very clear that Abortion is murder and is a serious sin, but he said the Orthodox Church has no problem if a couple does not want to have a baby, and chooses to use a preventative method of birth control.

I was surprised, but a OCA priest told me the same thing, and if I might add , the Coptic Church also holds this view: that there is nothing wrong with preventative methods of birth control. Even the ROAC priest I spoke with at Dormition Skete didn't seem all that against birth control. The only Orthodox priest I have heard clearly condemn birth control was a ROCOR one.

But thank God, I have never run into an Orthodox priest that didn't clearly condemn abortion, as murder.

The GOA priest and the OCA priest have obviously never read their churches' official statements on the subject.  While the don't overtly condemn contraception, they discourage it and say it must only be for really overtly compelling reasons, and that it is still missing the mark of what GOd intended for marriage.  Any priest saying the Church has "no" problem with it is just uninformed.  Having studied in a seminary now for 2 years it is apparent how this could be the case--some students just don't pay attention.

anastasios
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: TomS on April 27, 2004, 08:52:44 PM
Any priest saying the Church has "no" problem with it is just uninformed.

Since the Priest who said this graduated from Catholic University in the early 1950's and his Associate Priest in the 1970's, I doubt that they are "uninformed"

Sounds to me like the Church in the "real world" may be modifying its views.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Linus7 on April 27, 2004, 09:12:37 PM
Since the Priest who said this graduated from Catholic University in the early 1950's and his Associate Priest in the 1970's, I doubt that they are "uninformed"

Sounds to me like the Church in the "real world" may be modifying its views.

The "real world" has a way of molding Christians into something very unlike Christ.

We are not supposed to be conformed to its image, but to His.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Νεκτάριος on April 27, 2004, 10:05:25 PM
Take back the GOA!
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: prodromos on April 28, 2004, 03:52:06 AM
I suggest you contact the bishop this priest is under and inform him of this priest's views, wait for the dust to settle and then ask the priest again ;)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: erracht on April 29, 2004, 06:19:48 AM
Well, Tom, my former pastor was a Greek New Calendarist - one of the more liberal groups of Orthodox - yet he was not very enthusiastic about birth control. He said it could be an accepted "necessary evil" after one has had a few kids, but was not promoting it as "acceptable". Clerics have only relatively recently accepted birth control; in the day of St. John Chrysostom, it was given severe penances and heavily criticized. And the Pill (and maybe also IUDs in some way, I'm not sure) can cause abortions, so it should be avoided like the plague. It apparently also causes birth defects; one of my relations was born with no hair, apparently because of her mother's previous use of the Pill.

As for abortion, it is murder. The Church is very clear on this issue. Only when the mother's life is in danger is it reluctantly tolerated. Even then, a mother who gives her life so her child won't be aborted is considered a saint, and a mother who doesn't may be assigned a penance.

Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ambrosemzv on April 29, 2004, 04:25:04 PM
. . . I was surprised, but a OCA priest told me the same thing, and if I might add , the Coptic Church also holds this view: that there is nothing wrong with preventative methods of birth control.

I'm surprised.  This is certainly not how things were explained to me by my parish priest, who grew up with, and is currently secretary to, his Eminence, Archbishop Dmitri (OCA diocese of the South).  My priest's council usually reflects the teaching of the Archbishop.

He explained that Orthodoxy teaches that the married couple are to cooperate with/remain open to the creative and life-giving work of the Holy Spirit, and that this generally implies not placing impediments in the way of contraception.  Contraception is never the ideal, and is never to be treated lightly, or publicly preached/discussed as the "norm."  

However, in cases where pregnancy would endanger the health of the mother, or cause other grave difficulties, and where the unity of the couple would likely be seriously damaged by long-term, total abstinence, the Church may apply economy.  This is never to be confused with the ideal, though.

The explanation given by Archbishop Kallistos in Orthodoxy reflects this position, too, I believe.  Many of the Serbian hierarchs take even harder lines against contraceptive use.

I have never myself encountered Orthodox leaders willing to dismiss contraceptive use as totally unproblematic.  I'm suprised you seem to have run into so many, Ben.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Rho on May 12, 2004, 04:28:29 AM
Please forgive my ignorance, if anyone is still reading this string...

Is it the OCA's position that contraception (example, condoms) in the absence of any known marital stress or risk of a problem pregnancy is a sin?  What of the other Orthodox churches?  

BTW - you can read about the risk of spontaneous abortion for any birth-control pill on the documentation you can request at the pharmacist.  I did so and was surprised, so my wife and I stopped using the pill.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Father Peter on May 12, 2004, 05:08:46 AM
I was surprised, but a OCA priest told me the same thing, and if I might add , the Coptic Church also holds this view: that there is nothing wrong with preventative methods of birth control.

I would be interested in your source for the Coptic Orthodox pov. Generally I would have expected most priests to be very conservative on this and certainly not make dogmatic statements outside the confines of the relationship of a person with their priest.

PT
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on January 14, 2008, 02:15:40 AM
Any need to squeeze a priest in there somewhere?  I wouldn't trust an OB who doubles as an abortionist, for instance.

Gods forbid! Surely someone who supports abortion cannot be a competent medical doctor. Heck, I'm probably a bad engineer because I'm pro-choice.

Where do you come up with this nonsense? ::)


The following discussion (starting with this post) originated within this thread:  Contraception: an observer's view (http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,14252.0.html).  - PeterTheAleut
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on January 14, 2008, 02:37:00 AM
Gods forbid! Surely someone who supports abortion cannot be a competent medical doctor. Heck, I'm probably a bad engineer because I'm pro-choice.

Where do you come up with this nonsense? ::)
Is not the vow to protect human life intrinsic to the ethics of every physician's practice, such that those doctors who violate this sacred calling should not be trusted?

Is it nonsense for an Orthodox Christian to be guided by the traditional faith of the Orthodox Church (e.g., her ancient and consistent opposition to voluntary abortion, an opposition that mandated that those who have an abortion, those who perform an abortion, and those who assist in procuring an abortion are to be excommunicated as murderers and accomplices to murder)?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on January 14, 2008, 02:41:28 AM
Is not the vow to protect human life intrinsic to the ethics of every physician's practice, such that those doctors who violate this sacred calling should not be trusted?

Is it nonsense for an Orthodox Christian to be guided by the traditional faith of the Orthodox Church (e.g., her ancient and consistent opposition to voluntary abortion, an opposition that mandated that those who have an abortion, those who perform an abortion, and those who assist in procuring an abortion are to be excommunicated as murderers and accomplices to murder)?

And how does any of this relate to a doctor's competence in their field?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on January 14, 2008, 03:53:58 AM
And how does any of this relate to a doctor's competence in their field?
And how does competence alone make a doctor worthy of trust?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on January 14, 2008, 04:07:10 AM
And how does competence alone make a doctor worthy of trust?

It certainly makes his medical opinions and recommendations credible. If one wants to depart from sound medical and scientific advice for purely idological reasons, that's their right, but I would think that even those people would want to hear said sound and objective medical advice first.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on January 14, 2008, 04:10:23 AM
It certainly makes his medical opinions and recommendations credible. If one wants to depart from sound medical and scientific advice for purely idological reasons, that's their right, but I would think that even those people would want to hear said sound and objective medical advice first.
And how is abortion not a departure from sound medicine and science for purely ideological reasons?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on January 14, 2008, 04:16:45 AM
And how is abortion not a departure from sound medicine and science for purely ideological reasons?

Abortion is just another medical tool, one that is prudent for an OBGYN to recommend at times; that they can recognize this where as many religious fundamentalists cannot is but evidence of their objectivity. If a doctor does find it appropriate to recommend abortion they generally have a very good reason, it is not a typical recommendation.

Surely everyone would want to here this medical objective opinion, free from the ideological constraints of passé 'moral' norms...even if they ultimately disagree they can at least make an informed decision on the matter and better understand the risks of such a decision and the appropriate medical precautions that will be necessary.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on January 14, 2008, 08:28:50 PM
Abortion is just another medical tool, one that is prudent for an OBGYN to recommend at times; that they can recognize this where as many religious fundamentalists cannot is but evidence of their objectivity. If a doctor does find it appropriate to recommend abortion they generally have a very good reason, it is not a typical recommendation.

Surely everyone would want to here this medical objective opinion, free from the ideological constraints of passé 'moral' norms...even if they ultimately disagree they can at least make an informed decision on the matter and better understand the risks of such a decision and the appropriate medical precautions that will be necessary.
*
As a Secret Agent for the Phanar you will know that your Patriarch is pro-choice (to his eternal shame, maybe even his damnation.)
"Save the trees and kill the humans."
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Tzimis on January 14, 2008, 09:25:35 PM
*
As a Secret Agent for the Phanar you will know that your Patriarch is pro-choice (to his eternal shame, maybe even his damnation.)
"Save the trees and kill the humans."
Pro-choice and pro-life are two different things. All pro-choice is, is the ability for one to exercise there free will. I believe God gave us that ability first. :laugh:
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on January 14, 2008, 10:28:27 PM
Pro-choice and pro-life are two different things. All pro-choice is, is the ability for one to exercise there free will. I believe God gave us that ability first. :laugh:
*
Well then, to be perfectly clear --  the Patriarch of the Greeks and the First among Equals believes that married people have the right to choose to kill their unborn children.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on January 14, 2008, 10:37:09 PM
*
As a Secret Agent for the Phanar you will know that your Patriarch is pro-choice (to his eternal shame, maybe even his damnation.)
"Save the trees and kill the humans."

While I would like nothing more than for you to be right on this matter and for His All-Holiness to advocate freedom in this matter to the same extent I do; however, I have yet to see anything come out of Constantinople that would suggest that His All-Holiness has advocated a pro-choice position. His actions seem to imply that he rightly believes the issue to be primarially political and thus does not directly involve himself in these affairs.

But if you can prove me wrong in this assessment, I pray you to do so by all means. In fact, I pray my assessment is incorrect and that it is, indeed, as you say.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on January 14, 2008, 10:45:05 PM
While I would like nothing more than for you to be right on this matter and for His All-Holiness to advocate freedom in this matter to the same extent I do; however, I have yet to see anything come out of Constantinople that would suggest that His All-Holiness has advocated a pro-choice position. His actions seem to imply that he rightly believes the issue to be primarially political and thus does not directly involve himself in these affairs.

But if you can prove me wrong in this assessment, I pray you to do so by all means. In fact, I pray my assessment is incorrect and that it is, indeed, as you say.
*
The pro-death words of His Most Divine All-Holiness of "Save the Penguins" fame are recorded in The San Francisco Chronicle,  Friday 20 July 1990, Section: News: Page A1.

At the time he was Metropolitan of Chalcedon and accompanying Patriarch Demetrios on his US tour as his closest aide.



Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on January 14, 2008, 10:48:43 PM
I know.... Strike that.  We all know your stance on when a fetus is really human and deserving of protection, and it happens to not be shared by the majority on the board.  I, er, we also know that you like stoking the fire as much as possible.  Leave this one alone.
I'm with cleveland on this call, GiC.  We know your position and tactics quite well, so you would do well to leave this thread alone.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on January 14, 2008, 10:56:50 PM
*
The pro-death words of His Most Divine All-Holiness of "Save the Penguins" fame are recorded in The San Francisco Chronicle,  Friday 20 July 1990, Section: News: Page A1.

At the time he was Metropolitan of Chalcedon and accompanying Patriarch Demetrios on his US tour as his closest aide.

You have certainly sparked my interest, unfortunately the website only has articles going back to 1995. You wouldn't happen to have a copy of the article that you could either post or scan and e-mail to me?

If not I may see if I can find one of the research firms in the city to find it on microfilm and send me a copy, I could possibly get it $30 or so. If the article started on A1 do you know if that was the entirety of the article or if it was continued on another page?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on January 14, 2008, 11:13:03 PM
Gods forbid! Surely someone who supports abortion cannot be a competent medical doctor. Heck, I'm probably a bad engineer because I'm pro-choice.

Engineer. Hmm.  Explains a lot.

By all accounts Dr. Mengela was quite a competent doctor, if the Hippocratic oath doesn't count.

Quote
Where do you come up with this nonsense? ::)

One of God's Top Ten Don't Do's.

Sorry, I'm not hiring "Dr." Kovorkian in geriatrics, and I'm not putting "Fr." Gagan (spelling?) in charge of the church youth group.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on January 14, 2008, 11:16:53 PM
It certainly makes his medical opinions and recommendations credible. If one wants to depart from sound medical and scientific advice for purely idological reasons, that's their right, but I would think that even those people would want to hear said sound and objective medical advice first.

Dr. Kevorkian has some for you.  (ooops!  can't say Dr., wasn't his license revoked?  But then again, he still had that medical advicea and expertise).
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on January 14, 2008, 11:21:35 PM
Engineer. Hmm.  Explains a lot.

Well, my undergraduate degree is in theoretical mathematics. Then I dropped out of school to go to seminary, so I'm kinda stuck as an engineer now. But that's how life works, we get to live with our bad decisions.

Quote
By all accounts Dr. Mengela was quite a competent doctor, if the Hippocratic oath doesn't count.

I wouldn't have any medical reservations about going to him as my personal physician...I just wouldn't give him power of attorney over me. ;)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on January 14, 2008, 11:27:28 PM
Well, my undergraduate degree is in theoretical mathematics. Then I dropped out of school to go to seminary, so I'm kinda stuck as an engineer now. But that's how life works, we get to live with our bad decisions.

I wouldn't have any medical reservations about going to him as my personal physician...I just wouldn't give him power of attorney over me. ;)

What makes you think he's going to worry about such niceties?  If the Netherlands is any indication....

I remember at the U of C I knew several who went into physics, and then were dropping like flies.  Only one made it all the way (a devote Copt btw).  The other one who came closest was the one who switched to mathematics in senior year.  Said that the further you went into physics, the less human you felt.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on January 14, 2008, 11:45:19 PM
What makes you think he's going to worry about such niceties?  If the Netherlands is any indication....

LOL...well, I guess I'm assuming that I can take the liability and malpractice laws of the United States for granted.

Quote
I remember at the U of C I knew several who went into physics, and then were dropping like flies.  Only one made it all the way (a devote Copt btw).  The other one who came closest was the one who switched to mathematics in senior year.  Said that the further you went into physics, the less human you felt.

I always enjoyed physics, I had enough credits for a minor minus two lab classes which I refused to take...I love the theory, the labs bored me to death. I guess I could see that with physics, everything, including ourselves, is reduced to the most fundamental element...in the end there is no difference between a rock and a human and quite probably no difference between a human and the void of space. Mathematics, on the other hand, deals with pure thought, it ultimately denies all absolutes, including the universe that physicists take as granted, everything becomes relative, everything becomes questionable. It's really a religion of sorts, and once one is finally initiated it is impossible to abandon. Amongst my mathematics professors were Protestants, Catholics, Mormons, Muslims, Buddhists, and Hindus but in the end they all had the same philosophy, the same theology, the same faith...they simply viewed their personal religion as a maifestation of mathematical principles.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on January 15, 2008, 12:06:30 AM
You have certainly sparked my interest, unfortunately the website only has articles going back to 1995. You wouldn't happen to have a copy of the article that you could either post or scan and e-mail to me?

If not I may see if I can find one of the research firms in the city to find it on microfilm and send me a copy, I could possibly get it $30 or so. If the article started on A1 do you know if that was the entirety of the article or if it was continued on another page?
I really hesitate to publicise the pro-abortion words of this evil Patriarch.  You can do a seach on the Indiana List using   Bartholomew and abortion

https://listserv.indiana.edu/cgi-bin/wa-iub.exe?S1=ORTHODOX&D=0
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on January 15, 2008, 01:07:45 AM
I really hesitate to publicise the pro-abortion words of this evil Patriarch.  You can do a seach on the Indiana List using   Bartholomew and abortion

https://listserv.indiana.edu/cgi-bin/wa-iub.exe?S1=ORTHODOX&D=0

Seeing as you stated elsewhere that you were a Priest (ROCOR, I believe? Which last I checked was in communion with Moscow which is in communion with Constantinople), I don't think that it would be too much to expect you to refer to our Lord and Patriarch who is ranked First amongst the Bishops of the Christian Church, His All-Holiness Bartholomew the Ecumenical Patriarch, Archbishop of Constantinople and New Rome, by the proper honorific: 'His All-Holiness'. I am certain that you were simply unaware of this and thus decided to call him the 'evil Patriarch', for lack of a better term, but I presume, now that this has been clarified, that in the future His All-Holiness will be refered to by his proper title.

Now on to the public statements of His All-Holiness, I fear that the only quote I could find was from a different date and on a different page and is as follows:

'"Although the Orthodox Church believes the soul
enters the body at conception and, generally
speaking, respects human life and the continuation
of the pregnancy," Barthlomew said, the church
also "respects the liberty and freedom of all human
persons and all Christian couples. . . .We are not
allowed to enter the bedrooms of the Christian
couples," he also said. “We cannot generalize.
There are many reasons for a couple to go toward
abortion.' (San Francisco Chronicle-7/20/90
p.A22)

Hardly sounds pro-choice to me, sounds more pastoral than anything. He gives the typical pro-life line up front, then basically says that it's a political issue that's none of our business; there are indeed many commonly accepted reasons that one might have an abortion, such as the woman's health, in that instance very few would object and it should come as no surprise that His All-Holiness would be supportive in such a situation. In any case, doesn't sound pro-choice to me, it seems to be a non-partisan pastoral approach to a pro-life position.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Riddikulus on January 15, 2008, 01:23:55 AM
Seeing as you stated elsewhere that you were a Priest (ROCOR, I believe? Which last I checked was in communion with Moscow which is in communion with Constantinople), I don't think that it would be too much to expect you to refer to our Lord and Patriarch who is ranked First amongst the Bishops of the Christian Church, His All-Holiness Bartholomew the Ecumenical Patriarch, Archbishop of Constantinople and New Rome, by the proper honorific: 'His All-Holiness'. I am certain that you were simply unaware of this and thus decided to call him the 'evil Patriarch', for lack of a better term, but I presume, now that this has been clarified, that in the future His All-Holiness will be refered to by his proper title.

Hear, hear!


Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Riddikulus on January 15, 2008, 01:29:30 AM
I really hesitate to publicise the pro-abortion words of this evil Patriarch.  You can do a seach on the Indiana List using   Bartholomew and abortion

https://listserv.indiana.edu/cgi-bin/wa-iub.exe?S1=ORTHODOX&D=0

Please don't go coy on us. If you are bold enough to accuse the Patriarch of being pro-choice, I believe you should be prepared to back up your accusation and supply the relevant article.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Jimmy on January 15, 2008, 01:34:12 AM
Seeing as you stated elsewhere that you were a Priest (ROCOR, I believe? Which last I checked was in communion with Moscow which is in communion with Constantinople), I don't think that it would be too much to expect you to refer to our Lord and Patriarch who is ranked First amongst the Bishops of the Christian Church, His All-Holiness Bartholomew the Ecumenical Patriarch, Archbishop of Constantinople and New Rome, by the proper honorific: 'His All-Holiness'. I am certain that you were simply unaware of this and thus decided to call him the 'evil Patriarch', for lack of a better term, but I presume, now that this has been clarified, that in the future His All-Holiness will be refered to by his proper title.

Now on to the public statements of His All-Holiness, I fear that the only quote I could find was from a different date and on a different page and is as follows:

'"Although the Orthodox Church believes the soul
enters the body at conception and, generally
speaking, respects human life and the continuation
of the pregnancy," Barthlomew said, the church
also "respects the liberty and freedom of all human
persons and all Christian couples. . . .We are not
allowed to enter the bedrooms of the Christian
couples," he also said. “We cannot generalize.
There are many reasons for a couple to go toward
abortion.' (San Francisco Chronicle-7/20/90
p.A22)

Hardly sounds pro-choice to me, sounds more pastoral than anything. He gives the typical pro-life line up front, then basically says that it's a political issue that's none of our business; there are indeed many commonly accepted reasons that one might have an abortion, such as the woman's health, in that instance very few would object and it should come as no surprise that His All-Holiness would be supportive in such a situation. In any case, doesn't sound pro-choice to me, it seems to be a non-partisan pastoral approach to a pro-life position.

And there are many reasons why Jeffry Daumer should have killed all those women.  What you call pastoral sounds like relativism to me.  A mother can determine whether her child is to live.  God gave the parents a child and they kill it.   
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on January 15, 2008, 01:59:18 AM
I really hesitate to publicise the pro-abortion words of this evil Patriarch.  You can do a seach on the Indiana List using   Bartholomew and abortion

https://listserv.indiana.edu/cgi-bin/wa-iub.exe?S1=ORTHODOX&D=0
With all due respects, Father, citing your own posts on other fora isn't proper evidence to support your claim that Patriarch Bartholomew is pro-choice.  You really need to post a link to the news article you quoted in those posts so we can cross-reference your citation.

In addition (putting on my moderator's hat here), many of our posters honor Patriarch Bartholomew as His All-Holiness, the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople.  I will permit you on the Faith board to accuse him of being pro-choice, even if you can't back this up with proper evidence, but to call him evil is an ad hominem that I, the moderator of this section, cannot tolerate.

- PeterTheAleut
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Tamara on January 15, 2008, 02:13:52 AM
That wasn't my point.  My point was that the pro-choice advocates use the same reasoning to justify what they justify.  I don't think the justification is valid.  

Justifying what? I was sharing my experiences of being pregnant. You have jumped the gun on this one.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on January 15, 2008, 02:21:40 AM
And there are many reasons why Jeffry Daumer should have killed all those women.  What you call pastoral sounds like relativism to me.  A mother can determine whether her child is to live.  God gave the parents a child and they kill it.   

If it can be demonstrated that he did so in defence of his life, liberty, or property then by all means I would argue that he did have such a right and related statues are on the books in every state.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on January 15, 2008, 04:13:33 AM
With all due respects, Father, citing your own posts on other fora isn't proper evidence to support your claim that Patriarch Bartholomew is pro-choice.  You really need to post a link to the news article you quoted in those posts so we can cross-reference your citation.

In addition (putting on my moderator's hat here), many of our posters honor Patriarch Bartholomew as His All-Holiness, the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople.  I will permit you on the Faith board to accuse him of being pro-choice, even if you can't back this up with proper evidence, but to call him evil is an ad hominem that I, the moderator of this section, cannot tolerate.

- PeterTheAleut
Dear Peter,

I believe that anybody who supports pro-choice is evil and this is backed up by the sacred canons which speak of abortion as murder and lay down the same penalties for it as for any homicide.

I appreciate the shock this must be for those who do not have an awareness of the Patriarch's views on abortion.  When I discovered his words I was almost physically sick and still hate to read them.  If you think of the US senators who have been honoured by him, those not censured by him for promoting abortion, those whom he has chosen to honour as archons of the ecumenical throne, etc., then you begin to see how it merges in with his attitude.

I have the article but was reluctant to post it;  I am aware of how dreadful this is.   I'll post it here plus a commentary from one of his own US clergy if you give permission?


EDIT:  Modified the text in my quote and nothing more  - PeterTheAleut
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on January 15, 2008, 04:31:22 AM
I believe that anybody who supports pro-choice is evil and this is backed up by the sacred canons which speak of abortion as murder and lay down the same penalties for it as for any homicide.

Then you can call him His All Holiness the 'evil patriarch'. ::)

Quote
I appreciate the shock this must be for those who do not have an awareness of the Patriarch's views on abortion.  When I discovered his words I was almost physically sick and still hate to read them.  If you think of the US senators who have been honoured by him, those not censured by him for promoting abortion, those whom he has chosen to honour as archons of the ecumenical throne, etc., then you begin to see how it merges in with his attitude.

Good try, but it takes a bit more than that to shock me.

Quote
I have the article but was reluctant to post it;  I am aware of how dreadful this is.   I'll post it here plus a commentary from one of his own US clergy if you give permission?

He already asked that you post it, are you waiting for someone to beg you or something? As far as the commentary goes, I can personally do without the propaganda spiel, but if you wish go for it.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on January 15, 2008, 04:35:25 AM
Seeing as you stated elsewhere that you were a Priest (ROCOR, I believe? Which last I checked was in communion with Moscow which is in communion with Constantinople), I don't think that it would be too much to expect you to refer to our Lord and Patriarch who is ranked First amongst the Bishops of the Christian Church, His All-Holiness Bartholomew the Ecumenical Patriarch, Archbishop of Constantinople and New Rome, by the proper honorific: 'His All-Holiness'. I am certain that you were simply unaware of this and thus decided to call him the 'evil Patriarch', for lack of a better term, but I presume, now that this has been clarified, that in the future His All-Holiness will be refered to by his proper title.to me, it seems to be a non-partisan pastoral approach to a pro-life position.
If you check through my posts you will see that I use his correct honorrific which is, btw, not the shortened English form of "His All-Holiness" but "His Most Divine All-Holiness."
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on January 15, 2008, 04:40:14 AM
He already asked that you post it, are you waiting for someone to beg you or something?
The San Francisco Chronicle
JULY 20, 1990, FRIDAY, FINAL EDITION
SECTION: NEWS; Pg. A1

SF Shows Off Its Ecumenical Spirit
Church leaders welcome head of Orthodox Christianity

Don Lattin, Chronicle Religion Writer


Pope Leo IX (1048-54) and Patriarch Michael I (1043-58) would be shocked.


There was Roman Catholic Archbishop John Quinn kneeling down to kiss the ring of Orthodox Patriarch Dimitrios I -- only 936 years after leaders of the Church of Rome and the Church of Constantinople excommunicated each other in the Great Schism of 1054.


Quinn, the archbishop of San Francisco, made his gesture yesterday at an extraordinary ecumenical meeting between Dimitrios, the archbishop of Constantinople and world leader of Orthodox Christianity, and a dozen Bay Area religious leaders.


Actually, the 11th century ecclesiastical curses that flew between Rome and Constantinople, which refused to acknowledge the primacy of the Roman pope, were formally lifted in 1965.


Nevertheless, the two largest and most ancient branches of Christianity remain separate -- a division religious leaders in San Francisco are trying to heal in their own small way.


Quinn said it is ''quite extraordinary'' that the Orthodox Patriarchate has invited him to preach with Dimitrios at a 10 a.m. worship service tomorrow at Davies Symphony Hall.


''His Holiness' visit heightens the consciousness of all of us to pursue the road of deeper Christian unity,'' Quinn said in an interview.


Episcopal Bishop William Swing, in formal remarks yesterday to Dimitrios at the Greek Orthodox Diocesan House in St. Francis Wood, said he hopes the patriarch will ''feel the ecumenical spirit that abides in the Bay Area.''


United Methodist Bishop Melvin Talbert of San Francisco, a leading force in the National Council of Churches, said the presence of the Orthodox churches in that group helps provide ''balance'' to the ecumenical movement. The Roman Catholic Church does not belong to the National Council of Churches.


KEY DIFFERENCES


Talbert said Orthodox and Protestant leaders ''struggle over the role of women in the church,'' but he said working together is a way to ''learn how to get along with other people in the world.'' Most Protestant denominations, unlike the Orthodox and Roman Catholic churches, allow the ordination of women.


Dimitrios said his visit has helped him understand the unique ''social and spiritual environment in which you are called to do your work.''


''But at the same time it must be confessed that contemporary societies, with their material comforts and advanced technology, also offer, unfortunately, the means of greater barrenness and erosion of the spirit,'' said Dimitrios, speaking through a translator at the breakfast meeting. ''This explains why the occupations of psychoanalysts, psychotherapists and the like are flourishing.''


Dimitrios, 75, has given no news conferences or media interviews since his July 2 arrival in the United States, although the man described by church sources as his ''heir apparent'' did meet the press yesterday.


'NO HYPOCRISY'


''His All Holiness has been impressed with the simplicity and openness of the American people and with their deep Christian faith,'' said Metropolitan Bartholomais of Chalcedon, the patriarch's closest aide. ''There is no hypocrisy. There is a sincereness and simplicity that must be proper to all Christians.''


Asked the Orthodox church's position on abortion, Bartholomais described a stand more liberal than that of the Roman Catholic Church, which condemns abortion in all cases and whose clergy have, in some cities, excommunicated leading pro-choice Catholics.


Although the Orthodox church believes the soul enters the body at conception and, ''generally speaking, respects human life and the continuation of pregnancy,'' Bartholomais said, the church also ''respects the liberty and freedom of all human persons and all Christian couples.''


''We are not allowed to enter the bedrooms of the Christian couples,'' he said. ''We cannot generalize. There are many reasons for a couple to go toward abortion.''


Also joining Dimitrios at yesterday's ecumenical gathering were Bishop Lyle Miller of the Evangelical Lutheran Church; Rabbi Malcolm Sparer, president of the Northern California Board of Rabbis; and officials representing the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, the Society of Friends, San Francisco Evangelical Association, the Reform Church of America, the Armenian Apostolic Orthodox Church and the Moscow Patriarch of the Russian Orthodox Church.


After the meeting, Dimitrios, who is considered the ''first among equals''
of Orthodox Patriarchs representing 200 million Orthodox Christians
worldwide, headed for Stockton for a parish visit.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on January 15, 2008, 04:48:12 AM
Orthodox Patriarchs "Wink" at Abortion
Fr Edward Pehanich
(ACROD)
http://www.oclife.org/vnine.pdf


In the years since the fall of Communism across Eastern Europe the Orthodox faithful of those lands have had the task of facing the unpleasant history of the subjugation of their Church to the Communist regimes. With many clergy and hierarchs compromising the Faith by unequivocally supporting the policies of the atheistic state, the Church lost its prophetic voice in society.There is hardly any room for us in the West to sit in judgment or criticism, we who were safely and comfortably living in the religious freedom of the West. What is most disturbing to me, however, is to see evidence of such a trend continuing, even here where the voice of the Church was never silenced by persecution.

..... Twice in the past few years we in America have witnessed visiting Orthodox shepherds from abroad "wink" at the prevailing public sentiment on abortion rather than loudly and clearly challenge us with the voice of truth proclaimed by Scriptures, and echoed by the ancient Fathers and Councils of the Church.

Patriarchs Speak

Recently, Armenian Christians in America welcomed into their midst His Holiness, Patriarch Karekin I of Etchmiadzin in Armenia who came on a pastoral visit to his flock. During a stop at St. Mary's Church in Washington, D.C. the patriarch was questioned on the Church's position on
abortion.-

"We don't issue dogmatic statements and impose
dogmatic principles. That is intervening and
invading on the freedom of the conscience of the
people. When a person is Christianity nurtured
and his conscience is shaped by Christian
principles, that person should have the freedom
to manifest his or her attitude toward specific
problems such as abortion or the forms of
abortion. The church does not get involved in
that kind of detail. Jesus never, never imposed
anything upon his followers. If you want to
inherit the Kingdom of God, do this, do not do
this. if you want, that is the greatest characteristic
feature of Christianity. (The Washington Post -
1/20/96 p. B6)

Nearly identical in tone and spirit, and lack of any clear, prophetic teaching are statements made by His Holiness, Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople when he visited San Francisco in 1990 as the metropolitan of Chalcedon as part of the entourage of the then Patriarch Dimitrios of blessed memory. The San Francisco Chronicle recorded this exchange-

Asked the Orthodox Church's position on abortion, Bartholomew described a stand more liberal than that of the Roman Catholic Church.

"Although the Orthodox Church believes the soul
enters the body at conception and, generally
speaking, respects human life and the continuation
of the pregnancy," Barthlomew said, the church
also "respects the liberty and freedom of all human
persons and all Christian couples. . . .We are not
allowed to enter the bedrooms of the Christian
couples," he also said. "We cannot generalize.
There are many reasons for a couple to go toward
abortion." (San Francisco Chronicle-7/20/90
p.A22)

For the rest of the article go to:

http://www.oclife.org/vnine.pdf

I have written to Fr Edward Pehanich on the matter in 2005 and did not receive a reply. Since Fr Edward is in the Greek Archdiocese (ACROD) it must have required some courage to write the article reporting on the Patriarch's position on abortion.


Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on January 15, 2008, 08:12:51 AM
"Although the Orthodox Church believes the soul
enters the body at conception and, generally
speaking, respects human life and the continuation
of the pregnancy," Barthlomew said, the church
also "respects the liberty and freedom of all human
persons and all Christian couples. . . .We are not
allowed to enter the bedrooms of the Christian
couples," he also said. "We cannot generalize.
There are many reasons for a couple to go toward
abortion." (San Francisco Chronicle-7/20/90
p.A22)

Thank God for the sanity of the Oecumenical Patriarch. Thank God there is at least one clergyman who will have the courage to stand up and say: "We are not allowed to enter the bedrooms of the Christian couples", instead of like so many others, trying to control society by controlling sex, and who acknowledges that "There are many reasons for a couple to go toward abortion."
Some people just shouldn't have children. And I should know, I'm about to foster the 5 year old child of a drug addict until she is 18.
If anyone adamantly makes prescriptive statements that abortion is never to be used in any case, and is childless themselves, and refuses to take on the foster care of neglected children, I now just laugh at them and think their opinion is about as valid as bald barber trying to sell hair restorer.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Jimmy on January 15, 2008, 08:31:00 AM
If it can be demonstrated that he did so in defence of his life, liberty, or property then by all means I would argue that he did have such a right and related statues are on the books in every state.

I don't care what every state says.  Rome said you had to eat meat that was sacrificed to idols but the saints did not.  If they had then they wouldn't be saints.  The state is not the truth.

It is liberty.  Why shouldn't he have the right to choose to manifest his conscience as he sees fit?  For you to say that Daumer did not have the right to kill those women is a limitation on his freedom.  That is like what the 'sane' patriarch said.  Law is meaningless and so is any sense of truth.  All we have is some fluffy idea of love which is no more than a feeling.

I find it amazing that abortion is considered to be a matter of the bedroom.  It has nothing to do with the bedroom.  God gave a child to a couple.  They have no right to kill it.  It is a matter of life, not a matter of sexuality.

If you want to speak of rights then very basic right is the right to life.  Abortion is a violation of this foundational right.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on January 15, 2008, 08:34:28 AM
I find it amazing that abortion is considered to be a matter of the bedroom.  It has nothing to do with the bedroom.  God gave a child to a couple.  They have no right to kill it.  It is a matter of life, not a matter of sexuality.

Let me explain to you where babies come from......
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Jimmy on January 15, 2008, 08:34:38 AM
Jesus did not command us to do anything to inherit salvation?  He commanded us to love our neighbor and to love God.  Abortion is a violation of both.  It is a denial of divine providence and it is the killing of a human child.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Jimmy on January 15, 2008, 08:36:48 AM
Let me explain to you where babies come from......

Do you think I do not know biology?  I spent my college career studying biology since that was my major.  I know the biology of it.  But the problem is that you turn it into pure biology.  You turn man into simply a peice of matter that is expendible.  You have also turned Christianity into deism.  God created the world and He has left it and now He is no longer acting.  We are simply a product of evolution and that is all.  This is heresy in every sense of the word.  We might as well be atheists if we are going to be deists.

With abortion, the child is already concieved.  Any abortion has nothing to do with sexuality and everything to do with killing what is already alive.  The US allows abortions for all nine months of pregnancy.  Why not follow the suggestion of Peter singer and allow it for the first three years of life as well?  That child is a burden on the parents freedom. 
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Fr. George on January 15, 2008, 08:39:54 AM
Jesus did not command us to do anything to inherit salvation?  He commanded us to love our neighbor and to love God.  Abortion is a violation of both.  It is a denial of divine providence and it is the killing of a human child. 

Do you think there is ever a case when murder, although heinous in and of itself, is justified?  I'm not trying to draw a parallel between this question and Abortion, but I'm just seeking background information.  Is there a time when killing someone, say in self-defense, or in the defense of others, is less serious than other cases?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Jimmy on January 15, 2008, 08:46:34 AM
Do you think there is ever a case when murder, although heinous in and of itself, is justified?  I'm not trying to draw a parallel between this question and Abortion, but I'm just seeking background information.  Is there a time when killing someone, say in self-defense, or in the defense of others, is less serious than other cases?

I don't know.  I have struggled with that issue.  But no matter which way it falls you can't compare self defense or defense of others to abortion.  The child is innocent and is not attacking the mother.  In self defense the person who is potentially dead was going to kill you.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on January 15, 2008, 08:46:55 AM
I spent my college career studying biology since that was my major. 
Perhaps, but you don't know the Orthodox Christian view.
Neither your soul, nor you body were created "ex nihilo". Both your soul and your body came to be through generativity, not creation. Like your DNA, your soul came from part of your mother's soul and part of your father's soul. Of course, the original Gifts of Life and Existence were given to Adam and Eve, but it is they and their descendants who have passed them on.

You turn man into simply a peice of matter that is expendible.
Is it I who make man expendable, or you who insist that drug addicts must see their pregnancies through and their children born into squalor, abuse and neglect?

I repeat:
If anyone adamantly makes prescriptive statements that abortion is never to be used in any case, and is childless themselves, and refuses to take on the foster care of neglected children, I now just laugh at them and think their opinion is about as valid as bald barber trying to sell hair restorer.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Fr. George on January 15, 2008, 08:51:08 AM
I don't know.  I have struggled with that issue.  But no matter which way it falls you can't compare self defense or defense of others to abortion.  The child is innocent and is not attacking the mother.  In self defense the person who is potentially dead was going to kill you.

Like I said, I wasn't trying to compare the two situations, as they may or may not be compatible.  However, while the situations are not analogous, there are times when the presence of the baby or the process of giving birth does threaten the life of the mother and itself, so one could draw a parallel, even though it would be the weakest of ones to be sure.

Personally (and I do fall into the potentially hypocritical category of the single and childless) at the moment I find myself unable to support abortion in any case.  However, I have left open the possibility that I am wrong.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Jimmy on January 15, 2008, 08:51:38 AM
Perhaps, but you don't know the Orthodox Christian view.
Neither your soul, nor you body were created "ex nihilo". Both your soul and your body came to be through generativity, not creation. Like your DNA, your soul came from part of your mother's soul and part of your father's soul. Of course, the original Gifts of Life and Existence were given to Adam and Eve, but it is they and their descendants who have passed them on.
Is it I who make man expendable, or you who insist that drug addicts must see their pregnancies through and their children born into squalor, abuse and neglect?

I repeat:

I did not know that was the Orthodox perspective so I will not respond to it right now.  I will allow myself some time to think my response through.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on January 15, 2008, 08:53:17 AM
If anyone adamantly makes prescriptive statements that abortion is never to be used in any case,
There is a very small number of exceptions such as an ectopic pregnancy but otherwise abortion is forbidden by the canons of the Church and treated as homicide.

Quote
the  and is childless themselves, and refuses to take on the foster care of neglected children, I now just laugh at them and think their opinion is about as valid
For the past 19 years I have given shelter to solvent abusers in my own home next to the church.  One in particular has stuck around and is like an adopted child.  Now that I have been hit with a cardiac problem I have to say that it is becoming much harder to deal with erratic and aggressive behaviour.  
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Jimmy on January 15, 2008, 09:01:20 AM
Like I said, I wasn't trying to compare the two situations, as they may or may not be compatible.  However, while the situations are not analogous, there are times when the presence of the baby or the process of giving birth does threaten the life of the mother and itself, so one could draw a parallel, even though it would be the weakest of ones to be sure.

Personally (and I do fall into the potentially hypocritical category of the single and childless) at the moment I find myself unable to support abortion in any case.  However, I have left open the possibility that I am wrong.

cleveland, I fall into the same category as you.  I am single but hold to my position.  I could be wrong like I have been on many things I have felt very firm on.  My principle is that if anyone has had an abortion then you should only show love and not condemn them or their actions.  They have done what they have done and God will judge each man in His own way.  But in a discussion like this where it is a discussion of doctrine or truth then I think it is good to defend the truth as you see it.  

I have to go.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on January 15, 2008, 09:07:37 AM
There is a very small number of exceptions such as an ectopic pregnancy but otherwise abortion is forbidden by the canons of the Church and treated as homicide.
Yeah, I know, and killing an enemy in war isn't homicide...... yet requires penance....
The Canons are guidelines, not prescriptions.

For the past 19 years I have given shelter to solvent abusers in my own home next to the church.  One in particular has stuck around and is like an adopted child.  Now that I have been hit with a cardiac problem I have to say that it is becoming much harder to deal with erratic and aggressive behaviour. 
Well I'll try not to be erratic and aggressive then. ;)
What I buck against is the idea that having an abortion or not is somehow always a clear-cut decision. Contraception fails sometimes, and some people know they will not be good parents and the child will suffer tremendously (which is why they used contraception). Orthodoxy is not prescriptive about actions, but rather, the agent, and recognises that in a fallen world, allowances sometimes have to be made- such as allowing up to two divorces, the use of economia in receiving the heterodox into the Church, permitting war as a lesser of two evils....etc...

Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on January 15, 2008, 09:13:39 AM
Perhaps, but you don't know the Orthodox Christian view.
Neither your soul, nor you body were created "ex nihilo". Both your soul and your body came to be through generativity, not creation. Like your DNA, your soul came from part of your mother's soul and part of your father's soul.
*
From the website of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia...

"In the view of some of the Church Fathers, (Clement of Alexandria, John Chrysostom, Ephraim the Syrian and others) each soul is created separately by God......

"In the view of other teachers and fathers of the Church (Tertulian, Gregory the Theologian, Gregory of Nyssa, Saint Macarius of Egypt and others), both substances soul and body receive their beginning and are perfected simultaneously: The soul is created from the souls of the parents, just as the body is created from the bodies of the father and mother."

See
http://home.it.net.au/~jgrapsas/pages/abortion2.htm
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Fr. George on January 15, 2008, 09:15:33 AM
permitting war as a lesser of two evils....etc... 

That's a big statement coming from the resident peacenik!

Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on January 15, 2008, 09:19:35 AM
Orthodoxy is not prescriptive about actions, but rather, the agent, and recognises that in a fallen world, allowances sometimes have to be made-
*
I honestly know of no Orthodox Church which allows abortion (excepting such things as ectopic pregnancies, cervical cancer), so I do not believe your words are well-founded.  Even His Most Divine All-Holiness has not repeated his pro-choice words from 17 years ago, but he has not withdrawn them either.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on January 15, 2008, 09:21:43 AM
*
From the website of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia...

"In the view of some of the Church Fathers, (Clement of Alexandria, John Chrysostom, Ephraim the Syrian and others) each soul is created separately by God......
"....moreover, some of them time its joining with the body to coincide with the 40th day of the formation of the body." (From the same article http://home.it.net.au/~jgrapsas/pages/abortion2.htm ) So is abortion before 40 days acceptable?

"In the view of other teachers and fathers of the Church (Tertulian, Gregory the Theologian, Gregory of Nyssa, Saint Macarius of Egypt and others), both substances soul and body receive their beginning and are perfected simultaneously: The soul is created from the souls of the parents, just as the body is created from the bodies of the father and mother."
Makes a lot more sense, don't you think?

That's a big statement coming from the resident peacenik!
Ah, I chose my words carefully. The lesser of two evils is still evil. ;)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Fr. George on January 15, 2008, 09:29:29 AM
Ah, I chose my words carefully. The lesser of two evils is still evil. ;) 

Which is essentially the same argument you seem to be making about abortion - that it is generally the least desirable way of handling some cases, but every once and awhile it is better than the alternative.  Do I have it right?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on January 15, 2008, 09:35:13 AM
Do I have it right?
Spot on.
I think the mistake people make is thinking that the compassion and understanding which the Church shows to human frailty equates to the condoning of evil. We can still see sin as sin, yet have compassion towards those who fall into it, or choose it due to pressures beyond their control. The article from our Archdiocese website (which Fr. Ambrose quoted from) concludes with the statement:
"Finally, it is with special compassion that the Church regards the mother already after having an abortion, frequently performed under pressure from family, society, poverty, etc. Such unfortunates should not be beaten further, but compassionately supported and saved. To this end the woman must consult with her Father Confessor." http://home.it.net.au/~jgrapsas/pages/abortion2.htm
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on January 15, 2008, 09:42:16 AM
"Today's holocaust: Abortion the indescribable calamity!"

His Grace Bishop Joseph (Harkiolakis) of Arianzos (New Zealand)

http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles4/BpJosephAbortion.shtml

Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on January 15, 2008, 09:53:42 AM
"....moreover, some of them time its joining with the body to coincide with the 40th day of the formation of the body." (From the same article http://home.it.net.au/~jgrapsas/pages/abortion2.htm ) So is abortion before 40 days acceptable?
 
No.  The Eastern Fathers knew of the theory, popular among the Western Fathers, that ensoulment took place around the 40th day for a male and around the 90th day for a female.  However, they refused to allow this to be a basis for abortion and called it murder from the very moment of conception.

Saont Basil the Great says:
"The woman who purposely destroys her unborn child is guilty of murder. The hair-splitting difference between formed and unformed makes no difference to us".   By 'formed' and 'unformed' he is referring to the Western theories concerning the time of ensoulment/animation/quickening which was thought to take place weeks after conception.


In the West the controversy about the time of ensoulment raged up until a few centuries ago.  Abortion of an un-animated foetus was considered less than a mortal sin.  I was banned from CAF for a couple of weeks for discussing this and allowed back only when I promised never to discuss the history of early abortion in the Latin Church!   

Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on January 15, 2008, 10:00:58 AM
And how many nappies did these Fathers change and school lunches did they cut, and school uniforms did they wash and iron? How many sleepless nights did they have nursing colic? How many jobs did they have to work to support their kids?
Oh please!
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on January 15, 2008, 10:05:13 AM
Here is the post which got me temporarily banned from CAF.  It is of Irish interest.....

Quote
Originally Posted by rjs1
Dear Fr Ambrose,
Again I am amazed at your allegation that the Catholic Church has somehow had a less definite stand regarding abortion than the Orthodox Church.

Well, given the strict stance of today I can well understand your amazement. But the teaching has changed.

Let me paste in something I was discussing in another thread. You will find it odd and even a liitle unbelievable.

I like to take an interest in the Lives of the old Irish Saints and one of the very curious things one encounters is their strange attitude to abortion. Four of the Saints have Lives in which they are responsible for some sort of abortions: Saint Brigid, Saint Kieran of Saigir, Saint Aed of Killarien, and Saint Kenneth of Aghaboe.


In the case of Saint Kieran of Saigir, a local king named Dima abducted Bruinnech, a vowed virgin, from Kieran's monastery.

"Sanctus quoque Keranus, tanti facinoris immanitatem detestans ac remedium apponere cupiens, ad domum sacrilegi, quesiturus ab eo puellam, accessit. . . . Reverente vero vir Dei cum puella ad monasterium, confessa est puella se conceptum habere in utero. Tunc vir Dei, zelo iustitie ductus, viperium semen animari nolens, impresso venri eius signo crucis, fecit illud exinaniri."  

Translation:
"St. Kieran, despising the enormity of such a crime and wishing to apply a cure, went to the house of sacrilege to seek the girl from there. . . . When the man of God returned to the monastery with the girl, she confessed that she was pregnant. Then the man of God, led by the zeal of justice, not wishing the serpent's seed to quicken, pressed down on her womb with the sign of the cross and forced her womb empty."

Notice a very interesting detail because it bears out what I posted earlier about the early Western (Catholic) theory of the distinction between a quickened (animated) and unquickened (not yet animated and therefore abortable) foetus -- Not wishing the serpent's seed to quicken -viperium semen animari nolens -

Saint Kieran did not believe he was causing the abortion of a live foetus. It had not yet "quickened" in his eyes and so it was not a sin for the Saint to bring about an abortion.


Bruinnech then resumes her previous status in the community until Dima returns to the monastery to abduct her again. The very sight of the king causes her to die, and in response Dima threatens Kieran with exile for killing his "wife." Kieran's holy power then causes two of Dima's sons to die, which thus removes Dima's threat to Bruinnech and Kieran's community. Kieran then restores the sons and Bruinnech back to life, and neither she nor Dima is mentioned again.

---
The two women who received such abortion services from Saint Aed of Killarien and Saint Kenneth of Aghaboe are not named, nor are the exact circumstances leading to the pregnancy detailed; they appear in the vitae exclusively as the occasion for
the saints to perform such a "miracle" upon them.

Saint Aed noticed that the womb of one of the consecrated virgins serving him

"grew quickly without food, as if it might flee from that place. Then the virgin confessed before all that she had sinned secretly and she did penance. St. Aed blessed her womb, and at once the baby in her womb disappeared as if it did not exist."

The Latin text for the above:
"...cito surrexit ille sine cibo, ut ab isto fugeret. Tunc illa coram omnibus confessa est quod occulte peccasset et penitentiam egit. Sanctus autem Aidus benedixit uterum eius, et statim infans in utero eius evanuit quasi non esset."

The virgin in Saint Kenneth's vita had "fornicated secretly," became pregnant, and asked Kenneth to bless her womb. When he did so, "at once the baby in her womb vanished without a trace."

"...occulte fornicavit . statim infans in utero eius non apparens evanuit."

There is not a hint in the hagiographies that the monk scribes found anything reprehensible in these saintly abortions. Indeed they are used as evidence of the miraculous powers of the Saints.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on January 15, 2008, 10:15:53 AM
And how many nappies did these Fathers change and school lunches did they cut, and school uniforms did they wash and iron? How many sleepless nights did they have nursing colic? How many jobs did they have to work to support their kids?
Oh please!
*
They were married.  We tend to forget that. A celibate episcopate was not mandatory until the 6th or 7th century.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on January 15, 2008, 10:20:41 AM
They were married.  We tend to forget that. A celibate episcopate was not mandatory until the 6th or 7th century.
You didn't answer my questions:
And how many nappies did these Fathers change and school lunches did they cut, and school uniforms did they wash and iron? How many sleepless nights did they have nursing colic? How many jobs did they have to work to support their kids?
This ain't the fifth century Father, nor 19th century Europe, and there's no use pretending it still is.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on January 15, 2008, 10:27:26 AM
*
They were married.  We tend to forget that. A celibate episcopate was not mandatory until the 6th or 7th century.

Don't you think it's a bit weird that the man who wrote a monastic rule should himself be married?

Saont Basil the Great says:
"The woman who purposely destroys her unborn child is guilty of murder. The hair-splitting difference between formed and unformed makes no difference to us".   By 'formed' and 'unformed' he is referring to the Western theories concerning the time of ensoulment/animation/quickening which was thought to take place weeks after conception.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on January 15, 2008, 10:31:34 AM
You didn't answer my questions:

And how many nappies did these Fathers change and school lunches did they cut, and school uniforms did they wash and iron? How many sleepless nights did they have nursing colic? How many jobs did they have to work to support their kids?pretending it still is.
*
If such lack of personal participation somehow invalidates the Fathers' teaching, then we can ask similar questions about their teaching on war and personal participation...

How many enemy soldiers did the Fathers kill?   How many heads did they lop off?  How many entrails did they spill on the ground? 
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on January 15, 2008, 10:35:51 AM
Don't you think it's a bit weird that the man who wrote a monastic rule should himself be married?
Saint Basil chose a life of celibacy for himself.  I don't think he was ever married.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on January 15, 2008, 10:37:37 AM
If such lack of personal participation somehow invalidates the Fathers' teaching, then we can ask similar questions about their teaching on war and personal participation...
That's right.

Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on January 15, 2008, 10:42:28 AM
Saint Basil chose a life of celibacy for himself.  I don't think he was ever married.

And St. John Chysostom? St. Ephaim the Syrian?...in fact, all the Fathers you appeal to? Which of them was married with children?
So I think you'll find your comment about the early Fathers being married somewhat redundant in this debate. ;)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on January 15, 2008, 10:48:12 AM
And St. John Chysostom? St. Ephaim the Syrian?...in fact, all the Fathers you appeal to? Which of them was married with children?
So I think you'll find your comment about the early Fathers being married somewhat redundant in this debate. ;)
Yes, you're right.  Although a great number of bishops were married up until the 6th century the ones whom we count as Church Fathers are the unmarried ones in the main.  You'll have to forgive me for being sloppy.  It's 3:40 in the morning in Wellington and I shouldn't be playing pingpong with you when I can hardly keep my eyes open.(http://forums.catholic.com/images/smilies/smile.gif)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on January 15, 2008, 10:56:38 AM
Yes, you're right.  Although a great number of bishops were married up until the 6th century the ones whom we count as Church Fathers are the unmarried ones in the main.  You'll have to forgive me for being sloppy.  It's 3:40 in the morning in Wellington and I shouldn't be playing pingpong with you when I can hardly keep my eyes open.(http://forums.catholic.com/images/smilies/smile.gif)


OK, I'll let you go then Father.
Good to exchange views with you.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on January 15, 2008, 11:08:57 AM
OK, I'll let you go then Father.
Good to exchange views with you.
Ditto.  Night,night!  (http://www.emotihost.com/glass/16.gif)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Ebor on January 15, 2008, 11:57:11 AM
And there are many reasons why Jeffry Daumer should have killed all those women.  What you call pastoral sounds like relativism to me.  A mother can determine whether her child is to live.  God gave the parents a child and they kill it.   

Beg pardon, but I think you're confusing things.  Jeffrey Dahmer was accused of killing 17 young men and doing other atrocious things to the bodies.  He was tried on 15 counts, found guilty, imprisoned and killed while incarcerated.

I'm sorry, but I do not follow nor understand how the deeds of a serial killer apply in this subject.

Ebor
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GreekChef on January 15, 2008, 01:02:52 PM
Just for the record, my reading of the quote from His All-Holiness is NOT condoning abortion.  He says that there are cases where it is understandable that a couple would choose abortion (as Fr. Ambrose pointed out with ectopic pregnancy and cervical cancer).  Rather, what he is saying is that it is not the business of the Church to get involved in the politics of legislating it.  God gave us the free will to choose whatever might save or condemn us.  He commanded that murder is a sin (which the Fathers-married or not- interpreted to also include abortion), but He did not put anyone in the position of not being able to choose to sin.

My own personal feelings, being a married woman who may one day, God-willing, have children, is that abortion is an absolute abomination.  I can't judge someone else for choosing abortion, as I don't know their particular circumstances, but for myself, given the terrible situation that being pregnant would endanger my own life or worse, my life AND the baby's, I would personally choose to have the baby no matter what the risk, rather than voluntarily kill it, even if it meant that I knew for sure that I would not survive.  And while I don't want to air my personal circumstances publicly on the internet, it suffices to say that this is something that my husband and I have given a great deal of thought and prayer to, and for good reason, in discussing starting a family.  And of course, God forbid I was ever raped- I would have the baby. 

Where ozgeorge's argument fails is in not recognizing the alternatives to abortion.  There is always another way.  I don't believe God would ever put us in the position of having to choose to murder another human being.  The alternative choice may be sacrificing our own life, but that is a choice, and I would rather sacrifice my own life that a baby might live.

The situation ozgeorge presents, of a woman unable to care for her child, disregards the possibility of putting the child up for adoption.  As one in favor of adoption, and praying to one day adopt at least one child, I would personally be more than happy to take that child off the mother's hands.  There are thousands upon thousands of couples out there who desire nothing more than to adopt a baby- this is why babies are so difficult to adopt.  All the woman has to do is tell the nurse at the hospital that she wants to give the baby up for adoption, and social services does all the work.  Besides that, other than in the case of rape, sex is a choice that two people make, knowing full well what the consequences are.  I don't believe that abortion is an acceptable form of birth control.  They should be willing to accept the consequences when they make the choice. 

As I said, these are my own personal feelings, and I am not in a position to judge others for whatever they may choose.  I do, however, believe that we have a responsibility as Christians to protect those who cannot protect themselves.  This is why I am pro-life, but believe in a law that allows exceptions for cases of danger to the mother's health and rape- similar to the way the law outlaws the use of marijuana except in medical cases such as glaucoma (I don't want to start a debate on that one, though.  I'm just using it as an example...).  I may not choose abortion in those cases, but I certainly cannot condemn someone else for choosing it.  But I do believe in legislating against murder, which is what abortion is tantamount to, as the Church has always witnessed.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on January 15, 2008, 01:16:20 PM
My own personal feelings, being a married woman who may one day, God-willing, have children, is that abortion is an absolute abomination.  I can't judge someone else for choosing abortion, as I don't know their particular circumstances, but for myself, given the terrible situation that being pregnant would endanger my own life or worse, my life AND the baby's, I would personally choose to have the baby no matter what the risk, rather than voluntarily kill it, even if it meant that I knew for sure that I would not survive.  And while I don't want to air my personal circumstances publicly on the internet, it suffices to say that this is something that my husband and I have given a great deal of thought and prayer to, and for good reason, in discussing starting a family.  And of course, God forbid I was ever raped- I would have the baby. 

And what if you already had two young children and a pregnancy endangered your life and the fetus? Would you force the pain and hardship of your death (which would likely result in the death of the fetus as well) for an ideological stand? Is this ideology really important enough to stand by at the expense of inflicting untold pain and suffering on not merely your neighbour but on your own Children...what would anybody gain but hardship? As ozgeorge said the right choice, the moral choice, is often the lesser of two evils.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Quinault on January 15, 2008, 01:30:15 PM
Although I personally would want yo choose my child life over my own in the case of a pregnancy that would kill me. My husband has already made it perfectly clear to me that given that situation if he was the one in charge of my care (i.e. I was incapacitated) he would choose my life over that of our child in utero.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: lubeltri on January 15, 2008, 05:46:13 PM
You have certainly sparked my interest, unfortunately the website only has articles going back to 1995. You wouldn't happen to have a copy of the article that you could either post or scan and e-mail to me?

If not I may see if I can find one of the research firms in the city to find it on microfilm and send me a copy, I could possibly get it $30 or so. If the article started on A1 do you know if that was the entirety of the article or if it was continued on another page?

I got the article via the Lexis-Nexis database (I work at a university):

''His All Holiness has been impressed with the simplicity and openness of the American people and with their deep Christian faith,'' said Metropolitan Bartholomais of Chalcedon, the patriarch's closest aide. ''There is no hypocrisy. There is a sincereness and simplicity that must be proper to all Christians.''

Asked the Orthodox church's position on abortion, Bartholomais described a stand more liberal than that of the Roman Catholic Church, which condemns abortion in all cases and whose clergy have, in some cities, excommunicated leading pro-choice Catholics.

Although the Orthodox church believes the soul enters the body at conception and, ''generally speaking, respects human life and the continuation of pregnancy,'' Bartholomais said, the church also ''respects the liberty and freedom of all human persons and all Christian couples.''

''We are not allowed to enter the bedrooms of the Christian couples,'' he said. ''We cannot generalize. There are many reasons for a couple to go toward abortion.''


 :o

(MTA: Just noticed that IrishHermit has already posted it.)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: lubeltri on January 15, 2008, 06:06:19 PM
Perhaps, but you don't know the Orthodox Christian view.

If it is the Orthodox Christian view to justify the killing of the innocent, then praise God I am not Orthodox. The consequences of this "Orthodox Christian view" are being borne out tragically in Eastern Europe.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: lubeltri on January 15, 2008, 06:16:44 PM
There is a very small number of exceptions such as an ectopic pregnancy but otherwise abortion is forbidden by the canons of the Church and treated as homicide.

And that isn't even an abortion. The removal of a section of Fallopian tube is not an abortion though it results in the death of a child. The child's death was a "side effect," if you will, but not the purpose of the operation.

Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Tzimis on January 15, 2008, 07:27:35 PM
The Patriarchs words don't mean that abortion is justified. His words preclude that the Church shouldn't get involved in the process of free will. You're make it out as if you posted a smoking gun. My view is that the law is written on peoples hearts. No matter what the situation is. You're gut will tell you what is right or wrong. Abortion should be avoided unless there is no other option. Even than it will feel wrong and need repenting.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on January 15, 2008, 07:59:21 PM
Don't forget, of course, as well, that we have many beloved saints in the Church who were doctors.  Ss. Cosmas and Damianos the Unmercenaries, St. Luke, St. Panteleimon, Ss. Cyril and John the Unmercenaries, just to name a few. 
*
And can we imagine Saint Luke... "so your husband earns only 20 denarii a week. Of course that is not enough to raise a second child on.   I'll perform an abortion for you tomorrow."

Or, at a consultation with Saints Cosmas and Damian.... "it would not be God's all-benevolent will for you to bear this child when you are an unmarried woman.  Come back later today and we'll abort it."
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on January 15, 2008, 09:05:25 PM
I would dare say we can not. However, it seems to me that the Holy Orthodox Church has just as much trouble concerning this issue and contraception as the Holy Catholic Church. At least, that's the impression I get from this forum. Sadly, I never had this impression of Holy Orthodoxy. 
*
I have been very dismayed to find the level of acceptance of abortion among some of the Orthodox members of this Forum.   To counter that and get the true teaching, it is necessary to read the official statements of the various Orthodox Churches.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Riddikulus on January 15, 2008, 09:10:30 PM

"Although the Orthodox Church believes the soul
enters the body at conception and, generally
speaking, respects human life and the continuation
of the pregnancy," Barthlomew said, the church
also "respects the liberty and freedom of all human
persons and all Christian couples. . . .We are not
allowed to enter the bedrooms of the Christian
couples," he also said. "We cannot generalize.
There are many reasons for a couple to go toward
abortion." (San Francisco Chronicle-7/20/90
p.A22)

While I agree with His All Holiness (I'm sure he will be pleased to know), that ellipsis bothers me. I wonder what has been omitted by the reporter.

Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Anastasios on January 16, 2008, 02:08:49 AM
If it is the Orthodox Christian view to justify the killing of the innocent, then praise God I am not Orthodox. The consequences of this "Orthodox Christian view" are being borne out tragically in Eastern Europe.

While I would share your disdain for anyone advocating abortion as a "tragic necessity in some cases," you probably know that the traditional Orthodox teaching is against abortion since it is murder. I could go to one of your Church's message boards and find people advocating non-Catholic teachings.  I could also make stupid comparisons of your Church's teaching on divorce and the fact that half of people in Central America are now living with people they are not married to, many because "they will only be able to get married once, so they better try it out first" (actual quote from several of my friends and even a RC priest I know).

I abhor your triumphalism. Praise God I am not...never mind, I will not idolize God by praising him for my preconceived notions.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on January 16, 2008, 02:20:15 AM
If it is the Orthodox Christian view to justify the killing of the innocent, then praise God I am not Orthodox. The consequences of this "Orthodox Christian view" are being borne out tragically in Eastern Europe.
So, you're going to conclude that because some on this board advocate "freedom" to kill the innocent via abortion, that this is the "Orthodox Christian view"?  Especially considering the posts others have submitted to show how the Orthodox Church has always and with the utmost clarity condemned the practice of abortion as murder?  I'm sorry, but this strikes me as more of a triumphalistic attempt to "stick it to the Orthodox" than any real attempt at intelligent discussion.  If you've done your homework apart from this forum, you will know very well that the opinions of those here who "justify the killing of the innocent" obviously do not represent the ancient Tradition of the Orthodox Church.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Riddikulus on January 16, 2008, 02:44:58 AM
So, you're going to conclude that because some on this board advocate "freedom" to kill the innocent via abortion, that this is the "Orthodox Christian view"?

I must have lost track of this thread because I haven't noticed anyone advocating the '"freedom" to kill the innocent via abortion'. What I have seen is an attempt at understanding that abortion might be a consideration; however rarely.

Is there any suggestion that the Church would deny a woman with cancer (for example) an abortion if carrying the child full-term was to kill her?

Let me make myself perfectly clear on this, I abhor abortion and wouldn't even take the life of unborn kittens, but I cannot in all conscience see myself insisting that anyone in such a situation as I mention above should be forced to deliver a child at the cost of their own life. I have no idea what I would do in such a case and as it's not going to be an issue for me, I feel I have no right to suggest that someone should do what I might not have the strength to.

Quote
 Especially considering the posts others have submitted to show how the Orthodox Church has always and with the utmost clarity condemned the practice of abortion as murder? 

Yes, and well it should do, but murder is committed on other ocassions, too. War, for instance, when innocents are bombed into oblivion or left horribly maimed for life. Ok, I'm not going to go off on that tangent, but I do see a certain duplicity going on, here.

Forgive me if I have caused offence.



Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on January 16, 2008, 04:17:15 AM
Secondly, does it mean that if someone doesn't have children, they can't say abortion is wrong, but if they do, they can say it is wrong?
Firstly, They can say it's wrong. Their opinion just doesn't carry that much weight for me.
Secondly, I never said abortion was ever "right". The analogies I used were divorce and killing in war. Neither of these is "right", but sometimes they are the lesser of evils.

Thirdly, what does one's state have to do with the fact that from the moment of conception, each soul exists, and by aborting it a person is denying this soul a) baptism and b) a chance at life on its own? How can choosing to end a child's life ever be better than any alternative?
When you have seen the "alternatives" I have seen- abuse and neglect of children, poverty which leads to crime, drug addiction and psychosis, you too will begin to question.

And finally, if it is pastoral to counsel abortion, what will the parents say on judgment day to the child they aborted? When it asks them why it was murdered and not allowed baptism, what will their response be? Has the priest counseled them on this?
I can understand fully the point expressed in your other post: if someone has already done the deed, we need to look at why they did it and be compassionate. The Roman Catholics have a group called Project Rachel that does a good job at that.  But if it is before the deed is done, I can't see how it could ever be suggested.
What do you mean by "counsel abortion"? Do you mean make the decision for the parent/s? Any Pastoral Carer worth their salt does not make decisions for those in their care. They present the facts and as far as possible, the implications of the decision.
The same goes for suicide. I can restrain someone from harming themselves only for so long, ultimately, they must make a decision whether to take their own life or not. All I can do is help them to see the implications of their decision. I can "schedule them" (I think you guys call it "commit them"), but if they have made a decision to kill themselves, they will find a way. This is simply the reality.

As far as the argument that some people know they should not be parents so they use contraception, if you are talking about non Orthodox that is one thing, as they do not have an Orthodox worldview, but in an Orthodox worldview, those who know they would not make good parents should not get married in the first place. You can't consent to an Orthodox marriage, hear all of the prayers for children, and say "nah, I am not good parent material, I think I will pass."  There is such a pressure in the modern world to be married, and yet we have such a floundering of vocations and people who should have been celibate being pressured into marriage and relationships...if people know they will not be good parents, they might consider monasticism or some other alternative.
I absolutely agree with you on this one. (Well, almost ;) ).
While I think that an Orthodox Christian couple should have children if they possible can, I'm not totally against the use of contraception to plan families. Note: abortion is not contraception. Contraception is the prevention of fertilization, not the expulsion of a fertilized ovum or foetus.

If it is the Orthodox Christian view to justify the killing of the innocent, then praise God I am not Orthodox. The consequences of this "Orthodox Christian view" are being borne out tragically in Eastern Europe.
So can we blame the AIDS epidemic in Africa on Roman Catholicism's objections to condoms?
Come to the Darkside, lubeltri. We have baklava......
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on January 16, 2008, 10:05:00 AM
Now I have a few questions for the "Right to Life" people:
What is the cut off age for the "Right to Life"? Why do people on Death Row not have a "Right to Life"? Why is the State killing adults acceptable to you? Why aren't you up in arms about the Death Penalty? Why do enemy combatants in war not have a "Right to Life"?
It seems almost as if you view yourselves as some sort of gods that can determine who has a right to live and who dies.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Riddikulus on January 16, 2008, 11:03:06 AM
Now I have a few questions for the "Right to Life" people:
What is the cut off age for the "Right to Life"? Why do people on Death Row not have a "Right to Life"? Why is the State killing adults acceptable to you? Why aren't you up in arms about the Death Penalty? Why do enemy combatants in war not have a "Right to Life"?
It seems almost as if you view yourselves as some sort of gods that can determine who has a right to live and who dies.

Being a confused pacifist, George, I really have no answers. I object most strongly to the death penalty. I hate the "just war" stance taken by Christians. And though I try with all my strength to follow Christ's example of loving an enemy, I know in my heart of hearts that if anyone forceably entered my home and tried to harm my grandchildren I would do anything in my power to stop them. I simply wouldn't be thinking of their right to life.

Please pray for this sinner.

Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GreekChef on January 16, 2008, 12:11:03 PM

I can understand fully the point expressed in your other post: if someone has already done the deed, we need to look at why they did it and be compassionate. The Roman Catholics have a group called Project Rachel that does a good job at that.  But if it is before the deed is done, I can't see how it could ever be suggested.



Just wanted to throw this out there for those interested.  This is a group called ZOE for life, and they are endorsed by SCOBA.  I would love to see this group become bigger and more active within the church.  They do WONDERFUL work to help prevent abortions without getting into the politics of legislating it:

Quote
ZOE is a non-profit Christ-centered support organization with three major goals: to help women in crisis pregnancy, to assist Orthodox Christian couples seeking to adopt, and to create an Orthodox Christian abstinence program to educate young people.
http://www.zoeforlifeonline.org/


My own belief, as I've said before, is that abortion is ALWAYS an abomination, and a terrible tragedy.  I am in full agreement that the Church has always clearly spoken against it, and that we should regard those who have had an abortion with love and compassion, and we should counsel them and try to reunite them with the Church.  I only wanted to point out that I don't think His All-Holiness was (is) pro-abortion, he just believes that the Church shouldn't get involved in politics, in legislating people's private lives.  He believes that Christ never forced anything on anyone, and neither should His Church.  While I agree with that, I also believe in legislating against murder, which the Church has always clearly taught is what abortion is.

God forgive us sinners...
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on January 16, 2008, 02:22:42 PM
Now I have a few questions for the "Right to Life" people:
What is the cut off age for the "Right to Life"? Why do people on Death Row not have a "Right to Life"? Why is the State killing adults acceptable to you? Why aren't you up in arms about the Death Penalty? Why do enemy combatants in war not have a "Right to Life"?
It seems almost as if you view yourselves as some sort of gods that can determine who has a right to live and who dies.

Well, I'm generally not pro-life so I don't have a problem with most these things; killing in war is perfectly acceptable, in fact I would argue that it would be a sin for a soldier to ignore his duty and refuse to kill the enemy. I have no problem with the death penalty in principle, though in practice I oppose it because I do not have enough confidence in the various judicial systems to accurately guilt and certainly not to do so within the constraints of constitutional and customary common law protections that should be afforded to the accused, so it's better to not execute anyone than execute those convicted by a faulty system.

As for a fetus' right to life, I'm all for it, but it does not have the right to remain inside the woman against her will. She has the right to remove it from her body, it can then receive medical attention have its rights protected as a citizen, but not at the expense of the rights of others.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on January 16, 2008, 10:53:25 PM
Well, I'm generally not pro-life so I don't have a problem with most these things; killing in war is perfectly acceptable, in fact I would argue that it would be a sin for a soldier to ignore his duty and refuse to kill the enemy. I have no problem with the death penalty in principle, though in practice I oppose it because I do not have enough confidence in the various judicial systems to accurately guilt and certainly not to do so within the constraints of constitutional and customary common law protections that should be afforded to the accused, so it's better to not execute anyone than execute those convicted by a faulty system.

As for a fetus' right to life, I'm all for it, but it does not have the right to remain inside the woman against her will. She has the right to remove it from her body, it can then receive medical attention have its rights protected as a citizen, but not at the expense of the rights of others.

I'm afraid you're behind the times.  The first custody/property (that was the legal arguments) battle over test tube babies occured decades ago.  More or less, it's within reason now that this canard will be put to rest, if it isn't already.  (Btw, in that case the father's argument was that he would be made a father against his will, which, given the legal precedents, he was legally correct.  Another reason why I'm not a legalist).

As for the "right," there's the concept of implied consent, which applies in all cases outside of rape.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on January 17, 2008, 02:05:42 AM
I'm afraid you're behind the times.  The first custody/property (that was the legal arguments) battle over test tube babies occured decades ago.  More or less, it's within reason now that this canard will be put to rest, if it isn't already.  (Btw, in that case the father's argument was that he would be made a father against his will, which, given the legal precedents, he was legally correct.  Another reason why I'm not a legalist).

And how, exactly is this relevant?

People may have some degree of a right to live, but not at the expense of another. If I need a kidney, I can't force you to give me one. If I need a kidney to survive and you are the only one who can give it to me, you are well within your rights to refuse...my 'right to life' does not extend to allowing me to violate you and force you to give me a kidney. Furthermore, your right to life does not extend to even a violation of my property rights, if you're freezing outside and are about to die of hypothermia you still can't enter my house against my will to get warm; if you did enter my house without my permission I would be within my rights to (and might very well) shoot you. Your 'right to life' is limited, it is only valid so long as you don't violate my rights...and vice versa. The same must be applied to any fetus' 'right to life'.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Riddikulus on January 17, 2008, 08:51:47 PM
I tend to equate the two, as those who label themselves "pro-choice" believe abortion should be allowed.  When I use the term "pro-abortion," I don't mean that the people in question think abortion is a great thing that should be practiced as much as possible.  I mean only that they support its use.  Therefore, I see the terms "pro-choice" and "pro-abortion" as being synonymous.  Plus, I honestly have trouble using the term "pro-choice," as the individual most affected by an abortion gets no choice in the matter.

Whilst not wishing to be contentious, it is my understanding that the two do not equate. But then, I am neither. For myself, I am decidedly pro-life. I do, however, accept another's right to be otherwise - so I suppose that makes me pro-choice in the eyes of some; but so be it. And I do accept a woman's right to make a decision to terminate a pregnancy - as horrible as that would be to me - if their life is endangered by that pregnancy.

Quote
"Lord, please make this union produce children.  Do not let me enter into it with any other desire in my mind.  Please remove any physical desire I have for my wife, as this could lead me to seek the marital embrace for reasons of the flesh.  If my wife is not fertile at this time, please prevent us from entering into this physical union, as the sinful pleasure we would receive would not be balanced out by the great good of childbearing.  I understand that, aside from its role in the creation of new life, sexual intercourse is an odious, sinful act, and I look forward to the day when my wife and I are no longer able to produce offspring, and may thus abandon this act forever."

No comment.

Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Myrrh23 on January 30, 2008, 03:31:20 AM
Hi Guys!


I don't think it's fair to compare GreekIsChristian's quote with NAMBLA, because I am assuming that GIC means two adult people on friendly terms. The monsters of NAMBLA wish to get their itches scratched with young children who have less-formed minds and/or come from backgrounds that make them easy pickings.

Quote
Considering that over 95% of people are sexually active prior to marriage (Reference),

Millions of people abort their own children for non-health reasons, but the statistics shouldn't mean we should see it as ok. Pre-marital sex occurs here in America because our society is saturated in sex, and many kids probably aren't getting the gentle persuasion NOT to "do-it" at home (Hee-hee! I got to type in the phrase "do-it" in a post! Ahem...sorry). Maybe when so many angles are encouraging what used to be a taboo, maybe we religious kinda give up?
One might say mingling the white and black races used to be taboo, but if you look at it, breaking down apartheid supports the Christian tenet that we are all children of God. Pre-marital sex is wrong because you're sharing something sacred with someone else ho doesn't have a right to it before the Lord.

Quote
Won what?  for one thing, will you chorttle if the muslims outbreed us into oblivion? Look at Eurabia.

You mean Arabia? I don't believe they'll out-rabbit us any time soon. According to my Pakistani father, Muslim countries, on the whole, favor boys more than girls. Girls are either killed outright, or left to rot in the streets and orphanages. You can't pop 'em out if you kill us girls. My father's country is notorious for throwing their baby girls right out into the streets. He told me a story one time about one of his visits. There were far more girl children begging on the streets than boys. To quote him, "You give one girl something, and so many of them see and come rushing up to you. It breaks your heart."
I think adults converting to Islam might be more of a concern.


Quote
You guys are pikers compared to them. 

What's a piker?

**Sorry...I didn't see that there were eight pages to this topic! I'm shouting into the distance, aren't I? ;)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GOCTheophan on January 30, 2008, 02:14:11 PM
*
As a Secret Agent for the Phanar you will know that your Patriarch is pro-choice (to his eternal shame, maybe even his damnation.)
"Save the trees and kill the humans."

Abortion never involves choice for the child concerned and often is not very much there for the mother involved either. Abortion is the willful taking of a life innocent if not of original at least of actual sin. It is extremely common in this evil world and outside of the restoration of a Christian order under an Orthodox Tsar will become more and more so. We all tend to make excuses for how twisted and demonized those around us and we ourselves have become...Very few people want to be considered "pro-abortion" or even consider it a "good thing"....but we must have "choice".

The teaching of the Orthodox Church on this matter is very clear. Abortion is murder. To deny that is damnable certainly.

If the Patriarch in question is indeed "pro-choice" and teaches such publically he is a heretic- he is conciously going aganist the teachings of the Orthodox Church and as such is no Patriarch at all. That no one has broken with him over this shows those who have eyes to see how far we have fallen.

Theophan.

Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on January 30, 2008, 02:40:51 PM
Abortion never involves choice for the child concerned and often is not very much there for the mother involved either. Abortion is the willful taking of a life innocent if not of original at least of actual sin. It is extremely common in this evil world and outside of the restoration of a Christian order under an Orthodox Tsar will become more and more so. We all tend to make excuses for how twisted and demonized those around us and we ourselves have become...

Ah, a tyrannical Tzar, what a great solution; I would rather see the death of hundreds of millions that the institution of another such hideous and autocratic government on this earth.

Quote
Very few people want to be considered "pro-abortion" or even consider it a "good thing"....but we must have "choice".

Yes, we must have freedom above all else.

Quote
The teaching of the Orthodox Church on this matter is very clear. Abortion is murder. To deny that is damnable certainly.

The 'teaching of the Orthodox Church' isn't even clear on whether or not an eternal hell even exists...much less the details of what will send you there. ::)

Quote
If the Patriarch in question is indeed "pro-choice" and teaches such publically he is a heretic- he is conciously going aganist the teachings of the Orthodox Church and as such is no Patriarch at all. That no one has broken with him over this shows those who have eyes to see how far we have fallen.

Without a formal declaration from the Synod of Constantinople there is no heresy; your accusations of heresy, as though you are qualifed to make that determination, is nothing but libel.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Riddikulus on January 30, 2008, 08:31:56 PM
Abortion never involves choice for the child concerned and often is not very much there for the mother involved either. Abortion is the willful taking of a life innocent if not of original at least of actual sin.

I agree, abortion is the wilful taking of an innocent life. You are completely correct, but what I find interesting is that the murdering of innocents via war is also sin and isn't the Church merciful to such an act? Why then would a woman who aborts a pregnancy that would take her life not be afforded the same mercy? If taking life in war or in self-defence is somehow justifiable and receives the mercy of the Church why not the taking of life in the instance of abortion?

Quote
It is extremely common in this evil world and outside of the restoration of a Christian order under an Orthodox Tsar will become more and more so.

???

Quote
We all tend to make excuses for how twisted and demonized those around us and we ourselves have become...Very few people want to be considered "pro-abortion" or even consider it a "good thing"....but we must have "choice".

Indeed we must have a choice, just as we have a choice to take up arms and murder during times of war, to protect the living. Why would a woman be denied such a right; to protect the living - herself?

Quote
The teaching of the Orthodox Church on this matter is very clear. Abortion is murder. To deny that is damnable certainly.

So abortion is the "unforgiveable sin"?

Quote
If the Patriarch in question is indeed "pro-choice" and teaches such publically he is a heretic- he is conciously going aganist the teachings of the Orthodox Church and as such is no Patriarch at all. That no one has broken with him over this shows those who have eyes to see how far we have fallen.

It is in no way certain what the Patriarch in question actually said. We have an ellipsis in the midst of a reported quote. This is hearsay. Perhaps I'm overly cautious, but I'm going to need just a little more evidence than an incomplete hearsay quote before I would even think for a moment that anyone is a heretic.

Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Simayan on January 30, 2008, 09:23:03 PM
My wife and I practice contraception to our shame. There. I've said it outside of the confessional. I don't see it as something to be proud of nor do I see it as something the Church in any other way than with compassion for our weaknesses. My wife and I rationalize our use of contraception because she has a medical condition which Doctors tell us should be addressed before we have anymore children.

Nothing to be ashamed of here, in my opinion. You are not aborting a fetus, nor are you doing it because you don't want the struggle of raising a child.

It is not a sin to prevent other children from living in poverty. In fact, it would seem to be a greater sin to continue reproducing and fall into poverty while harming everyone in the family inadvertently.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on January 30, 2008, 09:29:44 PM
*
Tough Questions


Question 1:


If you knew a woman who was pregnant, who had 8 kids already, three who were deaf, two who were blind, one mentally retarded, and she had syphilis, would you recommend that she have an abortion?
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..

Your answer to the abortion question?

If you said YES, you just killed Beethoven.


Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Riddikulus on January 30, 2008, 10:02:08 PM
I don't see how the above is relavent. It seems to me to be more an emotive argument than rational. God doesn't stop inspiring talented people. The crying shame is that many potentionally brilliant people have died in the womb or during infancy; a result of this fallen world.

For myself, because of my own beliefs, I would not suggest to anyone that they have an abortion, but if they considered it their only option - ie; the pregnancy would cost them their life, it would be their choice and I would forgive them for making it.

 
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Νεκτάριος on January 30, 2008, 10:20:40 PM
I don't see how the above is relavent. It seems to me to be more an emotive argument than rational. God doesn't stop inspiring talented people. The crying shame is that many potentionally brilliant people have died in the womb or during infancy; a result of this fallen world.

And it is ultimately a silly argument when you follow it's logic to the end.  How many people have been killed by being burned at the stake, at the hands of religious wars, how much free expression has been stifled by religious institutions etc. Therefore if one wants to be pro-life why not support the eradication of religion?  For the that matter, how about the higher rates of disease in overpopulated areas and people killed by those diseases? 
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: livefreeordie on January 31, 2008, 01:31:09 AM
ANY law limits someone's choice.  Society balances a person's freedom to choose with the effect that choice has on society.  The logic of the whole "pro-choice" position seems to me to lead to a society of VERY selfish people.  Oh but wait a minute, that is the society we live in.  One of very selfish people.

A few thoughts based on knowing people who've had abortions, knowing people who were adopted out of horrible circumstances, talking with my mother who specializes in counseling sexually abused children after they are removed from their home, having 5 children myself, working in prisons and with troubled youth which many people in society would like to have seen aborted, etc.

In general, those women who get pregnant, are poor, on drugs, etc. or maybe just don't think they can take care of it, but are sincerely worried about bringing their kid up in that environment either give it up for adoption, or tragically, have the baby thinking they can take care of it, don't care for it like they thought it would, then get it taken away.

And in general, woman of all circumstances who don't want to be inconvenienced by the child, kill it in the womb.  A society that thinks these woman are doing the child a favor is just a plain sick society.

And although many would like to make this the Rhetoric list.  As an Orthodox Christian who believes one day he'll meet his maker, I'd sure rather be on the side of saving babies/fetuses than on the side of justifying the killing of them for people's convenience.  And don't kid yourself, most abortions aren't to save the fetus from a life of misery, it's to save the mother from the trouble of taking care of it. And in general people who want to protect a mother's right to murder, are really just worried about protecting their own vices.  And some just like reading/hearing themselves argue.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: livefreeordie on January 31, 2008, 01:41:27 AM
Also, people throw out these red herrings about the mother's life, rape, etc.  They are a small percentage of abortions. In 2000 study I saw 3.3% of abortions were because or risk to fetal health, 2.8% because of risk to mother, and 1% because of rape.  Why on earth would anyone object to a law where these types of abortions are left to the mother and her doctor, and the other 92.9% abortions of pure selfishness are not allowed?

I would welcome a law allowing abortion in the above 3 circumstances while outlawing the rest versus our current system, but I would lobby towards abortion only as a legal choice when the life of the mother is at stake.

Also, I've read, but don't know if it's accurate or not, that many abortions get reported as due to the life of the mother, etc. when in fact they are not. 
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: livefreeordie on January 31, 2008, 02:13:00 AM
I consider myself "Right to Life".

Cut off age, when you know you are pregnant, you should have the baby unless your life is in danger then that's up to you, God and your doctor.

While I'd put a hole in someone's head violently entering my house, I'm against the death penalty.

The state, with all its errors, isn't acceptable to me in sentencing people to death. Innocent men have been and are on death row.
 
I am up in arms about the death penalty. 

Enemy combatants do have a Right to Life, if they surrender.  Although The Fog of War is great and sometimes they even lose that right, accidently of course!  Hey, I was a Marine. If someone might know where the next mortar round is coming from that is going to kill some of my men, he is going to tell me.

A God says "I can look into the future and decide whether the future life of this embryo is so bleak it's better off dead."


Now I have a few questions for the "Right to Life" people:
What is the cut off age for the "Right to Life"? Why do people on Death Row not have a "Right to Life"? Why is the State killing adults acceptable to you? Why aren't you up in arms about the Death Penalty? Why do enemy combatants in war not have a "Right to Life"?
It seems almost as if you view yourselves as some sort of gods that can determine who has a right to live and who dies.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on January 31, 2008, 02:13:51 AM
In 2000 study I saw 3.3% of abortions were because or risk to fetal health, 2.8% because of risk to mother, and 1% because of rape.  Why on earth would anyone object to a law where these types of abortions are left to the mother and her doctor, and the other 92.9% abortions of pure selfishness are not allowed?
I'm interested to know if you can find online documentation of this study and share the link with us.  I think that would be quite good for this discussion. :)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: livefreeordie on January 31, 2008, 02:25:10 AM
I got this from a reference in the following Wikipedia Article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_the_United_States#_note-7

This study seems to say that 98% are elective and only 2% are due to rape, incest and the life of the mother.
http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/abreasons.html

I've always seen statistics very similar to these.


I'm interested to know if you can find online documentation of this study and share the link with us.  I think that would be quite good for this discussion. :)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Νεκτάριος on January 31, 2008, 03:07:13 AM
And although many would like to make this the Rhetoric list.  As an Orthodox Christian who believes one day he'll meet his maker, I'd sure rather be on the side of saving babies/fetuses than on the side of justifying the killing of them for people's convenience.  And don't kid yourself, most abortions aren't to save the fetus from a life of misery, it's to save the mother from the trouble of taking care of it. And in general people who want to protect a mother's right to murder, are really just worried about protecting their own vices.  And some just like reading/hearing themselves argue.

Speak for yourself about protecting your own vices.  Believing that it is impossible to force one's morality on another through the judicial system and legislation is not an indication that one partakes of "vices". 
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Riddikulus on January 31, 2008, 03:41:29 AM
Speak for yourself about protecting your own vices.  Believing that it is impossible to force one's morality on another through the judicial system and legislation is not an indication that one partakes of "vices". 

Well said.  :)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on January 31, 2008, 04:55:35 AM
'livefreeordie',

Wouldn't 'livebymyreligiouscodeordie' have been a more appropriate screen name?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GOCTheophan on January 31, 2008, 10:12:36 AM

So abortion is the "unforgiveable sin"?


An abortion is not an unforgiveable sin.

However someone claiming to be an Orthodox Patriarch publically teaching that it is not a sin if they remain unrepentent does not stand much chance of entering the Kingdom of Heaven.

Let us hope that he repents if he indeed has said such.

Theophan.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: livefreeordie on January 31, 2008, 11:04:43 AM
Nothing I said indicated I want to force people to live the totality of my moral code.  I said I think abortion is wrong and should be limited.  If I say, "Cocaine should be illegal" am I forcing my "complete morality system" on people or am I just saying I think cocaine should be illegal.  What laws do you think should be enforced through the judicial system?

Speak for yourself about protecting your own vices.  Believing that it is impossible to force one's morality on another through the judicial system and legislation is not an indication that one partakes of "vices". 
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: livefreeordie on January 31, 2008, 11:08:18 AM
You are funny! :) The only time I mentioned religion was in saying because I believe in meeting my maker I want to err on the side of the unborn.  I'm not sure where you see my "religious code" in my post.  I was against abortion when I attended no church and held no creed. And if any one on this board tries to make religion some rhetorical, mathmatical type code, it's you.

GIC resorting to name calling!  That makes my day!

'livefreeordie',

Wouldn't 'livebymyreligiouscodeordie' have been a more appropriate screen name?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on January 31, 2008, 12:24:28 PM
Nothing I said indicated I want to force people to live the totality of my moral code.  I said I think abortion is wrong and should be limited.  If I say, "Cocaine should be illegal" am I forcing my "complete morality system" on people or am I just saying I think cocaine should be illegal.  What laws do you think should be enforced through the judicial system?

By just saying so? No, you're not forcing it on anyone. But if you were to lobby for a law to this effect, then yes, you would be forcing your 'complete morality system' on people, which would be wrong.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on January 31, 2008, 12:32:35 PM
You are funny! :) The only time I mentioned religion was in saying because I believe in meeting my maker I want to err on the side of the unborn.  I'm not sure where you see my "religious code" in my post.  I was against abortion when I attended no church and held no creed. And if any one on this board tries to make religion some rhetorical, mathmatical type code, it's you.

GIC resorting to name calling!  That makes my day!

I was just pointing out the irony of one who claims to advocate the ideal of 'freedom or death' advocating the usurpation of liberty because of a religious code. And yes, you only mentioned religion once as your reasoning for this position, but that's also the only time you actually gave a reason. The rest of the time you were busy talking about statistics on rape or health, which really doesn't matter to me, if our primary concern is liberty then it is those abortions that are not from forced circumstances that must, first and foremost, be defended. And by creating an accepting culture in those instances, those who have abortions because of the necessity of their situation will find it all that much easier.

(I read a paper from some Scandinavian country (I want to say Sweeden) a while back while researching for a pastoral theology class which established a pretty clear relationship between psychological problems associated with abortion and the social situation and philosophy (read: religion and religiousness) of the woman, which convinced me that the most important thing to do is to create a culture of acceptance for abortion...the professor just 'loved' my paper ;D)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GabrieltheCelt on January 31, 2008, 01:13:54 PM
Now I have a few questions for the "Right to Life" people:
What is the cut off age for the "Right to Life"? Why do people on Death Row not have a "Right to Life"? Why is the State killing adults acceptable to you? Why aren't you up in arms about the Death Penalty? Why do enemy combatants in war not have a "Right to Life"?
It seems almost as if you view yourselves as some sort of gods that can determine who has a right to live and who dies.
I've noticed that whenever someone speaks about abortion, this is the first thing that's fired back.  It's puzzling really, yet I'll do my best to answer this.

First, the term "Right to Life" is like the word "Christian"; it has several meanings.  When you say you're a Christian, it's not clear at all that you're Protestant, Roman Catholic, or Eastern Orthodox.  When you say you're a Protestant it's not clear at all what exactly that means either.  Likewise, it's the same with "Right to Life".  Here's what I mean.  All "Right to Life" folks are against abortion; some at any cost while there are those who give leeway for medical reasons (such as to save the mother's life.)  Some "Right to Life" folks abhor the Death Penalty and see it as a contradiction to their cause while some "Right to Life" folks see the Death Penalty as a just since the person on Death Row (supposedly) gave up their right when they murdered another person.  Some "Right to Life" folks see war as evil, but as sometimes unavoidable, while other "Right to Life" folks are complete pacifists and will not take up arms at any cost.

So, while the question asked really has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with 'Abortion' (the title of this thread), it still cannot be answered because ALL "Right to Life" people have been unfairly lumped together. 
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Papist on January 31, 2008, 01:35:40 PM
*
Well then, to be perfectly clear --  the Patriarch of the Greeks and the First among Equals believes that married people have the right to choose to kill their unborn children.
This is just about the saddest thing i have heard in years.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on January 31, 2008, 01:37:05 PM
First, the term "Right to Life" is like the word "Christian"; it has several meanings.  When you say you're a Christian, it's not clear at all that you're Protestant, Roman Catholic, or Eastern Orthodox.  When you say you're a Protestant it's not clear at all what exactly that means either.  Likewise, it's the same with "Right to Life".  Here's what I mean.  All "Right to Life" folks are against abortion; some at any cost while there are those who give leeway for medical reasons (such as to save the mother's life.)  Some "Right to Life" folks abhor the Death Penalty and see it as a contradiction to their cause while some "Right to Life" folks see the Death Penalty as a just since the person on Death Row (supposedly) gave up their right when they murdered another person.  Some "Right to Life" folks see war as evil, but as sometimes unavoidable, while other "Right to Life" folks are complete pacifists and will not take up arms at any cost.

But that's just what I'm saying. If one takes the view of what "Right to Life" means which you espouse above, then the Right to Life is not an intrinsic, inalienable, absolute right inherent in being human, but rather, a relative, subjective opinion. What you therefore want to impose is a relative truth as though it were an absolute one. So the honest approach would simply be to say that you are "anti-abortion", rather than supporting a "Right to Life". You can't oppose something you see as absolutely negative by using something only relatively positive.  Either the Right to Life is an absolute , inalienable right of all human beings, or you don't have a leg to stand on if you try to impose it as an absolute when in reality, you hold it to be relative and capable of being arbitrarily applied.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Νεκτάριος on January 31, 2008, 01:45:25 PM
Nothing I said indicated I want to force people to live the totality of my moral code.  I said I think abortion is wrong and should be limited.  If I say, "Cocaine should be illegal" am I forcing my "complete morality system" on people or am I just saying I think cocaine should be illegal.  What laws do you think should be enforced through the judicial system?

You said:
And in general people who want to protect a mother's right to murder, are really just worried about protecting their own vices.

And that was what I was responding to (the best indication of that is how I quoted that text in my post  ::) ).  You are accusing people with whom you disagree of being immoral, which is flat out false.  If someone wanted to legalize cocaine or other hard drugs for coherent reasons that could possibly benefit society, it wouldn't be appropriate to respond "you must be a coke addict."  I don't appreciate it being insinuated that since I favor a more libertarian view on a lot of social issues that I am somehow not a real Christian.  Can you find anything in the New Testament to justify a theocracy? 

An abortion is not an unforgiveable sin.

However someone claiming to be an Orthodox Patriarch publically teaching that it is not a sin if they remain unrepentent does not stand much chance of entering the Kingdom of Heaven.

God,

Thank you for posting on oc.net.  Although, since you are Almighty and all that why don't you pick a cooler username than GOCTheophan?  And why don't you at least link to a good website such as www.yourgoingtohell.com (http://www.yourgoingtohell.com)?




Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GabrieltheCelt on January 31, 2008, 01:51:56 PM
By just saying so? No, you're not forcing it on anyone. But if you were to lobby for a law to this effect, then yes, you would be forcing your 'complete morality system' on people, which would be wrong.
Here's another angle for your consideration GiC.  If you were walking alone at night and saw a group of youth rapidly approaching your direction would you feel better knowing that they were law-abiding Christians on their way to a Bible study?  Or, would you be thinking, "Gee, I hope these gents are like me and don't accept others' forced morality on me in the form of laws.  Afterall, just because one group of people say it's not OK to go out and hurt others doesn't mean that we ALL have to believe that way."?  Don't bother to launch into a litany of 'freedoms' and 'suppressions' tirade because we all know the answer; you would be greatful that they followed the law- laws, BTW, that stemmed from someone's 'morality system'.  Ofcoarse, the first thing you would say in this situation is, "Feet, don't fail me now!" which would prove my point.  :D    

So, while we as Christians cannot legislate others into becomming Christians, we absolutely must legally do what we can to end the majority of abortions.    
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Νεκτάριος on January 31, 2008, 02:01:54 PM
Here's another angle for your consideration GiC.  If you were walking alone at night and saw a group of youth rapidly approaching your direction would you feel better knowing that they were law-abiding Christians on their way to a Bible study?  Or, would you be thinking, "Gee, I hope these gents are like me and don't accept others' forced morality on me in the form of laws.  Afterall, just because one group of people say it's not OK to go out and hurt others doesn't mean that we ALL have to believe that way."?  Don't bother to launch into a litany of 'freedoms' and 'suppressions' tirade because we all know the answer; you would be greatful that they followed the law- laws, BTW, that stemmed from someone's 'morality system'.  Ofcoarse, the first thing you would say in this situation is, "Feet, don't fail me now!" which would prove my point.  :D   

So, while we as Christians cannot legislate others into becomming Christians, we absolutely must legally do what we can to end the majority of abortions. 

The laws and social norms you cite about not hurting or robbing or whatever on the streets can just as easily be ascribed to social contract rather than an religious or moral system's influence.  The former probably has had more impact on the latter, for that matter.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GOCTheophan on January 31, 2008, 02:05:57 PM

Thank you for posting on oc.net.  Although, since you are Almighty and all that why don't you pick a cooler username than GOCTheophan?  And why don't you at least link to a good website such as www.yourgoingtohell.com (http://www.yourgoingtohell.com)?


I was merely agreeing with what Fr Ambrose had already said.

Abortion involves the killing of a human innocent of any actual (though of course not Original Sin). Therefore it could well be argued that it is the greatest of all forms of the greatest sin which is killing somebody made in the Image of God (though of course the killing of the All Pure Lord Jesus Christ was much, much worse). Now IF the Patriarch meant what he certainly SEEMS to have meant...well someone claiming to be a representative of Christ and leader of his flock advocating acceptance of such a heinous crime...Put two and two together.

Therefore though God's judgement remains His I will have to agree with Father Ambrose on this one.

Theophan.

Theophan.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Papist on January 31, 2008, 02:59:19 PM
I was merely agreeing with what Fr Ambrose had already said.

Abortion involves the killing of a human innocent of any actual (though of course not Original Sin). Therefore it could well be argued that it is the greatest of all forms of the greatest sin which is killing somebody made in the Image of God (though of course the killing of the All Pure Lord Jesus Christ was much, much worse). Now IF the Patriarch meant what he certainly SEEMS to have meant...well someone claiming to be a representative of Christ and leader of his flock advocating acceptance of such a heinous crime...Put two and two together.

Therefore though God's judgement remains His I will have to agree with Father Ambrose on this one.

Theophan.

Theophan.
If he is pro-choice, can he even be viewed as Orthodox anymore? Is really the rightful Patriarch of Constantinople?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: livefreeordie on January 31, 2008, 03:01:18 PM
Sorry if I touched a nerve.  I said "vices".  We all have vices.  I have vices.  If you don't have vices, I applaud you.  There must be uncreated light in your confessions!  ;) Saying people have vices though is not the same as saying they must be coke addicts, etc.  I called nobody immoral.  I stated the obvious, the nature of vices and passions is that they cloud and influence our judgement and decision making.  When our nature is to look out for ourselves it's easy to sit at a computer and condemn unborn children to death in the name of personal freedom.  Since I'm no advocate of theocracy and my views on abortion didn't originate with my theology. I'll let you worry about that topic.

You said:
And that was what I was responding to (the best indication of that is how I quoted that text in my post  ::) ).  You are accusing people with whom you disagree of being immoral, which is flat out false.  If someone wanted to legalize cocaine or other hard drugs for coherent reasons that could possibly benefit society, it wouldn't be appropriate to respond "you must be a coke addict."  I don't appreciate it being insinuated that since I favor a more libertarian view on a lot of social issues that I am somehow not a real Christian.  Can you find anything in the New Testament to justify a theocracy? 


Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: livefreeordie on January 31, 2008, 03:03:49 PM
So are you Alistair Crowley in disguise, "Do what thou wilt"? or just a fan?  ;)

By just saying so? No, you're not forcing it on anyone. But if you were to lobby for a law to this effect, then yes, you would be forcing your 'complete morality system' on people, which would be wrong.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Fr. George on January 31, 2008, 03:09:08 PM
Now IF the Patriarch meant what he certainly SEEMS to have meant...well someone claiming to be a representative of Christ and leader of his flock advocating acceptance of such a heinous crime...Put two and two together. 

I have yet to see any quote attributed to the Patriarch claiming that abortion is not sinful, and not a grave decision.  The quote provided doesn't prove to me that he is "pro-choice" at all (and maybe that's just my bias affecting my judgment - who knows?).
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: livefreeordie on January 31, 2008, 03:13:41 PM
I must say, it's an inspiring thing to see your discipline in sticking to your stated debate techniques!  Of course, the fact you like to humiliate people casts a shadow that keeps me from being a true fan.  But maybe I'll come around.

I'm sorry, I guess I could work on some dissertation why I think killing, then ripping apart a fetus to be sucked out of its mother needs logic to explain why I think it's not a good thing.  But since I don't need that to be convinced it's a horrible thing that shouldn't be allowed except under the most extreme circumstances, and since you value your personal freedom so much at the expense of innocent life, I doubt I could convince you otherwise.

I would love to see your paradise of accepting abortion, accepting drug use, accepting prostitution, etc. after a few years.  Probably would look like a dead addict after their heroin overdose.

I was just pointing out the irony of one who claims to advocate the ideal of 'freedom or death' advocating the usurpation of liberty because of a religious code. And yes, you only mentioned religion once as your reasoning for this position, but that's also the only time you actually gave a reason. The rest of the time you were busy talking about statistics on rape or health, which really doesn't matter to me, if our primary concern is liberty then it is those abortions that are not from forced circumstances that must, first and foremost, be defended. And by creating an accepting culture in those instances, those who have abortions because of the necessity of their situation will find it all that much easier.

(I read a paper from some Scandinavian country (I want to say Sweeden) a while back while researching for a pastoral theology class which established a pretty clear relationship between psychological problems associated with abortion and the social situation and philosophy (read: religion and religiousness) of the woman, which convinced me that the most important thing to do is to create a culture of acceptance for abortion...the professor just 'loved' my paper ;D)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GabrieltheCelt on January 31, 2008, 03:17:08 PM
The laws and social norms you cite about not hurting or robbing or whatever on the streets can just as easily be ascribed to social contract rather than an religious or moral system's influence.  The former probably has had more impact on the latter, for that matter.
What is a 'social contract'?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: livefreeordie on January 31, 2008, 03:27:30 PM
Live Free or Die relates to the things we allow to enslave us and keep us from living fulfilling lives. The people I meet everyday aren't enslaved because our government limits personal freedom, they are enslaved because of their own passions and vices.

Freedom to me has nothing to do with government.  I've met men in prison who were the most free souls you'd ever meet.  Freedom is having enough control over your own passions and vices to live a life of true meaning and purpose.

How a person live speaks way more about freedom than what they say or type.


I was just pointing out the irony of one who claims to advocate the ideal of 'freedom or death' advocating the usurpation of liberty because of a religious code.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Αριστοκλής on January 31, 2008, 03:30:29 PM
"Live Free or Die"..."Orthodoxy or Death" - works for me.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on January 31, 2008, 03:52:49 PM
Here's another angle for your consideration GiC.  If you were walking alone at night and saw a group of youth rapidly approaching your direction would you feel better knowing that they were law-abiding Christians on their way to a Bible study?  Or, would you be thinking, "Gee, I hope these gents are like me and don't accept others' forced morality on me in the form of laws.  Afterall, just because one group of people say it's not OK to go out and hurt others doesn't mean that we ALL have to believe that way."?  Don't bother to launch into a litany of 'freedoms' and 'suppressions' tirade because we all know the answer; you would be greatful that they followed the law- laws, BTW, that stemmed from someone's 'morality system'.  Ofcoarse, the first thing you would say in this situation is, "Feet, don't fail me now!" which would prove my point.  :D    

So, while we as Christians cannot legislate others into becomming Christians, we absolutely must legally do what we can to end the majority of abortions.    

I'd feel better after I reached down and griped the handle of my M1911, rather than hoping that they decided to follow the law that evening. Of course, this is a fundamentally different situation, laws against assault are necessary to maintain social order and prevent a complete descent into anarchy; a society, to remain free, should stay on the verge of anarchy without ever entering into it, the state should always face that threat and only pass the laws needed to prevent the ultimate descent. Laws against abortion are not necessary to maintain a reasonable degree of social order, as the past few decades have demonstrate, as such they are inherently unjust.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on January 31, 2008, 03:53:51 PM
So are you Alistair Crowley in disguise, "Do what thou wilt"? or just a fan?  ;)

Perhaps, in a past life. ;)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on January 31, 2008, 03:54:36 PM
Live Free or Die relates to the things we allow to enslave us and keep us from living fulfilling lives. The people I meet everyday aren't enslaved because our government limits personal freedom, they are enslaved because of their own passions and vices.

Freedom to me has nothing to do with government.  I've met men in prison who were the most free souls you'd ever meet.  Freedom is having enough control over your own passions and vices to live a life of true meaning and purpose.

How a person live speaks way more about freedom than what they say or type.

Ah, and I thought you were quoting Gen. Stark...so much for the ideals of the revolution.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on January 31, 2008, 04:03:44 PM
I must say, it's an inspiring thing to see your discipline in sticking to your stated debate techniques!  Of course, the fact you like to humiliate people casts a shadow that keeps me from being a true fan.  But maybe I'll come around.

Oh, everyone does in time. ;D

Quote
I'm sorry, I guess I could work on some dissertation why I think killing, then ripping apart a fetus to be sucked out of its mother needs logic to explain why I think it's not a good thing.

Not that I'm willing to concede that a fetus is alive, since it is incapable of surviving on its own; however, for the sake of argument: I believe it was you who already said you'd put a bullet into the head of someone who invades your house against your will, and I commend you for that. But, why would you not same afford the same courtesy to someone who invaded your body against your will?

Quote
But since I don't need that to be convinced it's a horrible thing that shouldn't be allowed except under the most extreme circumstances, and since you value your personal freedom so much at the expense of innocent life, I doubt I could convince you otherwise.

Probably not...'Live free or die: Death is not the worst of evils.'

Quote
I would love to see your paradise of accepting abortion, accepting drug use, accepting prostitution, etc. after a few years.  Probably would look like a dead addict after their heroin overdose.

Yeah, a country that embraces those things might end up as primitive as the Netherlands. ::)

Of course my utopia would be an even better place since it wouldn't suffer from the difficulties associated with overpopulation. ;)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: livefreeordie on January 31, 2008, 05:14:24 PM
If he was my motivation it would have too cliche'd.  Gotta love the general though.

Ah, and I thought you were quoting Gen. Stark...so much for the ideals of the revolution.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: livefreeordie on January 31, 2008, 05:24:17 PM
A fetus is an invader?  Analogous to a criminal entering my house? Hold a fetus in your hand young enough to be aborted.  I have.  Then think about putting a bullet in its head. Or ripping it's limbs apart with forceps.  Or puncturing its skull.  We aren't talking theory, or some hypothetical situation of someone entering my house. I'm not being "emotional".  I'm talking about something real that happens everyday.  We are talking about a horrible ending everyday for innocent "developing" life(like that better) for the sake of someone's convenience over 90% of the time.

Who said primitive and who said how long it would take?  And as far as I know the Netherlands haven't embraced hard drugs, etc. and large scale drug production, distribution, etc. is prosecuted heavily as it has become something of a European center for the production/distribution of hard drugs(some paradise). When the cycle of acceptance is fully implemented in the glorious Netherlands and you can buy and shoot heroin in your hashish shop, then we can judge the outcome.

I'm happy to say my home has contributed 5 young heathens to world overpopulation and a sixth is probably on the way.  And my home is a glorious place!  ;D

Oh, everyone does in time. ;D

Not that I'm willing to concede that a fetus is alive, since it is incapable of surviving on its own; however, for the sake of argument: I believe it was you who already said you'd put a bullet into the head of someone who invades your house against your will, and I commend you for that. But, why would you not same afford the same courtesy to someone who invaded your body against your will?

Probably not...'Live free or die: Death is not the worst of evils.'

Yeah, a country that embraces those things might end up as primitive as the Netherlands. ::)

Of course my utopia would be an even better place since it wouldn't suffer from the difficulties associated with overpopulation. ;)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: livefreeordie on January 31, 2008, 05:24:58 PM
Sorry, hit the wrong button! :o
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: livefreeordie on January 31, 2008, 05:31:02 PM
I must ask.  Do you actually own a M1911 and are you actually proficient with it?


I'd feel better after I reached down and griped the handle of my M1911, rather than hoping that they decided to follow the law that evening. Of course, this is a fundamentally different situation, laws against assault are necessary to maintain social order and prevent a complete descent into anarchy; a society, to remain free, should stay on the verge of anarchy without ever entering into it, the state should always face that threat and only pass the laws needed to prevent the ultimate descent. Laws against abortion are not necessary to maintain a reasonable degree of social order, as the past few decades have demonstrate, as such they are inherently unjust.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Veniamin on January 31, 2008, 05:41:32 PM
I must ask.  Do you actually own a M1911 and are you actually proficient with it?



Oh, I'm pretty sure it's a no to both of those.  GiC does talk a good game, though.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: livefreeordie on January 31, 2008, 05:42:24 PM
Why am I not suprised!  :o

Though I have some sympathy for you as Alistair's star disciple, James Page, is my favorite practitioner of the dark art of weaving the six strings of electric guitar.

Perhaps, in a past life. ;)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Νεκτάριος on January 31, 2008, 05:47:45 PM
I was merely agreeing with what Fr Ambrose had already said.

Abortion involves the killing of a human innocent of any actual (though of course not Original Sin). Therefore it could well be argued that it is the greatest of all forms of the greatest sin which is killing somebody made in the Image of God (though of course the killing of the All Pure Lord Jesus Christ was much, much worse). Now IF the Patriarch meant what he certainly SEEMS to have meant...well someone claiming to be a representative of Christ and leader of his flock advocating acceptance of such a heinous crime...Put two and two together.

Therefore though God's judgement remains His I will have to agree with Father Ambrose on this one.

Theophan.

Theophan.

God,

Christianity is a strange religion indeed.  Your holy texts say that only you, God, can judge hearts and souls and yet God apparently posts on this forum as both GOCtheophan AND Irish Hermit?

Who said primitive and who said how long it would take?  And as far as I know the Netherlands haven't embraced hard drugs, etc. and large scale drug production, distribution, etc. is prosecuted heavily as it has become a European center for the production of hard drugs(some paradise). When the cycle of acceptance it fully implemented in the glorious Netherlands and you can buy heroin in yor hashish shop, then we can judge the outcome.

There you go again.  Accusing people who disagree with you of vices when they take a libertarian position on a social issue. "you can buy heroin in yor hashish shop"  I've never consumed any illegal drugs, period.  I've never had any involvement with an abortion.  If statistics are any guide, my hunch is the same isn't true of all of the people most vocal about the right to life in this thread.  And you are also ignoring the benefits of dramatically reduced rates of violent crime in the Netherlands relative to the US; if you don't send people to prison for long sentences for minor drug crimes gang membership decreases, etc.   


Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: livefreeordie on January 31, 2008, 05:52:31 PM
Take a deep breath. :o

I accused no one on this board, nor implied anyone on this board consumes heroin or any other illegal drug. Nor implied that people who disagree with me take drugs.  I said when/if the Netherlands allow a truly "free" society and hard drugs are freely available,i.e. heroin in hash shops, then lets fully judge their social experiment.

God,

Christianity is a strange religion indeed.  Your holy texts say that only you, God, can judge hearts and souls and yet God apparently posts on this forum as both GOCtheophan AND Irish Hermit?

There you go again.  Accusing people who disagree with you of vices when they take a libertarian position on a social issue. "you can buy heroin in yor hashish shop"  I've never consumed any illegal drugs, period.  I've never had any involvement with an abortion.  If statistics are any guide, my hunch is the same isn't true of all of the people most vocal about the right to life in this thread.  And you are also ignoring the benefits of dramatically reduced rates of violent crime in the Netherlands relative to the US; if you don't send people to prison for long sentences for minor drug crimes gang membership decreases, etc.   



Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on January 31, 2008, 05:53:51 PM
I must ask.  Do you actually own a M1911 and are you actually proficient with it?

Yes and inside about 50 yards.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Νεκτάριος on January 31, 2008, 05:54:09 PM
This is just about the saddest thing i have heard in years.

Good thing there is the Catholic Church to guide us all in issues of human dignity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juan_Gin%C3%A9s_de_Sep%C3%BAlveda)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Νεκτάριος on January 31, 2008, 05:55:25 PM
Take a deep breath. :o

I accused no one on this board, nor implied anyone on this board consumes heroin or any other illegal drug. Nor implied that people who disagree with me take drugs.  I said when/if the Netherlands allow a truly "free" society and hard drugs are freely available,i.e. heroin in hash shops, then lets fully judge their social experiment.


You used the second person and not the third person impersonal.  So as you wrote your post, you did in fact accuse someone on this board. 
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: livefreeordie on January 31, 2008, 06:02:10 PM
You can shoot an M1911 accurately to 50 yards?  What technique do you use?  Is your M1911 modified?  What is your trigger pressure?



Yes and inside about 50 yards.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: livefreeordie on January 31, 2008, 06:04:45 PM
Forgive me my grammatical Obi-Wan! :o

You used the second person and not the third person impersonal.  So as you wrote your post, you did in fact accuse someone on this board. 
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on January 31, 2008, 06:18:31 PM
You can shoot an M1911 accurately to 50 yards?

I can get the vast majority of the rounds within about six or seven inches of the bullseye and could certainly hit a human sized target a few times before I emptied it. Not real impressive I know, one can always use more time at the shooting range, but it's good enough to make me feel safe when I have it on me.

Quote
What technique do you use?

Couldn't tell you that, just shooting the way I was always taught to shoot. I don't have any professional training, I was just born with a gun in my hand. ;)

Quote
Is your M1911 modified?

Nope, Kimber Tactical II, stock.

Quote
What is your trigger pressure?

As it's stock I believe it comes with around a 4 1/2 pound trigger pressure, that's one modification I might think about at some point, a pound lower trigger pressure would improve my accuracy out beyond about 25 yards.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Νεκτάριος on January 31, 2008, 06:30:23 PM
What is a 'social contract'?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contract (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contract)

To use the example you gave, the youths decide not to attack GiC while he is walking down the road not simply because he is likely armed and dangerous, nor because they have moral qualms about murder (whether they do or not is irrelevant) but because as members of societies they have mutually agreed to give up certain rights / freedoms for greater social order. 
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GOCTheophan on January 31, 2008, 07:16:28 PM
Well someone should discuss the whole topic of "judging". The Bible does tell us who will and we will not enter into the Kingdom of the Heavens.

Theophan.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: livefreeordie on January 31, 2008, 07:36:15 PM
Kimber Tactical II is a nice weapon.  If you are really hitting that close to a bullseye at 50 yards you are doing good, close to expert territory. Good job.

The best way to increase accuracy and accuracy in a combat situation is to work on controlling your breathing and trigger pressure.  Even trained shooters can have a hard time hitting a man sized target even 10 yards away in a combat situation when you are breathing hard and your adreniline is pumping.

I can get the vast majority of the rounds within about six or seven inches of the bullseye and could certainly hit a human sized target a few times before I emptied it. Not real impressive I know, one can always use more time at the shooting range, but it's good enough to make me feel safe when I have it on me.

Couldn't tell you that, just shooting the way I was always taught to shoot. I don't have any professional training, I was just born with a gun in my hand. ;)

Nope, Kimber Tactical II, stock.

As it's stock I believe it comes with around a 4 1/2 pound trigger pressure, that's one modification I might think about at some point, a pound lower trigger pressure would improve my accuracy out beyond about 25 yards.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on January 31, 2008, 09:19:56 PM
Kimber Tactical II is a nice weapon.  If you are really hitting that close to a bullseye at 50 yards you are doing good, close to expert territory. Good job.

Well, this is shooting at a leisurely pace, if I try to get through 8 rounds in a quarter of a minute or something my accuracy suffers considerably, especially at that range. To have a half way decent grouping I need to take a few seconds between each shot, so I don't know that my shooting would hold up to the 'rapid fire' requirement that I understand is part of the qualification process.

But in any case, I was a pretty good shot in high school, but I went away to college and would only shoot a few times a year during the summer over the past 6 years. When I got back to the range I noticed my skill had dropped considerably, I hit a deer at about 450 this year, but my rifle was shooting to the right and I failed to compensate enough for the distance so I ened up with a gut shot (the problem with getting a new rifle the day before you leave to Colorado to go hunting), tracked him for about a mile then lost the blood trail. I bought a couple more guns (270 WSM and the Kimber) and try to make time to shoot regularly (well, not the short mag at $3 a pop) now that I'm in a situation where I can again, but it's often difficult to make the time (especially this time of year since the dirt road going out there is half mud and half creek); but once I'm out there I have a great time.

Quote
The best way to increase accuracy and accuracy in a combat situation is to work on controlling your breathing and trigger pressure.  Even trained shooters can have a hard time hitting a man sized target even 10 yards away in a combat situation when you are breathing hard and your adreniline is pumping.

I have no idea how I'd perform in a combat situation, never had the opportunity to do so and, quite frankly, hope I never have to be in that situation. I'm sure the first time would be difficult for anyone, regardless of their marksmanship skill. I'm hoping I can stick to fury animals and paper targets, but if I find myself in a situation where I need to defend myself I'll do what I can.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: livefreeordie on January 31, 2008, 09:46:34 PM
450 yards?  Nothing like hunting stories! ;) I should make you a ghillie suit and call you Carlos.

At 450 yards wind drift is the hardest thing to compensate for.  270 WSM is a good round for distant shots though.


But in any case, I was a pretty good shot in high school, but I went away to college and would only shoot a few times a year during the summer over the past 6 years. When I got back to the range I noticed my skill had dropped considerably, I hit a deer at about 450 this year, but my rifle was shooting to the right and I failed to compensate enough for the distance so I ened up with a gut shot (the problem with getting a new rifle the day before you leave to Colorado to go hunting), tracked him for about a mile then lost the blood trail. I bought a couple more guns (270 WSM and the Kimber) and try to make time to shoot regularly (well, not the short mag at $3 a pop) now that I'm in a situation where I can again, but it's often difficult to make the time (especially this time of year since the dirt road going out there is half mud and half creek); but once I'm out there I have a great time.

I have no idea how I'd perform in a combat situation, never had the opportunity to do so and, quite frankly, hope I never have to be in that situation. I'm sure the first time would be difficult for anyone, regardless of their marksmanship skill. I'm hoping I can stick to fury animals and paper targets, but if I find myself in a situation where I need to defend myself I'll do what I can.


Fixed quote tags to make post easier to read  - PeterTheAleut
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on January 31, 2008, 11:37:58 PM
450 yards?  Nothing like hunting stories! ;) I should make you a ghillie suit and call you Carlos.

At 450 yards wind drift is the hardest thing to compensate for.  270 WSM is a good round for distant shots though.

LOL, wasn't his famous shot about 2500 yards? 450 isn't that far and I had a rest (the hood of a pick-up ;)), if I'm not mistake isn't military rifle qualification off-hand at 100, kneeling at 300, and prone at 500? And that's without a scope.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on February 01, 2008, 01:17:19 AM
It is extremely common in this evil world and outside of the restoration of a Christian order under an Orthodox Tsar will become more and more so.

???
From the interaction of the Church with the imperial structures of the Byzantine Empire developed the concept of a symphony between the secular authority of the Empire and the spiritual authority of the Church--i.e., the doctrine of Orthodox Christian Empire.  (Patriarch Anthony IV of Constantinople once said, "It is not possible for Christians to have a church and not to have an empire.") This is part of the Byzantine world view that the Russian church received from those missionaries who brought the faith to her people. Many will say, however, that this concept of Orthodox Christian Empire and the glorification of the Orthodox Tsar blinded the Russian Church to the fact that the Romanov Tsars (heirs of Tsar Peter the Great) were anything but Orthodox and sought to use the Church to advance their imperial ends, hence the Synod with an imperially appointed layman at its head to make the Church little more than the spiritual arm of the Tsar's rule over his subjects. This Russo-Byzantine ideal of Orthodox Christian Empire died a cataclysmic and final death in 1917 with the Bolshevik Revolution.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on February 01, 2008, 01:27:17 AM
I have yet to see any quote attributed to the Patriarch claiming that abortion is not sinful, and not a grave decision.  The quote provided doesn't prove to me that he is "pro-choice" at all (and maybe that's just my bias affecting my judgment - who knows?).
One can hold to the traditional Orthodox belief that abortion is fundamentally murder and can therefore, as a spiritual leader in the Church, not condone abortion.  But does this mean that one must strive to establish laws forbidding abortion and counsel his flock to do the same?  I'm actually not so sure of that.  Regardless of the righteousness of the goal, is it proper for the Church to be an active agent for legislative change?  In being such, would the Church need to compromise her mission to be a hospital for dying souls and to preach the Gospel of salvation via the Ark of Salvation, the Holy Church of Christ?  Does our Orthodox Christian pursuit of a legislative agenda, even if that be the state prohibition of abortion, require us to get too involved in the arena of secular politics?

I personally believe, living as I do in a representative democracy which places on me the responsibility to make my Christian voice heard via the ballot box, that I am called to use my voting rights to help bring about an end to the holocaust of abortion.  I recognize this, however, within my understanding of my role as an individual Orthodox Christian within my society, so I don't push this as an official position of the Church.  Therefore, I don't see myself in any position to judge any bishop or patriarch of the Church who counsels his flock to not pursue anti-abortion legislation.  The question I see His All-Holiness, Patriarch Bartholomew answering (in the negative) is this: "Does our Church's traditional condemnation of abortion require us today to seek legislation banning the practice?"  I may disagree with his conclusion, but I'm not willing to say that he doesn't base his reasoning on Orthodox premises.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on February 01, 2008, 01:37:28 AM
450 yards?  Nothing like hunting stories! ;) I should make you a ghillie suit and call you Carlos.

At 450 yards wind drift is the hardest thing to compensate for.  270 WSM is a good round for distant shots though.

LOL, wasn't his famous shot about 2500 yards? 450 isn't that far and I had a rest (the hood of a pick-up ;)), if I'm not mistake isn't military rifle qualification off-hand at 100, kneeling at 300, and prone at 500? And that's without a scope.

Guys, I know you like to talk about guns and target shooting, but could you please take it to another thread so we can keep this one on topic?  Thank you.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Νεκτάριος on February 01, 2008, 02:03:37 AM
???

From the interaction of the Church with the imperial structures of the Byzantine Empire developed the concept of a symphony between the secular authority of the Empire and the spiritual authority of the Church--i.e., the doctrine of Orthodox Christian Empire.  (Patriarch Anthony IV of Constantinople once said, "It is not possible for Christians to have a church and not to have an empire.") This is part of the Byzantine world view that the Russian church received from those missionaries who brought the faith to her people. Many will say, however, that this concept of Orthodox Christian Empire and the glorification of the Orthodox Tsar blinded the Russian Church to the fact that the Romanov Tsars (heirs of Tsar Peter the Great) were anything but Orthodox and sought to use the Church to advance their imperial ends, hence the Synod with an imperially appointed layman at its head to make the Church little more than the spiritual arm of the Tsar's rule over his subjects. This Russo-Byzantine ideal of Orthodox Christian Empire died a cataclysmic and final death in 1917 with the Bolshevik Revolution.

The Church - State relationship in imperial Russia outside of European Russia was much different than the romanticized  version that is so popular on the internet.  The Imperial authorities deemed it would be more in their interests to promote Buddhism and Islam in Siberia and Russia to the point that there were some strong restrictions on Orthodox missionary work, and some peoples like some Kyrgyz and Kazakh groups were actually islamified under Tsarist aegis as were many Yakuts brought into Buddhism (with some degree of violence).  Some of this is told in Leskov's On the Edge of the World.  As more and more Mongols and Buryats turned to the Russian Empire for protection against the Chinese (and there were even some Tibetans who wanted to swap British backing for Russian backing), Russia adopted a very pro-buddhist policy (for instance, you can still see today a Buryat temple and a very beautiful Mosque in St. Petersburg - something definitely lacking in London, Paris or Berlin of that time!) and some Mongol / Buryat buddhists considered the Romanovs to be a line of reincarnations of one of their gods.  My point in this ramble is that religious policy wasn't really driven by ideology during imperial Russia, but rather on political concerns.  Often, and especially in European Russia, this worked to benefit the Orthodox, but in other cases it was to their disadvantage.     
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Theognosis on February 13, 2008, 06:54:27 AM
Okay GiC, let's be legalistic for argument's sake.

Quote
As for a fetus' right to life, I'm all for it, but it does not have the right to remain inside the woman against her will.

Are you saying that trespassing is a crime punishable by death?

Quote
She has the right to remove it from her body,

Can she do it by herself and not involve another citizen, i.e. a doctor, to help her eliminate the "threat"?

Quote
it can then receive medical attention have its rights protected as a citizen, but not at the expense of the rights of others.

If the child is a "citizen", please use "he" or "she." 

BTW, we also have laws against child abuse and negligence.

Not to mention murder.

Hence, if the mother leaves the child to die after the abortion, she must be punished accordingly.

Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Theognosis on February 13, 2008, 07:05:08 AM
It's sad that the Ecumenical Patriarch appears to be more concerned about the environment than the fate of the millions of unborn children.

Let's pray that the Theotokos guide his All-Holiness.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Αριστοκλής on February 13, 2008, 08:03:09 AM
It's sad that the Ecumenical Patriarch appears to be more concerned about the environment than the fate of the millions of unborn children.

Let's pray that the Theotokos guide his All-Holiness.


I think the operative word here is "appears". And it would appear to me that the Ecumenical Patriarch needs some 'media sensitivity' training in that his words will be scrutinized by those who hate the Church and/or those who dislike the Ecumenical Patriarchate no matter who occupies the throne.
I'm certain that had he stated that the Church has canons condemning abortion and severe penalties for those who acquire one or aid and abet one, that that would never appear in print.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Theognosis on February 13, 2008, 10:35:33 AM
I think the operative word here is "appears". And it would appear to me that the Ecumenical Patriarch needs some 'media sensitivity' training in that his words will be scrutinized by those who hate the Church and/or those who dislike the Ecumenical Patriarchate no matter who occupies the throne.

Exactly my thoughts.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Νεκτάριος on February 13, 2008, 12:39:25 PM
It's sad that the Ecumenical Patriarch appears to be more concerned about the environment than the fate of the millions of unborn children.

Let's pray that the Theotokos guide his All-Holiness.


Considering that much of his flock lives on low lying coastal areas and islands, some concern for the environment is warranted, I'd think.

For all this talk of the EP supporting abortion, does anyone know of even a single priest who has ever counseled someone to obtain an abortion?  I'd honestly be shocked if someone has.  Perhaps that would be a but more indicative than microanalysing one particular statement of the Patriarch.  Or maybe GOCTheophan is right, it doesn't matter anyway since women wear trousers in our churches.   
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Myrrh23 on February 13, 2008, 06:58:37 PM
Hey Guys!


I know nothing about the Ecumenical Patriarch, but I do have an observation. Why would a mother whose life is in danger during birth be given a penance if she aborts her child? This is especially a concern if she has other young children at home to think about. A C-section might very well solve this dilemma, but if the mother is acting in a justified way, should she not also be considered a saint if she puts family first before the unborn child? I would think that a mother's primary responsibility is the family she has here and now...

LiveFreeorDie, it's even worse when some of these babies are accidently born alive during abortion, and the doctors and nurses leave them in the waste buckets to die! I've read stories from former abortion providers, who have participated in this and feel absolutely terrible that they did.

GIC! You actually believe a fetus is not alive, simply because it cannot survive on its own outside the womb??  :'(
And I was just starting to fall in love with you!  ;)
By your logic, any human infant, born under normal circumstances, cannot be considered "alive" because they cannot survive on their own. Do you believe an unborn child has any rights, or are they graciously considerable if they happen to be "wanted"?
Too bad God Himself can't post on this forum, especially after you identified an unborn fetus as a potential home invader...I know we're not rabbits, G, but we're also not beasts.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ytterbiumanalyst on February 14, 2008, 08:44:24 PM
Too bad God Himself can't post on this forum, especially after you identified an unborn fetus as a potential home invader...
Right, because that would be the one issue he would want to weigh in on. Besides, he doesn't have to post here, we have enough people who can speak His mind for Him. ::)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on February 14, 2008, 09:11:34 PM
GIC! You actually believe a fetus is not alive, simply because it cannot survive on its own outside the womb??  :'(
And I was just starting to fall in love with you!  ;)
By your logic, any human infant, born under normal circumstances, cannot be considered "alive" because they cannot survive on their own. Do you believe an unborn child has any rights, or are they graciously considerable if they happen to be "wanted"?
Too bad God Himself can't post on this forum, especially after you identified an unborn fetus as a potential home invader...I know we're not rabbits, G, but we're also not beasts.

Actually, my argument for it not being human relates not so much to survivability, but rather to brain development. (The argument I put forth concerning survivability is that even if it has a right to life, the mother also has a right to remove it from her body that transcends its right to life, for the same (but even stronger) reason that one's right to remove someone from their home transcends the person's right to life...whether or not the fetus is human is moot in this argument.) At some point during gestation the fetus may acquire the computational potential of a human being, but certainly not during the first trimester; and, thus, I don't believe it can be regarded as human at that time.

Sorry to disappoint, but I have this tendency to defend my libertarian ideals even when it gets me in trouble. ;)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Myrrh23 on February 14, 2008, 10:46:36 PM
GIC---


I understand your point, yet one must put forth the question of when a human body acquires a soul. Some say at the moment of conception, while others argue a soul is present when there is brain and brain stem activity. If there is no brain activity, as was the case of Terri Schiavo, "aint no one home". Btw, I personally agreed that Schiavo was looooong gone.
What if a woman decides a month before birth that she no longer wants the child? Do you believe she has the right to abort the child, even if it is healthy and viable, with healthy brain activity? I remember reading a news article about a woman who was in the middle of giving birth--at the end of nine months-- to twins. She was told she had to have a C-section in order to safely remove both babies, and this woman then decided to terminate one of the babies because she didn't want another C-section scar. Would you have supported this woman's decision to terminate so close to birth? Not trying to burn you at the stake--just getting ahold of your beliefs.
When do you personally believe a woman should not be allowed to abort her baby?

And, of course, I'm gonna ask the forbidden question: do you have any kids? Hey, "having a baby changes everything"...

Myrrh23
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on February 15, 2008, 01:22:19 AM
GIC---


I understand your point, yet one must put forth the question of when a human body acquires a soul. Some say at the moment of conception, while others argue a soul is present when there is brain and brain stem activity. If there is no brain activity, as was the case of Terri Schiavo, "aint no one home". Btw, I personally agreed that Schiavo was looooong gone.

I don't believe this issue should be given any consideration from the perspective of law since there is no objective way of determining the answer to this question. Even our own theological tradition is unclear on this, some insist it's at conception, others have said in the past that it's 40 days after birth when the Churching takes place. But even if our theological tradition did directly address the issue, we have no right to codify a religious belief as law and force it on others.

Quote
What if a woman decides a month before birth that she no longer wants the child? Do you believe she has the right to abort the child, even if it is healthy and viable, with healthy brain activity?

I think that in this instance it would be wonderful if we could set up a means system where labour is induced and the child is cared for the best our medical technology allows and is given up for adoption when appropriate...provided such a system does not present undue difficulty to the woman. However, in the end, her right to remove the fetus from her body trumps the fetus' right to life, even if I would regard it as human at this point (which was the point of the whole 'home invaders' analogy I've been villainized for ;)).

Quote
I remember reading a news article about a woman who was in the middle of giving birth--at the end of nine months-- to twins. She was told she had to have a C-section in order to safely remove both babies, and this woman then decided to terminate one of the babies because she didn't want another C-section scar. Would you have supported this woman's decision to terminate so close to birth? Not trying to burn you at the stake--just getting ahold of your beliefs.

I find this decision to be very selfish and unfortunate on her part and certainly disagree with it on a moral level. However, with that said, I do not believe that the government has a right to force her to undergo a medical procedure, against her will, even in this case. As I said before, one's right to life ends when it becomes dependent on the abrogation of another's fundamental personal liberties. So while I do not support her decision, per se, I do support her right to make this decision.

Quote
When do you personally believe a woman should not be allowed to abort her baby?

I do not believe that there is any time, under any conditions, when the state has the right to make this determination for a woman.

Quote
And, of course, I'm gonna ask the forbidden question: do you have any kids? Hey, "having a baby changes everything"...

Nope, not even close. But considering that 60 percent of women who have an abortion already have at least one child, I don't know how significant this really is.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Heorhij on February 15, 2008, 10:01:04 AM
???

From the interaction of the Church with the imperial structures of the Byzantine Empire developed the concept of a symphony between the secular authority of the Empire and the spiritual authority of the Church--i.e., the doctrine of Orthodox Christian Empire.  (Patriarch Anthony IV of Constantinople once said, "It is not possible for Christians to have a church and not to have an empire.") This is part of the Byzantine world view that the Russian church received from those missionaries who brought the faith to her people. Many will say, however, that this concept of Orthodox Christian Empire and the glorification of the Orthodox Tsar blinded the Russian Church to the fact that the Romanov Tsars (heirs of Tsar Peter the Great) were anything but Orthodox and sought to use the Church to advance their imperial ends, hence the Synod with an imperially appointed layman at its head to make the Church little more than the spiritual arm of the Tsar's rule over his subjects. This Russo-Byzantine ideal of Orthodox Christian Empire died a cataclysmic and final death in 1917 with the Bolshevik Revolution.

I agree, essentially... but there were diffrences between different Romanovs. Peter I (the "Great") was definitely not Orthodox. Catherine II (also the "Great") was hardly Orthodox, too; superficially, she was very pious, atteded Divine Liturgies, had her confessor-priest, etc., but her policies were pretty much anti-Church. Her son Paul I was very different - even though he had a terrible temper and was generally feared, he had some intrinsic loyalty to the Church teachings. Alexander I was, apparently, very influenced by his Roman Catholic friends (Polish princes), and during his reign, Freemasonry flourished all over the Empire. Nicholas I was definitely Orthodox. Alexander II (the "Liberator," the Tsar who freed serfs) was an extremely nice, kind, generous, wonderfully educated man, but his relationships with the Church were very difficult because of his extra-marital affairs and then his "morganatic" secular marriage with his former mistress. Alexander III was Orthodox. Nicholas II was, of course, Orthodox.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Tzimis on February 15, 2008, 10:22:52 AM
Posted by GIC;

Quote
So while I do not support her decision, per se, I do support her right to make this decision.

This is exactly what the EP stated. He will not get in the way of free will. That doesn't mean that he is pro-choice. It really has nothing to do with abortion. He is just sticking up for what God gave man. It is man that chooses his destiny and not the Church.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Papist on February 15, 2008, 10:53:35 AM
Free will is not license. It simply means that we are not like the animals; our decisions are not all conditioned by instinct.  Should we make murder legal and just say that we are not taking away people's free wil?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Tzimis on February 15, 2008, 11:04:26 AM
Free will is not license. It simply means that we are not like the animals; our decisions are not all conditioned by instinct.  Should we make murder legal and just say that we are not taking away people's free wil?

  The law punishes and condemns. The Churches job isn't to uphold the law but to save people from it.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: The young fogey on February 15, 2008, 11:39:52 AM
Now-Patriarch Bartholomew was right about Christian liberty but that liberty's limit is the harm principle, or the golden rule in the form of 'don't harm others'. ('Your freedom ends where my nose begins' as my dad put it.) Many sins are none of the law's business but killing a foetus for any reason other than to save the woman's life (even rarer than before thanks to advances in medicine) is inexcusable. So on that he was wrong in implying that the law should allow it.

Exceptions for rape and incest say 'I have the right to kill you because of the horrible thing your father did'.

As for excuses for contraception (http://www.angelfire.com/pa3/OldWorldBasic/NoContraception.html) the ones I read from Orthodox sound like the ones from Anglicans around the 1950s, cautious and conservative ('it's not ideal but we allow it; couples should consult their priest on it'). Before 1930 Christians were unanimous condemning it.

With the interesting exception in Roman Catholic moral theology that you can prevent conception that way if the sex is against one's will, hence the dispensation for the African nuns.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Νεκτάριος on February 15, 2008, 11:43:43 AM
I agree, essentially... but there were diffrences between different Romanovs. Peter I (the "Great") was definitely not Orthodox. Catherine II (also the "Great") was hardly Orthodox, too; superficially, she was very pious, atteded Divine Liturgies, had her confessor-priest, etc., but her policies were pretty much anti-Church. Her son Paul I was very different - even though he had a terrible temper and was generally feared, he had some intrinsic loyalty to the Church teachings. Alexander I was, apparently, very influenced by his Roman Catholic friends (Polish princes), and during his reign, Freemasonry flourished all over the Empire. Nicholas I was definitely Orthodox. Alexander II (the "Liberator," the Tsar who freed serfs) was an extremely nice, kind, generous, wonderfully educated man, but his relationships with the Church were very difficult because of his extra-marital affairs and then his "morganatic" secular marriage with his former mistress. Alexander III was Orthodox. Nicholas II was, of course, Orthodox.

So in short, the less Orthodox a tsar was, the more competent of ruler he or she proved to be.  For all the complaints against them, Peter I and Catherine II brought more geopolitical power and stability to Russia, both of which were highly beneficial to the church, even if indirectly.  As Orthodox as Alexander III and Nicholas II were, their poor statecraft led to the collapse of the empire and the church within the empire. 
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Tzimis on February 15, 2008, 12:15:57 PM
Now-Patriarch Bartholomew was right about Christian liberty but that liberty's limit is the harm principle, or the golden rule in the form of 'don't harm others'. ('Your freedom ends where my nose begins' as my dad put it.) Many sins are none of the law's business but killing a foetus for any reason other than to save the woman's life (even rarer than before thanks to advances in medicine) is inexcusable. So on that he was wrong in implying that the law should allow it.

I don't think he was implying any such thing. What I believe he is implying is that the church can't put up a fence to protect sinners from themselves.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on February 15, 2008, 12:28:08 PM
Now-Patriarch Bartholomew was right about Christian liberty but that liberty's limit is the harm principle, or the golden rule in the form of 'don't harm others'. ('Your freedom ends where my nose begins' as my dad put it.)

And the fetus' right to life ends where the woman's body begins. Just like your right to life ends at my front door if you decide to either enter or remain in my house uninvited. You do not have the right to live at the expense of another's freedom over their person.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Αριστοκλής on February 15, 2008, 12:30:26 PM
And the fetus' right to life ends where the woman's body begins. Just like your right to life ends at my front door if you decide to either enter or remain in my house uninvited. You do not have the right to live at the expense of another's freedom over their person.

Got a canon on that one?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Schultz on February 15, 2008, 12:49:45 PM
And the fetus' right to life ends where the woman's body begins. Just like your right to life ends at my front door if you decide to either enter or remain in my house uninvited. You do not have the right to live at the expense of another's freedom over their person.

Define person, please.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Theognosis on February 15, 2008, 01:29:22 PM
At some point during gestation the fetus may acquire the computational potential of a human being, but certainly not during the first trimester; and, thus, I don't believe it can be regarded as human at that time.

That's heresy.  Do you know nothing about the Incarnation???

Our Lord Jesus Christ became FULLY human (as well as fully God) the moment he was conceived inside the womb of the Theotokos.

Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Theognosis on February 15, 2008, 01:37:02 PM
And the fetus' right to life ends where the woman's body begins.

And you think that the abortionist's deadly medical instruments have the right to ENTER the unborn child's arms, legs, torso and neck and cut them into pieces?

Quote
Just like your right to life ends at my front door if you decide to either enter or remain in my house uninvited.

Where do you plan to put the severed arms, legs and head of the person who enters your house uninvited? 

You know what, I had a discussion with an atheist several years ago who used the same set of arguments.  They're lame, lame, lame.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Theognosis on February 15, 2008, 02:04:00 PM
He will not get in the way of free will.

It should not just be the will of the mother.  And not just the will of the unborn child.  We must not forget that the Church also has the FREE WILL to protect her children.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Papist on February 15, 2008, 02:22:20 PM

  The law punishes and condemns. The Churches job isn't to uphold the law but to save people from it.
Its not just a matter of religion. Its a simple matter of right and wrong, natural law. We shouldn't purposely kill innocent human beings so don't kill them. At conception it has all the chromosomes need to be human, it is technicallly an organism, and the species of that organism is homosapien. That means human. Come now people. We don't even need religion to argue this point.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Papist on February 15, 2008, 02:23:36 PM
That's heresy.  Do you know nothing about the Incarnation???

Our Lord Jesus Christ became FULLY human (as well as fully God) the moment he was conceived inside the womb of the Theotokos.


GOOD POINT!!!
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Papist on February 15, 2008, 02:24:45 PM


You know what, I had a discussion with an atheist several years ago who used the same set of arguments.  They're lame, lame, lame.

I agree. The pro-choice position is as irrational as atheism.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Papist on February 15, 2008, 02:26:27 PM
I am getting a really bad taste in my mouth from this thread. PLEASE tell me that Eastern Orthodoxy does not allow for the legality of abortion!
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Fr. George on February 15, 2008, 02:49:27 PM
I am getting a really bad taste in my mouth from this thread. PLEASE tell me that Eastern Orthodoxy does not allow for the legality of abortion! 

We don't like abortion, we think abortion is sinful (of course, just as murder is sinful yet more understandable in war, self defense, etc., the degree of understanding of abortion is left to the discretion of those hearing confession and, ultimately, to the Lord's judgment)... But as for "allow for the legality" - I don't know how we can disallow, considering we're not the State.  We understand why people want it to be lagal, and we understand that it's unlikely to change (i.e. the legality of abortion in this country), but we still try to change people's hearts (which is the most effective way to end abortion, IMO).

I think my last point above bears repeating: changing people's hearts is the most effective way to end abortion.  We can make abortion illegal, but then it will just continue "underground."  But if we change people's hearts, then they won't seek it, whether it's legal or not.  The Church wasn't designed or intended to be a legal advocacy group - the Christian revolution of the 1st-4th century was made possible through changing individual peoples' hearts - when their hearts are changed, the law will change.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: FrChris on February 15, 2008, 02:54:12 PM
I am getting a really bad taste in my mouth from this thread. PLEASE tell me that Eastern Orthodoxy does not allow for the legality of abortion!

It doesn't, and I suspect you know this, Papist.

However, this board does allow people the freedom to express their own opinions, and these opinions do not have to be upheld as Truth by the Body of Christ.

But you know that, since you also express your opinions here....and some of those opinions are definately not shared by the Orthodox Church.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Papist on February 15, 2008, 02:57:45 PM
It doesn't, and I suspect you know this, Papist.

However, this board does allow people the freedom to express their own opinions, and these opinions do not have to be upheld as Truth by the Body of Christ.

But you know that, since you also express your opinions here....and some of those opinions are definately not shared by the Orthodox Church.
Fr. Chris, my concern here is the statement made by the EP, not individuals on this forum. I suspect you know this.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Papist on February 15, 2008, 02:59:16 PM
We don't like abortion, we think abortion is sinful (of course, just as murder is sinful yet more understandable in war, self defense, etc., the degree of understanding of abortion is left to the discretion of those hearing confession and, ultimately, to the Lord's judgment)... But as for "allow for the legality" - I don't know how we can disallow, considering we're not the State.  We understand why people want it to be lagal, and we understand that it's unlikely to change (i.e. the legality of abortion in this country), but we still try to change people's hearts (which is the most effective way to end abortion, IMO).

I think my last point above bears repeating: changing people's hearts is the most effective way to end abortion.  We can make abortion illegal, but then it will just continue "underground."  But if we change people's hearts, then they won't seek it, whether it's legal or not.  The Church wasn't designed or intended to be a legal advocacy group - the Christian revolution of the 1st-4th century was made possible through changing individual peoples' hearts - when their hearts are changed, the law will change.
So you do or do you not believe that it is a Christian's responsibility to put forth effort to change unjust laws?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: FrChris on February 15, 2008, 03:04:05 PM
Fr. Chris, my concern here is the statement made by the EP, not individuals on this forum. I suspect you know this.

Let's look at your post:

Quote
I am getting a really bad taste in my mouth from this thread. PLEASE tell me that Eastern Orthodoxy does not allow for the legality of abortion!

No where do you define that you are commenting solely on the statement made by the EP.
You are, however, responding to posts made by individuals on this forum.



Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Fr. George on February 15, 2008, 03:19:38 PM
So you do or do you not believe that it is a Christian's responsibility to put forth effort to change unjust laws?

It is the responsibility of every Christian, just as it is of every citizen, to put forth effort to change unjust laws.  But the Church itself, the collective, is to be a vehicle of salvation, not an activist group.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Tzimis on February 15, 2008, 03:29:38 PM
It should not just be the will of the mother.  And not just the will of the unborn child.  We must not forget that the Church also has the FREE WILL to protect her children.

At what expense? Losing two people instead of one?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Νεκτάριος on February 15, 2008, 05:32:16 PM
You are, however, responding to posts made by individuals on this forum.

Not to pick on to GiC, but it is pretty obvious his views are well outside the mainstream of orthodox Orthodoxy.  He has pretty much said that he is a neo-platonist or something of the sort on many occasions in the public fora.  So why on earth do certain Catholic posters get almost giddy that the Orthodox Church does not consider abortion to be immoral solely based off of a few posts of GiC?

I still challenge anyone to show any evidence of an Orthodox priest, with the blessing of his bishop, explicitly stating that abortion is not immoral or counseling a woman to obtain an abortion (in non-life threatening circumstances).  Until then, I think it is fairly safe to say that the Orthodox Church's position is that abortion is immoral.

I am getting a really bad taste in my mouth from this thread. PLEASE tell me that Eastern Orthodoxy does not allow for the legality of abortion!

So where in the New Testament do you draw the notion that Christianity is anything but apolitical and that it is our duty to set up a theocracy to impose our moral values on society?  I am entirely pro-life, but I simply do not believe that trying to regulate abortion via judicial / legislative fiat is going to dramatically lower the abortion rate.  There are just too many other important issues out there for me to use abortion as the end all litmus test.   
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Fr. George on February 15, 2008, 06:08:21 PM
I still challenge anyone to show any evidence of an Orthodox priest, with the blessing of his bishop, explicitly stating that abortion is not immoral or counseling a woman to obtain an abortion (in non-life threatening circumstances).  Until then, I think it is fairly safe to say that the Orthodox Church's position is that abortion is immoral.

So where in the New Testament do you draw the notion that Christianity is anything but apolitical and that it is our duty to set up a theocracy to impose our moral values on society?  I am entirely pro-life, but I simply do not believe that trying to regulate abortion via judicial / legislative fiat is going to dramatically lower the abortion rate.  There are just too many other important issues out there for me to use abortion as the end all litmus test.   

Agreed.  Well put.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Myrrh23 on February 15, 2008, 06:44:47 PM
The whole point of free will was, and is, to choose God. In examining Genesis, Adam and Eve were punished when they used their free will to choose something not in line with the Will of God. Unless the mother's life is in danger, abortion does not seem to be in line with the Will of God, even if people want to argue that a woman's body belongs to her. Everything that we are and everything that we have came from the Lord. Is it honorable to then throw unborn lives back in His face?

Btw, I believe contraception displeases the Lord, but is much better than abortion. This is where the brain that God gave us comes in, through self-control. But abstaining from practicing abortion and supporting it, this is where the grace of God through compassion comes in.

Myrrh23
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on February 15, 2008, 06:50:57 PM
Got a canon on that one?

The 13th Canon of St. Voltaire. ;D
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on February 15, 2008, 07:07:25 PM
And you think that the abortionist's deadly medical instruments have the right to ENTER the unborn child's arms, legs, torso and neck and cut them into pieces?

I could buy that argument...but the woman still has a right to remove the fetus from her body. I don't know if letting it lay there and die on it's own is an improvement in the system, but I may be able to agree that this would be a better approach on a philosophical (though not practical) level.

Quote
Where do you plan to put the severed arms, legs and head of the person who enters your house uninvited? 

I throw them in the front yard, their family can pick them up. j/k...the coroner will come and pick them up.

Quote
You know what, I had a discussion with an atheist several years ago who used the same set of arguments.  They're lame, lame, lame.

More lame than 'God told me so'? I don't think so.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on February 15, 2008, 07:08:47 PM
Not to pick on to GiC, but it is pretty obvious his views are well outside the mainstream of orthodox Orthodoxy.  He has pretty much said that he is a neo-platonist or something of the sort on many occasions in the public fora.  So why on earth do certain Catholic posters get almost giddy that the Orthodox Church does not consider abortion to be immoral solely based off of a few posts of GiC?

Agreed, I don't think I ever claimed to speak for the Church.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Myrrh23 on February 15, 2008, 07:14:26 PM
I would barter with GIC for those body parts..and then make one of those Neo-Modern blah blah-French Chic sculptures in my front yard. THEN, it would attract those nasty starlings, and I would shoot them!
(gets a crazy look in her eye and drools)  ;) :D

Myrrh23
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Veniamin on February 15, 2008, 07:23:38 PM
I would barter with GIC for those body parts..and then make one of those Neo-Modern blah blah-French Chic sculptures in my front yard. THEN, it would attract those nasty starlings, and I would shoot them!
(gets a crazy look in her eye and drools)  ;) :D

Myrrh23

Wow, you and GiC, a match made in....well, I dunno if heaven is where it was made... :P
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Papist on February 15, 2008, 07:27:18 PM
Let's look at your post:

No where do you define that you are commenting solely on the statement made by the EP.
You are, however, responding to posts made by individuals on this forum.




Ok. I see your point. However, it all bothers me because of how it relates back to the EP's statements.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Papist on February 15, 2008, 07:29:50 PM
Not to pick on to GiC, but it is pretty obvious his views are well outside the mainstream of orthodox Orthodoxy.  He has pretty much said that he is a neo-platonist or something of the sort on many occasions in the public fora.  So why on earth do certain Catholic posters get almost giddy that the Orthodox Church does not consider abortion to be immoral solely based off of a few posts of GiC?

Not Giddy at all. I feel for those in the EO Church who profess the Orthodox faith while the EP is basically professing the pro-choice position. Doesn't sound like a fun position to be in at all.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Myrrh23 on February 15, 2008, 07:33:47 PM
Veniamin, do we kinda remind you of scenes from The Thing?  ;D ;)

Myrrh23
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Νεκτάριος on February 15, 2008, 07:43:49 PM
Not Giddy at all. I feel for those in the EO Church who profess the Orthodox faith while the EP is basically professing the pro-choice position. Doesn't sound like a fun position to be in at all.

*sigh* Where / when has the Patriarch said that abortion is anything but immoral?  The most I got out of the statement posted in this thread was to not be judgmental.  If the most that people can put forth is ONE ambiguous quote to to the contrary, maybe conventional wisdom would dictate that the obvious answer (that the Orthodox Church is opposed to abortion) would make sense. 
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on February 15, 2008, 08:00:27 PM
We don't like abortion, we think abortion is sinful (of course, just as murder is sinful yet more understandable in war, self defense, etc., the degree of understanding of abortion is left to the discretion of those hearing confession and, ultimately, to the Lord's judgment)... But as for "allow for the legality" - I don't know how we can disallow, considering we're not the State.  We understand why people want it to be lagal, and we understand that it's unlikely to change (i.e. the legality of abortion in this country), but we still try to change people's hearts (which is the most effective way to end abortion, IMO).

I think my last point above bears repeating: changing people's hearts is the most effective way to end abortion.  We can make abortion illegal, but then it will just continue "underground."  But if we change people's hearts, then they won't seek it, whether it's legal or not.  The Church wasn't designed or intended to be a legal advocacy group - the Christian revolution of the 1st-4th century was made possible through changing individual peoples' hearts - when their hearts are changed, the law will change.

True.  But then again, outlawing adult murder doesn't stop it, it just goes on "underground," and yet we ban that.

We ought to obey God rather than men. Acts of the Apostles.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Νεκτάριος on February 15, 2008, 08:31:17 PM
True.  But then again, outlawing adult murder doesn't stop it, it just goes on "underground," and yet we ban that.

As long as one's wearing a uniform, killing isn't illegal - but that's another topic altogether.

There is not a single well ordered society in which homicide isn't regulate.  Homicide is also fairly simple to regulate in most cases.  On the other hand, abortion is much like other issues of personal morality like sex, prostitution, drugs etc. that are nearly impossible to ever really regulate.  Even in states like Ceasescu's Romania in which there were draconian anti-abortion laws, abortions remained fairly common. 

Quote
We ought to obey God rather than men. Acts of the Apostles.

Irrelevant to the conversation here.  Other than GiC, who here has said that abortion is an option for Orthodox Christians? 

And I'm still waiting for the verse about Christian Sharia from the NT.   
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on February 15, 2008, 08:50:53 PM
As long as one's wearing a uniform, killing isn't illegal - but that's another topic altogether.

There is not a single well ordered society in which homicide isn't regulate.  Homicide is also fairly simple to regulate in most cases.  On the other hand, abortion is much like other issues of personal morality like sex, prostitution, drugs etc. that are nearly impossible to ever really regulate.  Even in states like Ceasescu's Romania in which there were draconian anti-abortion laws, abortions remained fairly common.

Sure.  All you had to do is been an informant. My ex-sister in-law was securitate, and had the permission.  My ex-wife's neighbor had one too: she had two sons that were born deaf.  Ceaucescu didn't want "defective" children around.

Quote
Irrelevant to the conversation here.  Other than GiC, who here has said that abortion is an option for Orthodox Christians? 

And I'm still waiting for the verse about Christian Sharia from the NT.   

Rev. 2:18 "And to the angel of the church in Thyati'ra write: 'The words of the Son of God, who has eyes like a flame of fire, and whose feet are like burnished bronze. 19 "'I know your works, your love and faith and service and patient endurance, and that your latter works exceed the first. 20 But I have this against you, that you tolerate the woman Jez'ebel, who calls herself a prophetess and is teaching and beguiling my servants to practice immorality and to eat food sacrificed to idols. 21 I gave her time to repent, but she refuses to repent of her immorality. 22 Behold, I will throw her on a sickbed, and those who commit adultery with her I will throw into great tribulation, unless they repent of her doings; 23 and I will strike her children dead. And all the churches shall know that I am he who searches mind and heart, and I will give to each of you as your works deserve. 24 But to the rest of you in Thyati'ra, who do not hold this teaching, who have not learned what some call the deep things of Satan, to you I say, I do not lay upon you any other burden; 25 only hold fast what you have, until I come. 26 He who conquers and who keeps my works until the end, I will give him power over the nations, 27 and he shall rule them with a rod of iron, as when earthen pots are broken in pieces, even as I myself have received power from my Father; 28 and I will give him the morning star. 29 He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.'
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Νεκτάριος on February 15, 2008, 09:07:54 PM
Sure.  All you had to do is been an informant. My ex-sister in-law was securitate, and had the permission.  My ex-wife's neighbor had one too: she had two sons that were born deaf.  Ceaucescu didn't want "defective" children around.

Those are pretty isolated situations.  The point remains that for the average woman in Ceausescu's Romania, abortion was illegal yet was also routine.  There was a recent study that's already been linked in the other threads on abortion about legality doing little to nothing to affect the actual rate of abortions in a country.  That is why I still don't see why, and nobody here has made a case for, using abortion legislation as a litmus test.   And quite frankly, I think collaboration with the securitate is far more repulsive than just about anything else.


Quote
Rev. 2:18 "And to the angel of the church in Thyati'ra write...

Relevance?  The passage in question is not about political power.  The Christians in question had no political power.  It was about allowing someone with non-christian values to teach and corrupt the local Christian community.  Again who here has said that abortion is an acceptable choice for Orthodox Christians? 
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Riddikulus on February 15, 2008, 09:18:22 PM
Sure.  All you had to do is been an informant. My ex-sister in-law was securitate, and had the permission.  My ex-wife's neighbor had one too: she had two sons that were born deaf.  Ceaucescu didn't want "defective" children around.

This is probably a really dumb question, but I'm pretty out of date regarding specific tests that are available during pregnancy. Is it possible for anyone to know with absolute certainty that they are going to give birth to a "defective" (in this case, deaf) child? 
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on February 15, 2008, 09:37:47 PM
This is probably a really dumb question, but I'm pretty out of date regarding specific tests that are available during pregnancy. Is it possible for anyone to know with absolute certainty that they are going to give birth to a "defective" (in this case, deaf) child? 

At that time no, in this day and age it depends on the defect...not sure about deafness, could depend on the specific cause.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Theognosis on February 15, 2008, 09:47:51 PM
At what expense? Losing two people instead of one?

Okay, let's use statistics for the sake of argument.

http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/abreasons.html

According to the above study, of all abortion cases, only a mere 2.8% involves health problems for the mother. 

So assuming that there have been 40,000,000 abortion cases and that abortion was NEVER an option, you have the POTENTIAL of saving as much as 38,880,000 unborn children at the expense of 1,120,000 martyred mothers.

In other words,

38,880,000 children saved > 1,120,000 mothers sacrificed

Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Theognosis on February 15, 2008, 09:55:46 PM
Those are pretty isolated situations.  The point remains that for the average woman in Ceausescu's Romania, abortion was illegal yet was also routine.  There was a recent study that's already been linked in the other threads on abortion about legality doing little to nothing to affect the actual rate of abortions in a country.  That is why I still don't see why, and nobody here has made a case for, using abortion legislation as a litmus test.   And quite frankly, I think collaboration with the securitate is far more repulsive than just about anything else.

Condemning something doesn't mean you want to put it into law.  More than anything else, the Church needs to make a stand and guide her flock, especially in these desperate times.

Thou shalt not slay the child by procuring abortion; nor, again, shalt thou destroy it after it is born.
- The Epistle of Barnabas
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Tzimis on February 15, 2008, 10:15:26 PM
Okay, let's use statistics for the sake of argument.

http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/abreasons.html

According to the above study, of all abortion cases, only a mere 2.8% involves health problems for the mother. 

So assuming that there have been 40,000,000 abortion cases and that abortion was NEVER an option, you have the POTENTIAL of saving as much as 38,880,000 unborn children at the expense of 1,120,000 martyred mothers.

In other words,

38,880,000 children saved > 1,120,000 mothers sacrificed


I don't think my point went through correctly. I wasn't defending abortion. This is exactly how papist viewed the EP's statement. I was defending the salvation of the mothers that have went through with abortion to later regret what they did.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Theognosis on February 15, 2008, 10:20:21 PM
Quote
I could buy that argument...but the woman still has a right to remove the fetus from her body. I don't know if letting it lay there and die on it's own is an improvement in the system,

The baby should not be allowed to die on his/her own because that would be negligence/child abuse/murder. 

The ideal system would be to have the unwanted child taken out of the mother's womb UNHARMED, and have the little baby live his/her life as a new citizen.  Funding for the life support system can come from people who plan to adopt.

Quote
but I may be able to agree that this would be a better approach on a philosophical (though not practical) level.

That's good to know.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Theognosis on February 15, 2008, 10:32:21 PM
Agreed, I don't think I ever claimed to speak for the Church.

It would help us a great deal if you had that DISCLAIMER in all your posts.

:angel:

BTW, how's your front yard?

;D
 
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on February 15, 2008, 10:50:35 PM
Those are pretty isolated situations.  The point remains that for the average woman in Ceausescu's Romania, abortion was illegal yet was also routine.  There was a recent study that's already been linked in the other threads on abortion about legality doing little to nothing to affect the actual rate of abortions in a country.  That is why I still don't see why, and nobody here has made a case for, using abortion legislation as a litmus test.   And quite frankly, I think collaboration with the securitate is far more repulsive than just about anything else.
Yes, foul things have a tendency to congeal.

No, they were not as isolated as you would make it, nor was abortion as routine as you imply (though the desire for it was perhaps more than the incidence).

If you look at case law on various subjects, say for instance marriage, there is an oft repeated reference to public policy.  Polygamy, for instance, is against public policy.  When the judiciary oversteps its bounds under the American system, saner courts have noted that is the legislature, not the judiciary, which sets public policy.  In this vein falls the prohibition of abortion. It says something about you as a society (something certain political types harp on when it comes to, say, universal insurance).


Quote
Relevance?  The passage in question is not about political power.  The Christians in question had no political power.
If you were so convinced of that, why did you ask for a sharia verse in the first place?

 
Quote
It was about allowing someone with non-christian values to teach and corrupt the local Christian community.
Maybe you missed this:
 26 ‘He who overcomes, and he who keeps My deeds until the end, TO HIM I WILL GIVE AUTHORITY OVER THE NATIONS; 27 AND HE SHALL RULE THEM WITH A ROD OF IRON, AS THE VESSELS OF THE POTTER ARE BROKEN TO PIECES, as I also have received authority from My Father.
And the Great Commission:
And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. 19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you.

 
Quote
Again who here has said that abortion is an acceptable choice for Orthodox Christians? 
I'm saying here that abortion is not an acceptable choice of anyone.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on February 15, 2008, 10:56:24 PM
This is probably a really dumb question, but I'm pretty out of date regarding specific tests that are available during pregnancy. Is it possible for anyone to know with absolute certainty that they are going to give birth to a "defective" (in this case, deaf) child? 

Does it matter?

My son suffers a fatal kidney disease that has robbed him of his hearing.  I still would have had him if I'd known.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: calligraphqueen on February 15, 2008, 11:21:22 PM


*in a small number of cases the pill can (could) lead the already-fertilized fetus to not implant.

Not so. There are 3-4 standard mechanisms of the typical birth control pill used in the US and other developed nations (and now handed to lesser developed countries)
Only one most folks want to hear about is the prevention of ovulation, therefore no egg can be fertilized. If it stopped there we would be fine. However the levels of hormones in the pill go so far as to make the birth canal a hostile environment to sperm by increasing the acidity there, causing the lining of the fallopian tubes to become think and hostile, and lining the uterus with a thick hostile film -should the fertiled egg make it past all other barriers. When a woman stops taking the pill she frequently has to spend months on end getting all of this mucus like build up out of her system-again depending on the maker of the pill and which pills in the line up they were on.
This is why so many people are opposed to them. Breakthrough pregnancies are actually occuring up to 8 months of the year, meaning a fertilized and living egg was washed away with the standard cycle and the woman never knew.

The reason the breakthrough level is now so high is because they have had to keep reducing and reformulation the hormone ratios as the first bc pills killed several women. My mother was in on the tests of the originals and she nearly died. Wiped out her immune system for a good while as well, and she miscarried twice afterwards.
This is a pet peeve of mine, sorry to give you guys so much info but consider yourself learned now.  :o
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Quinault on February 15, 2008, 11:23:45 PM
They can test for nearly anything. In fact, you can thru egg harvesting, sperm harvesting and invitro fertilization have a nearly "perfect" child. Couples that are carriers of Tay Sachs for example, often select babies that are not afflicted with this malady...the list can go on and on.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Quinault on February 15, 2008, 11:26:48 PM
Not to mention you can gain a tremendous amount of weight, become a bitch nearly 24/7 and possibly become completely infertile on hormonal birth control.

Even the "mini pill" which is marketed to breastfeeding moms is awful.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Νεκτάριος on February 15, 2008, 11:37:40 PM
Condemning something doesn't mean you want to put it into law.  More than anything else, the Church needs to make a stand and guide her flock, especially in these desperate times.

OK I WILL ASK AGAIN, WHO IN THE ORTHODOX CHURCH HAS CONDONED ABORTION?

If you look at case law on various subjects, say for instance marriage, there is an oft repeated reference to public policy.  Polygamy, for instance, is against public policy.  When the judiciary oversteps its bounds under the American system, saner courts have noted that is the legislature, not the judiciary, which sets public policy.  In this vein falls the prohibition of abortion. It says something about you as a society (something certain political types harp on when it comes to, say, universal insurance).

I think the same principle applies with polygamy.  The practice tends to go away on its own under the right social conditions.  And I'm not so sure that current policy / enforcement is really addressing the issue with FLDS.  With immigrants who bring polygamy to the states, it tends to go away on its own.

Quote
Maybe you missed this:
 26 ‘He who overcomes, and he who keeps My deeds until the end, TO HIM I WILL GIVE AUTHORITY OVER THE NATIONS; 27 AND HE SHALL RULE THEM WITH A ROD OF IRON, AS THE VESSELS OF THE POTTER ARE BROKEN TO PIECES, as I also have received authority from My Father.
And the Great Commission:
And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. 19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you.

I think the first one refers to the ministry of the church and is not political.  And both, the point is to preach Christianity to people, not some political ideology that is currently in vogue among the religious right.  We preach Christianity by living the Christian life and sharing our Gospel, not creating another system of dhminitude.

Quote
I'm saying here that abortion is not an acceptable choice of anyone.

Prostitution, substance abuse, pornography, etc. etc. are not acceptable for anyone, but that still doesn't mean it is practical, nor even the intention of Christianity to create a political system that forces people to comply. 
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Riddikulus on February 16, 2008, 12:31:16 AM
Does it matter?

My son suffers a fatal kidney disease that has robbed him of his hearing.  I still would have had him if I'd known.

That isn't the point of your post. You seem to indicate that the women you mentioned were having abortions to prevent the possibility of children with defects....if I read it right.

It doesn't "matter" per se, but I'd be interested in discovering how such defects could be discovered during pregnancy so that a "no children with defects" policy could be implimented. Or did the women just decide to have their children aborted "just in case".

Just trying to get some clarity on your post, actually.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Riddikulus on February 16, 2008, 12:34:26 AM
I'm saying here that abortion is not an acceptable choice of anyone.

So you would deny any women the choice to have an abortion in the event (albet it rare) of a pregnancy that would cost her her life?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on February 16, 2008, 01:01:36 AM
That isn't the point of your post. You seem to indicate that the women you mentioned were having abortions to prevent the possibility of children with defects....if I read it right.

Whether she had abortions or not I don't know.  I do know that she had some sort of certificate that if she wanted one, she could have it, state approved.  The state decided that it didn't want her children, so it was OK if she wanted to abort them.  Otherwise, every Romanian woman was expected to have 5 children (after which she too, if I remember correctly, could have abortions, having done her patriotic duty to the state).

Quote
It doesn't "matter" per se, but I'd be interested in discovering how such defects could be discovered during pregnancy so that a "no children with defects" policy could be implimented. Or did the women just decide to have their children aborted "just in case".


The determination, from what I was told, was pretty automatic (to give you an idea of what we are dealing with, women in Romania at work once a month were lined up and inspected (examined is perhaps not the right term) for pregnancy and signs of abortion).  Two deaf kids, the certificate was yours.  Life wasn't valuable enough to worry about the testing being right.

So you would deny any women the choice to have an abortion in the event (albet it rare) of a pregnancy that would cost her her life?

I avoid that slippery slope, making <2% the rule.

If in treatment of a woman for a, say, tubal pregnancy, and the child dies/is killed as a result, such is the nature of the beast.  In any case both would probably die. So one life is lost while trying to save another.  Such is life.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on February 16, 2008, 01:05:16 AM
I've been told I can't report my post to the moderator "that doesn't make sense!" :police:

Perhaps I suffer self hatred.

Perhaps I have my inner voice yearning to turn myself in.

Perhaps I WANT TO DELETE A DUPLICATE POST...

is that too much to ask?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Riddikulus on February 16, 2008, 02:16:04 AM
I avoid that slippery slope, making <2% the rule.

How do you deal with what you stated; "I'm saying here that abortion is not an acceptable choice of anyone" when you admit there are <2% of women who find themselves faced with a life-threathening pregnancy? The <2% might not seem very significant on paper, but that figure represents actual human beings. How about you forget the number for a moment and think of the person involved; your wife, daughter, sister or someone else you love. Such is life, doesn't seem to be a particularly caring attitude toward the women who find themselves in the <2% bracket.

 
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on February 16, 2008, 02:55:40 AM
How do you deal with what you stated; "I'm saying here that abortion is not an acceptable choice of anyone" when you admit there are <2% of women who find themselves faced with a life-threathening pregnancy? The <2% might not seem very significant on paper, but that figure represents actual human beings. How about you forget the number for a moment and think of the person involved; your wife, daughter, sister or someone else you love. Such is life, doesn't seem to be a particularly caring attitude toward the women who find themselves in the <2% bracket.

 

I'm not even sure it makes 2%.

I'm quite sure that over 2% of abused children, wives and husbands (yes, they exist: mandatory reporting has revealed not a small group at all) might be justified in killing the abuser.  Do we legalize familiar murder?

Btw, such is life refered to the case where the baby is lost: one can only do what is humanly possible, and if you cannot save both, odds are heavily in favor of saving the mother.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on February 16, 2008, 04:53:07 AM
The baby should not be allowed to die on his/her own because that would be negligence/child abuse/murder. 

Depends on how far gestation has progressed, if it's only a matter of weeks no amount of medical attention will do any good with current technology (perhaps in the future, not today).

Quote
The ideal system would be to have the unwanted child taken out of the mother's womb UNHARMED, and have the little baby live his/her life as a new citizen.  Funding for the life support system can come from people who plan to adopt.

I think that'd be a good system in principle. But I don't know if it would practically work.

It would help us a great deal if you had that DISCLAIMER in all your posts.

:angel:

Oh, I figure people are smart enough to figure this out on their own...it should be pretty obvious. ;)

Quote
BTW, how's your front yard?

;D

Nice and clean...the coroner came by this afternoon. ;D
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on February 16, 2008, 04:54:16 AM
Does it matter?

My son suffers a fatal kidney disease that has robbed him of his hearing.  I still would have had him if I'd known.

Considering that you can do genetic screening as part of an in vitro fertilization process, I'd say yes, it does matter.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on February 16, 2008, 05:01:19 AM
I'm quite sure that over 2% of abused children, wives and husbands (yes, they exist: mandatory reporting has revealed not a small group at all) might be justified in killing the abuser.  Do we legalize familiar murder?

Ummm, we do have laws on the books that specifically allow for the killing of one who threatens your life or property. These cases of 'murder' are perfectly legal.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on February 16, 2008, 09:18:02 AM
Ummm, we do have laws on the books that specifically allow for the killing of one who threatens your life or property. These cases of 'murder' are perfectly legal.

Property: no.

Life: it's an affirmative defense, in other words a pleading that can raise reasonable doubt on the predicate of a crime.  Manslaughter is still a crime, not a right, nor legal.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Heorhij on February 16, 2008, 09:42:38 AM
Interesting discussion...

I am curious... dear women, would you, really, have a child if you knew for sure, very early in your pregnancy, that this child would have an incurable disease?

Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: livefreeordie on February 16, 2008, 09:48:26 AM
A good thing to remember.  All this arguing is just a fun game to GIC.  Don't let yourself get too worked up.

I even notice he changed his nickname to "The Howard Stern of ....".  If you remember he sees this forum as his stage he's much easier to put up with!  ;)


Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: livefreeordie on February 16, 2008, 09:52:54 AM
Don't know about her, but I can tell you about my wife.  We have 5 kids.  The last four she refused the test for birth defects, etc.  The first she had it done without really thinking about why it was being done. She'd have the baby if it was going to be born deaf, dumb and blind with a cleft lip.  To her it's a child, and before she quit working to stay at home with our kids she took care of children that would have been called "incurable" and worthy of an abortion by many people.

Interesting discussion...

I am curious... dear women, would you, really, have a child if you knew for sure, very early in your pregnancy, that this child would have an incurable disease?


Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on February 16, 2008, 09:55:42 AM
Considering that you can do genetic screening as part of an in vitro fertilization process, I'd say yes, it does matter.

In vitro is your first problem....
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Riddikulus on February 16, 2008, 10:05:38 AM
Interesting discussion...

I am curious... dear women, would you, really, have a child if you knew for sure, very early in your pregnancy, that this child would have an incurable disease?

Abortion would be out of the question for me, George. But not everyone is bound by my beliefs, so I wouldn't judge anyone who made a choice different to mine.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: livefreeordie on February 16, 2008, 10:54:46 AM
Abortion would be out of the question for me, George. But not everyone is bound by my beliefs, so I wouldn't judge anyone who made a choice different to mine.

If you saw a mother beating her baby in a store, would you intervene somehow, or you would pass by so as "not to judge".  I say this sure of the fact you would probably do something.  You wouldn't let your moral value to "not judge" allow you to stand back and watch a child be beaten.  Yet, if months earlier it was in its mother's womb do you mean from your above statement that you would defend the mother's right to have the child's limbs torn apart under the mantle of "do not judge".  If this is the kind of logic you are alluding to its hard for me to understand.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Tzimis on February 16, 2008, 11:39:44 AM
If you saw a mother beating her baby in a store, would you intervene somehow, or you would pass by so as "not to judge".  I say this sure of the fact you would probably do something.  You wouldn't let your moral value to "not judge" allow you to stand back and watch a child be beaten.  Yet, if months earlier it was in its mother's womb do you mean from your above statement that you would defend the mother's right to have the child's limbs torn apart under the mantle of "do not judge".  If this is the kind of logic you are alluding to its hard for me to understand.

You can't fence in someone from themselves. If someone is about to jump off a bridge and you intervene and stop them. What makes you think you can stop them tomorrow or the next day after that? You are looking for nothing more than control. This is what the modern day Protestant wants.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Riddikulus on February 16, 2008, 11:51:26 AM
If you saw a mother beating her baby in a store, would you intervene somehow, or you would pass by so as "not to judge".  I say this sure of the fact you would probably do something.  You wouldn't let your moral value to "not judge" allow you to stand back and watch a child be beaten.  Yet, if months earlier it was in its mother's womb do you mean from your above statement that you would defend the mother's right to have the child's limbs torn apart under the mantle of "do not judge".  If this is the kind of logic you are alluding to its hard for me to understand.

livefreeordie,

Your choice of nick is hard for me to understand, because I get the very strong feeling that (probably for the best of intentions) you feel the need to be in control. However, I don't even try to be. 
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: calligraphqueen on February 16, 2008, 12:13:35 PM
Interesting discussion...

I am curious... dear women, would you, really, have a child if you knew for sure, very early in your pregnancy, that this child would have an incurable disease?



Every time a woman gets pregnant she is taking this chance, even with all the testing in the world. I have seven children, and I had 4 of them outside of the standard OB's office where they test for everything under the son-and then try to terrify you to death.  I have a child with an incurable genetic deletion on one of her x chromosomes. It's entirely random, one in every 15-20,000 live female births (in the US) Who are we to decide whose life has value and whose doesn't? My daughter who can't speak touches grown men who break down and weep, or begin to sing to her. She can touch people in ways the rest of us cannot. She has a purpose here, despite Rett.

As far as a woman chosing her life over her child's, when it comes to a tubal that life is not currently able to be placed in the womb where it should have gone anyway. We don't have the tech for it, yet. Letting the mother die for a child that is not viable is not a valid choice. However most mothers truly faced with a situation of one or the other would choose their child's life over their own, it's what mothers do.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: livefreeordie on February 16, 2008, 12:27:50 PM
Now that is funny!  I ask a question about the logic of defending someone's right to have an abortion, and you question whether I'm some kind of control freak.  My wife is more pro-life than I am.  Does that make her a control freak?

The key word in LIVE FREE OR DIE, is LIVE.  We live in a world where most people TALK about hypotheticals but live live's they don't truly like and don't truly give them meaning.  Why, they are slaves to their passions, slaves to debt, slaves to themselves.

I believe actions and HOW we live speak much louder than words. 


livefreeordie,

Your choice of nick is hard for me to understand, because I get the very strong feeling that (probably for the best of intentions) you feel the need to be in control. However, I don't even try to be. 
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on February 16, 2008, 02:12:08 PM
Property: no.

Depends on the Jurisdiction, many jurisdictions allow for the use of deadly force against someone breaking into your home or place of business, whether they're armed or not, your life may be in no danger but your property is. In the State of Texas, the use of deadly force is specifically authorized to prevent 'theft in the nighttime' and the use of deadly force to recover stolen property is authorized. I remember a case a few years ago when a man looked out the window in texas to observe a repo man taking his truck, he took out his rifle and shot and killed the repo man as he was driving off with his vehicle, he recovered, because of the laws of the state no charges were filed against him, and he paid it off using donations from sympathetic supporters. Many jusrisdictions have removed these rights we have traditionally enjoyed, but not all jurisdictions.

Quote
Life: it's an affirmative defense, in other words a pleading that can raise reasonable doubt on the predicate of a crime.  Manslaughter is still a crime, not a right, nor legal.

Killing in defence of life or property is a specific right, a natural right, outlined in the laws of several jurisdictions. Generally these cases never go to trial, if it does, this right can be invoked to argue that the law against murder is inapplicable just as the first amendment can be invoked if one is unjustly persecuted for use of their freedom of speech.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on February 16, 2008, 02:19:46 PM
In vitro is your first problem....

For some people it's the only option, for others it's by far the most prudent...welcome to the real world. ::)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on February 16, 2008, 02:35:22 PM
For some people it's the only option, for others it's by far the most prudent...welcome to the real world. ::)

By pure coincidence here in Illinois we have a guy named Peterson, like the one in California.  And like him, his one has a wife that is missing.

A lot of men don't want to throught the trouble of a divorce court, where you're fair game, losing your children, home, income,....whether you are innocent or guilty.

So it seems some have happened on the Peterson Plan for marriage dissolution.  Not that they invented it, but just a handy example of it.

For some people it's the only option, for others it's by far the most prudent....welcome to the real world. ::)

And I thought you said there were too many people around already, Greeki?  Btw, would you have the same "real world" attitude if the Muslims adapted it as a means of outnumbering the non-Muslims?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on February 16, 2008, 02:42:42 PM
Now that is funny!  I ask a question about the logic of defending someone's right to have an abortion, and you question whether I'm some kind of control freak.  My wife is more pro-life than I am.  Does that make her a control freak?

The key word in LIVE FREE OR DIE, is LIVE.  We live in a world where most people TALK about hypotheticals but live live's they don't truly like and don't truly give them meaning.  Why, they are slaves to their passions, slaves to debt, slaves to themselves.

I believe actions and HOW we live speak much louder than words.

Considering that 'Live Free or Die' (and related sayings such as 'Freedom or Death', 'Ελευθερία ή θάνατος', 'Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité, ou la Mort!', etc.) have traditionally been used as the battle cry that would sacrifice everything else of value from their property and honour to their lives to the lives of their families, friends, and countrymen for the singular cause of liberty, considering that this has been the battle cry of noble people who have fought hopeless battles, facing near certain death, against superior forces, forsaking all else for freedom and self-determination, your use of this old and noble phrase seems quite ironic. It's ironic because you do not seem to espouse the ideals of those who had it on their lips as they marched forth to kill and to die.

In fact I would even say that your use of the term, while advocating the precepts of tyranny, is offensive to their most noble and exalted memory. It is, in essence, because I hold to these ideals of liberty that I take the position I do on this matter, to me the question of whether or not a fetus is alive or human is moot, what is important is that we here have a viable choice between life and liberty, so I have no doubt that the latter must be chosen; since laws against abortion are clearly not needed for the direct maintaining of the integrity of our social contract, he protection of human life is a secondary consideration.

And, traditionally speaking, 'live' is not the key word in the phrase 'live free or die', 'free' is the key word...the point is that life without freedom is utterly devoid of all value. To quote General Stark, who is credited with coining the phrase, in his entirety, 'Live free or die: Death is not the worst of evils.'
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on February 16, 2008, 02:43:53 PM
Depends on the Jurisdiction, many jurisdictions allow for the use of deadly force against someone breaking into your home or place of business, whether they're armed or not, your life may be in no danger but your property is. In the State of Texas, the use of deadly force is specifically authorized to prevent 'theft in the nighttime' and the use of deadly force to recover stolen property is authorized. I remember a case a few years ago when a man looked out the window in texas to observe a repo man taking his truck, he took out his rifle and shot and killed the repo man as he was driving off with his vehicle, he recovered, because of the laws of the state no charges were filed against him, and he paid it off using donations from sympathetic supporters. Many jusrisdictions have removed these rights we have traditionally enjoyed, but not all jurisdictions.

Killing in defence of life or property is a specific right, a natural right, outlined in the laws of several jurisdictions. Generally these cases never go to trial, if it does, this right can be invoked to argue that the law against murder is inapplicable just as the first amendment can be invoked if one is unjustly persecuted for use of their freedom of speech.

I don't have the fortune of living in Texas, but the misfortune of being in Illiniois, a state getting bluer in more ways than one.  And in Chicago on top of that.

I do recall a common law prohibition on, say, booby traps, to protect property: had its roots in lords having their hunting grounds so protected, the enclosure movement etc.  I do believe that the self defense common law right comes from a different source.  It's not worth my time to research it at this time, which for me is getting shorter.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on February 16, 2008, 02:45:35 PM
By pure coincidence here in Illinois we have a guy named Peterson, like the one in California.  And like him, his one has a wife that is missing.

A lot of men don't want to throught the trouble of a divorce court, where you're fair game, losing your children, home, income,....whether you are innocent or guilty.

So it seems some have happened on the Peterson Plan for marriage dissolution.  Not that they invented it, but just a handy example of it.

Relevance?

Quote
And I thought you said there were too many people around already, Greeki?  Btw, would you have the same "real world" attitude if the Muslims adapted it as a means of outnumbering the non-Muslims?

I'm not opposed to people having children, but I do believe we should limit family sizes to one or two children, I see no reason to deny this to people. People who make use of in vitro fertilization are usually more reasonable in this regard anyway. Not many people use in vitro fertilization to have ten children.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Quinault on February 16, 2008, 02:50:22 PM
I want to clarify something. I have know a number of women that had to end the life of a child from a tubal pregnancy. EVEN SINGLE WOMAN I have ever met does it. It is so excrutiatingly painful that you COULD NOT continue the pregnancy until you die. Most tubal pregnancies are caught AS THE WOMAN IS DYING. Rarely, is a tubal pregnancy caught before it gets to the dangerous point because most women don't have ultrasounds before 12 weeks at the earliest due to the cost and insurance policys. If you undergo fertility treatments, or you are really rich, or like me you have had untold number of miscarriages, or you have had previous tubal pregnancies or other medical issues, you will have early ultrasounds to determine viability. But that is ONLY to check for heartbeat and to make sure the pregnancy isn't in your tube.

So no, most women put into the situation of a known tubal pregnancy would not continue it to their own peril.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on February 16, 2008, 02:54:41 PM
Considering that 'Live Free or Die' (and related sayings such as 'Freedom or Death', 'Ελευθερία ή θάνατος', 'Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité, ou la Mort!', etc.) have traditionally been used as the battle cry that would sacrifice everything else of value from their property and honour to their lives to the lives of their families, friends, and countrymen for the singular cause of liberty, considering that this has been the battle cry of noble people who have fought hopeless battles, facing near certain death, against superior forces, forsaking all else for freedom and self-determination, your use of this old and noble phrase seems quite ironic. It's ironic because you do not seem to espouse the ideals of those who had it on their lips as they marched forth to kill and to die.

In fact I would even say that your use of the term, while advocating the precepts of tyranny, is offensive to their most noble and exalted memory. It is, in essence, because I hold to these ideals of liberty that I take the position I do on this matter, to me the question of whether or not a fetus is alive or human is moot, what is important is that we here have a viable choice between life and liberty, so I have no doubt that the latter must be chosen; since laws against abortion are clearly not needed for the direct maintaining of the integrity of our social contract, he protection of human life is a secondary consideration.

And, traditionally speaking, 'live' is not the key word in the phrase 'live free or die', 'free' is the key word...the point is that life without freedom is utterly devoid of all value. To quote General Stark, who is credited with coining the phrase, in his entirety, 'Live free or die: Death is not the worst of evils.'

Get a grip Greeki.

Their noble and exalted memory also includes the States' rights argument for negro slavery and the Reign of Terror.

I would go on about abortion does tear the fabric of the social contract, but I perhaps might first admit I don't buy the social contract **** in the first place (no one asked me to sign).
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Quinault on February 16, 2008, 02:56:08 PM
I haven't undergone the genetic testing since my eldest was born. But I did give my son the Vitamin K injection since hemophilia runs in the family. I don't think that you have to use the results to terminate the pregnancy either though. A young couple in our church found out that they were carrying a daughter with moderate downs syndrome and heart and lung  issues. They knew ahead of time so that there was a full NICU staff onboard when she gave birth in order to save their daughters life right after her birth. And the pregnancy was monitored so that they could keep her baby in as long as possible.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on February 16, 2008, 03:00:21 PM
Relevance?

That your philosophy of bending morality to "the real world" must be applied to other situations other than your pet issues.  Yes, I'm a fan of Kant on that.

Quote
I'm not opposed to people having children, but I do believe we should limit family sizes to one or two children, I see no reason to deny this to people. People who make use of in vitro fertilization are usually more reasonable in this regard anyway. Not many people use in vitro fertilization to have ten children.

The problems of in vitro are just multiplying, such as what to do with the surplus of fetuses.  I'm personally fond of the idea of childless couples, and then nuns being the recipients.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on February 16, 2008, 03:05:30 PM
I haven't undergone the genetic testing since my eldest was born. But I did give my son the Vitamin K injection since hemophilia runs in the family. I don't think that you have to use the results to terminate the pregnancy either though. A young couple in our church found out that they were carrying a daughter with moderate downs syndrome and heart and lung  issues. They knew ahead of time so that there was a full NICU staff onboard when she gave birth in order to save their daughters life right after her birth. And the pregnancy was monitored so that they could keep her baby in as long as possible.

Yes, I would support testing for the simple reason of being prepared.  In my case, the fact that my son wasn't diagnosed until far later was better, because he had already proved himself in mainstream schooling.  In fact, it wasn't until some three years later that he ever thought of himself as disabled (a well intentioned assembly at school had someone who was a parapalygic, I believe, and when he mentioned deafness as a handicap, my son first realized that described him.  I cried).
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on February 16, 2008, 03:42:00 PM
That your philosophy of bending morality to "the real world" must be applied to other situations other than your pet issues.  Yes, I'm a fan of Kant on that.

That's where social contract theory comes in.

Quote
The problems of in vitro are just multiplying, such as what to do with the surplus of fetuses.  I'm personally fond of the idea of childless couples, and then nuns being the recipients.

I'm personally fond of using them for scientific research.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on February 16, 2008, 03:44:52 PM
That's where social contract theory comes in.

I'm personally fond of using them for scientific research.

How unlike you. ::)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on February 16, 2008, 03:50:11 PM
Get a grip Greeki.

Their noble and exalted memory also includes the States' rights argument for negro slavery and the Reign of Terror.

The 'reign of terror' was a necessary evil and a far better thing than the continuation of the French monarchy. And, of course, I fully support the rights of the state over the rights of the federal government, where I would have disagreed with the apologists on both sides of the conflict is that I also support the rights of the individual over the rights of both the state and federal government.

Quote
I would go on about abortion does tear the fabric of the social contract, but I perhaps might first admit I don't buy the social contract **** in the first place (no one asked me to sign).

As it does not directly and immediately undermine the social contract (like allowing wanton adult homicide would quickly throw us into a state of complete anarchy), liberty should always be given precedence. Our laws are a balance between maintaining our social contract and maintaining our liberty, but if there is ever a question as to which one is more important in a given situation, preference should be given to liberty as it is what gives our social contract a value absent in other societies, it's what makes it worth maintaining.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on February 16, 2008, 03:53:18 PM
How unlike you. ::)

Yes I know, I'm one of those evil secularists who want to advance the boundaries of modern science. I'm sure the diabolical implications of our actions, like a cure for AIDS (clearly a disease given by God to evil people as punishment of their sins), will manifest themselves in the next few decades. ::)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Νεκτάριος on February 16, 2008, 04:10:29 PM
Yes I know, I'm one of those evil secularists who want to advance the boundaries of modern science. I'm sure the diabolical implications of our actions, like a cure for AIDS (clearly a disease given by God to evil people as punishment of their sins), will manifest themselves in the next few decades. ::)

That is what frustrates me the most with the self righteous religious zealots on this forum and in general: if you don't agree with their narrow political views to the letter you are scum of the earth evil.  How many times how ialmisry said on the politics forum that you and I are no different than Stalin or Hilter because we *gasp* believe in separation of church and state?  Or my favorite was that working for a non-religious NGO that feeds children is evil since it is obviously part of a utopian scheme. 

What in religion causes people to get like that? 
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: livefreeordie on February 16, 2008, 04:33:14 PM
Nice words.

I was a Marine for 5 and half years to protect our liberties.  I'm not sure any of our founding fathers would have said Liberty is a license to do what you want.  None that I know of advocated for no laws.  But it does mean a lot of different things to different people.  To me it meant a responsibility to protect human freedom and dignity.  I fought for them.

How quickly you stereotype people with little to no knowledge of them.  So you know that I'm against abortion.  Not for religious reasons, not for political reasons.  I just happen to think it's a heinous, selfish act.  Just as heinous and selfish as child abuse or murder.  And just as worthy of having restrictions on it.  I would allow it in the case of the health of the mother allowing her to make that moral choice.

Then because of that one position, I'm all of sudden a religious zealot and anti-freedom?  I can't imagine someone being more judgemental, more narrow-minded, more of a zealot than judging a person based on one position they take.  It makes me wonder what you know about freedom.  Oh, and I forgot, from other threads.  The fact I don't think people should be allowed to steal music, software, games, etc. and I think hard drugs like heroin and cocaine should be illegal must make me anti-freedom in your mind also.

My use of the words, Live Free or Die?  Offensive?  I'm self employed.  We home school our kids.  I served our country and I suffered a broken back defending it.  I spend every week in prisons and with poor people. Every day I get up and do what I want and what I love. By your definition, my actions, my life, is as free as anyone you probably know. General Stark wouldn't find me offensive.  I would fit right in. We'd be on his farm after the war telling war stories. The person he would find offensive is the one who uses his words to justify vice as opposed to true human liberty, along with anyone who is more into talking than action.  Yes, I'm sure the general and I would find much agreement in the words, "talk is cheap."

Considering that 'Live Free or Die' (and related sayings such as 'Freedom or Death', 'Ελευθερία ή θάνατος', 'Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité, ou la Mort!', etc.) have traditionally been used as the battle cry that would sacrifice everything else of value from their property and honour to their lives to the lives of their families, friends, and countrymen for the singular cause of liberty, considering that this has been the battle cry of noble people who have fought hopeless battles, facing near certain death, against superior forces, forsaking all else for freedom and self-determination, your use of this old and noble phrase seems quite ironic. It's ironic because you do not seem to espouse the ideals of those who had it on their lips as they marched forth to kill and to die.

In fact I would even say that your use of the term, while advocating the precepts of tyranny, is offensive to their most noble and exalted memory. It is, in essence, because I hold to these ideals of liberty that I take the position I do on this matter, to me the question of whether or not a fetus is alive or human is moot, what is important is that we here have a viable choice between life and liberty, so I have no doubt that the latter must be chosen; since laws against abortion are clearly not needed for the direct maintaining of the integrity of our social contract, he protection of human life is a secondary consideration.

And, traditionally speaking, 'live' is not the key word in the phrase 'live free or die', 'free' is the key word...the point is that life without freedom is utterly devoid of all value. To quote General Stark, who is credited with coining the phrase, in his entirety, 'Live free or die: Death is not the worst of evils.'
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on February 16, 2008, 05:16:59 PM
The 'reign of terror' was a necessary evil


yes, outrages of evil are always done in the name of the higher good.

Quote
and a far better thing than the continuation of the French monarchy.

I don't even have to address the merits of your contention, as the monarchy had been abolished, and the king executed, by the time the Terror began on September 5, 1793.

Btw 70% of its victims were the working, poor class.

Quote
And, of course, I fully support the rights of the state over the rights of the federal government, where I would have disagreed with the apologists on both sides of the conflict is that I also support the rights of the individual over the rights of both the state and federal government.

What individuals?  Chief Justice Taney had ruled that those of African ancestry could NOT be individual citizens under the US Constitution.

He also stated that although personally opposed to slavery (he freed those he inherited, and gave the old ones pensions), he could not force his moral beliefs on everyone.  That wasn't in the social contract he was sworn to uphold.

Quote
As it does not directly and immediately undermine the social contract (like allowing wanton adult homicide would quickly throw us into a state of complete anarchy), liberty should always be given precedence. Our laws are a balance between maintaining our social contract and maintaining our liberty, but if there is ever a question as to which one is more important in a given situation, preference should be given to liberty as it is what gives our social contract a value absent in other societies, it's what makes it worth maintaining.
Al-Qa'ida is depending on that.

Yes I know, I'm one of those evil secularists who want to advance the boundaries of modern science.

You mean push them.

Quote
I'm sure the diabolical implications of our actions, like a cure for AIDS (clearly a disease given by God to evil people as punishment of their sins), will manifest themselves in the next few decades. ::)

Yes, more people. But then, I'm not the one who has a problem with that, now am I?

That is what frustrates me the most with the self righteous religious zealots on this forum and in general: if you don't agree with their narrow political views to the letter you are scum of the earth evil.  How many times how ialmisry said on the politics forum that you and I are no different than Stalin or Hilter because we *gasp* believe in separation of church and state?

Uh, never.

Quote
Or my favorite was that working for a non-religious NGO that feeds children is evil since it is obviously part of a utopian scheme.

Didn't say that either. 

Quote
What in religion causes people to get like that? 

What in secularism causes such a martyr complex?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: calligraphqueen on February 16, 2008, 05:40:52 PM
Relevance?

I'm not opposed to people having children, but I do believe we should limit family sizes to one or two children, I see no reason to deny this to people.

Why Greek? explain please
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Νεκτάριος on February 16, 2008, 06:15:39 PM
What in secularism causes such a martyr complex?

I defend the right to religious freedom and you say I have a martyr complex because you want to impose your religious values on all of society by force. 
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on February 16, 2008, 06:32:31 PM
I defend the right to religious freedom and you say I have a martyr complex because you want to impose your religious values on all of society by force. 

No, I say you have a martyr's complex because I didn't say a single thing you "quoted" from me.

Is a morally informed vote too violent for you?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on February 16, 2008, 06:40:03 PM
Nice words.

Glad I could help. ;)

Quote
I was a Marine for 5 and half years to protect our liberties.

That's nice, but that hardly implies that your ideas are consonant with the ideals of liberty. We have another thread going on here right now about officers abusing their rank and authority proselytize, they, at least, see more concerned about their religion than the freedom of religion and the principles of this republic they have sworn to uphold. (Not saying anything about you pesonally, but about the implication that somehow military service amounts to concern for the values of the republic.)

Quote
I'm not sure any of our founding fathers would have said Liberty is a license to do what you want.  None that I know of advocated for no laws.  But it does mean a lot of different things to different people.  To me it meant a responsibility to protect human freedom and dignity.  I fought for them.

Of course, I never said it required 'no laws', only that it required 'no laws that are not directly and immediately necessary to preserve our social contract.' And the ideal I put forward would have been viewed quite favourably by the founding fathers.

Quote
How quickly you stereotype people with little to no knowledge of them.  So you know that I'm against abortion.  Not for religious reasons, not for political reasons.  I just happen to think it's a heinous, selfish act.  Just as heinous and selfish as child abuse or murder.  And just as worthy of having restrictions on it.  I would allow it in the case of the health of the mother allowing her to make that moral choice.

Oh, as a reformed former pro-life advocate I'm probably a little harsh on this issue, but as a student of the enlightenment and a person who recognizes the importance of the pro-choice movement to women's rights I do understand that the issue is important. Even IF you were a staunch advocate of liberty in all other aspects, this one insonsistancy in your beliefs would be most troubling...the reason I finally stopped being anti-abortion was because I could no longer deal with the hypocracy of my opposition to oppression, of my believing that life is secondary to liberty, and then supporting oppression and survival at the expense of that which, in all of heaven and on all of the earth, is most valuable and most dear, freedom.

Quote
Then because of that one position, I'm all of sudden a religious zealot and anti-freedom?  I can't imagine someone being more judgemental, more narrow-minded, more of a zealot than judging a person based on one position they take.  It makes me wonder what you know about freedom.  Oh, and I forgot, from other threads.  The fact I don't think people should be allowed to steal music, software, games, etc. and I think hard drugs like heroin and cocaine should be illegal must make me anti-freedom in your mind also.

That's right, you have more than once expressed your displeasure of liberty and love of religion at the expense of liberty.

Quote
My use of the words, Live Free or Die?  Offensive?  I'm self employed.  We home school our kids.  I served our country and I suffered a broken back defending it.  I spend every week in prisons and with poor people.

These all sound like 'liberties' that were even granted by Nazi Germany and Maoist China. Nothing to be too excited over.

Quote
Every day I get up and do what I want and what I love. By your definition, my actions, my life, is as free as anyone you probably know. General Stark wouldn't find me offensive.  I would fit right in. We'd be on his farm after the war telling war stories. The person he would find offensive is the one who uses his words to justify vice as opposed to true human liberty, along with anyone who is more into talking than action.  Yes, I'm sure the general and I would find much agreement in the words, "talk is cheap."

Oh, you may have gotten along with the General quite well, but he, as perhaps the only true Cincinnatus of our Revolution, would probably not agree with your theory about government intrution into our private lives (nor offer praise for serving in a peace-time military, for that matter, since you brought the subject up).
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: livefreeordie on February 16, 2008, 07:02:29 PM
If defending unborn children, advocating against stealing intellectual property and stating that heroin and cocaine should be illegal make me an "enemy of freedom" in your world, so be it.  I stand accused by GIC! ;)

I must admit though, you are disappointing me. More personal attacks and grandiose inferences that you understand the founding fathers better than me and most people on this board.  And my favorite, you demean my life by bringing up Nazi Germany and Maoist China. I think I liked you better when you were an Agent of the Phanar. C'mon Howard, you can do better than this! ;)

Glad I could help. ;)

That's nice, but that hardly implies that your ideas are consonant with the ideals of liberty. We have another thread going on here right now about officers abusing their rank and authority proselytize, they, at least, see more concerned about their religion than the freedom of religion and the principles of this republic they have sworn to uphold. (Not saying anything about you pesonally, but about the implication that somehow military service amounts to concern for the values of the republic.)

Of course, I never said it required 'no laws', only that it required 'no laws that are not directly and immediately necessary to preserve our social contract.' And the ideal I put forward would have been viewed quite favourably by the founding fathers.

Oh, as a reformed former pro-life advocate I'm probably a little harsh on this issue, but as a student of the enlightenment and a person who recognizes the importance of the pro-choice movement to women's rights I do understand that the issue is important. Even IF you were a staunch advocate of liberty in all other aspects, this one insonsistancy in your beliefs would be most troubling...the reason I finally stopped being anti-abortion was because I could no longer deal with the hypocracy of my opposition to oppression, of my believing that life is secondary to liberty, and then supporting oppression and survival at the expense of that which, in all of heaven and on all of the earth, is most valuable and most dear, freedom.

That's right, you have more than once expressed your displeasure of liberty and love of religion at the expense of liberty.

These all sound like 'liberties' that were even granted by Nazi Germany and Maoist China. Nothing to be too excited over.

Oh, you may have gotten along with the General quite well, but he, as perhaps the only true Cincinnatus of our Revolution, would probably not agree with your theory about government intrution into our private lives (nor offer praise for serving in a peace-time military, for that matter, since you brought the subject up).
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Νεκτάριος on February 16, 2008, 07:05:57 PM
No, I say you have a martyr's complex because I didn't say a single thing you "quoted" from me.

Apparently you forgot some of the recent threads in the politics forum.

Quote
Is a morally informed vote too violent for you?

If you are using the state apparatus to impose your views on those who don't hold them, then yes.  If you are going to use a single political issue as a litmus test, I also think that is incredibly simplistic.  There are a broad range of political issues dealing with Christianity today, creating a litmus test on a single issue  eliminates any ability to compromise whatsoever.  And of course, nobody has yet demonstrated that my position is at all at odds with any part of the New Testament.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: livefreeordie on February 16, 2008, 07:14:51 PM
Oh, forgot this too, diminishing my service because it was a "peace-time military"? That's just classic.

I volunteered during the first Iraq war when all you heard about was how bloody it was going to be and people were going to come home in body bags.  When we started rolling into Kuwait I was in training and we were visited by the Great General Gray who talked about preparing ourselves for the war ahead.  Sorry the war ended before I could get in the mix and gain credibility from you.  I guess going down in a burning jet, breaking my back and watching my co-pilot die isn't worthy of much.

All a statement like your's proves is that in spite of all your reading and rhetoric, you probably know very little about what motivates someone like General Stark.  Every soldier I've ever met from WW1 to the present went into War for pretty simple reasons, honor and a sense of duty usually.  I doubt General Stark was much different.  He was a farmer, felt a duty to fight, fought, and went back to the farm.


Oh, you may have gotten along with the General quite well, but he, as perhaps the only true Cincinnatus of our Revolution, would probably not agree with your theory about government intrution into our private lives (nor offer praise for serving in a peace-time military, for that matter, since you brought the subject up).
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Heorhij on February 16, 2008, 07:33:12 PM
Abortion would be out of the question for me, George. But not everyone is bound by my beliefs, so I wouldn't judge anyone who made a choice different to mine.

But why these beliefs, do they have any rational substance? One might just say, hmmm, 128 or 256 or 512 or 1024 dividing cells. When you wash your hands, you peel off some ten million cells of your epidermis from your palms.

In many cultures, even a newborn baby was not really considered a being. Babies were not shown to people outside of the family until they were one month old or so.

In the former USSR, abortion was illegal as long as Stalin lived. One of the first changes after his death on March 5, 1953 was legalization of abortion till the begining of the fourth month of pregnancy. If a woman was pregnant, but less than 4 months, she could abort her baby without giving any reason, and a doctor had no right to say no. If she was past the 4th month, she still could have her baby aborted if there were "medical reasons." Needless to say... doctors were terribly underpaid, so, in a village or in a small town, "medical reasons" could be a chicken, or a ten-rouble bill stuffed into a doctor's pocket.

Millions over millions over millions of abortions were performed. Abortion is still legal in post-Soviet republics, and the vast majority of women do not think of their fetuses as true human beings at least at the beginning of pregnancy.

Is it all conditioned by some set of beliefs, this view on what is really life and what is yet not?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Myrrh23 on February 16, 2008, 08:00:13 PM
In my Sociology 101 class, we learned that many pro-lifers are also anti-welfare. I wonder which is more selfish: aborting a child or being anti-welfare? Also, I'd like to know how much of Michael Moore's Sicko was truth in relation to how new mothers are treated in other developed countries. Anyone know? I think this is relevant because women often abort their unborn babies because they do not have access to the resources to care for them. From watching the movie, it seemed that women are more supported in other countries where raising kids is concerned. If a woman feels she is not, and will not, be supported, more often than not she will probably abort her babies.
To illustrate this latter point, most babies aborted are Latino or black...

I especially think it's hypocritical to be anti-contraception if you're also anti-abortion. We all know people are going to "do-it", especially those high-schoolers. I'd rather have people be safe than sorry.

Quote
Is it all conditioned by some set of beliefs, this view on what is really life and what is yet not?

Heorhij, I think it has to do with what we've been trained to believe and what we feel is true. A very religious person, though not feeling anything for their baby except that it's their baby, might refuse to abort because they've been taught at Jesus Camp that it's wrong. However, I've heard numerous women say they didn't feel it was a baby until they felt it kick or move. I think your question might deserve another thread entirely...

Myrrh23
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Riddikulus on February 16, 2008, 08:56:43 PM
But why these beliefs, do they have any rational substance? One might just say, hmmm, 128 or 256 or 512 or 1024 dividing cells. When you wash your hands, you peel off some ten million cells of your epidermis from your palms.

In many cultures, even a newborn baby was not really considered a being. Babies were not shown to people outside of the family until they were one month old or so.

In the former USSR, abortion was illegal as long as Stalin lived. One of the first changes after his death on March 5, 1953 was legalization of abortion till the begining of the fourth month of pregnancy. If a woman was pregnant, but less than 4 months, she could abort her baby without giving any reason, and a doctor had no right to say no. If she was past the 4th month, she still could have her baby aborted if there were "medical reasons." Needless to say... doctors were terribly underpaid, so, in a village or in a small town, "medical reasons" could be a chicken, or a ten-rouble bill stuffed into a doctor's pocket.

Millions over millions over millions of abortions were performed. Abortion is still legal in post-Soviet republics, and the vast majority of women do not think of their fetuses as true human beings at least at the beginning of pregnancy.

Is it all conditioned by some set of beliefs, this view on what is really life and what is yet not?

George,

I think we are all conditioned by a set of beliefs, even if we are not completely aware of it. And I really don't argue that my beliefs are rational, and I suppose that reticence could even be part of the reason I don't believe that I can or should foist them upon anyone else. In simple terms I don't believe it is the duty of Christians to be the "moral police" of society. I don't believe that is our purpose, but that's a topic for another thread.   

Even if we allow that my reasons for not considering an abortion in the case of an incurably diseased baby are completely irrational; that biologically a fetus is just a bunch of cells; it would surely be my right as the mother/carrier to bear the child and bear the consequences. And yes, I'm aware that the consequences would be hard for the child, too, but as a fallible human being I could only hope to be making the best choice in a no-win situation.

I have to admit that I am somewhat hesitant to get too involved with hypothetical situations, because reality is always different to theory. But sitting at my desk, well-fed, reasonably well-off financially and enjoying my new life in the tropical wonderland that is Queensland, I'm quite sure I would continue with such a pregnancy. What I'm saying is that a totally different situation for someone else might dictate what they decide to do. (If I'm making any sense, at all!)

However, my point in this discussion has consistently been for the right of a woman to terminate a pregnancy that would kill her, not one that would be inconvenient or not produce the perfect baby. As I have said previously, I don't know what I would do in such a situation; but I certainly wouldn't deny the right to any woman to make a choice for her own life over the life of the child. 

Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: livefreeordie on February 16, 2008, 10:17:37 PM
Riddikulus, we agree! I was worried based on earlier postings we'd be forever doomed to be in contention.  I must say, I'm jealous.  Queensland sure seems like a nice place to be as we look to the end of our grey Indiana winter. silouan

G
However, my point in this discussion has consistently been for the right of a woman to terminate a pregnancy that would kill her, not one that would be inconvenient or not produce the perfect baby. As I have said previously, I don't know what I would do in such a situation; but I certainly wouldn't deny the right to any woman to make a choice for her own life over the life of the child. 


Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: livefreeordie on February 16, 2008, 10:27:29 PM
Combined this is true, but 40% of abortions are to white woman, and 56% are to woman in their twenties.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/18/AR2005071801164.html

It's funny, I was reading something today and it said how Susan B. Anthony was against abortion and a lot of the early women's right's people saw abortion as something men wanted to force on them.  Now I'm not sure how accurate this is, and obviously the position of the woman't rights movement has changed.  But I wonder what someone like Susan B. Anthony would think if she could see how woman were objectified and sexualized in our society today.  I mean to go to any grocery store and look at the magazines on the rack.  We've turned the value of women into a superficial shell of a human being.  To me, that is the greatest danger of abortion.  It dehumanizes the unborn child, objectifies it, and allows us to conveniently sacrifice it in the name of freedom.  But if we can objectify unborn children when it suits our desires, we can objectify anything.  And unfortunately, all you have to do is look on the magazine rack of a grocery store and see that is what we are doing to our daughters.

("When a woman destroys the life of her unborn child, it is a sign that, by education or circumstances, she has been greatly wronged." Susan B. Anthony, 1869


To illustrate this latter point, most babies aborted are Latino or black...

Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: livefreeordie on February 16, 2008, 11:21:05 PM
Was reading through the canons of the Orthodox Church and found this from 692 a.d.

CANON XCI
"Those who give drugs for procuring abortion, and those who receive poisons to kill the foetus, are subjected to the penalty of murder."

It is clarified by Canon XXL of Ancyra, and Canon II of St. Basil, "She who purposely destroys the foetus, shall suffer the punishment of murder.  And we pay no attention to the subtile distinction as to whether the foetus was formed or unformed.  And by this not only is justice satisfied for the child that should have been born, but also for her who prepared for herself the snares, since the women very often die who make such experiments."

If this has been posted before, I apologize.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Heorhij on February 16, 2008, 11:28:45 PM

Even if we allow that my reasons for not considering an abortion in the case of an incurably diseased baby are completely irrational; that biologically a fetus is just a bunch of cells; it would surely be my right as the mother/carrier to bear the child and bear the consequences. And yes, I'm aware that the consequences would be hard for the child, too, but as a fallible human being I could only hope to be making the best choice in a no-win situation.


Yes, I understand. A totally irrational hope...
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on February 16, 2008, 11:34:19 PM
If defending unborn children, advocating against stealing intellectual property and stating that heroin and cocaine should be illegal make me an "enemy of freedom" in your world, so be it.  I stand accused by GIC! ;)

Well, now that you have confessed to the crime of despotism we'll arrange the firing squad. ;)

Quote
I must admit though, you are disappointing me. More personal attacks and grandiose inferences that you understand the founding fathers better than me and most people on this board.  And my favorite, you demean my life by bringing up Nazi Germany and Maoist China.

Oh, I wasn't demeaning your life, only questioning the aspects you put forth to illustrate your love of freedom. I would have thought you'd list things like the right to bear arms or criticize the state rather than the right to visit prisons and serve in the military...those arn't the freedoms we have to fight for.

Quote
I think I liked you better when you were an Agent of the Phanar. C'mon Howard, you can do better than this! ;)

Well, as I've said before I like it when people dislike me, it helps me avoid dealing with any psychological issues due to the residue of my former morality when I stab them in the back. ;D
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on February 16, 2008, 11:44:58 PM
It's funny, I was reading something today and it said how Susan B. Anthony was against abortion and a lot of the early women's right's people saw abortion as something men wanted to force on them.  Now I'm not sure how accurate this is, and obviously the position of the woman't rights movement has changed.  But I wonder what someone like Susan B. Anthony would think if she could see how woman were objectified and sexualized in our society today.  I mean to go to any grocery store and look at the magazines on the rack.  We've turned the value of women into a superficial shell of a human being.  To me, that is the greatest danger of abortion.  It dehumanizes the unborn child, objectifies it, and allows us to conveniently sacrifice it in the name of freedom.  But if we can objectify unborn children when it suits our desires, we can objectify anything.  And unfortunately, all you have to do is look on the magazine rack of a grocery store and see that is what we are doing to our daughters.

("When a woman destroys the life of her unborn child, it is a sign that, by education or circumstances, she has been greatly wronged." Susan B. Anthony, 1869

Sounds a lot like the great philosopher and founder of the french school of feminism Simone de Beauvoir, wrote a far harsher condemnation of the circumstances that lead to abortion as being crimes against women. That the circumstances can exist where a pregnancy is unwanted is most unfortunate and a failure of society. But to forbid abortion only makes these circumstances, these social sins, worse by inflicting hardship and economic disadvantage upon these poor women. Which is why de Beauvoir, though opposed to the social institutions that made abortion necessary, lead the movement to legalize abortion in France and was ultimately successful in '74.

If you want to stop abortions, change the social circumstances that lead to them. Don't use your faux 'morality' to impose hardships you will never have to bear on others.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: livefreeordie on February 16, 2008, 11:48:54 PM
Said like a good commissar!

Quote
Oh, I wasn't demeaning your life, only questioning the aspects you put forth to illustrate your love of freedom. I would have thought you'd list things like the right to bear arms or criticize the state rather than the right to visit prisons and serve in the military...those arn't the freedoms we have to fight for.

When's the last time you had to "fight" for a freedom.  Ever been in jail to minister to people or served in the military.  Doing both are much harder than pontificating on freedom.  Sitting in front of a computer like I'm doing now is easy.  Or pontificating on the right to bear arms or criticizing our tax policy is easy.  Going into a prison to minister to men and help them find freedom, and serving in our all volunteer military to protect our freedom, now those take effort and thus I mentioned them.  Of course, that doesn't make me any more or less right than you, thank the lord we can still have public disagreements on what "freedom" means. God Bless the USA!

Quote
Well, as I've said before I like it when people dislike me, it helps me avoid dealing with any psychological issues due to the residue of my former morality when I stab them in the back. ;D

Man, you must have a really interesting "Happy Place"!  :o

I fixed the quotes, nothing more.--YtterbiumAnalyst
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: livefreeordie on February 17, 2008, 12:01:39 AM
Man, you sure like making condescending inferences about people you know nothing about. My wife and I lived well below the poverty level for years and had 2 children during that time.  I've walked to the store at night with nothing to feed my family but the change we found in the sofa. 

"Hardships".  While delivery is a hardship that I can attest to as I've been at all our children's births, there is no shortage of people who want to adopt children and would take the hardship of raising the child.


If you want to stop abortions, change the social circumstances that lead to them. Don't use your faux 'morality' to impose hardships you will never have to bear on others.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on February 17, 2008, 12:13:18 AM
Said like a good commissar!

Dang, I was going for the Jacobinist label...I guess I'll have to try harder.

Quote
When's the last time you had to "fight" for a freedom.  Ever been in jail to minister to people or served in the military.  Doing both are much harder than pontificating on freedom. Sitting in front of a computer like I'm doing now is easy.  Or pontificating on the right to bear arms or criticizing our tax policy is easy.

I'm not really a huge opponent of our tax policy, can it be improved? Of course, but I think we have larger problems. Though the right to keep and bear arms is a pet issue for me.

Quote
Going into a prison to minister to men and help them find freedom, and serving in our all volunteer military to protect our freedom, now those take effort and thus I mentioned them.

Well, I've already expressed my opinion about a peace time military, a few times I almost joined, almost had myself convinced (or, at least, my friends in the military almost convinced me) that I would be a mere mercenary rather than a peace time soldier of a once-free republic, or that joining the Corps would be tantamount to helping maintain a standing Navy instead of a standing army; but I can't quite convince myself. Between the two degrees I already have and the Masters in Military Science I'm working on, I could probably do quite well for myself. Plus, nothing would have made my grandfather prouder while he lived than had I joined the Corps. But even he had great respect for the ideal that we should only form a standing army during time of war.

In any case, I spend my time at the rifle range, at the gym, and in the formal study of the art of war, in the event of actual need against real threats and enemies (internal or external, and probably the former) hopefully I won't completely useless, at least my professors of Military Science don't think I would be. It's a great tragedy that the noble tradition of the militia has been replaced by a standing army loyal to the federal government.

Quote
Of course, that doesn't make me any more or less right than you, thank the lord we can still have public disagreements on what "freedom" means. God Bless the USA!

Here, at least, we are in agreement. One of the greatest things about this republic is that we can publically disagree with each other and with the state; and our freedom of conscience is valued above all else by our laws and principles.

Quote
Man, you must have a really interesting "Happy Place"!  :o

Eh, I don't know that you want to go there. ;D ;)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on February 17, 2008, 12:26:46 AM
Man, you sure like making condescending inferences about people you know nothing about. My wife and I lived well below the poverty level for years and had 2 children during that time.  I've walked to the store at night with nothing to feed my family but the change we found in the sofa. 

"Hardships".  While delivery is a hardship that I can attest to as I've been at all our children's births, there is no shortage of people who want to adopt children and would take the hardship of raising the child.

You've 'been' at your children's births, I'm guessing that you haven't given birth to any of them. See, I can make certain inferences based solely on your biological gender. Not to dismiss your opinion based on this alone; but the fact that you would take the position of wanting to use oppressive law to impose hardships you will never experience does make me take note.

And, I will even confess, your living below the poverty line has probably placed you slightly closer to these circumstances than I've even been (or ever want to be). I was pretty poor as a student (but according to Karl Marx, at least, that doesn't mean anything since I should be judged based on the standing of my parents...so much for the ideal of every person being judged for who the are, independent of who their ancestors were), but other than that I've always managed to find jobs that placed me firmly in the upper-middle class. But, still, you didn't have to give birth and at least you had your wife and did not have to deal with it alone. And, even then, if you had gone through that and had managed it just fine, I still don't believe you would have the right to presume that all people can do it and impose these hardships on them.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: livefreeordie on February 17, 2008, 12:27:14 AM
A little advice if you ever decide you join the Corps.  God help us all! ;)

The men you lead could care less about your degrees and your philosophy.  They'll care more about how you mentor them, your character, and that you are willing to lead from the front, not talk about it from the rear.  If you talk to your men like you debate people on this list, they'll be following your rank but they won't be following you.

I'm sure you know this intellectually.  But if you can learn to address people here more like a good leader, you'll be better prepared for whatever lays in front of you.  If you think some of us here are intellectually challenged, wait till you meet some enlisted soldier fresh out of high school! Lots of enthusiasm though.

The troops HATE know-it-alls. HATE, as in, bullet in the back hate.  Much worse than someone who back-stabs their friends and enjoys being disliked! ;)

Turn yourself into a good leader though, and they'll follow you to hell and back.  And no book teaches you that.  It must be practiced.

Dang, I was going for the Jacobinist label...I guess I'll have to try harder.

I'm not really a huge opponent of our tax policy, can it be improved? Of course, but I think we have larger problems. Though the right to keep and bear arms is a pet issue for me.

Well, I've already expressed my opinion about a peace time military, a few times I almost joined, almost had myself convinced (or, at least, my friends in the military almost convinced me) that I would be a mere mercenary rather than a peace time soldier of a once-free republic, or that joining the Corps would be tantamount to helping maintain a standing Navy instead of a standing army; but I can't quite convince myself. Between the two degrees I already have and the Masters in Military Science I'm working on, I could probably do quite well for myself. Plus, nothing would have made my grandfather prouder while he lived than had I joined the Corps. But even he had great respect for the ideal that we should only form a standing army during time of war.

In any case, I spend my time at the rifle range, at the gym, and in the formal study of the art of war, in the event of actual need against real threats and enemies (internal or external, and probably the former) hopefully I won't completely useless, at least my professors of Military Science don't think I would be. It's a great tragedy that the noble tradition of the militia has been replaced by a standing army loyal to the federal government.

Here, at least, we are in agreement. One of the greatest things about this republic is that we can publically disagree with each other and with the state; and our freedom of conscience is valued above all else by our laws and principles.

Eh, I don't know that you want to go there. ;D ;)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: livefreeordie on February 17, 2008, 12:35:48 AM
Well my wife has "given" birth, at home except for the first, naturally, to 5 babies all over 10 lbs, actually I take that back, Mary Inger was 9lbs 10oz.  And I said "we" lived below the poverty line, so she understands the hardships of being poor and giving birth. And her parents were poor if that satisfies you.  And she is more pro-life than me. 

I did "deliver" 4 of the babies though.  Is that more valid to you than just being there?  It was a walk in the park compared to what my wife was going through, but it wasn't easy.  And when you are poor, it's a little freaky thinking how you are going to pay for it all. 

Fortunately, the struggle was worth it and now we are very successful.  So if we have a 6th under these circumstances I'll ask my wife if it is any less or more of a hardship.  She'll probably slap me! ;)

Oh, and I'm sure now you are typing, "yeah, but your wife might have been poor and understands the hardships better than most, but she had you, what about poor single woman, do you understand their hardship?  Would you impose such a hardship on them?"  I'll save time and answer you now, obviously I'm not a poor and single mother, but our church is in the inner city and we help these woman.  And there are multiple families in our church who have adopted children from poor single mother's and would adopt more if they were available.  None of the poor single mother's we help seem anything but grateful and happy to have not aborted their babies.  And I've never heard any of the adopted children say or be rumored to say, "man, being adopted by this Orthodox family sucks, I wish my mom would have ripped me apart in the womb instead of waiting 5 months to deliver me."

I wouldn't want to impose a hardship on anyone.  I would ask them to deliver the baby and then ask me or someone like me to help them endure the hardships and get them whatever help they need.  Except for the very rare cases where a mother's life is truly at risk, I don't know why an Orthodox Christian, or any Christian for that matter, would have any other response.  I do believe that before we can tell women, "no abortions of convenience", we must be ready to help them with the hardships of caring for them.  And that means Churches and Christians who are against abortion must be ready to get out of their pews and help people on a personal level. If not for the poor mother, for the poor mother's children.

You've 'been' at your children's births, I'm guessing that you haven't given birth to any of them. See, I can make certain inferences based solely on your biological gender. Not to dismiss your opinion based on this alone; but the fact that you would take the position of wanting to use oppressive law to impose hardships you will never experience does make me take note.

And, I will even confess, your living below the poverty line has probably placed you slightly closer to these circumstances than I've even been (or ever want to be). I was pretty poor as a student (but according to Karl Marx, at least, that doesn't mean anything since I should be judged based on the standing of my parents...so much for the ideal of every person being judged for who the are, independent of who their ancestors were), but other than that I've always managed to find jobs that placed me firmly in the upper-middle class. But, still, you didn't have to give birth and at least you had your wife and did not have to deal with it alone. And, even then, if you had gone through that and had managed it just fine, I still don't believe you would have the right to presume that all people can do it and impose these hardships on them.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Myrrh23 on February 17, 2008, 01:09:11 AM
LiveFreeorDie, I mean absolutely no offense to you, but why did you keep having more children if you were below the poverty line?
Also, it is honorable to ask a person to deliver a baby so as to keep abortion totally out of the picture, but how many of these poor, inner-city women keep having baby after baby after baby, that they know they can't take care of? Perhaps the care that some of these women also need is a good smack in the back of the head and a tube-tying party. I say these latter words because it pains me that so many children end up in foster care home after foster care home, and the irresponsibility of their parents is like the Energizer Bunny for the poverty cycle. What do you presume to do, LiveFree--have your family and other families continually adopt these children?

It is not the fault of these children to be born in such circumstances, and I do know that there are beloved saints who were born into stark poverty. However, I think there needs to be a movement to encourage all people, rich and poor, to practice natural contraception or have their reproductive powers taken from them. I also write these lines knowing that some poor women make damn fine better mothers than some that are more well off. My own mother is an example of this. She was well-off, with a job working for the State, yet was a horrible and abusive mother.

Myrrh23
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on February 17, 2008, 01:09:58 AM
A little advice if you ever decide you join the Corps.  God help us all! ;)

True, if I did by some outside chance both join and move up through the ranks we'd all be in trouble. ;D

Quote
The men you lead could care less about your degrees and your philosophy.  They'll care more about how you mentor them, your character, and that you are willing to lead from the front, not talk about it from the rear.  If you talk to your men like you debate people on this list, they'll be following your rank but they won't be following you.

I'm sure you know this intellectually.

Of course I do, I'm sure everyone knows this on an intellectual level. And I'm probably at a position in my life that, psychologically speaking, I wouldn't have a problem putting myself in a position to get myself killed, I can't think of a better way to die...though outside of combat it's anyone's guess. ;D ;)

Quote
But if you can learn to address people here more like a good leader, you'll be better prepared for whatever lays in front of you.  If you think some of us here are intellectually challenged, wait till you meet some enlisted soldier fresh out of high school! Lots of enthusiasm though.

The troops HATE know-it-alls. HATE, as in, bullet in the back hate.  Much worse than someone who back-stabs their friends and enjoys being disliked! ;)

Turn yourself into a good leader though, and they'll follow you to hell and back.  And no book teaches you that.  It must be practiced.

Eh, I've had the opportunity to be in charge of about 15-20 people in the civilian life, don't know how well that'd translate into a combat situation. But, in all seriousness, you really shouldn't judge my leadership abilities based on my posts on OC.net, I tend to view this forum as a medium for academic debate more than anything else. If you have any doubts give cleveland or frchris a PM, while I'm still probably not fit to lead a sizable military unit, this forum really isn't a good reflection of who I am in real life.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: livefreeordie on February 17, 2008, 01:20:38 AM
No offense, but ask my wife your first question!  She loves children and takes care of them like a saint! We only gave birth to 2 living under these conditions, and by the 5th we were doing pretty good. But if there is a lot of love in the house, you'd be surprised how you can get by with little money.  You might be surprised to know we look back on those days fondly. 

Sure it's honorable when their are plenty of people who would take care of the baby.  These woman should have their children taken away sooner when their children can be placed in a good home.  The problem is they are allowed to live in abusive homes too long.  I agree, foster care for older children is horrible.  I saw first hand as my mom was a social worker and we had foster children growing up.  I heard plenty of horror stories.  But never did I think they would have been better off dead.  A Boy my parents took in when he was 14 came from a horribly abusive background and was mentally slow.  He lived with them for 4 years.  Today he is married with a child, makes a decent living as a truck driver, is happy, and keeps in touch with my parents.  When he was 14, as the mentally handicapped abused son of a drug user, he would have been a poster boy for the "should have been aborted crowd."

There might be a day when there were more babies being born who the mother was willing to put up for adoption than people looking to adopt, but I'm willing to save as many children as we can now and face that world, if it ever comes, when it comes.  One of my dreams is to build an Orthodox Home for children.

I have no problem teaching and teaching and teaching people contraception.   And women who turn out baby after baby for welfare checks shouldn't be rewarded.  They should be punished and their babies taken away while they are young enough to have a family adopt them.

I'm truly sorry you had to overcome an abusive mother.  God be with you, and thank God you survived.

LiveFreeorDie, I mean absolutely no offense to you, but why did you keep having more children if you were below the poverty line?
Also, it is honorable to ask a person to deliver a baby so as to keep abortion totally out of the picture, but how many of these poor, inner-city women keep having baby after baby after baby, that they know they can't take care of? Perhaps the care that some of these women also need is a good smack in the back of the head and a tube-tying party. I say these latter words because it pains me that so many children end up in foster care home after foster care home, and the irresponsibility of their parents is like a the Energizer Bunny for the poverty cycle. What do you presume to do, LiveFree--have your family and other families continually adopt these children?

It is not the fault of these children to be born in such circumstances, and I do know that there are beloved saints who were born into stark poverty. However, I think there needs to be a movement to encourage all people, rich and poor, to practice natural contraception or have their reproductive powers taken from them. I also write these lines knowing that some poor women make damn fine better mothers than some that are more well off. My own mother is an example of this. She was well-off, with a job working for the State, yet was a horrible and abusive mother.

Myrrh23

Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: livefreeordie on February 17, 2008, 01:25:23 AM
Then there is hope for you!  :o ;)

. If you have any doubts give cleveland or frchris a PM, while I'm still probably not fit to lead a sizable military unit, this forum really isn't a good reflection of who I am in real life.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Myrrh23 on February 17, 2008, 01:32:52 AM
LiveFree, you know all about force in the military. I'm sure you also know that it is saddening when force must be used. I personally think some of these women should be forced to have their tubes tied. I'm not talking about Nazi methods or anything.

Myrrh23
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: livefreeordie on February 17, 2008, 01:36:13 AM
I'd have a hard time disagreeing in the extreme cases.  My greatest fear would be GIC labeling me an even greater attacker of freedom and personal liberty!!!! ;)

I would just equate it to a crime.  We lock people up for child abuse, we've castrated rapists.  If a women neglects children and keeps having them, there should be some recourse that keeps this from happening.  Not sure about tying her down and having her tubes tied though.

I have a feeling we would never need to think about such drastic measures if we just took the babies away once their were signs of abuse.  Almost any baby a year old or younger can get adopted pretty easily and if the woman knows she won't gain welfare checks from it and went through the effort of delivering it only to get no benefit, I have a feeling the incident of this would drop significantly.  Their would still be plenty of unwanted pregnancies, but don't think for a minute the serial mom's you are talking about don't know how to milk the system.  And do.

And I really believe, as I stated before, any solution means we as Christians must get up out of our pews and truly help those around us on a personal level. If we don't, I believe our faith is as empty and shallow as the secular world around us.

LiveFree, you know all about force in the military. I'm sure you also know that it is saddening when force must be used. I personally think some of these women should be forced to have their tubes tied. I'm not talking about Nazi methods or anything.

Myrrh23
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: livefreeordie on February 17, 2008, 01:58:07 AM
Not sure how much it would translate to leading men in combat. Leading men otherwise, I'm sure it's taught you a lot.  Leading Marines or any soldiers is a 24 hour a day job.  You live, eat, breath and work with them.  One of the best practices as a civilian would be to help out with a Scout troop.  Seriously, you'll learn a lot about yourself as a leader of men spending a week camping out with a bunch of gung ho 16 year olds.  They see you 24hrs a day, they see all your faults, and all your strengths.  How they respond to your leadership is a good indication of what you know and what you have to learn.  I helped my Uncle with an Explorer Post off and on for almost 6 years and it's amazing the leadership lessons I learned from that and use to this day.

Put your enthusiasm for learning into something like that and you'll be thankful you did it.

Eh, I've had the opportunity to be in charge of about 15-20 people in the civilian life, don't know how well that'd translate into a combat situation.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Riddikulus on February 17, 2008, 04:15:38 AM
Riddikulus, we agree! I was worried based on earlier postings we'd be forever doomed to be in contention.

Forever is such a long time! I'm sure we would have worked something out.  ;)

Quote
I must say, I'm jealous.  Queensland sure seems like a nice place to be as we look to the end of our grey Indiana winter. silouan

It's just lovely here, although we have had an unusual amount of rain this summer. Perhaps that is not such a bad thing, seeing as it is my first here and I was dreading very high temperatures. ;D
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on February 17, 2008, 08:25:04 AM
Apparently you forgot some of the recent threads in the politics forum.

Perhaps you can post them to "remind" me.

Quote
If you are using the state apparatus to impose your views on those who don't hold them, then yes.


So, I am supposed to use MY vote to voice YOUR opinion.  Sounds like elections in the Middle East, Eastern Europe,...

Quote
If you are going to use a single political issue as a litmus test, I also think that is incredibly simplistic.

yes, you have voiced your ASSUMPTION that I have a single issue litmus test.  It makes things simple for you.


Quote
 There are a broad range of political issues dealing with Christianity today

Pro death politicians rarely fail to have a whole host of issues in train, as reasons for me not to vote from them.

Quote
, creating a litmus test on a single issue  eliminates any ability to compromise whatsoever.
 

sorry, but I'm not signing on to your convenant with death and agreement with Hell.

Quote
And of course, nobody has yet demonstrated that my position is at all at odds with any part of the New Testament.

You yourself stated no one in the NT had political power, and set no political power.

To whom much is given, much is expected.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on February 17, 2008, 08:49:23 AM
Sounds a lot like the great philosopher and founder of the french school of feminism Simone de Beauvoir, wrote a far harsher condemnation of the circumstances that lead to abortion as being crimes against women. That the circumstances can exist where a pregnancy is unwanted is most unfortunate and a failure of society. But to forbid abortion only makes these circumstances, these social sins, worse by inflicting hardship and economic disadvantage upon these poor women. Which is why de Beauvoir, though opposed to the social institutions that made abortion necessary, lead the movement to legalize abortion in France and was ultimately successful in '74.

If you want to stop abortions, change the social circumstances that lead to them. Don't use your faux 'morality' to impose hardships you will never have to bear on others.

Beauvoir?  Wasn't she the one in the abusive, codependent and parasitic relationship with Sartre?  And one of many (the majority) who falsely claimed  to have had an abortion in the Manefesto of 343, a step to legalization in France?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on February 17, 2008, 09:05:58 AM
In my Sociology 101 class, we learned that many pro-lifers are also anti-welfare.

You learned, or were you taught?

Quote
I wonder which is more selfish: aborting a child or being anti-welfare?


Both are offered as solutions, but they create problems. There are women who have another child for another check. (I am aware you can't raise a kid on it, but that's irrelvant, as that's not what they are thinking). Abortion helps decrease you base on which to base your welfare state (see below).

 
Quote
Also, I'd like to know how much of Michael Moore's Sicko was truth in relation to how new mothers are treated in other developed countries. Anyone know? I think this is relevant because women often abort their unborn babies because they do not have access to the resources to care for them. From watching the movie, it seemed that women are more supported in other countries where raising kids is concerned. If a woman feels she is not, and will not, be supported, more often than not she will probably abort her babies.
To illustrate this latter point, most babies aborted are Latino or black...

Haven't seen it (having seen his 911 farce, I see no reason to).

Most of the developed countries are trying to pay their women into becoming mothers (and the men into becoming fathers, marriage is also in serious decline), to stem their plumeting population (and the tax base problems it brings).

Quote
I especially think it's hypocritical to be anti-contraception if you're also anti-abortion. We all know people are going to "do-it", especially those high-schoolers. I'd rather have people be safe than sorry.

yes, helping people to sink onto all fours, rather than raise them to stand on their own two feet, always solved things.

Quote
Heorhij, I think it has to do with what we've been trained to believe and what we feel is true. A very religious person, though not feeling anything for their baby except that it's their baby, might refuse to abort because they've been taught at Jesus Camp that it's wrong. However, I've heard numerous women say they didn't feel it was a baby until they felt it kick or move. I think your question might deserve another thread entirely...

And those "parents" who don't see their children as seperate individuals in their 30s, what of them?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on February 17, 2008, 01:12:18 PM
Not sure how much it would translate to leading men in combat. Leading men otherwise, I'm sure it's taught you a lot.  Leading Marines or any soldiers is a 24 hour a day job.  You live, eat, breath and work with them.  One of the best practices as a civilian would be to help out with a Scout troop.  Seriously, you'll learn a lot about yourself as a leader of men spending a week camping out with a bunch of gung ho 16 year olds.  They see you 24hrs a day, they see all your faults, and all your strengths.  How they respond to your leadership is a good indication of what you know and what you have to learn.  I helped my Uncle with an Explorer Post off and on for almost 6 years and it's amazing the leadership lessons I learned from that and use to this day.

Put your enthusiasm for learning into something like that and you'll be thankful you did it.

No thanks, I put up with the whining and stupidity of those under me at work because it pays well; not a chance of my doing it for free...I guess different things motivate different people. ;)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: livefreeordie on February 17, 2008, 02:34:03 PM
"whining and stupidity"

Did you learn to talk about your subordinates like that from General Stark?!  :o

No thanks, I put up with the whining and stupidity of those under me at work because it pays well; not a chance of my doing it for free...I guess different things motivate different people. ;)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on February 17, 2008, 02:52:11 PM
Beauvoir?  Wasn't she the one in the abusive, codependent and parasitic relationship with Sartre?

And her sex life is relevant to her philosophical writings because???

Her open relationship, starting in the 20's, was a revolutionary act that undermined many social institutions that had once been used to oppress women. The took the old Bourgeoise social constructs that allowed men to have socially acceptable affairs and turned them on their head. Her relationship was, in large part, the catalyst of the sexual revolution of the 60's, through it she helped change society by thwarting the traditional stigma (and double standard) associated with women freely exploring their sexuality.

Quote
And one of many (the majority) who falsely claimed  to have had an abortion in the Manefesto of 343, a step to legalization in France?

She was a very influential memeber of France's women's liberation movement and in large part orchestrated the Manifesto of the 343; she was a master of the art of propaganda and had great insight into western society, it was a calculated political move that forced the abortion issue and ultimately helped legalize abortion in France within three years. Much like with her open relationship with Sartre the goal was to take what was traditionally a social stigma and wear it proudly, one of the most powerful weapon against cultural expectations, when the scarlet letter becomes a badge of honour the social customs behind it are undermined. That she hadn't actually had an abortion was a calculated political risk, but it paid off as abortion was legalized before it became public knowledge; but it was certainly an honourable act to take upon herself (as many of the 343 did) a social stigma that she had no need to endure. Through this courageous act she helped overcome misogynistic and oppressive laws and eventually transform French society and western society in general.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Νεκτάριος on February 17, 2008, 02:53:18 PM
So, I am supposed to use MY vote to voice YOUR opinion.  Sounds like elections in the Middle East, Eastern Europe,...

No, I am saying that there is nothing in the current political system the world's liberal democracies that would keep you from following your religious beliefs.  You believe, as do I, that abortion (and for the sake of brevity, I think we both mean in circumstances not life threatening to the mother when we simply say abortion) is immoral.  How is that impinging on your freedom to practice your religion or moral code?   

Quote
yes, you have voiced your ASSUMPTION that I have a single issue litmus test.  It makes things simple for you.

And the very next thing you say:
Quote
Pro death politicians rarely fail to have a whole host of issues in train, as reasons for me not to vote from them. sorry, but I'm not signing on to your convenant with death and agreement with Hell.

You see it simple, black and white terms and as an agreement with "Hell."  If that is not evidence of using the issue as a litmus test, then I don't know what would be.
 
Quote
You yourself stated no one in the NT had political power, and set no political power.

So where do you get your justification for creating a political Christianity?

Quote
To whom much is given, much is expected.

Relevance?  The ironic part of this is that in the discussion of this topic on the politics forum, one of the loudest advocates of political Christianity admitted that he had a relative who uses abortion as a form of birth control and had had many abortions.  I know that if any of my female relative found themselves in a crisis pregnancy situation, my entire extended family would do everything possible to encourage them to not only keep the baby but then we would all pitch in to raise the child.  Being pro-life is a personal matter and in my personal life I am pro-life.  That is why I tire of your insinuations that I'm making agreements with Hell or whatever.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on February 17, 2008, 02:55:44 PM
"whining and stupidity"

Did you learn to talk about your subordinates like that from General Stark?!  :o

Nah, my leadership style is modeled on Heinrich Himmler's. ;D

But, truth be told, I don't really like having to deal with 'subordinates', but those are the jobs that pay well.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Myrrh23 on February 17, 2008, 03:57:05 PM
Quote
yes, helping people to sink onto all fours, rather than raise them to stand on their own two feet, always solved things.

Ialmisry, I believe that our children should be taught not to use their sexuality like a snack tray--to be passed around from person to person. We should teach kids to be responsible, but doing so in an abstinence-only program, which seems to me what you might be meaning from this quote, has been shown not to work. Looking at the American culture, we are fighting an uphill battle to teach children how God would want them to act sexually, as LiveFreeorDie had stated concerning how our culture has so sexualized people.

Myrrh23
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on February 17, 2008, 04:54:02 PM
And her sex life is relevant to her philosophical writings because???

Her open relationship, starting in the 20's, was a revolutionary act that undermined many social institutions that had once been used to oppress women. The took the old Bourgeoise social constructs that allowed men to have socially acceptable affairs and turned them on their head. Her relationship was, in large part, the catalyst of the sexual revolution of the 60's, through it she helped change society by thwarting the traditional stigma (and double standard) associated with women freely exploring their sexuality.

Yes, Sartre I understand got to milk (and kick around) the cow for free.  How liberating! 

Interesting how you reduce a codependent, abusive relationship to just sex.  I can see why your image of marriage seems to be skewed.

As for the relevence of this relationshop to her "philosophy": if I'm not mistaken when money was tight she would sacrifice her resources to Sartre, because his work was so much "more important."  So much for practicing what you preach.

Quote
She was a very influential memeber of France's women's liberation movement and in large part orchestrated the Manifesto of the 343; she was a master of the art of propaganda and had great insight into western society, it was a calculated political move that forced the abortion issue and ultimately helped legalize abortion in France within three years. Much like with her open relationship with Sartre the goal was to take what was traditionally a social stigma and wear it proudly, one of the most powerful weapon against cultural expectations, when the scarlet letter becomes a badge of honour the social customs behind it are undermined. That she hadn't actually had an abortion was a calculated political risk, but it paid off as abortion was legalized before it became public knowledge; but it was certainly an honourable act to take upon herself (as many of the 343 did) a social stigma that she had no need to endure. Through this courageous act she helped overcome misogynistic and oppressive laws and eventually transform French society and western society in general.

At least the admission that her actions were based on lies to further a political agenda is useful.  And the truth shall set you free.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on February 17, 2008, 05:02:25 PM
No, I am saying that there is nothing in the current political system the world's liberal democracies that would keep you from following your religious beliefs.  You believe, as do I, that abortion (and for the sake of brevity, I think we both mean in circumstances not life threatening to the mother when we simply say abortion) is immoral.  How is that impinging on your freedom to practice your religion or moral code?

Following my religious beliefs includes voting into office pro-life candidates, with a pro-life agenda.

Quote
And the very next thing you say:
You see it simple, black and white terms and as an agreement with "Hell."  If that is not evidence of using the issue as a litmus test, then I don't know what would be.

Again, I've yet to find a candidate whose only issue seperating him from me is abortion.  It is usually (and I've never been shown wrong) an indicator of other problems.
 
Quote
So where do you get your justification for creating a political Christianity?

Where's it in the US Constitution that I get to vote?

Quote
Relevance?  The ironic part of this is that in the discussion of this topic on the politics forum, one of the loudest advocates of political Christianity admitted that he had a relative who uses abortion as a form of birth control and had had many abortions.  I know that if any of my female relative found themselves in a crisis pregnancy situation, my entire extended family would do everything possible to encourage them to not only keep the baby but then we would all pitch in to raise the child.  Being pro-life is a personal matter and in my personal life I am pro-life.  That is why I tire of your insinuations that I'm making agreements with Hell or whatever.

Well, good for you and your entire extended family.  I hope He give you your reward.  But when you are talking about public policy, no, I'm not going to keep the Church's teachings a private matter. As for you, that's between you and God, until you ask me to do it.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on February 17, 2008, 05:24:04 PM
Yes, Sartre I understand got to milk (and kick around) the cow for free.  How liberating! 

Interesting how you reduce a codependent, abusive relationship to just sex.  I can see why your image of marriage seems to be skewed.

As for the relevence of this relationshop to her "philosophy": if I'm not mistaken when money was tight she would sacrifice her resources to Sartre, because his work was so much "more important."  So much for practicing what you preach.

Oh, she had her own affairs as well, sometimes with the same woman as Sartre, it was a two way street. Not always the easiest of relationships, but it seemed to last far longer than most marriages do today (though I believe it was entirely platonic after the war) so they obviously had something going for them. She certainly thought very highly of Sartre and he thought rather highly of her. Of course, as to who's work was the most important, history will ultimately be the judge and things seem to be comming out in her favour based both and the quality and the impact of her work. From a social perspective The Second Sex has had a far greater impact than any work of Sartre's ever will.

Quote
At least the admission that her actions were based on lies to further a political agenda is useful.  And the truth shall set you free.

In the end, it didn't matter that she hadn't had an abortion, what mattered was that she was willing to take on the social stigma to transform society. And I have nothing against propaganda when used to advance a noble cause like women's rights...here, at least, the end is justification enough for the means.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on February 17, 2008, 05:28:13 PM
Following my religious beliefs includes voting into office pro-life candidates, with a pro-life agenda.

Which is why liberty is too important to be subjected to the whims of the masses and should be codified out of their reach in Constitutional Law. Fortunately, the Supreme Court has interpreted the Constitution in this manner, in the manner most conducive to liberty, though I would feel more secure in the matter if we actually had a constitutional amendment directly prohibiting anti-abortion laws rather than relying on the court's interpretation of liberty.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Νεκτάριος on February 17, 2008, 06:08:56 PM
Which is why liberty is too important to be subjected to the whims of the masses and should be codified out of their reach in Constitutional Law. Fortunately, the Supreme Court has interpreted the Constitution in this manner, in the manner most conducive to liberty, though I would feel more secure in the matter if we actually had a constitutional amendment directly prohibiting anti-abortion laws rather than relying on the court's interpretation of liberty.

Thank God, that the founding fathers of this Republic were deists and secularists and not religious zealots, and that they had the wisdom to craft a constitutional Republic that could prevent the tyranny of the majority. 
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Αριστοκλής on February 17, 2008, 06:48:38 PM
Thank God, that the founding fathers of this Republic were deists and secularists and not religious zealots, and that they had the wisdom to craft a constitutional Republic that could prevent the tyranny of the majority. 
"could prevent the tyranny of the majority" ...so far. 
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on February 17, 2008, 07:04:59 PM
Oh, she had her own affairs as well, sometimes with the same woman as Sartre, it was a two way street. Not always the easiest of relationships, but it seemed to last far longer than most marriages do today (though I believe it was entirely platonic after the war) so they obviously had something going for them. She certainly thought very highly of Sartre and he thought rather highly of her. Of course, as to who's work was the most important, history will ultimately be the judge and things seem to be comming out in her favour based both and the quality and the impact of her work. From a social perspective The Second Sex has had a far greater impact than any work of Sartre's ever will.

In the end, it didn't matter that she hadn't had an abortion, what mattered was that she was willing to take on the social stigma to transform society. And I have nothing against propaganda when used to advance a noble cause like women's rights...here, at least, the end is justification enough for the means.

MORE TRUTH!

The fact that you continue to see their relationship through sex only, continues to prove my point.

"so they obviously had something going for them." You do know what co-dependent means?

Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on February 17, 2008, 07:20:04 PM
Which is why liberty is too important to be subjected to the whims of the masses and should be codified out of their reach in Constitutional Law. Fortunately, the Supreme Court has interpreted the Constitution in this manner, in the manner most conducive to liberty, though I would feel more secure in the matter if we actually had a constitutional amendment directly prohibiting anti-abortion laws rather than relying on the court's interpretation of liberty.

Soooo popular sovereignty is great, unless the views you oppose are popular.  Why don't we abolish the Constitution and have the philosopher kings run things from the bench?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on February 17, 2008, 07:40:38 PM
Thank God, that the founding fathers of this Republic were deists and secularists and not religious zealots, and that they had the wisdom to craft a constitutional Republic that could prevent the tyranny of the majority. 

yeah, like that abolitionist rabble.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: GiC on February 17, 2008, 08:19:49 PM
Soooo popular sovereignty is great, unless the views you oppose are popular.  Why don't we abolish the Constitution and have the philosopher kings run things from the bench?

If we could ensure that our Justices were always like what we found in the last court, I would agree; I would happily submit to the reign of Justice Sandra Day O'connor...but, of course, we can't. But since our Court tends to follow the intent of the Constitution, regardless of who sits on the Bench we have had fairly good decisions the Supreme Court, though on paper the most dangerous branch of government, has proven itself to be the most reliable and best defender of liberty amongst the three branches of government.

Of course, I'm not a democrat, I have never, in all my life, advocated pure democracy, the mob can undermine our rights as easily as a monarch can. I am a republican, in the truest sense of the term, and a constitutional republican at that. I support a representative government restricted by a constitution that will uphold our liberties against autocrat and democrat alike. The reason I advocate a republican government is not because the representatives of the people are inherently better rulers than an autocrat, but because history has proven that such a form of government has done more to preserve liberty than any other. To quote Winston Churchill, 'Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except all those others that have been tried from time to time.'

Liberty should be our primary concern. We choose our system of government base on that which will give the greatest degree of liberty to the citizens of the state. The rise of Nazi Germany demonstrates the problem of having no constitution, or of having a constitution too easily altered, republican government alone does not ensure liberty. But a constitution like we enjoy and an independent branch of government designed to uphold this Constitution has proven to be of great benefit to the citizens of this republic and the cause of freedom.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 04, 2010, 05:33:08 PM
I have never, until now, participated in a discussion on this on the Forum.  I have been far too ashamed to speak of it where Catholics are present.  But Alveus raised the topic and HandmaidenofGod asked for substantiation.
1.  You have posted links to this article before and used them to express your disdain for His All Holiness's "pro-choice" positions.
2.  We have discussed the politics of abortion many times on the Politics board--it's one of our oft recurring hot topics.
3.  The new thread would need to be in Politics.

I do not discuss politics.

For me it is a question of the religious and moral teaching of the Ecumenical Patriarch.

I can appreciate that Americans may see it as "politics" since they mix it up with pro-choice Greek politicians in the States.  But the rest of the world over which His All-Holiness presides has little knowlegde of US politics and Greek senators and we see it as a religious matter.  We simply are unable to discuss the political American angle since it is hardly known to us.  But we are able to objectively discuss the Church teaching on abortion vis-a-vis the statement of the Ecumenical Patriarch.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 04, 2010, 05:45:09 PM
I have never, until now, participated in a discussion on this on the Forum.  I have been far too ashamed to speak of it where Catholics are present.  But Alveus raised the topic and HandmaidenofGod asked for substantiation.
1.  You have posted links to this article before

I see that I have mentioned this article once before, in January 2008.  Apologies.  That had slipped my mind.

Quote
and used them to express your disdain for His All Holiness's "pro-choice" positions.


I have read what I posted 2 years ago and find it to be quite polite.  None of it is my words anyway, apart from the concluding sentence.

Please read it for yourself.

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,3282.msg202642.html#msg202642
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 04, 2010, 06:09:20 PM
I have never, until now, participated in a discussion on this on the Forum.  I have been far too ashamed to speak of it where Catholics are present.  But Alveus raised the topic and HandmaidenofGod asked for substantiation.
1.  You have posted links to this article before

I see that I have mentioned this article once before, in January 2008.  Apologies.  That had slipped my mind.

Quote
and used them to express your disdain for His All Holiness's "pro-choice" positions.


I have read what I posted 2 years ago and find it to be quite polite.  None of it is my words anyway, apart from the concluding sentence.

Please read it for yourself.

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,3282.msg202642.html#msg202642
You weren't so polite here:  http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,14965.msg213927.html#msg213927
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 04, 2010, 06:21:42 PM

You weren't so polite here:  http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,14965.msg213927.html#msg213927

These are my words:

"As you know, I have zero respect for this Patriarch because of his pro-choice stance on abortion."

Do you find that impolite?  Given the epithets used in the sacred canons for those who procure abortions and those who facilitate them, I would say that my words are rather restrained.  I imagine the only people they could possibly offend would not be Christians but those who support abortion.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 04, 2010, 06:25:55 PM
I have never, until now, participated in a discussion on this on the Forum.  I have been far too ashamed to speak of it where Catholics are present.  But Alveus raised the topic and HandmaidenofGod asked for substantiation.
1.  You have posted links to this article before and used them to express your disdain for His All Holiness's "pro-choice" positions.
2.  We have discussed the politics of abortion many times on the Politics board--it's one of our oft recurring hot topics.
3.  The new thread would need to be in Politics.

I do not discuss politics.

For me it is a question of the religious and moral teaching of the Ecumenical Patriarch.

I can appreciate that Americans may see it as "politics" since they mix it up with pro-choice Greek politicians in the States.  But the rest of the world over which His All-Holiness presides has little knowlegde of US politics and Greek senators and we see it as a religious matter.  We simply are unable to discuss the political American angle since it is hardly known to us.  But we are able to objectively discuss the Church teaching on abortion vis-a-vis the statement of the Ecumenical Patriarch.

In what way have I misrepreesnted His Most Divine All-Holiness?
You would rather His All Holiness take such a firm stance on abortion that he would invade private bedrooms to enforce it?  You judge him as pro-choice because he won't?  What if he holds to the Church's traditional doctrine on abortion but has deemed it wise to approach the issue from a more pastoral perspective that recognizes the many reasons why many couples might pursue an abortion?

What we've read is a newspaper article that relates particular soundbites from a person's interview with Patriarch Bartholomew.  How do we know the article presented His All Holiness faithfully and accurately?  Do we know the context of the soundbites?  Do we know that the words he chose communicated accurately what he really had on his mind?  After all, we're talking about someone for whom English is most likely not a first language.

This is how I think you, Isa, Michal, et al., may be misrepresenting His All Holiness.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 04, 2010, 06:27:17 PM
A little google magic for the words "Bartholomew" "Archon" and "Sarbanes" led to this link:
http://solomonhezekiah.wordpress.com/2009/11/16/the-greatest-scandal-in-american-orthodoxy/

It's a run down of "pro-choice" politicians and their relationship with their church.

Quote
Any Orthodox bishop, including the Ecumenical Patriarch, who praises or elevates such a person in the Church should be causing a scandal far worse than the misappropriation of funds in the OCA, or a drunk Antiochian touching up girl in a casino. Every clergy and every lay person of such a diocese who cares about the integrity of the Orthodox Church should be writing to their bishop.

Oddly enough, I hit the web page on the drunk Antiochian yesterday as well.

Do you have access to the private Politics board, because that's where you'll find my response?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: John Larocque on March 04, 2010, 06:29:01 PM
A little google magic for the words "Bartholomew" "Archon" and "Sarbanes" led to this link:
http://solomonhezekiah.wordpress.com/2009/11/16/the-greatest-scandal-in-american-orthodoxy/

It's a run down of "pro-choice" politicians and their relationship with their church.

Quote
Any Orthodox bishop, including the Ecumenical Patriarch, who praises or elevates such a person in the Church should be causing a scandal far worse than the misappropriation of funds in the OCA, or a drunk Antiochian touching up girl in a casino. Every clergy and every lay person of such a diocese who cares about the integrity of the Orthodox Church should be writing to their bishop.

Oddly enough, I hit the web page on the drunk Antiochian yesterday as well.

Do you have access to the private Politics board, because that's where you'll find my response?

Yeah, I actually forgot that thread wasn't part of that forum.. Mea culpa.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 04, 2010, 06:34:30 PM
You would rather His All Holiness take such a firm stance on abortion that he would invade private bedrooms to enforce it? 

Oh, Peter, thanks for the chuckle.  Would we expect His Divine All-Holiness to invade bordellos to enforce his views against prostitution?   Or the bedrooms of unmarried couples to enforce his views on fornication?     

HDAH Bartholomew is well able to state his views forcefully without needing to invade bedrooms and bordellos!! 
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 04, 2010, 06:43:30 PM

What if he holds to the Church's traditional doctrine on abortion but has deemed it wise to approach the issue from a more pastoral perspective that recognizes the many reasons why many couples might pursue an abortion?

Leaving aside such extreme cases as ectopic pregnancy, that approach would seem to place us on the slippery slope of relativism.

The true voice of the Church was expressed in January last year by Metropolitan Jonah  --- "…unqualified opposition to abortion is at the heart of the Orthodox Christian Tradition and is unarguably the teaching and the dogma of the Orthodox Church."

~ Metropolitan Jonah at the March for Life in Washington last year.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 04, 2010, 06:51:24 PM

What if he holds to the Church's traditional doctrine on abortion but has deemed it wise to approach the issue from a more pastoral perspective that recognizes the many reasons why many couples might pursue an abortion?

Leaving aside such extreme cases as ectopic pregnancy, that approach would seem to place us on the slippery slope of relativism.
Then feel free to disagree with His All Holiness's pastoral approach to this issue--there's certainly nothing wrong with that.  I much prefer to see that than a statement of, "I have zero respect for the man..."
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 04, 2010, 06:55:01 PM
A little google magic for the words "Bartholomew" "Archon" and "Sarbanes" led to this link:
http://solomonhezekiah.wordpress.com/2009/11/16/the-greatest-scandal-in-american-orthodoxy/

It's a run down of "pro-choice" politicians and their relationship with their church.

Quote
Any Orthodox bishop, including the Ecumenical Patriarch, who praises or elevates such a person in the Church should be causing a scandal far worse than the misappropriation of funds in the OCA, or a drunk Antiochian touching up girl in a casino. Every clergy and every lay person of such a diocese who cares about the integrity of the Orthodox Church should be writing to their bishop.

Oddly enough, I hit the web page on the drunk Antiochian yesterday as well.

Do you have access to the private Politics board, because that's where you'll find my response?

Yeah, I actually forgot that thread wasn't part of that forum.. Mea culpa.

I went ahead and moved your post to the Politics board and merged it into the thread I started in reply to your post:  http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,26264.0.html. ;)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 04, 2010, 07:10:05 PM
Then feel free to disagree with His All Holiness's pastoral approach to this issue--there's certainly nothing wrong with that.

HDAH Bartholomew's reported pastoral approach of "There are many reasons for a couple to go toward abortion" is outside the moral parameters and the sacred canons of Orthodoxy.  It is the position of the pro-abortion lobby.   As such the position is not pastoral at all and is in conflict with 2 millennia of Orthodox teaching, unarguable Orthodox teaching and dogma as Metropolitan Jonah proclaimed at the 2009 March for Life.

There are not two options here, Peter.  The Patriarch has no choice but to be the voice of the Church's authentic teaching so that the light of Christ may shine before men.   One bishop (the Primate of your Church) was this voice in Washington last year; another bishop , sadly, was not that voice.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Gebre Menfes Kidus on March 04, 2010, 07:41:29 PM
You would rather His All Holiness take such a firm stance on abortion that he would invade private bedrooms to enforce it? 

Oh, Peter, thanks for the chuckle.  Would we expect His Divine All-Holiness to invade bordellos to enforce his views against prostitution?   Or the bedrooms of unmarried couples to enforce his views on fornication?     

HDAH Bartholomew is well able to state his views forcefully without needing to invade bedrooms and bordellos!! 


Exactly!


Selam
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 04, 2010, 07:55:32 PM
I see that in the changeover from thread to thread we lost the words of His Grace Bishop Tikhon...

-----------------------------
Bishop Tikhon (FitzGerald), retired bishop of San Francisco expresses in his own inimitable way his opinion of the Patriarch's pro-choice stance...  This is a classic "tikhonism."

"I have long been in the ranks of those who view with
distaste the care with which the current Patriarch
(even when only a Metropolitan) has avoided
discomfiting anyone anywhere on the topic of abortion"

Source ::
https://listserv.indiana.edu/cgi-bin/wa-iub.exe?A2=ind0909D&L=ORTHODOX&P=R2730
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Gebre Menfes Kidus on March 04, 2010, 08:38:29 PM
I see that in the changeover from thread to thread we lost the words of His Grace Bishop Tikhon...

-----------------------------
Bishop Tikhon (FitzGerald), retired bishop of San Francisco expresses in his own inimitable way his opinion of the Patriarch's pro-choice stance...  This is a classic "tikhonism."

"I have long been in the ranks of those who view with
distaste the care with which the current Patriarch
(even when only a Metropolitan) has avoided
discomfiting anyone anywhere on the topic of abortion"

Source ::
https://listserv.indiana.edu/cgi-bin/wa-iub.exe?A2=ind0909D&L=ORTHODOX&P=R2730

I love it! ;D


Selam
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 04, 2010, 09:00:33 PM
Then feel free to disagree with His All Holiness's pastoral approach to this issue--there's certainly nothing wrong with that.

HDAH Bartholomew's reported pastoral approach of "There are many reasons for a couple to go toward abortion" is outside the moral parameters and the sacred canons of Orthodoxy.  It is the position of the pro-abortion lobby.   As such the position is not pastoral at all and is in conflict with 2 millennia of Orthodox teaching, unarguable Orthodox teaching and dogma as Metropolitan Jonah proclaimed at the 2009 March for Life.

There are not two options here, Peter.  The Patriarch has no choice but to be the voice of the Church's authentic teaching so that the light of Christ may shine before men.   One bishop (the Primate of your Church) was this voice in Washington last year; another bishop , sadly, was not that voice.
Yes, I know how you feel about this.  But how do you know you're representing His All Holiness faithfully?

I see that in the changeover from thread to thread we lost the words of His Grace Bishop Tikhon...

-----------------------------
Bishop Tikhon (FitzGerald), retired bishop of San Francisco expresses in his own inimitable way his opinion of the Patriarch's pro-choice stance...  This is a classic "tikhonism."

"I have long been in the ranks of those who view with
distaste the care with which the current Patriarch
(even when only a Metropolitan) has avoided
discomfiting anyone anywhere on the topic of abortion"

Source ::
https://listserv.indiana.edu/cgi-bin/wa-iub.exe?A2=ind0909D&L=ORTHODOX&P=R2730
And how do I know that my former bishop's understanding of His All Holiness is correct?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Punch on March 04, 2010, 09:48:38 PM
I see that in the changeover from thread to thread we lost the words of His Grace Bishop Tikhon...

-----------------------------
Bishop Tikhon (FitzGerald), retired bishop of San Francisco expresses in his own inimitable way his opinion of the Patriarch's pro-choice stance...  This is a classic "tikhonism."

"I have long been in the ranks of those who view with
distaste the care with which the current Patriarch
(even when only a Metropolitan) has avoided
discomfiting anyone anywhere on the topic of abortion"

Source ::
https://listserv.indiana.edu/cgi-bin/wa-iub.exe?A2=ind0909D&L=ORTHODOX&P=R2730

I love it! ;D


Selam

Amen.  It is good that some Bishops still speak with the Fathers.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Rafa999 on March 04, 2010, 10:12:24 PM
Then feel free to disagree with His All Holiness's pastoral approach to this issue--there's certainly nothing wrong with that.

HDAH Bartholomew's reported pastoral approach of "There are many reasons for a couple to go toward abortion" is outside the moral parameters and the sacred canons of Orthodoxy.  It is the position of the pro-abortion lobby.   As such the position is not pastoral at all and is in conflict with 2 millennia of Orthodox teaching, unarguable Orthodox teaching and dogma as Metropolitan Jonah proclaimed at the 2009 March for Life.

There are not two options here, Peter.  The Patriarch has no choice but to be the voice of the Church's authentic teaching so that the light of Christ may shine before men.   One bishop (the Primate of your Church) was this voice in Washington last year; another bishop , sadly, was not that voice.
Yes, I know how you feel about this.  But how do you know you're representing His All Holiness faithfully?

I see that in the changeover from thread to thread we lost the words of His Grace Bishop Tikhon...

-----------------------------
Bishop Tikhon (FitzGerald), retired bishop of San Francisco expresses in his own inimitable way his opinion of the Patriarch's pro-choice stance...  This is a classic "tikhonism."

"I have long been in the ranks of those who view with
distaste the care with which the current Patriarch
(even when only a Metropolitan) has avoided
discomfiting anyone anywhere on the topic of abortion"

Source ::
https://listserv.indiana.edu/cgi-bin/wa-iub.exe?A2=ind0909D&L=ORTHODOX&P=R2730
And how do I know that my former bishop's understanding of His All Holiness is correct?

He presided over the bishopric while making that statement  ;D
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ms.hoorah on March 04, 2010, 10:13:23 PM
I had never read the following statement from Patriarch Bartholomew on abortion before today.....very disheartening.
 
“Although the Orthodox Church believes the soul enters the body at conception and, generally speaking, respects human life and the continuation of the pregnancy,” Bartholomew said, the church also “respects the liberty and freedom of all human persons and all Christian couples. We are not allowed to enter the bedrooms of the Christian couples,” he also said. “We cannot generalize. There are many reasons for a couple to go toward abortion.” (San Francisco Chronicle-7/20/90 p.A22)

I would hope that the previous statement was grossly distorted due to a translation problems, but it seems to fit with the following statement from his 2008 book, pg. 150.

"In all such social and moral issues, it is not one or another position that the Orthodox Church seeks to promote in a defensive spirit. Indeed, we would normally refrain from expounding a single rigidly defined dogma on social and moral challenges.”




 
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ytterbiumanalyst on March 04, 2010, 10:16:13 PM
I had never read the following statement from Patriarch Bartholomew on abortion before today.....very disheartening.
 
“Although the Orthodox Church believes the soul enters the body at conception and, generally speaking, respects human life and the continuation of the pregnancy,” Bartholomew said, the church also “respects the liberty and freedom of all human persons and all Christian couples. We are not allowed to enter the bedrooms of the Christian couples,” he also said. “We cannot generalize. There are many reasons for a couple to go toward abortion.” (San Francisco Chronicle-7/20/90 p.A22)

I would hope that the previous statement was grossly distorted due to a translation problems, but it seems to fit with the following statement from his 2008 book, pg. 150.

"In all such social and moral issues, it is not one or another position that the Orthodox Church seeks to promote in a defensive spirit. Indeed, we would normally refrain from expounding a single rigidly defined dogma on social and moral challenges.”
But we don't have rigidly defined dogmas on what to do when people sin. That is to be handled between them and their priest, in confession and repentance. The Vatican may proclaim punishments for sin, but our Patriarchs do not. It's simply not their place.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 04, 2010, 10:34:02 PM
There are not two options here, Peter.  The Patriarch has no choice but to be the voice of the Church's authentic teaching so that the light of Christ may shine before men.   One bishop (the Primate of your Church) was this voice in Washington last year; another bishop , sadly, was not that voice.
Yes, I know how you feel about this.  But how do you know you're representing His All Holiness faithfully?

May I present a message which was not transferred from thread to thread in the split.  In it you will find the contact details for two prominent OCL clergymen, including the founder of OCL.  If you have the interest you could contact them and their word will be much more credible than mine.

------------------------------

"Orthodox Patriarchs 'Wink' at Abortion"
(written by a priest under the Ecumenical Throne)

http://www.oclife.org/vnine.pdf
http://web.archive.org/web/20040407123705/http://www.oclife.org/vnine.pdf


Here are his words:

"Although the Orthodox Church believes the soul
enters the body at conception and, generally
speaking, respects human life and the continuation
of the pregnancy," Bartholomew said, the church
also "respects the liberty and freedom of all human
persons and all Christian couples. . . .We are not
allowed to enter the bedrooms of the Christian
couples," he also said. "We cannot generalize.
There are many reasons for a couple to go toward
abortion."

I understand that Fr Dr Edward Pehanich (ACROD, founder of Orthodox
Christians For Life) who reported all this in an article in oclife.org
< http://www.oclife.org/vnine.pdf > has sought clarification or retraction
from His Divine All-Holiness.  There has been no response.

As for those who doubt that the Patriarch was honestly reported, why would
Fr Edward Pehanich who holds a prominent position in ACROD highlight these
remarks in the Orthodox Christians for Life magazine if they were
unreliable, thereby antagonising his supreme spiritual authority in the
Phanar. I'd say he's a brave and honest priest.

If you'd like to contact Fr Edward and ask for up to date information his
contact details are:

Very Rev. Dr. Edward Pehanich
10062 Firethorn Dr.
N. Huntingdon, PA 15642
Phone: (724) 863-3741
---

And Fr Anthony Nelson, a prominent ROCA priest in the Right to Life
Movement, has written:

We at Oklahoma Orthodox Christians for Life also wrote both to the
Patriarchate and the GOA requesting comments/clarification of the comments
at the time. Our requests went unanswered.

Protopriest Anthony Nelson
St. Benedict Russian Orthodox Church
Oklahoma City, OK USA 405-672-1441
Source:
https://listserv.indiana.edu/cgi-bin/wa-iub.exe?A2=ind0701D&L=ORTHODOX&D=0&m=998\
15&P=6149

____________________________
If the Patriarch were wrongly reported it seems to me that he has a strong moral responsibility to correct the statement and publicly support the moral teaching of the Church.  Why has he not done so?

Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 04, 2010, 10:37:22 PM
There are not two options here, Peter.  The Patriarch has no choice but to be the voice of the Church's authentic teaching so that the light of Christ may shine before men.   One bishop (the Primate of your Church) was this voice in Washington last year; another bishop , sadly, was not that voice.
Yes, I know how you feel about this. 

It is not a matter of "feelings,"  Peter, but of whether HDAH Bartholomew is faithful to the canons and teaching of the Orthodox Church.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ytterbiumanalyst on March 04, 2010, 10:41:02 PM
If the Patriarch were wrongly reported it seems to me that he has a strong moral responsibility to correct the statement and publicly support the moral teaching of the Church.  Why has he not done so?
No, if anyone is wrongly reported, it is the responsibility of the reporter to correct the statement, not the one incorrectly quoted.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: bogdan on March 04, 2010, 10:50:41 PM
I see that in the changeover from thread to thread we lost the words of His Grace Bishop Tikhon...

-----------------------------
Bishop Tikhon (FitzGerald), retired bishop of San Francisco expresses in his own inimitable way his opinion of the Patriarch's pro-choice stance...  This is a classic "tikhonism."

"I have long been in the ranks of those who view with
distaste the care with which the current Patriarch
(even when only a Metropolitan) has avoided
discomfiting anyone anywhere on the topic of abortion"

Source ::
https://listserv.indiana.edu/cgi-bin/wa-iub.exe?A2=ind0909D&L=ORTHODOX&P=R2730

I love it! ;D


Selam

Amen.  It is good that some Bishops still speak with the Fathers.

This is wonderful. I love Bishop Tikhon. :)

I prefer our Bishops to speak plainly and clearly, and not mask themselves with the clutter of focus-group-tested non-offensive anti-inflammatory language (this is for all clergy, not just HAH). Since the Church is the custodian of the absolute Truth about God and mankind, why do we not take bold stands? Why do our bishops make statements that even require interpretation on black-and-white issues like abortion?

It's better to ruffle feathers and hurt people's feelings with the Truth than it is to leave people to their own devices or lead people astray with ambiguity. That seems to have been St. John Chrysostom's philosophy. :)

(I am giving the benefit of the doubt and assuming HAH is against abortion and would call it infanticide and slaughter like the Fathers did, and the ambiguity is just fear of backlash. If he actually wavers on the wrongness of infanticide, then God help us.)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 04, 2010, 10:50:58 PM
If the Patriarch were wrongly reported it seems to me that he has a strong moral responsibility to correct the statement and publicly support the moral teaching of the Church.  Why has he not done so?

No, if anyone is wrongly reported, it is the responsibility of the reporter to correct the statement, not the one incorrectly quoted.

1.  How will the reporter know his mistake if the person interviewed does not contact him?

2.  This is not a purported error in a minor local scandal but it involves the teaching of the supreme spiritual leader of the Orthodox Church, on a moral question which greatly agitates all Christian Churches and nations of our era.   It is not an error that can be allowed to stand because it leads astray not just the Homogenia but circa 350 million people in the Orthodox Church.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ytterbiumanalyst on March 04, 2010, 10:59:20 PM
If the Patriarch were wrongly reported it seems to me that he has a strong moral responsibility to correct the statement and publicly support the moral teaching of the Church.  Why has he not done so?

No, if anyone is wrongly reported, it is the responsibility of the reporter to correct the statement, not the one incorrectly quoted.

1.  How will the reporter know his mistake if the person interviewed does not contact him?
Good point. How do we know the EP has not contacted the reporter? All we have from this article is a statement that as of the date of the article's publication, the EP had not yet contacted ACROD. We have no other information.

Quote
2.  This is not a purported error in a minor local scandal but it involves the teaching of the supreme spiritual leader of the Orthodox Church, on a moral question which greatly agitates all Christian Churches and nations of our era.   It is not an error that can be allowed to stand because it leads astray not just the Homogenia but circa 350 million people in the Orthodox Church.
If there is an error here, I believe it is one of interpretation. Yes, you could interpret the EP's words to mean that he supports the freedom of individuals to have an abortion, but I think that is a disingenuous interpretation. I interpret his words to mean, "We disapprove of abortion, but we also do not handle every case in the same way, because we know that there are many different reasons for a person to have an abortion, and each one of these requires the sinner to repent in a different manner." As this is my interpretation, I find it to be quite in line with Orthodox teaching.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 04, 2010, 11:03:53 PM
There are not two options here, Peter.  The Patriarch has no choice but to be the voice of the Church's authentic teaching so that the light of Christ may shine before men.   One bishop (the Primate of your Church) was this voice in Washington last year; another bishop , sadly, was not that voice.
Yes, I know how you feel about this.  But how do you know you're representing His All Holiness faithfully?

May I present a message which was not transferred from thread to thread in the split.  In it you will find the contact details for two prominent OCL clergymen, including the founder of OCL.  If you have the interest you could contact them and their word will be much more credible than mine.
Sorry, I don't put much credibility in such activist organizations as the Orthodox Christian Laity.

If the Patriarch were wrongly reported it seems to me that he has a strong moral responsibility to correct the statement and publicly support the moral teaching of the Church.  Why has he not done so?
It may seem so to you, but that's just the problem here.  I'm not saying His All Holiness was wrongly reported.  I'm saying that you may be misinterpreting what His All Holiness is reported to have said in the interview.  How do you know that your interpretation is correct and that any error would therefore have to have been the reporter's?


There are not two options here, Peter.  The Patriarch has no choice but to be the voice of the Church's authentic teaching so that the light of Christ may shine before men.   One bishop (the Primate of your Church) was this voice in Washington last year; another bishop , sadly, was not that voice.
Yes, I know how you feel about this.

It is not a matter of "feelings,"  Peter, but of whether HDAH Bartholomew is faithful to the canons and teaching of the Orthodox Church.
But when it comes to your judgment of whether he has been faithful to the canons and teaching of the Church, it IS a matter of [your] feelings.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on March 04, 2010, 11:07:24 PM
If the Patriarch were wrongly reported it seems to me that he has a strong moral responsibility to correct the statement and publicly support the moral teaching of the Church.  Why has he not done so?
No, if anyone is wrongly reported, it is the responsibility of the reporter to correct the statement, not the one incorrectly quoted.

WRONG

His All Holiness goes trotting around the globe, claiming to speak for 300 million Orthodox.

Now two priests, one under the Phanar's omophorion, who represent many Orthodox on a central moral issue, ask for clarification on a quote and get silence. Qui tacit consentit.

So either His All Holiness can correct the record, or stop involving us when he is talking himself up to his pals.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 04, 2010, 11:10:29 PM
But we don't have rigidly defined dogmas on what to do when people sin. That is to be handled between them and their priest, in confession and repentance. The Vatican may proclaim punishments for sin, but our Patriarchs do not. It's simply not their place.

The canon mandating 7 years exclusion from communion for abortion is observed even in our days, although usually it is not the full seven years but a smaller period of time.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 04, 2010, 11:12:55 PM
2.  This is not a purported error in a minor local scandal but it involves the teaching of the supreme spiritual leader of the Orthodox Church, on a moral question which greatly agitates all Christian Churches and nations of our era.   It is not an error that can be allowed to stand because it leads astray not just the Homogenia but circa 350 million people in the Orthodox Church.
Yes, I see.  His All Holiness is the supreme spiritual leader of the Orthodox Church when he is in error, yet when he speaks truth, he is merely another bishop speaking the truth. ::)  Do you really think the EP has that much power to lead the whole Church astray?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 04, 2010, 11:14:44 PM
If there is an error here, I believe it is one of interpretation. Yes, you could interpret the EP's words to mean that he supports the freedom of individuals to have an abortion, but I think that is a disingenuous interpretation.

Why write in such a derogatory manner of those who are quite genuinely distressed by the words of the Patriarch?   Why does the Patriarch not issue a statement to allay this distress? 
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ytterbiumanalyst on March 04, 2010, 11:17:06 PM
If there is an error here, I believe it is one of interpretation. Yes, you could interpret the EP's words to mean that he supports the freedom of individuals to have an abortion, but I think that is a disingenuous interpretation.

Why write in such a derogatory manner of those who are quite genuinely distressed by the words of the Patriarch?   Why does the Patriarch not issue a statement to allay this distress? 
Because you're not distressed. To be distressed by the EP's words, you have to trust the EP. It doesn't take much time reading your posts to find out how you feel about him.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 04, 2010, 11:19:48 PM
Yes, I see.  His All Holiness is the supreme spiritual leader of the Orthodox Church when he is in error, yet when he speaks truth, he is merely another bishop speaking the truth. ::)  Do you really think the EP has that much power to lead the whole Church astray?

Yes, because when Bishop Joseph Harkiolakis was Metropolitan of New Zealand he revealed that when he was a bishop in Australia he had been asked not to publish his article against abortion and not to promote the anti-abortion icon because the EP did not want such clear cut guidance from a bishop.  I see that Bishop's Joseph's article is referenced earlier in this thread.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 04, 2010, 11:24:02 PM
Because you're not distressed. To be distressed by the EP's words, you have to trust the EP. It doesn't take much time reading your posts to find out how you feel about him.

Unfortunately, I have learnt not to trust HDAH.  A great part of the source of distrust is his words on abortion.  Would you trust a bishop who promoted his reported views?  I feel the same disdain for him as Bishop Emeritus Tikhon of San Francisco himself expressed.

I am indeed sincerely distressed that the First See of the Orthodox world holds such views.   If only it were not so.... and we could offer him the love and respect which should be given.....
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 04, 2010, 11:26:41 PM
Because you're not distressed. To be distressed by the EP's words, you have to trust the EP. It doesn't take much time reading your posts to find out how you feel about him.

Unfortunately, I have learnt not to trust HDAH.  A great part of source of distrust is his words on abortion.  Would you trust a bishop who promoted his reported views?  I feel the same disdain for him as Bishop Emeritus Tikhon of San Francisco.

I am indeed sincerely distressed that the First See of the Orthodox world holds such views.   If only it were not so.... and we could offer him the love and respect which should be given.....
You keep dodging my question, Fr. Ambrose.  How do you know that you have interpreted His All Holiness's words correctly?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 04, 2010, 11:28:46 PM
Because you're not distressed. To be distressed by the EP's words, you have to trust the EP. It doesn't take much time reading your posts to find out how you feel about him.

Unfortunately, I have learnt not to trust HDAH.  A great part of source of distrust is his words on abortion.  Would you trust a bishop who promoted his reported views?  I feel the same disdain for him as Bishop Emeritus Tikhon of San Francisco.
Speaking as a member of the retired Bishop Tikhon's former diocese, his disdain for anyone really doesn't mean a whole lot to me.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Rafa999 on March 04, 2010, 11:34:32 PM
If I was Orthodox I would take this more seriously. The command to preserve life is above all other commands. I would slam the books on him for promoting abortion in countries suffering from this practice. Let he who present another gospel be khrim.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Rafa999 on March 04, 2010, 11:34:32 PM
Let's hope CAF does not see this thread.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 04, 2010, 11:35:13 PM
Let's hope CAF does not see this thread.
So what if they do?  Since when are we supposed to care what the people at CAF think?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ytterbiumanalyst on March 04, 2010, 11:35:59 PM
Because you're not distressed. To be distressed by the EP's words, you have to trust the EP. It doesn't take much time reading your posts to find out how you feel about him.

Unfortunately, I have learnt not to trust HDAH.  A great part of source of distrust is his words on abortion.  Would you trust a bishop who promoted his reported views?  I feel the same disdain for him as Bishop Emeritus Tikhon of San Francisco.

I am indeed sincerely distressed that the First See of the Orthodox world holds such views.   If only it were not so.... and we could offer him the love and respect which should be given.....
I submit that you are distressed not by the EP's words, but by your interpretation of the EP's words, which is filtered through your distrust of the EP.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 05, 2010, 12:00:47 AM
You keep dodging my question, Fr. Ambrose.  How do you know that you have interpreted His All Holiness's words correctly?

It's not a worthwhile question to attempt to answer.  We have had, for example, newspaper reports that Metropolitan Hilarion accepts the validity and efficaciousness of Roman Catholic sacraments and considers them on a par with Orthodox sacraments.   No forum member has raised similar points about the articles and contested them.

If it bothers you that some of us think that the Patriarch was correctly quoted, then I suppose we could begin messages with disclaimers:   If the Patriarch has been correctly reported, then.... such and such.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 05, 2010, 12:03:06 AM
Because you're not distressed. To be distressed by the EP's words, you have to trust the EP. It doesn't take much time reading your posts to find out how you feel about him.

Unfortunately, I have learnt not to trust HDAH.  A great part of source of distrust is his words on abortion.  Would you trust a bishop who promoted his reported views?  I feel the same disdain for him as Bishop Emeritus Tikhon of San Francisco.

I am indeed sincerely distressed that the First See of the Orthodox world holds such views.   If only it were not so.... and we could offer him the love and respect which should be given.....
I submit that you are distressed not by the EP's words, but by your interpretation of the EP's words, which is filtered through your distrust of the EP.

As you like.  But you are whistling in the dark.  You may like to consider how and when I came to distrust the EP.  Was it before or after his reported pro-choice position?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 05, 2010, 12:53:12 AM
I see that in 1999 Touchstone magazine ran an article on what it calls the "numbing moral silence"  of the Ecumenical Patriarch in neglecting pro-life issues.

"Constantinople's Moral Oversight"
http://touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=12-02-014-v

Extract:

" I suggest that it is time for Orthodox Christians in America to begin questioning the pastoral leadership of the Ecumenical Patriarchate with respect to its stewardship of Orthodox Christian Tradition in America. Put simply: the Ecumenical Patriarchate has severely neglected, and continues to neglect, pro-life and other pivotal social issues in its American ministry.
 
"This neglect is readily noticeable if one compares the relative silence of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America on pro-life issues with the active involvement of other Orthodox hierarchies in this country.
 
" Consider, for example, the amicus curiae brief (click to view) filed on February 21, 1989, on behalf of Orthodox Christians in America in the famous Webster case before the Supreme Court (also printed in Touchstone, Spring 1992, pp 15-20). This was arguably the strongest and clearest statement on the evil of abortion to come from Orthodox auspices in America.

"Yet Bishop (now Metropolitan) Maximos of Pittsburgh was the only Greek Orthodox bishop among the many signers of that document, in contrast to the unanimous signatures of the ranking hierarchs from the Russian (OCA, ROCOR), Antiochian, Serbian, Ukrainian, and Romanian jurisdictions.
 
"A full half of the Orthodox in America belong to the Greek Orthodox archdiocese, whose spiritual leaders were--with the exception of one bishop--completely silent on that solemn occasion."
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 05, 2010, 01:02:10 AM
You keep dodging my question, Fr. Ambrose.  How do you know that you have interpreted His All Holiness's words correctly?

It's not a worthwhile question to attempt to answer.
But since you're basing your whole response to the EP's words on your interpretation of what he said, the question of whether your interpretation is correct is crucial to this discussion, which therefore makes your answer necessary.

We have had, for example, newspaper reports that Metropolitan Hilarion accepts the validity and efficaciousness of Roman Catholic sacraments and considers them on a par with Orthodox sacraments.   No forum member has raised similar points about the articles and contested them.
I don't see how that's relevant.

If it bothers you that some of us think that the Patriarch was correctly quoted, then I suppose we could begin messages with disclaimers:   If the Patriarch has been correctly reported, then.... such and such.
Regardless of whether Patriarch Bartholomew was correctly quoted, the question of how you interpret his words, the meaning you give to them, is the issue here.  You might be quoting him correctly yet still be dead wrong in how you understand the words you quote.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 05, 2010, 01:07:34 AM
I see that in 1999 Touchstone magazine ran an article on what it calls the "numbing moral silence"  of the Ecumenical Patriarch in neglecting pro-life issues.

"Constantinople's Moral Oversight"
http://touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=12-02-014-v

Extract:

" I suggest that it is time for Orthodox Christians in America to begin questioning the pastoral leadership of the Ecumenical Patriarchate with respect to its stewardship of Orthodox Christian Tradition in America. Put simply: the Ecumenical Patriarchate has severely neglected, and continues to neglect, pro-life and other pivotal social issues in its American ministry.
 
"This neglect is readily noticeable if one compares the relative silence of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America on pro-life issues with the active involvement of other Orthodox hierarchies in this country.
 
" Consider, for example, the amicus curiae brief (click to view) filed on February 21, 1989, on behalf of Orthodox Christians in America in the famous Webster case before the Supreme Court (also printed in Touchstone, Spring 1992, pp 15-20). This was arguably the strongest and clearest statement on the evil of abortion to come from Orthodox auspices in America.

"Yet Bishop (now Metropolitan) Maximos of Pittsburgh was the only Greek Orthodox bishop among the many signers of that document, in contrast to the unanimous signatures of the ranking hierarchs from the Russian (OCA, ROCOR), Antiochian, Serbian, Ukrainian, and Romanian jurisdictions.
 
"A full half of the Orthodox in America belong to the Greek Orthodox archdiocese, whose spiritual leaders were--with the exception of one bishop--completely silent on that solemn occasion."

So Touchstone magazine criticized His All Holiness for not acting as they think he should have acted.  Big deal! ::)  Is Touchstone magazine the authority on how the EP should assert his authority as "spiritual leader" of the Orthodox world?  The last I saw, Touchstone is an ecumenical magazine with writers from Orthodox, Catholic, and Protestant confessions.  This hardly makes them the authority on all things Orthodox.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 05, 2010, 01:15:31 AM
I see that in 1999 Touchstone magazine ran an article on what it calls the "numbing moral silence"  of the Ecumenical Patriarch in neglecting pro-life issues.

"Constantinople's Moral Oversight"
http://touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=12-02-014-v

Extract:

" I suggest that it is time for Orthodox Christians in America to begin questioning the pastoral leadership of the Ecumenical Patriarchate with respect to its stewardship of Orthodox Christian Tradition in America. Put simply: the Ecumenical Patriarchate has severely neglected, and continues to neglect, pro-life and other pivotal social issues in its American ministry.
 
"This neglect is readily noticeable if one compares the relative silence of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America on pro-life issues with the active involvement of other Orthodox hierarchies in this country.
 
" Consider, for example, the amicus curiae brief (click to view) filed on February 21, 1989, on behalf of Orthodox Christians in America in the famous Webster case before the Supreme Court (also printed in Touchstone, Spring 1992, pp 15-20). This was arguably the strongest and clearest statement on the evil of abortion to come from Orthodox auspices in America.

"Yet Bishop (now Metropolitan) Maximos of Pittsburgh was the only Greek Orthodox bishop among the many signers of that document, in contrast to the unanimous signatures of the ranking hierarchs from the Russian (OCA, ROCOR), Antiochian, Serbian, Ukrainian, and Romanian jurisdictions.
 
"A full half of the Orthodox in America belong to the Greek Orthodox archdiocese, whose spiritual leaders were--with the exception of one bishop--completely silent on that solemn occasion."

So Touchstone magazine criticized His All Holiness for not acting as they think he should have acted.  Big deal! ::)  Is Touchstone magazine the authority on how the EP should assert his authority as "spiritual leader" of the Orthodox world?  The last I saw, Touchstone is an ecumenical magazine with writers from Orthodox, Catholic, and Protestant confessions.  This hardly makes them the authority on all things Orthodox.

Is there some individual here who has said that Touchstone is an authority on all things Orthodox?  Not me! Not you!

The article which I referenced was written by an Orthodox Christian writer Andrew Estocin.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 05, 2010, 01:19:27 AM
I see that in 1999 Touchstone magazine ran an article on what it calls the "numbing moral silence"  of the Ecumenical Patriarch in neglecting pro-life issues.

"Constantinople's Moral Oversight"
http://touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=12-02-014-v

Extract:

" I suggest that it is time for Orthodox Christians in America to begin questioning the pastoral leadership of the Ecumenical Patriarchate with respect to its stewardship of Orthodox Christian Tradition in America. Put simply: the Ecumenical Patriarchate has severely neglected, and continues to neglect, pro-life and other pivotal social issues in its American ministry.
 
"This neglect is readily noticeable if one compares the relative silence of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America on pro-life issues with the active involvement of other Orthodox hierarchies in this country.
 
" Consider, for example, the amicus curiae brief (click to view) filed on February 21, 1989, on behalf of Orthodox Christians in America in the famous Webster case before the Supreme Court (also printed in Touchstone, Spring 1992, pp 15-20). This was arguably the strongest and clearest statement on the evil of abortion to come from Orthodox auspices in America.

"Yet Bishop (now Metropolitan) Maximos of Pittsburgh was the only Greek Orthodox bishop among the many signers of that document, in contrast to the unanimous signatures of the ranking hierarchs from the Russian (OCA, ROCOR), Antiochian, Serbian, Ukrainian, and Romanian jurisdictions.
 
"A full half of the Orthodox in America belong to the Greek Orthodox archdiocese, whose spiritual leaders were--with the exception of one bishop--completely silent on that solemn occasion."

So Touchstone magazine criticized His All Holiness for not acting as they think he should have acted.  Big deal! ::)  Is Touchstone magazine the authority on how the EP should assert his authority as "spiritual leader" of the Orthodox world?  The last I saw, Touchstone is an ecumenical magazine with writers from Orthodox, Catholic, and Protestant confessions.  This hardly makes them the authority on all things Orthodox.

Is there some individual here who has said that Touchstone is an authority on all things Orthodox?  Not me! Not you!
And yet you posted quotes from the article in some apparent attempt to bolster your arguments.  Surely you must think them somewhat authoritative, or else you wouldn't have quoted them.

The article which I referenced was written by an Orthodox Christian writer Andrew Estocin.
Okay.  What's that supposed to mean?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 05, 2010, 01:23:16 AM
But since you're basing your whole response to the EP's words on your interpretation of what he said, the question of whether your interpretation is correct is crucial to this discussion, which therefore makes your answer necessary.

...............Regardless of whether Patriarch Bartholomew was correctly quoted, the question of how you interpret his words, the meaning you give to them, is the issue here.  You might be quoting him correctly yet still be dead wrong in how you understand the words you quote.

I am not alone in the way I understand the words of HDAH Bartholomew.  Others, it seems, are interpreting his words "disingenuously."

1.  http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2009/10/27/a-not-so-pro-life-patriarch/
2.  http://www.orthodoxnews.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=EditorialsOpinion.one&content_id=18280&CFID=23007755&CFTOKEN=29751934&tp_preview=true
3.  http://web.archive.org/web/20040407123705/http://www.oclife.org/vnine.pdf

I would welcome the chance to read other articles you know of which interpret the words of Patriarch Bartholomew as authentic Orthodox teaching.

Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 05, 2010, 01:31:56 AM
Is there some individual here who has said that Touchstone is an authority on all things Orthodox?  Not me! Not you!
And yet you posted quotes from the article in some apparent attempt to bolster your arguments.  Surely you must think them somewhat authoritative, or else you wouldn't have quoted them

I cannot see the logic.  Why is the writing of an Orthodox writer diminished in value if it is publisheded in a non-Orthodox magazine, one which frequently publishes good articles of Orthodox interest?

Surely we distinguish between an Orthodox article with an Orthodox author and the magazine which publishes it? Is there a problem?

If one does a google search you will find the article on several Orthodox sites.

Why are we spending so much time on these peripheral issues?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on March 05, 2010, 01:46:29 AM
Is there some individual here who has said that Touchstone is an authority on all things Orthodox?  Not me! Not you!
And yet you posted quotes from the article in some apparent attempt to bolster your arguments.  Surely you must think them somewhat authoritative, or else you wouldn't have quoted them

I cannot see the logic.  Why is the writing of an Orthodox writer diminished in value if it is publisheded in a non-Orthodox magazine, one which frequently publishes good articles of Orthodox interest?

Surely we distinguish between an Orthodox article with an Orthodox author and the magazine which publishes it? Is there a problem?

If one does a google search you will find the article on several Orthodox sites.

Why are we spending so much time on these peripheral issues?

Well, just for the sake of completeness and damn Touchstone all to hell for PtA, I personally know most of the senior editors of Touchstone, its headquarters being in our parish house (I used to briefly do news articles for it many years ago) and vouch for the Orthodoxy of most of the Orthodox (although as it happens I don't know Andrew Escotin, at least I don't think I know him).  And it is a widely disseminated journal, well known and respected.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 05, 2010, 01:47:13 AM
But since you're basing your whole response to the EP's words on your interpretation of what he said, the question of whether your interpretation is correct is crucial to this discussion, which therefore makes your answer necessary.

...............Regardless of whether Patriarch Bartholomew was correctly quoted, the question of how you interpret his words, the meaning you give to them, is the issue here.  You might be quoting him correctly yet still be dead wrong in how you understand the words you quote.

I am not alone in the way I understand the words of HDAH Bartholomew.  Others, it seems, are interpreting his words "disingenuously."

1.  http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2009/10/27/a-not-so-pro-life-patriarch/
2.  http://www.orthodoxnews.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=EditorialsOpinion.one&content_id=18280&CFID=23007755&CFTOKEN=29751934&tp_preview=true
3.  http://web.archive.org/web/20040407123705/http://www.oclife.org/vnine.pdf
So what?  Your appeal to authority doesn't prove your interpretation correct.  They could be just as wrong.

I would welcome the chance to read other articles you know of which interpret the words of Patriarch Bartholomew as authentic Orthodox teaching.
But then, I'm not trying to prove that his words, as quoted from this interview, represent authentic Orthodox teaching.  I just don't think we're seeing the whole picture here, and that we are therefore not qualified to judge the Patriarch's position based solely on what you've presented thus far.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 05, 2010, 01:55:29 AM
But then, I'm not trying to prove that his words, as quoted from this interview, represent authentic Orthodox teaching.  I just don't think we're seeing the whole picture here, and that we are therefore not qualified to judge the Patriarch's position based solely on what you've presented thus far.

I am more than keen to see contrary articles, one which show that the Patriarch was giving authentic Orthodox moral teaching on abortion.

If you know of such articles, please, let us know of them.

I would truly love to know that the Patriarch's words have been misinterpreted.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 05, 2010, 01:56:36 AM
Is there some individual here who has said that Touchstone is an authority on all things Orthodox?  Not me! Not you!
And yet you posted quotes from the article in some apparent attempt to bolster your arguments.  Surely you must think them somewhat authoritative, or else you wouldn't have quoted them

I cannot see the logic.  Why is the writing of an Orthodox writer diminished in value if it is publisheded in a non-Orthodox magazine, one which frequently publishes good articles of Orthodox interest?
I didn't say that.  I just don't see what authority they have to sway my thinking and persuade me that I should accept your arguments.

Surely we distinguish between an Orthodox article with an Orthodox author and the magazine which publishes it? Is there a problem?

If one does a google search you will find the article on several Orthodox sites.
So what?  What authority does that grant to your arguments?

Why are we spending so much time on these peripheral issues?
Because you insist on dragging His All Holiness through the mud based on your possible misinterpretation of something he said?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 05, 2010, 02:00:09 AM
Is there some individual here who has said that Touchstone is an authority on all things Orthodox?  Not me! Not you!
And yet you posted quotes from the article in some apparent attempt to bolster your arguments.  Surely you must think them somewhat authoritative, or else you wouldn't have quoted them

I cannot see the logic.  Why is the writing of an Orthodox writer diminished in value if it is publisheded in a non-Orthodox magazine, one which frequently publishes good articles of Orthodox interest?

Surely we distinguish between an Orthodox article with an Orthodox author and the magazine which publishes it? Is there a problem?

If one does a google search you will find the article on several Orthodox sites.

Why are we spending so much time on these peripheral issues?

Well, just for the sake of completeness and damn Touchstone all to hell for PtA, I personally know most of the senior editors of Touchstone, its headquarters being in our parish house (I used to briefly do news articles for it many years ago) and vouch for the Orthodoxy of most of the Orthodox (although as it happens I don't know Andrew Escotin, at least I don't think I know him).  And it is a widely disseminated journal, well known and respected.
Don't get me wrong.  I have a lot of respect for Touchstone magazine.  I just respect them for what they are and not for what they aren't.  For all the good stuff Touchstone publishes, I don't see them as a definitive authority on what I am to believe as an Orthodox Christian, and I am therefore free to disagree with them or think them wrong about certain things.  As such, I am under no obligation to consider arguments from their supposed authority convincing.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 05, 2010, 02:01:37 AM
Because you insist on dragging His All Holiness through the mud based on your possible misinterpretation of something he said?

You think I am dragging him through the mud?  Because I understand his words as others have done, others of far greater acumen than I.  Do you not think that I weep and pray for a correction or a clarification from him?  Why does the First See of Orthodoxy stay adamantly silent?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 05, 2010, 02:03:43 AM
Because you insist on dragging His All Holiness through the mud based on your possible misinterpretation of something he said?

You think I am dragging him through the mud?  Because I understand his words as others have done, others of far greater acumen than I.  Do you not think that I weep and pray for a correction or a clarification from him?  Why does the First See of Orthodoxy stay adamantly silent?
Does His All Holiness answer to you?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Rafa999 on March 05, 2010, 02:16:11 AM
Let's hope CAF does not see this thread.
So what if they do?  Since when are we supposed to care what the people at CAF think?

Because they can then contrast the unorthodox Ecumenical patriarch promoting the Gospel of abortion versus the conservative Pope of Rome promoting the Gospel of no contraception to preserve human life. Or is the number of days in Lent a better reason to form a schism?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 05, 2010, 02:21:13 AM
Because you insist on dragging His All Holiness through the mud based on your possible misinterpretation of something he said?

You think I am dragging him through the mud?  Because I understand his words as others have done, others of far greater acumen than I.  Do you not think that I weep and pray for a correction or a clarification from him?  Why does the First See of Orthodoxy stay adamantly silent?
Does His All Holiness answer to you?

That is a question of ecclesiology which would take us far outside the parameters of this thread.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on March 05, 2010, 02:31:37 AM
(http://www.cre8asiteforums.com/forums/uploads/post-3012-1185415263.gif)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 05, 2010, 02:49:00 AM
Because you insist on dragging His All Holiness through the mud based on your possible misinterpretation of something he said?

You think I am dragging him through the mud?  Because I understand his words as others have done, others of far greater acumen than I.  Do you not think that I weep and pray for a correction or a clarification from him?  Why does the First See of Orthodoxy stay adamantly silent?
Does His All Holiness answer to you?

That is a question of ecclesiology which would take us far outside the parameters of this thread.
You're making this too hard. ;)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Iconodule on March 05, 2010, 09:48:33 AM
If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, etc.... If one considers the context of His Holiness' words (ie, his other actions or lack thereof related to abortion) it's pretty clear that Irish Hermit and others have interpreted him completely ingenuously.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: bogdan on March 05, 2010, 10:27:13 AM
If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, etc.... If one considers the context of His Holiness' words (ie, his other actions or lack thereof related to abortion) it's pretty clear that Irish Hermit and others have interpreted him completely ingenuously.

I agree. It's not a matter of who answers to who, it's a matter of being a clear spiritual father for his children. What father refuses to clarify when he says something that causes confusion and distress to his children...especially when it appears to be the exact opposite of what he supposedly believes?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on March 05, 2010, 11:21:22 AM
it's a matter of being a clear spiritual father for his children.
Of those of you currently active in this thread, (yourself, ytterbiumanalyst, Irish Hermit, Rafa999, PeterTheAleut, ialmisry and Iconodule) not a single one of you can claim to be "spiritual children" of His All Holiness. So why do you care what he has to say? Do you now want him to behave like a Latin Pope? Why?
Tend to yourselves and seek your salvation in your own Churches.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Michał on March 05, 2010, 11:25:34 AM
Let's hope CAF does not see this thread.
So what if they do?  Since when are we supposed to care what the people at CAF think?

Because they can then contrast the unorthodox Ecumenical patriarch promoting the Gospel of abortion versus the conservative Pope of Rome promoting the Gospel of no contraception to preserve human life.

EP is not any Orthodox equivalent of the Pope of Rome - he is not the voice of Orthodoxy. And Catholics have their own cardinal Jean-Claude Turcotte who said, "I can understand that in certain cases, there is almost no other choice than to practice (abortion)" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Claude_Turcotte#Abortion).
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: bogdan on March 05, 2010, 11:31:12 AM
it's a matter of being a clear spiritual father for his children.
Of those of you currently active in this thread, (yourself, ytterbiumanalyst, Irish Hermit, Rafa999, PeterTheAleut, ialmisry and Iconodule) not a single one of you can claim to be "spiritual children" of His All Holiness. So why do you care what he has to say? Do you now want him to behave like a Latin Pope? Why?
Tend to yourselves and seek your salvation in your own Churches.

That's fine with me, but the EP is the one who is posturing himself as a quasi-Pope figure and presents himself as the figurehead of Orthodoxy.

And I'm sure there are plenty of Greeks who have the same concerns, clergy, who have written for clarification and received no reply.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on March 05, 2010, 11:36:26 AM
That's fine with me, but the EP is the one who is posturing himself as a quasi-Pope figure and presents himself as the figurehead of Orthodoxy.
Is he? I don't know what gave you that impression, but even if it was the case, why would you encourage it by demanding that he pontificate to you?

And I'm sure there are plenty of Greeks who have the same concerns, clergy, who have written for clarification and received no reply.
How can you be "sure" of this? Have you checked? Or are you just making assumptions about people and posting it on internet forums for all to see?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: bogdan on March 05, 2010, 01:15:06 PM
That's fine with me, but the EP is the one who is posturing himself as a quasi-Pope figure and presents himself as the figurehead of Orthodoxy.
Is he? I don't know what gave you that impression, but even if it was the case, why would you encourage it by demanding that he pontificate to you?

Yes, he does.

I'm not demanding that he pontificate, I'm asking that he clarify what he means. He does not have administrative power over any of us, but right or wrong he does have a certain spiritual authority and he is looked to for guidance by people outside his jurisdiction.

And regardless of whether we accept him as the "universal patriarch" or not, the outside world tends to see him that way and he needs to be clear to all the non-Orthodox as well that abortion is absolutely and always a sin. I don't see those kinds of definitive statements coming from him. If I've missed them, please provide examples because I'd like to be wrong. But this is how I read what he says:

"Generally speaking, we respect human life" is not a definitive anti-abortion statement.

"We are not allowed to enter the bedrooms of the Christian couples" is just sophistry. The Church has the right to speak to every detail of our lives, because all of life is spiritual.

"We cannot generalize. There are many reasons for a couple to go toward abortion" implies that some of those reasons may have merit.

Not to mention his praise of pro-abortion Orthodox politicians. Why he lauds them instead of calling them to repentance is beyond my ability to understand, especially because the sins of a politician affect many, many people outside himself.

You see how none of what he said makes sense? It all comes across as carefully-weighed political-speak.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ytterbiumanalyst on March 05, 2010, 01:47:32 PM
Because you're not distressed. To be distressed by the EP's words, you have to trust the EP. It doesn't take much time reading your posts to find out how you feel about him.

Unfortunately, I have learnt not to trust HDAH.  A great part of source of distrust is his words on abortion.  Would you trust a bishop who promoted his reported views?  I feel the same disdain for him as Bishop Emeritus Tikhon of San Francisco.

I am indeed sincerely distressed that the First See of the Orthodox world holds such views.   If only it were not so.... and we could offer him the love and respect which should be given.....
I submit that you are distressed not by the EP's words, but by your interpretation of the EP's words, which is filtered through your distrust of the EP.

As you like.  But you are whistling in the dark.  You may like to consider how and when I came to distrust the EP.  Was it before or after his reported pro-choice position?
The Patriarch is neither pro-life nor pro-choice. Those terms apply to the legality of abortion in the United States, and as the EP is not an American, it's not an issue in which he needs to be involved. This is another example of your reading into his statements things that aren't there.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ytterbiumanalyst on March 05, 2010, 01:52:19 PM
it's a matter of being a clear spiritual father for his children.
Of those of you currently active in this thread, (yourself, ytterbiumanalyst, Irish Hermit, Rafa999, PeterTheAleut, ialmisry and Iconodule) not a single one of you can claim to be "spiritual children" of His All Holiness. So why do you care what he has to say? Do you now want him to behave like a Latin Pope? Why?
Tend to yourselves and seek your salvation in your own Churches.
Good point. I'm in this discussion not because I care about the EP or about abortion. I don't care one way or the other on either; they simply aren't my issues. I am here because I have noticed that Irish Hermit is behaving in a very Protestant fashion, interpreting the EP's words according to his own prejudices and then projecting his interpretation onto the EP. Through my posts, I hoped to bring out that prejudice, so the discussion would be more balanced. I think I've had at least a mild degree of success to that end.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Iconodule on March 05, 2010, 01:54:34 PM
That's fine with me, but the EP is the one who is posturing himself as a quasi-Pope figure and presents himself as the figurehead of Orthodoxy.
Is he? I don't know what gave you that impression, but even if it was the case, why would you encourage it by demanding that he pontificate to you.

I don't agree with you that a hierarch becomes a Pope-like figure by the mere act of publicly teaching. I was under the impression that this is what hierarchs are all supposed to do.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: bogdan on March 05, 2010, 03:08:28 PM
it's a matter of being a clear spiritual father for his children.
Of those of you currently active in this thread, (yourself, ytterbiumanalyst, Irish Hermit, Rafa999, PeterTheAleut, ialmisry and Iconodule) not a single one of you can claim to be "spiritual children" of His All Holiness. So why do you care what he has to say? Do you now want him to behave like a Latin Pope? Why?
Tend to yourselves and seek your salvation in your own Churches.
Good point. I'm in this discussion not because I care about the EP or about abortion. I don't care one way or the other on either; they simply aren't my issues. I am here because I have noticed that Irish Hermit is behaving in a very Protestant fashion, interpreting the EP's words according to his own prejudices and then projecting his interpretation onto the EP. Through my posts, I hoped to bring out that prejudice, so the discussion would be more balanced. I think I've had at least a mild degree of success to that end.

You don't care one way or the other about people (not to mention Christians) murdering their infant children?

Since the EP does not clearly condemn abortion in the strongest terms, his own statements open themselves to projection.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 05, 2010, 03:26:28 PM
it's a matter of being a clear spiritual father for his children.
Of those of you currently active in this thread, (yourself, ytterbiumanalyst, Irish Hermit, Rafa999, PeterTheAleut, ialmisry and Iconodule) not a single one of you can claim to be "spiritual children" of His All Holiness. So why do you care what he has to say? Do you now want him to behave like a Latin Pope? Why?
Tend to yourselves and seek your salvation in your own Churches.
Good point. I'm in this discussion not because I care about the EP or about abortion. I don't care one way or the other on either; they simply aren't my issues. I am here because I have noticed that Irish Hermit is behaving in a very Protestant fashion, interpreting the EP's words according to his own prejudices and then projecting his interpretation onto the EP. Through my posts, I hoped to bring out that prejudice, so the discussion would be more balanced. I think I've had at least a mild degree of success to that end.
Exactly the reason I'm here on this thread, as well.  I was just about to say this, but Mr. Y said it so eloquently I don't want to be redundant.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 05, 2010, 03:32:52 PM
it's a matter of being a clear spiritual father for his children.
Of those of you currently active in this thread, (yourself, ytterbiumanalyst, Irish Hermit, Rafa999, PeterTheAleut, ialmisry and Iconodule) not a single one of you can claim to be "spiritual children" of His All Holiness. So why do you care what he has to say? Do you now want him to behave like a Latin Pope? Why?
Tend to yourselves and seek your salvation in your own Churches.
Good point. I'm in this discussion not because I care about the EP or about abortion. I don't care one way or the other on either; they simply aren't my issues. I am here because I have noticed that Irish Hermit is behaving in a very Protestant fashion, interpreting the EP's words according to his own prejudices and then projecting his interpretation onto the EP. Through my posts, I hoped to bring out that prejudice, so the discussion would be more balanced. I think I've had at least a mild degree of success to that end.

You don't care one way or the other about people (not to mention Christians) murdering their infant children?

Since the EP does not clearly condemn abortion in the strongest terms, his own statements open themselves to projection.
So, because His All Holiness isn't doing what you think he should be doing, he's being less than the pastor you think he should be?  Is he the spokesperson for all of Orthodoxy?  When he asserts himself as such, people cry foul at his "papal pretensions", yet when he doesn't, people cry foul at his "dereliction of duty".  He just can't win.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 05, 2010, 03:52:52 PM
That's fine with me, but the EP is the one who is posturing himself as a quasi-Pope figure and presents himself as the figurehead of Orthodoxy.
Is he? I don't know what gave you that impression, but even if it was the case, why would you encourage it by demanding that he pontificate to you?

Yes, he does.

I'm not demanding that he pontificate, I'm asking that he clarify what he means. He does not have administrative power over any of us, but right or wrong he does have a certain spiritual authority and he is looked to for guidance by people outside his jurisdiction.
I'm a spiritual child under the episcopal oversight of Bishop Benjamin of San Francisco and the primatial oversight of Metropolitan Jonah.  Anything Patriarch Bartholomew says therefore has no direct impact on my Orthodox Christian life.  Why should I look to His All Holiness for guidance and spiritual authority?

And regardless of whether we accept him as the "universal patriarch" or not, the outside world tends to see him that way and he needs to be clear to all the non-Orthodox as well that abortion is absolutely and always a sin.
Again, why should he do what YOU think he should do?  Last I knew, YOU aren't the final arbiter of truth.  You're just an Internet poster who wants His All Holiness to say things that fit your particular agenda.  Why should he care about your agenda?

Not to mention his praise of pro-abortion Orthodox politicians. Why he lauds them instead of calling them to repentance is beyond my ability to understand, especially because the sins of a politician affect many, many people outside himself.
Comment on American politics that belongs only on the Politics board; therefore, you will find my reply there.  Re: Patriarch Bartholomew and the Politics of Abortion (http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,26264.msg414253.html#msg414253)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Iconodule on March 05, 2010, 03:56:17 PM
All bishops have a responsibility to teach the Christian faith and morals; they do so primarily for their own particular flock but what they say is important to all Christians. To say, "he's not my bishop, why should I care what he says?" is demonstrate indifference to the unity of the Church, as if the various dioceses are sealed compartments. Regardless of what his particular jurisdiction happens to be, the Ecumenical Patriarch, like other patriarchs, has a prominent public position in the Church and his opinions carry a certain weight to them which everyone feels. I would be similarly worried if the Patriarch of Moscow waffled on an important doctrinal or moral point; he's not my Patriarch but he is a prominent representative authority of the Church to the world. This has nothing to do with demanding that hierarchs act in a papal fashion; rather, it's about maintaining cohesion in the Church's witness.  
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 05, 2010, 04:16:59 PM
All bishops have a responsibility to teach the Christian faith and morals; they do so primarily for their own particular flock but what they say is important to all Christians. To say, "he's not my bishop, why should I care what he says?" is demonstrate indifference to the unity of the Church, as if the various dioceses are sealed compartments. Regardless of what his particular jurisdiction happens to be, the Ecumenical Patriarch, like other patriarchs, has a prominent public position in the Church and his opinions carry a certain weight to them which everyone feels. I would be similarly worried if the Patriarch of Moscow waffled on an important doctrinal or moral point; he's not my Patriarch but he is a prominent representative authority of the Church to the world. This has nothing to do with demanding that hierarchs act in a papal fashion; rather, it's about maintaining cohesion in the Church's witness.  
But in the context of this debate, I said what I said as a means of expressing my opinion that some of us here are just getting far too hung up on Patriarch Bartholomew's reticence to preach clearly the anti-abortion message they want him to preach.  There's much more to Orthodox faith than just how we relate to the abortion issue.  Maybe His All Holiness is in such a position that he needs to focus on other issues of importance to the Orthodox under his care, issues that are not so closely tied to one nation's politics.

The glory of the decentralized authority structure of the Orthodox Church is that other bishops can speak specifically to the moral issues faithful in their diocese face.  I see that Metropolitan Jonah has spoken very clearly and unequivocally to his American audience that abortion is evil, and I say, "Kudos, Vladyka!"  He spoke a message people in his flock needed to hear.  I see that the Orthodox Church has made itself visibly present at the annual Right to Life rallies in Washington, D.C.  I laud this action as something we Orthodox in the U.S. need to do.  But do you not see the common thread here?  These are examples of the Church acting and speaking its message locally by addressing concerns of importance to the local faithful.  This isn't about a hierarch speaking the message you want to hear from some ivory tower in a land far, far away.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Iconodule on March 05, 2010, 04:34:49 PM
If His Holiness had made no statement about abortion at all, then I, for one, would not make an issue of it. The trouble is, he did make a statement which was, at best, ambiguous and liable to misinterpretation, about an issue which is of great importance throughout the world and especially so in Orthodox countries. He has not clarified his statement. That is a problem.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 05, 2010, 04:42:30 PM
If His Holiness had made no statement about abortion at all, then I, for one, would not make an issue of it. The trouble is, he did make a statement which was, at best, ambiguous and liable to misinterpretation, about an issue which is of great importance throughout the world and especially so in Orthodox countries. He has not clarified his statement. That is a problem.
Do we have the complete transcript of the oft cited interview in question?  If not, then all we have is soundbites.  Can we discern accurately what His All Holiness said in that interview just from the soundbites that got published?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: bogdan on March 05, 2010, 05:35:31 PM
If His Holiness had made no statement about abortion at all, then I, for one, would not make an issue of it. The trouble is, he did make a statement which was, at best, ambiguous and liable to misinterpretation, about an issue which is of great importance throughout the world and especially so in Orthodox countries. He has not clarified his statement. That is a problem.
Do we have the complete transcript of the oft cited interview in question?  If not, then all we have is soundbites.  Can we discern accurately what His All Holiness said in that interview just from the soundbites that got published?

That, I think, is a fair question, and could very much change my whole opinion on the matter. Maybe he said "We cannot generalize. There are many reasons for a couple to go toward abortion" but the fact remains that it is still murder.

However, when the media grossly distorts a person's words, usually they rush to set the record straight. The EP evidently has a competent media staff to do everything he does, so it can't be that they aren't aware of any of this. So the confusion remains, and the silence speaks volumes.

I am inclined to think it's accurate, based on his track record. I realize that is an assumption on my part, but it's not an unreasonable assumption.

I also disagree that abortion is an American issue and less of an issue elsewhere. Abortion is legal in places all over the world, and a huge problem in Orthodox countries. It's definitely not peculiar to America, and it may well be worse in other countries. Mass infanticide—human life—is a much bigger issue than all the environmentalist stuff he is focusing on, so I reject the implication that abortion is a minor issue not worth mentioning.

We've had a "Green Patriarch", I hope the next patriarch is the "Anti-Murder Patriarch."
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on March 05, 2010, 05:51:24 PM
The EP evidently has a competent media staff to do everything he does,

"Media Staff"?  :D ROFL! You are so American!
Have you actually seen the Phanar?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 05, 2010, 05:54:21 PM
I am inclined to think it's accurate, based on his track record. I realize that is an assumption on my part, but it's not an unreasonable assumption.
Not unreasonable because it's your assumption? ;)

I also disagree that abortion is an American issue and less of an issue elsewhere.
Not saying it is a distinctively American issue.  Just that the language a lot of people on this forum use to talk about abortion paints it in colors unique to the American experience of the abortion issue.

Abortion is legal in places all over the world, and a huge problem in Orthodox countries. It's definitely not peculiar to America, and it may well be worse in other countries. Mass infanticide—human life—is a much bigger issue than all the environmentalist stuff he is focusing on, so I reject the implication that abortion is a minor issue not worth mentioning.
Not calling abortion a minor issue.  Just saying that it's not the ONLY issue of importance to Orthodox Christians and, therefore, to the EP.

We've had a "Green Patriarch", I hope the next patriarch is the "Anti-Murder Patriarch."
Hope all you want, but remember that the Ecumenical Patriarch isn't beholden to you and what you would like him to be.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 05, 2010, 05:56:22 PM
The EP evidently has a competent media staff to do everything he does, so it can't be that they aren't aware of any of this.
Evident from what?  Your own "reasonable" assumptions?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: bogdan on March 05, 2010, 06:00:43 PM
Quote
Evident from what?  Your own "reasonable" assumptions?

It's more reasonable than thinking that he personally directs all media relations for the Phanar, which is the other alternative...

The EP evidently has a competent media staff to do everything he does,

"Media Staff"?  :D ROFL! You are so American!
Have you actually seen the Phanar?

Well, I doubt he has a full entourage of transcribers and handlers, photographers and documentary filmmakers, but someone sets up his interviews for him and coordinates all this. I don't expect that he does it himself. If he does, I'll eat crow.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 05, 2010, 06:02:56 PM
Quote
Evident from what?  Your own "reasonable" assumptions?

It's more reasonable than thinking that he personally directs all media relations for the Phanar, which is the other alternative...

The EP evidently has a competent media staff to do everything he does,

"Media Staff"?  :D ROFL! You are so American!
Have you actually seen the Phanar?

Well, I doubt he has a full entourage of transcribers and handlers, photographers and documentary filmmakers, but someone sets up his interviews for him and coordinates all this. I don't expect that he does it himself. If he does, I'll eat crow.
Why are you thinking of only two alternatives?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: bogdan on March 05, 2010, 06:03:16 PM
I am inclined to think it's accurate, based on his track record. I realize that is an assumption on my part, but it's not an unreasonable assumption.
Not unreasonable because it's your assumption? ;)

Based on his track record of unqualified glowing praise (http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=12-02-014-v) for unabashedly pro-abortion (http://www.issues2000.org/Social/Paul_Sarbanes_Abortion.htm) politicians like Paul Sarbanes.

Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: bogdan on March 05, 2010, 06:04:22 PM
Quote
Evident from what?  Your own "reasonable" assumptions?

It's more reasonable than thinking that he personally directs all media relations for the Phanar, which is the other alternative...

The EP evidently has a competent media staff to do everything he does,

"Media Staff"?  :D ROFL! You are so American!
Have you actually seen the Phanar?

Well, I doubt he has a full entourage of transcribers and handlers, photographers and documentary filmmakers, but someone sets up his interviews for him and coordinates all this. I don't expect that he does it himself. If he does, I'll eat crow.
Why are you thinking of only two alternatives?

Maybe his staff is incompetent, which I left open as a possibility. In that case he should fire them  :D
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 05, 2010, 06:08:35 PM
I am inclined to think it's accurate, based on his track record. I realize that is an assumption on my part, but it's not an unreasonable assumption.
Not unreasonable because it's your assumption? ;)

Based on his track record of unqualified glowing praise for pro-abortion politicians like Paul Sarbanes.
I've addressed that already on the Politics thread that runs parallel to this.  Before you bring politics into this discussion again, I recommend you read the Politics thread and submit your political comments there.  You can read the thread by following this link:  Patriarch Bartholomew and the Politics of Abortion (http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,26264.0.html)  If you don't yet have access to the Private Forum, send Fr. Chris a PM requesting this access.  I will not discuss politics on this public thread, since doing so is a violation of forum policy, and I cannot permit you to discuss politics here, either.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 05, 2010, 06:18:49 PM

I agree. It's not a matter of who answers to who, it's a matter of being a clear spiritual father for his children. What father refuses to clarify when he says something that causes confusion and distress to his children...especially when it appears to be the exact opposite of what he supposedly believes?

Bogdan,

Than you for these words.  They are illumined with the spirit of Orthodoxy which sees the relationship between a bishop and his flock as you describe it - a familiar and personalist one of interdependence and mutual respect, love, and accountability.

This is part of the principle of conciliarity whch animates our Church.   But such attitudes as are implicit in a question such as "Does the Patriarch answer to you?" are infused with a more Western principle of authority and subordinationism the Church - in other words who's the boss and why should he be accountable to the plebs?   Ecclesia docens versus the Ecclesia Discens.

I feared to touch the question when it was asked of me because I thought it would require days of messages and take us right off topic.  But you have answered it so well in just two sentences!!!   God bless you!
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on March 05, 2010, 06:22:10 PM
And I repeat: of those of you currently active in this thread, (yourself, ytterbiumanalyst, Bogdan, Rafa999, PeterTheAleut, ialmisry and Iconodule) not a single one of you can claim to be "spiritual children" of His All Holiness. So why do you care what he has to say? Do you now want him to behave like a Latin Pope? Why?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on March 05, 2010, 06:24:20 PM
Do you not think that I weep and pray for a correction or a clarification from him? 
Frankly, no.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 05, 2010, 06:26:13 PM
it's a matter of being a clear spiritual father for his children.
Of those of you currently active in this thread, (yourself, ytterbiumanalyst, Irish Hermit, Rafa999, PeterTheAleut, ialmisry and Iconodule) not a single one of you can claim to be "spiritual children" of His All Holiness. So why do you care what he has to say? Do you now want him to behave like a Latin Pope? Why?
Tend to yourselves and seek your salvation in your own Churches.

As far as I am aware HDAH Bartholomew claims often and insistently that all of us are his spiritual children, and in particular the Homogenia and the rest of the Diaspora.  

In his statement to the British High Court last year Bishop Basil Osborne (who had been in the Russian Church for 30 years) gave testimony that the Ecumenical Patriarch is the one and only canonical authority in Western Europe and the Russian, Serb and Antiochian Churches in W.Europe are uncanonical interlopers.

See Paragraph 37 and Paragraph 38
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2009/1250.html


See also the speech of the Secretary of the Sacred Synod Archimandrite Elpidiphoros  who was sent from Constantinople to Holy Cross seminary Boston in March last year to preach the Constantinople claims to the American Orthodox.  
 
"American Diaspora Must Submit to Mother Church"
http://www.aoiusa.org/blog/2009/03/ecumenical-patriarchate-american-diaspora-must-submit-to-mother-church/

So, he has indeed claimed us as his spiritual children.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: SolEX01 on March 05, 2010, 06:27:18 PM
And I repeat: of those of you currently active in this thread, (yourself, ytterbiumanalyst, Bogdan, Rafa999, PeterTheAleut, ialmisry and Iconodule) not a single one of you can claim to be "spiritual children" of His All Holiness. So why do you care what he has to say? Do you now want him to behave like a Latin Pope? Why?

Do we know (or better, does it matter) if His All Holiness has spiritual children from when he was a Deacon, Priest, Bishop, Metropolitan?

Obviously, some posters are comfortable in saying that so and so is their spiritual father; however, I'm at least 3 degrees removed from the Ecumenical Patriarch and I can't say that I am his spiritual child, especially not by association and especially if I happen to share the same large space with His All Holiness like I have on two occasions.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: SolEX01 on March 05, 2010, 06:30:47 PM
Well, I doubt he has a full entourage of transcribers and handlers, photographers and documentary filmmakers, but someone sets up his interviews for him and coordinates all this. I don't expect that he does it himself. If he does, I'll eat crow.

The GOA has 75 staff members.  I'm sure His All Holiness has an equivalent amount of staff from throughout the world both secular and clergy.  CBS can also collaborate with Turkish media networks because CBS has wide global reach.  How do you think CBS films The Amazing Race (http://www.cbs.com/primetime/amazing_race/) with so many international stops?

Edit to add web link for The Amazing Race
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Iconodule on March 05, 2010, 06:33:31 PM
And I repeat: of those of you currently active in this thread, (yourself, ytterbiumanalyst, Bogdan, Rafa999, PeterTheAleut, ialmisry and Iconodule) not a single one of you can claim to be "spiritual children" of His All Holiness. So why do you care what he has to say? Do you now want him to behave like a Latin Pope? Why?

This peculiar strawman argument has already been addressed a couple of times.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on March 05, 2010, 06:33:57 PM
Are you not aware that HDAH Bartholomew claims often and insistently that all of us are his spiritual children, and in particular the Homogenia and the rest of the Diaspora. 

No. And I certainly doubt that he would touch your Church (ROCOR) with a barge pole. Your Archbishop is not even commemorated on the Diptych of Constantinople, so his "authority" as leader of a local Church is not recognised. If you really want to be a "spiritual child" of His All Holiness, then consider joining a Church under his jurisdiction.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on March 05, 2010, 06:37:08 PM
And I repeat: of those of you currently active in this thread, (yourself, ytterbiumanalyst, Bogdan, Rafa999, PeterTheAleut, ialmisry and Iconodule) not a single one of you can claim to be "spiritual children" of His All Holiness. So why do you care what he has to say? Do you now want him to behave like a Latin Pope? Why?
This peculiar strawman argument has already been addressed a couple of times.
As with Irish Hermit, your Archbishop isn't recognised on the Diptych of Constantinople either. :)
Interesting how you choose to ignore concrete statements from the Phanar such as this, but latch on to editorial American political opinions about His All Holiness such as the one Irish Hermit posted from "Touchstone Magazine".
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: SolEX01 on March 05, 2010, 06:38:25 PM
So, he has indeed claimed us as his spiritual children.

Neither you nor I nor 99.99999% of Orthodox Christians was baptized by the Ecumenical Patriarch: (1 Corinthians 1:10-17, NKJV)

Quote
10 Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that  you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. 11 For it has been declared to me concerning you, my brethren, by those of Chloe’s household,  that there are contentions among you. 12 Now I say this, that each of you says, “I am of Paul,” or “I am of Apollos,” or “I am of Cephas,” or “I am of Christ.” 13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?
14 I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, 15 lest anyone should say that I had baptized in my own name. 16 Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas. Besides, I do not know whether I baptized any other. 17 For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of no effect

Verse 10 does not make anyone a spiritual child of the Ecumenical Patriarch.  Do we want to argue elsewhere that His All Holiness is a Sectarianist (http://www.piney.com/LockeHerSch.html)?

Quote
Sectarianism adds in worship or discipline those "acts" not necessary to Christian unity because they are not commanded in express words by the Holy Spirit. Men like Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Campbell and Alexander Campbell found that the basis for unity was fully defined by Locke when to do so was dangerous to your physical health.

So, is His All Holiness silence on abortion a sectarianist view because many of you are criticizing His All Holiness' silence on abortion?

Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Iconodule on March 05, 2010, 06:40:05 PM
And I repeat: of those of you currently active in this thread, (yourself, ytterbiumanalyst, Bogdan, Rafa999, PeterTheAleut, ialmisry and Iconodule) not a single one of you can claim to be "spiritual children" of His All Holiness. So why do you care what he has to say? Do you now want him to behave like a Latin Pope? Why?
This peculiar strawman argument has already been addressed a couple of times.
As with Irish Hermit, your Archbishop isn't recognised on the Diptych of Constantinople either. :)

What's your point?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 05, 2010, 06:41:21 PM
The Patriarch is neither pro-life nor pro-choice. Those terms apply to the legality of abortion in the United States, and as the EP is not an American, it's not an issue in which he needs to be involved. This is another example of your reading into his statements things that aren't there.

Given your rather urbane look in your avatar, I would not have expected this american-centrism.  The terms pro-life and pro-choice have entered into the vocabulary of many if not all nations around the world.

If you do not wish to use the term pro-choice of the Patriarch's position how would you describe it?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: SolEX01 on March 05, 2010, 06:48:14 PM
And I repeat: of those of you currently active in this thread, (yourself, ytterbiumanalyst, Bogdan, Rafa999, PeterTheAleut, ialmisry and Iconodule) not a single one of you can claim to be "spiritual children" of His All Holiness. So why do you care what he has to say? Do you now want him to behave like a Latin Pope? Why?
This peculiar strawman argument has already been addressed a couple of times.
As with Irish Hermit, your Archbishop isn't recognised on the Diptych of Constantinople either. :)

What's your point?

I posted a link on how MP/OCA/ROCOR Churches in the USA commemorate 2-3 Hierarchs in their Diptychs:

The MP and/or Bishop Job
Metropolitan Jonah (OCA)
Metropolian Hilarion (ROCOR)

Guess who the EP Commemorates in His Diptychs (hint, bolded text).  There's the point.   :)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 05, 2010, 06:49:53 PM
I am here because I have noticed that Irish Hermit is behaving in a very Protestant fashion, interpreting the EP's words according to his own prejudices and then projecting his interpretation onto the EP. Through my posts, I hoped to bring out that prejudice, so the discussion would be more balanced.

What accusations you bring aganst me!  Have you read the various articles presented here, from senior Orthodox clergy and from various Orthodox magazines.  Are you writing to them to help them to see their prejudice and their false interpretation of the words of HDAH.   It is from these sources that we know the views of HDAH, not from me.   I am nothing more than a minnow.  Go after the big boys, the archpriests and the magazine editors.  They are the sources of what you see as prejudice and false interpretation.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Iconodule on March 05, 2010, 06:50:14 PM
And I repeat: of those of you currently active in this thread, (yourself, ytterbiumanalyst, Bogdan, Rafa999, PeterTheAleut, ialmisry and Iconodule) not a single one of you can claim to be "spiritual children" of His All Holiness. So why do you care what he has to say? Do you now want him to behave like a Latin Pope? Why?
This peculiar strawman argument has already been addressed a couple of times.
As with Irish Hermit, your Archbishop isn't recognised on the Diptych of Constantinople either. :)

What's your point?

I posted a link on how MP/OCA/ROCOR Churches in the USA commemorate 2-3 Hierarchs in their Diptychs:

The MP and/or Bishop Job
Metropolitan Jonah (OCA)
Metropolian Hilarion (ROCOR)

Guess who the EP Commemorates in His Diptychs (hint, bolded text).  There's the point.   :)

Why is this important to the issue of the EP's statements on abortion?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 05, 2010, 07:00:28 PM
Good point. I'm in this discussion not because I care about the EP or about abortion. I don't care one way or the other on either; they simply aren't my issues.
Exactly the reason I'm here on this thread, as well.  I was just about to say this, but Mr. Y said it so eloquently I don't want to be redundant.

Good grief!  Tears seem called for. (http://www.emotihost.com/crying/12.gif) To hear such statements from the Orthodox laity - it is something I never thought to ever hear!    While our children are being torn limb from limb in the womb (use Google image to see what beheaded and dismembered babies look like) people are declaring here that they don't care one way or the other, that these are not their issues.  Qui tacet consentit.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on March 05, 2010, 07:01:00 PM
And I repeat: of those of you currently active in this thread, (yourself, ytterbiumanalyst, Bogdan, Rafa999, PeterTheAleut, ialmisry and Iconodule) not a single one of you can claim to be "spiritual children" of His All Holiness. So why do you care what he has to say? Do you now want him to behave like a Latin Pope? Why?
This peculiar strawman argument has already been addressed a couple of times.
As with Irish Hermit, your Archbishop isn't recognised on the Diptych of Constantinople either. :)

What's your point?
Its not my point Iconodule, it is a very clear point made by The Oecumenical Patriarchate, and that point is that your Church is not recognised as either an autocephalous or autonomous local Church by Constantinople, and neither is Irish Hermit's Church. Now, I know that you two disagree with this very clear statement of Constantinople, which is fine, but I have to wonder why it is that if you don't accept Constantinople's very clear opinion about the very Churches you are seeking your salvation in, why would a polticial opinion in the US about The Oecumenical Patriarchate concern you (ie whether Constantinople is politically "Pro-Choice" or "Pro-Life" which as ytterbiumanalyst correctly pointed out, is not the way the Orthodox Church operates, but it is more the way the Vatican operates)? If you and Irish Hermit want to pressure your own Archbishops and Synods to make it clear which politician in the US they support and who people in the US should vote for, go right ahead, but why do you need Constantinople's opinion? Especially when Constantinople has made it clear that she does not recognise your Church as an autonomous or autocephalous local Orthodox Church?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 05, 2010, 07:08:53 PM
If His Holiness had made no statement about abortion at all, then I, for one, would not make an issue of it. The trouble is, he did make a statement which was, at best, ambiguous and liable to misinterpretation, about an issue which is of great importance throughout the world and especially so in Orthodox countries. He has not clarified his statement. That is a problem.

And he is more than capable of clarifying statements when he is misquoted or misunderstood.

Last year the Catholic press reported that His Divine All-Holiness was recommending dual communion rights for Eastern Catholics in the Ukraine - they could receive communion in both their Catholic churches and in Orthodox churches.

Wthin a few days the Media Office of the Phanar issued a very strong statement denying Patriarch Bartholomew had recommended any such thing.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 05, 2010, 07:12:48 PM
The EP evidently has a competent media staff to do everything he does, so it can't be that they aren't aware of any of this.
Evident from what?  Your own "reasonable" assumptions?

Refer to the way his Media Office promptly handled the double-communion issue for Eastern Catholics.  Bogdan is not assuming.  We know that the Patriarch has competent media staff.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Iconodule on March 05, 2010, 07:16:37 PM
And I repeat: of those of you currently active in this thread, (yourself, ytterbiumanalyst, Bogdan, Rafa999, PeterTheAleut, ialmisry and Iconodule) not a single one of you can claim to be "spiritual children" of His All Holiness. So why do you care what he has to say? Do you now want him to behave like a Latin Pope? Why?
This peculiar strawman argument has already been addressed a couple of times.
As with Irish Hermit, your Archbishop isn't recognised on the Diptych of Constantinople either. :)

What's your point?
Its not my point Iconodule, it is a very clear point made by The Oecumenical Patriarchate, and that point is that your Church is not recognised as either an autocephalous or autonomous local Church by Constantinople, and neither is Irish Hermit's Church. Now, I know that you two disagree with this very clear statement of Constantinople, which is fine, but I have to wonder why it is that if you don't accept Constantinople's very clear opinion about the very Churches you are seeking your salvation in, why would a polticial opinion in the US about The Oecumenical Patriarchate concern you (ie whether Constantinople is politically "Pro-Choice" or "Pro-Life" which as ytterbiumanalyst correctly pointed out, is not the way the Orthodox Church operates, but it is more the way the Vatican operates)?

Ah, you are truly a master of the strawman argument. Where in this thread did I ever argue that I wanted the EP to support any US politicians or adopt an American-style "pro-life" agenda?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: SolEX01 on March 05, 2010, 07:18:39 PM
And I repeat: of those of you currently active in this thread, (yourself, ytterbiumanalyst, Bogdan, Rafa999, PeterTheAleut, ialmisry and Iconodule) not a single one of you can claim to be "spiritual children" of His All Holiness. So why do you care what he has to say? Do you now want him to behave like a Latin Pope? Why?
This peculiar strawman argument has already been addressed a couple of times.
As with Irish Hermit, your Archbishop isn't recognised on the Diptych of Constantinople either. :)

What's your point?

I posted a link on how MP/OCA/ROCOR Churches in the USA commemorate 2-3 Hierarchs in their Diptychs:

The MP and/or Bishop Job
Metropolitan Jonah (OCA)
Metropolian Hilarion (ROCOR)

Guess who the EP Commemorates in His Diptychs (hint, bolded text).  There's the point.   :)

Why is this important to the issue of the EP's statements on abortion?

ozgeorge answered your question.   :)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 05, 2010, 07:18:57 PM
Do you not think that I weep and pray for a correction or a clarification from him? 
Frankly, no.


Well, you would be wrong.  I hang my head and shame and weep because this man claims to be the spiritual leader of 300 million people globally and he is accepted as such by the non-Orthodox world.  

George, if I remember correctly it was mentioned that you have contacts with bishops in the Phanar (and the Patriarch?) and have previously written and obtained replies on some topics.  Would you consider making enquiries on this issue?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on March 05, 2010, 07:23:17 PM
Ah, you are truly a master of the strawman argument. Where in this thread did I ever argue that I wanted the EP to support any US politicians or adopt an American-style "pro-life" agenda?

Lets look at your claim on this thread:

If His Holiness had made no statement about abortion at all, then I, for one, would not make an issue of it. The trouble is, he did make a statement which was, at best, ambiguous and liable to misinterpretation, about an issue which is of great importance throughout the world and especially so in Orthodox countries. He has not clarified his statement. That is a problem.

What statement "did" His all Holiness make which you interpret as "at best, ambiguous and liable to misinterpretation"?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 05, 2010, 07:28:28 PM
And I certainly doubt that he would touch your Church (ROCOR) with a barge pole. Your Archbishop is not even commemorated on the Diptych of Constantinople, so his "authority" as leader of a local Church is not recognised.

George,

I am surprised that you have made such a basic mistake.  You are always well clued up on ecclesiology.

If the Patriarch were to commemorate Metropolitan Hilarion in the Diptychs of Constantinople it would be a breach of canonical order.

Only the heads of autocephalous Churches are commemorated by the heads of other autocpehalopus Churches.

The Russian Orthodox Church Abroad is not an autocephalous Church and not even an autonomous Church.  It has the lesser staus of a self-govenring Church within the Church of Russia.  Our Patriarch is the Patriarch of Moscow.  It is he who is commemorated in Constantinople's Diptychs.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on March 05, 2010, 07:30:34 PM
If the Patriarch were to commemorate Metropolitan Hilarion in the Diptychs of Constantinople it would be a breach of canonical order.
Of course it would. Because "ROCOR" has an uncanonical status.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 05, 2010, 07:42:57 PM
, it is a very clear point made by The Oecumenical Patriarchate, and that point is that your Church is not recognised as either an autocephalous or autonomous local Church by Constantinople, and neither is Irish Hermit's Church.

You are not making sense.  The Russian Orthodox Church Abroad is neither autocephalous nor autonomous and makes no such claims. It would be decidedly odd if Constantinople viewed us as either autocephalous or autonomous.  We are neither.   We are an integral part of the Moscow Patriarchate.  Our bishops from the West are full members of the Synod of the Church of Russia, and they participate and vote in all synodal meetings in Moscow.  Our bishops voted in the election of Patriarch Kirill.

The canonical status of the Russian Church Abroad is detailed in the
provisions which govern Self-Governing Churches of the Church of Russia.
Chapter VIII of the Ustav. See

http://www.patriarchia.ru/db/text/133132.html

Paragraph VIII has been amended to include the Russian Church Abroad:
http://www.patriarchia.ru/db/text/428872.html

(Encoding Unicode UTF-8)

These sites are in Russian.  I'll look for them in English.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 05, 2010, 07:49:22 PM
If the Patriarch were to commemorate Metropolitan Hilarion in the Diptychs of Constantinople it would be a breach of canonical order.
Of course it would. Because "ROCOR" has an uncanonical status.

I really do not know who is supplying you with this misinformation but be it known that since May 2007 the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad has been an integral part of the Patriarchate of Moscow.  If ROCA is uncanonical I guess that Moscow is uncanonical.

Act of Canonical Communion Signed in Moscow
http://www.pravmir.com/article_228.html
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on March 05, 2010, 07:55:28 PM
If the Patriarch were to commemorate Metropolitan Hilarion in the Diptychs of Constantinople it would be a breach of canonical order.
Of course it would. Because "ROCOR" has an uncanonical status.

I really do not know who is supplying you with this misinformation but be it known that since May 2007 the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad has been an integral part of the Patriarchate of Moscow.  If ROCA is uncanonical I guess that Moscow is uncanonical.

Act of Canonical Communion Signed in Moscow
http://www.pravmir.com/article_228.html
LOL!  :D What a riot!
Lets look at facts Irish Hermit:
Certainly, there is a problem in geographical areas which do not have a long standing history of the Orthodox Church in that different jurisdictions have Bishops in the same area, but if this in itself is uncanonical, then it is more uncanonical that the same jurisdiction (Moscow Patriarchate) should have three different Bishops and three different local Churches in the same geographical area.

First we have  His Grace Iov, Bishop of Kashira, Administrator of the Patriarchal Parishes in Canada (and temporarily in the USA)
http://www.russianchurchusa.org/index.php3?ln=en

Next we have His Beatitude Metropolitan Jonah of the Orthodox Church in America
http://www.oca.org/

Then we have His Eminence, Metropolitan Hilarion of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia
http://www.russianorthodoxchurch.ws/synod/indexeng.htm

I think we all have bigger things to worry about than a political editorial in the US.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 05, 2010, 08:01:31 PM
[First we have  His Grace Iov, Bishop of Kashira, Administrator of the Patriarchal Parishes in Canada (and temporarily in the USA)
http://www.russianchurchusa.org/index.php3?ln=en

Next we have His Beatitude Metropolitan Jonah of the Orthodox Church in America
http://www.oca.org/

Then we have His Eminence, Metropolitan Hilarion of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia
http://www.russianorthodoxchurch.ws/synod/indexeng.htm

I think you have bigger things to worry about than a political editorial in the US.

I am not worried.  These matters are already under discussion.  We have already seen how 3 years ago the Russian Church Abroad was folded back into the Church of Russia.  More changes will occur.  One other great hope is the reintegration of the Russian Exarchate in Europe (currently under Constantinople) into the Church of Russia.

Let's get back to Orthodoxy and abortion.   You would have knowledge of the Greek situation.  What is the percentage of abortions to live births among the Greek Orthodox?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ytterbiumanalyst on March 05, 2010, 08:44:53 PM
The Patriarch is neither pro-life nor pro-choice. Those terms apply to the legality of abortion in the United States, and as the EP is not an American, it's not an issue in which he needs to be involved. This is another example of your reading into his statements things that aren't there.
Given your rather urbane look in your avatar, I would not have expected this american-centrism.  The terms pro-life and pro-choice have entered into the vocabulary of many if not all nations around the world.
That's interesting, because you look rather two-dimensional in yours.

If you do not wish to use the term pro-choice of the Patriarch's position how would you describe it?
Pastoral.

I am here because I have noticed that Irish Hermit is behaving in a very Protestant fashion, interpreting the EP's words according to his own prejudices and then projecting his interpretation onto the EP. Through my posts, I hoped to bring out that prejudice, so the discussion would be more balanced.
What accusations you bring aganst me!  Have you read the various articles presented here, from senior Orthodox clergy and from various Orthodox magazines.  Are you writing to them to help them to see their prejudice and their false interpretation of the words of HDAH.
First of all, this (?) is a question mark. One uses this strange squiggle when one wants to ask a question. Secondly, like I said, this is not my issue. I don't care at all what the EP has to say about abortion or anything else for that matter. If it distresses you, you should find out from the authors and from the EP what was meant, rather than making accusations on the Internet.

Quote
It is from these sources that we know the views of HDAH, not from me.   I am nothing more than a minnow.  Go after the big boys, the archpriests and the magazine editors.  They are the sources of what you see as prejudice and false interpretation.
Yes, it's not your words, it's God's. It's all in the Bible.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on March 05, 2010, 08:45:43 PM
What is the percentage of abortions to live births among the Greek Orthodox?
Firstly- why would I know that?
Secondly- what constitutes someone being "Greek Orthodox"? Do we count the unchurched and unliturgised?

Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 05, 2010, 08:49:37 PM
What is the percentage of abortions to live births among the Greek Orthodox?
Firstly- why would I know that?
Secondly- what constitutes someone being "Greek Orthodox"? Do we count the unchurched and unliturgised?

I see from various sources that the Greek Orthodox Church claims 97% of the population.   Surely there must be studies of the abortion rate among them?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 05, 2010, 08:52:18 PM
First of all, this (?) is a question mark. One uses this strange squiggle when one wants to ask a question.

Ah, but you knew the two sentences were questions.  Communication was effective. 
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ytterbiumanalyst on March 05, 2010, 08:55:07 PM
First of all, this (?) is a question mark. One uses this strange squiggle when one wants to ask a question.

Ah, but you knew the two sentences were questions.  Communication was effective. 
Ah, so what you wrote was intended to be interpreted. You expected me to look at the words I was reading in light of the context to determine a reasonable meaning behind them. I see.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 05, 2010, 09:02:27 PM

Given your rather urbane look in your avatar...
That's interesting, because you look rather two-dimensional in yours.


ytterbiumanalyst,

Why do you see yourself as "The new face of freedom"?  Is that a religious statement?  Or a political one?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ytterbiumanalyst on March 05, 2010, 09:04:22 PM

Given your rather urbane look in your avatar...
That's interesting, because you look rather two-dimensional in yours.


ytterbiumanalyst,

Why do you see yourself as "The new face of freedom"?  Is that a religious statement?  Or a political one?
Why are you so sure that is a picture of me?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 05, 2010, 09:05:33 PM
First of all, this (?) is a question mark. One uses this strange squiggle when one wants to ask a question.

Ah, but you knew the two sentences were questions.  Communication was effective. 
Ah, so what you wrote was intended to be interpreted. You expected me to look at the words I was reading in light of the context to determine a reasonable meaning behind them. I see.

No need for any interpretation.  The meaning was crystal clear.   The inversion of verb and subject is a sign of a question...

Have you read...

Are you writing to them...
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 05, 2010, 09:06:41 PM

Given your rather urbane look in your avatar...
That's interesting, because you look rather two-dimensional in yours.


ytterbiumanalyst,

Why do you see yourself as "The new face of freedom"?  Is that a religious statement?  Or a political one?
Why are you so sure that is a picture of me?

Is it a politician?  Are you making a political statement?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on March 05, 2010, 09:07:02 PM
What is the percentage of abortions to live births among the Greek Orthodox?
Firstly- why would I know that?
Secondly- what constitutes someone being "Greek Orthodox"? Do we count the unchurched and unliturgised?

I see from various sources that the Greek Orthodox Church claims 97% of the population.   Surely there must be studies of the abortion rate among them?
I thought your interest was what the Church teaches, not political demographics. If someone is barred from Communion (as indeed a woman who procures an abortion is) are they "Greek Orthodox" in good standing?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ytterbiumanalyst on March 05, 2010, 09:07:34 PM
First of all, this (?) is a question mark. One uses this strange squiggle when one wants to ask a question.

Ah, but you knew the two sentences were questions.  Communication was effective. 
Ah, so what you wrote was intended to be interpreted. You expected me to look at the words I was reading in light of the context to determine a reasonable meaning behind them. I see.

No need for any interpretation.  The meaning was crystal clear.   The inversion of verb and subject is a sign of a question...

Have you read...

Are you writing to them...

Again, you completely missed the point.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ytterbiumanalyst on March 05, 2010, 09:09:31 PM

Given your rather urbane look in your avatar...
That's interesting, because you look rather two-dimensional in yours.


ytterbiumanalyst,

Why do you see yourself as "The new face of freedom"?  Is that a religious statement?  Or a political one?
Why are you so sure that is a picture of me?

Is it a politician?  Are you making a political statement?
St. Patrick is the patron saint of Ireland, but not of Northern Ireland. Are you making a political statement?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 05, 2010, 09:10:03 PM
First of all, this (?) is a question mark. One uses this strange squiggle when one wants to ask a question.

Ah, but you knew the two sentences were questions.  Communication was effective.  
Ah, so what you wrote was intended to be interpreted. You expected me to look at the words I was reading in light of the context to determine a reasonable meaning behind them. I see.

No need for any interpretation.  The meaning was crystal clear.   The inversion of verb and subject is a sign of a question...

Have you read...

Are you writing to them...

Again, you completely missed the point.

Not half as important as the point you are missing - with your declared indifference to the issue of the killing of unborn children.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ytterbiumanalyst on March 05, 2010, 09:11:34 PM
First of all, this (?) is a question mark. One uses this strange squiggle when one wants to ask a question.

Ah, but you knew the two sentences were questions.  Communication was effective. 
Ah, so what you wrote was intended to be interpreted. You expected me to look at the words I was reading in light of the context to determine a reasonable meaning behind them. I see.

No need for any interpretation.  The meaning was crystal clear.   The inversion of verb and subject is a sign of a question...

Have you read...

Are you writing to them...

Again, you completely missed the point.

Not half as important as the point you are missing - your declared indifference to the issue of the killing of unborn children.
You seem to interpret my indifference to the issue of abortion as indifference to abortion. Poor interpretation, indeed.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 05, 2010, 09:15:13 PM

Given your rather urbane look in your avatar...
That's interesting, because you look rather two-dimensional in yours.


ytterbiumanalyst,

Why do you see yourself as "The new face of freedom"?  Is that a religious statement?  Or a political one?
Why are you so sure that is a picture of me?

Is it a politician?  Are you making a political statement?
St. Patrick is the patron saint of Ireland, but not of Northern Ireland. Are you making a political statement?

Saint Patrick is a red herring and if you are a Profesor Emeritus I don't think you would have tolerated such a trick from any of your students.

You don't plan to tell us who your avatar is?

Do we understand it is not a politrical statement?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ytterbiumanalyst on March 05, 2010, 09:17:34 PM

Given your rather urbane look in your avatar...
That's interesting, because you look rather two-dimensional in yours.


ytterbiumanalyst,

Why do you see yourself as "The new face of freedom"?  Is that a religious statement?  Or a political one?
Why are you so sure that is a picture of me?

Is it a politician?  Are you making a political statement?
St. Patrick is the patron saint of Ireland, but not of Northern Ireland. Are you making a political statement?

Saint Patrick is a red herring
Yep. So is my avatar.

Quote
and if you are a Profesor Emeritus I don't think you would have tolerated such a trick from any of your students.
I'm not; I just play one on Internet forums. But I am a teacher, yes.

Quote
You don't plan to tell us who your avatar is?
I don't see how it has the slightest relevance to the discussion at hand.

Quote
Do we understand it is not a politrical statement?
Do you think it is? How does that make you feel?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on March 05, 2010, 09:19:06 PM
Look! A purple demon!
(http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/2274/purplecartoondemonmugp1.jpg)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 05, 2010, 09:22:42 PM
Quote
Do we understand it is not a politrical statement?
Do you think it is? How does that make you feel?

If you are promoting a political figure I would feel that forum members should not have to tolerate it in the public section of the Forum where political statements are not allowed.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 05, 2010, 09:28:21 PM
First of all, this (?) is a question mark. One uses this strange squiggle when one wants to ask a question.

Ah, but you knew the two sentences were questions.  Communication was effective. 
Ah, so what you wrote was intended to be interpreted. You expected me to look at the words I was reading in light of the context to determine a reasonable meaning behind them. I see.

No need for any interpretation.  The meaning was crystal clear.   The inversion of verb and subject is a sign of a question...

Have you read...

Are you writing to them...

Again, you completely missed the point.

Not half as important as the point you are missing - your declared indifference to the issue of the killing of unborn children.
You seem to interpret my indifference to the issue of abortion as indifference to abortion. Poor interpretation, indeed.

Professor,

The distinction is too fine for me, as if I were to say,  do not interpret my indifference to the issue of prostitution as indifference to prostitution.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 05, 2010, 09:29:50 PM
Look! A purple demon!
(http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/2274/purplecartoondemonmugp1.jpg)

Try Holy Water on it.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Punch on March 05, 2010, 09:54:48 PM
Quote
Do we understand it is not a politrical statement?
Do you think it is? How does that make you feel?

If you are promoting a political figure I would feel that forum members should not have to tolerate it in the public section of the Forum where political statements are not allowed.

Well, if you don't know who he is, how could it possibly be a political statement?  Or, is any reference to Freedom political?  Just asking since the thread took such a turn that I almost derailed reading it.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 05, 2010, 10:05:36 PM
Quote
Do we understand it is not a politrical statement?
Do you think it is? How does that make you feel?

If you are promoting a political figure I would feel that forum members should not have to tolerate it in the public section of the Forum where political statements are not allowed.

Well, if you don't know who he is, how could it possibly be a political statement?  Or, is any reference to Freedom political?  Just asking since the thread took such a turn that I almost derailed reading it.

Well, when you see a man labelled as "The new face of freedom" odds are that is either a religious or political statement.  I cannot imagine that the Professor is touting a religious figure in a suit on an Orthodox list so it is likely to be a political figure.  I suppose it could be a geneticist offering us freedom from disease?

So, what is being advertised....  religion, politics, medicine...?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 05, 2010, 10:13:46 PM
Quote
Do we understand it is not a politrical statement?
Do you think it is? How does that make you feel?

If you are promoting a political figure I would feel that forum members should not have to tolerate it in the public section of the Forum where political statements are not allowed.

Well, if you don't know who he is, how could it possibly be a political statement?  Or, is any reference to Freedom political?  Just asking since the thread took such a turn that I almost derailed reading it.

It has kind of derailed and that is why I tried to get it back on track with the question about abortion and the Greek Church.  With the population of Greece being 97% Orthodox, it should be a coherent social entity to study on such issues.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Iconodule on March 05, 2010, 10:16:00 PM
What statement "did" His all Holiness make which you interpret as "at best, ambiguous and liable to misinterpretation"?

"We are not allowed to enter the bedrooms of the Christian couples...We cannot generalize. There are many reasons for a couple to go toward abortion.”

What this has to do with American politicians is beyond me.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 05, 2010, 11:18:02 PM
St. Patrick is the patron saint of Ireland, but not of Northern Ireland. Are you making a political statement?

Dear Professor,

Forgive me for correcting you.

Saint Patrick is indeed the patron Saint of Northern Island.  His day of commemoration on 17th March is kept in Northern Island as their National Day (along with the Battle of the Boyne later in July.)  In Northern Ireland Saint Patrick's day is a public holiday.

Saint Patrick's flag is incorporated into the Union Jack - the common flag for the United Kingdom.  The Union Jack is also used by quite a few Commonwealth countries and will be seen in the top left corner of their own flags.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Punch on March 05, 2010, 11:50:45 PM
Quote
Do we understand it is not a politrical statement?
Do you think it is? How does that make you feel?

If you are promoting a political figure I would feel that forum members should not have to tolerate it in the public section of the Forum where political statements are not allowed.

I'm back on the rails.

Well, if you don't know who he is, how could it possibly be a political statement?  Or, is any reference to Freedom political?  Just asking since the thread took such a turn that I almost derailed reading it.

Well, when you see a man labelled as "The new face of freedom" odds are that is either a religious or political statement.  I cannot imagine that the Professor is touting a religious figure in a suit on an Orthodox list so it is likely to be a political figure.  I suppose it could be a geneticist offering us freedom from disease?

So, what is being advertised....  religion, politics, medicine...?
:)

OK, I understand.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 05, 2010, 11:52:49 PM

I agree. It's not a matter of who answers to who, it's a matter of being a clear spiritual father for his children. What father refuses to clarify when he says something that causes confusion and distress to his children...especially when it appears to be the exact opposite of what he supposedly believes?
This is part of the principle of conciliarity whch animates our Church.   But such attitudes as are implicit in a question such as "Does the Patriarch answer to you?" are infused with a more Western principle of authority and subordinationism the Church - in other words who's the boss and why should he be accountable to the plebs?   Ecclesia docens versus the Ecclesia Discens.
How do you expect that your interpretation of His All Holiness is correct when you can't even interpret ME correctly?  You presume so much to analyze what I just said and to know my mind that you end up putting words into my mouth.  It takes a lot of work to read between the lines of a one-liner.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 05, 2010, 11:54:31 PM
And I repeat: of those of you currently active in this thread, (yourself, ytterbiumanalyst, Bogdan, Rafa999, PeterTheAleut, ialmisry and Iconodule) not a single one of you can claim to be "spiritual children" of His All Holiness. So why do you care what he has to say? Do you now want him to behave like a Latin Pope? Why?
Honestly, George, I couldn't care less what His All Holiness has to say about abortion.  I just don't like how some here want to drag him through the mud because he won't say what they want him to say.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 06, 2010, 12:12:39 AM
I am here because I have noticed that Irish Hermit is behaving in a very Protestant fashion, interpreting the EP's words according to his own prejudices and then projecting his interpretation onto the EP. Through my posts, I hoped to bring out that prejudice, so the discussion would be more balanced.

What accusations you bring aganst me!  Have you read the various articles presented here, from senior Orthodox clergy and from various Orthodox magazines.  Are you writing to them to help them to see their prejudice and their false interpretation of the words of HDAH.   It is from these sources that we know the views of HDAH, not from me.   I am nothing more than a minnow.  Go after the big boys, the archpriests and the magazine editors.  They are the sources of what you see as prejudice and false interpretation.
Trying to absolve yourself of all responsibility for what you have done on this thread?  "Don't blame me!  I'm just the messenger!"  Why do you choose to be the messenger?  Why did you choose these articles?  As an appeal to "authority" to show us that your interpretation of the EP's words is correct?  In the end, it's still your interpretation of Patriarch Bartholomew's words you're advancing in some attempt to portray His All Holiness as a pro-choice patriarch and thus justify your feigned (self)-righteous indignation.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Rafa999 on March 06, 2010, 12:17:53 AM
If the EP's wife had an abortion would this be between them and their bedroom? That is what his statement implied.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Rafa999 on March 06, 2010, 12:17:53 AM
Quote
Grecian Abortion Rate Has Left 150K Couples Unable To Have Children

5/3/02

Thessaloniki, Greece -- The first position in abortions, comparatively speaking, both in relation to European countries and to the US, is held by Greece. The large number of abortions, which take place both before and during a marriage, and which can cause serious complications, are the main reason for the high percentage of under-fertility in Greece.

According to specialists, abortions are responsible for a 40% decrease in a woman's fertility. It is estimated that 150,000 couples in Greece cannot have children, because they have at least one abortion in their past.

More than 250,000 abortions take place every year in Greece, of which 40,000 are on underage girls younger than 16. Also, a third of them are performed on married women who would avoid them if they could afford a larger family.

This information was announced by Gynecology Professor of Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Ioannis Bodis, speaking at the 2nd day of the 17th Northern Greece Medical Conference, organized by the Thessaloniki Medical Company.

In the 1980-1999 periods, stressed Mr. Bodis, Greece exhibited a decrease of 41% in fertility, twice as much (in percentage) as in the rest of Europe, while the US showed an increase in the fertility factor of 14%.

13% of Greeks have had an abortion:

http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/ab-greece.html

see 2004 stats. The abortion rate is increasing (before the data stopped being given of course).

For a peer reviewed study on the matter:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15938171


blame is placed on the laxity of the OC on the matter in several articles I read.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 06, 2010, 12:19:25 AM
If the EP's wife had an abortion would this be between them and their bedroom? That is what his statement implied.
Stupid analogy...  The EP will never be a married man.  A widower, maybe, but never married.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 06, 2010, 12:20:34 AM
Quote
Grecian Abortion Rate Has Left 150K Couples Unable To Have Children

5/3/02

Thessaloniki, Greece -- The first position in abortions, comparatively speaking, both in relation to European countries and to the US, is held by Greece. The large number of abortions, which take place both before and during a marriage, and which can cause serious complications, are the main reason for the high percentage of under-fertility in Greece.

According to specialists, abortions are responsible for a 40% decrease in a woman's fertility. It is estimated that 150,000 couples in Greece cannot have children, because they have at least one abortion in their past.

More than 250,000 abortions take place every year in Greece, of which 40,000 are on underage girls younger than 16. Also, a third of them are performed on married women who would avoid them if they could afford a larger family.

This information was announced by Gynecology Professor of Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Ioannis Bodis, speaking at the 2nd day of the 17th Northern Greece Medical Conference, organized by the Thessaloniki Medical Company.

In the 1980-1999 periods, stressed Mr. Bodis, Greece exhibited a decrease of 41% in fertility, twice as much (in percentage) as in the rest of Europe, while the US showed an increase in the fertility factor of 14%.

13% of Greeks have had an abortion:

http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/ab-greece.html

see 2004 stats. The abortion rate is increasing (before the data stopped being given of course).

For a peer reviewed study on the matter:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15938171


blame is placed on the laxity of the OC on the matter in several articles I read.
Show us how these articles you've read place blame on the Orthodox Church.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on March 06, 2010, 01:34:04 AM
Quote
Do we understand it is not a politrical statement?
Do you think it is? How does that make you feel?

If you are promoting a political figure I would feel that forum members should not have to tolerate it in the public section of the Forum where political statements are not allowed.

Well, if you don't know who he is, how could it possibly be a political statement?  Or, is any reference to Freedom political?  Just asking since the thread took such a turn that I almost derailed reading it.

Well, when you see a man labelled as "The new face of freedom" odds are that is either a religious or political statement.  I cannot imagine that the Professor is touting a religious figure in a suit on an Orthodox list so it is likely to be a political figure.  I suppose it could be a geneticist offering us freedom from disease?

So, what is being advertised....  religion, politics, medicine...?
LOL.  I hope not banking, finance and ethics.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: bogdan on March 06, 2010, 01:37:38 AM
Quote
Do we understand it is not a politrical statement?
Do you think it is? How does that make you feel?

If you are promoting a political figure I would feel that forum members should not have to tolerate it in the public section of the Forum where political statements are not allowed.

I agree with this.

The man is Senator Chris Dodd of Connecticut.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on March 06, 2010, 01:40:31 AM
And I repeat: of those of you currently active in this thread, (yourself, ytterbiumanalyst, Bogdan, Rafa999, PeterTheAleut, ialmisry and Iconodule) not a single one of you can claim to be "spiritual children" of His All Holiness. So why do you care what he has to say? Do you now want him to behave like a Latin Pope? Why?

Because the invariable second sentence to any bizarre policy statement he makes is "spiritual leader of 300 million Orthodox." So even if we didn't claim him, HDAH is sure claiming us. I've been to the Phanar and there is nowhere near 300 million in it, let alone 300 million Orthodox.

So as long as the EP keeps spewing us out in his mouthfull, he can expect an earful from us.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on March 06, 2010, 01:45:15 AM
And I repeat: of those of you currently active in this thread, (yourself, ytterbiumanalyst, Bogdan, Rafa999, PeterTheAleut, ialmisry and Iconodule) not a single one of you can claim to be "spiritual children" of His All Holiness. So why do you care what he has to say? Do you now want him to behave like a Latin Pope? Why?
This peculiar strawman argument has already been addressed a couple of times.
As with Irish Hermit, your Archbishop isn't recognised on the Diptych of Constantinople either. :)
Interesting how you choose to ignore concrete statements from the Phanar such as this, but latch on to editorial American political opinions about His All Holiness such as the one Irish Hermit posted from "Touchstone Magazine".

Interesting how HDAH can make concrete statements on things not under his jurisdiction, but can mumble only vague ramblings on moral issues with his jurisdiction.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on March 06, 2010, 01:49:29 AM
Because you're not distressed. To be distressed by the EP's words, you have to trust the EP. It doesn't take much time reading your posts to find out how you feel about him.

Unfortunately, I have learnt not to trust HDAH.  A great part of source of distrust is his words on abortion.  Would you trust a bishop who promoted his reported views?  I feel the same disdain for him as Bishop Emeritus Tikhon of San Francisco.

I am indeed sincerely distressed that the First See of the Orthodox world holds such views.   If only it were not so.... and we could offer him the love and respect which should be given.....
I submit that you are distressed not by the EP's words, but by your interpretation of the EP's words, which is filtered through your distrust of the EP.

As you like.  But you are whistling in the dark.  You may like to consider how and when I came to distrust the EP.  Was it before or after his reported pro-choice position?
The Patriarch is neither pro-life nor pro-choice. Those terms apply to the legality of abortion in the United States, and as the EP is not an American, it's not an issue in which he needs to be involved. This is another example of your reading into his statements things that aren't there.
Ah, but he wants to: his metropolitans here claiming jurisdiction are, per his order, supposed to cough up property and register it in the name of the EP, to give him legal personality.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on March 06, 2010, 01:50:56 AM
it's a matter of being a clear spiritual father for his children.
Of those of you currently active in this thread, (yourself, ytterbiumanalyst, Irish Hermit, Rafa999, PeterTheAleut, ialmisry and Iconodule) not a single one of you can claim to be "spiritual children" of His All Holiness. So why do you care what he has to say? Do you now want him to behave like a Latin Pope? Why?
Tend to yourselves and seek your salvation in your own Churches.
Good point. I'm in this discussion not because I care about the EP or about abortion. I don't care one way or the other on either; they simply aren't my issues. I am here because I have noticed that Irish Hermit is behaving in a very Protestant fashion, interpreting the EP's words according to his own prejudices and then projecting his interpretation onto the EP. Through my posts, I hoped to bring out that prejudice, so the discussion would be more balanced. I think I've had at least a mild degree of success to that end.
Exactly the reason I'm here on this thread, as well.  I was just about to say this, but Mr. Y said it so eloquently I don't want to be redundant.
LOL.  Can you two get a room....
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on March 06, 2010, 02:05:04 AM
And I repeat: of those of you currently active in this thread, (yourself, ytterbiumanalyst, Bogdan, Rafa999, PeterTheAleut, ialmisry and Iconodule) not a single one of you can claim to be "spiritual children" of His All Holiness. So why do you care what he has to say? Do you now want him to behave like a Latin Pope? Why?
This peculiar strawman argument has already been addressed a couple of times.
As with Irish Hermit, your Archbishop isn't recognised on the Diptych of Constantinople either. :)
Interesting how you choose to ignore concrete statements from the Phanar such as this, but latch on to editorial American political opinions about His All Holiness such as the one Irish Hermit posted from "Touchstone Magazine".

Interesting how HDAH can make concrete statements on things not under his jurisdiction, but can mumble only vague ramblings on moral issues with his jurisdiction.
I guess you just have a better Patriarch than I do. So can we drop this now?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on March 06, 2010, 02:28:40 AM
If, perchance, anyone is genuinely interested in what the Oecumenical Patriarchate teaches about abortion (though given the tone of the posters thread, thats pretty unlikely), here is what my own Archbishop Stylianos (Oecumenical Patriarchate, GO Archdiocese of Australia) has written:

Dearly beloved,

With this letter, I wish to address in particular the sensitivity and charity of all the faithful of our Archdiocese in order to remind the sacredness of human life, which apparently we have not yet taken as seriously as we should.
I do not refer to the daily actions at the expense of the bodily and spiritual health of our fellow human beings or of ourselves, for which we are certainly responsible before God.
I mean rather the hardness and criminality against human life in its still embryonic state, unable to defend itself or protest.
I mean the question of mass abortions which is silently turning our contemporary - supposedly Christian, or at least humanitarian - societies into a field of invisible slaughter without anyone condemning publicly the numbers of victims and magnitude of this cruelty.
Official statistics given by the relevant state authorities claim that in New South Wales alone, during the year 1988-89 31,351 abortions took place. Of these, only 1% were necessitated by medical opinion owing to the immediate danger of the pregnant woman.
These numbers constitute a terrible sign of our behaviour in the most sacred matter in which God calls us to become His close collaborators. However, it unfortunately appears that the issue of abortion in contemporary societies has almost become a matter of routine, without any moral problematic. Otherwise one cannot explain the ease with which one decides about an abortion today, just as one decides to extract a tooth.
We must therefore remember that whatever the reason leading couples to decide to cease in a violent manner an undesired pregnancy, the good of life and of existence lies totally in God's hands, and we must know that any intervention entangles us in a profound mystery.
Our Church, as in all similar moral issues, does not respond with a blind answer of "yes" or "no". The first thing it says is "Stand well!" This means: "Be careful!" And when in this way one realises that one is dealing with a question of life or death - not only of physical death, but also spiritual - then one is in a position to weigh up in the fear of God both the opinion of responsible science and the advice of the spiritual confessor.
I wish and pray fervently that our faithful may see this tremendous moral subject with renewed responsibility and act in each specific case according to the sacredness of the problem.

With paternal love in the Lord

http://www.greekorthodox.org.au/general/livinganorthodoxlife/modernissuesandthechurchsview/abortion

http://www.orthodoxchristian.info/pages/abortion1.htm
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Gebre Menfes Kidus on March 06, 2010, 02:52:37 AM
If, perchance, anyone is genuinely interested in what the Oecumenical Patriarchate teaches about abortion (though given the tone of the posters thread, thats pretty unlikely), here is what my own Archbishop Stylianos (Oecumenical Patriarchate, GO Archdiocese of Australia) has written:

Dearly beloved,

With this letter, I wish to address in particular the sensitivity and charity of all the faithful of our Archdiocese in order to remind the sacredness of human life, which apparently we have not yet taken as seriously as we should.
I do not refer to the daily actions at the expense of the bodily and spiritual health of our fellow human beings or of ourselves, for which we are certainly responsible before God.
I mean rather the hardness and criminality against human life in its still embryonic state, unable to defend itself or protest.
I mean the question of mass abortions which is silently turning our contemporary - supposedly Christian, or at least humanitarian - societies into a field of invisible slaughter without anyone condemning publicly the numbers of victims and magnitude of this cruelty.
Official statistics given by the relevant state authorities claim that in New South Wales alone, during the year 1988-89 31,351 abortions took place. Of these, only 1% were necessitated by medical opinion owing to the immediate danger of the pregnant woman.
These numbers constitute a terrible sign of our behaviour in the most sacred matter in which God calls us to become His close collaborators. However, it unfortunately appears that the issue of abortion in contemporary societies has almost become a matter of routine, without any moral problematic. Otherwise one cannot explain the ease with which one decides about an abortion today, just as one decides to extract a tooth.
We must therefore remember that whatever the reason leading couples to decide to cease in a violent manner an undesired pregnancy, the good of life and of existence lies totally in God's hands, and we must know that any intervention entangles us in a profound mystery.
Our Church, as in all similar moral issues, does not respond with a blind answer of "yes" or "no". The first thing it says is "Stand well!" This means: "Be careful!" And when in this way one realises that one is dealing with a question of life or death - not only of physical death, but also spiritual - then one is in a position to weigh up in the fear of God both the opinion of responsible science and the advice of the spiritual confessor.
I wish and pray fervently that our faithful may see this tremendous moral subject with renewed responsibility and act in each specific case according to the sacredness of the problem.

With paternal love in the Lord

http://www.greekorthodox.org.au/general/livinganorthodoxlife/modernissuesandthechurchsview/abortion

http://www.orthodoxchristian.info/pages/abortion1.htm


I was with him until the last paragraph.

Selam
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on March 06, 2010, 02:56:51 AM
If, perchance, anyone is genuinely interested in what the Oecumenical Patriarchate teaches about abortion (though given the tone of the posters thread, thats pretty unlikely), here is what my own Archbishop Stylianos (Oecumenical Patriarchate, GO Archdiocese of Australia) has written:

Dearly beloved,

With this letter, I wish to address in particular the sensitivity and charity of all the faithful of our Archdiocese in order to remind the sacredness of human life, which apparently we have not yet taken as seriously as we should.
I do not refer to the daily actions at the expense of the bodily and spiritual health of our fellow human beings or of ourselves, for which we are certainly responsible before God.
I mean rather the hardness and criminality against human life in its still embryonic state, unable to defend itself or protest.
I mean the question of mass abortions which is silently turning our contemporary - supposedly Christian, or at least humanitarian - societies into a field of invisible slaughter without anyone condemning publicly the numbers of victims and magnitude of this cruelty.
Official statistics given by the relevant state authorities claim that in New South Wales alone, during the year 1988-89 31,351 abortions took place. Of these, only 1% were necessitated by medical opinion owing to the immediate danger of the pregnant woman.
These numbers constitute a terrible sign of our behaviour in the most sacred matter in which God calls us to become His close collaborators. However, it unfortunately appears that the issue of abortion in contemporary societies has almost become a matter of routine, without any moral problematic. Otherwise one cannot explain the ease with which one decides about an abortion today, just as one decides to extract a tooth.
We must therefore remember that whatever the reason leading couples to decide to cease in a violent manner an undesired pregnancy, the good of life and of existence lies totally in God's hands, and we must know that any intervention entangles us in a profound mystery.
Our Church, as in all similar moral issues, does not respond with a blind answer of "yes" or "no". The first thing it says is "Stand well!" This means: "Be careful!" And when in this way one realises that one is dealing with a question of life or death - not only of physical death, but also spiritual - then one is in a position to weigh up in the fear of God both the opinion of responsible science and the advice of the spiritual confessor.
I wish and pray fervently that our faithful may see this tremendous moral subject with renewed responsibility and act in each specific case according to the sacredness of the problem.

With paternal love in the Lord

http://www.greekorthodox.org.au/general/livinganorthodoxlife/modernissuesandthechurchsview/abortion

http://www.orthodoxchristian.info/pages/abortion1.htm


I was with him until the last paragraph.

Selam
So you don't think the faithful should see this tremendous moral subject with renewed responsibility and act in each specific case according to the sacredness of the problem? Why not?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 06, 2010, 03:20:23 AM

How do you expect that your interpretation of His All Holiness is correct when you can't even interpret ME correctly?

Am I interpreting HDAH Bartholomew?   I have accepted the interpretation of senior clergy including a noted priest of his own Church, as well as that of some not unserious Orthodox religious commentators.  So you're barking up the wrong tree by concentrating on the worm of a monk Ambrose and accusing him of silly interpretations.  I am nothing but a worm and a minnow.   Go after the archpriests and the religious writers who have been referenced in this thread.....  Leave me to my lenten bread and water.

And, if you can, make reference to the articles which must have been written in horrified reaction to the erroneous interpretation of the archpriests and the various articles.  There ought to be a large number of rebuttals which proclaim the orthodoxy of the position of His Divine All-Holiness on abortion.

(http://aggreen.net/pro-life/ix-xc_life.jpg)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on March 06, 2010, 03:29:40 AM

How do you expect that your interpretation of His All Holiness is correct when you can't even interpret ME correctly?

Am I interpreting HDAH Bartholomew? 
No. You are misinterpreting him, and I dare say you are doing so deliberately.

I have accepted the interpretation of senior clergy including a noted priest of his own Church
And you are deliberately ignoring what one of the Oecumenical Patriarchates own Archbishops said (quoted above). So it is quite clear your agenda has nothing to do with the moral issue of abortion, and everything to do with your disdain for the Oecumenical Patriarch.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 06, 2010, 03:35:04 AM
Trying to absolve yourself of all responsibility for what you have done on this thread?  "Don't blame me!  I'm just the messenger!"  Why do you choose to be the messenger? 

Actually, this question of abortion was raised by Alveus in the thread from which you have taken the posts and reinvigorated this thread.  One or two people replied to Alveus and so did I.


Quote
Why did you choose these articles?

Actually, it was Michal of Poland who first provided two of the articles which referenced the one from OCL.  I added information on the OCL article and I then provided one from Estocin. 

If I or anybody locates a clarification or a denial from Patriarch Bartholomew, I would be more than delighted to see it.   But as we have been told by two archpriests (one of them from his own Church) requests to the GOA and to the Phanar have met with no response.

Quote
As an appeal to "authority" to show us that your interpretation of the EP's words is correct?  In the end, it's still your interpretation of Patriarch Bartholomew's words you're advancing in some attempt to portray His All Holiness as a pro-choice patriarch and thus justify your feigned (self)-righteous indignation.

Nothing feigned about it.  I have a great hatred of abortion.  It frequently impinges on the work of every priest.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Gebre Menfes Kidus on March 06, 2010, 03:37:49 AM
If, perchance, anyone is genuinely interested in what the Oecumenical Patriarchate teaches about abortion (though given the tone of the posters thread, thats pretty unlikely), here is what my own Archbishop Stylianos (Oecumenical Patriarchate, GO Archdiocese of Australia) has written:

Dearly beloved,

With this letter, I wish to address in particular the sensitivity and charity of all the faithful of our Archdiocese in order to remind the sacredness of human life, which apparently we have not yet taken as seriously as we should.
I do not refer to the daily actions at the expense of the bodily and spiritual health of our fellow human beings or of ourselves, for which we are certainly responsible before God.
I mean rather the hardness and criminality against human life in its still embryonic state, unable to defend itself or protest.
I mean the question of mass abortions which is silently turning our contemporary - supposedly Christian, or at least humanitarian - societies into a field of invisible slaughter without anyone condemning publicly the numbers of victims and magnitude of this cruelty.
Official statistics given by the relevant state authorities claim that in New South Wales alone, during the year 1988-89 31,351 abortions took place. Of these, only 1% were necessitated by medical opinion owing to the immediate danger of the pregnant woman.
These numbers constitute a terrible sign of our behaviour in the most sacred matter in which God calls us to become His close collaborators. However, it unfortunately appears that the issue of abortion in contemporary societies has almost become a matter of routine, without any moral problematic. Otherwise one cannot explain the ease with which one decides about an abortion today, just as one decides to extract a tooth.
We must therefore remember that whatever the reason leading couples to decide to cease in a violent manner an undesired pregnancy, the good of life and of existence lies totally in God's hands, and we must know that any intervention entangles us in a profound mystery.
Our Church, as in all similar moral issues, does not respond with a blind answer of "yes" or "no". The first thing it says is "Stand well!" This means: "Be careful!" And when in this way one realises that one is dealing with a question of life or death - not only of physical death, but also spiritual - then one is in a position to weigh up in the fear of God both the opinion of responsible science and the advice of the spiritual confessor.
I wish and pray fervently that our faithful may see this tremendous moral subject with renewed responsibility and act in each specific case according to the sacredness of the problem.

With paternal love in the Lord

http://www.greekorthodox.org.au/general/livinganorthodoxlife/modernissuesandthechurchsview/abortion

http://www.orthodoxchristian.info/pages/abortion1.htm


I was with him until the last paragraph.

Selam
So you don't think the faithful should see this tremendous moral subject with renewed responsibility and act in each specific case according to the sacredness of the problem? Why not?

IMHO, the Archbishop did an excellent job clarifying the sanctity of unborn life and describing the callousness and ease with which our culture discards such innocent and defenseless children in the womb. So I was a bit disheartened when he ended such a forceful statement with words that seem tainted with moral relativism. You see, regardless of "each specific case," the sanctity of the unborn child remains the same. But the archbishop went from the "sacredness of the unborn child" to the "sacredness of the problem." So, it could possibly be interpreted that the deliberate murder of an unbron child is sometimes morally justified. I also do not believe that the "opinion of responsible science and the advice of the spiritual confessor" can ever negate the clear apostolic prohibitions against murdering the unborn child. So, that's my concern, FWIW.

Selam
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 06, 2010, 03:43:05 AM
Today's holocaust
Abortion the indescribable calamity!


By His Grace Bishop Joseph of Arianzos [of the Second Archdiocesan District Melbourne]


This Icon is a work of the iconographer Mr. Kostas Vrousgos from Thessaloniki and was painted in Adelaide, South Australia, with the blessing of Bishop Joseph of Arianzos. It was published in thousands of copies. His Grace wrote the following text about abortion and the Icon, printed on the reverse side of the Icon.

"The All-Holy God is the fountain of life. Life belongs to him. His love provides life to all living organisms and especially to man, whom He created in His own image and likeness. We live and exist because of the overflowing love of God. As in this sacred overflowing love of God which is life, every person has a right which cannot be taken away. The Son and Word of God became human, was crucified and was resurrected so that all "may have life and abundantly they may have" (John 10:10). God's gift of life is inviolable and murder is forbidden by the Holy Scriptures and the Holy Tradition of the Church (Holy Fathers, Synods and Canons). He who takes away life opposes the work of the Life-giving Lord and joins with the devil, who "was a murderer from the beginning" (John 8:44).

Human life begins from the moment of conception and fertilisation. The Church believes this, and so does contemporary medicine (Panhellenic Medical Conference 1985). Furthermore the science of embryology, with the assistance of ultrasound and of other admirable technological means which are available, proved that the unborn baby is "certainly a new human being, a new member of human society, inseparable from each and every one of us in any way" (Dr Bernard Nathanson). Therefore, from the moment of conception, the violation of life at whatever stage is murder! As much as the killing of an adult or an adolescent is murder, so much so is the killing of a foetus by abortion at any stage of pregnancy. It is the cowardly murder of an innocent and completely unprotected human being, which has no possibility whatsoever to defend or protect itself.

Despite all these, the various human passions and especially sensuality, hard-heartedness, superficiality and indifference, very often lead to abortion as a "solution" of some "unwanted" or otherwise problematic pregnancy! Nevertheless, this is no solution. It is a manifestation of rage of the above-mentioned fathomless passions, which characterise the souls which are found outside the life of the Church and the fear of God.

I believe that this most beautiful Icon by the talented Iconographer Mr Costas Vrousgos, very clearly expresses all the Church wants to say to Her children about the dreadful subject, the indescribable calamity of abortion, the contemporary baby-killer Herod. The Iconographer's ability to blend colours, being led by the Spirit of Truth, presents the causes of evil, the murderers of innocent babes, the sadness of the Life-giving Christ, the solution and need for repentance of the mother, the equally responsible and unloving father and perjurer murderer-doctor, and to anyone else associated with the crime. The testimonial cross of the unmarried mother who prefers the cost of social shame rather than the killing of her child. The blessing of the Christian family. The eternal prototype of the mother of God, the all-honoured person of the breast-feeding Mother of the Blessed One. No other comment is needed".

(http://www.ss-peterandpaul.net/images/abortion_icon.gif)

Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 06, 2010, 03:48:10 AM

How do you expect that your interpretation of His All Holiness is correct when you can't even interpret ME correctly?

Am I interpreting HDAH Bartholomew?   I have accepted the interpretation of senior clergy including a noted priest of his own Church, as well as that of some not unserious Orthodox religious commentators.  So you're barking up the wrong tree by concentrating on the worm of a monk Ambrose and accusing him of silly interpretations.  I am nothing but a worm and a minnow.
Well, it's obvious you share their interpretation, which makes that interpretation now yours.  Either that, or they share your interpretation.  Which is it?

Go after the archpriests and the religious writers who have been referenced in this thread.....  Leave me to my lenten bread and water.
There's one very simple way to keep people from scrutinizing your posts, Fr. Ambrose.  Don't submit them.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 06, 2010, 03:49:37 AM
Trying to absolve yourself of all responsibility for what you have done on this thread?  "Don't blame me!  I'm just the messenger!"  Why do you choose to be the messenger? 

Actually, this question of abortion was raised by Alveus in the thread from which you have taken the posts and reinvigorated this thread.  One or two people replied to Alveus and so did I.
Yes, YOU did. ;)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Gebre Menfes Kidus on March 06, 2010, 03:49:59 AM

How do you expect that your interpretation of His All Holiness is correct when you can't even interpret ME correctly?

Am I interpreting HDAH Bartholomew?   I have accepted the interpretation of senior clergy including a noted priest of his own Church, as well as that of some not unserious Orthodox religious commentators.  So you're barking up the wrong tree by concentrating on the worm of a monk Ambrose and accusing him of silly interpretations.  I am nothing but a worm and a minnow.   Go after the archpriests and the religious writers who have been referenced in this thread.....  Leave me to my lenten bread and water.

And, if you can, make reference to the articles which must have been written in horrified reaction to the erroneous interpretation of the archpriests and the various articles.  There ought to be a large number of rebuttals which proclaim the orthodoxy of the position of His Divine All-Holiness on abortion.

(http://aggreen.net/pro-life/ix-xc_life.jpg)


I love this Icon! First time I've seen it. Wow.


Selam
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on March 06, 2010, 03:51:32 AM
If, perchance, anyone is genuinely interested in what the Oecumenical Patriarchate teaches about abortion (though given the tone of the posters thread, thats pretty unlikely), here is what my own Archbishop Stylianos (Oecumenical Patriarchate, GO Archdiocese of Australia) has written:

Dearly beloved,

With this letter, I wish to address in particular the sensitivity and charity of all the faithful of our Archdiocese in order to remind the sacredness of human life, which apparently we have not yet taken as seriously as we should.
I do not refer to the daily actions at the expense of the bodily and spiritual health of our fellow human beings or of ourselves, for which we are certainly responsible before God.
I mean rather the hardness and criminality against human life in its still embryonic state, unable to defend itself or protest.
I mean the question of mass abortions which is silently turning our contemporary - supposedly Christian, or at least humanitarian - societies into a field of invisible slaughter without anyone condemning publicly the numbers of victims and magnitude of this cruelty.
Official statistics given by the relevant state authorities claim that in New South Wales alone, during the year 1988-89 31,351 abortions took place. Of these, only 1% were necessitated by medical opinion owing to the immediate danger of the pregnant woman.
These numbers constitute a terrible sign of our behaviour in the most sacred matter in which God calls us to become His close collaborators. However, it unfortunately appears that the issue of abortion in contemporary societies has almost become a matter of routine, without any moral problematic. Otherwise one cannot explain the ease with which one decides about an abortion today, just as one decides to extract a tooth.
We must therefore remember that whatever the reason leading couples to decide to cease in a violent manner an undesired pregnancy, the good of life and of existence lies totally in God's hands, and we must know that any intervention entangles us in a profound mystery.
Our Church, as in all similar moral issues, does not respond with a blind answer of "yes" or "no". The first thing it says is "Stand well!" This means: "Be careful!" And when in this way one realises that one is dealing with a question of life or death - not only of physical death, but also spiritual - then one is in a position to weigh up in the fear of God both the opinion of responsible science and the advice of the spiritual confessor.
I wish and pray fervently that our faithful may see this tremendous moral subject with renewed responsibility and act in each specific case according to the sacredness of the problem.

With paternal love in the Lord

http://www.greekorthodox.org.au/general/livinganorthodoxlife/modernissuesandthechurchsview/abortion

http://www.orthodoxchristian.info/pages/abortion1.htm


I was with him until the last paragraph.

Selam
So you don't think the faithful should see this tremendous moral subject with renewed responsibility and act in each specific case according to the sacredness of the problem? Why not?

IMHO, the Archbishop did an excellent job clarifying the sanctity of unborn life and describing the callousness and ease with which our culture discards such innocent and defenseless children in the womb. So I was a bit disheartened when he ended such a forceful statement with words that seem tainted with moral relativism. You see, regardless of "each specific case," the sanctity of the unborn child remains the same. But the archbishop went from the "sacredness of the unborn child" to the "sacredness of the problem." So, it could possibly be interpreted that the deliberate murder of an unbron child is sometimes morally justified. I also do not believe that the "opinion of responsible science and the advice of the spiritual confessor" can ever negate the clear apostolic prohibitions against murdering the unborn child. So, that's my concern, FWIW.

Selam
Thanks for clarifying. I didn't read it that way though. As I read it, the Archbishop  begins by reminding us of our responsibility for the "bodily and spiritual health of our fellow human beings" and then extends it to include "human life in its still embryonic state, unable to defend itself or protest", and calls the wanton destruction of this life "criminality" and condemns "the ease with which one decides about an abortion today, just as one decides to extract a tooth." He reminds us that all Life comes from God, and therefore anyone who procures an abortion ("to cease in a violent manner an undesired pregnancy") entangles them "in a profound mystery"- that is, they are not just messing with Life, they are messing with God. This is the "sacredness of the problem" the Archbishop is referring to when he concludes :"I wish and pray fervently that our faithful may see this tremendous moral subject with renewed responsibility and act in each specific case according to the sacredness of the problem." Thats how I see it anyway.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Gebre Menfes Kidus on March 06, 2010, 03:56:46 AM
If, perchance, anyone is genuinely interested in what the Oecumenical Patriarchate teaches about abortion (though given the tone of the posters thread, thats pretty unlikely), here is what my own Archbishop Stylianos (Oecumenical Patriarchate, GO Archdiocese of Australia) has written:

Dearly beloved,

With this letter, I wish to address in particular the sensitivity and charity of all the faithful of our Archdiocese in order to remind the sacredness of human life, which apparently we have not yet taken as seriously as we should.
I do not refer to the daily actions at the expense of the bodily and spiritual health of our fellow human beings or of ourselves, for which we are certainly responsible before God.
I mean rather the hardness and criminality against human life in its still embryonic state, unable to defend itself or protest.
I mean the question of mass abortions which is silently turning our contemporary - supposedly Christian, or at least humanitarian - societies into a field of invisible slaughter without anyone condemning publicly the numbers of victims and magnitude of this cruelty.
Official statistics given by the relevant state authorities claim that in New South Wales alone, during the year 1988-89 31,351 abortions took place. Of these, only 1% were necessitated by medical opinion owing to the immediate danger of the pregnant woman.
These numbers constitute a terrible sign of our behaviour in the most sacred matter in which God calls us to become His close collaborators. However, it unfortunately appears that the issue of abortion in contemporary societies has almost become a matter of routine, without any moral problematic. Otherwise one cannot explain the ease with which one decides about an abortion today, just as one decides to extract a tooth.
We must therefore remember that whatever the reason leading couples to decide to cease in a violent manner an undesired pregnancy, the good of life and of existence lies totally in God's hands, and we must know that any intervention entangles us in a profound mystery.
Our Church, as in all similar moral issues, does not respond with a blind answer of "yes" or "no". The first thing it says is "Stand well!" This means: "Be careful!" And when in this way one realises that one is dealing with a question of life or death - not only of physical death, but also spiritual - then one is in a position to weigh up in the fear of God both the opinion of responsible science and the advice of the spiritual confessor.
I wish and pray fervently that our faithful may see this tremendous moral subject with renewed responsibility and act in each specific case according to the sacredness of the problem.

With paternal love in the Lord

http://www.greekorthodox.org.au/general/livinganorthodoxlife/modernissuesandthechurchsview/abortion

http://www.orthodoxchristian.info/pages/abortion1.htm


I was with him until the last paragraph.

Selam
So you don't think the faithful should see this tremendous moral subject with renewed responsibility and act in each specific case according to the sacredness of the problem? Why not?

IMHO, the Archbishop did an excellent job clarifying the sanctity of unborn life and describing the callousness and ease with which our culture discards such innocent and defenseless children in the womb. So I was a bit disheartened when he ended such a forceful statement with words that seem tainted with moral relativism. You see, regardless of "each specific case," the sanctity of the unborn child remains the same. But the archbishop went from the "sacredness of the unborn child" to the "sacredness of the problem." So, it could possibly be interpreted that the deliberate murder of an unbron child is sometimes morally justified. I also do not believe that the "opinion of responsible science and the advice of the spiritual confessor" can ever negate the clear apostolic prohibitions against murdering the unborn child. So, that's my concern, FWIW.

Selam
Thanks for clarifying. I didn't read it that way though. As I read it, the Archbishop  begins by reminding us of our responsibility for the "bodily and spiritual health of our fellow human beings" and then extends it to include "human life in its still embryonic state, unable to defend itself or protest", and calls the wanton destruction of this life "criminality" and condemns "the ease with which one decides about an abortion today, just as one decides to extract a tooth." He reminds us that all Life comes from God, and therefore anyone who procures an abortion ("to cease in a violent manner an undesired pregnancy") entangles them "in a profound mystery"- that is, they are not just messing with Life, they are messing with God. This is the "sacredness of the problem" the Archbishop is referring to when he concludes :"I wish and pray fervently that our faithful may see this tremendous moral subject with renewed responsibility and act in each specific case according to the sacredness of the problem." Thats how I see it anyway.

Yes, it's a good statement. I just know that it's human nature to find a loophole in anything. Thank you so much for posting it though.


Selam
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 06, 2010, 03:58:21 AM
If, perchance, anyone is genuinely interested in what the Oecumenical Patriarchate teaches about abortion (though given the tone of the posters thread, thats pretty unlikely), here is what my own Archbishop Stylianos (Oecumenical Patriarchate, GO Archdiocese of Australia) has written:

Dearly beloved,

With this letter, I wish to address in particular the sensitivity and charity of all the faithful of our Archdiocese in order to remind the sacredness of human life, which apparently we have not yet taken as seriously as we should.
I


George, thank you for posting this.  Marvellous.   His Eminence needs praising.  It is just as strong as the statement from His Grace Bishop Joseph (Harliolakis) who was at the time one of the bishops of Archbp Stylianos serving in the Second District but for some reason His Grace was in disfavour for his anti-abortion article and for his suppoert of the propagation of the anti-abortion icon (painted in Australia.)

However I note the words of Gebre Menfes Kidus and his concerns for the "let-out" clauses in the letter.  No doubt people will now pile on him for his "interpretation" but I share his concern.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on March 06, 2010, 03:58:34 AM
By His Grace Bishop Joseph of Arianzos [of the Second Archdiocesan District Melbourne]

Gosh Irish Hermit, yet another Bishop of the Oecumenical Patriarchate seems not to have interpreted His All Holiness the Oecumenical Patriarch the way you seem to. Perhaps you were wrong in your interpretation? I hope so. I hate the thought of you weeping over what you thought the Oecumenical Patriarch's position is:

You think I am dragging him through the mud?  Because I understand his words as others have done, others of far greater acumen than I.  Do you not think that I weep and pray for a correction or a clarification from him?  Why does the First See of Orthodoxy stay adamantly silent?

And yes. I'm being sarcastic.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 06, 2010, 04:10:17 AM
.....it is quite clear your agenda has nothing to do with the moral issue of abortion, and everything to do with your disdain for the Oecumenical Patriarch.

The latter was born from the former.  And I am not alone; may I offer again the words of Bishop Emeritus Tikhon (FitzGerald.)

"I have long been in the ranks of those who view with
distaste the care with which the current Patriarch
(even when only a Metropolitan) has avoided
discomfiting anyone anywhere on the topic of abortion"

Source ::
https://listserv.indiana.edu/cgi-bin/wa-iub.exe?A2=ind0909D&L=ORTHODOX&P=R2730

I think that too much attention is being focused on my person and not on the issue at hand.  Poor Gebre Menfes Kidus may start to feel the same glare of attention for his "interpretation" of the words of Archbishop Stylianos.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 06, 2010, 04:21:37 AM

Gosh Irish Hermit, yet another Bishop of the Oecumenical Patriarchate seems not to have interpreted His All Holiness the Oecumenical Patriarch the way you seem to.

Do you see any interpretation of the words of His Divine All-Holiness in Archbishop Stylianos' letter?  I see mo mention of the Patriarch let alone any interpretation of what the Patriarch has  said.   You are interpreting the letter wrongly. 

Archbp Stylianonos has never been known as marching in lockstep with Constantinople.  For example, you must be aware of his scathing attack on Patriarch Bartholomew for his role and participation in the ecumenical dialogue with Rome.  It's not the first time he has attacked his Patriarch quite aggressively.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on March 06, 2010, 04:39:36 AM
Archbp Stylianonos has never been known as marching in lockstep with Constantinople.  
::) Yet more of "The World According to Irish Hermit".

And I am not alone; may I offer again the words of Bishop Emeritus Tikhon (FitzGerald.)

"I have long been in the ranks of those who view with
distaste the care with which the current Patriarch
(even when only a Metropolitan) has avoided
discomfiting anyone anywhere on the topic of abortion"
You mean the "Bishop Emeritus" who cannot spell "discomforting"? That guy?
As per your request, I'll leave you now to your Lenten Bread and Water:
Leave me to my lenten bread and water.
Try not to weep too much either:
Do you not think that I weep and pray for a correction or a clarification from him?


Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 06, 2010, 04:51:41 AM
And I am not alone; may I offer again the words of Bishop Emeritus Tikhon (FitzGerald.)

"I have long been in the ranks of those who view with
distaste the care with which the current Patriarch
(even when only a Metropolitan) has avoided
discomfiting anyone anywhere on the topic of abortion"
You mean the "Bishop Emeritus" who cannot spell "discomforting"? That guy?

Yes, that is most unusual.  His Grace is pedantic about spelling and grammar and I cannot imagine how that slipped through.  His Grace uses one of those voice recognition programmes to write his e-mails and in this case I guess it slipped up and was not corrected manually by the bishop.

Do you see a spelling error from his software as invalidating what he is saying?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 06, 2010, 04:53:55 AM
.....it is quite clear your agenda has nothing to do with the moral issue of abortion, and everything to do with your disdain for the Oecumenical Patriarch.

The latter was born from the former.  And I am not alone; may I offer again the words of Bishop Emeritus Tikhon (FitzGerald.)

"I have long been in the ranks of those who view with
distaste the care with which the current Patriarch
(even when only a Metropolitan) has avoided
discomfiting anyone anywhere on the topic of abortion"

Source ::
https://listserv.indiana.edu/cgi-bin/wa-iub.exe?A2=ind0909D&L=ORTHODOX&P=R2730
Please forgive me if I'm less than impressed by anything coming from the keyboard of the retired Bishop Tikhon of San Francisco.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 06, 2010, 04:58:49 AM
Archbp Stylianonos has never been known as marching in lockstep with Constantinople.  
::) Yet more of "The World According to Irish Hermit".

Archbishop Stylianos had an unholy row with the Patriarch over the transfer of Bishop Joseph Harkiolakis out of his jurisdiction.  For some reason the Archbishop chose to broadcast his bellicose letters to the Patriarch on the Internet for all to read -- and bellicose and aggressive are certainly the words to decribe them.

More recently there has been a public attack on the Patriarch for his ecumenical relationship and activites with Rome, and again, instead of confining it to an in-house matter for the Sacred Synod, Archbp Stylianos has chosen to take it to the Internet and bring it to the attention of the Orthodox world.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 06, 2010, 05:02:21 AM
.....it is quite clear your agenda has nothing to do with the moral issue of abortion, and everything to do with your disdain for the Oecumenical Patriarch.

The latter was born from the former.  And I am not alone; may I offer again the words of Bishop Emeritus Tikhon (FitzGerald.)

"I have long been in the ranks of those who view with
distaste the care with which the current Patriarch
(even when only a Metropolitan) has avoided
discomfiting anyone anywhere on the topic of abortion"

Source ::
https://listserv.indiana.edu/cgi-bin/wa-iub.exe?A2=ind0909D&L=ORTHODOX&P=R2730
Please forgive me if I'm less than impressed by anything coming from the keyboard of the retired Bishop Tikhon of San Francisco.

Would we expect otherwise?  A mind already made up and dealing in generalisations ("I'm less than impressed by anything...")
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on March 06, 2010, 05:06:51 AM
Archbp Stylianos has chosen to take it to the Internet and bring it to the attention of the Orthodox world.
Really? That's strange, since he published it in 1990 in The Voice of Orthodoxy.
Your bread will and water will go stale, and you'll run out of tissues if you keep going Irish Hermit.
The previous two pages of this thread says it all.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 06, 2010, 05:11:22 AM

You mean the "Bishop Emeritus" who cannot spell "discomforting"? That guy?


Oops!  Both you and I stand convicted of ignorance and you owe Bishop Tikhon and his voice recognition software an apology.

Dictionaries reveal that "discomfit" is an English word and it means exactly what the Bishop used it to mean.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 06, 2010, 05:13:57 AM
Archbp Stylianos has chosen to take it to the Internet and bring it to the attention of the Orthodox world.
Really? That's strange, since he published it in 1990 in The Voice of Orthodoxy.
Your bread will and water will go stale, and you'll run out of tissues if you keep going Irish Hermit.
The previous two pages of this thread says it all.

I have wanted to deal with the issue but others, including yourself, have sought to focus the discussion on my personal failings.  That is why the thread has become a bit of a mess.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 06, 2010, 05:18:34 AM

You mean the "Bishop Emeritus" who cannot spell "discomforting"? That guy?


Maybe "emeritus" is not widely used in Australia?

From Wiki:

Emeritus (pronounced /ɨˈmɛrɨtəs/) (plural Emeriti, abbreviation emer.)
is an adjective that is used in the title of a retired professor, bishop, or other professional.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emeritus

Bolding is mine.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on March 06, 2010, 05:23:54 AM
Archbp Stylianos has chosen to take it to the Internet and bring it to the attention of the Orthodox world.
Really? That's strange, since he published it in 1990 in The Voice of Orthodoxy.
Your bread will and water will go stale, and you'll run out of tissues if you keep going Irish Hermit.
The previous two pages of this thread says it all.

I have wanted to deal with the issue but others, including yourself, have sought to focus the discussion on my personal failings.  That is why the thread has become a bit of a mess.
I don't think you have any personal failings. I am well acquainted with your great ascesis. We all are. You posted about them in this thread:
Leave me to my lenten bread and water.
Do you not think that I weep and pray for a correction or a clarification from him?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 06, 2010, 05:28:32 AM
.....it is quite clear your agenda has nothing to do with the moral issue of abortion, and everything to do with your disdain for the Oecumenical Patriarch.

The latter was born from the former.  And I am not alone; may I offer again the words of Bishop Emeritus Tikhon (FitzGerald.)

"I have long been in the ranks of those who view with
distaste the care with which the current Patriarch
(even when only a Metropolitan) has avoided
discomfiting anyone anywhere on the topic of abortion"

Source ::
https://listserv.indiana.edu/cgi-bin/wa-iub.exe?A2=ind0909D&L=ORTHODOX&P=R2730
Please forgive me if I'm less than impressed by anything coming from the keyboard of the retired Bishop Tikhon of San Francisco.

Would we expect otherwise?  A mind already made up and dealing in generalisations ("I'm less than impressed by anything...")
So what?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 06, 2010, 05:32:02 AM

Because "ROCOR" has an uncanonical status.

George, I implore you to find an accurate source of information. What you are saying is inaccurate and damaging to the unity of the Church.

In May the bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad will be participating in the the Regional Episcopal Assemby for North America.  This will be presided over by the first ranking hierarch of the American Greek Church, His Eminence Archbishop Demetrios.   Clearly he accepts ROCA as canonical.

For the past several years our clergy, including myself, have been serving freely with the local Greek Metropolitan Amphilochios and his clergy.  So he too clearly accepts our canonicity.

Where are you getting contrary information?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 06, 2010, 05:35:11 AM
Archbp Stylianos has chosen to take it to the Internet and bring it to the attention of the Orthodox world.
Really? That's strange, since he published it in 1990 in The Voice of Orthodoxy.
Your bread will and water will go stale, and you'll run out of tissues if you keep going Irish Hermit.
The previous two pages of this thread says it all.

I have wanted to deal with the issue but others, including yourself, have sought to focus the discussion on my personal failings.  That is why the thread has become a bit of a mess.
I don't think you have any personal failings. I am well acquainted with your great ascesis. We all are. You posted about them in this thread:


I lied, I am a poor example of a monk.  I lied (sort of) about living on bread and water.  I prefer toast and tea.... Modern monks are not a patch on those of old. (http://www.emotihost.com/crying/6.gif)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on March 06, 2010, 05:49:45 AM
Because "ROCOR" has an uncanonical status.
George, I implore you to find an accurate source of information.
I did. You just choose to ignore it. Just like you choose to ignore what the Oecumenical Patriarchate actually teaches because it doesn't suit your agenda.  Here it is again:
If the Patriarch were to commemorate Metropolitan Hilarion in the Diptychs of Constantinople it would be a breach of canonical order.
Of course it would. Because "ROCOR" has an uncanonical status.

I really do not know who is supplying you with this misinformation but be it known that since May 2007 the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad has been an integral part of the Patriarchate of Moscow.  If ROCA is uncanonical I guess that Moscow is uncanonical.

Act of Canonical Communion Signed in Moscow
http://www.pravmir.com/article_228.html
LOL!  :D What a riot!
Lets look at facts Irish Hermit:
Certainly, there is a problem in geographical areas which do not have a long standing history of the Orthodox Church in that different jurisdictions have Bishops in the same area, but if this in itself is uncanonical, then it is more uncanonical that the same jurisdiction (Moscow Patriarchate) should have three different Bishops and three different local Churches in the same geographical area.

First we have  His Grace Iov, Bishop of Kashira, Administrator of the Patriarchal Parishes in Canada (and temporarily in the USA)
http://www.russianchurchusa.org/index.php3?ln=en

Next we have His Beatitude Metropolitan Jonah of the Orthodox Church in America
http://www.oca.org/

Then we have His Eminence, Metropolitan Hilarion of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia
http://www.russianorthodoxchurch.ws/synod/indexeng.htm

I think we all have bigger things to worry about than a political editorial in the US.


What you are saying is inaccurate and damaging to the unity of the Church.
:D ROFL! Physician, heal thyself!

I lied (sort of) about living on bread and water.  I prefer toast and tea.... Modern monks are not a patch on those of old. (http://www.emotihost.com/crying/6.gif)
How great your ascesis! Well done! Thanks for letting the world know about it.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 06, 2010, 05:51:11 AM
Thanks for presenting this, Rafa.  It is interesting and saddening.



Quote
Grecian Abortion Rate Has Left 150K Couples Unable To Have Children

5/3/02

Thessaloniki, Greece -- The first position in abortions, comparatively speaking, both in relation to European countries and to the US, is held by Greece. The large number of abortions, which take place both before and during a marriage, and which can cause serious complications, are the main reason for the high percentage of under-fertility in Greece.

According to specialists, abortions are responsible for a 40% decrease in a woman's fertility. It is estimated that 150,000 couples in Greece cannot have children, because they have at least one abortion in their past.

More than 250,000 abortions take place every year in Greece, of which 40,000 are on underage girls younger than 16. Also, a third of them are performed on married women who would avoid them if they could afford a larger family.

This information was announced by Gynecology Professor of Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Ioannis Bodis, speaking at the 2nd day of the 17th Northern Greece Medical Conference, organized by the Thessaloniki Medical Company.

In the 1980-1999 periods, stressed Mr. Bodis, Greece exhibited a decrease of 41% in fertility, twice as much (in percentage) as in the rest of Europe, while the US showed an increase in the fertility factor of 14%.

13% of Greeks have had an abortion:

http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/ab-greece.html

see 2004 stats. The abortion rate is increasing (before the data stopped being given of course).

For a peer reviewed study on the matter:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15938171


blame is placed on the laxity of the OC on the matter in several articles I read.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on March 06, 2010, 05:55:13 AM
Thanks for presenting this, Rafa.  It is interesting and saddening.

See, again you are showing you have no interest in the teachings of the Oecumenical Patriarchate as expounded on this thread. You're just going to ignore them. Instead you rehash stuff addressed pages ago.

Your tea is getting cold, and you keep telling us you wish to be left to your Lenten ascesis which you have quite clearly described to the world on the Internet.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 06, 2010, 06:03:48 AM
Because "ROCOR" has an uncanonical status.
George, I implore you to find an accurate source of information.
I did. You just choose to ignore it.

I really think you should substantiate your claim that ROCA is uncanonical in Constantinople's eyes.  Your repeated assertions of non-canonicity are damaging to the unity of the Church.

In May the bishops of ROCA will be participating in the Regional Episcopal Assembly for North America, convened by His Eminence Archbp Demetrios, a hierarch of the Ecumenical Throne

As you will know if you have read the Chambesy statements, participation at these Regional Episcopal Assemblies is restricted to canonical bishops.

Btw, when is Archbishop Stylianos going to convene an Assembly of all the Bishops of Australasia.  The onus falls on him to convene it and to preside.  Metropolitan Hilarion of the Russian Church Abroad will participate.

Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 06, 2010, 06:06:44 AM
Your tea is getting cold, and you keep telling us you wish to be left to your Lenten ascesis which you have quite clearly described to the world on the Internet.

If tea and toast comprises lenten ascesis then I think I must be engaged in it 365 days of the year.    And since I adore tea and toast it is not so ascetic really.   :laugh:
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on March 06, 2010, 06:09:40 AM
I really think you should substantiate your claim that ROCA is uncanonical in Constantinople's eyes.
See above. Your eyesight must be weak from your great fasting and many tears you told us all about.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 06, 2010, 06:17:46 AM

See, again you are showing you have no interest in the teachings of the Oecumenical Patriarchate as expounded on this thread.

Dear George,

The question of abortion in Greece is concomitant with the issue of the Patriarch and abortion.   A large swathe of Greece, the Northern Territories, is part of the Ecumenical Patriarchate.  The Ecumenical Patriarch has over 30 dioceses and bishops under his jurisdiction in northern Greece.

Greek statistics on abortion and the ways the Church is dealing with the problem among its faithful have everything to do with the Ecumenical Patriarchate.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 06, 2010, 06:19:11 AM
Archbp Stylianos has chosen to take it to the Internet and bring it to the attention of the Orthodox world.
Really? That's strange, since he published it in 1990 in The Voice of Orthodoxy.
Your bread will and water will go stale, and you'll run out of tissues if you keep going Irish Hermit.
The previous two pages of this thread says it all.

I have wanted to deal with the issue but others, including yourself, have sought to focus the discussion on my personal failings.  That is why the thread has become a bit of a mess.
Kinda hot under the lights, ain't it? ;)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 06, 2010, 06:23:11 AM
I really think you should substantiate your claim that ROCA is uncanonical in Constantinople's eyes.
See above. Your eyesight must be weak from your great fasting and many tears you told us all about.

Indeed it must be so because I have seen nothing saying that the Russian Church Abroad is uncanonical in the eyes of Constantinople.  

Somebody ought to report the Greek bishops all around the world who are serving Liturgy with "uncanonical" ROCA clergy.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 06, 2010, 06:38:15 AM
I really think you should substantiate your claim that ROCA is uncanonical in Constantinople's eyes.
See above. Your eyesight must be weak from your great fasting and many tears you told us all about.

Constantinople is in communion with ROCOR...

In 14 points just so you notice...!   :laugh:

SWITZERLAND: March 10, 2009
The Triumph of Orthodoxy Celebrated in Orthodox Churches


... That morning, in the Church of Apostle Paul ...in the Orthodox Center of the Contantinople Patriarchate in Chambessy, near Geneva, Divine Liturgy was led jointly by His Eminence Metropolitan Jeremiah of Switzerland (Constantinople Patriarchate); His Grace Bishop Michael of Geneva and Western Europe (Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia); and His Grace Bishop Macarius of Lampsaque (Constantinople Patriarchate). They were joined by ten priests and two deacons representing the Constantinople, Antiochian, Russian (including ROCOR) and Rumanian Churches. ...

Read the article at http://www.russianorthodoxchurch.ws/synod/eng2009/3engeneva.html
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 06, 2010, 06:47:07 AM
Thanks for presenting this, Rafa.  It is interesting and saddening.

Instead you rehash stuff addressed pages ago.

Rafa posted that 5 hours ago.   That is hardly a long time.

He posted it in response to my request for information on abortion in Greece.  It was polite to take notice of his message and thank him for finding the information.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 06, 2010, 06:49:45 AM
Archbp Stylianos has chosen to take it to the Internet and bring it to the attention of the Orthodox world.
Really? That's strange, since he published it in 1990 in The Voice of Orthodoxy.
Your bread will and water will go stale, and you'll run out of tissues if you keep going Irish Hermit.
The previous two pages of this thread says it all.

I have wanted to deal with the issue but others, including yourself, have sought to focus the discussion on my personal failings.  That is why the thread has become a bit of a mess.
Kinda hot under the lights, ain't it? ;)

The greasepaint is running.  It's like the old days when you and George would play tag with me.   :laugh:
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on March 06, 2010, 06:52:10 AM
Constantinople is in communion with ROCOR...
Thats nice. But what has that got to do with ROCOR's or OCA's canonical status?

Thanks for presenting this, Rafa.  It is interesting and saddening.

Instead you rehash stuff addressed pages ago.

Rafa posted that 5 hours ago.   That is hardly a long time.
You realise that means you've been sitting on this thread posting continually for over five hours including your accusations against The Oecumenical Patriarchate and telling the world about your great fasting and tears.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 06, 2010, 07:08:30 AM

You realise that means you've been sitting on this thread posting continually for over five hours

No, my man, it means the opposite, otherwise I would have noticed Rafa's reply earlier.

If you examine my posts you will see there is nothing for 4 hours between 4 pm and 8 pm (New Zealand time, Saturday evening here.)

That is a 4 hour interval.  I've been occupied.  You may have heard that we uncanonical ;D  Russians like to serve Vigil before Sunday Liturgy. Its length varies but since this is the Sunday of the Cross the Vigil takes a little longer.   The veneration of the Holy Cross is one of many people's most loved services.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on March 06, 2010, 07:18:15 AM
we uncanonical   Russians
I didn't know you were Russian. I thought you were Irish. (Or Serbian, or a New Zealander or something else). Whatever you are, an ethnicity cannot be "uncanonical".
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 06, 2010, 07:26:52 AM
we uncanonical   Russians
I didn't know you were Russian. I thought you were Irish. (Or Serbian, or a New Zealander or something else). Whatever you are, an ethnicity cannot be "uncanonical".

Grief!  Do we have to descend to this kindergarten level of the use of English!?  I am sure that everybody fully understood the point I was making.

"Constantinople" is regularly used here to mean the "Church of Constantinople."  Everybody accepts this convention although Constantinople is not a Church at all but the name of a city on the Bosphorus.

Let's get back to the topic of the thread.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ytterbiumanalyst on March 06, 2010, 07:37:10 AM
we uncanonical   Russians
I didn't know you were Russian. I thought you were Irish. (Or Serbian, or a New Zealander or something else). Whatever you are, an ethnicity cannot be "uncanonical".
Grief!  Do we have to descend to this kindergarten level of the use of English!?  I am sure that everybody fully understood the point I was making.
I'm sure the EP was equally confident that everyone understood his point.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 06, 2010, 07:46:27 AM
we uncanonical   Russians
I didn't know you were Russian. I thought you were Irish. (Or Serbian, or a New Zealander or something else). Whatever you are, an ethnicity cannot be "uncanonical".
Grief!  Do we have to descend to this kindergarten level of the use of English!?  I am sure that everybody fully understood the point I was making.
I'm sure the EP was equally confident that everyone understood his point.

What makes you confident of that? 

The evidence points to the opposite if your interpretation is right and the Patriarch was simply being pastoral and allowing couples to choose abortion. 

Senior clergy, including his own, as well as Orthodox religious commentators,  have understood his point as pro-choice.   
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on March 06, 2010, 08:00:40 AM
 ::) Here we go again.
Please read the previous two pages again Irish Hermit. Repeating things ad nauseum despite the evidence shown you does not make your claims true.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 06, 2010, 08:18:09 AM
::) Here we go again.
Please read the previous two pages again Irish Hermit. Repeating things ad nauseum despite the evidence shown you does not make your claims true.

Are you referring to your ad nauseam repetition of "ROCOR is uncanonical, uncanonical, uncanonical"?

Btw, I think you may be in the glasshouse throwing stones when you wrongly accused Bp Tikhon of writing "discomfit" because you thought it ought to have been "discomfort."    Ad nauseam is spelt just so with an -am, and your ad nauseum does not exist.  Professor Y  -what spelling do you ask of your students?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on March 06, 2010, 08:21:55 AM
Your tea and toast will be getting cold.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 06, 2010, 08:36:24 AM
Your tea and toast will be getting cold.

Uuummmmm.... tea.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on March 06, 2010, 10:54:48 AM
If the Patriarch were to commemorate Metropolitan Hilarion in the Diptychs of Constantinople it would be a breach of canonical order.
Of course it would. Because "ROCOR" has an uncanonical status.

I really do not know who is supplying you with this misinformation but be it known that since May 2007 the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad has been an integral part of the Patriarchate of Moscow.  If ROCA is uncanonical I guess that Moscow is uncanonical.

Act of Canonical Communion Signed in Moscow
http://www.pravmir.com/article_228.html
LOL!  :D What a riot!
Lets look at facts Irish Hermit:
Certainly, there is a problem in geographical areas which do not have a long standing history of the Orthodox Church in that different jurisdictions have Bishops in the same area, but if this in itself is uncanonical, then it is more uncanonical that the same jurisdiction (Moscow Patriarchate) should have three different Bishops and three different local Churches in the same geographical area.

First we have  His Grace Iov, Bishop of Kashira, Administrator of the Patriarchal Parishes in Canada (and temporarily in the USA)
http://www.russianchurchusa.org/index.php3?ln=en

Next we have His Beatitude Metropolitan Jonah of the Orthodox Church in America
http://www.oca.org/

Then we have His Eminence, Metropolitan Hilarion of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia
http://www.russianorthodoxchurch.ws/synod/indexeng.htm

I think we all have bigger things to worry about than a political editorial in the US.

His Beatitude Metropolitan Jonah of the Orthodox Church in American is not in the jurisdiction of Moscow.  I know that those in the Phanar, who haven't noticed that the Ottoman Empire has fallen and so the EP is no longer the Sultan's consecrated Milet Bashi, doesn't see it that way, but then didn''t someone bring up the idea here (or the sister thread) that those of us not in the EP's jurisdiction shouldn't be paying attention to His Divein All Holiness?

His Grace, Iob of Kashira. I don't know how well you know geography, but Kashira is in Russia. Not far from Moscow in fact, with a population of 40,000. I mention that given the Phanar perchance for installing bishops of uninhabited sees to rule over those thousands of miles away from said abandoned sees.  HG is not here because of that: Kashira has churches, e.g.:
(http://www.flickr.com/photos/msirotin/3431317917/in/set-72157616640997100/)(http://www.flickr.com/photos/msirotin/3432170716/in/set-72157616640997100/)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/msirotin/sets/72157616640997100/
The terms of the OCA's Tomos of Autocephaly require that, for those by the terms of the Tomos of Autocephaly "are excluded from autocephaly on the territory of North America....shall be governed by the Most Holy Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia through one of his vicar bishops; not having a title of the local American Church, especially appointed for this, and until such time as these parishes express their official desire to join the Autocephalous Church in America in the manner described" by the terms of the Tomos.

HE Met.Hilarion's status is rather recent, and explicitely grandfathered by the terms of the Tomos (ROCOR was not part of the Metropolia, has not joined it, and the Tomos allows the PoM to receive uncanonical groups, which by terms of the Tomos at its signing, ROCOR was). "Being guided by the effort towards reestablishing blessed peace, Divinely-decreed love, and brotherly unity in the common work in the harvest-fields of God within the Fullness of the Russian Orthodox Church and her faithful in the Fatherland and abroad, taking into consideration the ecclesiastical life of the Russian diaspora outside the canonical borders of the Moscow Patriarchate, as dictated by history..[and]...Taking into account that the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia performs its service on the territories of many nations...conducting its salvific service in the dioceses, parishes, monasteries, brotherhoods, and other ecclesiastical bodies that were formed through history [as a] self-governing part of the Local Russian Orthodox Church....independent in pastoral, educational, administrative, management, property, and civil matters, existing at the same time in canonical unity with the Fullness of the Russian Orthodox Church."  Given the recent (and immediate: the OCA and ROCOR publically concelebrated as soon as the Act of Canonical Communion was signed) meetings and good will between Met. Jonah and Met. Hilarion (no speech from Met. Jonah upset Met. Hilarion, as obviouly his speaches have riled feathers in the Phanar), these issues of appearance will be dealt with, although there is no argument on substance, at least between the PoM, Met. Jonah, and Met. Hilarion.  Btw, the patriarchal parishes are required to commemorate Met. Jonah in additon to Pat. Kyril.  ROCOR parishes as of yet are not required to commemorate Pat. Kyril in addition to Met. Hilarion.

Your EP, however, has not only his Greek bishops, but others on an ethnic basis over the same territory in North America.  But then, that was the basis on which the EP codified the nonsense we are dealing with in its  1908 "Patriarchal and Synodal Tomos about the orthodox Greek Churches [sic] outside of the specified boundaries of the individual autocephalous churches’ regions dispersed both in Europe and America and the remaining countries.....I.)  For the spiritual oversight and direction of these Churches an Archpriest [i.e. a bishop] appointed by the Sacred Synod of the Church of Greece, having the duty of ministering inspection of each one of these churches from time to time.  II.)  The Archpriest appointed to this spiritual oversight and inspection of the said churches by the Sacred Synod of the Church of Greece, who can both be and receive from among the archpriests by us of the Most Holy Patriarchal Ecumenical Throne, each one given leave from it must appear in Constantinople both to receive the blessing assent of the Ecumenical Patriarch and further for the Holy Myron for these churches...."
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on March 06, 2010, 10:56:45 AM
we uncanonical   Russians
I didn't know you were Russian. I thought you were Irish. (Or Serbian, or a New Zealander or something else). Whatever you are, an ethnicity cannot be "uncanonical".
Grief!  Do we have to descend to this kindergarten level of the use of English!?  I am sure that everybody fully understood the point I was making.
I'm sure the EP was equally confident that everyone understood his point.
The petitions for clarification he received should have told him that his confidence was misplaced.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 06, 2010, 11:03:23 AM

 ROCOR parishes as of yet are not required to commemorate Pat. Kyril in addition to Met. Hilarion.


From discussions on rocorclergy, our clergy list on Yahoo, we have established that none of our priests are not commemorating Patriarch Kirill.   There may be one or two hold-outs but we would probably know of them if there were.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on March 06, 2010, 11:15:32 AM
His Beatitude Metropolitan Jonah of the Orthodox Church in American is not in the jurisdiction of Moscow.  I know that those in the Phanar, who haven't noticed that the Ottoman Empire has fallen and so the EP is no longer the Sultan's consecrated Milet Bashi,.........etc
I really don't see your point ialmisry. Why are you telling me all the drivel in this post (other than to join Irish Hermit in disdain for the Oecumenical Patriarchate)?
I have to ask before you responded:
1) Why did you not question your Irish Hermit's claim that ROCOR is now "canonical" due to its union with the Moscow Patrirchate?
2) If Irish Hemit's point is that Constantinople now considers ROCOR "canonical" because of its union with Moscow, where does that leave the  canonicity of the OCA if Constantinople does not commemorate their First Heirarch?
3) Did you read the plural pronoun in the last sentance of what you quoted from me?
4) Did you read my first point to Irish Hermit about the canonical problem of all the Churches in the US?
5) What difference does it make who the Bishop is of the Moscow Patriarchate in America? The pont is its neither Metropolitan Jonah (OCA) nor Archbishop Hilarion (ROCOR), so we still have the problem of three Bishops of the same cities,  yet only one Patriarch (of Moscow) is commemorated the the dyptich of Constantinople
My guess is that you didn't, because you were to eager to please Irish Hermit and bash the Oecumenical Patriarchate.
As I said to you earlier on the thread, perhaps you just have a better Patriarch than I do, so lets drop it huh?
And to quote your own very wise words to ytterbiaumanalist and PetertheAleut earlier in this thread, perhaps you and Irish Hermit should consider the option of:
Can you two get a room....
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 06, 2010, 11:43:08 AM

1) Why did you not question your Irish Hermit's claim that ROCOR is now "canonical"

Isn't it just a bit icky for you to speak of me to Isa as "your Irish Hermit."   Let's straighten up here, George.  Can you rip open a tinny with your front teeth?  They say that's the test of an aussie man.   :D
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: augustin717 on March 06, 2010, 12:35:15 PM
Quote
Your EP, however, has not only his Greek bishops, but others on an ethnic basis over the same territory in North America.]Your EP, however, has not only his Greek bishops, but others on an ethnic basis over the same territory in North America.
You accuse the Ecumenical Patriarchate of the exact same thing the OCA is doing: don't they have Albanian, Bulgarian and Romanian non-geographical dioceses?  Besides the "real American" ones, of course.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on March 06, 2010, 12:55:02 PM

 ROCOR parishes as of yet are not required to commemorate Pat. Kyril in addition to Met. Hilarion.


From discussions on rocorclergy, our clergy list on Yahoo, we have established that none of our priests are not commemorating Patriarch Kirill.   There may be one or two hold-outs but we would probably know of them if there were.

Thus confirming the wisdom of Pat. Alexei (of blessed memory)'s economy in not requiring it of the ROCOR clergy, and instead of high handed, in your face, imposition of his canonical rights (unlike some's broadcasting of their alleged rights  ::)), forebearance to let them come of their own volition.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on March 06, 2010, 01:08:41 PM
(http://img63.imageshack.us/img63/9104/vrg45t.jpg)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on March 06, 2010, 01:18:11 PM
Quote
Your EP, however, has not only his Greek bishops, but others on an ethnic basis over the same territory in North America.]Your EP, however, has not only his Greek bishops, but others on an ethnic basis over the same territory in North America.
You accuse the Ecumenical Patriarchate of the exact same thing the OCA is doing: don't they have Albanian, Bulgarian and Romanian non-geographical dioceses?  

No. Bishop Nikon is bishop of Boston and New England, Bishop Melchizedek has succeeded Bishop Kyrill as bishop of Pittsburgh and Western Pennsylvania (I was priviledged to be there for his consecration in his cathedral) while Met. Jonah is now serving as locum tenens for the Bulgarians, and Bishop Nathaniel is bishop of Detroit.  Above and beyond their sees, they do oversee Albanian, Bulgarian and Romanians elsewhere.  For one thing, they approve the liturgical texts for Albanian, Bulgarian and Romanian.

Quote
Besides the "real American" ones, of course.

I've only been to Romanian Churches.  Besides the Holy Dormition monastery, I don't recall a word of English.  But then, they don't speak English at the coffee hour either, except to say "Hello!  How are you?"

Btw, the set up the OCA has with its ethnics is akin to what canon 28 of Chalcedon is really talking about.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 06, 2010, 01:38:44 PM
So, what does this all have to do with abortion?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on March 06, 2010, 01:44:21 PM
So, what does this all have to do with abortion?
Nufin.
But it cant be helped, since we have a broken record by a has-been band (see above).
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 06, 2010, 01:46:14 PM
So, what does this all have to do with abortion?
Nufin.
But it cant be helped, since we have a broken record by a has-been band (see above).
Yes, I see. ::)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on March 06, 2010, 04:45:33 PM
So, what does this all have to do with abortion?
Nufin.
But it cant be helped, since we have a broken record by a has-been band (see above).
LOL....Phanar....EP....LOL....Constantinople....supra-jurisdiction.....has-been.....LOL......

Rich
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ialmisry on March 06, 2010, 05:12:59 PM
His Beatitude Metropolitan Jonah of the Orthodox Church in American is not in the jurisdiction of Moscow.  I know that those in the Phanar, who haven't noticed that the Ottoman Empire has fallen and so the EP is no longer the Sultan's consecrated Milet Bashi,.........etc
I really don't see your point ialmisry. Why are you telling me all the drivel in this post (other than to join Irish Hermit in disdain for the Oecumenical Patriarchate)?

The Phanar episcopal cartel has been broken.  He doesn't have the might of the Sultan to enforce his choice in diptychs in places where he once had jurisdiction, let alone places where Constantinople never had jurisdiction.

Quote
I have to ask before you responded:
1) Why did you not question your Irish Hermit's

MY Irish Hermit?  As the father raising two sons I am not free to act as Abbot and having any hermits, Irish or otherwise.

Quote
claim that ROCOR is now "canonical" due to its union with the Moscow Patrirchate?

He spoke the Truth. Why would I question it?

Quote
2) If Irish Hemit's point is that Constantinople now considers ROCOR "canonical" because of its union with Moscow, where does that leave the  canonicity of the OCA if Constantinople does not commemorate their First Heirarch?

In place: the Metropolia was not considered canonical until the Tomos of 1970 and the GOANSA, for instance, was not in communion with the Metropolia, now the OCA, until the Tomos.  The Metropolia had a few years earlier approached to come under the EP's omophorion (like the Ukrainians later did) but was rebuffed and told that they would have to settle things with their Mother Church.  Ironic, no?


Quote
3) Did you read the plural pronoun in the last sentance of what you quoted from me?
Yes.
Ὁ πρὸς τὴν πνευματικὴν ταύτην ἐποπτείαν καὶ ἐπίσκεψιν τῶν εἰρημένων ἐκκλησιῶν διοριζόμενος ὑπὸ τῆς Ἱερᾶς Συνόδου τῆς Ἐκκλησίας τῆς Ἑλλάδος Ἀχιερεύς, ὅστις δύναται εἶναι καὶ λαμβάνεσθαι καὶ ἐκ τῶν ἀρχιερέων τοῦ καθ᾽ ἡμᾶς Ἁγιωτάτου Πατριαρχικοῦ Οἰκουμενικοῦ Θρόνου, ἀπολυόμενος ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ
  ὀφείλει παραγίγνεσθαι ἑκάστοτε εἰς Κωνσταντινούπολιν καὶ λαμβάνειν τὴν ἑπευλογίαν τοῦ Οἰκουμενικοῦ Πατριάρχου πρὸς δὲ καὶ τὸ διὰ τὰς ἐκκλησίας ταύτας Ἅγιον Μῦρον.  
Your question?

Quote
4) Did you read my first point to Irish Hermit about the canonical problem of all the Churches in the US?

This one?
Constantinople is in communion with ROCOR...
Thats nice. But what has that got to do with ROCOR's or OCA's canonical status?
Yes.
Quote
5) What difference does it make who the Bishop is of the Moscow Patriarchate in America? The pont is its neither Metropolitan Jonah (OCA) nor Archbishop Hilarion (ROCOR), so we still have the problem of three Bishops of the same cities,

LOL.  That's been a long standing problem: how many canons had to be adopted by the Fathers to stop bishops from lagging about Constantinople, hanging on the "Resident Synod."  

LOL. How many bishops are sitting around navel gazing in the Phanar today?  When was the last time that, say, Met. Zizoulis was in Pergamon?  No pastoral duties, instead sitting about St. George's, dreaming up things like the Primus/protos or whatever they call that nonsense.

LOL.  Actually no, the three aren't in New York, and given that 1 of the three you mention is in a metochian, and another has stravropegal status, even if they were, hardly a problem of the local bishop.  Met. Jonah is in Washington, and their is no bishop at present in New York.  The Headquarters is in Syosett, the Cathedral in Brooklyn.  ROCOR's headquaters is in New York City, as is the metochion of the Patriarch of Moscow, from which the bishop of Kahira (not in New York) managed the patriarchal parishes.

Met. Hilarion isn't the head of an autocephalous Church, so he wouldn't be commemorated by the EP in any case: does the EP commemorate his Congolese Cypriot "Estonian?"


Quote
yet only one Patriarch (of Moscow) is commemorated the the dyptich of Constantinople

Which would made sense as their is only one Patriarch of Moscow.

Quote
My guess is that you didn't,

Guess again.

Quote
because you were to eager to please Irish Hermit and bash the Oecumenical Patriarchate.
::)
Quote
As I said to you earlier on the thread, perhaps you just have a better Patriarch than I do, so lets drop it huh?

And yet you picked it up here.

Quote
And to quote your own very wise words to ytterbiaumanalist and PetertheAleut earlier in this thread, perhaps you and Irish Hermit should consider the option of:
Can you two get a room....

A chapel?  I'd love to have the honor of saying a Paraklesis/Molieben or Akathist with Fr. Ambrose, and a many years to Met. Hilarion and Patriarch Kyril.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 06, 2010, 08:35:16 PM

see 2004 stats. The abortion rate is increasing (before the data stopped being given of course).

For a peer reviewed study on the matter:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15938171


blame is placed on the laxity of the OC on the matter in several articles I read.

Rafa, I followed your link and found this.  Totally astounding, in a country which is 97% Orthodox.

http://tinyurl.com/yfbsvtg


"The triviality of abortion in Greece"

"In Greece ...abortion is the primary form of birth control.

"Abortion is used as the primary method of birth control regardless of a woman's socioeconomic status.

"Abortion is not a moral issue in Greece."

The last statement is the most astounding of all and it upholds your comment that the Church is lax (how about utterly failing?) in this area of moral education. Either it is failing or, God forbid, it shares the Patriarch's reported teaching that abortion is a personal choice.  Is there any information available on this?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Rafa999 on March 06, 2010, 08:45:15 PM
That's what disturbed me Father Ambrose. The highest rate in Europe and 97% orthodox!! Clearly a firmer stand needs to be taken. I will research further. Nobody can say "well it was communists" since Greeks were never communists too.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Michał on March 06, 2010, 10:20:37 PM
Nobody can say "well it was communists" since Greeks were never communists too.

Actually, the Communist Party of Greece is the oldest party on the Greek political scene. There are several other communist parites there. The fact that they never gained full power does not mean that they had no influence on society. "Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump?"

And it cannot be said that the GOC does nothing to improve the situation: http://www.unborn.gr
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: bogdan on March 06, 2010, 11:25:59 PM
"In Greece ...abortion is the primary form of birth control.

Lord have mercy.  :'(
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: SolEX01 on March 07, 2010, 12:54:11 AM
The last statement is the most astounding of all and it upholds your comment that the Church is lax (how about utterly failing?) in this area of moral education. Either it is failing or, God forbid, it shares the Patriarch's reported teaching that abortion is a personal choice.  Is there any information available on this?

So are other personal choices prevalent in Greece like: drinking, aggressive driving, staying at the nightclub until sunrise, falling asleep on the job, killing police officers during protests, et al.  Should His All Holiness speak out against these personal choices.

The people of Greece felt that they didn't have freedom until 1975 when they rejected the monarchy.  A now assistant professor of sociology in Athens (http://www.genderpanteion.gr/en/other_pdf/brief_cv_halkias.pdf) wrote a book on the topic of Greek women and abortions during the 1990's:

The Empty Cradle of Democracy: Sex, Abortion, and Nationalism in Modern Greece (http://www.dukeupress.edu/books.php3?isbn=8223-3323-6)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 07, 2010, 01:11:39 AM
The last statement is the most astounding of all and it upholds your comment that the Church is lax (how about utterly failing?) in this area of moral education. Either it is failing or, God forbid, it shares the Patriarch's reported teaching that abortion is a personal choice.  Is there any information available on this?

So are other personal choices prevalent in Greece like: drinking, aggressive driving, staying at the nightclub until sunrise, falling asleep on the job, killing police officers during protests, et al.  Should His All Holiness speak out against these personal choices.

It's sad and frustrating to see fellow Orthodox treating abortion like a minor issue, even a non-issue.  I have been profoundly shocked to see something remotely defensive about abortion coming from Christian mouths.  Maybe I have grown too old and there is a new Orthodoxy being born?

And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Gebre Menfes Kidus on March 07, 2010, 01:20:39 AM

It's sad and frustrating to see fellow Orthodox treating abortion like a minor issue, even a non-issue.  I have been profoundly shocked to see something remotely defensive about abortion coming from Christian mouths.  Maybe I have grown too old and there is a new Orthodoxy being born?

And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?



I feel the same way. But stand firm, and continue to shine the Light of Christ in the midst of this darkness. You are not alone.


Selam
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: SolEX01 on March 07, 2010, 01:30:28 AM
The last statement is the most astounding of all and it upholds your comment that the Church is lax (how about utterly failing?) in this area of moral education. Either it is failing or, God forbid, it shares the Patriarch's reported teaching that abortion is a personal choice.  Is there any information available on this?

So are other personal choices prevalent in Greece like: drinking, aggressive driving, staying at the nightclub until sunrise, falling asleep on the job, killing police officers during protests, et al.  Should His All Holiness speak out against these personal choices.

It's sad and frustrating to see fellow Orthodox treating abortion like a minor issue, even a non-issue. 

From a country where a Bishop, then under the Ecumenical Patriarch for there was no Church of Greece, raised the Liberty or Death flag against the Ottoman Turks.  Guess what, whoever the EP was in 1821 kept silent about the Greek Independence Movement which was, apparently, another personal choice.

I'm against abortion; however, I remember my own prurient sins before I judge someone who has had an abortion, or drank too much, or drives aggressively, well, you get the picture.   8)

I cannot condemn a woman for going to an abortion clinic any more than I condemn myself for my multitude of sins; I have been taught to pray and that's it.  The topic is personal for me; however, just as the Orthodox Church dealt with many controversial topics; She will deal with this one.

I have been profoundly shocked to see something remotely defensive about abortion coming from Christian mouths.  Maybe I have grown too old and there is a new Orthodoxy being born?

Father, there is no new Orthodoxy being born.   

And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?

Lord have Mercy on all of us.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: SolEX01 on March 07, 2010, 01:32:10 AM

It's sad and frustrating to see fellow Orthodox treating abortion like a minor issue, even a non-issue.  I have been profoundly shocked to see something remotely defensive about abortion coming from Christian mouths.  Maybe I have grown too old and there is a new Orthodoxy being born?

And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?



I feel the same way. But stand firm, and continue to shine the Light of Christ in the midst of this darkness. You are not alone.

Amen.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Rafa999 on March 07, 2010, 01:37:39 AM
SolEX just paraphrased the EP's words: he cannot "condemn" abortion and he just leaves it for the person to decide based on their "situation". This is an unacceptable unorthodox position. At least the Coptic patriarch is more honest: he says that in the case of something like incest, abortion is still a sin but it should be left to God to judge the sinner. He does not absolve abortion like the EP.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: SolEX01 on March 07, 2010, 01:55:51 AM
SolEX just paraphrased the EP's words: he cannot "condemn" abortion and he just leaves it for the person to decide based on their "situation". This is an unacceptable unorthodox position.

Do you think you are being judgmental when you use the terms "unacceptable unorthodox position?"  Who are you to say that?

At least the Coptic patriarch is more honest: he says that in the case of something like incest, abortion is still a sin but it should be left to God to judge the sinner. He does not absolve abortion like the EP.

Where did you find the words "absolution" in what the EP said and what I allegedly paraphrased?  Seems to me you missed the point.  If a Nestorian woman has an abortion, what would your Church do about it before and after the fact?  Would they excommunicate her?  Would they beat her?  You tell me?   ???

Should the same apply for any woman who has an abortion under the EP's Omophorion?  Are you supportive of the use of religious police like in Iran?  Did Jesus Christ beat anyone who sinned?  What did He say on the cross as He drew his final breath?

Edited for Content
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Rafa999 on March 07, 2010, 02:24:10 AM
Quote
If a "Nestorian" woman has an abortion

Impossible!


Such a sin would necessitate the "Takhsa d'Khusaya" (order of pardon).

Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 07, 2010, 05:35:31 AM
SolEX just paraphrased the EP's words: he cannot "condemn" abortion and he just leaves it for the person to decide based on their "situation".
And I questioned Irish Hermit's interpretation of the words of His All Holiness. ::)  Yours exercises even greater license with what's been presented to us on this thread.  So what's your agenda?  Take every opportunity you can to bash us big, bad "Byzantines"?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Irish Hermit on March 07, 2010, 06:00:27 AM

And I questioned Irish Hermit's interpretation of the words of His All Holiness.

Dear Peter,  here are interpretations of other people.

1.  "Orthodox Patriarchs 'Wink' at Abortion"
      Rev  Dr Edward Pehanich, priest under the Ecumenical Throne
      Founder of Orthodox Christians for Life
      http://web.archive.org/web/20040407123705/http://www.oclife.org/vnine.pdf


2.   "A Not So Pro-life Patriarch . . ."
      http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2009/10/27/a-not-so-pro-life-patriarch/


3.   "A patriarch who ‘generally speaking, respects human life’ "
      John Couretas, American Orthodox Institute
      http://tinyurl.com/ygusmzg


4.   "Constantinople’s Moral Oversight"
      Andrew F. Estocin on Orthodoxy in the Public Square
      http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=12-02-014-v




Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Punch on March 07, 2010, 09:52:47 AM

It's sad and frustrating to see fellow Orthodox treating abortion like a minor issue, even a non-issue.  I have been profoundly shocked to see something remotely defensive about abortion coming from Christian mouths.  Maybe I have grown too old and there is a new Orthodoxy being born?

And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?




I feel the same way. But stand firm, and continue to shine the Light of Christ in the midst of this darkness. You are not alone.


Selam


Before the Lord returns, there must be the Great Apostasy.  The Protestants and Latins cannot apostatize because they are not the Church.  Only the Church can fall into apostasy, and I believe that we can see that all around us.  Christ Himself asked the question "When I return, will I find Faith?"  The answer is Yes, because the gates of Hell will not triumph over the Body of Christ.  However, we will be much like the Prophet who, in despair asked God if he was the only one left in Jerusalem who still believed.  Then God gave him the words of comfort (and admonition) that there were several thousand who had not bowed to Baal.  We need to keep this story from the Old Testament in our hearts and minds as the Churches around us turn to Antichrist.  We should be comforted that there will be thousands who will not fall into apostasy and worship the spirit of the Antichrist.  We should also be admonished not to judge, because like the great prophet, we will not always know who they are.

Peace my Brothers
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Michał on March 07, 2010, 01:09:28 PM
Well said, Punch.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: SolEX01 on March 07, 2010, 02:10:59 PM
Quote
If a "Nestorian" woman has an abortion

Impossible!

Quite confident and boastful, aren't we.   ::)  Does that mean there are no abortion clinics where Nestorian women live or do Nestorian women not engage in "personal choices" that Greek and other western Orthodox Christian women engage in?   ???

Such a sin would necessitate the "Takhsa d'Khusaya" (order of pardon).

Kindly tell us what the order of pardon means and who enforces it?  Does it involve stoning, whipping and/or other kinds of physical punishment?   ???  We live in the 21st Century, not the 4th Century.   ::)
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Gebre Menfes Kidus on March 07, 2010, 04:03:34 PM

It's sad and frustrating to see fellow Orthodox treating abortion like a minor issue, even a non-issue.  I have been profoundly shocked to see something remotely defensive about abortion coming from Christian mouths.  Maybe I have grown too old and there is a new Orthodoxy being born?

And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?




I feel the same way. But stand firm, and continue to shine the Light of Christ in the midst of this darkness. You are not alone.


Selam


Before the Lord returns, there must be the Great Apostasy.  The Protestants and Latins cannot apostatize because they are not the Church.  Only the Church can fall into apostasy, and I believe that we can see that all around us.  Christ Himself asked the question "When I return, will I find Faith?"  The answer is Yes, because the gates of Hell will not triumph over the Body of Christ.  However, we will be much like the Prophet who, in despair asked God if he was the only one left in Jerusalem who still believed.  Then God gave him the words of comfort (and admonition) that there were several thousand who had not bowed to Baal.  We need to keep this story from the Old Testament in our hearts and minds as the Churches around us turn to Antichrist.  We should be comforted that there will be thousands who will not fall into apostasy and worship the spirit of the Antichrist.  We should also be admonished not to judge, because like the great prophet, we will not always know who they are.

Peace my Brothers


Thanks for the good word my friend. Indeed we must be careful not to pull the wheat up with the tares. Christ will separate the Sheep from the goats in due time.

But I do think that we must judge sin and call it what it is. There is a difference between judging sin and judging the sinner. I cannot judge the sinner, for I am not God. I also have the beam of sin in my own eye. But, as Orthodox Christians, we are to be the light of the world and the salt of the earth. This involves calling good, "good" and evil "evil." By condemning sin, we are not setting ourselves up as God or being self righteous; instead, we are bearing witness to the Truth of Christ. By condemning sin, we are also being compassionate; for it is unmerciful not to warn our fellow man of the temporal and eternal consequences of violating God's commands.

The two main points to remember about judgment are: 1) That our judgement must be without hypocrisy; and 2)That we judge righteously.

So we should judge the act, but not the heart or the person who commits the act. Abortion is murder, and those who facilitate such an act are murderers. But to say so is not to judge the person. If I were to seek to punish the abortionist or the people who have abortions, then I would be guilty of judging them. But to clearly and plainly define such an act for what it is is no more judgmental than stating that the color blue is blue.


Selam
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on March 07, 2010, 04:20:00 PM
So as long as the EP keeps spewing us out in his mouthfull, he can expect an earful from us.
I see. Firstly, what "mouthful" is this he is spewing, and secondly, do you think he reads this thread? How about you grow some kahunas and actually write your deranged views in a letter to him instead of making complete fools of yourselves on an anonymous discussion forum?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: SolEX01 on March 07, 2010, 05:03:32 PM
Thanks for the good word my friend. Indeed we must be careful not to pull the wheat up with the tares. Christ will separate the Sheep from the goats in due time.

But I do think that we must judge sin and call it what it is.

What you call sin is another person's "personal choice."  The sinful woman made a personal choice to commit adultery, which carried the death penalty; however, she was not executed when Jesus intervened.

There is a difference between judging sin and judging the sinner. I cannot judge the sinner, for I am not God. I also have the beam of sin in my own eye. But, as Orthodox Christians, we are to be the light of the world and the salt of the earth. This involves calling good, "good" and evil "evil."

Those require judgments.   :)

By condemning sin, we are not setting ourselves up as God or being self righteous; instead, we are bearing witness to the Truth of Christ. By condemning sin, we are also being compassionate; for it is unmerciful not to warn our fellow man of the temporal and eternal consequences of violating God's commands.

Only if you are prepared to suffer the consequences for interfering in a person's "personal choices."  Many of us are unwilling to do that.  Dr. King spent many a night in jail for protesting injustice and look at what happened to him at the end.  Are we prepared to pay that price?  As Orthodox Christians, we are called to be prepared to pay that price and yet, very few of us put our money where our mouth is so to speak.

The two main points to remember about judgment are: 1) That our judgement must be without hypocrisy; and 2)That we judge righteously.

So we should judge the act, but not the heart or the person who commits the act. Abortion is murder, and those who facilitate such an act are murderers. But to say so is not to judge the person. If I were to seek to punish the abortionist or the people who have abortions, then I would be guilty of judging them. But to clearly and plainly define such an act for what it is is no more judgmental than stating that the color blue is blue.

I say abortion is a sin which is the truth taught by the Orthodox Church and the Holy Fathers.  Am I prepared to lay down my life to be locked up or killed for opposing abortion ... no.  Does that make me any less of an Orthodox Christian ... if I understand your POV on this forum, yes.  Do I care what you think ... NO.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 07, 2010, 05:13:25 PM
So we should judge the act, but not the heart or the person who commits the act. Abortion is murder, and those who facilitate such an act are murderers. But to say so is not to judge the person. If I were to seek to punish the abortionist or the people who have abortions, then I would be guilty of judging them. But to clearly and plainly define such an act for what it is is no more judgmental than stating that the color blue is blue.
How is it that calling someone a murderer, as you did, is not judging a person?  Seems like a twisted definition of judgment to me.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: bogdan on March 07, 2010, 05:16:43 PM
So we should judge the act, but not the heart or the person who commits the act. Abortion is murder, and those who facilitate such an act are murderers. But to say so is not to judge the person. If I were to seek to punish the abortionist or the people who have abortions, then I would be guilty of judging them. But to clearly and plainly define such an act for what it is is no more judgmental than stating that the color blue is blue.
How is it that calling someone a murderer, as you did, is not judging a person?  Seems like a twisted definition of judgment to me.

Murder is killing a human person. A murderer is someone who commits the act of murder.

Calling a facilitator of abortion a murderer can only be considered judgmental to someone who does not believe that abortion is murder. For someone who does (and that is the Church's position), it's simply a fact.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 07, 2010, 05:17:11 PM

And I questioned Irish Hermit's interpretation of the words of His All Holiness.

Dear Peter,  here are interpretations of other people.

1.  "Orthodox Patriarchs 'Wink' at Abortion"
      Rev  Dr Edward Pehanich, priest under the Ecumenical Throne
      Founder of Orthodox Christians for Life
      http://web.archive.org/web/20040407123705/http://www.oclife.org/vnine.pdf


2.   "A Not So Pro-life Patriarch . . ."
      http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2009/10/27/a-not-so-pro-life-patriarch/


3.   "A patriarch who ‘generally speaking, respects human life’ "
      John Couretas, American Orthodox Institute
      http://tinyurl.com/ygusmzg


4.   "Constantinople’s Moral Oversight"
      Andrew F. Estocin on Orthodoxy in the Public Square
      http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=12-02-014-v
Why do you accept their interpretations uncritically?  Certainly, you must interpret His All Holiness's words the same way as these authors you cite, or else you would not deem them authoritative.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Iconodule on March 07, 2010, 05:19:49 PM
So we should judge the act, but not the heart or the person who commits the act. Abortion is murder, and those who facilitate such an act are murderers. But to say so is not to judge the person. If I were to seek to punish the abortionist or the people who have abortions, then I would be guilty of judging them. But to clearly and plainly define such an act for what it is is no more judgmental than stating that the color blue is blue.
How is it that calling someone a murderer, as you did, is not judging a person?  Seems like a twisted definition of judgment to me.

Why don't you consider abortion to be murder?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 07, 2010, 05:24:51 PM
So we should judge the act, but not the heart or the person who commits the act. Abortion is murder, and those who facilitate such an act are murderers. But to say so is not to judge the person. If I were to seek to punish the abortionist or the people who have abortions, then I would be guilty of judging them. But to clearly and plainly define such an act for what it is is no more judgmental than stating that the color blue is blue.
How is it that calling someone a murderer, as you did, is not judging a person?  Seems like a twisted definition of judgment to me.

Murder is killing a human person. A murderer is someone who commits the act of murder.

Calling a facilitator of abortion a murderer can only be considered judgmental to someone who does not believe that abortion is murder.
Why such conclusive language?  How do you know this with such absolute certainty?

For someone who does (and that is the Church's position), it's simply a fact.
To call a person a murderer IS a judgment of that person.  I don't care how you dress it up.  The fact that I call abortion murder does not lead me to judge those who perform abortions as murderers.  What do we hope to accomplish by calling someone a murderer, anyway?  Do we hope with the label to provoke others to think even worse of the person who in some way facilitated the abortion?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 07, 2010, 05:25:46 PM
So we should judge the act, but not the heart or the person who commits the act. Abortion is murder, and those who facilitate such an act are murderers. But to say so is not to judge the person. If I were to seek to punish the abortionist or the people who have abortions, then I would be guilty of judging them. But to clearly and plainly define such an act for what it is is no more judgmental than stating that the color blue is blue.
How is it that calling someone a murderer, as you did, is not judging a person?  Seems like a twisted definition of judgment to me.

Why don't you consider abortion to be murder?
Why do you think I don't consider abortion to be murder?  I said no such thing.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: bogdan on March 07, 2010, 05:26:46 PM
Thanks for the good word my friend. Indeed we must be careful not to pull the wheat up with the tares. Christ will separate the Sheep from the goats in due time.

But I do think that we must judge sin and call it what it is.

What you call sin is another person's "personal choice."  The sinful woman made a personal choice to commit adultery, which carried the death penalty; however, she was not executed when Jesus intervened.

Jesus never said she was not an adulterer. He never said adultery was an acceptable choice.

He forgave her when she repented. And He will forgive those involved in the present infanticide if they repent as well. But you cannot construe that story to say that abortion is simply a personal choice. There is no such thing as a personal choice in Orthodox Christianity. Absolutely every choice—both good or sinful—affects every other person.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Iconodule on March 07, 2010, 05:28:37 PM
So we should judge the act, but not the heart or the person who commits the act. Abortion is murder, and those who facilitate such an act are murderers. But to say so is not to judge the person. If I were to seek to punish the abortionist or the people who have abortions, then I would be guilty of judging them. But to clearly and plainly define such an act for what it is is no more judgmental than stating that the color blue is blue.
How is it that calling someone a murderer, as you did, is not judging a person?  Seems like a twisted definition of judgment to me.

Why don't you consider abortion to be murder?
Why do you think I don't consider abortion to be murder?  I said no such thing.

So what's your definition of "murderer"?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 07, 2010, 05:31:27 PM
So we should judge the act, but not the heart or the person who commits the act. Abortion is murder, and those who facilitate such an act are murderers. But to say so is not to judge the person. If I were to seek to punish the abortionist or the people who have abortions, then I would be guilty of judging them. But to clearly and plainly define such an act for what it is is no more judgmental than stating that the color blue is blue.
How is it that calling someone a murderer, as you did, is not judging a person?  Seems like a twisted definition of judgment to me.

Why don't you consider abortion to be murder?
Why do you think I don't consider abortion to be murder?  I said no such thing.

So what's your definition of "murderer"?
Why does it matter?  I call abortion murder.  But I refuse to judge those who perform abortions.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Iconodule on March 07, 2010, 05:32:30 PM
So we should judge the act, but not the heart or the person who commits the act. Abortion is murder, and those who facilitate such an act are murderers. But to say so is not to judge the person. If I were to seek to punish the abortionist or the people who have abortions, then I would be guilty of judging them. But to clearly and plainly define such an act for what it is is no more judgmental than stating that the color blue is blue.
How is it that calling someone a murderer, as you did, is not judging a person?  Seems like a twisted definition of judgment to me.

Why don't you consider abortion to be murder?
Why do you think I don't consider abortion to be murder?  I said no such thing.

So what's your definition of "murderer"?
Why does it matter?  I call abortion murder.  But I refuse to judge those who perform abortions.

If abortion is murder, then those who perform abortions are performing murders. How is that not a judgment?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 07, 2010, 05:38:48 PM
So we should judge the act, but not the heart or the person who commits the act. Abortion is murder, and those who facilitate such an act are murderers. But to say so is not to judge the person. If I were to seek to punish the abortionist or the people who have abortions, then I would be guilty of judging them. But to clearly and plainly define such an act for what it is is no more judgmental than stating that the color blue is blue.
How is it that calling someone a murderer, as you did, is not judging a person?  Seems like a twisted definition of judgment to me.

Why don't you consider abortion to be murder?
Why do you think I don't consider abortion to be murder?  I said no such thing.

So what's your definition of "murderer"?
Why does it matter?  I call abortion murder.  But I refuse to judge those who perform abortions.

If abortion is murder, then those who perform abortions are performing murders.
With that logic I don't disagree at all, since it's focused on the act and not on the actor.  To go the next step, though, and call someone a murderer based on this logic is to attach a label to that person that will affect how you and others view that person from this time forth.  I would rather counter the person's murderous acts by calling him to see what he's doing and repent.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: bogdan on March 07, 2010, 05:39:22 PM
Why such conclusive language?  How do you know this with such absolute certainty?

Are you serious?

Because an infant, from the moment the soul enters the body at conception, is a distinct and unique human being. To intentionally cause a human being's life to end prematurely is murder. How can it be any less conclusive?

What else can it be called? Do you have any alternative names for the concept of returning a human soul to God prematurely?

What do we hope to accomplish by calling someone a murderer, anyway?  Do we hope with the label to call attention to the person's acts and therefore provoke others to think even worse of the person who in some way facilitated the abortion?

Since when is it labeling to apply an accurate noun ("murder") to a concept ("cutting a live infant to pieces")?

Clearly, in our present callous culture, people have no awe or respect for human life. Maybe if we start calling things what they are instead of playing around with euphemisms, people will actually take a moment to think about what's happening around us every day. If all it takes to get people riled up is using words they don't like, I'm all for it.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: bogdan on March 07, 2010, 05:44:16 PM
So we should judge the act, but not the heart or the person who commits the act. Abortion is murder, and those who facilitate such an act are murderers. But to say so is not to judge the person. If I were to seek to punish the abortionist or the people who have abortions, then I would be guilty of judging them. But to clearly and plainly define such an act for what it is is no more judgmental than stating that the color blue is blue.
How is it that calling someone a murderer, as you did, is not judging a person?  Seems like a twisted definition of judgment to me.

Why don't you consider abortion to be murder?
Why do you think I don't consider abortion to be murder?  I said no such thing.

So what's your definition of "murderer"?
Why does it matter?  I call abortion murder.  But I refuse to judge those who perform abortions.

If abortion is murder, then those who perform abortions are performing murders.
With that logic I don't disagree at all, since it's focused on the act and not on the actor.  To go the next step, though, and call someone a murderer based on this logic is to attach a label to that person that will affect how you and others view that person from this time forth.  I would rather counter the person's murderous acts by calling him to see what he's doing and repent.

I don't see anything judgmental about calling people by the thing they do. St Paul does it, saying that fornicators, idolators, adulterers, etc will not inherit the kingdom. It's just stating facts, I don't understand why people are so upset by it.

I am a glutton, among other things. I know it, and I have to repent every day for it. If someone called me a glutton I would try to apply it as a needed chastisement. If people are repentant, they will accept the labels that are thrown at them as good for their salvation, I think.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 07, 2010, 05:49:34 PM
Why such conclusive language?  How do you know this with such absolute certainty?

Are you serious?

Because an infant, from the moment the soul enters the body at conception, is a distinct and unique human being. To intentionally cause a human being's life to end prematurely is murder. How can it be any less conclusive?

What else can it be called? Do you have any alternative names for the concept of returning a human soul to God prematurely?
I have no issue with calling abortion murder.  Read my reply again and see what I actually quoted and replied to.
Calling a facilitator of abortion a murderer can only be considered judgmental to someone who does not believe that abortion is murder.
How can you say with such absolute certainty that there's only one possible way to interpret someone's refusal to call a facilitator of abortion a murderer?

What do we hope to accomplish by calling someone a murderer, anyway?  Do we hope with the label to call attention to the person's acts and therefore provoke others to think even worse of the person who in some way facilitated the abortion?

Since when is it labeling to apply an accurate noun ("murder") to a concept ("cutting a live infant to pieces")?

Clearly, in our present callous culture, people have no awe or respect for human life. Maybe if we start calling things what they are instead of playing around with euphemisms, people will actually take a moment to think about what's happening around us every day. If all it takes to get people riled up is using words they don't like, I'm all for it.
Again, you're implying that my refusal to call an abortion facilitator a murderer means automatically that I don't see abortion as murder.  You're not listening to a thing I'm saying.  Rather, you interpret my words solely through the prism of your own presuppositions.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: PeterTheAleut on March 07, 2010, 05:51:28 PM
So we should judge the act, but not the heart or the person who commits the act. Abortion is murder, and those who facilitate such an act are murderers. But to say so is not to judge the person. If I were to seek to punish the abortionist or the people who have abortions, then I would be guilty of judging them. But to clearly and plainly define such an act for what it is is no more judgmental than stating that the color blue is blue.
How is it that calling someone a murderer, as you did, is not judging a person?  Seems like a twisted definition of judgment to me.

Why don't you consider abortion to be murder?
Why do you think I don't consider abortion to be murder?  I said no such thing.

So what's your definition of "murderer"?
Why does it matter?  I call abortion murder.  But I refuse to judge those who perform abortions.

If abortion is murder, then those who perform abortions are performing murders.
With that logic I don't disagree at all, since it's focused on the act and not on the actor.  To go the next step, though, and call someone a murderer based on this logic is to attach a label to that person that will affect how you and others view that person from this time forth.  I would rather counter the person's murderous acts by calling him to see what he's doing and repent.

I don't see anything judgmental about calling people by the thing they do. St Paul does it, saying that fornicators, idolators, adulterers, etc will not inherit the kingdom. It's just stating facts, I don't understand why people are so upset by it.
Are you comparing yourself to St. Paul?

I am a glutton, among other things. I know it, and I have to repent every day for it. If someone called me a glutton I would try to apply it as a needed chastisement. If people are repentant, they will accept the labels that are thrown at them as good for their salvation, I think.
Judge yourself if you want.  I don't have a problem with it.
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: ozgeorge on March 07, 2010, 05:53:55 PM
If people are repentant, they will accept the labels that are thrown at them as good for their salvation, I think.
Perhaps, but I don't think labeling people is a good way of calling them to repentance. If someone doesn't think abortion is murder, calling them a murderer doesn't actually teach them anything. Reminding them that all Life comes from God and that anyone who messes with that is messing with God might call them to repentance- but calling them a "murderer" simply makes a statement they don't accept and which therefore will in no way prevent them from procuring an abortion. Has calling yourself a "glutton" stopped you from being one?
Title: Re: Orthodoxy and Abortion
Post by: Gebre Menfes Kidus on March 07, 2010, 06:23:19 PM
My replies follow here in red:

Thanks for the good word my friend. Indeed we must be careful not to pull the wheat up with the tares. Christ will separate the Sheep from the goats in due time.

But I do think that we must judge sin and call it what it is.

What you call sin is another person's "personal choice."  The sinful woman made a personal choice to commit adultery, which carried the death penalty; however, she was not executed when Jesus intervened.

And I oppose the death penalty. So what's your point?

There is a difference between judging sin and judging the sinner. I cannot judge the sinner, for I am not God. I also have the beam of sin in my own eye. But, as Orthodox Christians, we are to be the light of the world and the salt of the earth. This involves calling good, "good" and evil "evil."

Those require judgments.   :)

Yes, that's what I'm saying. And I clearly defined what judgments are acceptable and what are not.

By condemning sin, we are not setting ourselves up as God or being self righteous; instead, we are bearing witness to the Truth of Christ. By condemning sin, we are also being compassionate; for it is unmerciful not to warn our fellow man of the temporal and eternal consequences of violating God's commands.

Only if you are prepared to suffer the consequences for interfering in a person's "personal choices."  Many of us are unwilling to do that.  Dr. King spent many a night in jail for protesting injustice and look at what happened to him at the end.  Are we prepared to pay that price?  As Orthodox Christians, we are called to be prepared to pay that price and yet, very few of us put our money where our mouth is so to speak.

The Saints and martyrs have always been the few, not the many. If we are to be like Christ, then we will inevitably have to interfere with other people's sinful choices in some way. Admonishing, rebuking, correcting, and reproving the wicked; and rescuing the innocent from the hands of the wicked. But sadly, most of us want to stay out of other people's "personal choices" unless those personal choices interfere with us. Then, of course, we decry the injustice!

The two main points to remember about judgment are: 1) That our judgement must be without hypocrisy; and 2)That we judge righteously.

So we should judge the act, but not the heart or the person who commits the act. Abortion is murder, and those who facilitate such an act are murderers. But to say so is not to judge the person. If I were to seek to punish the abortionist or the people who have abortions, then I would be guilty of judging them. But to clearly and plainly define such an act for what it is is no more judgmental than stating that the color blue is blue.

I say abortion is a sin which is the truth taught by the Orthodox Church and the Holy Fathers.  Am I prepared to lay down my life to be locked up or killed for opposing abortion ... no.  Does that make me any less of an Orthodox Christian ... if I understand your POV on this forum, yes.  Do I care what you think ... NO.

"Greater love has no man than this, that he lay down his life for his friend." [St. John 15:13]

"Whatsoever you have done unto the least of these, you have done it unto Me." [St. Matthew 25:40]


Sela