OrthodoxChristianity.net

Moderated Forums => Free-For-All => Religious Topics => Topic started by: Robb on February 04, 2013, 11:49:25 PM

Title: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Robb on February 04, 2013, 11:49:25 PM
In the last few months I've started viewing the videos of Brother Nathaniel Kapner.I realize that he is a controversial figure, and that he also claims to be an Orthodox brother ( ROCOT I heard).  Is this true?  Does ROCOR actually sanction such afigure  controversial as him.in their monastic ranks?  Or is he more an independent monk?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Tikhon.of.Colorado on February 05, 2013, 12:06:23 AM
I think he's rather nutty, especially in his theories of antisemitism.  I would think a real monk would focus more on inner prayer and salvation, rather than current affairs and the roles of Jews in them.

I read that he's part of a schismatic sect (some sort of Russian Old Calenderist group) but unfortunately I can't site my sources.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: pmpn8rGPT on February 05, 2013, 12:12:35 AM
I think he's rather nutty, especially in his theories of antisemitism.  I would think a real monk would focus more on inner prayer and salvation, rather than current affairs and the roles of Jews in them.
While I'm not disagreeing with you, I think he does make good points in regards to the fact that Zionist Jews are on control of the media and ultimately the government.

I know many Jews who are nice people, but unfortunately so many more are too powerful and only desire more power...
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Tikhon.of.Colorado on February 05, 2013, 12:14:54 AM
I think he's rather nutty, especially in his theories of antisemitism.  I would think a real monk would focus more on inner prayer and salvation, rather than current affairs and the roles of Jews in them.
While I'm not disagreeing with you, I think he does make good points in regards to the fact that Zionist Jews are on control of the media and ultimately the government.

I know many Jews who are nice people, but unfortunately so many more are too powerful and only desire more power...
Perhaps I'm not looking at issues with a fine-toothed comb like some, but I see many people who are too powerful in our society.  The fact that some of them are Jewish just seems to be a coincidence.  I don't put much thought into the ethnicity or religious beliefs of the people in power. 
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Robb on February 05, 2013, 12:15:35 AM
He's actually very ecumenical and wants to form coalitions with other Christian churches to fight zionism.  Wasn't he on this forum some time ago?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Asteriktos on February 05, 2013, 12:21:52 AM
You know what else the Jews are good at? Winning Nobel prizes in science! We must stop this radical attempt by them to improve our lives though science! We shouldn't stand for it! Do you know that Jews make up about 25% of Nobel prize winners in the sciences? This can't be a coincidence. They control science!

 ;D :P
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Tikhon.of.Colorado on February 05, 2013, 12:23:18 AM
You know what else the Jews are good at? Winning Nobel prizes in science! We must stop this radical attempt by them to improve our lives though science! We shouldn't stand for it! Do you know that Jews make up about 25% of Nobel prize winners in the sciences? This can't be a coincidence. They control science!

 ;D :P
Thank you  :laugh:
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Ioannis Climacus on February 05, 2013, 12:28:07 AM
In the last few months I've started viewing the videos of Brother Nathaniel Kapner.I realize that he is a controversial figure, and that he also claims to be an Orthodox brother ( ROCOT I heard).  Is this true?  Does ROCOR actually sanction such afigure  controversial as him.in their monastic ranks?  Or is he more an independent monk?
He is in ROCOR (or at least was when I met him in Summer 2012), though I doubt his activities are approved of in any official capacity (which is a good thing).

I think he is a hermit, but I could wrong. Last time I spoke with him, he was meeting with Elder Ephraim with the hopes of establishing a monastery in his state of residence (under GOARCH).
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Shanghaiski on February 05, 2013, 12:36:06 AM
Yes, many weirdos are Orthodox Christians. Some pretend to be monks, others actually are. Many live on the Internet. Some live on the moon.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Peacemaker on February 05, 2013, 02:02:40 AM
He is not Orthodox and not a member of ROCOR. In the Orthodox world only novices are called brother, an Abbot would never let a novice be a hermit or let them wear a cross like the one he wears on his neck, or stand in traffic in an all white cassock waving around a cross like a mad man. Sometimes he wears a white monastic hat (which is ONLY for metropolitans). His website is trying to get people to give money to his "foundation". It would seem he is just trying to attract Orthodox and con them. He isn't Orthodox and he didn't live on Mt Athos like he claims. He would get kicked out of a monastery.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: psalm110 on February 05, 2013, 04:07:45 AM
Is there an official statement by the church about him, whether he should be listened to ?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: mike on February 05, 2013, 04:21:51 AM
Is there an official statement by the church about him, whether he should be listened to ?

Why should it be? Should the Church issue an official statement whether I should be listened to (or you, for example)?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Asteriktos on February 05, 2013, 04:42:32 AM
Hasn't there been, in the past, orders from ROCOR to cease publishing certain materials (e.g. in the Archbp. Puhalo vs. Fr. Seraphim stuff)? So sometimes they do identify particular people who are causing turmoil...
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: mike on February 05, 2013, 04:51:41 AM
Hasn't there been, in the past, orders from ROCOR to cease publishing certain materials (e.g. in the Archbp. Puhalo vs. Fr. Seraphim stuff)? So sometimes they do identify particular people who are causing turmoil...

AFAIK he is not a member of ROCOR clergy or monastics so how would ROCOR issue such thing in this case?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Asteriktos on February 05, 2013, 05:15:12 AM
Hasn't there been, in the past, orders from ROCOR to cease publishing certain materials (e.g. in the Archbp. Puhalo vs. Fr. Seraphim stuff)? So sometimes they do identify particular people who are causing turmoil...

AFAIK he is not a member of ROCOR clergy or monastics so how would ROCOR issue such thing in this case?

ROCOR didn't patent the idea, so other groups would be free to issue similar orders, I'd think :)
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: mike on February 05, 2013, 05:17:33 AM
Hasn't there been, in the past, orders from ROCOR to cease publishing certain materials (e.g. in the Archbp. Puhalo vs. Fr. Seraphim stuff)? So sometimes they do identify particular people who are causing turmoil...

AFAIK he is not a member of ROCOR clergy or monastics so how would ROCOR issue such thing in this case?

ROCOR didn't patent the idea, so other groups would be free to issue similar orders, I'd think :)

He is a layman, crossdressing, but still a layman. How can any Synod ban a laymen from public activity?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Asteriktos on February 05, 2013, 05:22:41 AM
They used to send laymen into exile (though sometimes they'd be so kind as to jail them in a monastery), didn't they? So I don't see why not?  But I did want to say that I didn't mean my last post to be as snarky as it sounded, I meant the patent thing jokingly.

EDIT--Or maybe they were all monks and clergy. I dunno. Anyway, ignore this.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: psalm110 on February 05, 2013, 07:43:17 AM
Is there an official statement by the church about him, whether he should be listened to ?

Why should it be? Should the Church issue an official statement whether I should be listened to (or you, for example)?

Yes if the individual has become popular, take for example Vassula Ryden shes been excommunicated by the Church.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: mike on February 05, 2013, 07:54:58 AM
Is there an official statement by the church about him, whether he should be listened to ?

Why should it be? Should the Church issue an official statement whether I should be listened to (or you, for example)?

Yes if the individual has become popular, take for example Vassula Ryden shes been excommunicated by the Church.

For theological errors. He does not talk about theology.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: psalm110 on February 05, 2013, 08:15:51 AM
Is there an official statement by the church about him, whether he should be listened to ?

Why should it be? Should the Church issue an official statement whether I should be listened to (or you, for example)?

Yes if the individual has become popular, take for example Vassula Ryden shes been excommunicated by the Church.

For theological errors. He does not talk about theology.

Aahhh  ;D
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: jah777 on February 05, 2013, 09:02:30 AM
It is my understanding that Brother Nathaniel is a member of ROCOR.  What he says is pretty much always accurate, but he is eccentric and the idea of political commentaries offered by a monastic can be off-putting.  Again, he knows what he is talking about regarding Israel and the Israeli influence on our government, our society, and the world; but because it comes from an Orthodox monk, one hesitates to send his media on to non-Orthodox friends and family.  The production quality of his videos is also very good, and his concise presentations helpful, but I wish it came from someone else who is not an Orthodox monk.   ;)
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: mike on February 05, 2013, 09:04:44 AM
It is my understanding that Brother Nathaniel is a member of ROCOR.  What he says is pretty much always accurate, but he is eccentric and the idea of political commentaries offered by a monastic can be off-putting.  Again, he knows what he is talking about regarding Israel and the Israeli influence on our government, our society, and the world; but because it comes from an Orthodox monk, one hesitates to send his media on to non-Orthodox friends and family.  The production quality of his videos is also very good, and his concise presentations helpful, but I wish it came from someone else who is not an Orthodox monk.   ;)

Can you prove he is a monk?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: jah777 on February 05, 2013, 09:21:05 AM
It is my understanding that Brother Nathaniel is a member of ROCOR.  What he says is pretty much always accurate, but he is eccentric and the idea of political commentaries offered by a monastic can be off-putting.  Again, he knows what he is talking about regarding Israel and the Israeli influence on our government, our society, and the world; but because it comes from an Orthodox monk, one hesitates to send his media on to non-Orthodox friends and family.  The production quality of his videos is also very good, and his concise presentations helpful, but I wish it came from someone else who is not an Orthodox monk.   ;)

Can you prove he is a monk?

You probably would want to call his bishop to prove that he is, or is not, a monk.  He became a monk first at Holy Transfiguration Monastery in Boston and later moved to Dormition Skete in Colorado.  Since he left them years ago, I believe he has been living alone but has maintained his vows and commitment to the monastic life.  I also recall his reception back into ROCOR a couple of years ago.  Beyond that, however, I do not have any specific information regarding what his bishop thinks of his videos, whether he is officially considered a monastic in ROCOR, why he is not in a monastery,  etc. 
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: pmpn8rGPT on February 05, 2013, 09:45:39 AM
It is my understanding that Brother Nathaniel is a member of ROCOR.  What he says is pretty much always accurate, but he is eccentric and the idea of political commentaries offered by a monastic can be off-putting.  Again, he knows what he is talking about regarding Israel and the Israeli influence on our government, our society, and the world; but because it comes from an Orthodox monk, one hesitates to send his media on to non-Orthodox friends and family.  The production quality of his videos is also very good, and his concise presentations helpful, but I wish it came from someone else who is not an Orthodox monk.   ;)
Most people who i know who watch them are non-orthodox...
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Deep Roots on February 05, 2013, 09:55:27 AM
there's a big difference between being suspicious of Zionism (anti-Israeli occupation, critical of our nation's often uncritical support of the Israeli state, etc...) and being anti-semitic.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: jah777 on February 05, 2013, 09:59:18 AM
there's a big difference between being suspicious of Zionism (anti-Israeli occupation, critical of our nation's often uncritical support of the Israeli state, etc...) and being anti-semitic.

Are you suggesting that Brother Nathaniel, who is Jewish, is also anti-semitic?  That  doesn't make very much sense.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Deep Roots on February 05, 2013, 10:06:14 AM
there's a big difference between being suspicious of Zionism (anti-Israeli occupation, critical of our nation's often uncritical support of the Israeli state, etc...) and being anti-semitic.

Are you suggesting that Brother Nathaniel, who is Jewish, is also anti-semitic?  That  doesn't make very much sense.

I have met Jewish folks who become christian, who then take on some very strange/hateful positions against Jews.  I've been in church (before I was Orthodox) with one or two of them.

Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: jah777 on February 05, 2013, 10:17:09 AM
there's a big difference between being suspicious of Zionism (anti-Israeli occupation, critical of our nation's often uncritical support of the Israeli state, etc...) and being anti-semitic.

Are you suggesting that Brother Nathaniel, who is Jewish, is also anti-semitic?  That  doesn't make very much sense.

I have met Jewish folks who become christian, who then take on some very strange/hateful positions against Jews.  I've been in church (before I was Orthodox) with one or two of them.


To me, he comes across as exposing the negative influence that Zionist Israel (and certain Jewish groups) has on the US and in the world, but that is quite different from being "anti-semitic" or being against a people because of their blood or ethnicity.  The reason that he exposes these things is that criticism of Israel is not allowed in our controlled media, and as a Jew himself he is uniquely suited to fill this niche.  To oppose crimes and conspiracies orchestrated by Israel and Jewish groups does not mean that all Jews are guilty by association. 
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: jah777 on February 05, 2013, 10:27:19 AM
It is my understanding that Brother Nathaniel is a member of ROCOR.  What he says is pretty much always accurate, but he is eccentric and the idea of political commentaries offered by a monastic can be off-putting.  Again, he knows what he is talking about regarding Israel and the Israeli influence on our government, our society, and the world; but because it comes from an Orthodox monk, one hesitates to send his media on to non-Orthodox friends and family.  The production quality of his videos is also very good, and his concise presentations helpful, but I wish it came from someone else who is not an Orthodox monk.   ;)

Can you prove he is a monk?


I just came across a message from a ROCOR priest dated 12/25/10 that states that while Brother Nathaniel may be in ROCOR, he is a layman and not a monastic since he does not live in a monastery and is not under monastic obedience to anyone.  Prior to returning to ROCOR, he had been a novice in a schismatic monastery, but I don't think he was ever tonsured a monk.  So, you can consider his attire just part of his eccentricity. 
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Deep Roots on February 05, 2013, 10:41:03 AM
there's a big difference between being suspicious of Zionism (anti-Israeli occupation, critical of our nation's often uncritical support of the Israeli state, etc...) and being anti-semitic.

Are you suggesting that Brother Nathaniel, who is Jewish, is also anti-semitic?  That  doesn't make very much sense.

I have met Jewish folks who become christian, who then take on some very strange/hateful positions against Jews.  I've been in church (before I was Orthodox) with one or two of them.


To me, he comes across as exposing the negative influence that Zionist Israel (and certain Jewish groups) has on the US and in the world, but that is quite different from being "anti-semitic" or being against a people because of their blood or ethnicity.  The reason that he exposes these things is that criticism of Israel is not allowed in our controlled media, and as a Jew himself he is uniquely suited to fill this niche.  To oppose crimes and conspiracies orchestrated by Israel and Jewish groups does not mean that all Jews are guilty by association. 
Of course.  I take heat all the time for my own criticism of Israeli occupation, etc.

But words matter.  He may be critiquing certain aspects of Zionist control in US politics and media, but his language doesn't really get that across.  Like many like him, his language is too broad, too forceful, and not targeted enough. 

You might say that it doesnt matter, but it does matter.  Words have consequences. 
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Shanghaiski on February 05, 2013, 11:17:49 AM
It is my understanding that Brother Nathaniel is a member of ROCOR.  What he says is pretty much always accurate, but he is eccentric and the idea of political commentaries offered by a monastic can be off-putting.  Again, he knows what he is talking about regarding Israel and the Israeli influence on our government, our society, and the world; but because it comes from an Orthodox monk, one hesitates to send his media on to non-Orthodox friends and family.  The production quality of his videos is also very good, and his concise presentations helpful, but I wish it came from someone else who is not an Orthodox monk.   ;)

Can you prove he is a monk?


I just came across a message from a ROCOR priest dated 12/25/10 that states that while Brother Nathaniel may be in ROCOR, he is a layman and not a monastic since he does not live in a monastery and is not under monastic obedience to anyone.  Prior to returning to ROCOR, he had been a novice in a schismatic monastery, but I don't think he was ever tonsured a monk.  So, you can consider his attire just part of his eccentricity. 


I can't remember who said it now--I believe it was a Russian Orthodox cergyman. He said that many so called holy fools are actually deluded. I wouldn't necessarily say that in this case, but it's a warning. I don't see how what he does helps others as much as it builds up a following for himself.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: yeshuaisiam on February 06, 2013, 11:44:21 PM
I can't put him off.  He backs up what he is saying.  He speaks the hard truth.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Fr.Aidan on February 07, 2013, 02:34:59 AM
Br. Nathaniel is a novice monk and member of the canonical Russian Orthodox Church. However, he is under the spiritual direction of a monastic leader in another canonical jurisdiction. In this unusual cross-jurisdictional situation, he does not do his activities with a blessing from the Russian hierarchy, but with a blessing from the other jurisdiction's leadership.

I believe he goes too far and I am worried about the appearances of antisemitism in what he says. Of course, he does disburse a lot of solid information one can never get from today's American Pravda and Izvestia media (whether MSNBC, CNN, or Fox News).

I think that the only answer to the problems he often identifies very accurately, is not a political alliance but the repentance before God of the American people, getting on their knees and weeping and repenting of their sins, and drawing near to the Lord, changing their sinful lives. Only this kind of activity can save our nation from the satanic One World Government antagonists and delay the arrival of the reign of Antichrist. Observing how the evil operates, is not enough to prevent it, in the same way that merely being aware of one's psychological reasons for committing a sin is not the same as actually being able to stop committing the sin.  
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: mike on February 07, 2013, 03:51:15 AM
"Novice monk" is an oxymoron.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: LBK on February 07, 2013, 03:54:07 AM
"Novice monk" is an oxymoron.

... and real novice monks don't become mouthpieces for their pet causes, but work at attaining a spirit of prayer and humility.  :police:
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Asteriktos on February 07, 2013, 03:56:10 AM
I find his stop-and-start cadence soothing.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: mike on February 07, 2013, 04:46:56 AM
"Novice monk" is an oxymoron.

... and real novice monks don't become mouthpieces for their pet causes, but work at attaining a spirit of prayer and humility.  :police:

With a broom and rake instead of youtube.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Asteriktos on February 07, 2013, 04:50:47 AM
This (http://youtu.be/_S5WJAPN4UU) is my favorite video by him. Who could not love monasticism after hearing his dulcet tones?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Nephi on February 07, 2013, 11:03:13 AM
This (http://youtu.be/_S5WJAPN4UU) is my favorite video by him. Who could not love monasticism after hearing his dulcet tones?
Just watched it, and it was the first video of his I've seen...

How can he talk like that?

And that was an awfully bright "midnight."
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Shanghaiski on February 07, 2013, 12:23:29 PM
I liked it better when novices were novices and pundits were pundits.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: yeshuaisiam on February 07, 2013, 01:07:36 PM
I think he does a fine job and backs up what he says.

I do believe that he is serving God doing what he's doing.  Some monks make candles, others write books on theology, some write books on threats to Christianity, he feels the un-Christian zionist Jews (not common Jews) are harming everybody.  He's relaying the information.

I have in my book collection right now books written by Eastern Orthodox monks speaking of the heresies of that many in the EO faith are practicing.  Things like ecumenism, new calendar, and shaving beards etc., (they call them heresies).   I have coffee and honey that comes from monasteries. I have some crosses that were hand carved.  My point is monks do a lot of stuff, even controversial.  They aren't all just hermits that sweep and pray.

I'm sure Brother Nathaniel does many things, and these videos are on a subject that he is an expert on.  Somebody asked "how can he talk like that", my answer is "with the mouth God gave him".
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Nephi on February 07, 2013, 01:09:10 PM
I'm sure Brother Nathaniel does many things, and these videos are on a subject that he is an expert on.  Somebody asked "how can he talk like that", my answer is "with the mouth God gave him".
I'm referring to how he speaks vocally, not to the content that he speaks of.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: yeshuaisiam on February 07, 2013, 01:21:35 PM
I'm sure Brother Nathaniel does many things, and these videos are on a subject that he is an expert on.  Somebody asked "how can he talk like that", my answer is "with the mouth God gave him".
I'm referring to how he speaks vocally, not to the content that he speaks of.

Like his speaking voice?  The tone of it?  I think it is pretty good myself?  Not too sure what you are asking. :)
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Nephi on February 07, 2013, 01:34:51 PM
Like his speaking voice?  The tone of it?  I think it is pretty good myself?  Not too sure what you are asking. :)

Yeah, his speaking voice. I found a bit disconcerting myself, kind of like listening to William Shatner play Captain Kirk.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Schultz on February 07, 2013, 01:38:35 PM
he talks (and emotes) like a salesman.

Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: yeshuaisiam on February 07, 2013, 01:42:30 PM
I believe it's basically he's giving a presentation.  I mean he has a lot of video edits, cuts, graphics, and one special effect at least at the beginning (cross sparkles).

I'm sure he's going off a script... Far more than a vblog.   I think he does sound salesman ish or like a teacher on a presentation.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Asteriktos on February 07, 2013, 01:48:52 PM
he talks (and emotes) like a salesman.

I think he does sound salesman ish or like a teacher on a presentation.

How dare you!  I have not heard a voice so wonderful since Kenneth Starr.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: orthonorm on February 07, 2013, 01:52:40 PM
I believe it's basically he's giving a presentation.  I mean he has a lot of video edits, cuts, graphics, and one special effect at least at the beginning (cross sparkles).

I'm sure he's going off a script... Far more than a vblog.   I think he does sound salesman ish or like a teacher on a presentation.

It's all very goyishe kop and schlock. But the Hanukkah decorations I saw at Bed, Bath, and Beyond were as well. Maybe Judaism is truly gone.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Ioannis Climacus on February 07, 2013, 02:47:35 PM
It's very much presentation (being a former salesman and all). His normal voice is much more subdued and contains nowhere near the number of pauses in the video.

On a side note, did anyone know Br. Nathanael was once part of the late-1960's band, Rebecca and the Sunnybrook Farmers (no, I am not joking) :  http://youtu.be/Us7iCKiXZ_o
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: psalm110 on February 07, 2013, 06:45:08 PM
Who is his abbot ?.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on February 07, 2013, 06:48:51 PM
In the last few months I've started viewing the videos of Brother Nathaniel Kapner.I realize that he is a controversial figure, and that he also claims to be an Orthodox brother ( ROCOT I heard).  Is this true?  Does ROCOR actually sanction such afigure  controversial as him.in their monastic ranks?  Or is he more an independent monk?

No we don't and that's official. Met. Hilarion visited our Church  last year and I spent some time with him. I brought up Br. Nathanial and he spoke about him with me. He confirmed that he is not in any way a member of Rocor..
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on February 07, 2013, 06:53:19 PM
"Novice monk" is an oxymoron.

... and real novice monks don't become mouthpieces for their pet causes, but work at attaining a spirit of prayer and humility.  :police:

Met. Hilarion emphasized to me several times that Br. Nathaniel is only a novice.
Title: Re: Brother Nathanael
Post by: Fr.Aidan on February 07, 2013, 07:33:42 PM
In the last few months I've started viewing the videos of Brother Nathaniel Kapner.I realize that he is a controversial figure, and that he also claims to be an Orthodox brother ( ROCOT I heard).  Is this true?  Does ROCOR actually sanction such afigure  controversial as him.in their monastic ranks?  Or is he more an independent monk?

No we don't and that's official. Met. Hilarion visited our Church  last year and I spent some time with him. I brought up Br. Nathanial and he spoke about him with me. He confirmed that he is not in any way a member of Rocor..

What time last year? Because Vladyka Jerome was confirming back in November that Br. Nathanael has made the ROCOR Synod church in New York his place of attendance. That was in the context of the accepted statement that Br. Nathanael is with ROCOR. Presumably all he does, is with the blessing of his canonical abbot who is not ROCOR. He is most unusual but also loved by many, not as extreme in person as he can come off in the videos, and even non-Orthodox people really appreciate his efforts and goodwill and encouragement and cheer.

And he basically speaks truth to authority, although I think he needs to refine his comments about "Jews" to clarify the difference between the zionist Jews in high positions who are intent on a path of great harm and destruction (and are worthy of the general moniker "antichrist") and ordinary Jews, who are not the antichrist. By lumping in the latter with the former, he very much opens himself to charges of antisemitism. Of course, others do this sort of "shorthand" as well. As a Russian priest pointed out, Romney said Russia was America's greatest enemy, but he was probably talking about Putin and not about "my grandmother." (Please note this is not political commentary, but an illustration of a communication principle--that discourse can clamber broadly when the intent is actually narrow.)
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: mike on February 07, 2013, 09:30:46 PM
I cringe when someone calls him a monk. Do you call acolytes blessed to do subdeaconing "bishops"?
Title: Re: Brother Nathanael
Post by: Marc1152 on February 07, 2013, 10:00:25 PM
In the last few months I've started viewing the videos of Brother Nathaniel Kapner.I realize that he is a controversial figure, and that he also claims to be an Orthodox brother ( ROCOT I heard).  Is this true?  Does ROCOR actually sanction such afigure  controversial as him.in their monastic ranks?  Or is he more an independent monk?

No we don't and that's official. Met. Hilarion visited our Church  last year and I spent some time with him. I brought up Br. Nathanial and he spoke about him with me. He confirmed that he is not in any way a member of Rocor..

What time last year? Because Vladyka Jerome was confirming back in November that Br. Nathanael has made the ROCOR Synod church in New York his place of attendance. That was in the context of the accepted statement that Br. Nathanael is with ROCOR. Presumably all he does, is with the blessing of his canonical abbot who is not ROCOR. He is most unusual but also loved by many, not as extreme in person as he can come off in the videos, and even non-Orthodox people really appreciate his efforts and goodwill and encouragement and cheer.

And he basically speaks truth to authority, although I think he needs to refine his comments about "Jews" to clarify the difference between the zionist Jews in high positions who are intent on a path of great harm and destruction (and are worthy of the general moniker "antichrist") and ordinary Jews, who are not the antichrist. By lumping in the latter with the former, he very much opens himself to charges of antisemitism. Of course, others do this sort of "shorthand" as well. As a Russian priest pointed out, Romney said Russia was America's greatest enemy, but he was probably talking about Putin and not about "my grandmother." (Please note this is not political commentary, but an illustration of a communication principle--that discourse can clamber broadly when the intent is actually narrow.)

I dont remember the exact date. I will ask while in Church this weekend when he was here and let you know.

Met. Hilarion not only said that he is not a member of Rocor but that he had viciously attacked Rocor during the reunification with Moscow, excoriating Rocor on his web page. Met. said that eventually he recanted and sent an apology and took down all the attacks from his page. He emphasized that Nathaniel was only a Novice. His clear implication was that Nathaniel has no authority to speak for the Church.

IMHO a novice should be cleaning floors not promoting grandiose and wholly fallacious theories about how the World is run.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Ioannis Climacus on February 07, 2013, 10:15:18 PM
Guys, it's Nathanael not Nathaniel. I am not typically one to point out such details, but establishing the correct spelling of his name should come prior to discussing the details of his personage.

I say this in good humor though. No offense meant to everyone on this thread.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: mike on February 07, 2013, 10:21:11 PM
Guys, it's Nathanael not Nathaniel.

This is the same name.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Fr.Aidan on February 07, 2013, 10:26:46 PM
Correct. Novice Nathanael has no authority to speak for the Orthodox Church.

I find his analyses quite accurate, and data-based.

Y'all's mileage may vary. May and should!
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Ioannis Climacus on February 07, 2013, 10:30:30 PM
Guys, it's Nathanael not Nathaniel.

This is the same name.
Maybe when dealing with people whose names have been directly translated from another language. Maybe it's different elsewhere, but in the anglosphere we typically spell people's names the way they do.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Shanghaiski on February 07, 2013, 10:55:14 PM
Guys, it's Nathanael not Nathaniel.

This is the same name.
Maybe when dealing with people whose names have been directly translated from another language. Maybe it's different elsewhere, but in the anglosphere we typically spell people's names the way they do.

Unfortunately.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on February 08, 2013, 12:00:12 AM
Correct. Novice Nathanael has no authority to speak for the Orthodox Church.

I find his analyses quite accurate, and data-based.

Y'all's mileage may vary. May and should!

Brother Nathanael is a vicious Anti-Semite and bigot. I would be terribly disappointed if I discovered a Priest that I was associated who thought highly of his ravings... Fortunately, the Orthodox Priesthood by overwhelming majority are men of good character and high intelligence.

I just went to his web site and this is the first video I clicked on. As you can see his Antisemitism has little to do with any semblance of Anti-Zionism but is rather the same old tired and discredited canard that the World is Run by a cabal of Jewish interests. No doubt he also has strong Anti-Zionist views. All people who are against Israel are not Anti-Semites. However, all Anti-Semites are also Anti-Israel. Such is the case with this evil person. He is a poor lost soul leading the naive and gullible into perdition.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GpUN7B8aNBc


 
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Fr.Aidan on February 08, 2013, 01:25:48 AM
I am not endorsing Br. Nathanael's various presentations and messages. I don't have time to even go through them all, in large part because at my workplace it's not possible to access many sites, including Youtube and Facebook. (I use break time or sometimes time spent waiting for a call, to make responses on here.) I am alarmed by his rhetoric, in that I think a line should be drawn between virulently anti-Christian, anti-human, anti-God plutocrats who are often but not always Jewish (culturally Jewish), on the one hand, and on the other hand, ordinary men and women who happen to be Jewish. Of course, many public figures who have gained wide support in the U.S. (e.g.) often make the very same mistakes in expression, and people and the public give them a pass. So I sense a double standard there, and this makes my little indicator of "What's Fair" start whirring and flashing. But, no, I am not a proponent of Br. Nathanael's work, I'm rather agnostic regarding it.

That the world is run, in very large part, by a cabal of (non-religious / irreligious) Jewish interests, is something backed up by a preponderance of the evidence. It does rather seem to be "the elephant in the room." But I also fully respect the views of those who don't at all think so. They either have imbibed other data sets, or have arrived at conclusions through various reasonings and processes which I may not even understand. I don't think those who dissent from the satanic cabal paradigm are therefore less pious, or less good human beings. And I can always have gotten something wrong.

I would hope that the same tolerance would be found in all Orthodox Christians. I also believe that ultimate solutions are spiritual, not political. I also love and respect the Jewish people, for they are the kinsmen of our Lord and God and Saviour Jesus Christ!
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: LBK on February 08, 2013, 05:22:15 AM

That the world is run, in very large part, by a cabal of (non-religious / irreligious) Jewish interests, is something backed up by a preponderance of the evidence. It does rather seem to be "the elephant in the room."

Last time I checked, Rupert Murdoch has no Jewish ancestry, nor has he ever identified himself as Jewish; William Randolph, the patriarch of the Hearst dynasty, was of Scottish Protestant stock.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on February 08, 2013, 11:46:16 AM
I am not endorsing Br. Nathanael's various presentations and messages. I don't have time to even go through them all, in large part because at my workplace it's not possible to access many sites, including Youtube and Facebook. (I use break time or sometimes time spent waiting for a call, to make responses on here.) I am alarmed by his rhetoric, in that I think a line should be drawn between virulently anti-Christian, anti-human, anti-God plutocrats who are often but not always Jewish (culturally Jewish), on the one hand, and on the other hand, ordinary men and women who happen to be Jewish. Of course, many public figures who have gained wide support in the U.S. (e.g.) often make the very same mistakes in expression, and people and the public give them a pass. So I sense a double standard there, and this makes my little indicator of "What's Fair" start whirring and flashing. But, no, I am not a proponent of Br. Nathanael's work, I'm rather agnostic regarding it.

That the world is run, in very large part, by a cabal of (non-religious / irreligious) Jewish interests, is something backed up by a preponderance of the evidence. It does rather seem to be "the elephant in the room." But I also fully respect the views of those who don't at all think so. They either have imbibed other data sets, or have arrived at conclusions through various reasonings and processes which I may not even understand. I don't think those who dissent from the satanic cabal paradigm are therefore less pious, or less good human beings. And I can always have gotten something wrong.

I would hope that the same tolerance would be found in all Orthodox Christians. I also believe that ultimate solutions are spiritual, not political. I also love and respect the Jewish people, for they are the kinsmen of our Lord and God and Saviour Jesus Christ!

Br. Nathanial's fundamental World View is exactly the same one developed some 70 plus years ago by Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party. In short, the World is run by an evil cabal of Jews. He has simply taken the same recipe and added current names and events to the mixture.

It's hard to imagine a political philosophy that has been more discredited. Just because an argument has internal logic does not mean it is true. The most insidious part of promoting such tripe is that it gets people looking in the wrong directions for political solutions. This was so destructive to the German People that it should give any serious person great pause before believing it. History forgotten is destined to be repeated and all that.

To then say that "Ordinary Jews" are fine folks but their Kinsman are responsible for the ills of the World is nonsense. Once again, it was the ordinary Jew who was slaughtered by people who bought into the exact same theories that Br. Nathaniel repeats today. "By their fruits you shall know them".. Nazi ideology and paranoid delusions about a Jewish Cabal nearly destroyed the World in my Parents generation. Extreme caution is advised if you find yourself starting to think Br. Nathaniel makes good sense. Cavet Emptor
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Gunnarr on February 08, 2013, 05:59:50 PM
I think he might slightly have some mental problems. but maybe that is because i saw a video of him dancing like a crazy man on a street

is this what fool-for-christs supposed to be like? they make me squirmy. At least he is not naked like some others
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on February 08, 2013, 07:27:13 PM
I think he might slightly have some mental problems. but maybe that is because i saw a video of him dancing like a crazy man on a street

is this what fool-for-christs supposed to be like? they make me squirmy. At least he is not naked like some others

Go back up a few posts and watch the You tube of him I posted where he suggests a Military Coup in the USA to overthrow all the Jews in power.

He bares his teeth at the end and comes very close to growling. I beleive this is a common sign of demonic possession.

Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: yeshuaisiam on February 08, 2013, 07:50:47 PM
I am not endorsing Br. Nathanael's various presentations and messages. I don't have time to even go through them all, in large part because at my workplace it's not possible to access many sites, including Youtube and Facebook. (I use break time or sometimes time spent waiting for a call, to make responses on here.) I am alarmed by his rhetoric, in that I think a line should be drawn between virulently anti-Christian, anti-human, anti-God plutocrats who are often but not always Jewish (culturally Jewish), on the one hand, and on the other hand, ordinary men and women who happen to be Jewish. Of course, many public figures who have gained wide support in the U.S. (e.g.) often make the very same mistakes in expression, and people and the public give them a pass. So I sense a double standard there, and this makes my little indicator of "What's Fair" start whirring and flashing. But, no, I am not a proponent of Br. Nathanael's work, I'm rather agnostic regarding it.

That the world is run, in very large part, by a cabal of (non-religious / irreligious) Jewish interests, is something backed up by a preponderance of the evidence. It does rather seem to be "the elephant in the room." But I also fully respect the views of those who don't at all think so. They either have imbibed other data sets, or have arrived at conclusions through various reasonings and processes which I may not even understand. I don't think those who dissent from the satanic cabal paradigm are therefore less pious, or less good human beings. And I can always have gotten something wrong.

I would hope that the same tolerance would be found in all Orthodox Christians. I also believe that ultimate solutions are spiritual, not political. I also love and respect the Jewish people, for they are the kinsmen of our Lord and God and Saviour Jesus Christ!

Br. Nathanial's fundamental World View is exactly the same one developed some 70 plus years ago by Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party. In short, the World is run by an evil cabal of Jews. He has simply taken the same recipe and added current names and events to the mixture.

It's hard to imagine a political philosophy that has been more discredited. Just because an argument has internal logic does not mean it is true. The most insidious part of promoting such tripe is that it gets people looking in the wrong directions for political solutions. This was so destructive to the German People that it should give any serious person great pause before believing it. History forgotten is destined to be repeated and all that.

To then say that "Ordinary Jews" are fine folks but their Kinsman are responsible for the ills of the World is nonsense. Once again, it was the ordinary Jew who was slaughtered by people who bought into the exact same theories that Br. Nathaniel repeats today. "By their fruits you shall know them".. Nazi ideology and paranoid delusions about a Jewish Cabal nearly destroyed the World in my Parents generation. Extreme caution is advised if you find yourself starting to think Br. Nathaniel makes good sense. Cavet Emptor

^^^^  This is actually not entirely true.  Hitler did not speak of the common Jews as he does.  If you want to know where some of Hitler got his symbol, and occult works - ask the Theosophy person.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: yeshuaisiam on February 08, 2013, 07:51:52 PM
I think he might slightly have some mental problems. but maybe that is because i saw a video of him dancing like a crazy man on a street

is this what fool-for-christs supposed to be like? they make me squirmy. At least he is not naked like some others

Go back up a few posts and watch the You tube of him I posted where he suggests a Military Coup in the USA to overthrow all the Jews in power.

He bares his teeth at the end and comes very close to growling. I beleive this is a common sign of demonic possession.

Actually he asks "will it take a military coup".   He doesn't suggest it.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: yeshuaisiam on February 08, 2013, 07:57:33 PM
I am not endorsing Br. Nathanael's various presentations and messages. I don't have time to even go through them all, in large part because at my workplace it's not possible to access many sites, including Youtube and Facebook. (I use break time or sometimes time spent waiting for a call, to make responses on here.) I am alarmed by his rhetoric, in that I think a line should be drawn between virulently anti-Christian, anti-human, anti-God plutocrats who are often but not always Jewish (culturally Jewish), on the one hand, and on the other hand, ordinary men and women who happen to be Jewish. Of course, many public figures who have gained wide support in the U.S. (e.g.) often make the very same mistakes in expression, and people and the public give them a pass. So I sense a double standard there, and this makes my little indicator of "What's Fair" start whirring and flashing. But, no, I am not a proponent of Br. Nathanael's work, I'm rather agnostic regarding it.

That the world is run, in very large part, by a cabal of (non-religious / irreligious) Jewish interests, is something backed up by a preponderance of the evidence. It does rather seem to be "the elephant in the room." But I also fully respect the views of those who don't at all think so. They either have imbibed other data sets, or have arrived at conclusions through various reasonings and processes which I may not even understand. I don't think those who dissent from the satanic cabal paradigm are therefore less pious, or less good human beings. And I can always have gotten something wrong.

I would hope that the same tolerance would be found in all Orthodox Christians. I also believe that ultimate solutions are spiritual, not political. I also love and respect the Jewish people, for they are the kinsmen of our Lord and God and Saviour Jesus Christ!

I do endorse a lot of his videos, not all of them.  I find them very fact based and well researched.  People are all getting up tight because here is an EO monk speaking about real issues.  They'd rather him be beat down by an abbot and reduced to sweeping floors. ("Know your place peasant!!!")  People like weakling Christians, not ones strong enough to speak up, as our Savior did and encouraged us to mentor.  I give a lot of props to him.  I see strong faith in him.   He's brave, I think he speaks well, and articulates his facts well.  I have no idea why people want to see a wimpy monk ordered back to his cell.   He's also a great mouthpiece to bring Jews to Christianity by his own testimony.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Asteriktos on February 08, 2013, 08:00:53 PM
Yeah, why would a monk be meek, reticent, and obedient to someone?

Wait, wut?  ;)
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: JamesR on February 08, 2013, 08:04:42 PM
I bought my mom a peppermint barsoap from some Orthodox monastery in the area for her birthday last year; those little knick-knacks that monks sell can make good witnessing tools.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on February 08, 2013, 08:18:50 PM
I am not endorsing Br. Nathanael's various presentations and messages. I don't have time to even go through them all, in large part because at my workplace it's not possible to access many sites, including Youtube and Facebook. (I use break time or sometimes time spent waiting for a call, to make responses on here.) I am alarmed by his rhetoric, in that I think a line should be drawn between virulently anti-Christian, anti-human, anti-God plutocrats who are often but not always Jewish (culturally Jewish), on the one hand, and on the other hand, ordinary men and women who happen to be Jewish. Of course, many public figures who have gained wide support in the U.S. (e.g.) often make the very same mistakes in expression, and people and the public give them a pass. So I sense a double standard there, and this makes my little indicator of "What's Fair" start whirring and flashing. But, no, I am not a proponent of Br. Nathanael's work, I'm rather agnostic regarding it.

That the world is run, in very large part, by a cabal of (non-religious / irreligious) Jewish interests, is something backed up by a preponderance of the evidence. It does rather seem to be "the elephant in the room." But I also fully respect the views of those who don't at all think so. They either have imbibed other data sets, or have arrived at conclusions through various reasonings and processes which I may not even understand. I don't think those who dissent from the satanic cabal paradigm are therefore less pious, or less good human beings. And I can always have gotten something wrong.

I would hope that the same tolerance would be found in all Orthodox Christians. I also believe that ultimate solutions are spiritual, not political. I also love and respect the Jewish people, for they are the kinsmen of our Lord and God and Saviour Jesus Christ!

Br. Nathanial's fundamental World View is exactly the same one developed some 70 plus years ago by Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party. In short, the World is run by an evil cabal of Jews. He has simply taken the same recipe and added current names and events to the mixture.

It's hard to imagine a political philosophy that has been more discredited. Just because an argument has internal logic does not mean it is true. The most insidious part of promoting such tripe is that it gets people looking in the wrong directions for political solutions. This was so destructive to the German People that it should give any serious person great pause before believing it. History forgotten is destined to be repeated and all that.

To then say that "Ordinary Jews" are fine folks but their Kinsman are responsible for the ills of the World is nonsense. Once again, it was the ordinary Jew who was slaughtered by people who bought into the exact same theories that Br. Nathaniel repeats today. "By their fruits you shall know them".. Nazi ideology and paranoid delusions about a Jewish Cabal nearly destroyed the World in my Parents generation. Extreme caution is advised if you find yourself starting to think Br. Nathaniel makes good sense. Cavet Emptor

^^^^  This is actually not entirely true.  Hitler did not speak of the common Jews as he does.  If you want to know where some of Hitler got his symbol, and occult works - ask the Theosophy person.

This is true. The part where Br. Nathanial blames an international Jewish Cabal for the ills of the World is the similar part.

All conspiratorial explanations of history and the workings of the World are always wrong...
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: biro on February 08, 2013, 08:20:47 PM
Quote from: Marc1152
All conspiratorial explanations of history and the workings of the World are always wrong...

Ding! We have a winner.  ;D
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Punch on February 08, 2013, 10:17:58 PM
I think he might slightly have some mental problems. but maybe that is because i saw a video of him dancing like a crazy man on a street

is this what fool-for-christs supposed to be like? they make me squirmy. At least he is not naked like some others

Go back up a few posts and watch the You tube of him I posted where he suggests a Military Coup in the USA to overthrow all the Jews in power.

He bares his teeth at the end and comes very close to growling. I beleive this is a common sign of demonic possession.

Actually he asks "will it take a military coup".   He doesn't suggest it.

You are dealing with a raving liberal.  Since when have small details like the truth mattered.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: pmpn8rGPT on February 08, 2013, 10:21:00 PM
All conspiratorial explanations of history and the workings of the World are always wrong...
You are clearly a gullible person if you think that there has NEVER been any secret plots throughout history.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: mike on February 08, 2013, 10:41:18 PM
I am not endorsing Br. Nathanael's various presentations and messages. I don't have time to even go through them all, in large part because at my workplace it's not possible to access many sites, including Youtube and Facebook. (I use break time or sometimes time spent waiting for a call, to make responses on here.) I am alarmed by his rhetoric, in that I think a line should be drawn between virulently anti-Christian, anti-human, anti-God plutocrats who are often but not always Jewish (culturally Jewish), on the one hand, and on the other hand, ordinary men and women who happen to be Jewish. Of course, many public figures who have gained wide support in the U.S. (e.g.) often make the very same mistakes in expression, and people and the public give them a pass. So I sense a double standard there, and this makes my little indicator of "What's Fair" start whirring and flashing. But, no, I am not a proponent of Br. Nathanael's work, I'm rather agnostic regarding it.

That the world is run, in very large part, by a cabal of (non-religious / irreligious) Jewish interests, is something backed up by a preponderance of the evidence. It does rather seem to be "the elephant in the room." But I also fully respect the views of those who don't at all think so. They either have imbibed other data sets, or have arrived at conclusions through various reasonings and processes which I may not even understand. I don't think those who dissent from the satanic cabal paradigm are therefore less pious, or less good human beings. And I can always have gotten something wrong.

I would hope that the same tolerance would be found in all Orthodox Christians. I also believe that ultimate solutions are spiritual, not political. I also love and respect the Jewish people, for they are the kinsmen of our Lord and God and Saviour Jesus Christ!

I do endorse a lot of his videos, not all of them.  I find them very fact based and well researched.  People are all getting up tight because here is an EO monk speaking about real issues.  They'd rather him be beat down by an abbot and reduced to sweeping floors. ("Know your place peasant!!!")  People like weakling Christians, not ones strong enough to speak up, as our Savior did and encouraged us to mentor.  I give a lot of props to him.  I see strong faith in him.   He's brave, I think he speaks well, and articulates his facts well.  I have no idea why people want to see a wimpy monk ordered back to his cell.   He's also a great mouthpiece to bring Jews to Christianity by his own testimony.

I'll write this for the 5th time or so: He is not an EO monk. He might be a monk of your Anabaptist religion, you can take him and make him even a bishop, but do not insult the Church that it allowed him to become a monk.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Shanghaiski on February 08, 2013, 11:43:51 PM
Conspiracy theories are like a modern version of gnosticism.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on February 09, 2013, 12:21:26 AM
I think he might slightly have some mental problems. but maybe that is because i saw a video of him dancing like a crazy man on a street

is this what fool-for-christs supposed to be like? they make me squirmy. At least he is not naked like some others

Go back up a few posts and watch the You tube of him I posted where he suggests a Military Coup in the USA to overthrow all the Jews in power.

He bares his teeth at the end and comes very close to growling. I beleive this is a common sign of demonic possession.

Actually he asks "will it take a military coup".   He doesn't suggest it.

You are dealing with a raving liberal.  Since when have small details like the truth mattered.

Ummm,, He said a coup was not preferable but it may come to it. The whole video is about how things are so bad the only alternative may be a military takeover...

But if you're already a raving extremest you may not notice that this guy is off his rocker.

(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRKkHmCDfgqXeXz3vq8nLt586kQupIyuDvUUZoFDbrmmR9yunxtbQ)
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Ioannis Climacus on February 09, 2013, 12:25:10 AM
I am not endorsing Br. Nathanael's various presentations and messages. I don't have time to even go through them all, in large part because at my workplace it's not possible to access many sites, including Youtube and Facebook. (I use break time or sometimes time spent waiting for a call, to make responses on here.) I am alarmed by his rhetoric, in that I think a line should be drawn between virulently anti-Christian, anti-human, anti-God plutocrats who are often but not always Jewish (culturally Jewish), on the one hand, and on the other hand, ordinary men and women who happen to be Jewish. Of course, many public figures who have gained wide support in the U.S. (e.g.) often make the very same mistakes in expression, and people and the public give them a pass. So I sense a double standard there, and this makes my little indicator of "What's Fair" start whirring and flashing. But, no, I am not a proponent of Br. Nathanael's work, I'm rather agnostic regarding it.

That the world is run, in very large part, by a cabal of (non-religious / irreligious) Jewish interests, is something backed up by a preponderance of the evidence. It does rather seem to be "the elephant in the room." But I also fully respect the views of those who don't at all think so. They either have imbibed other data sets, or have arrived at conclusions through various reasonings and processes which I may not even understand. I don't think those who dissent from the satanic cabal paradigm are therefore less pious, or less good human beings. And I can always have gotten something wrong.

I would hope that the same tolerance would be found in all Orthodox Christians. I also believe that ultimate solutions are spiritual, not political. I also love and respect the Jewish people, for they are the kinsmen of our Lord and God and Saviour Jesus Christ!

I do endorse a lot of his videos, not all of them.  I find them very fact based and well researched.  People are all getting up tight because here is an EO monk speaking about real issues.  They'd rather him be beat down by an abbot and reduced to sweeping floors. ("Know your place peasant!!!")  People like weakling Christians, not ones strong enough to speak up, as our Savior did and encouraged us to mentor.  I give a lot of props to him.  I see strong faith in him.   He's brave, I think he speaks well, and articulates his facts well.  I have no idea why people want to see a wimpy monk ordered back to his cell.   He's also a great mouthpiece to bring Jews to Christianity by his own testimony.

I'll write this for the 5th time or so: He is not an EO monk. He might be a monk of your Anabaptist religion, you can take him and make him even a bishop, but do not insult the Church that it allowed him to become a monk.
I am not sure how that would be an insult. Far worse have taken up the habit throughout the course of history.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on February 09, 2013, 12:36:03 AM
All conspiratorial explanations of history and the workings of the World are always wrong...
You are clearly a gullible person if you think that there has NEVER been any secret plots throughout history.

That's not what I said. Try to focus.

A conspiratorial explanation of the great events of history and/or as an explanation of the State of current affairs is always false.


The Lydon Larouche "Movement" is a great example of this. They put forward one conspiracy after another. A British Cabal. a Masonic Cabal, the Trilateral Commission.. Cabal. Etc. Br. Nataniel is cut from the same cloth.

(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ_D7-k116stEls1wxEjquSN9ewd3En13tBn0U-t7gsadOCjMTR)  

(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSDGqrZWGa1rH3rFAqt45YGNDhT5anPJq4zQ8Grba6d1PpH_YLj)

(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTRjWc6kLZOmCsshFV--oy7BHqzHpCupJXtb49dy12tVC_cpRsr0w)
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Shanghaiski on February 09, 2013, 12:48:49 AM
All conspiratorial explanations of history and the workings of the World are always wrong...
You are clearly a gullible person if you think that there has NEVER been any secret plots throughout history.

That's not what I said. Try to focus.

A conspiratorial explanation of the great events of history and/or as an explanation of the State of current affairs is always false.


The Lydon Larouche "Movement" is a great example of this. They put forward one conspiracy after another. A British Cabal. a Masonic Cabal, the Trilateral Commission.. Cabal. Etc. Br. Nataniel is cut from the same cloth.

(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ_D7-k116stEls1wxEjquSN9ewd3En13tBn0U-t7gsadOCjMTR)  

(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSDGqrZWGa1rH3rFAqt45YGNDhT5anPJq4zQ8Grba6d1PpH_YLj)

(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTRjWc6kLZOmCsshFV--oy7BHqzHpCupJXtb49dy12tVC_cpRsr0w)

I thought there were canons against impersonating clergy.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: pmpn8rGPT on February 09, 2013, 12:49:27 AM
All conspiratorial explanations of history and the workings of the World are always wrong...
You are clearly a gullible person if you think that there has NEVER been any secret plots throughout history.

That's not what I said. Try to focus.

A conspiratorial explanation of the great events of history and/or as an explanation of the State of current affairs is always false.
Actually, this view that conspiracies are ALWAYS false is exactly what I was referring to...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1APfv_GmtyE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVYN21_THpg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mDIFn8O2P9o
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on February 09, 2013, 12:58:35 AM
All conspiratorial explanations of history and the workings of the World are always wrong...
You are clearly a gullible person if you think that there has NEVER been any secret plots throughout history.

That's not what I said. Try to focus.

A conspiratorial explanation of the great events of history and/or as an explanation of the State of current affairs is always false.
Actually, this view that conspiracies are ALWAYS false is exactly what I was referring to...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1APfv_GmtyE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVYN21_THpg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mDIFn8O2P9o


I know... I wouldn't be too proud if I were you.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: pmpn8rGPT on February 09, 2013, 01:17:39 AM
All conspiratorial explanations of history and the workings of the World are always wrong...
You are clearly a gullible person if you think that there has NEVER been any secret plots throughout history.

That's not what I said. Try to focus.

A conspiratorial explanation of the great events of history and/or as an explanation of the State of current affairs is always false.
Actually, this view that conspiracies are ALWAYS false is exactly what I was referring to...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1APfv_GmtyE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVYN21_THpg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mDIFn8O2P9o


I know... I wouldn't be too proud if I were you.
So, what are you denying, the existence of the evil in the Talmud (Matthew 23), the existence of the NWO (Psalm 2), the existence of the Zionist agenda (Revelation 3:9), or all of the above?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Asteriktos on February 09, 2013, 02:29:27 AM
(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSDGqrZWGa1rH3rFAqt45YGNDhT5anPJq4zQ8Grba6d1PpH_YLj)

(http://www.antiochian.org/sites/antiochian.org/files/images/Metropolitan_Philip3.teaser-large_feature.jpg)
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: mike on February 09, 2013, 02:39:05 AM
Why is Kapner wearing these white gloves?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on February 09, 2013, 12:12:02 PM
It's above our pay grade to pass judgement on the spiritual state of the dear Brother. In general, Fools for Christ are good people, not hate filled bigots. If I had his ear, I would try to persuade him to submit to an exorcism.. maybe several
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: orthonorm on February 09, 2013, 12:47:34 PM
All conspiratorial explanations of history and the workings of the World are always wrong...
You are clearly a gullible person if you think that there has NEVER been any secret plots throughout history.

?SYNTAX ERROR
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: orthonorm on February 09, 2013, 12:49:36 PM
Conspiracy theories are like a modern version of gnosticism.

Dude, I like it.

Change that.

.sig worthy.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: rakovsky on February 09, 2013, 02:26:59 PM
is this what fool-for-christs supposed to be like? At least he is not naked like some others

And the LORD said, Like as my servant Isaiah hath walked naked and barefoot three years for a sign and wonder upon Egypt and upon Ethiopia;

Not sure how I feel about this. Perhaps his top was naked? Was he in Ethiopia? It snows in Palestine.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: rakovsky on February 09, 2013, 03:18:29 PM
LBK,

You wrote:
Last time I checked, Rupert Murdoch has no Jewish ancestry, nor has he ever identified himself as Jewish

What do you think about Yahoo Answers?
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071025102913AAjilr3
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: rakovsky on February 09, 2013, 03:28:53 PM
Ioannis Climacus,

It was curious as you pointed out:
Quote
On a side note, did anyone know Br. Nathanael was once part of the late-1960's band, Rebecca and the Sunnybrook Farmers :  http://youtu.be/Us7iCKiXZ_o
Rebecca and the Sunnybrook Farmers were a psychedelic-influenced band from Pittsburgh, PN, whose music was an interesting blend of country rock, folk rock, and sunshine pop. Featuring Ilene Rappaport on vocals, guitar, harmonica, and recorder, Ilene Novog on vocals, viola, and harpsichord, Mickey Kapner on guitar, sitar, organ, and backing vocals...
http://www.allmusic.com/artist/rebecca-and-the-sunnybrook-farmers-mn0000468010
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: rakovsky on February 09, 2013, 03:39:10 PM
Yeshuaisiam,

Would you (still?) consider yourself a Messianic Christian? If so what do you think about Chr.Zionism and the State it follows? (You can mention it on the politics forum, if you prefer).
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Hiwot on February 09, 2013, 03:40:39 PM

is this what fool-for-christs supposed to be like? .


regardless of their attire or the lack there of, you need to consider that the abject foolishness of some has nothing to do with their love for Christ.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: rakovsky on February 09, 2013, 03:42:19 PM
This (http://youtu.be/_S5WJAPN4UU) is my favorite video by him. Who could not love monasticism after hearing his dulcet tones?
How can he talk like that?

And that was an awfully bright "midnight."
Former salesman. Possibly moonlight with artificial lighting.

I thought that particular movie (about monastery life) was good. However, I really don't think I want to donate to his foundation because he seems unhinged.

When the clip ended, my computer started playing a radio channel somehow. Clicking on different unrelated buttons on my browser seemed to interfere with it, and closing youtube didn't seem to make a difference. Anyway...
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on February 09, 2013, 03:46:05 PM
LBK,

You wrote:
Last time I checked, Rupert Murdoch has no Jewish ancestry, nor has he ever identified himself as Jewish

What do you think about Yahoo Answers?
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071025102913AAjilr3

His grandmother was Jewish.. Do you think that's enough to drive him into the International Jewish Cabal?

I think the reality is closer to this:   

From Wikipedia:

Murdoch was born in Melbourne, the only son of Sir Keith Murdoch (1885–1952) and Elisabeth Greene (1909-2012). He has English, Irish and Scottish ancestry.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rupert_Murdoch
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: orthonorm on February 09, 2013, 05:06:25 PM
People arguing over whether someone in the media is a Jew or not.

A lose-lose proposition.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Ioannis Climacus on February 09, 2013, 06:22:21 PM
LBK,

You wrote:
Last time I checked, Rupert Murdoch has no Jewish ancestry, nor has he ever identified himself as Jewish

What do you think about Yahoo Answers?
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071025102913AAjilr3

His grandmother was Jewish.. Do you think that's enough to drive him into the International Jewish Cabal?

I think the reality is closer to this:  

From Wikipedia:

Murdoch was born in Melbourne, the only son of Sir Keith Murdoch (1885–1952) and Elisabeth Greene (1909-2012). He has English, Irish and Scottish ancestry.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rupert_Murdoch
I believe that Br. Nathanael has argued yes, on the grounds that "Jewishness" passes through the maternal line. I don't know of any evidence, however, that Murdoch identifies as such. I have found that with people like Br. Nathanael, almost anyone can be connected with almost anything if you try hard enough. He has even "implicated" the woman in my avatar (H. P. Blavatsky) in being a part of the International Jewish Conspiracy™. Much to my disappointment, I can't find the video. I have needed a good laugh recently, but not so much that I want to watch all 150+ of his rants.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: orthonorm on February 09, 2013, 06:28:30 PM
I have needed a good laugh recently, but not so much that I want to watch all 150+ of his rants.

I might soon. I'll let you know.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: yeshuaisiam on February 09, 2013, 06:55:14 PM
Yeah, why would a monk be meek, reticent, and obedient to someone?

Wait, wut?  ;)

:)

I believe monks can be very strong, even outspoken, if they are speaking the truth.  Obviously his abbot approves.  He's in a beautiful setting no doubt.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: yeshuaisiam on February 09, 2013, 07:06:03 PM
Yeshuaisiam,

Would you (still?) consider yourself a Messianic Christian? If so what do you think about Chr.Zionism and the State it follows? (You can mention it on the politics forum, if you prefer).

Sort of.

I just try to adapt my life around the practices of VERY early Christians as much as possible.  Often this leads people to confusion and myself as well. :)

I keep the Sabbath (as the Early Christians) and recognize the Lord's day.  My family practices much adaptation of the early Christians in lifestyle.   We learn from some of the understanding of the Hebrew culture that the Messianic Christians (Nazarites) can teach, and how it makes the life of Yeshua even more beautiful and incredible.  However, we do believe in the Trinity, unlike many Messianic Jews.

We do not wear gold/costly array, the women in my family cover their heads as commanded because they are to "pray without ceasing".   We do not take oaths, can't hold any public or government jobs.... This is much like many of the Anabaptists.

We do also practice some of the beautiful roots of Orthodoxy.  We sing many of its hymns at home, love the stories of the Saints, traditions, etc.    As many know however, we do not practice Orthodoxy fully for reasons on many other threads.  I know to many EO is an "all or none package", which is probably why I confuse a lot. 

To answer directly, I do not believe that Jews are Zionist Jews at all.   The Zionist Jews Brother Nathanael speaks of are not the typical "Jew".
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on February 09, 2013, 10:40:19 PM
Yeah, why would a monk be meek, reticent, and obedient to someone?

Wait, wut?  ;)

:)

I believe monks can be very strong, even outspoken, if they are speaking the truth.  Obviously his abbot approves.  He's in a beautiful setting no doubt.

Whose his "Abbot" ?.. And if you have an address for him that would be super.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: rakovsky on February 10, 2013, 12:18:27 PM
Dear Yesh.,

Thanks for replying. I think it's an attractive idea as you say:
I just try to adapt my life around the practices of VERY early Christians as much as possible.  Often this leads people to confusion and myself as well. :)

I keep the Sabbath (as the Early Christians) and recognize the Lord's day.  My family practices much adaptation of the early Christians in lifestyle.   We learn from some of the understanding of the Hebrew culture that the Messianic Christians (Nazarites) can teach, and how it makes the life of Yeshua even more beautiful and incredible.  However, we do believe in the Trinity, unlike many Messianic Jews.

We do not wear gold/costly array, the women in my family cover their heads as commanded because they are to "pray without ceasing".   We do not take oaths, can't hold any public or government jobs.... This is much like many of the Anabaptists.
By "we", do you mean that there is a specific religious group that shares your orientation that mixes Messianic and Orthodox customs?

You mentioned an interesting point when you said:
Quote
As many know however, we do not practice Orthodoxy fully for reasons on many other threads.  I know to many EO is an "all or none package", which is probably why I confuse a lot.

Orthodoxy also has a goal of continuing the practices of the first Christians. It also a goal of being a full package on important beliefs, as opposed to lesser questions about customs (Greek vs Russian vs Western Rite Orthodox).

An  early Christian example of Orthodoxy being a full package on main beliefs is the Council of Jerusalem, where the Church came together to take a united belief on whether non-Jews would follow the Torah. Incidentally, that particular case relates to the issue you bring up of whether non-Jews like us should follow many things in the Torah, like keeping a strict Sabbath.

Nonetheless, I do find the Messianics' claim worthy of discussion, because early Jewish Christians did keep the Sabbath, yet Church canons prohibit anyone from keeping Jewish feasts (I know even Orthodox leaders do not always follow this). At the same time, due to a positive urge at interfaith reconciliation, as well as unfamiliarity with the gospels, one can overlook the differences that early Jewish Christians had with the larger religious community, even including Torah observance (for example, the issue of whether food can make someone ritually "unclean". Matt 15:11)
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Santagranddad on February 10, 2013, 12:34:31 PM


[/quote]I believe that Br. Nathanael has argued yes, on the grounds that "Jewishness" passes through the maternal line. I don't know of any evidence, however, that Murdoch identifies as such. I have found that with people like Br. Nathanael, almost anyone can be connected with almost anything if you try hard enough. He has even "implicated" the woman in my avatar (H. P. Blavatsky) in being a part of the International Jewish Conspiracy™. Much to my disappointment, I can't find the video. I have needed a good laugh recently, but not so much that I want to watch all 150+ of his rants.
[/quote]

Rabbinic Jews assert that Jewish lineage passes through the female line but the Kairites assert it passes along the male line.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: rakovsky on February 10, 2013, 12:36:55 PM
I read here that (Br.?) Nathanael is involved with a noncanonical group to whose monastery he belonged, but that he also belongs to ROCOR, which is canonical. I am not sure whether this contradictory state of affairs is itself canonical. I mean, how can it be canonical for someone to belong to a noncanonical group or monastery?

Obviously his political views do not go against Orthodoxy's religious views. But since his main religious activity seems to be with the noncanonical group, doesn't that suggest that his anti-elitist activism and organization are more orientated to his noncanonical activity as well?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: rakovsky on February 10, 2013, 12:38:42 PM
Rabbinic Jews assert that Jewish lineage passes through the female line but the Kairites assert it passes along the male line.
Hmmm... This seems possible too, because I think that in the OT censuses people were identified based on male descent, like the Levites were identified based on their descent from Aaron (a paternal figure).
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Santagranddad on February 10, 2013, 02:30:54 PM
All the genealogies in the Bible follow the male line, not the female.

And the Samaritans bring in Jews but only females.

Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Ebor on February 10, 2013, 02:50:52 PM
I read here that (Br.?) Nathanael is involved with a noncanonical group to whose monastery he belonged,

I went looking for the precise information on this as it has been some years since I had a brush with Nathanael over on the E-Cafe.  He was a novice in ROAC under Gregory of Colorado in 2005 when there was some form of disagreement that involve the local sheriff's office.   So it has been more than 7.5 years since he was associated with a monastery unless there's another one that he's been with since.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: yeshuaisiam on February 10, 2013, 04:47:06 PM
Dear Yesh.,

Thanks for replying. I think it's an attractive idea as you say:
I just try to adapt my life around the practices of VERY early Christians as much as possible.  Often this leads people to confusion and myself as well. :)

I keep the Sabbath (as the Early Christians) and recognize the Lord's day.  My family practices much adaptation of the early Christians in lifestyle.   We learn from some of the understanding of the Hebrew culture that the Messianic Christians (Nazarites) can teach, and how it makes the life of Yeshua even more beautiful and incredible.  However, we do believe in the Trinity, unlike many Messianic Jews.

We do not wear gold/costly array, the women in my family cover their heads as commanded because they are to "pray without ceasing".   We do not take oaths, can't hold any public or government jobs.... This is much like many of the Anabaptists.
By "we", do you mean that there is a specific religious group that shares your orientation that mixes Messianic and Orthodox customs?

You mentioned an interesting point when you said:
Quote
As many know however, we do not practice Orthodoxy fully for reasons on many other threads.  I know to many EO is an "all or none package", which is probably why I confuse a lot.

Orthodoxy also has a goal of continuing the practices of the first Christians. It also a goal of being a full package on important beliefs, as opposed to lesser questions about customs (Greek vs Russian vs Western Rite Orthodox).

An  early Christian example of Orthodoxy being a full package on main beliefs is the Council of Jerusalem, where the Church came together to take a united belief on whether non-Jews would follow the Torah. Incidentally, that particular case relates to the issue you bring up of whether non-Jews like us should follow many things in the Torah, like keeping a strict Sabbath.

Nonetheless, I do find the Messianics' claim worthy of discussion, because early Jewish Christians did keep the Sabbath, yet Church canons prohibit anyone from keeping Jewish feasts (I know even Orthodox leaders do not always follow this). At the same time, due to a positive urge at interfaith reconciliation, as well as unfamiliarity with the gospels, one can overlook the differences that early Jewish Christians had with the larger religious community, even including Torah observance (for example, the issue of whether food can make someone ritually "unclean". Matt 15:11)

By "we" I mean my family.

To go further, would heavily hijack this thread... Let's just say I disagree with your statement of the EO church's goal.  We can discuss in PM because this would be another unfortunate can of worms. :)  God bless.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Shanghaiski on February 10, 2013, 04:47:42 PM
I read here that (Br.?) Nathanael is involved with a noncanonical group to whose monastery he belonged,

I went looking for the precise information on this as it has been some years since I had a brush with Nathanael over on the E-Cafe.  He was a novice in ROAC under Gregory of Colorado in 2005 when there was some form of disagreement that involve the local sheriff's office.   So it has been more than 7.5 years since he was associated with a monastery unless there's another one that he's been with since.

I was under the impression that there was newer information that Nathanael had gone into canonical Orthodoxy.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: yeshuaisiam on February 10, 2013, 04:48:38 PM
I read here that (Br.?) Nathanael is involved with a noncanonical group to whose monastery he belonged, but that he also belongs to ROCOR, which is canonical. I am not sure whether this contradictory state of affairs is itself canonical. I mean, how can it be canonical for someone to belong to a noncanonical group or monastery?

Obviously his political views do not go against Orthodoxy's religious views. But since his main religious activity seems to be with the noncanonical group, doesn't that suggest that his anti-elitist activism and organization are more orientated to his noncanonical activity as well?

Is he with HOCNA?  I can't remember.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: yeshuaisiam on February 10, 2013, 05:04:31 PM
In my opinion guys, there is no use looking for "who he is with" honestly. 

He is what he is.  His abbot obviously approves.

That said -

What exactly does he say that is wrong that you can factually discredit?  Is this more of an issue that some of you would rather see a monk beaten down, silent, and a wimp?  Is this a control issue people have against monks?

I have absolutely no problem with a monk speaking the TRUTH.  I don't care how "outspoken" it sounds, as the truth stands on a rock.  I am not a person who wishes to control another human being wishing them to be wimpy and under "orders".   I believe we are all equals, who are all sinners, and we do God's will. 

Brother Nathanael -
1) Promotes Orthodoxy -  Check
2) Promotes faith in Christ - Check
3) Condemns those oppressing, wanting to oppress,  and confusing Christians - Check
4) Speaks from his own experiences in Judaism - Check
5) Supports his arguments with facts, quotes, and video excerpts - Check

I can't have a problem with him.  He's not antisemite, he's anti Zionist.

I think this is a funky control issue that many EO Christians have.  Some people seem so weak in their own lives that they'd rather shove a monk in place and make him "mind" than listen to what he has to say.  Monks are about humility and humbleness, but they are also about truth and will do right in the face of evil.  Brother Nathanael fights what he sees as evil.

Not all monks are the same.  There are hermit monks... There are your "obedient subservient" ones.  There are monks who beat iron on anvils for a good part of the day making fishing gear.  There are monks who make icons, candles, incense.  There are also monks who make coffee.  There are are monks who help in heavy duty construction projects.   Brother Nathanael, he's outspoken against evil on youtube.

His abbot approves.  Obviously.  He wouldn't be this big if not.  Web sites, weekly videos, full edits with special effects, texts, and video cut ins.  Obviously lots of time spent on this.

If his abbot approves, that's all folks. 


Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Shanghaiski on February 10, 2013, 05:18:29 PM
It has not even been confirmed that he has an abbot. As a novice, he is not a tonsured monk. He has not given a vow of obedience so he can technically go and do whatever he wants, say whatever he wants, etc. He is not accountable accept as he chooses to be, and he can change on his own whim.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Asteriktos on February 10, 2013, 05:24:18 PM
Is he with HOCNA?  I can't remember.

Is there anything left of HOCNA?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Shanghaiski on February 10, 2013, 05:55:13 PM
Is he with HOCNA?  I can't remember.

Is there anything left of HOCNA?

Take Internet presence and divide by 10?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Asteriktos on February 10, 2013, 06:09:13 PM
Is he with HOCNA?  I can't remember.

Is there anything left of HOCNA?

Take Internet presence and divide by 10?

Well, there was a major fracturing last year, and a lot of their monks/parishes went to the GOC (Fr. Anastasios' group). That was after a couple of their bishops had made a similar move a year earlier. Not sure what the exact numbers are...

[in before Michal Kalina says "schismatics being schismatic"]
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Ebor on February 10, 2013, 06:11:43 PM
I read here that (Br.?) Nathanael is involved with a noncanonical group to whose monastery he belonged,

I went looking for the precise information on this as it has been some years since I had a brush with Nathanael over on the E-Cafe.  He was a novice in ROAC under Gregory of Colorado in 2005 when there was some form of disagreement that involve the local sheriff's office.   So it has been more than 7.5 years since he was associated with a monastery unless there's another one that he's been with since.

I was under the impression that there was newer information that Nathanael had gone into canonical Orthodoxy.

I was merely giving the information about his being part, however briefly, with the "non-canonical group" as it unfolded on the E-Cafe more than seven years ago.

He may be associated with some canonical jurisdiction now, but I haven't seen any information about any other abbot/monastery having taken him on, as it were.  

He still has several things on his "news" site putting for the loathsome forgery "The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion" as true and real.  It isn't and it has been used for more than a century to promote antagonism against human beings. That he is also, at least a month ago, part of the "Sandy Hook is a Conspiracy" does nothing to instill faith in his particular ideas.

Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on February 10, 2013, 07:07:54 PM
I read here that (Br.?) Nathanael is involved with a noncanonical group to whose monastery he belonged, but that he also belongs to ROCOR, which is canonical. I am not sure whether this contradictory state of affairs is itself canonical. I mean, how can it be canonical for someone to belong to a noncanonical group or monastery?

Obviously his political views do not go against Orthodoxy's religious views. But since his main religious activity seems to be with the noncanonical group, doesn't that suggest that his anti-elitist activism and organization are more orientated to his noncanonical activity as well?

+Met Hilarion, hierarch of Rocor looked me in the eye and confirmed that Br. Nataniel is not a member of Rocor. This was no more than six months ago.
He went on to tell me about Br. Nathaniel's attacks on Rocor concerning reunification with Moscow  (since recanted by Br. Nathaniel).
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: LBK on February 10, 2013, 07:13:55 PM

+Met Hilarion, hierarch of Rocor looked me in the eye and confirmed that Br. Nataniel is not a member of Rocor. This was no more than six months ago.
He went on to tell me about Br. Nathaniel's attacks on Rocor concerning reunification with Moscow  (since recanted by Br. Nathaniel).

That, folks should settle it. Anyone who knows HE Hilarion knows he would be telling the truth.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Ebor on February 10, 2013, 07:18:35 PM
I saw some of his screeds against the ROCOR/MP reunification.  They were vile, crude and scurrilous.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: rakovsky on February 10, 2013, 07:20:46 PM
+Met Hilarion, hierarch of Rocor looked me in the eye and confirmed that Br. Nataniel is not a member of Rocor.
He went on to tell me about Br. Nathaniel's attacks on Rocor concerning reunification with Moscow  (since recanted by Br. Nathaniel).
That, folks should settle it. Anyone who knows HE Hilarion knows he would be telling the truth.
Of course- if Met. Hilarion did say this. Is there anything to confirm that?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on February 10, 2013, 07:21:28 PM
In my opinion guys, there is no use looking for "who he is with" honestly. 

He is what he is.  His abbot obviously approves.

That said -

What exactly does he say that is wrong that you can factually discredit?  Is this more of an issue that some of you would rather see a monk beaten down, silent, and a wimp?  Is this a control issue people have against monks?

I have absolutely no problem with a monk speaking the TRUTH.  I don't care how "outspoken" it sounds, as the truth stands on a rock.  I am not a person who wishes to control another human being wishing them to be wimpy and under "orders".   I believe we are all equals, who are all sinners, and we do God's will. 

Brother Nathanael -
1) Promotes Orthodoxy -  Check
2) Promotes faith in Christ - Check
3) Condemns those oppressing, wanting to oppress,  and confusing Christians - Check
4) Speaks from his own experiences in Judaism - Check
5) Supports his arguments with facts, quotes, and video excerpts - Check

I can't have a problem with him.  He's not antisemite, he's anti Zionist.

I think this is a funky control issue that many EO Christians have.  Some people seem so weak in their own lives that they'd rather shove a monk in place and make him "mind" than listen to what he has to say.  Monks are about humility and humbleness, but they are also about truth and will do right in the face of evil.  Brother Nathanael fights what he sees as evil.

Not all monks are the same.  There are hermit monks... There are your "obedient subservient" ones.  There are monks who beat iron on anvils for a good part of the day making fishing gear.  There are monks who make icons, candles, incense.  There are also monks who make coffee.  There are are monks who help in heavy duty construction projects.   Brother Nathanael, he's outspoken against evil on youtube.

His abbot approves.  Obviously.  He wouldn't be this big if not.  Web sites, weekly videos, full edits with special effects, texts, and video cut ins.  Obviously lots of time spent on this.

If his abbot approves, that's all folks. 




He's not antisemite, he's anti Zionist.

Naw... he's a straight up Antisemite.

Self hating Jews are not a new thing. For example, in the Warsaw Ghetto the Germans recruited a Jewish Police force to work for them. Br. Nathaniel is cut from that same cloth.. He is loathsome.

(https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRRkLJC32HZG9agsvZsq6VGEA41Oen4io4My9y-e___kr-vhLP5Jg)

(https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTTFypIp_YA_GPtKqOwuqsjErYEhZbC-NeBBm0PpKNu4faSbqWyxA)

(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTkSmVwSgCjDCEOXfhnwbWq5vhgVGaxZed6WXlhfZlHD-gDZbZp-g)

(https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQnjdrlHOyMdKEYKFXhC_J1jYd7qXGM8rJPVQ4zILMaCYnn8HFj)
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on February 10, 2013, 07:23:01 PM
+Met Hilarion, hierarch of Rocor looked me in the eye and confirmed that Br. Nataniel is not a member of Rocor.
He went on to tell me about Br. Nathaniel's attacks on Rocor concerning reunification with Moscow  (since recanted by Br. Nathaniel).
That, folks should settle it. Anyone who knows HE Hilarion knows he would be telling the truth.
Of course- if Met. Hilarion did say this. Is there anything to confirm that?

He is not a member of Rocor.



Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on February 10, 2013, 07:35:14 PM
I just went to the About section of his web page.

http://brothernathanaelfoundation.org/about

Read carefully:

Brother Nathanael Kapner is a recognized monastic with the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Of Russia (ROCOR) where he is officially recognized as a "poslushnik"/"novice" monk.

Brother Nathanael speaks and writes as a former Jew--now an Orthodox Christian--and not in any official capacity with the ROCOR jurisdiction. He resides in the Rocky Mountains of Colorado.



He is actually being a little vague isn't he? He is saying that his status as a Novice is recognized by Rocor. This is true. His status as a Novice is indeed "recognized" as valid. Met. Hillarion himself mentioned to me that Nathaniel is a Novice. There is no question about that. That does not mean he is a member of Rocor....does it? It just means what he said. His status as a Novice is recognized, just like it would be in the OCA or GOA or anywhere else..

He then goes on to say that he has no authority what so ever to speak for Rocor. Yes, non members with not position of authority cant speak for Rocor.. Duh

Duplicity seems to be his game. 

Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Santagranddad on February 10, 2013, 07:54:52 PM
Whatever he is or is not he certainly appears to be a propagandist 'par excellence'. But then so was Josef Goebbels.

As to anything else, heaven only knows!
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: rakovsky on February 10, 2013, 08:01:39 PM
Brother Nathanael Kapner is a recognized monastic with the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Of Russia (ROCOR) where he is officially recognized as a "poslushnik"/"novice" monk.

His status as a Novice is indeed "recognized" as valid. Met. Hillarion himself mentioned to me that Nathaniel is a Novice. That does not mean he is a member of Rocor....does it?
His status as a Novice is recognized, just like it would be in the OCA or GOA or anywhere else..
Marc, I am doubtful he really is with ROCOR, but it would be more helpful if there was a statement by a clergyman recorded to that effect. Not just between you and me, but so people elsewhere would know.

His statement above basically means that he is a "monk with ROCOR".
If someone says they are "a boy scout with the Boy Scouts of America but do not speak for it in an official capacity", it means they are a member of it, but do not have the role of a leader or spokesperson.
Quote
Actually I recently wrote to Brother Kapner and asked him about his status. He referred me to his Bishop, His Grace Jerome of The Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia (ROCOR). So, I did. He said that Brother Kapner is indeed an Orthodox Christian and while he is not a full monk, he is a novice, which makes him a monastic.
Dec 30, 2011
http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php?a=topic&t=19083&min=20&num=10
But then again, you said your conversation with Bp. Hilarion was more recent.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: orthonorm on February 10, 2013, 08:48:21 PM
In my opinion guys, there is no use looking for "who he is with" honestly. 

He is what he is.  His abbot obviously approves.

That said -

What exactly does he say that is wrong that you can factually discredit?  Is this more of an issue that some of you would rather see a monk beaten down, silent, and a wimp?  Is this a control issue people have against monks?

I have absolutely no problem with a monk speaking the TRUTH.  I don't care how "outspoken" it sounds, as the truth stands on a rock.  I am not a person who wishes to control another human being wishing them to be wimpy and under "orders".   I believe we are all equals, who are all sinners, and we do God's will. 

Brother Nathanael -
1) Promotes Orthodoxy -  Check
2) Promotes faith in Christ - Check
3) Condemns those oppressing, wanting to oppress,  and confusing Christians - Check
4) Speaks from his own experiences in Judaism - Check
5) Supports his arguments with facts, quotes, and video excerpts - Check

I can't have a problem with him.  He's not antisemite, he's anti Zionist.

I think this is a funky control issue that many EO Christians have.  Some people seem so weak in their own lives that they'd rather shove a monk in place and make him "mind" than listen to what he has to say.  Monks are about humility and humbleness, but they are also about truth and will do right in the face of evil.  Brother Nathanael fights what he sees as evil.

Not all monks are the same.  There are hermit monks... There are your "obedient subservient" ones.  There are monks who beat iron on anvils for a good part of the day making fishing gear.  There are monks who make icons, candles, incense.  There are also monks who make coffee.  There are are monks who help in heavy duty construction projects.   Brother Nathanael, he's outspoken against evil on youtube.

His abbot approves.  Obviously.  He wouldn't be this big if not.  Web sites, weekly videos, full edits with special effects, texts, and video cut ins.  Obviously lots of time spent on this.

If his abbot approves, that's all folks. 




He's not antisemite, he's anti Zionist.

Naw... he's a straight up Antisemite.

Self hating Jews are not a new thing. For example, in the Warsaw Ghetto the Germans recruited a Jewish Police force to work for them. Br. Nathaniel is cut from that same cloth.. He is loathsome.

(https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRRkLJC32HZG9agsvZsq6VGEA41Oen4io4My9y-e___kr-vhLP5Jg)

(https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTTFypIp_YA_GPtKqOwuqsjErYEhZbC-NeBBm0PpKNu4faSbqWyxA)

(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTkSmVwSgCjDCEOXfhnwbWq5vhgVGaxZed6WXlhfZlHD-gDZbZp-g)

(https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQnjdrlHOyMdKEYKFXhC_J1jYd7qXGM8rJPVQ4zILMaCYnn8HFj)

Rly Marc? Can you knock this stuff off just a little?

You understanding of the role of Jews within the power relations of the camps in which they served is probably less than sophisticated.

But that aside, please stop posting for the most insipid of reasons photos of the misery and death of others. Your trivializing of these persons' unfortunate plight to make some tangential and confused point on a internet board strikes me a being rather tasteless.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on February 10, 2013, 08:51:49 PM
Brother Nathanael Kapner is a recognized monastic with the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Of Russia (ROCOR) where he is officially recognized as a "poslushnik"/"novice" monk.

His status as a Novice is indeed "recognized" as valid. Met. Hillarion himself mentioned to me that Nathaniel is a Novice. That does not mean he is a member of Rocor....does it?
His status as a Novice is recognized, just like it would be in the OCA or GOA or anywhere else..
Marc, I am doubtful he really is with ROCOR, but it would be more helpful if there was a statement by a clergyman recorded to that effect. Not just between you and me, but so people elsewhere would know.

His statement above basically means that he is a "monk with ROCOR".
If someone says they are "a boy scout with the Boy Scouts of America but do not speak for it in an official capacity", it means they are a member of it, but do not have the role of a leader or spokesperson.
Quote
Actually I recently wrote to Brother Kapner and asked him about his status. He referred me to his Bishop, His Grace Jerome of The Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia (ROCOR). So, I did. He said that Brother Kapner is indeed an Orthodox Christian and while he is not a full monk, he is a novice, which makes him a monastic.
Dec 30, 2011
http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php?a=topic&t=19083&min=20&num=10
But then again, you said your conversation with Bp. Hilarion was more recent.

I asked the Heirarch and got a direct answer.  I'm complete on the issue.

I found this post on catholicinfo.not com. I dont want to copy posts from another forum so just click on the link:

http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php?a=topic&t=19083&min=10&num=5

Apparently someone there wrote to Fr. Serge head of the Rocor media office and asked about Br. Nathaniel. Fr. Serge confirmed that Nathaniel is not a member of Rocor and he doesn't think that he is even a monk.

These are just posts on a forum so i suggest if you want to know more that you do the same and write to Fr. Serge as well.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on February 10, 2013, 09:02:14 PM
In my opinion guys, there is no use looking for "who he is with" honestly. 

He is what he is.  His abbot obviously approves.

That said -

What exactly does he say that is wrong that you can factually discredit?  Is this more of an issue that some of you would rather see a monk beaten down, silent, and a wimp?  Is this a control issue people have against monks?

I have absolutely no problem with a monk speaking the TRUTH.  I don't care how "outspoken" it sounds, as the truth stands on a rock.  I am not a person who wishes to control another human being wishing them to be wimpy and under "orders".   I believe we are all equals, who are all sinners, and we do God's will. 

Brother Nathanael -
1) Promotes Orthodoxy -  Check
2) Promotes faith in Christ - Check
3) Condemns those oppressing, wanting to oppress,  and confusing Christians - Check
4) Speaks from his own experiences in Judaism - Check
5) Supports his arguments with facts, quotes, and video excerpts - Check

I can't have a problem with him.  He's not antisemite, he's anti Zionist.

I think this is a funky control issue that many EO Christians have.  Some people seem so weak in their own lives that they'd rather shove a monk in place and make him "mind" than listen to what he has to say.  Monks are about humility and humbleness, but they are also about truth and will do right in the face of evil.  Brother Nathanael fights what he sees as evil.

Not all monks are the same.  There are hermit monks... There are your "obedient subservient" ones.  There are monks who beat iron on anvils for a good part of the day making fishing gear.  There are monks who make icons, candles, incense.  There are also monks who make coffee.  There are are monks who help in heavy duty construction projects.   Brother Nathanael, he's outspoken against evil on youtube.

His abbot approves.  Obviously.  He wouldn't be this big if not.  Web sites, weekly videos, full edits with special effects, texts, and video cut ins.  Obviously lots of time spent on this.

If his abbot approves, that's all folks. 




He's not antisemite, he's anti Zionist.

Naw... he's a straight up Antisemite.

Self hating Jews are not a new thing. For example, in the Warsaw Ghetto the Germans recruited a Jewish Police force to work for them. Br. Nathaniel is cut from that same cloth.. He is loathsome.

(https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRRkLJC32HZG9agsvZsq6VGEA41Oen4io4My9y-e___kr-vhLP5Jg)

(https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTTFypIp_YA_GPtKqOwuqsjErYEhZbC-NeBBm0PpKNu4faSbqWyxA)

(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTkSmVwSgCjDCEOXfhnwbWq5vhgVGaxZed6WXlhfZlHD-gDZbZp-g)

(https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQnjdrlHOyMdKEYKFXhC_J1jYd7qXGM8rJPVQ4zILMaCYnn8HFj)

Rly Marc? Can you knock this stuff off just a little?

You understanding of the role of Jews within the power relations of the camps in which they served is probably less than sophisticated.

But that aside, please stop posting for the most insipid of reasons photos of the misery and death of others. Your trivializing of these persons' unfortunate plight to make some tangential and confused point on a internet board strikes me a being rather tasteless.

Youre interpretation is muddled.

I am giving an example of the kind of person Nathaniel is, a self hating Jew.The nearest equivalent are the Jewish Police in the Warsaw Ghetto.

(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTRjWc6kLZOmCsshFV--oy7BHqzHpCupJXtb49dy12tVC_cpRsr0w)

(https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSG2SEdY_x3B8upqYIqUhSZkE8uc_DnZ9foV8cP1Y_-Y1ORmwwBqw)

(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQV_pmRpypn4xoYoLuFzFoRlkNuN74L0H0RpQTsW1ekDNdR9mJprQ)

Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: rakovsky on February 10, 2013, 09:16:52 PM
Marc,

Thanks for posting. I do think it's strange he would be ROCOR and also in a noncanonical jurisdiction at the same time. On one hand, we have your discussion with Met. Hilarion and a statement from Fr. Sergei, both from 6 months ago, and statements by Bp. Shaw and another clergyman that he was part of ROCOR a year ago.

As you point out this is all hearsay, but I guess what you are saying is right because it's strange he would be ROCOR and also a monk in a noncanonical jurisdiction, although he could have left one for the other. One could ask why he says he is ROCOR or ROCA (he has signed both, perhaps at different times), and why he would "recant" of anti-ROCOR statements if he had no interest in ROCOR to begin with.

The issue under discussion is:  ::)

Regards.  
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Fr.Aidan on February 10, 2013, 09:20:43 PM
1. Br. Nathanael is absolutely a member of ROCOR, according to our bishops.
2. Br. Nathanael has made clear he is anti-Zionist, not anti-Semite. Of course, recent dictionaries equating anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism, though there is no logical basis for such a conflation, don't help the clarity of things.
3. Many Jewish faithful are also anti-Zionist, especially the Orthodox and more conservative Jews, and also Hebrew Hippies (sorry, couldn't resist).
4. The website appears non-vague in delivering two important pieces of info: that he is a novice in ROCOR and that he does not speak for ROCOR.
5. I view him as being, in our times, a sort of Cassandra of Troy. Even his (asserted) assertion that Sandy Hook was a psy-op, has quite a bit of evidence in its favor, although I am not ready to subscribe to a particular version of events behind those events. I believe there are still many unanswered questions, and am very, very reluctant to assert things which could turn out to be untrue or which can't be proven.

6. But to me the big doozy here, the elephant in the room most seem to be missing, is that we have horribly evil people doing evil and horrible things to people that are causing and can yet cause untold deaths and suffering, and deprive people of their most basic human dignity. In the context of these heinous and enormous crimes, the whistleblower is attacked. Then, instead of speaking ill of the wicked criminals who are actually harming and killing and sterilizing people and starting unnecessary wars, and doing much other mischief, our eccentric and outspoken but completely harmless Br. Nathanael is himself attacked.

There's something profoundly and extremely wrong with this picture.

P.S. While the Other Mainstream Media (Limbaugh, Hannity, Savage, etc.) always speak ill of the ACLU, the fact is that on occasion they have defended the right to free speech of some  persons we cannot possibly see as exhibiting the political views which the ACLU seems to espouse. The ACLU has worked to defend Constitutional rights of various persons. So I disagree with the broad-brush and view them more as a mixed bag of advocacy.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: rakovsky on February 10, 2013, 09:29:35 PM
1. Br. Nathanael is absolutely a member of ROCOR, according to our bishops.
Fr. Aidan,

Can you confirm whether he is still a member of ROCOR within the last 6 months, and can I please ask what is your basis for that?

Thanks.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: pmpn8rGPT on February 10, 2013, 10:26:03 PM
I think the ultimate answer to Brother Nathanael is to take his videos with a grain of salt.  I have heard over and over that he is not an anti-semite yet I, honestly, can't agree with that.  However, the evidence that he backs for all his claims about ZIONISTS is very much unrefutable.  Like every guy on the internet you should take some and leave some, with Br. Nathanael you should probably leave a little more.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on February 11, 2013, 12:00:10 AM
1. Br. Nathanael is absolutely a member of ROCOR, according to our bishops.
2. Br. Nathanael has made clear he is anti-Zionist, not anti-Semite. Of course, recent dictionaries equating anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism, though there is no logical basis for such a conflation, don't help the clarity of things.
3. Many Jewish faithful are also anti-Zionist, especially the Orthodox and more conservative Jews, and also Hebrew Hippies (sorry, couldn't resist).
4. The website appears non-vague in delivering two important pieces of info: that he is a novice in ROCOR and that he does not speak for ROCOR.
5. I view him as being, in our times, a sort of Cassandra of Troy. Even his (asserted) assertion that Sandy Hook was a psy-op, has quite a bit of evidence in its favor, although I am not ready to subscribe to a particular version of events behind those events. I believe there are still many unanswered questions, and am very, very reluctant to assert things which could turn out to be untrue or which can't be proven.

6. But to me the big doozy here, the elephant in the room most seem to be missing, is that we have horribly evil people doing evil and horrible things to people that are causing and can yet cause untold deaths and suffering, and deprive people of their most basic human dignity. In the context of these heinous and enormous crimes, the whistleblower is attacked. Then, instead of speaking ill of the wicked criminals who are actually harming and killing and sterilizing people and starting unnecessary wars, and doing much other mischief, our eccentric and outspoken but completely harmless Br. Nathanael is himself attacked.

There's something profoundly and extremely wrong with this picture.

P.S. While the Other Mainstream Media (Limbaugh, Hannity, Savage, etc.) always speak ill of the ACLU, the fact is that on occasion they have defended the right to free speech of some  persons we cannot possibly see as exhibiting the political views which the ACLU seems to espouse. The ACLU has worked to defend Constitutional rights of various persons. So I disagree with the broad-brush and view them more as a mixed bag of advocacy.

1. He is not a member of Rocor according to Met. Hillarion
2. He is a notorious Anti-Semite, not just Anti-Zionist.. If you cant tell the difference then that doest speak well of you.
    Holding up signs that say ACLU Jews are the Anti-Christ is pretty clearly Anti-Semitic with nothing what so ever to do with Israel.

3. If you think "Brother" Nathaniel is some sort of "Whistle Blower" than you have very poor insight about such things.. IMHO..

I find it enormously disappointing that an Orthodox Priest thinks highly of such a vicious Anti-Semite and subscribes to his warped theories..At best you could dismiss Nathaniel as mentally ill but to take him seriously is rather breathtaking... I will stop at that before I say something I will regret.

   
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: yeshuaisiam on February 11, 2013, 12:10:02 AM
Is he with HOCNA?  I can't remember.

Is there anything left of HOCNA?

Take Internet presence and divide by 10?

Well, there was a major fracturing last year, and a lot of their monks/parishes went to the GOC (Fr. Anastasios' group). That was after a couple of their bishops had made a similar move a year earlier. Not sure what the exact numbers are...

[in before Michal Kalina says "schismatics being schismatic"]

I thought Father Anastasios was with HOTCA....  (acronyms seem similar)

HOCNA had some kind of homosexual scandal... I think somebody in HOCNA accused Bishop Gregory (dormition skete) of being gay.  It was one of their uppers, but I'm not well versed in all scandals.  As far as I know, totally different bunch, but I don't know much.

HOTCA on the other hand, as far as I can tell is old calendar, anti ecumenism, and very traditional.  They are the "Church of the Genuine Greek Orthodox in America" not part of GOC.  If I rejoined Orthodoxy, I would go with HOTCA myself...

Title added by moderator.
(http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/Themes/Pascha2010/images/warnwarn.gif) You are given 14 days of warning for not using a title for clergy. Carl Kraeff (second Chance)
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: yeshuaisiam on February 11, 2013, 12:13:08 AM
In my opinion guys, there is no use looking for "who he is with" honestly. 

He is what he is.  His abbot obviously approves.

That said -

What exactly does he say that is wrong that you can factually discredit?  Is this more of an issue that some of you would rather see a monk beaten down, silent, and a wimp?  Is this a control issue people have against monks?

I have absolutely no problem with a monk speaking the TRUTH.  I don't care how "outspoken" it sounds, as the truth stands on a rock.  I am not a person who wishes to control another human being wishing them to be wimpy and under "orders".   I believe we are all equals, who are all sinners, and we do God's will. 

Brother Nathanael -
1) Promotes Orthodoxy -  Check
2) Promotes faith in Christ - Check
3) Condemns those oppressing, wanting to oppress,  and confusing Christians - Check
4) Speaks from his own experiences in Judaism - Check
5) Supports his arguments with facts, quotes, and video excerpts - Check

I can't have a problem with him.  He's not antisemite, he's anti Zionist.

I think this is a funky control issue that many EO Christians have.  Some people seem so weak in their own lives that they'd rather shove a monk in place and make him "mind" than listen to what he has to say.  Monks are about humility and humbleness, but they are also about truth and will do right in the face of evil.  Brother Nathanael fights what he sees as evil.

Not all monks are the same.  There are hermit monks... There are your "obedient subservient" ones.  There are monks who beat iron on anvils for a good part of the day making fishing gear.  There are monks who make icons, candles, incense.  There are also monks who make coffee.  There are are monks who help in heavy duty construction projects.   Brother Nathanael, he's outspoken against evil on youtube.

His abbot approves.  Obviously.  He wouldn't be this big if not.  Web sites, weekly videos, full edits with special effects, texts, and video cut ins.  Obviously lots of time spent on this.

If his abbot approves, that's all folks. 




He's not antisemite, he's anti Zionist.

Naw... he's a straight up Antisemite.

Self hating Jews are not a new thing. For example, in the Warsaw Ghetto the Germans recruited a Jewish Police force to work for them. Br. Nathaniel is cut from that same cloth.. He is loathsome.

(https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRRkLJC32HZG9agsvZsq6VGEA41Oen4io4My9y-e___kr-vhLP5Jg)

(https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTTFypIp_YA_GPtKqOwuqsjErYEhZbC-NeBBm0PpKNu4faSbqWyxA)

(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTkSmVwSgCjDCEOXfhnwbWq5vhgVGaxZed6WXlhfZlHD-gDZbZp-g)

(https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQnjdrlHOyMdKEYKFXhC_J1jYd7qXGM8rJPVQ4zILMaCYnn8HFj)

True on the fact some Jews were self hating, however;

Brother Nathanael attacks "elite" Jews, and Jewish teachings that harm gentiles.  He doesn't attack a common Jew.  He attacks principles of Zionism.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: yeshuaisiam on February 11, 2013, 12:22:00 AM
1. Br. Nathanael is absolutely a member of ROCOR, according to our bishops.
2. Br. Nathanael has made clear he is anti-Zionist, not anti-Semite. Of course, recent dictionaries equating anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism, though there is no logical basis for such a conflation, don't help the clarity of things.
3. Many Jewish faithful are also anti-Zionist, especially the Orthodox and more conservative Jews, and also Hebrew Hippies (sorry, couldn't resist).
4. The website appears non-vague in delivering two important pieces of info: that he is a novice in ROCOR and that he does not speak for ROCOR.
5. I view him as being, in our times, a sort of Cassandra of Troy. Even his (asserted) assertion that Sandy Hook was a psy-op, has quite a bit of evidence in its favor, although I am not ready to subscribe to a particular version of events behind those events. I believe there are still many unanswered questions, and am very, very reluctant to assert things which could turn out to be untrue or which can't be proven.

6. But to me the big doozy here, the elephant in the room most seem to be missing, is that we have horribly evil people doing evil and horrible things to people that are causing and can yet cause untold deaths and suffering, and deprive people of their most basic human dignity. In the context of these heinous and enormous crimes, the whistleblower is attacked. Then, instead of speaking ill of the wicked criminals who are actually harming and killing and sterilizing people and starting unnecessary wars, and doing much other mischief, our eccentric and outspoken but completely harmless Br. Nathanael is himself attacked.

There's something profoundly and extremely wrong with this picture.

P.S. While the Other Mainstream Media (Limbaugh, Hannity, Savage, etc.) always speak ill of the ACLU, the fact is that on occasion they have defended the right to free speech of some  persons we cannot possibly see as exhibiting the political views which the ACLU seems to espouse. The ACLU has worked to defend Constitutional rights of various persons. So I disagree with the broad-brush and view them more as a mixed bag of advocacy.

1. He is not a member of Rocor according to Met. Hillarion
2. He is a notorious Anti-Semite, not just Anti-Zionist.. If you cant tell the difference then that doest speak well of you.
    Holding up signs that say ACLU Jews are the Anti-Christ is pretty clearly Anti-Semitic with nothing what so ever to do with Israel.

3. If you think "Brother" Nathaniel is some sort of "Whistle Blower" than you have very poor insight about such things.. IMHO..

I find it enormously disappointing that an Orthodox Priest thinks highly of such a vicious Anti-Semite and subscribes to his warped theories..At best you could dismiss Nathaniel as mentally ill but to take him seriously is rather breathtaking... I will stop at that before I say something I will regret.

  

I agree with Father Aiden's post.

Nathanael is NOT an anti-semite.   There is a huge difference between anti-Zionism and anti-semite.   Anti Zionism is against Jews wanting world domination through Jewish roots obtaining power through the banking, media, and political routes.

I have not once heard him go after Jewish families or common Jews.  When he speaks, it is in terms against Zionists.  He often calls out the names of Zionist Jews and posts videos of them.

I don't really care where he's a member of.  He speaks of faith in the Orthodox Church... The only concern as to where a he is a member of is to go after him through uppers, which is cold.

Title inserted by moderator.
(http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/Themes/Pascha2010/images/warnwarn.gif) Warning period extended to 30 days for not using a title for clergy (again). Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on February 11, 2013, 12:30:21 AM
In my opinion guys, there is no use looking for "who he is with" honestly. 

He is what he is.  His abbot obviously approves.

That said -

What exactly does he say that is wrong that you can factually discredit?  Is this more of an issue that some of you would rather see a monk beaten down, silent, and a wimp?  Is this a control issue people have against monks?

I have absolutely no problem with a monk speaking the TRUTH.  I don't care how "outspoken" it sounds, as the truth stands on a rock.  I am not a person who wishes to control another human being wishing them to be wimpy and under "orders".   I believe we are all equals, who are all sinners, and we do God's will. 

Brother Nathanael -
1) Promotes Orthodoxy -  Check
2) Promotes faith in Christ - Check
3) Condemns those oppressing, wanting to oppress,  and confusing Christians - Check
4) Speaks from his own experiences in Judaism - Check
5) Supports his arguments with facts, quotes, and video excerpts - Check

I can't have a problem with him.  He's not antisemite, he's anti Zionist.

I think this is a funky control issue that many EO Christians have.  Some people seem so weak in their own lives that they'd rather shove a monk in place and make him "mind" than listen to what he has to say.  Monks are about humility and humbleness, but they are also about truth and will do right in the face of evil.  Brother Nathanael fights what he sees as evil.

Not all monks are the same.  There are hermit monks... There are your "obedient subservient" ones.  There are monks who beat iron on anvils for a good part of the day making fishing gear.  There are monks who make icons, candles, incense.  There are also monks who make coffee.  There are are monks who help in heavy duty construction projects.   Brother Nathanael, he's outspoken against evil on youtube.

His abbot approves.  Obviously.  He wouldn't be this big if not.  Web sites, weekly videos, full edits with special effects, texts, and video cut ins.  Obviously lots of time spent on this.

If his abbot approves, that's all folks. 




He's not antisemite, he's anti Zionist.

Naw... he's a straight up Antisemite.

Self hating Jews are not a new thing. For example, in the Warsaw Ghetto the Germans recruited a Jewish Police force to work for them. Br. Nathaniel is cut from that same cloth.. He is loathsome.

(https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRRkLJC32HZG9agsvZsq6VGEA41Oen4io4My9y-e___kr-vhLP5Jg)

(https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTTFypIp_YA_GPtKqOwuqsjErYEhZbC-NeBBm0PpKNu4faSbqWyxA)

(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTkSmVwSgCjDCEOXfhnwbWq5vhgVGaxZed6WXlhfZlHD-gDZbZp-g)

(https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQnjdrlHOyMdKEYKFXhC_J1jYd7qXGM8rJPVQ4zILMaCYnn8HFj)

True on the fact some Jews were self hating, however;

Brother Nathanael attacks "elite" Jews, and Jewish teachings that harm gentiles.  He doesn't attack a common Jew.  He attacks principles of Zionism.

You dont have to scroll through his filth too long to find video's that are simply straight up Antisemitism promoting the idea that Jews rule the country and are responsible for every conceivable evil... Nothing what ever to do with Israel.

Here, see for yourself. What does any of this have to do with Zionism.. ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k68DXCmJ7Jk
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on February 11, 2013, 12:31:50 AM
1. Br. Nathanael is absolutely a member of ROCOR, according to our bishops.
2. Br. Nathanael has made clear he is anti-Zionist, not anti-Semite. Of course, recent dictionaries equating anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism, though there is no logical basis for such a conflation, don't help the clarity of things.
3. Many Jewish faithful are also anti-Zionist, especially the Orthodox and more conservative Jews, and also Hebrew Hippies (sorry, couldn't resist).
4. The website appears non-vague in delivering two important pieces of info: that he is a novice in ROCOR and that he does not speak for ROCOR.
5. I view him as being, in our times, a sort of Cassandra of Troy. Even his (asserted) assertion that Sandy Hook was a psy-op, has quite a bit of evidence in its favor, although I am not ready to subscribe to a particular version of events behind those events. I believe there are still many unanswered questions, and am very, very reluctant to assert things which could turn out to be untrue or which can't be proven.

6. But to me the big doozy here, the elephant in the room most seem to be missing, is that we have horribly evil people doing evil and horrible things to people that are causing and can yet cause untold deaths and suffering, and deprive people of their most basic human dignity. In the context of these heinous and enormous crimes, the whistleblower is attacked. Then, instead of speaking ill of the wicked criminals who are actually harming and killing and sterilizing people and starting unnecessary wars, and doing much other mischief, our eccentric and outspoken but completely harmless Br. Nathanael is himself attacked.

There's something profoundly and extremely wrong with this picture.

P.S. While the Other Mainstream Media (Limbaugh, Hannity, Savage, etc.) always speak ill of the ACLU, the fact is that on occasion they have defended the right to free speech of some  persons we cannot possibly see as exhibiting the political views which the ACLU seems to espouse. The ACLU has worked to defend Constitutional rights of various persons. So I disagree with the broad-brush and view them more as a mixed bag of advocacy.

1. He is not a member of Rocor according to Met. Hillarion
2. He is a notorious Anti-Semite, not just Anti-Zionist.. If you cant tell the difference then that doest speak well of you.
    Holding up signs that say ACLU Jews are the Anti-Christ is pretty clearly Anti-Semitic with nothing what so ever to do with Israel.

3. If you think "Brother" Nathaniel is some sort of "Whistle Blower" than you have very poor insight about such things.. IMHO..

I find it enormously disappointing that an Orthodox Priest thinks highly of such a vicious Anti-Semite and subscribes to his warped theories..At best you could dismiss Nathaniel as mentally ill but to take him seriously is rather breathtaking... I will stop at that before I say something I will regret.

   

I agree with Aiden's post.

Nathanael is NOT an anti-semite.   There is a huge difference between anti-Zionism and anti-semite.   Anti Zionism is against Jews wanting world domination through Jewish roots obtaining power through the banking, media, and political routes.

I have not once heard him go after Jewish families or common Jews.  When he speaks, it is in terms against Zionists.  He often calls out the names of Zionist Jews and posts videos of them.

I don't really care where he's a member of.  He speaks of faith in the Orthodox Church... The only concern as to where a he is a member of is to go after him through uppers, which is cold.

You obviously dont know what Zionism is.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Fr.Aidan on February 11, 2013, 12:38:57 AM
1. He is not a member of Rocor according to Met. Hillarion
2. He is a notorious Anti-Semite, not just Anti-Zionist.. If you cant tell the difference then that doest speak well of you.
    Holding up signs that say ACLU Jews are the Anti-Christ is pretty clearly Anti-Semitic with nothing what so ever to do with Israel.

3. If you think "Brother" Nathaniel is some sort of "Whistle Blower" than you have very poor insight about such things.. IMHO..

I find it enormously disappointing that an Orthodox Priest thinks highly of such a vicious Anti-Semite and subscribes to his warped theories..At best you could dismiss Nathaniel as mentally ill but to take him seriously is rather breathtaking... I will stop at that before I say something I will regret.
 

This whole thing got really illogical in about 2 seconds flat. Here, for example, my opinions have been characterized in a way that surprised me. I don't think I've given enough information for someone to conclude that I have a "high" opinion of Br. Nathanael. I have many criticisms of his activities, and I have shared at least two of my serious misgivings. Do you remember what those were? Yet this is ignored just because I said his presentations have lots of factually-sound data in them.

The fact remains that everyone is ready to ride Br. Nathanael out on a rail, while the really evil people, no one has any problem with. It's so strange, as if, e.g., child rape and kidnapping and murder and war and poisoning men, women, and children were thought to be things of no great moment morally, while poor grammar and spelling were thought utterly intolerable, and attracted all the condemnation better reserved for the foregoing evils.

It just ain't right. And then, taking a person who doesn't even espouse any sort of violence, and equating him with Hitler's henchmen oppressing and killing innocent people, is hugely slanderous and grievously unjust. All because Br. Nathanael points out what a few powerful and evil people are doing?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: pmpn8rGPT on February 11, 2013, 12:42:26 AM
You obviously dont know what Zionism is.
Zionism
Quote
a worldwide Jewish movement that resulted in the establishment and development of the state of Israel.
(source: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Zionism)
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/86/Members_of_Neturei_Karta_Orthodox_Jewish_group_protest_against_Israel.jpg)
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: yeshuaisiam on February 11, 2013, 12:45:06 AM
1. Br. Nathanael is absolutely a member of ROCOR, according to our bishops.
2. Br. Nathanael has made clear he is anti-Zionist, not anti-Semite. Of course, recent dictionaries equating anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism, though there is no logical basis for such a conflation, don't help the clarity of things.
3. Many Jewish faithful are also anti-Zionist, especially the Orthodox and more conservative Jews, and also Hebrew Hippies (sorry, couldn't resist).
4. The website appears non-vague in delivering two important pieces of info: that he is a novice in ROCOR and that he does not speak for ROCOR.
5. I view him as being, in our times, a sort of Cassandra of Troy. Even his (asserted) assertion that Sandy Hook was a psy-op, has quite a bit of evidence in its favor, although I am not ready to subscribe to a particular version of events behind those events. I believe there are still many unanswered questions, and am very, very reluctant to assert things which could turn out to be untrue or which can't be proven.

6. But to me the big doozy here, the elephant in the room most seem to be missing, is that we have horribly evil people doing evil and horrible things to people that are causing and can yet cause untold deaths and suffering, and deprive people of their most basic human dignity. In the context of these heinous and enormous crimes, the whistleblower is attacked. Then, instead of speaking ill of the wicked criminals who are actually harming and killing and sterilizing people and starting unnecessary wars, and doing much other mischief, our eccentric and outspoken but completely harmless Br. Nathanael is himself attacked.

There's something profoundly and extremely wrong with this picture.

P.S. While the Other Mainstream Media (Limbaugh, Hannity, Savage, etc.) always speak ill of the ACLU, the fact is that on occasion they have defended the right to free speech of some  persons we cannot possibly see as exhibiting the political views which the ACLU seems to espouse. The ACLU has worked to defend Constitutional rights of various persons. So I disagree with the broad-brush and view them more as a mixed bag of advocacy.

1. He is not a member of Rocor according to Met. Hillarion
2. He is a notorious Anti-Semite, not just Anti-Zionist.. If you cant tell the difference then that doest speak well of you.
    Holding up signs that say ACLU Jews are the Anti-Christ is pretty clearly Anti-Semitic with nothing what so ever to do with Israel.

3. If you think "Brother" Nathaniel is some sort of "Whistle Blower" than you have very poor insight about such things.. IMHO..

I find it enormously disappointing that an Orthodox Priest thinks highly of such a vicious Anti-Semite and subscribes to his warped theories..At best you could dismiss Nathaniel as mentally ill but to take him seriously is rather breathtaking... I will stop at that before I say something I will regret.

   

I agree with Aiden's post.

Nathanael is NOT an anti-semite.   There is a huge difference between anti-Zionism and anti-semite.   Anti Zionism is against Jews wanting world domination through Jewish roots obtaining power through the banking, media, and political routes.

I have not once heard him go after Jewish families or common Jews.  When he speaks, it is in terms against Zionists.  He often calls out the names of Zionist Jews and posts videos of them.

I don't really care where he's a member of.  He speaks of faith in the Orthodox Church... The only concern as to where a he is a member of is to go after him through uppers, which is cold.

You obviously dont know what Zionism is.

Look, Zionism itself claims to have many branches.   Wikipedia defines them well.

I'm coming from an anti-Zionist position against world domination through money (banking), military, media, and political forces.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Ebor on February 11, 2013, 12:45:44 AM
HOCNA had some kind of homosexual scandal... I think somebody in HOCNA accused Bishop Gregory (dormition skete) of being gay.  It was one of their uppers, but I'm not well versed in all scandals.

I would have to find the document again, but Bishop Gregory of Colorado and his Dormition Skete were with ROAC 7+ years ago, though he passed through ROCOR and HOCNA.  Then he was with ROAC with the now late Metropolitan Valentin of Suzdal in Russia. There should be some threads from that time with a few posters following him either in person or long distance. Then there were some goings-on that led to *that* group splintering around 2004 and BishopGregory's group, according to the skete site is "temporarily independent" and using the name "Genuine Orthodox Church of America"  

There was a scandal with HOCNA some years before that that was separate.

This is just for historical information.

Titles inserted by moderator.
(http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/Themes/Pascha2010/images/warnwarn.gif)
You are given 30 days warning for not using a title for clergy. Carl Kraeff (second Chance)
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: yeshuaisiam on February 11, 2013, 12:47:31 AM
1. He is not a member of Rocor according to Met. Hillarion
2. He is a notorious Anti-Semite, not just Anti-Zionist.. If you cant tell the difference then that doest speak well of you.
    Holding up signs that say ACLU Jews are the Anti-Christ is pretty clearly Anti-Semitic with nothing what so ever to do with Israel.

3. If you think "Brother" Nathaniel is some sort of "Whistle Blower" than you have very poor insight about such things.. IMHO..

I find it enormously disappointing that an Orthodox Priest thinks highly of such a vicious Anti-Semite and subscribes to his warped theories..At best you could dismiss Nathaniel as mentally ill but to take him seriously is rather breathtaking... I will stop at that before I say something I will regret.
 

This whole thing got really illogical in about 2 seconds flat. Here, for example, my opinions have been characterized in a way that surprised me. I don't think I've given enough information for someone to conclude that I have a "high" opinion of Br. Nathanael. I have many criticisms of his activities, and I have shared at least two of my serious misgivings. Do you remember what those were? Yet this is ignored just because I said his presentations have lots of factually-sound data in them.

The fact remains that everyone is ready to ride Br. Nathanael out on a rail, while the really evil people, no one has any problem with. It's so strange, as if, e.g., child rape and kidnapping and murder and war and poisoning men, women, and children were thought to be things of no great moment morally, while poor grammar and spelling were thought utterly intolerable, and attracted all the condemnation better reserved for the foregoing evils.

It just ain't right. And then, taking a person who doesn't even espouse any sort of violence, and equating him with Hitler's henchmen oppressing and killing innocent people, is hugely slanderous and grievously unjust. All because Br. Nathanael points out what a few powerful and evil people are doing?

I 100% agree with this.

Gotta stop posting, because you seriously put this perfectly.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on February 11, 2013, 11:53:02 AM
1. He is not a member of Rocor according to Met. Hillarion
2. He is a notorious Anti-Semite, not just Anti-Zionist.. If you cant tell the difference then that doest speak well of you.
    Holding up signs that say ACLU Jews are the Anti-Christ is pretty clearly Anti-Semitic with nothing what so ever to do with Israel.

3. If you think "Brother" Nathaniel is some sort of "Whistle Blower" than you have very poor insight about such things.. IMHO..

I find it enormously disappointing that an Orthodox Priest thinks highly of such a vicious Anti-Semite and subscribes to his warped theories..At best you could dismiss Nathaniel as mentally ill but to take him seriously is rather breathtaking... I will stop at that before I say something I will regret.
 

This whole thing got really illogical in about 2 seconds flat. Here, for example, my opinions have been characterized in a way that surprised me. I don't think I've given enough information for someone to conclude that I have a "high" opinion of Br. Nathanael. I have many criticisms of his activities, and I have shared at least two of my serious misgivings. Do you remember what those were? Yet this is ignored just because I said his presentations have lots of factually-sound data in them.

The fact remains that everyone is ready to ride Br. Nathanael out on a rail, while the really evil people, no one has any problem with. It's so strange, as if, e.g., child rape and kidnapping and murder and war and poisoning men, women, and children were thought to be things of no great moment morally, while poor grammar and spelling were thought utterly intolerable, and attracted all the condemnation better reserved for the foregoing evils.

It just ain't right. And then, taking a person who doesn't even espouse any sort of violence, and equating him with Hitler's henchmen oppressing and killing innocent people, is hugely slanderous and grievously unjust. All because Br. Nathanael points out what a few powerful and evil people are doing?

Yes you do appear to have some minor reservations but you also seem to agree with Br. Nathanel's basic premise.

You have constructed for yourself an 'out' which is to claim that he is only attacking what you beleive to be people who are in some sort of elite class ( and participants in the Jewish Cabal)...

I think the facts speak otherwise. Nathanael has a history of disrupting religious services in Synagogues and he also "Crashes" Jewish Weddings and disrupts them. He stands outside of Synagogues and yells at the congregants as they arrive and depart.

Here is an example of an extreme Anti-Semitic comment typical of him that has absolutely no connection with Jewish "elites" or Israel. It is an interview by a reporter from "StormFront" which is a Neo Nazi outfit. Nathanael is very popular with them, which should tell you something.

Father, are you really certain you wish to make common cause with such people?

http://rense.com/general81/prophet.htm

Br. Nathanael: When I was eight years old, my parents took me to my cousin's Bar Mitzvah at a farther part of the City of Pittsburgh, where I grew up. We entered into an old, musty smelling synagogue, which had the Jewish Star of David everywhere.
 
After only ten minutes of being inside, I got nauseated and wanted to vomit. The synagogue seemed to have a deathly pall about it. And I couldn't bear looking at the Jewish Star everywhere. I learned later that the Star of David is an occult symbol that was popularized by the Kabbalists of the 13th Century in Europe. It was then at the age of eight, through my experience in that old, musty smelling synagogue, that I knew that Judaism was a religion of death.
 
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: rakovsky on February 11, 2013, 03:20:48 PM
Marc,

In ancient Hebrew of David's time, Hebrew actually looked alot like Greek letters. The D's in David looked like Greek "Deltas", ie triangles. Hence the two D's in David could have been joined as a kind of "seal", to make the star, like a family herald. Doesn't that sound like a good, even admirable explanation?

About 200 years after David's son, King Solomon, the prophet Amos (Amos 5:26; Cf. Acts 7:43) says:
You have lifted up the shrine of your king, the pedestal of your idols, the star of your god--which you made for yourselves.
What star symbol could Amos have been talking about? The 6 sided star is also called the Seal of Solomon by some, and Solomon became a Moloch-worshipper. Rabbinic traditions say he used his ring with the seal to control demons. Yet Byzantine Christian ruins also have Star of David symbols, and Byzantine pilgrims kissed a ring with the seal of Solomon.

In any case, it seems steeped in mystery long preceding Kabbalah, and I would be interested in finding out more about it. On the upside, it could add religious reverence for David's Star. Perhaps you can add something more definite?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: rakovsky on February 11, 2013, 03:35:01 PM
Fr. Aidan and Marc,

As against Br(?) Nathan's canonicity, we have Marc's claim that Met. Hilarion told him 6 months ago Br.Nathan was not in ROCOR, and a poster at Cathinfo claiming to quote Fr. Sergius of ROCOR 6 months ago saying Br. Nathan is not part of ROCOR.

Yet Br. Nathan's website says he is a monk "with ROCOR", a skeptic on the Cathinfo website looked into it a year ago and Bp. Shaw replied he was, another website (called "Varvara") mentions a clergyman said Bp. Shaw said he was, and you, Fr. Aidan, say he is.

So is there is anything else to decide one way or another? (eg. Fr. Aidan, what is your basis?).
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on February 11, 2013, 03:56:37 PM
Marc,

In ancient Hebrew of David's time, Hebrew actually looked alot like Greek letters. The D's in David looked like Greek "Deltas", ie triangles. Hence the two D's in David could have been joined as a kind of "seal", to make the star, like a family herald. Doesn't that sound like a good, even admirable explanation?

About 200 years after David's son, King Solomon, the prophet Amos (Amos 5:26; Cf. Acts 7:43) says:
You have lifted up the shrine of your king, the pedestal of your idols, the star of your god--which you made for yourselves.
What star symbol could Amos have been talking about? The 6 sided star is also called the Seal of Solomon by some, and Solomon became a Moloch-worshipper. Rabbinic traditions say he used his ring with the seal to control demons. Yet Byzantine Christian ruins also have Star of David symbols, and Byzantine pilgrims kissed a ring with the seal of Solomon.

In any case, it seems steeped in mystery long preceding Kabbalah, and I would be interested in finding out more about it. On the upside, it could add religious reverence for David's Star. Perhaps you can add something more definite?

I know nothing at all about it. I was quoting from an interview Br. Nathaneal gave to StormFront.

Btw.. The Neo Nazi's characterize him as a "Modern Day Prophet" ( see link to the article I posted)
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on February 11, 2013, 04:01:41 PM
Fr. Aidan and Marc,

As against Br(?) Nathan's canonicity, we have Marc's claim that Met. Hilarion told him 6 months ago Br.Nathan was not in ROCOR, and a poster at Cathinfo claiming to quote Fr. Sergius of ROCOR 6 months ago saying Br. Nathan is not part of ROCOR.

Yet Br. Nathan's website says he is a monk "with ROCOR", a skeptic on the Cathinfo website looked into it a year ago and Bp. Shaw replied he was, another website (called "Varvara") mentions a clergyman said Bp. Shaw said he was, and you, Fr. Aidan, say he is.

So is there is anything else to decide one way or another? (eg. Fr. Aidan, what is your basis?).

His language is actually a little slippery.

In any case I would like to know which Parish he belongs to or which Monetary and/or which Abbot he is under obedience to?
If he is a member of Rocor where is he actually a member? It's easy to find out where any of the rest of us belong. It shouldn't be a problem if true.

Who, what , where , when , how?  Ya know?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: mike on February 11, 2013, 05:04:46 PM
FatherGiryus could share a few thoughts, just saying...
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Punch on February 11, 2013, 05:37:36 PM
Not surprising considering who you are arguing with.  He does the same thing in the Gun Control thread, namely reading half of what you write and then misrepresenting even that.  In any case, you make a good point here.  I know that my Priest has a high regard for Brother Nathaniel, and I would not even know of this man if it were not for him.  The Brother is right on so many fronts that I am well prepared to forgive him for a few eccentricities.  The Jews (and their Liberal lap dogs), not so much.


This whole thing got really illogical in about 2 seconds flat. Here, for example, my opinions have been characterized in a way that surprised me. I don't think I've given enough information for someone to conclude that I have a "high" opinion of Br. Nathanael. I have many criticisms of his activities, and I have shared at least two of my serious misgivings. Do you remember what those were? Yet this is ignored just because I said his presentations have lots of factually-sound data in them.

The fact remains that everyone is ready to ride Br. Nathanael out on a rail, while the really evil people, no one has any problem with. It's so strange, as if, e.g., child rape and kidnapping and murder and war and poisoning men, women, and children were thought to be things of no great moment morally, while poor grammar and spelling were thought utterly intolerable, and attracted all the condemnation better reserved for the foregoing evils.

It just ain't right. And then, taking a person who doesn't even espouse any sort of violence, and equating him with Hitler's henchmen oppressing and killing innocent people, is hugely slanderous and grievously unjust. All because Br. Nathanael points out what a few powerful and evil people are doing?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Iconodule on February 11, 2013, 05:43:19 PM
I love Br. Nathanael for bringing all the closet Nazis out of the woodwork to support him, so I know whom to ignore.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: stpaulphilip on February 11, 2013, 06:09:59 PM
I introduced Brother Nathanael to my priest last year.  Since then many other people in our church have watched his videos on YouTube.  Brother Nathanael speaks a whole lot of truth, and points out the obvious, but most people don't want to hear it because since they were in middle school they were taught not to speak or think anything bad about the Jewish people.  When I was in high school it was MANDATORY that we watch Schindler's List.  Brother Nathanael may honestly be considered eccentric, but he's not evil, and he's not violent. 

If you'll notice, he is against Zionism (as others have already stated).  He's Jewish himself.  Jesus was Jewish, as was the Theotokos, St. John the Baptist, the Apostles, etc.  To hate Jews would be to hate Christ.  Zionism is a whole different ball game. 
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: orthonorm on February 11, 2013, 06:11:06 PM
I love Br. Nathanael for bringing all the closet Nazis out of the woodwork to support him, so I know whom to ignore.

A point there you have.

I just don't know which bothers me more. Impotent men heaping their castration anxieties from their botched circumcisions on the Jews, or "liberals" who like to post holopr0n at the drop of a dreidl?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: orthonorm on February 11, 2013, 06:12:02 PM
When I was in high school it was MANDATORY that we watch Schindler's List. 

That sounds like child abuse. Terrible film. But don't blame all the Jews for the evil of one.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: biro on February 11, 2013, 06:20:21 PM
I love Br. Nathanael for bringing all the closet Nazis out of the woodwork to support him, so I know whom to ignore.

A point there you have.

I just don't know which bothers me more. Impotent men heaping their castration anxieties from their botched circumcisions on the Jews, or "liberals" who like to post holopr0n at the drop of a dreidl?

Yet again someone proves that we need an Ignore button. I'd say a lot more, but I'm already dealing with the green dot.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on February 11, 2013, 06:54:45 PM
I love Br. Nathanael for bringing all the closet Nazis out of the woodwork to support him, so I know whom to ignore.

Good point.  Disturbing...... Disappointing too.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on February 11, 2013, 07:00:14 PM
I love Br. Nathanael for bringing all the closet Nazis out of the woodwork to support him, so I know whom to ignore.

A point there you have.

I just don't know which bothers me more. Impotent men heaping their castration anxieties from their botched circumcisions on the Jews, or "liberals" who like to post holopr0n at the drop of a dreidl?

This is the dreidel game:

(https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSFFh8IyymQShP8MYnrYj7sZQPTQN4N4_bxJf71MeBCM8Hi6KXbvw)


This is really aggressive Antisemitism:


http://rense.com/general81/prophet.htm

Br. Nathanael: When I was eight years old, my parents took me to my cousin's Bar Mitzvah at a farther part of the City of Pittsburgh, where I grew up. We entered into an old, musty smelling synagogue, which had the Jewish Star of David everywhere.
 
After only ten minutes of being inside, I got nauseated and wanted to vomit. The synagogue seemed to have a deathly pall about it. And I couldn't bear looking at the Jewish Star everywhere. I learned later that the Star of David is an occult symbol that was popularized by the Kabbalists of the 13th Century in Europe. It was then at the age of eight, through my experience in that old, musty smelling synagogue, that I knew that Judaism was a religion of death.
   
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Fr.Aidan on February 11, 2013, 07:34:44 PM
Nazis here on OC.net? Who, on OC.net, is a Nazi?


 

Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Shiny on February 11, 2013, 07:40:35 PM
I just don't know why but I think it's so funny he used to be under the tutelage of Bishop Gregory of Colorado. You know the "True Orthodoxy".

Title added by moderator.
(http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/Themes/Pascha2010/images/warnwarn.gif) 
Your warning status is raised to 99 days for not using a title for clergy. This constitutes a raise from the 60 days you were given just a few days ago.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: orthonorm on February 11, 2013, 08:17:04 PM
I love Br. Nathanael for bringing all the closet Nazis out of the woodwork to support him, so I know whom to ignore.

A point there you have.

I just don't know which bothers me more. Impotent men heaping their castration anxieties from their botched circumcisions on the Jews, or "liberals" who like to post holopr0n at the drop of a dreidl?

Yet again someone proves that we need an Ignore button. I'd say a lot more, but I'm already dealing with the green dot.

Was it me or Iconodule?

Why am I even asking . . .
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: orthonorm on February 11, 2013, 08:20:14 PM
I love Br. Nathanael for bringing all the closet Nazis out of the woodwork to support him, so I know whom to ignore.

A point there you have.

I just don't know which bothers me more. Impotent men heaping their castration anxieties from their botched circumcisions on the Jews, or "liberals" who like to post holopr0n at the drop of a dreidl?

This is the dreidel game:

(https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSFFh8IyymQShP8MYnrYj7sZQPTQN4N4_bxJf71MeBCM8Hi6KXbvw)


This is really aggressive Antisemitism:


http://rense.com/general81/prophet.htm

Br. Nathanael: When I was eight years old, my parents took me to my cousin's Bar Mitzvah at a farther part of the City of Pittsburgh, where I grew up. We entered into an old, musty smelling synagogue, which had the Jewish Star of David everywhere.
 
After only ten minutes of being inside, I got nauseated and wanted to vomit. The synagogue seemed to have a deathly pall about it. And I couldn't bear looking at the Jewish Star everywhere. I learned later that the Star of David is an occult symbol that was popularized by the Kabbalists of the 13th Century in Europe. It was then at the age of eight, through my experience in that old, musty smelling synagogue, that I knew that Judaism was a religion of death.
   

It's one thing to repost ad infinitum the idiocy of some "monk", it is another to post photos of personal loss you cannot imagine with the aplomb you do.

Really, it is sorta a sick way of making a point and a real problem, like the dead fetus people, you denude such images of any possible opening of humanity by making them ubiquitous.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on February 11, 2013, 09:35:10 PM
I love Br. Nathanael for bringing all the closet Nazis out of the woodwork to support him, so I know whom to ignore.

A point there you have.

I just don't know which bothers me more. Impotent men heaping their castration anxieties from their botched circumcisions on the Jews, or "liberals" who like to post holopr0n at the drop of a dreidl?

This is the dreidel game:

(https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSFFh8IyymQShP8MYnrYj7sZQPTQN4N4_bxJf71MeBCM8Hi6KXbvw)


This is really aggressive Antisemitism:


http://rense.com/general81/prophet.htm

Br. Nathanael: When I was eight years old, my parents took me to my cousin's Bar Mitzvah at a farther part of the City of Pittsburgh, where I grew up. We entered into an old, musty smelling synagogue, which had the Jewish Star of David everywhere.
 
After only ten minutes of being inside, I got nauseated and wanted to vomit. The synagogue seemed to have a deathly pall about it. And I couldn't bear looking at the Jewish Star everywhere. I learned later that the Star of David is an occult symbol that was popularized by the Kabbalists of the 13th Century in Europe. It was then at the age of eight, through my experience in that old, musty smelling synagogue, that I knew that Judaism was a religion of death.
   

It's one thing to repost ad infinitum the idiocy of some "monk", it is another to post photos of personal loss you cannot imagine with the aplomb you do.

Really, it is sorta a sick way of making a point and a real problem, like the dead fetus people, you denude such images of any possible opening of humanity by making them ubiquitous.

I strongly disagree. Showing people the results of their support of such creeps as Br. Nathanael brings  several issues into the light. A picture is worth 1000 words.

BTW..Learn to speak for yourself about what is comprehensible and what isnt.

I have hardly made such images "Ubiquitous" 

Oh and ..you cant tell me what to do:

(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRDz0b43Y3-3LhBECKWVMCDOGIqxXahC-LGE9Wtdzuj9Y5fM4lW)

(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRo9netEhJ2ZEzMHYhHCjiu-Xstxobqz_hSC_PaPfz-Z7Bm9O7w2Q)
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: That person on February 11, 2013, 10:23:15 PM
His inability, as a native English speaker, to properly emphasize syllables offends me almost as much as the disgusting racism.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) on February 11, 2013, 11:00:53 PM
I am locking this thread as too many posters have started to (a) ignoring the forum rule on titles and (b) getting personal. I may consider unlocking it in a couple of weeks. Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) on May 08, 2013, 11:26:56 AM
This topic is unlocked. Carl Kraeff
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Fr.Aidan on May 08, 2013, 02:50:45 PM
Great. So the unanswered question, following a statement about the "Nazis" on OrthodoxChristianity.net, is: "Who, on OC.net, is a Nazi?"

Thanks,

Fr. Aidan+
sinner
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: jah777 on May 08, 2013, 03:12:55 PM
The fact remains that everyone is ready to ride Br. Nathanael out on a rail, while the really evil people, no one has any problem with.

Don't you understand, Father?  Criticism of evil is always acceptable unless one is criticizing evil done by Jews.  Haven't you heard of the Holocaust?  Because of the Holocaust, Jews can do whatever they want to anyone and it is okay since they are the real victims.  Killing innocent people, taking women as slaves and forcing them into prostitution - such things are evil if done by non-Jews, but it is okay for Jews to be involved since, after all, they were victims of the Holocaust.

If you are going to criticize evil done by Jews, you have to at least pretend that the people you are criticizing aren't Jews by referring them as the "Russian Jewish Mafia" or something.  Otherwise, you are a Nazi, since only Nazis and other evil people criticize Jews.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: GabrieltheCelt on May 08, 2013, 03:26:15 PM

Brother Nathanael is a vicious Anti-Semite ...


Nah.  He's got some weird hang-up with Jews, but I haven't heard him say anything about any of the other Semitic peoples.  And unless he's castigation all of them, he cannot be labeled as being an anti-Semite. 
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: J Michael on May 08, 2013, 03:27:45 PM
The fact remains that everyone is ready to ride Br. Nathanael out on a rail, while the really evil people, no one has any problem with.

Don't you understand, Father?  Criticism of evil is always acceptable unless one is criticizing evil done by Jews.  Haven't you heard of the Holocaust?  Because of the Holocaust, Jews can do whatever they want to anyone and it is okay since they are the real victims.  Killing innocent people, taking women as slaves and forcing them into prostitution - such things are evil if done by non-Jews, but it is okay for Jews to be involved since, after all, they were victims of the Holocaust.

If you are going to criticize evil done by Jews, you have to at least pretend that the people you are criticizing aren't Jews by referring them as the "Russian Jewish Mafia" or something.  Otherwise, you are a Nazi, since only Nazis and other evil people criticize Jews.


Oy.

Vey.

 ::)
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: J Michael on May 08, 2013, 03:31:41 PM

Brother Nathanael is a vicious Anti-Semite ...


Nah.  He's got some weird hang-up with Jews, but I haven't heard him say anything about any of the other Semitic peoples.  And unless he's castigation all of them, he cannot be labeled as being an anti-Semite. 

You obviously do not understand or just choose to ignore the meaning of the most common current usage of the term "anti-Semite". 
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Fr.Aidan on May 08, 2013, 03:34:18 PM
So let me understand. Br. Nathanael is accused of anti-Semitism (let us grant that one could take the part for the whole, i.e., call him anti-Jew even if he is not anti-Arab, both Jews and Arabs being Semites), on the basis of a statement that he was freaked out as a child to see many occult symbols prominently displayed at a Jewish center, together with some bad smell of death (as he perceived it). Perceiving Judaism to be a religion of death, this man turned to the true religion of Life, the Christian Faith.

So would there be the same outrage, if he had substituted Islam for Judaism? If he said, "I went into the mosque, and I saw occult symbol after occult symbol prominently displayed, and there was a strange pall of death and a musty smell which made me think Islam is a religion of death. So I turned to Jesus Christ and I embraced faith in Him." Would we, in equal measure, call him an anti-Semite for saying THAT?

And, on the basis of such a statement about a MOSQUE, would people be calling him hateful, or dangerous, or criminal, or despicable? This is an important question!
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: GabrieltheCelt on May 08, 2013, 03:37:54 PM

Brother Nathanael is a vicious Anti-Semite ...


Nah.  He's got some weird hang-up with Jews, but I haven't heard him say anything about any of the other Semitic peoples.  And unless he's castigation all of them, he cannot be labeled as being an anti-Semite.  

You obviously do not understand or just choose to ignore the meaning of the most common current usage of the term "anti-Semite".  

Option B.  I refuse to let the racist Zionist political machine dictate who is and isn't Semitic.  Clear?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: mike on May 08, 2013, 03:40:48 PM

Brother Nathanael is a vicious Anti-Semite ...


Nah.  He's got some weird hang-up with Jews, but I haven't heard him say anything about any of the other Semitic peoples.  And unless he's castigation all of them, he cannot be labeled as being an anti-Semite. 

You obviously do not understand or just choose to ignore the meaning of the most common current usage of the term "anti-Semite". 

He wants to seem cunning and witty (but fails).
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Schultz on May 08, 2013, 03:45:41 PM
So let me understand. Br. Nathanael is accused of anti-Semitism (let us grant that one could take the part for the whole, i.e., call him anti-Jew even if he is not anti-Arab, both Jews and Arabs being Semites), on the basis of a statement that he was freaked out as a child to see many occult symbols prominently displayed at a Jewish center, together with some bad smell of death (as he perceived it). Perceiving Judaism to be a religion of death, this man turned to the true religion of Life, the Christian Faith.

So would there be the same outrage, if he had substituted Islam for Judaism? If he said, "I went into the mosque, and I saw occult symbol after occult symbol prominently displayed, and there was a strange pall of death and a musty smell which made me think Islam is a religion of death. So I turned to Jesus Christ and I embraced faith in Him." Would we, in equal measure, call him an anti-Semite for saying THAT?

And, on the basis of such a statement about a MOSQUE, would people be calling him hateful, or dangerous, or criminal, or despicable? This is an important question!

I don't think that people accuse Br. Nathaniel of being anti-Semitic from this one quote but from a larger pattern of behavior and sayings.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: GabrieltheCelt on May 08, 2013, 03:46:50 PM

Brother Nathanael is a vicious Anti-Semite ...


Nah.  He's got some weird hang-up with Jews, but I haven't heard him say anything about any of the other Semitic peoples.  And unless he's castigation all of them, he cannot be labeled as being an anti-Semite. 

You obviously do not understand or just choose to ignore the meaning of the most common current usage of the term "anti-Semite". 

He wants to seem cunning and witty (but fails).

It's pretty elementary, really.  Speak with an Arab about it.  Or any of the other Semitic peoples.  Of course, you'll probably attempt a snazzy comeback with them, too.  
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: orthonorm on May 08, 2013, 03:48:54 PM

Brother Nathanael is a vicious Anti-Semite ...


Nah.  He's got some weird hang-up with Jews, but I haven't heard him say anything about any of the other Semitic peoples.  And unless he's castigation all of them, he cannot be labeled as being an anti-Semite. 

You obviously do not understand or just choose to ignore the meaning of the most common current usage of the term "anti-Semite". 

He wants to seem cunning and witty (but fails).

I bet he loves to give the fruitarians a mind bender when he tells them about the olive, avocado, tomato, etc. Then after they recover he drops the whole nut thing on them.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: orthonorm on May 08, 2013, 03:51:42 PM

Brother Nathanael is a vicious Anti-Semite ...


Nah.  He's got some weird hang-up with Jews, but I haven't heard him say anything about any of the other Semitic peoples.  And unless he's castigation all of them, he cannot be labeled as being an anti-Semite. 

You obviously do not understand or just choose to ignore the meaning of the most common current usage of the term "anti-Semite". 

He wants to seem cunning and witty (but fails).

It's pretty elementary, really.  Speak with an Arab about it.  Or any of the other Semitic peoples.  Of course, you'll probably attempt a snazzy comeback with them, too.  

If someone says they hate dogs, do you ask them if they've ever met a Thai Ridgeback?

I am all for precision in language, but the whole anti-Semite thing is just creative distraction. OK, Brother Nathaniel shows a disconcerting contempt and disregard for Jews and issues important to them.

Better?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on May 08, 2013, 03:59:17 PM
So let me understand. Br. Nathanael is accused of anti-Semitism (let us grant that one could take the part for the whole, i.e., call him anti-Jew even if he is not anti-Arab, both Jews and Arabs being Semites), on the basis of a statement that he was freaked out as a child to see many occult symbols prominently displayed at a Jewish center, together with some bad smell of death (as he perceived it). Perceiving Judaism to be a religion of death, this man turned to the true religion of Life, the Christian Faith.

So would there be the same outrage, if he had substituted Islam for Judaism? If he said, "I went into the mosque, and I saw occult symbol after occult symbol prominently displayed, and there was a strange pall of death and a musty smell which made me think Islam is a religion of death. So I turned to Jesus Christ and I embraced faith in Him." Would we, in equal measure, call him an anti-Semite for saying THAT?

And, on the basis of such a statement about a MOSQUE, would people be calling him hateful, or dangerous, or criminal, or despicable? This is an important question!

Whether or not he saw occult symbolism as a child or was simply dropped on his head, he presents a bigoted and inaccurate World View. You only need to view his last couple of You Tubes about the Boston Bombing to see that this guy is pretty crazy. I personally think he is possesed by a demon as I have said before.. He needs pity and prayers not encouragement IMHO

Never the less, if you can honestly look at his stuff and think he has some really good idea's or if you agree with his analyses of events then I would say there is something quite a miss about your understanding of the World and how it works.

Sometimes people who are deeply Antisemitic are called Nazi's.. It's just short hand and easy to understand. It does not mean the person is actually a Nazi Party Member, though we have had one or two who were members on these boards in the past.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Fr.Aidan on May 08, 2013, 04:01:41 PM
No, not much better, quite inaccurate because his beef is not with your run-of-the-mill Jew, but certain ultra-wealthy Jews who harm others. However, as I've noted, he consistently fails to distinguish verbally between these two very different groups of people, one group making no great harm or suffering in the world, the other causing great harm to people, as well as suffering, ethnic cleansing, death, and destruction.

And I'm still amazed that people have no problem (apparently) with those who perpetrate such horrific crimes against humanity, but a little guy who looks goofy and denounces such awful criminals, is pounced upon and becomes a lightning rod for the vitriol of the otherwise complacent. It's eerie. It's Orwellian. Who hath bewitched you, O Galatians? Orthodox Christians?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: J Michael on May 08, 2013, 04:02:00 PM
So let me understand. Br. Nathanael is accused of anti-Semitism (let us grant that one could take the part for the whole, i.e., call him anti-Jew even if he is not anti-Arab, both Jews and Arabs being Semites), on the basis of a statement that he was freaked out as a child to see many occult symbols prominently displayed at a Jewish center, together with some bad smell of death (as he perceived it). Perceiving Judaism to be a religion of death, this man turned to the true religion of Life, the Christian Faith.

So would there be the same outrage, if he had substituted Islam for Judaism? If he said, "I went into the mosque, and I saw occult symbol after occult symbol prominently displayed, and there was a strange pall of death and a musty smell which made me think Islam is a religion of death. So I turned to Jesus Christ and I embraced faith in Him." Would we, in equal measure, call him an anti-Semite for saying THAT?

And, on the basis of such a statement about a MOSQUE, would people be calling him hateful, or dangerous, or criminal, or despicable? This is an important question!

Some might.  Especially in the overly-p.c., Islamo-sensitive world we live in these days.

Personally, I would have to take the body of their statements and the consistency (or lack of it) of any anti-whoever behavior into consideration before making such judgments.  One isolated statement is not necessarily enough to label anyone anti-semite or anti-islamic or anti-whatever.

Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Iconodule on May 08, 2013, 04:03:34 PM

Brother Nathanael is a vicious Anti-Semite ...


Nah.  He's got some weird hang-up with Jews, but I haven't heard him say anything about any of the other Semitic peoples.  And unless he's castigation all of them, he cannot be labeled as being an anti-Semite. 

You obviously do not understand or just choose to ignore the meaning of the most common current usage of the term "anti-Semite". 

He wants to seem cunning and witty (but fails).

Lost causes seem to be his thing (hence his nostalgia for white supremacy).
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on May 08, 2013, 04:08:05 PM
No, not much better, quite inaccurate because his beef is not with your run-of-the-mill Jew, but certain ultra-wealthy Jews who harm others. However, as I've noted, he consistently fails to distinguish verbally between these two very different groups of people, one group making no great harm or suffering in the world, the other causing great harm to people, as well as suffering, ethnic cleansing, death, and destruction.

And I'm still amazed that people have no problem (apparently) with those who perpetrate such horrific crimes against humanity, but a little guy who looks goofy and denounces such awful criminals, is pounced upon and becomes a lightning rod for the vitriol of the otherwise complacent. It's eerie. It's Orwellian. Who hath bewitched you, O Galatians? Orthodox Christians?

 People care about what is true, not ultra complicated conspiratorial theories which by in large are meant to manipulate politically naive people.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Punch on May 08, 2013, 04:09:39 PM
But Father, have you not read the Scriptures that in the last days what is evil will be called good, and what is good will become evil?  It seems that lately the bewitching has gotten really bad.  From the posting that I have read in the last few months, I am convinced that if the Antichrist decided to stop suddenly, half of the OC.Net would have to be surgically removed from his bum.

No, not much better, quite inaccurate because his beef is not with your run-of-the-mill Jew, but certain ultra-wealthy Jews who harm others. However, as I've noted, he consistently fails to distinguish verbally between these two very different groups of people, one group making no great harm or suffering in the world, the other causing great harm to people, as well as suffering, ethnic cleansing, death, and destruction.

And I'm still amazed that people have no problem (apparently) with those who perpetrate such horrific crimes against humanity, but a little guy who looks goofy and denounces such awful criminals, is pounced upon and becomes a lightning rod for the vitriol of the otherwise complacent. It's eerie. It's Orwellian. Who hath bewitched you, O Galatians? Orthodox Christians?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Punch on May 08, 2013, 04:11:48 PM
Very few people actually care about the truth, and the average liberal would not recognize truth if it hit them in the face.

No, not much better, quite inaccurate because his beef is not with your run-of-the-mill Jew, but certain ultra-wealthy Jews who harm others. However, as I've noted, he consistently fails to distinguish verbally between these two very different groups of people, one group making no great harm or suffering in the world, the other causing great harm to people, as well as suffering, ethnic cleansing, death, and destruction.

And I'm still amazed that people have no problem (apparently) with those who perpetrate such horrific crimes against humanity, but a little guy who looks goofy and denounces such awful criminals, is pounced upon and becomes a lightning rod for the vitriol of the otherwise complacent. It's eerie. It's Orwellian. Who hath bewitched you, O Galatians? Orthodox Christians?

 People care about what is true, not ultra complicated conspiratorial theories which by in large are meant to manipulate politically naive people.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: mike on May 08, 2013, 04:13:19 PM
I am convinced that if the Antichrist decided to stop suddenly, half of the OC.Net would have to be surgically removed from his bum.

Do you want not to share this pleasure with anyone?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Punch on May 08, 2013, 04:15:33 PM
I am convinced that if the Antichrist decided to stop suddenly, half of the OC.Net would have to be surgically removed from his bum.

Do you want not to share this pleasure with anyone?

Sorry, there won't be any room for me.  On the other hand, you won't need a surgeon to be removed.  A dentist will be able to do it quite easily.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: J Michael on May 08, 2013, 04:17:17 PM
I wonder if Carl shouldn't be having second thoughts about unlocking this thread.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Santagranddad on May 08, 2013, 04:22:19 PM
So let me understand. Br. Nathanael is accused of anti-Semitism (let us grant that one could take the part for the whole, i.e., call him anti-Jew even if he is not anti-Arab, both Jews and Arabs being Semites), on the basis of a statement that he was freaked out as a child to see many occult symbols prominently displayed at a Jewish center, together with some bad smell of death (as he perceived it). Perceiving Judaism to be a religion of death, this man turned to the true religion of Life, the Christian Faith.

So would there be the same outrage, if he had substituted Islam for Judaism? If he said, "I went into the mosque, and I saw occult symbol after occult symbol prominently displayed, and there was a strange pall of death and a musty smell which made me think Islam is a religion of death. So I turned to Jesus Christ and I embraced faith in Him." Would we, in equal measure, call him an anti-Semite for saying THAT?

And, on the basis of such a statement about a MOSQUE, would people be calling him hateful, or dangerous, or criminal, or despicable? This is an important question!

Whether or not he saw occult symbolism as a child or was simply dropped on his head, he presents a bigoted and inaccurate World View. You only need to view his last couple of You Tubes about the Boston Bombing to see that this guy is pretty crazy. I personally think he is possesed by a demon as I have said before.. He needs pity and prayers not encouragement IMHO

Never the less, if you can honestly look at his stuff and think he has some really good idea's or if you agree with his analyses of events then I would say there is something quite a miss about your understanding of the World and how it works.

Sometimes people who are deeply Antisemitic are called Nazi's.. It's just short hand and easy to understand. It does not mean the person is actually a Nazi Party Member, though we have had one or two who were members on these boards in the past.

The labelling of individuals as Nazi, Fascist, racist, anti-Semite etc., is all too often a tactic of the Left and avoids having to argue with holders of views sharply divergent from theirs. It is an Orwellian tactic that appears to have little to commend it. In my view Brother Nathaniel's preoccupations appear either indicative of an unhealthy preoccupation or possibly a spiritual problem. Neither merits him being labelled but perhaps given less of an audience but rather some appropriate support.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Fr.Aidan on May 08, 2013, 04:29:35 PM
Christ is risen!

Also, the idea that we can label someone a "Nazi" if he disagrees with the Jewish faith dogmatically, or if he sharply denounces a small group of criminals who are culturally Jewish, because it's "just shorthand," is 100% unacceptable.

Weird example, and I mean to start no flame war by it, but it's like saying that if there is a Greek Archdiocese parish that uses an organ, it is therefore okay to call them "Protestants," since it's "just a shorthand" and "everyone understands what is meant."

No. It is not okay. They are Orthodox Christians who happen to use an organ.

See?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: That person on May 08, 2013, 04:33:28 PM

Brother Nathanael is a vicious Anti-Semite ...


Nah.  He's got some weird hang-up with Jews, but I haven't heard him say anything about any of the other Semitic peoples.  And unless he's castigation all of them, he cannot be labeled as being an anti-Semite. 
You obviously do not understand or just choose to ignore the meaning of the most common current usage of the term "anti-Semite". 
You know, this is actually fairly tame by the standards of weird semantic games people play here.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) on May 08, 2013, 04:33:54 PM
I wonder if Carl shouldn't be having second thoughts about unlocking this thread.

Not really. This just shows that we have all kinds of folks in the Holy Orthodox Church. This is actually a very good thing; if every member of my spiritual family was of the same mind as I and behaved in most agreeable ways, I would not grow as much spiritually as if that was not the case--as I am experiencing on OC.Net and this forum from time to time. I do not think that the Lord will give us more than we can handle, although at one point, when I was weak, I felt it best for my spiritual health to temporarily halt troublesome discussions.

That said, I will say that Brother Nathanael is not somebody that I admire. I join Marc in thinking that this man masquerading as a monk is an anti-semite and Marc and I are politically as opposed as can be. One good thing in this is that I have another person that I have to pray for.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: GabrieltheCelt on May 08, 2013, 04:34:23 PM

Brother Nathanael is a vicious Anti-Semite ...


Nah.  He's got some weird hang-up with Jews, but I haven't heard him say anything about any of the other Semitic peoples.  And unless he's castigation all of them, he cannot be labeled as being an anti-Semite. 

You obviously do not understand or just choose to ignore the meaning of the most common current usage of the term "anti-Semite". 

He wants to seem cunning and witty (but fails).

Lost causes seem to be his thing (hence his nostalgia for white supremacy).

 Care to back that up?  I have friends of all colors.  I venerate the hand of Fr. Moses Berry, an African-American priest in a neighboring town.  Aaaaaand my wife is a Korean-American.  I realize that the forums' aversion to ad hominems is losing its luster 'round here, but this goes too far.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) on May 08, 2013, 04:38:49 PM
It is true that this is a free-for-all forum where polemics can indeed get very heated. OTOH, I am getting that nagging feeling that I must start using some rules to get things cooled down a bit. Please don't make my job easier.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Iconodule on May 08, 2013, 04:43:07 PM

Brother Nathanael is a vicious Anti-Semite ...


Nah.  He's got some weird hang-up with Jews, but I haven't heard him say anything about any of the other Semitic peoples.  And unless he's castigation all of them, he cannot be labeled as being an anti-Semite.  

You obviously do not understand or just choose to ignore the meaning of the most common current usage of the term "anti-Semite".  

He wants to seem cunning and witty (but fails).

Lost causes seem to be his thing (hence his nostalgia for white supremacy).

 Care to back that up?  I have friends of all colors.  I venerate the hand of Fr. Moses Berry, an African-American priest in a neighboring town.  Aaaaaand my wife is a Korean-American.  I realize that the forums' aversion to ad hominems is losing its luster 'round here, but this goes too far.

Ah, the good old "but I have a black friend" defense... I was wondering how soon it would pop up.

Maybe it's true that you do not behave as a white supremacist in your day to day life. That's good.

But...

Fact 1: The CSA was a white supremacist government, and white supremacy was a cornerstone of its founding, as Confederate VP Alexander Stephens made very plain.

Fact 2: You are nostalgic for the CSA and are therefore nostalgic for white supremacy.

There is nothing hyperbolic or sensationalist or even "ad hominem" in the above two statements.

And even if you kid yourself that the CSA was really just about states' rights, resisting overbearing federal government, blah blah, your callous overlooking of the monstrous horror of the enslavement of Africans, as just some superficial flaw on an otherwise admirable society, is reprehensible and inhuman.

Informal warning: Please stay on topic. Thanks, Carl Kraeff
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: GabrieltheCelt on May 08, 2013, 04:45:03 PM

I am all for precision in language, but the whole anti-Semite thing is just creative distraction.  

To you, perhaps.  But what you call 'distraction' might be what Arab Christians who are caught in the middle of the Islamo-Zionist war would call 'education.'  Back in my Muslim days, the Arabs always complained about the word 'Semite' and 'Semitic' as being manipulated.  Seeing that they too are Semitic, who the heck am I to argue with them?  Who are any of us to argue with them?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: GabrieltheCelt on May 08, 2013, 04:48:20 PM

Brother Nathanael is a vicious Anti-Semite ...


Nah.  He's got some weird hang-up with Jews, but I haven't heard him say anything about any of the other Semitic peoples.  And unless he's castigation all of them, he cannot be labeled as being an anti-Semite.  

You obviously do not understand or just choose to ignore the meaning of the most common current usage of the term "anti-Semite".  

He wants to seem cunning and witty (but fails).

Lost causes seem to be his thing (hence his nostalgia for white supremacy).

 Care to back that up?  I have friends of all colors.  I venerate the hand of Fr. Moses Berry, an African-American priest in a neighboring town.  Aaaaaand my wife is a Korean-American.  I realize that the forums' aversion to ad hominems is losing its luster 'round here, but this goes too far.

Ah, the good old "but I have a black friend" defense... I was wondering how soon it would pop up.

Maybe it's true that you do not behave as a white supremacist in your day to day life. That's good.

But...

Fact 1: The CSA was a white supremacist government, and white supremacy was a cornerstone of its founding, as Confederate VP Alexander Stephens made very plain.

Fact 2: You are nostalgic for the CSA and are therefore nostalgic for white supremacy.

There is nothing hyperbolic or sensationalist or even "ad hominem" in the above two statements.

And even if you kid yourself that the CSA was really just about states' rights, resisting overbearing federal government, blah blah, your callous overlooking of the monstrous horror of the enslavement of Africans, as just some superficial flaw on an otherwise admirable society, is reprehensible and inhuman.

 Ah yes.  The product of New England revisionism.  You boys are wound up tighter than a preachers' belt on Sunday morning.  

Informal warning: Please stay on topic. Thanks, Carl Kraeff
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: J Michael on May 08, 2013, 04:51:36 PM
If I wasn't going to logout and go home (a veritable haven of love and sanity!!), I'd pop some corn, open a beer (well, maybe just a Coke) and enjoy the show. ;D
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Iconodule on May 08, 2013, 05:07:56 PM
Ah, the good old "but I have a black friend" defense... I was wondering how soon it would pop up.

Maybe it's true that you do not behave as a white supremacist in your day to day life. That's good.

But...

Fact 1: The CSA was a white supremacist government, and white supremacy was a cornerstone of its founding, as Confederate VP Alexander Stephens made very plain.

Fact 2: You are nostalgic for the CSA and are therefore nostalgic for white supremacy.

There is nothing hyperbolic or sensationalist or even "ad hominem" in the above two statements.

And even if you kid yourself that the CSA was really just about states' rights, resisting overbearing federal government, blah blah, your callous overlooking of the monstrous horror of the enslavement of Africans, as just some superficial flaw on an otherwise admirable society, is reprehensible and inhuman.

 Ah yes.  The product of New England revisionism.  

Of course you must say this, though of course without any substantiating evidence. So try this....

Read here (http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?documentprint=76) the speech by Alexander Stephens plain affirming that:

Quote
Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth.

And then try to demonstrate that this is somehow Yankee revisionism.

I look forward to the hilarious results.

I'm glad to hear though that you've brought yourself to kiss the hand of Fr. Moses Berry. Your next step is to stop glorifying the people who treated his ancestors like cattle.
(http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/Themes/Pascha2010/images/warnwarn.gif) You are warned for 30 days for getting off topic. If you wish to contest this decision, you must PM me first. Carl Kraeff
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Alpo on May 08, 2013, 05:11:00 PM
If I wasn't going to logout and go home

Heretic!
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: GabrieltheCelt on May 08, 2013, 06:34:55 PM
Ah, the good old "but I have a black friend" defense... I was wondering how soon it would pop up.

Maybe it's true that you do not behave as a white supremacist in your day to day life. That's good.

But...

Fact 1: The CSA was a white supremacist government, and white supremacy was a cornerstone of its founding, as Confederate VP Alexander Stephens made very plain.

Fact 2: You are nostalgic for the CSA and are therefore nostalgic for white supremacy.

There is nothing hyperbolic or sensationalist or even "ad hominem" in the above two statements.

And even if you kid yourself that the CSA was really just about states' rights, resisting overbearing federal government, blah blah, your callous overlooking of the monstrous horror of the enslavement of Africans, as just some superficial flaw on an otherwise admirable society, is reprehensible and inhuman.

 Ah yes.  The product of New England revisionism.  

Of course you must say this, though of course without any substantiating evidence. So try this....

Read here (http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?documentprint=76) the speech by Alexander Stephens plain affirming that:

Quote
Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth.

And then try to demonstrate that this is somehow Yankee revisionism.

I look forward to the hilarious results.

I'm glad to hear though that you've brought yourself to kiss the hand of Fr. Moses Berry. Your next step is to stop glorifying the people who treated his ancestors like cattle.

 Not only do you pick and choose what you read, sometimes it appears you don't bother to read at all.  To wit: we were both asked to keep things on topic by a moderator yet you stumble and plod right on.  Start a new thread and I'll respond accordingly.  :)
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: lovesupreme on May 08, 2013, 08:11:54 PM
Brother Nathaniel speaks from a bad place. He was most likely traumatized as a child and at some point picked up a lot of these anti-Jewish conspiracy theories that he echoes on his YouTube videos. It's acceptable to criticize the beliefs of the Jewish faith. I certainly dislike when people try to make legitimate criticism of Judaism, or of the Israeli government, look like an attack on the Jewish people.

Brother Nathanael has moved into what I call "crazy territory," with his conspiracy delusions of Jewish domination of international banks, Jewish 911 coverups, Holocaust denial. This is classic "nutjob" material. I don't understand why any sane person would think otherwise. And no, I don't care what you've read; scapegoating is NEVER justifiable, and it's always in bad taste.  :police:
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on May 08, 2013, 09:21:54 PM
So let me understand. Br. Nathanael is accused of anti-Semitism (let us grant that one could take the part for the whole, i.e., call him anti-Jew even if he is not anti-Arab, both Jews and Arabs being Semites), on the basis of a statement that he was freaked out as a child to see many occult symbols prominently displayed at a Jewish center, together with some bad smell of death (as he perceived it). Perceiving Judaism to be a religion of death, this man turned to the true religion of Life, the Christian Faith.

So would there be the same outrage, if he had substituted Islam for Judaism? If he said, "I went into the mosque, and I saw occult symbol after occult symbol prominently displayed, and there was a strange pall of death and a musty smell which made me think Islam is a religion of death. So I turned to Jesus Christ and I embraced faith in Him." Would we, in equal measure, call him an anti-Semite for saying THAT?

And, on the basis of such a statement about a MOSQUE, would people be calling him hateful, or dangerous, or criminal, or despicable? This is an important question!

Whether or not he saw occult symbolism as a child or was simply dropped on his head, he presents a bigoted and inaccurate World View. You only need to view his last couple of You Tubes about the Boston Bombing to see that this guy is pretty crazy. I personally think he is possesed by a demon as I have said before.. He needs pity and prayers not encouragement IMHO

Never the less, if you can honestly look at his stuff and think he has some really good idea's or if you agree with his analyses of events then I would say there is something quite a miss about your understanding of the World and how it works.

Sometimes people who are deeply Antisemitic are called Nazi's.. It's just short hand and easy to understand. It does not mean the person is actually a Nazi Party Member, though we have had one or two who were members on these boards in the past.

The labelling of individuals as Nazi, Fascist, racist, anti-Semite etc., is all too often a tactic of the Left and avoids having to argue with holders of views sharply divergent from theirs. It is an Orwellian tactic that appears to have little to commend it. In my view Brother Nathaniel's preoccupations appear either indicative of an unhealthy preoccupation or possibly a spiritual problem. Neither merits him being labelled but perhaps given less of an audience but rather some appropriate support.

Red Baiting is the often used tactic the Right uses to shut down debate. They use is without hesitation early and often. Obama for example is called a "Communist" when any sane person can see that he is nothing more then the most tepid of Liberals. Red baiting is an unhealthy preoccupation or possibly a spiritual problem.
(http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/Themes/Pascha2010/images/warnwarn.gif) 
(http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/Themes/Pascha2010/images/warnwarn.gif) You are warned for 30 days for getting off topic. If you wish to contest this decision, you must PM me first. Carl Kraeff
[/color]
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on May 08, 2013, 09:28:50 PM
Brother Nathaniel speaks from a bad place. He was most likely traumatized as a child and at some point picked up a lot of these anti-Jewish conspiracy theories that he echoes on his YouTube videos. It's acceptable to criticize the beliefs of the Jewish faith. I certainly dislike when people try to make legitimate criticism of Judaism, or of the Israeli government, look like an attack on the Jewish people.

Brother Nathanael has moved into what I call "crazy territory," with his conspiracy delusions of Jewish domination of international banks, Jewish 911 coverups, Holocaust denial. This is classic "nutjob" material. I don't understand why any sane person would think otherwise. And no, I don't care what you've read; scapegoating is NEVER justifiable, and it's always in bad taste.  :police:

I don't intend to write too much more about him but I agree with the post above. Nathanael is pretty close to stark raving mad. He is the poster boy for not playing with a full deck. If you find yourself nodding in agreement with his various Antisemitic conspiracy theories or admire him in any way, it may be time to take a nice restful vacation.

(https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTGW7WjGhqN2c9-xicpP6OdLxN2k3sqSesBrKjS9G0ESJqTR2tg)

(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSDGqrZWGa1rH3rFAqt45YGNDhT5anPJq4zQ8Grba6d1PpH_YLj)
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Shanghaiski on May 08, 2013, 09:35:10 PM
I wonder if Carl shouldn't be having second thoughts about unlocking this thread.

I'm sure he has third and fourth thoughts as well about a good many threads here.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: yeshuaisiam on May 08, 2013, 09:51:06 PM
He doesn't hate Jews nor is he an anti-semite.

He dislikes/exposes Zionist Jews.  There is a huge difference.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Punch on May 08, 2013, 10:22:12 PM
He doesn't hate Jews nor is he an anti-semite.

He dislikes/exposes Zionist Jews.  There is a huge difference.


And doggon, if you and I agree, it has to be true!
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: rakovsky on May 08, 2013, 10:31:13 PM
this man masquerading as a monk is an anti-semite
He seems over the top with showing himself as a monk, what with the white cross on the hat, but nonetheless, doesn't he count as a monk if he is a novice?

I am interested in what his status in the church actually is, since there have been allegations by critics that he is not a canonical Orthodox. But on the other hand, others, including people who did not promote him, have repeatedly looked into this and found he was.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: rakovsky on May 08, 2013, 10:36:56 PM
What you call 'distraction' might be what Arab Christians would call 'education.'  Arabs always complained about the word 'Semite' and 'Semitic' as being manipulated.  Seeing that they too are Semitic... Who are any of us to argue with them?
One Christian from the Holy Land pointed out about this term that he is a Semite himself.

What is the label that is given to racism against native Semitic peoples, calling them "Sand monkeys", etc.?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: mike on May 09, 2013, 07:25:36 AM
He seems over the top with showing himself as a monk, what with the white cross on the hat, but nonetheless, doesn't he count as a monk if he is a novice?

No. And there are no proofs he is even novice (there are many hints that prove the contrary).
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on May 09, 2013, 09:25:09 AM
He doesn't hate Jews nor is he an anti-semite.

He dislikes/exposes Zionist Jews.  There is a huge difference.


Nathanael repeats core Nazi Ideology, that Jews secretly control World Events, the Monetary System and similar. Like all good Anti-Semites he also does not like Israel but you haven't been watching his You Tubes much if you think the core of his message is some sort of Ant-Zionism or concern for Palestinians. That is strictly ancillary to his Ideology.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Santagranddad on May 09, 2013, 09:55:19 AM
He doesn't hate Jews nor is he an anti-semite.

He dislikes/exposes Zionist Jews.  There is a huge difference.


Nathanael repeats core Nazi Ideology, that Jews secretly control World Events, the Monetary System and similar. Like all good Anti-Semites he also does not like Israel but you haven't been watching his You Tubes much if you think the core of his message is some sort of Ant-Zionism or concern for Palestinians. That is strictly ancillary to his Ideology.

The term 'anti-Semitism' has much currency but is a misleading social construct for reasons others have already set out. The only description that accurately reflects what many users of this misrepresentative term is Jew hate. Sadly I have seen evidence of this among people of Semitic and other origins.

As to the gentleman calling himself Brother Nathaniel, watching his video's is a pastime best avoided if only to avoid the necessity of having your cringe surgically removed afterwards. So why an earth give him so much attention? Surely this is what he craves and what he should not be given, whether his behaviour is viewed as a psychological or spiritual sickness or outright bigotry? As to his views reflecting Nationalist Socialist core ideology, these Jew hating predate Adolf Hitler's setting down of his political philosophy, so why the label him with that tag? If his offence is to hate and denigrate Jews then why not simply say so, after all Hitler's message went rather further than Jew hate.

The all too ready labelling of those who hold divergent views, even repugnant ones, is I believe a sickness in our society and stems from political philosophies incompatible with Christianity, indeed hostile to Christianity. Saint Paul would have found himself reaching out to those holding beliefs repugnant and contrary to the Gospel yet he did so without insulting them.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: jah777 on May 09, 2013, 09:58:31 AM
He doesn't hate Jews nor is he an anti-semite.

He dislikes/exposes Zionist Jews.  There is a huge difference.


Nathanael repeats core Nazi Ideology, that Jews secretly control World Events, the Monetary System and similar. Like all good Anti-Semites he also does not like Israel but you haven't been watching his You Tubes much if you think the core of his message is some sort of Ant-Zionism or concern for Palestinians. That is strictly ancillary to his Ideology.

The concerns expressed in Germany regarding the Jewish role in the Bolshevik Revolution, Jewish influence in German society, and regarding international Jewish movements was not entirely incorrect.  To say that their concerns were not entirely incorrect does not mean that they were entirely right either.  And whether they were right or wrong about certain things does not justify murder.  The problem with this subject is the jump from "Nazis killed millions of Jews" to "criticizing Jews is what Jew-killing Nazis did, so if you criticize anything done by Jews you are just like Jew-killing Nazis."  Even if one accepts the claim that the Nazis' ultimate intent was to wipe out and kill off all Jews (rather than deport them), this would not invalidate all of their perceptions of the Jews, it would only indicate that they acted wrongly in trying to kill off the Jews.

If someone gets angry at their wife for getting a speeding ticket and kills her, that person is a murderer.  He should not have killed his wife, but that doesn't mean that the murderer was wrong about the fact that his wife got a speeding ticket, he just didn't address the problem properly.  It also doesn't mean that everyone who gets upset at their wife for getting a speeding ticket is "just like" the murderer.

No group of people is essentially "evil", whether they be Nazis, Jews, etc. But the "bad rap" that Jews have received in different societies at different times is not entirely baseless.  If one cannot acknowledge that possibility, not much can come from a discussion on the subject.  
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: vamrat on May 09, 2013, 10:37:30 AM
He doesn't hate Jews nor is he an anti-semite.

He dislikes/exposes Zionist Jews.  There is a huge difference.


Nathanael repeats core Nazi Ideology, that Jews secretly control World Events, the Monetary System and similar. Like all good Anti-Semites he also does not like Israel but you haven't been watching his You Tubes much if you think the core of his message is some sort of Ant-Zionism or concern for Palestinians. That is strictly ancillary to his Ideology.

The concerns expressed in Germany regarding the Jewish role in the Bolshevik Revolution, Jewish influence in German society, and regarding international Jewish movements was not entirely incorrect.  To say that their concerns were not entirely incorrect does not mean that they were entirely right either.  And whether they were right or wrong about certain things does not justify murder.  The problem with this subject is the jump from "Nazis killed millions of Jews" to "criticizing Jews is what Jew-killing Nazis did, so if you criticize anything done by Jews you are just like Jew-killing Nazis."  Even if one accepts the claim that the Nazis' ultimate intent was to wipe out and kill off all Jews (rather than deport them), this would not invalidate all of their perceptions of the Jews, it would only indicate that they acted wrongly in trying to kill off the Jews.

If someone gets angry at their wife for getting a speeding ticket and kills her, that person is a murderer.  He should not have killed his wife, but that doesn't mean that the murderer was wrong about the fact that his wife got a speeding ticket, he just didn't address the problem properly.  It also doesn't mean that everyone who gets upset at their wife for getting a speeding ticket is "just like" the murderer.

No group of people is essentially "evil", whether they be Nazis, Jews, etc. But the "bad rap" that Jews have received in different societies at different times is not entirely baseless.  If one cannot acknowledge that possibility, not much can come from a discussion on the subject.  

This is pretty much the reason that a Reductio ad Hitlerum is logically flawed.  For the most part it looks like the entire debate against this fellow is:

He doesn't like Zionism.  Many Zionists are Jews.  Hitler didn't like Jews.  THIS MAN IS HITLER!!!!!!!11!!1!

Hitler liked dogs.  If you like dogs you share an interest with Hitler.

Hitler had brown hair.  If you have brown hair you are like Hitler.

Hitler was a decorated veteran.  All decorated veterans from Hermann Goering to Audie Murphey are wannabe Hitlers.

Brother Nathaniel is a monk.  Rasputin was a monk.  OMFG HE'S A RASPUTIN-HITLER HYBRID SO HE MUST LIKE DOGS A DOG BIT ME WHEN I WAS A KID THIS MAN BELIEVES EVERYONE DESERVES TO DIE IN AUSCHWITZ-RABIESWALD!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: J Michael on May 09, 2013, 11:13:25 AM
He doesn't hate Jews nor is he an anti-semite.

He dislikes/exposes Zionist Jews.  There is a huge difference.


Nathanael repeats core Nazi Ideology, that Jews secretly control World Events, the Monetary System and similar. Like all good Anti-Semites he also does not like Israel but you haven't been watching his You Tubes much if you think the core of his message is some sort of Ant-Zionism or concern for Palestinians. That is strictly ancillary to his Ideology.

The concerns expressed in Germany regarding the Jewish role in the Bolshevik Revolution, Jewish influence in German society, and regarding international Jewish movements was not entirely incorrect.  To say that their concerns were not entirely incorrect does not mean that they were entirely right either.  And whether they were right or wrong about certain things does not justify murder.  The problem with this subject is the jump from "Nazis killed millions of Jews" to "criticizing Jews is what Jew-killing Nazis did, so if you criticize anything done by Jews you are just like Jew-killing Nazis."  Even if one accepts the claim that the Nazis' ultimate intent was to wipe out and kill off all Jews (rather than deport them), this would not invalidate all of their perceptions of the Jews, it would only indicate that they acted wrongly in trying to kill off the Jews.

If someone gets angry at their wife for getting a speeding ticket and kills her, that person is a murderer.  He should not have killed his wife, but that doesn't mean that the murderer was wrong about the fact that his wife got a speeding ticket, he just didn't address the problem properly.  It also doesn't mean that everyone who gets upset at their wife for getting a speeding ticket is "just like" the murderer.

No group of people is essentially "evil", whether they be Nazis, Jews, etc. But the "bad rap" that Jews have received in different societies at different times is not entirely baseless.  If one cannot acknowledge that possibility, not much can come from a discussion on the subject.  

This is pretty much the reason that a Reductio ad Hitlerum is logically flawed.  For the most part it looks like the entire debate against this fellow is:

He doesn't like Zionism.  Many Zionists are Jews.  Hitler didn't like Jews.  THIS MAN IS HITLER!!!!!!!11!!1!

Hitler liked dogs.  If you like dogs you share an interest with Hitler.

Hitler had brown hair.  If you have brown hair you are like Hitler.

Hitler was a decorated veteran.  All decorated veterans from Hermann Goering to Audie Murphey are wannabe Hitlers.

Brother Nathaniel is a monk.  Rasputin was a monk.  OMFG HE'S A RASPUTIN-HITLER HYBRID SO HE MUST LIKE DOGS A DOG BIT ME WHEN I WAS A KID THIS MAN BELIEVES EVERYONE DESERVES TO DIE IN AUSCHWITZ-RABIESWALD!!!!!!!!!!!!!

LOLOLOLOL!!

You nailed it, brother!!
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on May 09, 2013, 11:25:02 AM
He doesn't hate Jews nor is he an anti-semite.

He dislikes/exposes Zionist Jews.  There is a huge difference.


Nathanael repeats core Nazi Ideology, that Jews secretly control World Events, the Monetary System and similar. Like all good Anti-Semites he also does not like Israel but you haven't been watching his You Tubes much if you think the core of his message is some sort of Ant-Zionism or concern for Palestinians. That is strictly ancillary to his Ideology.

The term 'antisemitism' has much currency but is a misleading social construct for reasons others have already set out. The only description that accurately reflects what many users of this misrepresentative term is Jew hate. Sadly I have seen evidence of this among people of Semitic and other origins.

As to the gentleman calling himself Brother Nathaniel, watching his video's is a pastime best avoided if only to avoid the necessity of having your cringe surgically removed afterwards. So why an earth give him so much attention? Surely this is what he craves and what he should not be given, whether his behaviour is viewed as a psychological or spiritual sickness or outright bigotry? As to his views reflecting Nationalist Socialist core ideology, these Jew hating predate Adolf Hitler's setting down of his political philosophy, so why the label him with that tag? If his offence is to hate and denigrate Jews then why not simply say so, after all Hitler's message went rather further than Jew hate.

The all too ready labelling of those who hold divergent views, even repugnant ones, is I believe a sickness in our society and stems from political philosophies incompatible with Christianity, indeed hostile to Christianity. Saint Paul would have found himself reaching out to those holding beliefs repugnant and contrary to the Gospel yet he did so without insulting them.

Jewish scapegoating was not the sole component of Hitler's message but it was near or at the top of the list and was the core component of his World View, that Jew's secretly control things and ruined Germany.

Nathanael is very popular with modern Neo Nazi's and White Supremacists. He is "Our kind of Jew". He has granted extensive interviews with White Supremest publications and he is mentioned in their press in glowing terms.

So it is not at all inaccurate to call the guy a Nazi. Probably the most exact term is "The Nazi Loving Br. Nathanael", but why split hairs?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on May 09, 2013, 11:31:26 AM
He doesn't hate Jews nor is he an anti-semite.

He dislikes/exposes Zionist Jews.  There is a huge difference.


Nathanael repeats core Nazi Ideology, that Jews secretly control World Events, the Monetary System and similar. Like all good Anti-Semites he also does not like Israel but you haven't been watching his You Tubes much if you think the core of his message is some sort of Ant-Zionism or concern for Palestinians. That is strictly ancillary to his Ideology.

The concerns expressed in Germany regarding the Jewish role in the Bolshevik Revolution, Jewish influence in German society, and regarding international Jewish movements was not entirely incorrect.  To say that their concerns were not entirely incorrect does not mean that they were entirely right either.  And whether they were right or wrong about certain things does not justify murder.  The problem with this subject is the jump from "Nazis killed millions of Jews" to "criticizing Jews is what Jew-killing Nazis did, so if you criticize anything done by Jews you are just like Jew-killing Nazis."  Even if one accepts the claim that the Nazis' ultimate intent was to wipe out and kill off all Jews (rather than deport them), this would not invalidate all of their perceptions of the Jews, it would only indicate that they acted wrongly in trying to kill off the Jews.

If someone gets angry at their wife for getting a speeding ticket and kills her, that person is a murderer.  He should not have killed his wife, but that doesn't mean that the murderer was wrong about the fact that his wife got a speeding ticket, he just didn't address the problem properly.  It also doesn't mean that everyone who gets upset at their wife for getting a speeding ticket is "just like" the murderer.

No group of people is essentially "evil", whether they be Nazis, Jews, etc. But the "bad rap" that Jews have received in different societies at different times is not entirely baseless.  If one cannot acknowledge that possibility, not much can come from a discussion on the subject.  

This is pretty much the reason that a Reductio ad Hitlerum is logically flawed.  For the most part it looks like the entire debate against this fellow is:

He doesn't like Zionism.  Many Zionists are Jews.  Hitler didn't like Jews.  THIS MAN IS HITLER!!!!!!!11!!1!

Hitler liked dogs.  If you like dogs you share an interest with Hitler.

Hitler had brown hair.  If you have brown hair you are like Hitler.

Hitler was a decorated veteran.  All decorated veterans from Hermann Goering to Audie Murphey are wannabe Hitlers.

Brother Nathaniel is a monk.  Rasputin was a monk.  OMFG HE'S A RASPUTIN-HITLER HYBRID SO HE MUST LIKE DOGS A DOG BIT ME WHEN I WAS A KID THIS MAN BELIEVES EVERYONE DESERVES TO DIE IN AUSCHWITZ-RABIESWALD!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Nathaneal is not an Anti-Zionist. He is Anti-Jewish and tells a sordid tale of a complicated conspiracy among Jews to run the World. Included within that is hatred of Israel of course but that is not anywhere close to his main message. It is tangential.

Not all Anti-Zionists are Antisemites but all Antisemites are Anti-Israel.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: GabrieltheCelt on May 09, 2013, 11:32:10 AM
He doesn't hate Jews nor is he an anti-semite.

He dislikes/exposes Zionist Jews.  There is a huge difference.


Nathanael repeats core Nazi Ideology, that Jews secretly control World Events, the Monetary System and similar. Like all good Anti-Semites he also does not like Israel but you haven't been watching his You Tubes much if you think the core of his message is some sort of Ant-Zionism or concern for Palestinians. That is strictly ancillary to his Ideology.

The concerns expressed in Germany regarding the Jewish role in the Bolshevik Revolution, Jewish influence in German society, and regarding international Jewish movements was not entirely incorrect.  To say that their concerns were not entirely incorrect does not mean that they were entirely right either.  And whether they were right or wrong about certain things does not justify murder.  The problem with this subject is the jump from "Nazis killed millions of Jews" to "criticizing Jews is what Jew-killing Nazis did, so if you criticize anything done by Jews you are just like Jew-killing Nazis."  Even if one accepts the claim that the Nazis' ultimate intent was to wipe out and kill off all Jews (rather than deport them), this would not invalidate all of their perceptions of the Jews, it would only indicate that they acted wrongly in trying to kill off the Jews.

If someone gets angry at their wife for getting a speeding ticket and kills her, that person is a murderer.  He should not have killed his wife, but that doesn't mean that the murderer was wrong about the fact that his wife got a speeding ticket, he just didn't address the problem properly.  It also doesn't mean that everyone who gets upset at their wife for getting a speeding ticket is "just like" the murderer.

No group of people is essentially "evil", whether they be Nazis, Jews, etc. But the "bad rap" that Jews have received in different societies at different times is not entirely baseless.  If one cannot acknowledge that possibility, not much can come from a discussion on the subject.  

This is pretty much the reason that a Reductio ad Hitlerum is logically flawed.  For the most part it looks like the entire debate against this fellow is:

He doesn't like Zionism.  Many Zionists are Jews.  Hitler didn't like Jews.  THIS MAN IS HITLER!!!!!!!11!!1!

Hitler liked dogs.  If you like dogs you share an interest with Hitler.

Hitler had brown hair.  If you have brown hair you are like Hitler.

Hitler was a decorated veteran.  All decorated veterans from Hermann Goering to Audie Murphey are wannabe Hitlers.

Brother Nathaniel is a monk.  Rasputin was a monk.  OMFG HE'S A RASPUTIN-HITLER HYBRID SO HE MUST LIKE DOGS A DOG BIT ME WHEN I WAS A KID THIS MAN BELIEVES EVERYONE DESERVES TO DIE IN AUSCHWITZ-RABIESWALD!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Very well said.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on May 09, 2013, 11:45:17 AM
He doesn't hate Jews nor is he an anti-semite.

He dislikes/exposes Zionist Jews.  There is a huge difference.


Nathanael repeats core Nazi Ideology, that Jews secretly control World Events, the Monetary System and similar. Like all good Anti-Semites he also does not like Israel but you haven't been watching his You Tubes much if you think the core of his message is some sort of Ant-Zionism or concern for Palestinians. That is strictly ancillary to his Ideology.

The concerns expressed in Germany regarding the Jewish role in the Bolshevik Revolution, Jewish influence in German society, and regarding international Jewish movements was not entirely incorrect.  To say that their concerns were not entirely incorrect does not mean that they were entirely right either.  And whether they were right or wrong about certain things does not justify murder.  The problem with this subject is the jump from "Nazis killed millions of Jews" to "criticizing Jews is what Jew-killing Nazis did, so if you criticize anything done by Jews you are just like Jew-killing Nazis."  Even if one accepts the claim that the Nazis' ultimate intent was to wipe out and kill off all Jews (rather than deport them), this would not invalidate all of their perceptions of the Jews, it would only indicate that they acted wrongly in trying to kill off the Jews.

If someone gets angry at their wife for getting a speeding ticket and kills her, that person is a murderer.  He should not have killed his wife, but that doesn't mean that the murderer was wrong about the fact that his wife got a speeding ticket, he just didn't address the problem properly.  It also doesn't mean that everyone who gets upset at their wife for getting a speeding ticket is "just like" the murderer.

No group of people is essentially "evil", whether they be Nazis, Jews, etc. But the "bad rap" that Jews have received in different societies at different times is not entirely baseless.  If one cannot acknowledge that possibility, not much can come from a discussion on the subject.  

This is pretty much the reason that a Reductio ad Hitlerum is logically flawed.  For the most part it looks like the entire debate against this fellow is:

He doesn't like Zionism.  Many Zionists are Jews.  Hitler didn't like Jews.  THIS MAN IS HITLER!!!!!!!11!!1!

Hitler liked dogs.  If you like dogs you share an interest with Hitler.

Hitler had brown hair.  If you have brown hair you are like Hitler.

Hitler was a decorated veteran.  All decorated veterans from Hermann Goering to Audie Murphey are wannabe Hitlers.

Brother Nathaniel is a monk.  Rasputin was a monk.  OMFG HE'S A RASPUTIN-HITLER HYBRID SO HE MUST LIKE DOGS A DOG BIT ME WHEN I WAS A KID THIS MAN BELIEVES EVERYONE DESERVES TO DIE IN AUSCHWITZ-RABIESWALD!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Very well said.

So he is just misunderstood?

I think not.

He repeats classic Nazi Ideology and makes common cause and actively works with modern Neo Nazi's and White Supremists..
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Schultz on May 09, 2013, 11:47:40 AM
He doesn't hate Jews nor is he an anti-semite.

He dislikes/exposes Zionist Jews.  There is a huge difference.


Nathanael repeats core Nazi Ideology, that Jews secretly control World Events, the Monetary System and similar. Like all good Anti-Semites he also does not like Israel but you haven't been watching his You Tubes much if you think the core of his message is some sort of Ant-Zionism or concern for Palestinians. That is strictly ancillary to his Ideology.

The concerns expressed in Germany regarding the Jewish role in the Bolshevik Revolution, Jewish influence in German society, and regarding international Jewish movements was not entirely incorrect.  To say that their concerns were not entirely incorrect does not mean that they were entirely right either.  And whether they were right or wrong about certain things does not justify murder.  The problem with this subject is the jump from "Nazis killed millions of Jews" to "criticizing Jews is what Jew-killing Nazis did, so if you criticize anything done by Jews you are just like Jew-killing Nazis."  Even if one accepts the claim that the Nazis' ultimate intent was to wipe out and kill off all Jews (rather than deport them), this would not invalidate all of their perceptions of the Jews, it would only indicate that they acted wrongly in trying to kill off the Jews.

If someone gets angry at their wife for getting a speeding ticket and kills her, that person is a murderer.  He should not have killed his wife, but that doesn't mean that the murderer was wrong about the fact that his wife got a speeding ticket, he just didn't address the problem properly.  It also doesn't mean that everyone who gets upset at their wife for getting a speeding ticket is "just like" the murderer.

No group of people is essentially "evil", whether they be Nazis, Jews, etc. But the "bad rap" that Jews have received in different societies at different times is not entirely baseless.  If one cannot acknowledge that possibility, not much can come from a discussion on the subject.  

This is pretty much the reason that a Reductio ad Hitlerum is logically flawed.  For the most part it looks like the entire debate against this fellow is:

He doesn't like Zionism.  Many Zionists are Jews.  Hitler didn't like Jews.  THIS MAN IS HITLER!!!!!!!11!!1!

Hitler liked dogs.  If you like dogs you share an interest with Hitler.

Hitler had brown hair.  If you have brown hair you are like Hitler.

Hitler was a decorated veteran.  All decorated veterans from Hermann Goering to Audie Murphey are wannabe Hitlers.

Brother Nathaniel is a monk.  Rasputin was a monk.  OMFG HE'S A RASPUTIN-HITLER HYBRID SO HE MUST LIKE DOGS A DOG BIT ME WHEN I WAS A KID THIS MAN BELIEVES EVERYONE DESERVES TO DIE IN AUSCHWITZ-RABIESWALD!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Nathaneal is not an Anti-Zionist. He is Anti-Jewish and tells a sordid tale of a complicated conspiracy among Jews to run the World. Included within that is hatred of Israel of course but that is not anywhere close to his main message. It is tangential.

Not all Anti-Zionists are Antisemites but all Antisemites are Anti-Israel.

And not all anti-semites are Nazis.

I'm sorry, I have to agree with the others.  The word "Nazi" has lost much of its meaning and power because it is overused.  Being a Nazi is more than just being an anti-Semite or, more broadly, a racialist.  I write this as someone who spent a great deal of his youth engaged in fist fights with self-professed Neo-Nazis, anti-Semites, and just plain ignorant white folk who have never seen a black person.

Nazis should be called Nazis, but racists should just be called racists.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: rakovsky on May 09, 2013, 11:51:41 AM
all Antisemites are Anti-Israel.
What about the opposite strain in the European far right and in 1980's South Africa?

What about the fact that fundamentalists in the US tend to be the least tolerant, but also the most supportive of that state's system?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on May 09, 2013, 11:54:06 AM
He doesn't hate Jews nor is he an anti-semite.

He dislikes/exposes Zionist Jews.  There is a huge difference.


Nathanael repeats core Nazi Ideology, that Jews secretly control World Events, the Monetary System and similar. Like all good Anti-Semites he also does not like Israel but you haven't been watching his You Tubes much if you think the core of his message is some sort of Ant-Zionism or concern for Palestinians. That is strictly ancillary to his Ideology.

The concerns expressed in Germany regarding the Jewish role in the Bolshevik Revolution, Jewish influence in German society, and regarding international Jewish movements was not entirely incorrect.  To say that their concerns were not entirely incorrect does not mean that they were entirely right either.  And whether they were right or wrong about certain things does not justify murder.  The problem with this subject is the jump from "Nazis killed millions of Jews" to "criticizing Jews is what Jew-killing Nazis did, so if you criticize anything done by Jews you are just like Jew-killing Nazis."  Even if one accepts the claim that the Nazis' ultimate intent was to wipe out and kill off all Jews (rather than deport them), this would not invalidate all of their perceptions of the Jews, it would only indicate that they acted wrongly in trying to kill off the Jews.

If someone gets angry at their wife for getting a speeding ticket and kills her, that person is a murderer.  He should not have killed his wife, but that doesn't mean that the murderer was wrong about the fact that his wife got a speeding ticket, he just didn't address the problem properly.  It also doesn't mean that everyone who gets upset at their wife for getting a speeding ticket is "just like" the murderer.

No group of people is essentially "evil", whether they be Nazis, Jews, etc. But the "bad rap" that Jews have received in different societies at different times is not entirely baseless.  If one cannot acknowledge that possibility, not much can come from a discussion on the subject.  

This is pretty much the reason that a Reductio ad Hitlerum is logically flawed.  For the most part it looks like the entire debate against this fellow is:

He doesn't like Zionism.  Many Zionists are Jews.  Hitler didn't like Jews.  THIS MAN IS HITLER!!!!!!!11!!1!

Hitler liked dogs.  If you like dogs you share an interest with Hitler.

Hitler had brown hair.  If you have brown hair you are like Hitler.

Hitler was a decorated veteran.  All decorated veterans from Hermann Goering to Audie Murphey are wannabe Hitlers.

Brother Nathaniel is a monk.  Rasputin was a monk.  OMFG HE'S A RASPUTIN-HITLER HYBRID SO HE MUST LIKE DOGS A DOG BIT ME WHEN I WAS A KID THIS MAN BELIEVES EVERYONE DESERVES TO DIE IN AUSCHWITZ-RABIESWALD!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Nathaneal is not an Anti-Zionist. He is Anti-Jewish and tells a sordid tale of a complicated conspiracy among Jews to run the World. Included within that is hatred of Israel of course but that is not anywhere close to his main message. It is tangential.

Not all Anti-Zionists are Antisemites but all Antisemites are Anti-Israel.

And not all anti-semites are Nazis.

I'm sorry, I have to agree with the others.  The word "Nazi" has lost much of its meaning and power because it is overused.  Being a Nazi is more than just being an anti-Semite or, more broadly, a racialist.  I write this as someone who spent a great deal of his youth engaged in fist fights with self-professed Neo-Nazis, anti-Semites, and just plain ignorant white folk who have never seen a black person.

Nazis should be called Nazis, but racists should just be called racists.

He is certainly a bigot. I don't know if he has a racial point of view. What he does do is repeat the main components of Nazi Ideology in terms of Jewish "World Domination", without any deviation just with current day players. He repeats Nazi Ideology. That makes calling him a Nazi pretty accurate. Calling him a Racist may even be less accurate. However, he makes common cause with Racists.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Schultz on May 09, 2013, 11:57:02 AM
He doesn't hate Jews nor is he an anti-semite.

He dislikes/exposes Zionist Jews.  There is a huge difference.


Nathanael repeats core Nazi Ideology, that Jews secretly control World Events, the Monetary System and similar. Like all good Anti-Semites he also does not like Israel but you haven't been watching his You Tubes much if you think the core of his message is some sort of Ant-Zionism or concern for Palestinians. That is strictly ancillary to his Ideology.

The concerns expressed in Germany regarding the Jewish role in the Bolshevik Revolution, Jewish influence in German society, and regarding international Jewish movements was not entirely incorrect.  To say that their concerns were not entirely incorrect does not mean that they were entirely right either.  And whether they were right or wrong about certain things does not justify murder.  The problem with this subject is the jump from "Nazis killed millions of Jews" to "criticizing Jews is what Jew-killing Nazis did, so if you criticize anything done by Jews you are just like Jew-killing Nazis."  Even if one accepts the claim that the Nazis' ultimate intent was to wipe out and kill off all Jews (rather than deport them), this would not invalidate all of their perceptions of the Jews, it would only indicate that they acted wrongly in trying to kill off the Jews.

If someone gets angry at their wife for getting a speeding ticket and kills her, that person is a murderer.  He should not have killed his wife, but that doesn't mean that the murderer was wrong about the fact that his wife got a speeding ticket, he just didn't address the problem properly.  It also doesn't mean that everyone who gets upset at their wife for getting a speeding ticket is "just like" the murderer.

No group of people is essentially "evil", whether they be Nazis, Jews, etc. But the "bad rap" that Jews have received in different societies at different times is not entirely baseless.  If one cannot acknowledge that possibility, not much can come from a discussion on the subject.  

This is pretty much the reason that a Reductio ad Hitlerum is logically flawed.  For the most part it looks like the entire debate against this fellow is:

He doesn't like Zionism.  Many Zionists are Jews.  Hitler didn't like Jews.  THIS MAN IS HITLER!!!!!!!11!!1!

Hitler liked dogs.  If you like dogs you share an interest with Hitler.

Hitler had brown hair.  If you have brown hair you are like Hitler.

Hitler was a decorated veteran.  All decorated veterans from Hermann Goering to Audie Murphey are wannabe Hitlers.

Brother Nathaniel is a monk.  Rasputin was a monk.  OMFG HE'S A RASPUTIN-HITLER HYBRID SO HE MUST LIKE DOGS A DOG BIT ME WHEN I WAS A KID THIS MAN BELIEVES EVERYONE DESERVES TO DIE IN AUSCHWITZ-RABIESWALD!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Nathaneal is not an Anti-Zionist. He is Anti-Jewish and tells a sordid tale of a complicated conspiracy among Jews to run the World. Included within that is hatred of Israel of course but that is not anywhere close to his main message. It is tangential.

Not all Anti-Zionists are Antisemites but all Antisemites are Anti-Israel.

And not all anti-semites are Nazis.

I'm sorry, I have to agree with the others.  The word "Nazi" has lost much of its meaning and power because it is overused.  Being a Nazi is more than just being an anti-Semite or, more broadly, a racialist.  I write this as someone who spent a great deal of his youth engaged in fist fights with self-professed Neo-Nazis, anti-Semites, and just plain ignorant white folk who have never seen a black person.

Nazis should be called Nazis, but racists should just be called racists.

He is certainly a bigot. I don't know if he has a racial point of view. What he does do is repeat the main components of Nazi Ideology in terms of the Jewish Question, without any deviation just with current day players. He repeats Nazi Ideology. That makes calling him a Nazi pretty accurate. Calling him a Racist may even be less accurate. However, he makes common cause with Racists.

Does he support nationalization of the industries?  Does he preach war in the name of patriotism and spreading the borders of his nation for expansion?

Those are just as strong platforms of the Nazi ethos as anti-Semitism. 
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: mike on May 09, 2013, 12:12:34 PM
Brother Nathaniel is a monk. 

No, he's not.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: GabrieltheCelt on May 09, 2013, 12:19:00 PM
Brother Nathaniel is a monk. 

No, he's not.

You're probably correct, but can you prove it?  I think that if he's proven to not be a monk, it would probably dissuade a lot of folks from giving him their time and attention.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: mike on May 09, 2013, 12:23:05 PM
Brother Nathaniel is a monk. 

No, he's not.

You're probably correct, but can you prove it?  I think that if he's proven to not be a monk, it would probably dissuade a lot of folks from giving him their time and attention.

How can one prove something does not happen?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: GabrieltheCelt on May 09, 2013, 12:26:22 PM
Brother Nathaniel is a monk. 

No, he's not.

You're probably correct, but can you prove it?  I think that if he's proven to not be a monk, it would probably dissuade a lot of folks from giving him their time and attention.

How can one prove something does not happen?

 That's my point, Michael.  Again, how do you know that that didn't happen?  I'm not disagreeing with you, I just want to know how you know this.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: mike on May 09, 2013, 12:28:24 PM
That's my point, Michael.  Again, how do you know that that didn't happen?  I'm not disagreeing with you, I just want to know how you know this.

He's not in a monastery. He does not say who his abbot is. He does not look like a monk. He does not behave like a monk.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: J Michael on May 09, 2013, 12:29:04 PM
Brother Nathaniel is a monk. 

No, he's not.

You're probably correct, but can you prove it?  I think that if he's proven to not be a monk, it would probably dissuade a lot of folks from giving him their time and attention.

How can one prove something does not happen?

He claims to be affiliated with ROCOR:
Quote
Brother Nathanael Kapner is a recognized monastic with the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Of Russia (ROCOR) where he is officially recognized as a "poslushnik"/"novice" monk.
http://brothernathanaelfoundation.org/about

I'm thinking that if someone is interested enough it shouldn't be too difficult to confirm that--or that he's not.

Probably anyone can call themself a "monk".  Official affiliation with a monastery is another matter, though.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: mike on May 09, 2013, 12:35:58 PM
He claims to be affiliated with ROCOR:
Quote
Brother Nathanael Kapner is a recognized monastic with the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Of Russia (ROCOR) where he is officially recognized as a "poslushnik"/"novice" monk.
http://brothernathanaelfoundation.org/about

I claim I'm an emperor of Saturn. Kneel in front of me.

Quote
I'm thinking that if someone is interested enough it shouldn't be too difficult to confirm that--or that he's not.

Yeah. Ask every ROCOR abbot and bishop. Piece of cake.

Quote
Official affiliation with a monastery is another matter, though.

Every monk has to be affiliated to a monastery or directly to a bishop.

NOVICES ARE NOT MONKS.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: J Michael on May 09, 2013, 12:56:18 PM
He claims to be affiliated with ROCOR:
Quote
Brother Nathanael Kapner is a recognized monastic with the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Of Russia (ROCOR) where he is officially recognized as a "poslushnik"/"novice" monk.
http://brothernathanaelfoundation.org/about

I claim I'm an emperor of Saturn. Kneel in front of me.

Quote
I'm thinking that if someone is interested enough it shouldn't be too difficult to confirm that--or that he's not.

Yeah. Ask every ROCOR abbot and bishop. Piece of cake.

Quote
Official affiliation with a monastery is another matter, though.

Every monk has to be affiliated to a monastery or directly to a bishop.

NOVICES ARE NOT MONKS.

How many ROCOR abbots and bishops do you think there are, anyway?  Hundreds?  According to their website, there are 9 ROCOR monasteries in North America, not all of which are men's.  So, it's not like it would be an overwhelming task for someone who cared enough.  In fact, they only list a total of 19 world wide--not all of which are men's.
http://www.synod.com/synod/engrocor/enmonasteries.html

It wouldn't surprise me to find out that someone's already contacted them about him.

Who are you shouting at about novices not being monks, anyway?  I think that's something I've known for quite a few years now.  I was only quoting from the "monk's" website, anyway, in case you hadn't noticed.

I'm relieved to discover that you are the emperor of Saturn rather than the Emperor of Ur-anus. ;D ;D
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: yeshuaisiam on May 09, 2013, 01:02:04 PM
He doesn't hate Jews nor is he an anti-semite.

He dislikes/exposes Zionist Jews.  There is a huge difference.


Nathanael repeats core Nazi Ideology, that Jews secretly control World Events, the Monetary System and similar. Like all good Anti-Semites he also does not like Israel but you haven't been watching his You Tubes much if you think the core of his message is some sort of Ant-Zionism or concern for Palestinians. That is strictly ancillary to his Ideology.

Well that's how they partially became powerful in their message, because their propaganda was laced in facts.   Anti Zionist facts are backed up.  The difference is that the Nazi's used this information to convince people to eradicate the Jews.

IE -  "Look at the Jews, they own banking cartels, let's go into neighborhoods and get em".

Brother Nathanael is speaking against Zionists specifically.  He desires to convert Jews to Eastern Orthodoxy (as he has expressed).

But I do agree with you he is using some of the information that the Nazi's used, but it is rational & truthful information.  His is a cause NOT to hate a people, but to understand the Zionists (Powerful people that are Jews seeking world domination through government, industry, religion, and banking).
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: yeshuaisiam on May 09, 2013, 01:03:09 PM
One thing we can all agree on, he sure lives in a beautiful part of America.  Gorgeous backgrounds in his videos. 
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: yeshuaisiam on May 09, 2013, 01:04:01 PM
He claims to be affiliated with ROCOR:
Quote
Brother Nathanael Kapner is a recognized monastic with the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Of Russia (ROCOR) where he is officially recognized as a "poslushnik"/"novice" monk.
http://brothernathanaelfoundation.org/about

I claim I'm an emperor of Saturn. Kneel in front of me.

Quote
I'm thinking that if someone is interested enough it shouldn't be too difficult to confirm that--or that he's not.

Yeah. Ask every ROCOR abbot and bishop. Piece of cake.

Quote
Official affiliation with a monastery is another matter, though.

Every monk has to be affiliated to a monastery or directly to a bishop.

NOVICES ARE NOT MONKS.

I thought the monastery he is in was affiliated with HOCNA
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: vamrat on May 09, 2013, 01:07:17 PM
He doesn't hate Jews nor is he an anti-semite.

He dislikes/exposes Zionist Jews.  There is a huge difference.


Nathanael repeats core Nazi Ideology, that Jews secretly control World Events, the Monetary System and similar. Like all good Anti-Semites he also does not like Israel but you haven't been watching his You Tubes much if you think the core of his message is some sort of Ant-Zionism or concern for Palestinians. That is strictly ancillary to his Ideology.

The concerns expressed in Germany regarding the Jewish role in the Bolshevik Revolution, Jewish influence in German society, and regarding international Jewish movements was not entirely incorrect.  To say that their concerns were not entirely incorrect does not mean that they were entirely right either.  And whether they were right or wrong about certain things does not justify murder.  The problem with this subject is the jump from "Nazis killed millions of Jews" to "criticizing Jews is what Jew-killing Nazis did, so if you criticize anything done by Jews you are just like Jew-killing Nazis."  Even if one accepts the claim that the Nazis' ultimate intent was to wipe out and kill off all Jews (rather than deport them), this would not invalidate all of their perceptions of the Jews, it would only indicate that they acted wrongly in trying to kill off the Jews.

If someone gets angry at their wife for getting a speeding ticket and kills her, that person is a murderer.  He should not have killed his wife, but that doesn't mean that the murderer was wrong about the fact that his wife got a speeding ticket, he just didn't address the problem properly.  It also doesn't mean that everyone who gets upset at their wife for getting a speeding ticket is "just like" the murderer.

No group of people is essentially "evil", whether they be Nazis, Jews, etc. But the "bad rap" that Jews have received in different societies at different times is not entirely baseless.  If one cannot acknowledge that possibility, not much can come from a discussion on the subject.  

This is pretty much the reason that a Reductio ad Hitlerum is logically flawed.  For the most part it looks like the entire debate against this fellow is:

He doesn't like Zionism.  Many Zionists are Jews.  Hitler didn't like Jews.  THIS MAN IS HITLER!!!!!!!11!!1!

Hitler liked dogs.  If you like dogs you share an interest with Hitler.

Hitler had brown hair.  If you have brown hair you are like Hitler.

Hitler was a decorated veteran.  All decorated veterans from Hermann Goering to Audie Murphey are wannabe Hitlers.

Brother Nathaniel is a monk.  Rasputin was a monk.  OMFG HE'S A RASPUTIN-HITLER HYBRID SO HE MUST LIKE DOGS A DOG BIT ME WHEN I WAS A KID THIS MAN BELIEVES EVERYONE DESERVES TO DIE IN AUSCHWITZ-RABIESWALD!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Nathaneal is not an Anti-Zionist. He is Anti-Jewish and tells a sordid tale of a complicated conspiracy among Jews to run the World. Included within that is hatred of Israel of course but that is not anywhere close to his main message. It is tangential.

Not all Anti-Zionists are Antisemites but all Antisemites are Anti-Israel.

And not all anti-semites are Nazis.

I'm sorry, I have to agree with the others.  The word "Nazi" has lost much of its meaning and power because it is overused.  Being a Nazi is more than just being an anti-Semite or, more broadly, a racialist.  I write this as someone who spent a great deal of his youth engaged in fist fights with self-professed Neo-Nazis, anti-Semites, and just plain ignorant white folk who have never seen a black person.

Nazis should be called Nazis, but racists should just be called racists.

He is certainly a bigot. I don't know if he has a racial point of view. What he does do is repeat the main components of Nazi Ideology in terms of Jewish "World Domination", without any deviation just with current day players. He repeats Nazi Ideology. That makes calling him a Nazi pretty accurate. Calling him a Racist may even be less accurate. However, he makes common cause with Racists.

What part of Nazi core ideology does he profess?  I looked at his website and saw nothing about third way economic systems.  Is he just anti-Bolshevist?  Does he believe that the Saarland should be reoccupied?  What about Danzig and Memel?  Is he opposed to the Versailles Treaty? 
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: jah777 on May 09, 2013, 01:07:59 PM
He doesn't hate Jews nor is he an anti-semite.

He dislikes/exposes Zionist Jews.  There is a huge difference.


Nathanael repeats core Nazi Ideology, that Jews secretly control World Events, the Monetary System and similar. Like all good Anti-Semites he also does not like Israel but you haven't been watching his You Tubes much if you think the core of his message is some sort of Ant-Zionism or concern for Palestinians. That is strictly ancillary to his Ideology.

The concerns expressed in Germany regarding the Jewish role in the Bolshevik Revolution, Jewish influence in German society, and regarding international Jewish movements was not entirely incorrect.  To say that their concerns were not entirely incorrect does not mean that they were entirely right either.  And whether they were right or wrong about certain things does not justify murder.  The problem with this subject is the jump from "Nazis killed millions of Jews" to "criticizing Jews is what Jew-killing Nazis did, so if you criticize anything done by Jews you are just like Jew-killing Nazis."  Even if one accepts the claim that the Nazis' ultimate intent was to wipe out and kill off all Jews (rather than deport them), this would not invalidate all of their perceptions of the Jews, it would only indicate that they acted wrongly in trying to kill off the Jews.

If someone gets angry at their wife for getting a speeding ticket and kills her, that person is a murderer.  He should not have killed his wife, but that doesn't mean that the murderer was wrong about the fact that his wife got a speeding ticket, he just didn't address the problem properly.  It also doesn't mean that everyone who gets upset at their wife for getting a speeding ticket is "just like" the murderer.

No group of people is essentially "evil", whether they be Nazis, Jews, etc. But the "bad rap" that Jews have received in different societies at different times is not entirely baseless.  If one cannot acknowledge that possibility, not much can come from a discussion on the subject.  

This is pretty much the reason that a Reductio ad Hitlerum is logically flawed.  For the most part it looks like the entire debate against this fellow is:

He doesn't like Zionism.  Many Zionists are Jews.  Hitler didn't like Jews.  THIS MAN IS HITLER!!!!!!!11!!1!

Hitler liked dogs.  If you like dogs you share an interest with Hitler.

Hitler had brown hair.  If you have brown hair you are like Hitler.

Hitler was a decorated veteran.  All decorated veterans from Hermann Goering to Audie Murphey are wannabe Hitlers.

Brother Nathaniel is a monk.  Rasputin was a monk.  OMFG HE'S A RASPUTIN-HITLER HYBRID SO HE MUST LIKE DOGS A DOG BIT ME WHEN I WAS A KID THIS MAN BELIEVES EVERYONE DESERVES TO DIE IN AUSCHWITZ-RABIESWALD!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Nathaneal is not an Anti-Zionist. He is Anti-Jewish and tells a sordid tale of a complicated conspiracy among Jews to run the World. Included within that is hatred of Israel of course but that is not anywhere close to his main message. It is tangential.

Not all Anti-Zionists are Antisemites but all Antisemites are Anti-Israel.

And not all anti-semites are Nazis.

I'm sorry, I have to agree with the others.  The word "Nazi" has lost much of its meaning and power because it is overused.  Being a Nazi is more than just being an anti-Semite or, more broadly, a racialist.  I write this as someone who spent a great deal of his youth engaged in fist fights with self-professed Neo-Nazis, anti-Semites, and just plain ignorant white folk who have never seen a black person.

Nazis should be called Nazis, but racists should just be called racists.

He is certainly a bigot. I don't know if he has a racial point of view. What he does do is repeat the main components of Nazi Ideology in terms of Jewish "World Domination", without any deviation just with current day players. He repeats Nazi Ideology. That makes calling him a Nazi pretty accurate. Calling him a Racist may even be less accurate. However, he makes common cause with Racists.

Was Winston Churchill a Nazi?:

http://library.flawlesslogic.com/ish.htm

Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Santagranddad on May 09, 2013, 01:20:27 PM
Sorry, this thread has for me all the charm of a Punch and Judy show.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: J Michael on May 09, 2013, 01:22:52 PM
He claims to be affiliated with ROCOR:
Quote
Brother Nathanael Kapner is a recognized monastic with the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Of Russia (ROCOR) where he is officially recognized as a "poslushnik"/"novice" monk.
http://brothernathanaelfoundation.org/about

I claim I'm an emperor of Saturn. Kneel in front of me.

Quote
I'm thinking that if someone is interested enough it shouldn't be too difficult to confirm that--or that he's not.

Yeah. Ask every ROCOR abbot and bishop. Piece of cake.

Quote
Official affiliation with a monastery is another matter, though.

Every monk has to be affiliated to a monastery or directly to a bishop.

NOVICES ARE NOT MONKS.

I thought the monastery he is in was affiliated with HOCNA

Maybe before he was affiliated with ROCOR??  I don't know.  And I don't really care  ;).  The man comes across as an attention-seeking, bigoted nut-job.  But, then again, he just might be a holy fool for Christ.   ;D
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: J Michael on May 09, 2013, 01:25:02 PM
Sorry, this thread has for me all the charm of a Punch and Judy show.

Well, at least you didn't have to pay for a ticket ;).

(http://www.calwatchdog.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Punch__Judy-wikipedia.jpg)
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: jah777 on May 09, 2013, 01:40:59 PM
He claims to be affiliated with ROCOR:
Quote
Brother Nathanael Kapner is a recognized monastic with the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Of Russia (ROCOR) where he is officially recognized as a "poslushnik"/"novice" monk.
http://brothernathanaelfoundation.org/about

I claim I'm an emperor of Saturn. Kneel in front of me.

Quote
I'm thinking that if someone is interested enough it shouldn't be too difficult to confirm that--or that he's not.

Yeah. Ask every ROCOR abbot and bishop. Piece of cake.

Quote
Official affiliation with a monastery is another matter, though.

Every monk has to be affiliated to a monastery or directly to a bishop.

NOVICES ARE NOT MONKS.

I thought the monastery he is in was affiliated with HOCNA

Maybe before he was affiliated with ROCOR??  I don't know.  And I don't really care  ;).  The man comes across as an attention-seeking, bigoted nut-job.  But, then again, he just might be a holy fool for Christ.   ;D

Nathaniel started out at HTM (which has been in HOCNA now for a while) and then was with Abp Gregory of Colorado in Dormition Skete.  He was a novice in both monasteries.  He then left the "true" Orthodox Church that was Abp Gregory's own creation and he was received back into ROCOR.  Since he does not now belong to a monastery, it is true that he should not be considered a monk or a novice.  Personally, his posing as a monk, his attire, and his strange "missionary" labors are the most off-putting to me and the most damaging to his credibility.  He has a good understanding of Zionism and the influence of Jewish movements in America and in the world, but the role he plays in this area clashes with the image he promotes of himself as an Orthodox monk.  I think it would be better for him to choose to either:

1) Join an actual monastery and become a monk, leaving behind involvement in exposing the politics of this world, including the exposure of Jewish movements that are harmful to our country and world.

2) Keep the videos and article going, but dress appropriately as a layman and without the goofy "street evangelism"

I think his labors would be more effective if he were to choose.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on May 09, 2013, 02:00:56 PM
He doesn't hate Jews nor is he an anti-semite.

He dislikes/exposes Zionist Jews.  There is a huge difference.


Nathanael repeats core Nazi Ideology, that Jews secretly control World Events, the Monetary System and similar. Like all good Anti-Semites he also does not like Israel but you haven't been watching his You Tubes much if you think the core of his message is some sort of Ant-Zionism or concern for Palestinians. That is strictly ancillary to his Ideology.

The concerns expressed in Germany regarding the Jewish role in the Bolshevik Revolution, Jewish influence in German society, and regarding international Jewish movements was not entirely incorrect.  To say that their concerns were not entirely incorrect does not mean that they were entirely right either.  And whether they were right or wrong about certain things does not justify murder.  The problem with this subject is the jump from "Nazis killed millions of Jews" to "criticizing Jews is what Jew-killing Nazis did, so if you criticize anything done by Jews you are just like Jew-killing Nazis."  Even if one accepts the claim that the Nazis' ultimate intent was to wipe out and kill off all Jews (rather than deport them), this would not invalidate all of their perceptions of the Jews, it would only indicate that they acted wrongly in trying to kill off the Jews.

If someone gets angry at their wife for getting a speeding ticket and kills her, that person is a murderer.  He should not have killed his wife, but that doesn't mean that the murderer was wrong about the fact that his wife got a speeding ticket, he just didn't address the problem properly.  It also doesn't mean that everyone who gets upset at their wife for getting a speeding ticket is "just like" the murderer.

No group of people is essentially "evil", whether they be Nazis, Jews, etc. But the "bad rap" that Jews have received in different societies at different times is not entirely baseless.  If one cannot acknowledge that possibility, not much can come from a discussion on the subject.  

This is pretty much the reason that a Reductio ad Hitlerum is logically flawed.  For the most part it looks like the entire debate against this fellow is:

He doesn't like Zionism.  Many Zionists are Jews.  Hitler didn't like Jews.  THIS MAN IS HITLER!!!!!!!11!!1!

Hitler liked dogs.  If you like dogs you share an interest with Hitler.

Hitler had brown hair.  If you have brown hair you are like Hitler.

Hitler was a decorated veteran.  All decorated veterans from Hermann Goering to Audie Murphey are wannabe Hitlers.

Brother Nathaniel is a monk.  Rasputin was a monk.  OMFG HE'S A RASPUTIN-HITLER HYBRID SO HE MUST LIKE DOGS A DOG BIT ME WHEN I WAS A KID THIS MAN BELIEVES EVERYONE DESERVES TO DIE IN AUSCHWITZ-RABIESWALD!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Nathaneal is not an Anti-Zionist. He is Anti-Jewish and tells a sordid tale of a complicated conspiracy among Jews to run the World. Included within that is hatred of Israel of course but that is not anywhere close to his main message. It is tangential.

Not all Anti-Zionists are Antisemites but all Antisemites are Anti-Israel.

And not all anti-semites are Nazis.

I'm sorry, I have to agree with the others.  The word "Nazi" has lost much of its meaning and power because it is overused.  Being a Nazi is more than just being an anti-Semite or, more broadly, a racialist.  I write this as someone who spent a great deal of his youth engaged in fist fights with self-professed Neo-Nazis, anti-Semites, and just plain ignorant white folk who have never seen a black person.

Nazis should be called Nazis, but racists should just be called racists.

He is certainly a bigot. I don't know if he has a racial point of view. What he does do is repeat the main components of Nazi Ideology in terms of the Jewish Question, without any deviation just with current day players. He repeats Nazi Ideology. That makes calling him a Nazi pretty accurate. Calling him a Racist may even be less accurate. However, he makes common cause with Racists.

Does he support nationalization of the industries?  Does he preach war in the name of patriotism and spreading the borders of his nation for expansion?

Those are just as strong platforms of the Nazi ethos as anti-Semitism.  

He certainly does not advocate actions that were specific to Germnay after World War One. America doesnt need more "Living Space", as in Germany in 1931. He does have the same sort of philosophy. In American that philosophy leads to fear of takeover, fear of immigrants fear of Jewish control over the banks and media and Hollywood. Same ideology, different time and country.

FYI Hitler was actually bank rolled by the German Industrialists.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: GabrieltheCelt on May 09, 2013, 02:50:11 PM

... fear of Jewish control over the banks and media and Hollywood.
 

 I don't know that 'taken over' is the right expression but Jews certainly are the majority in Hollywood.  Even Ellen DeGeneres acknowledges it.

Fast forward to 1:40
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZY06m4tro2E
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: jah777 on May 09, 2013, 03:03:02 PM

... fear of Jewish control over the banks and media and Hollywood.
 

 I don't know that 'taken over' is the right expression but Jews certainly are the majority in Hollywood.  Even Ellen DeGeneres acknowledges it.

Fast forward to 1:40
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZY06m4tro2E

It isn't about fear, but fact.  Like B. Nathaniel or not, he names names and does research.  Whether or not someone likes him, they can look into his claims and determine their veracity.

Some Jew are quite proud of their control of Hollywood and the media, and aren't afraid to flaunt it.  Read this article in the LA Times, for instance:

http://touch.latimes.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-44081319/

Quote
As a proud Jew, I want America to know about our accomplishment. Yes, we control Hollywood. Without us, you'd be flipping between "The 700 Club" and "Davey and Goliath" on TV all day.

So I've taken it upon myself to re-convince America that Jews run Hollywood by launching a public relations campaign, because that's what we do best. I'm weighing several slogans, including: "Hollywood: More Jewish than ever!"; "Hollywood: From the people who brought you the Bible"; and "Hollywood: If you enjoy TV and movies, then you probably like Jews after all."
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: augustin717 on May 09, 2013, 03:04:55 PM
Theories like his are quite common place in many monastic or otherwise church settings. Although in Romania from what I've seen they are easy to come across with although not in normal regular parishes but in more marginal settings. But definitely enough monasteries carry anti-zionist/jewish conspiracy theory literature  . And I understand the phenomenon is quite common in all countries of the former communist bloc or even in Greece.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Fr.Aidan on May 09, 2013, 03:51:27 PM
Br. Nathanael has theories, I have theories, Augustin has theories, Marc has theories. Every person on OC.net has theories.

Br. Nathanael's presentations differ in that they are undergirded with an unusually substantial amount of factual documentation.

Not that I agree with him on everything, but he is definitely aware of a lot of things that many people are unaware of.

He is under the spiritual guidance of a canonical Orthodox monastery. Which one it is, our ROCOR bishops will not say. But they do say that it is canonical. At the same time, he communes in the ROCOR. He is pan-Orthodox in that respect.

My take: I don't have time to comb through his stuff to find skeletons. So far, the worst anyone can pin on him is having an aversion to Zionism, occult insignia, and the musty smell of his former synagogue. If that's all he's got for skeletons, he must be clean as a whistle...
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: mike on May 09, 2013, 03:58:05 PM
He is under the spiritual guidance of a canonical Orthodox monastery. Which one it is, our ROCOR bishops will not say. But they do say that it is canonical.

That is funny. Nice joke!
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Fr.Aidan on May 09, 2013, 04:02:20 PM
No joke, I have it straight from one of our ROCOR bishops. Michal, are you claiming that the bishop is lying?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: mike on May 09, 2013, 04:28:51 PM
No joke, I have it straight from one of our ROCOR bishops. Michal, are you claiming that the bishop is lying?

After thinking about it seems quite likely. No surprise no one wants to get associated with him.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Fr.Aidan on May 09, 2013, 04:50:03 PM
Michal, let's examine your theory. Let's examine it from the point of view of which theories are more plausible and which are less plausible.

Here is a very controversial figure, Br. Nathanael. You are a bishop of the ROCOR. Someone asks you, in outrage, about this controversial figure. 

Here are the things you can do when confronted with outraged questions about the controversial figure.

1. Say you just don't know much at all about that topic.
2. Say the person must be a part of someone else's jurisdiction.
3. Say the person is in your jurisdiction, but cannot speak for the church.
4. Create, on the spot, an elaborate hoax, with multiple players and parties, saying that the controversial person is a communicant of your jurisdiction but is under guidance from the head of a monastery of another jurisdiction, with which your own jurisdiction is in full communion.

Which of these scenarios is the most plausible? I would put 4. as clearly the least plausible.

Occam's razor.

Yet your theory appears to be number 4.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: GabrieltheCelt on May 09, 2013, 04:58:51 PM


Yet your theory appears to be number 4.

Hard to say.  Afterall, he is the self-designated OC.Net trickster.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: mike on May 09, 2013, 05:06:52 PM
So what is the point in hiding what his monastery is?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: mike on May 09, 2013, 05:58:23 PM
So what is the point in hiding what his monastery is?

A few additional questions:

Why is the "novice outside the monastery thing" allowed and what is the point in it?
What is the canonical basis of the "novice outside the monastery" thing?
Why is he allowed to mock monastic garment with wearing stuff he is not allowed to (ryasa, white klobuk, pectoral cross)?
Why is he allowed to keep being an internet phenomena, and not make to do traditional novice duties (you know, the ones with rakes, hoes, brooms etc.)?
Why is he allowed to ridicule ROCOR?

(assuming he indeed is a "secret novice")
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Punch on May 09, 2013, 08:47:37 PM
So what is the point in hiding what his monastery is?

A few additional questions:

Why is the "novice outside the monastery thing" allowed and what is the point in it?
What is the canonical basis of the "novice outside the monastery" thing?
Why is he allowed to mock monastic garment with wearing stuff he is not allowed to (ryasa, white klobuk, pectoral cross)?
Why is he allowed to keep being an internet phenomena, and not make to do traditional novice duties (you know, the ones with rakes, hoes, brooms etc.)?
Why is he allowed to ridicule ROCOR?

(assuming he indeed is a "secret novice")


1.  Ask his Bishop.  No, don't ask people on the Internet, but call the head of ROCOR and ask him.  If you can't find the number, I can get it for you.  I have spoken with Bp. Hilarion and he is a nice, personable Bishop.  If he does not know, he will certainly tell you who does.
2.  What authority do you have to say that he is wearing what he is not allowed?  I wear a ryasa, and have the blessing of two priests via their Bishops in two different jurisdictions to do so.  One of the priest's wives made it for me.  Do you object? Too bad. Next time I see them I will let them know that Mikey objects.
3.  Since when do YOU decide what a novice is to do?  Are you his Bishop?  Heck, you are not even in his Country, let alone his diocese.  How do you know his Bishop has not blessed him to do what he is doing.  Hey, the US is not Poland.  You guys stand around in Church and ignore each other and we act like fools.  Each to his own.
4. I don't think that he at all ridicules ROCOR.  My priest loves him, as do many other priests.  And why would you care anyway?  Are you thinking of joining ROCOR?

The guy has a following.  One of his videos has close to 100,000 hits.  Are you jealous?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: mike on May 09, 2013, 08:55:09 PM
What authority do you have to say that he is wearing what he is not allowed?

Even if he is a novitiate, he is not tonsured yet. Riasophore, stavrophore - ring a bell? Not to mention metropolitan's klobuk.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Punch on May 09, 2013, 09:59:27 PM
What authority do you have to say that he is wearing what he is not allowed?

Even if he is a novitiate, he is not tonsured yet. Riasophore, stavrophore - ring a bell? Not to mention metropolitan's klobuk.

Again, who made you his Bishop?  I happen to know the ranks of the monks quite well.  My Godfather is one (an Igumen).  I was blessed to wear the riasa before I was tonsured as a Reader.  In fact, I was required to wear one while performing my duties behind the altar, as were all the men who served in the same capacity as I did.  Later, I was allowed to wear it in the Serbian Church when performing my duties by virtue of my blessing to wear it previously.  Other men were not allowed to wear it as it was not the Serbian tradition to do so.  It is up to the Bishop as to how we are to dress, not you.  Again, do you know that his Bishop has NOT blessed him to wear what he wears?  No, you do not.  Nor do you or anyone else on this forum know all of the exceptions to the "rules" that are out there.  Here in the United States, we are lucky if the Canons are followed, let alone any particular dress code.  I know that the ROCOR is pretty good at kicking people out who do not do what they are told.  I have run ac cross many such men in my time.  If Br. Nathaniel is ROCOR (and I believe he is in spite of some people's claimed "knowledge" to the contrary), he has been blessed to do what he does.   
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: stanley123 on May 10, 2013, 12:02:19 AM
What authority do you have to say that he is wearing what he is not allowed?

Even if he is a novitiate, he is not tonsured yet. Riasophore, stavrophore - ring a bell? Not to mention metropolitan's klobuk.

Again, who made you his Bishop?  I happen to know the ranks of the monks quite well.  My Godfather is one (an Igumen).  I was blessed to wear the riasa before I was tonsured as a Reader.  In fact, I was required to wear one while performing my duties behind the altar, as were all the men who served in the same capacity as I did.  Later, I was allowed to wear it in the Serbian Church when performing my duties by virtue of my blessing to wear it previously.  Other men were not allowed to wear it as it was not the Serbian tradition to do so.  It is up to the Bishop as to how we are to dress, not you.  Again, do you know that his Bishop has NOT blessed him to wear what he wears?  No, you do not.  Nor do you or anyone else on this forum know all of the exceptions to the "rules" that are out there.  Here in the United States, we are lucky if the Canons are followed, let alone any particular dress code.  I know that the ROCOR is pretty good at kicking people out who do not do what they are told.  I have run ac cross many such men in my time.  If Br. Nathaniel is ROCOR (and I believe he is in spite of some people's claimed "knowledge" to the contrary), he has been blessed to do what he does.   
Does anyone know who his bishop is?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Gunnarr on May 10, 2013, 01:13:16 AM
Nathaniel is very weird.

is he a fool for christ? i dont think so...

all he seems to talk about is jews jews jews!


I need to find that video of him where he is dancing in the streets though... he is a really funky dancer
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Gunnarr on May 10, 2013, 01:16:47 AM
found one of the videos of his dancing!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ykeGTKLaYA (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ykeGTKLaYA)
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Gunnarr on May 10, 2013, 01:25:52 AM
this video he made he explains how he got into the orthodox church

his first attendence was at a russian orthodox "Holy Trinity Orthodox Cathedral" in Boston

I would assume this was already posted

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hjf4AUeBRc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hjf4AUeBRc)

I changed my mind, he seems pretty nice. a little crazy, but nice... i think...
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on May 10, 2013, 10:44:32 AM

... fear of Jewish control over the banks and media and Hollywood.
 

 I don't know that 'taken over' is the right expression but Jews certainly are the majority in Hollywood.  Even Ellen DeGeneres acknowledges it.

Fast forward to 1:40
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZY06m4tro2E

Maybe, I really dont know but it is a big leap to then conclude there is an organized conspiracy with a set agenda....big leap.

Are the Movies made by Gentile directors and producers discernibly different? Are the films made Robert Redford different in any way? There is no  pattenr from what I can see. Nathanael implies there is a conspiracy based on the large number of successful Jews in Hollywood..Balderdash

(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRoZ7Q9LwrWenGcikpzu5z50huZEw5d_wLodyeWjkzSFwzgh7dD6A)

 

   
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on May 10, 2013, 10:46:39 AM
this video he made he explains how he got into the orthodox church

his first attendence was at a russian orthodox "Holy Trinity Orthodox Cathedral" in Boston

I would assume this was already posted

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hjf4AUeBRc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hjf4AUeBRc)

I changed my mind, he seems pretty nice. a little crazy, but nice... i think...

Hitler was said to be very charming. Good listener.. Veterinarian... Artist
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: primuspilus on May 10, 2013, 11:58:42 AM
Is he associated with a canonical Church? If so, which one?

PP
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: orthonorm on May 10, 2013, 12:09:53 PM
Occam's razor.

I think more men know how to shave with a straight razor than to how use Occam's razor appropriately.

Given your profile pics and the above post, I would say you likely cannot do the former and certainly have trouble with the latter.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Gunnarr on May 10, 2013, 12:24:35 PM
this video he made he explains how he got into the orthodox church

his first attendence was at a russian orthodox "Holy Trinity Orthodox Cathedral" in Boston

I would assume this was already posted

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hjf4AUeBRc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hjf4AUeBRc)

I changed my mind, he seems pretty nice. a little crazy, but nice... i think...

Hitler was said to be very charming. Good listener.. Veterinarian... Artist

He was certainly not the best artist! But I always find hitler interesting as well. I do not really like either of them really, but still I find them interesting and I enjoy at times to learn more about them. is this why I watched like 5 hours of some tv show about hitlers bodyguards/trains/cars? ... perhaps I am a neo-nazi!  :'(

a new question!

If Novice Nathaniel was made Kaiser of Germany instead of hitler, what would have happened!? hmm I dont know but I hope he would still be dancing int he streets

EDIT:

oops sorry not kaiser, i meant fuhrer...
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Santagranddad on May 10, 2013, 01:14:40 PM
this video he made he explains how he got into the orthodox church

his first attendence was at a russian orthodox "Holy Trinity Orthodox Cathedral" in Boston

I would assume this was already posted

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hjf4AUeBRc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hjf4AUeBRc)

I changed my mind, he seems pretty nice. a little crazy, but nice... i think...

Hitler was said to be very charming. Good listener.. Veterinarian... Artist

I was present when a Jewish lady spoke of the time she was a child and walking along a road near the Kehlsteinhaus or Eagles Nest with her mother. They were nearly run down by the Fuhrer's car. It stopped and the Fuhrer got out and was effusive in his concern for a shaken and frightened mother and child.

Certainly Herr Hitler could be charming, was particular about his diet and loved dogs. But like Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot he was a truly frightening and murderous monster. Brother Nathaniel cannot be likened to any of them. As to his narrative about his Jewish teacher's singular disdain for Christianity, this rings bells and in writing this I do so having spent much time in contact with Jews, religious and secular, over decades. Anti-Christian sentiments have been expressed in graffiti on Church and Monastery buildings in Israel and elsewhere. I have the opposite response to from very conservative religious Jews.

Some seen to criticise Brother Nathaniel on little more than he's committed the unforgivable sin of raising concerns about the exercise of power and influence by individuals and groups he names. He certainly appears to have done some serious research. Whether he interprets that same research in a balanced and credible way may be another thing.

What all these revoluntaries had in common was a commitment to killing at least 10 per cent of their populations and identifying scapegoats, supposed enemies of the struggle and the expendable in the population in order to build the new society. This is as true of the horrendous French Revolution through the various 20th Century movements. However Marxists have a new strategy, the destruction of culture, institutions, values and morality. In my opinion Brother Nathaniel needs the oxygen of publicity like a hole in head. There are far bigger issues in the world.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: podkarpatska on May 10, 2013, 01:23:42 PM
I agree with the above posters comment that there are far bigger issues out there than this dancing fellow. Outside of part of the internet world, I doubt his existence is known to most Orthodox. As far as YouTube views, my youtube clips are nearing 300,000 views - so what...it is a meaningless number.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Gunnarr on May 10, 2013, 01:27:30 PM
I agree with the above posters comment that there are far bigger issues out there than this dancing fellow. Outside of part of the internet world, I doubt his existence is known to most Orthodox. As far as YouTube views, my youtube clips are nearing 300,000 views - so what...it is a meaningless number.

link link link i want to dislike all your videos! ;) WITH AD BLOCK ON!
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on May 10, 2013, 01:31:56 PM
Is he associated with a canonical Church? If so, which one?

PP

Let me take this chance to correct myself from before the thread was locked.

He is in Rocor and can and does take communion. I checked with Bishop Jerome.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on May 10, 2013, 01:34:38 PM
this video he made he explains how he got into the orthodox church

his first attendence was at a russian orthodox "Holy Trinity Orthodox Cathedral" in Boston

I would assume this was already posted

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hjf4AUeBRc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hjf4AUeBRc)

I changed my mind, he seems pretty nice. a little crazy, but nice... i think...

Hitler was said to be very charming. Good listener.. Veterinarian... Artist

I was present when a Jewish lady spoke of the time she was a child and walking along a road near the Kehlsteinhaus or Eagles Nest with her mother. They were nearly run down by the Fuhrer's car. It stopped and the Fuhrer got out and was effusive in his concern for a shaken and frightened mother and child.

Certainly Herr Hitler could be charming, was particular about his diet and loved dogs. But like Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot he was a truly frightening and murderous monster. Brother Nathaniel cannot be likened to any of them. As to his narrative about his Jewish teacher's singular disdain for Christianity, this rings bells and in writing this I do so having spent much time in contact with Jews, religious and secular, over decades. Anti-Christian sentiments have been expressed in graffiti on Church and Monastery buildings in Israel and elsewhere. I have the opposite response to from very conservative religious Jews.

Some seen to criticise Brother Nathaniel on little more than he's committed the unforgivable sin of raising concerns about the exercise of power and influence by individuals and groups he names. He certainly appears to have done some serious research. Whether he interprets that same research in a balanced and credible way may be another thing.

What all these revoluntaries had in common was a commitment to killing at least 10 per cent of their populations and identifying scapegoats, supposed enemies of the struggle and the expendable in the population in order to build the new society. This is as true of the horrendous French Revolution through the various 20th Century movements. However Marxists have a new strategy, the destruction of culture, institutions, values and morality. In my opinion Brother Nathaniel needs the oxygen of publicity like a hole in head. There are far bigger issues in the world.

LOL I made a spelling goof again. He was not a Veterinarian.. He was a Vegetarian. He loved animals.

Nice guy from all accounts.. Maybe a littel crazy
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on May 10, 2013, 01:39:17 PM
this video he made he explains how he got into the orthodox church

his first attendence was at a russian orthodox "Holy Trinity Orthodox Cathedral" in Boston

I would assume this was already posted

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hjf4AUeBRc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hjf4AUeBRc)

I changed my mind, he seems pretty nice. a little crazy, but nice... i think...

Hitler was said to be very charming. Good listener.. Veterinarian... Artist

I was present when a Jewish lady spoke of the time she was a child and walking along a road near the Kehlsteinhaus or Eagles Nest with her mother. They were nearly run down by the Fuhrer's car. It stopped and the Fuhrer got out and was effusive in his concern for a shaken and frightened mother and child.

Certainly Herr Hitler could be charming, was particular about his diet and loved dogs. But like Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot he was a truly frightening and murderous monster. Brother Nathaniel cannot be likened to any of them. As to his narrative about his Jewish teacher's singular disdain for Christianity, this rings bells and in writing this I do so having spent much time in contact with Jews, religious and secular, over decades. Anti-Christian sentiments have been expressed in graffiti on Church and Monastery buildings in Israel and elsewhere. I have the opposite response to from very conservative religious Jews.

Some seen to criticise Brother Nathaniel on little more than he's committed the unforgivable sin of raising concerns about the exercise of power and influence by individuals and groups he names. He certainly appears to have done some serious research. Whether he interprets that same research in a balanced and credible way may be another thing.

What all these revoluntaries had in common was a commitment to killing at least 10 per cent of their populations and identifying scapegoats, supposed enemies of the struggle and the expendable in the population in order to build the new society. This is as true of the horrendous French Revolution through the various 20th Century movements. However Marxists have a new strategy, the destruction of culture, institutions, values and morality. In my opinion Brother Nathaniel needs the oxygen of publicity like a hole in head. There are far bigger issues in the world.

The "Secret World Wide Jewish Conspiracy" that wields so much power is an old canard. It was Hitler's core message and it's Nathaneal's too.

Fascist Ideology of this nature is probably the most debunked in history.. If you think it makes sense or that Nathanael is dong good work, then that's a real shame.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: biro on May 10, 2013, 04:45:08 PM
People still believe this crap?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: J Michael on May 10, 2013, 04:49:32 PM
People still believe this crap?

Why not?  Some still believe the earth is flat, too.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Fr.Aidan on May 11, 2013, 10:33:29 PM
Christ is risen.

There appears to be misuse of the word "Fascist." Do people understand what "Fascism" is? How in the world could it possibly relate to Br. Nathanael?

One thing is for sure - the issue of Br. Nathanael seems to provoke a drastic evaporation of rational thinking processes in many (not all!) of those who have strong reactions against him. I notice this strange phenomenon and I don't quite know what it means, but it appears that many of Br. Nathanael's messages or themes seem to run counter to things that people were taught by the secular educational system. It's a system which was and is designed to promote marxism and related anti-Christian thinking and values and weltanschauung, as Charlotte Isserby discovered and documented carefully. And when its planks which are meant to be swallowed whole as "givens" are challenged, then... woe betide.

I'm not painting everyone who really dislikes Br. Nathanael with the same brush.

By the way, it's really an awful slander and a grievous sin to ascribe to people sins which they don't have. So calling him hateful, or murderous, or fascist, or a nazi, or the various other absolutely outrageous and unhinged things he's been called in this thread, is not only dense, it's seriously sinful.

People mentioned the bizarre dress of Br. Nathanael (which doesn't sit well with me, by the way). But what did St. Xenia wear? Man's clothing. Do we accuse her, then, of cross-dressing, the overturning of society, confused gender or sexual identity, or any such nonsense? Of course not.

Could that one example (I could give others) somehow shed light on the case of Br. Nathanael?

Let's all show a certain elemental tolerance. Try to keep our minds open.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Maria on May 11, 2013, 10:52:20 PM
Christ is risen.

There appears to be misuse of the word "Fascist." Do people understand what "Fascism" is? How in the world could it possibly relate to Br. Nathanael?

One thing is for sure - the issue of Br. Nathanael seems to provoke a drastic evaporation of rational thinking processes in many (not all!) of those who have strong reactions against him. I notice this strange phenomenon and I don't quite know what it means, but it appears that many of Br. Nathanael's messages or themes seem to run counter to things that people were taught by the secular educational system. It's a system which was and is designed to promote marxism and related anti-Christian thinking and values and weltanschauung, as Charlotte Isserby discovered and documented carefully. And when its planks which are meant to be swallowed whole as "givens" are challenged, then... woe betide.

I'm not painting everyone who really dislikes Br. Nathanael with the same brush.

By the way, it's really an awful slander and a grievous sin to ascribe to people sins which they don't have. So calling him hateful, or murderous, or fascist, or a nazi, or the various other absolutely outrageous and unhinged things he's been called in this thread, is not only dense, it's seriously sinful.

People mentioned the bizarre dress of Br. Nathanael (which doesn't sit well with me, by the way). But what did St. Xenia wear? Man's clothing. Do we accuse her, then, of cross-dressing, the overturning of society, confused gender or sexual identity, or any such nonsense? Of course not.

Could that one example (I could give others) somehow shed light on the case of Br. Nathanael?

Let's all show a certain elemental tolerance. Try to keep our minds open.

Post of the Month Nominee!
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Punch on May 12, 2013, 12:05:00 AM
Christ is risen.

There appears to be misuse of the word "Fascist." Do people understand what "Fascism" is? How in the world could it possibly relate to Br. Nathanael?

One thing is for sure - the issue of Br. Nathanael seems to provoke a drastic evaporation of rational thinking processes in many (not all!) of those who have strong reactions against him. I notice this strange phenomenon and I don't quite know what it means, but it appears that many of Br. Nathanael's messages or themes seem to run counter to things that people were taught by the secular educational system. It's a system which was and is designed to promote marxism and related anti-Christian thinking and values and weltanschauung, as Charlotte Isserby discovered and documented carefully. And when its planks which are meant to be swallowed whole as "givens" are challenged, then... woe betide.

I'm not painting everyone who really dislikes Br. Nathanael with the same brush.

By the way, it's really an awful slander and a grievous sin to ascribe to people sins which they don't have. So calling him hateful, or murderous, or fascist, or a nazi, or the various other absolutely outrageous and unhinged things he's been called in this thread, is not only dense, it's seriously sinful.

People mentioned the bizarre dress of Br. Nathanael (which doesn't sit well with me, by the way). But what did St. Xenia wear? Man's clothing. Do we accuse her, then, of cross-dressing, the overturning of society, confused gender or sexual identity, or any such nonsense? Of course not.

Could that one example (I could give others) somehow shed light on the case of Br. Nathanael?

Let's all show a certain elemental tolerance. Try to keep our minds open.

I really like you.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Shanghaiski on May 12, 2013, 12:08:03 AM
He claims to be affiliated with ROCOR:
Quote
Brother Nathanael Kapner is a recognized monastic with the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Of Russia (ROCOR) where he is officially recognized as a "poslushnik"/"novice" monk.
http://brothernathanaelfoundation.org/about

I claim I'm an emperor of Saturn. Kneel in front of me.

Quote
I'm thinking that if someone is interested enough it shouldn't be too difficult to confirm that--or that he's not.

Yeah. Ask every ROCOR abbot and bishop. Piece of cake.

Quote
Official affiliation with a monastery is another matter, though.

Every monk has to be affiliated to a monastery or directly to a bishop.

NOVICES ARE NOT MONKS.

I thought the monastery he is in was affiliated with HOCNA

Maybe before he was affiliated with ROCOR??  I don't know.  And I don't really care  ;).  The man comes across as an attention-seeking, bigoted nut-job.  But, then again, he just might be a holy fool for Christ.   ;D

Nathaniel started out at HTM (which has been in HOCNA now for a while) and then was with Abp Gregory of Colorado in Dormition Skete.  He was a novice in both monasteries.  He then left the "true" Orthodox Church that was Abp Gregory's own creation and he was received back into ROCOR.  Since he does not now belong to a monastery, it is true that he should not be considered a monk or a novice.  Personally, his posing as a monk, his attire, and his strange "missionary" labors are the most off-putting to me and the most damaging to his credibility.  He has a good understanding of Zionism and the influence of Jewish movements in America and in the world, but the role he plays in this area clashes with the image he promotes of himself as an Orthodox monk.  I think it would be better for him to choose to either:

1) Join an actual monastery and become a monk, leaving behind involvement in exposing the politics of this world, including the exposure of Jewish movements that are harmful to our country and world.

2) Keep the videos and article going, but dress appropriately as a layman and without the goofy "street evangelism"

I think his labors would be more effective if he were to choose.


I favor option 1 for him, with a vow of silence and exile in an obscure Siberian monastery without Internet access.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Shanghaiski on May 12, 2013, 12:11:53 AM
So what is the point in hiding what his monastery is?

A few additional questions:

Why is the "novice outside the monastery thing" allowed and what is the point in it?
What is the canonical basis of the "novice outside the monastery" thing?
Why is he allowed to mock monastic garment with wearing stuff he is not allowed to (ryasa, white klobuk, pectoral cross)?
Why is he allowed to keep being an internet phenomena, and not make to do traditional novice duties (you know, the ones with rakes, hoes, brooms etc.)?
Why is he allowed to ridicule ROCOR?

(assuming he indeed is a "secret novice")

Bizarre and disorderly indeed. Not a credit to Orthodoxy.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Shanghaiski on May 12, 2013, 12:14:19 AM
What authority do you have to say that he is wearing what he is not allowed?

Even if he is a novitiate, he is not tonsured yet. Riasophore, stavrophore - ring a bell? Not to mention metropolitan's klobuk.

If he is a novice anywhere and not simply a poser, he must be under obedience. Therefore, someone in authority over him must bless the videos and other things he does. If not, then we have a problem. We have not monasticism, but vanity masquerading as some kind of public service.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Shanghaiski on May 12, 2013, 12:16:25 AM
What authority do you have to say that he is wearing what he is not allowed?

Even if he is a novitiate, he is not tonsured yet. Riasophore, stavrophore - ring a bell? Not to mention metropolitan's klobuk.

Again, who made you his Bishop?  I happen to know the ranks of the monks quite well.  My Godfather is one (an Igumen).  I was blessed to wear the riasa before I was tonsured as a Reader.  In fact, I was required to wear one while performing my duties behind the altar, as were all the men who served in the same capacity as I did.  Later, I was allowed to wear it in the Serbian Church when performing my duties by virtue of my blessing to wear it previously.  Other men were not allowed to wear it as it was not the Serbian tradition to do so.  It is up to the Bishop as to how we are to dress, not you.  Again, do you know that his Bishop has NOT blessed him to wear what he wears?  No, you do not.  Nor do you or anyone else on this forum know all of the exceptions to the "rules" that are out there.  Here in the United States, we are lucky if the Canons are followed, let alone any particular dress code.  I know that the ROCOR is pretty good at kicking people out who do not do what they are told.  I have run ac cross many such men in my time.  If Br. Nathaniel is ROCOR (and I believe he is in spite of some people's claimed "knowledge" to the contrary), he has been blessed to do what he does.   

Wearing the riasa whilst performing a liturgical function is quite different than wearing the riasa outside of liturgical function, if one does not hold holy orders.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Shanghaiski on May 12, 2013, 12:17:58 AM
this video he made he explains how he got into the orthodox church

his first attendence was at a russian orthodox "Holy Trinity Orthodox Cathedral" in Boston

I would assume this was already posted

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hjf4AUeBRc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hjf4AUeBRc)

I changed my mind, he seems pretty nice. a little crazy, but nice... i think...

Hitler was said to be very charming. Good listener.. Veterinarian... Artist

Veterinarian?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Shanghaiski on May 12, 2013, 12:20:44 AM
this video he made he explains how he got into the orthodox church

his first attendence was at a russian orthodox "Holy Trinity Orthodox Cathedral" in Boston

I would assume this was already posted

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hjf4AUeBRc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hjf4AUeBRc)

I changed my mind, he seems pretty nice. a little crazy, but nice... i think...

Hitler was said to be very charming. Good listener.. Veterinarian... Artist

I was present when a Jewish lady spoke of the time she was a child and walking along a road near the Kehlsteinhaus or Eagles Nest with her mother. They were nearly run down by the Fuhrer's car. It stopped and the Fuhrer got out and was effusive in his concern for a shaken and frightened mother and child.

Certainly Herr Hitler could be charming, was particular about his diet and loved dogs. But like Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot he was a truly frightening and murderous monster. Brother Nathaniel cannot be likened to any of them. As to his narrative about his Jewish teacher's singular disdain for Christianity, this rings bells and in writing this I do so having spent much time in contact with Jews, religious and secular, over decades. Anti-Christian sentiments have been expressed in graffiti on Church and Monastery buildings in Israel and elsewhere. I have the opposite response to from very conservative religious Jews.

Some seen to criticise Brother Nathaniel on little more than he's committed the unforgivable sin of raising concerns about the exercise of power and influence by individuals and groups he names. He certainly appears to have done some serious research. Whether he interprets that same research in a balanced and credible way may be another thing.

What all these revoluntaries had in common was a commitment to killing at least 10 per cent of their populations and identifying scapegoats, supposed enemies of the struggle and the expendable in the population in order to build the new society. This is as true of the horrendous French Revolution through the various 20th Century movements. However Marxists have a new strategy, the destruction of culture, institutions, values and morality. In my opinion Brother Nathaniel needs the oxygen of publicity like a hole in head. There are far bigger issues in the world.

LOL I made a spelling goof again. He was not a Veterinarian.. He was a Vegetarian. He loved animals.

Nice guy from all accounts.. Maybe a littel crazy

He had some good ideas at first. He just went a little crazy. Okay, that was Marge Schott.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: lovesupreme on May 12, 2013, 02:06:11 AM
I don't care how accurate his claims are, he frames his arguments in a hateful and incediary manner. Who are these mysterious "Jews" he keeps talking about? The Jewish people are not a homogenous body of greedy Zionist truth-suppressors, as he would have you believe. The Jewish people represent a wide range of nationalities, education levels, religious views, and political views. Don't you guys understand the thresholds of sanity you have to cross to come to the conclusion that all people of a particular descent think and act exactly the same?

Read this statement:

"The Arabs' victory over France is now complete. The alien domination of an elite, self-conscious group, who see the world in terms of 'us' & 'them,' has flowed into every pore of French society with its anti-Christian views."

How is that not okay, but this is:

Quote
Jewry’s victory over America is now complete. The alien domination of an elite, self-conscious group, who see the world in terms of “us” & “them,” has flowed into every pore of American society with its Anti-Christian views.
Source: http://www.realjewnews.com/?p=353

Yes, those Yemenite Jews have really been longing for the day when their totally separated distant cousins in America, who hold virtually none of the same religious views and live a completely different lifestyle, would conquer America for all Jews in the world! And those Messianic Jews, those Crypto-Talmudists, secretly rejoice every time an Ultra-Orthodox Israeli Jew desecrates a church.

Do you guys honestly believe that there was even one Jewish person who died in the Holocaust who was secretly planning to take over the world before Hitler "heroically saved" the pure white German race? Don't you see what he so successfully did to brainwash a whole country into participating in mass genocide and other horrendous crimes against humanity? He took a very very very small subset of people (wealthy bankers and businessmen lacking moral scruples), identified the common link (their Jewish ethnicity, which is not a coincidence, since Jews, no stranger to scapegoating before the Third Reich, were often forced into such unpopular jobs), then made a completely unjustified but "credible" blanket statement that the evil must come from the ethnicity itself. NOT the social circumstances of certain members of the ethnicity (German Jews were particularly well received during the Enlightenment; flawed human beings prospered then and some sacrificed their morality for success). If that had been the conclusion that Hitler preached, Germany might have just developed new finance laws to cut down on monopolies and the corruption inherent to them. But Hitler did not target bad behavior; he targeted AN ENTIRE RACE OF PEOPLE. And his message has been rehashed over and over again by various white supremacist groups, and I believe that Brother Nathanael has been sucked into their ignorance and hate.

Do I think Brother Nathanael should be shut down? No. I think he certainly raises some eye-opening critiques of this decadent, anti-religious society that we live in. But he goes about it all wrong. He thinks the evil lies in a particular bloodline of people. In his articles, he calls out "The Jews," less commonly the "Zionist Jews" and rarely (if ever) the individual characters of the people who have committed crimes. His methods do not promote honest reflection; they promote baseless hatred and misdirected anger.

I'm Jewish, and I'm heartbroken to read that some people still think that it's okay to go about attacking a whole people because of certain people who, by birth alone, are a part of it. There is no uniform "Jewish Race" to which people can point and accuse. This is a myth. This is not how the world works. If you want to call me a liar who's covering up for his Zionist Christian-hating friends and relatives, fine, be my guest. I pray that one day you may see the truth.

And to be clear: I would never call Brother Nathanael a fascist or a nazi, or Hitler Jr. That's just utter hyperbole. He's not a war criminal, not even remotely close. He's just a normal person with some particularly dangerous and distorted views. I would call him a confused man who, in a state of vulnerability, has allowed hate to flow through him and spread through his words.

Lord God have mercy on my soul.

...Christ is Risen!
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on May 12, 2013, 10:50:15 AM
Christ is risen.

There appears to be misuse of the word "Fascist." Do people understand what "Fascism" is? How in the world could it possibly relate to Br. Nathanael?

One thing is for sure - the issue of Br. Nathanael seems to provoke a drastic evaporation of rational thinking processes in many (not all!) of those who have strong reactions against him. I notice this strange phenomenon and I don't quite know what it means, but it appears that many of Br. Nathanael's messages or themes seem to run counter to things that people were taught by the secular educational system. It's a system which was and is designed to promote marxism and related anti-Christian thinking and values and weltanschauung, as Charlotte Isserby discovered and documented carefully. And when its planks which are meant to be swallowed whole as "givens" are challenged, then... woe betide.

I'm not painting everyone who really dislikes Br. Nathanael with the same brush.

By the way, it's really an awful slander and a grievous sin to ascribe to people sins which they don't have. So calling him hateful, or murderous, or fascist, or a nazi, or the various other absolutely outrageous and unhinged things he's been called in this thread, is not only dense, it's seriously sinful.

People mentioned the bizarre dress of Br. Nathanael (which doesn't sit well with me, by the way). But what did St. Xenia wear? Man's clothing. Do we accuse her, then, of cross-dressing, the overturning of society, confused gender or sexual identity, or any such nonsense? Of course not.

Could that one example (I could give others) somehow shed light on the case of Br. Nathanael?

Let's all show a certain elemental tolerance. Try to keep our minds open.

Criticism of the guy is not at all muddled or unclear. He is a rabid Anti Semite who maintains an extreme conspiratorial view of history very similar to the Fascists in World War Two.

His appearance as a fool is probably calculated to spackle over his fringe message. Or he is just plain old mentally ill. Comparing a hateful bigot like Nathanael  to a Saint like Xenia is blasphemous IMHO.

Either way he deserved pity and pray, not support and encouragement.

Discerning Good from Evil is an important skill for Christians.  
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on May 12, 2013, 11:19:30 AM
Here is his latest You Tube... In the middle he takes a shot at
"Race Mixing".. I guess he needs to keep his friends in the White Supremacist Movement happy.

Clearly racist stuff... Told ya so. :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mY8GqwnjJs&feature=em-subs_digest

 
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on May 12, 2013, 11:28:17 AM
Oh and read the comments of his followers under the You Tube.. It's full up with White Supremacist comments. I especially like the guy whose photo is of a German Soldier wearing his helmet... Sad ..yet kinda funny

(https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRa2QGW48IXxFChzHgYxBLqddSyqn4cCAbO2mkyD2AqNg-4xRg_)



 
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Punch on May 12, 2013, 01:53:09 PM
Do you guys honestly believe that there was even one Jewish person who died in the Holocaust who was secretly planning to take over the world before Hitler "heroically saved" the pure white German race? 

Of course not!  The ones that were trying to take over the world used their money to escape Germany and come to the US where they could buy the Government and continue their evil work in relative safety.  Man, don't you ever read Stormfront?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Santagranddad on May 12, 2013, 02:30:48 PM
Do you guys honestly believe that there was even one Jewish person who died in the Holocaust who was secretly planning to take over the world before Hitler "heroically saved" the pure white German race? 

Of course not!  The ones that were trying to take over the world used their money to escape Germany and come to the US where they could buy the Government and continue their evil work in relative safety.  Man, don't you ever read Stormfront?

Stormfront, is this a meteorological journal?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: podkarpatska on May 12, 2013, 02:55:58 PM
I don't care how accurate his claims are, he frames his arguments in a hateful and incediary manner. Who are these mysterious "Jews" he keeps talking about? The Jewish people are not a homogenous body of greedy Zionist truth-suppressors, as he would have you believe. The Jewish people represent a wide range of nationalities, education levels, religious views, and political views. Don't you guys understand the thresholds of sanity you have to cross to come to the conclusion that all people of a particular descent think and act exactly the same?

Read this statement:

"The Arabs' victory over France is now complete. The alien domination of an elite, self-conscious group, who see the world in terms of 'us' & 'them,' has flowed into every pore of French society with its anti-Christian views."

How is that not okay, but this is:

Quote
Jewry’s victory over America is now complete. The alien domination of an elite, self-conscious group, who see the world in terms of “us” & “them,” has flowed into every pore of American society with its Anti-Christian views.
Source: http://www.realjewnews.com/?p=353

Yes, those Yemenite Jews have really been longing for the day when their totally separated distant cousins in America, who hold virtually none of the same religious views and live a completely different lifestyle, would conquer America for all Jews in the world! And those Messianic Jews, those Crypto-Talmudists, secretly rejoice every time an Ultra-Orthodox Israeli Jew desecrates a church.

Do you guys honestly believe that there was even one Jewish person who died in the Holocaust who was secretly planning to take over the world before Hitler "heroically saved" the pure white German race? Don't you see what he so successfully did to brainwash a whole country into participating in mass genocide and other horrendous crimes against humanity? He took a very very very small subset of people (wealthy bankers and businessmen lacking moral scruples), identified the common link (their Jewish ethnicity, which is not a coincidence, since Jews, no stranger to scapegoating before the Third Reich, were often forced into such unpopular jobs), then made a completely unjustified but "credible" blanket statement that the evil must come from the ethnicity itself. NOT the social circumstances of certain members of the ethnicity (German Jews were particularly well received during the Enlightenment; flawed human beings prospered then and some sacrificed their morality for success). If that had been the conclusion that Hitler preached, Germany might have just developed new finance laws to cut down on monopolies and the corruption inherent to them. But Hitler did not target bad behavior; he targeted AN ENTIRE RACE OF PEOPLE. And his message has been rehashed over and over again by various white supremacist groups, and I believe that Brother Nathanael has been sucked into their ignorance and hate.

Do I think Brother Nathanael should be shut down? No. I think he certainly raises some eye-opening critiques of this decadent, anti-religious society that we live in. But he goes about it all wrong. He thinks the evil lies in a particular bloodline of people. In his articles, he calls out "The Jews," less commonly the "Zionist Jews" and rarely (if ever) the individual characters of the people who have committed crimes. His methods do not promote honest reflection; they promote baseless hatred and misdirected anger.

I'm Jewish, and I'm heartbroken to read that some people still think that it's okay to go about attacking a whole people because of certain people who, by birth alone, are a part of it. There is no uniform "Jewish Race" to which people can point and accuse. This is a myth. This is not how the world works. If you want to call me a liar who's covering up for his Zionist Christian-hating friends and relatives, fine, be my guest. I pray that one day you may see the truth.

And to be clear: I would never call Brother Nathanael a fascist or a nazi, or Hitler Jr. That's just utter hyperbole. He's not a war criminal, not even remotely close. He's just a normal person with some particularly dangerous and distorted views. I would call him a confused man who, in a state of vulnerability, has allowed hate to flow through him and spread through his words.

Lord God have mercy on my soul.

...Christ is Risen!

Indeed He is Risen! Thank you for your wise observations.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: KBN1 on May 12, 2013, 03:09:19 PM
"White identity is indeed a necessary component in resisting the nightmare of multi-racialism that the Jewish agenda brought to America and throughout Europe.  International Jewry's intention, objective, and aim?  To destroy the one force that could oppose them, namely, a white Christian political power block...  The Christian roots of white nations are deep and sturdy.  With a little pruning and lots of fencing about, we can make that tree of white nations grow to a great and magnificent height once again."  -Brother Nathaniel

So he's not a white supremacist, eh?  This is from his video, "Christian Roots of White Nations"  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-bIhTwI7OU

I have yet to hear him preach the good news of Jesus Christ.  But then again, can a thistle bring forth figs?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Shanghaiski on May 12, 2013, 03:20:51 PM
"White identity is indeed a necessary component in resisting the nightmare of multi-racialism..."  -Brother Nathaniel

This is heresy.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Punch on May 12, 2013, 03:22:36 PM
Do you guys honestly believe that there was even one Jewish person who died in the Holocaust who was secretly planning to take over the world before Hitler "heroically saved" the pure white German race? 

Of course not!  The ones that were trying to take over the world used their money to escape Germany and come to the US where they could buy the Government and continue their evil work in relative safety.  Man, don't you ever read Stormfront?

Stormfront, is this a meteorological journal?

LOL
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: vamrat on May 12, 2013, 04:08:18 PM
Do you guys honestly believe that there was even one Jewish person who died in the Holocaust who was secretly planning to take over the world before Hitler "heroically saved" the pure white German race? 

Of course not!  The ones that were trying to take over the world used their money to escape Germany and come to the US where they could buy the Government and continue their evil work in relative safety.  Man, don't you ever read Stormfront?

Stormfront, is this a meteorological journal?

First Dresden Files novel.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: SolEX01 on May 12, 2013, 04:22:04 PM
Brother Nathaniel has a PO Box in Frisco, CO which is right in the middle of Archbishop Gregory's area.  I've actually been to Frisco, CO.  There is a ROCOR Church in Denver.  There's no other ROCOR monastery nearby.

Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: SolEX01 on May 13, 2013, 12:36:32 AM
What authority do you have to say that he is wearing what he is not allowed?

Even if he is a novitiate, he is not tonsured yet. Riasophore, stavrophore - ring a bell? Not to mention metropolitan's klobuk.

If he is a novice anywhere and not simply a poser, he must be under obedience. Therefore, someone in authority over him must bless the videos and other things he does. If not, then we have a problem. We have not monasticism, but vanity masquerading as some kind of public service.

Could a novice monastic operate a foundation with full legal and accounting representation (and receive the appropriate blessing from his superiors to do so)?  His foundation website says that he speaks ... "not in any official capacity with the ROCOR jurisdiction."

http://brothernathanaelfoundation.org/about (http://brothernathanaelfoundation.org/about)
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Shanghaiski on May 13, 2013, 11:15:00 AM
What authority do you have to say that he is wearing what he is not allowed?

Even if he is a novitiate, he is not tonsured yet. Riasophore, stavrophore - ring a bell? Not to mention metropolitan's klobuk.

If he is a novice anywhere and not simply a poser, he must be under obedience. Therefore, someone in authority over him must bless the videos and other things he does. If not, then we have a problem. We have not monasticism, but vanity masquerading as some kind of public service.

Could a novice monastic operate a foundation with full legal and accounting representation (and receive the appropriate blessing from his superiors to do so)?  His foundation website says that he speaks ... "not in any official capacity with the ROCOR jurisdiction."

http://brothernathanaelfoundation.org/about (http://brothernathanaelfoundation.org/about)

I would think that whatever he does, as a novice, would be subject to the abbot overseeing him. Otherwise, I'm not sure what kind of novice status he can claim, if that's even a status.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: podkarpatska on May 13, 2013, 11:43:01 AM
What authority do you have to say that he is wearing what he is not allowed?

Even if he is a novitiate, he is not tonsured yet. Riasophore, stavrophore - ring a bell? Not to mention metropolitan's klobuk.

If he is a novice anywhere and not simply a poser, he must be under obedience. Therefore, someone in authority over him must bless the videos and other things he does. If not, then we have a problem. We have not monasticism, but vanity masquerading as some kind of public service.

Could a novice monastic operate a foundation with full legal and accounting representation (and receive the appropriate blessing from his superiors to do so)?  His foundation website says that he speaks ... "not in any official capacity with the ROCOR jurisdiction."

http://brothernathanaelfoundation.org/about (http://brothernathanaelfoundation.org/about)

I would think that whatever he does, as a novice, would be subject to the abbot overseeing him. Otherwise, I'm not sure what kind of novice status he can claim, if that's even a status.

Whatever he is, and whatever nonsense he spews out and whatever he purports to be, is not of the same faith and from the same heart as the Orthodox Church in which I was brought up, try to serve faithfully and love. Keeping him in your prayers that he may find the true light is all that one can do.

Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Orthodox11 on May 14, 2013, 10:28:20 AM
Whatever he is, and whatever nonsense he spews out and whatever he purports to be, is not of the same faith and from the same heart as the Orthodox Church in which I was brought up, try to serve faithfully and love. Keeping him in your prayers that he may find the true light is all that one can do.

Theologically, I have not heard him say anything incorrect (though I have only watched a few of his videos). His politics, Jewish conspiracy theories, weird dress, and clownish behaviour is another matter.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on May 14, 2013, 10:49:33 AM
Whatever he is, and whatever nonsense he spews out and whatever he purports to be, is not of the same faith and from the same heart as the Orthodox Church in which I was brought up, try to serve faithfully and love. Keeping him in your prayers that he may find the true light is all that one can do.

Theologically, I have not heard him say anything incorrect (though I have only watched a few of his videos). His politics, Jewish conspiracy theories, weird dress, and clownish behaviour is another matter.

This brings up an interesting question. At what point, if any, do extreme political views cross over into being counter to Orthodox Christian teachings.

He may fully understand and believe the Church's teachings on the Trinity and all theological doctrines. But let's hypothesize that he continues to push past his Jewish Conspiracy theories into Racism against Blacks and Hispanics. He is already condemning "Race Mixing". How bigoted can a tonsured person be and still be in communion with The Church?.. I don't know myself but it's an interesting question.

    
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Orthodox11 on May 14, 2013, 11:02:28 AM
This brings up an interesting question. At what point, if any, do extreme political views cross over into being counter to Orthodox Christian teachings.

I think that depends on the nature of those extreme views. If those extreme views involve intentional dishonesty that's obviously a sin - but extreme views can be honestly held and propagated even if they're factually incorrect.

Quote
He may fully understand and believe the Church's teachings on the Trinity and all theological doctrines. But let's hypothesize that he continues to push past his Jewish Conspiracy theories into Racism against Blacks and Hispanics. He is already condemning "Race Mixing". How bigoted can a tonsured person be and still be in communion with The Church?.. I don't know myself but it's an interesting question.

On what grounds does he oppose race mixing? God giving Miriam leprosy after hers and Aaron's objection to Moses' marriage to an Ethiopian woman gives us a fairly clear indication of how God feels about the subject. However, if someone does not oppose "race mixing" per se, but considers the promotion thereof by the elites to be an attempt to undermine the cultural heritage of European/Western civilisation and thereby weaken the standing and influence of Christianity, this might be seriously misguided but I don't think one can call it heresy - it belongs to the realm of politics.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Punch on May 14, 2013, 11:05:56 AM
Bigotry is a relatively recently defined term and really has no theological basis unless it involves hatred.  Modern liberals cannot tell the difference between hatred and other emotions since anything that even slightly goes against what they feel good about is hatred.  Rational people, on the other hand,  can differentiate between not wanting your offspring to marry into another social / racial group and shunning them if they do.  There is nothing "non-Canonical" about recognizing that marriage is difficult enough without bringing in other differences and issues.  On the other hand, not accepting a person of another race into your family after the die has been cast is a completely other matter.

Whatever he is, and whatever nonsense he spews out and whatever he purports to be, is not of the same faith and from the same heart as the Orthodox Church in which I was brought up, try to serve faithfully and love. Keeping him in your prayers that he may find the true light is all that one can do.

Theologically, I have not heard him say anything incorrect (though I have only watched a few of his videos). His politics, Jewish conspiracy theories, weird dress, and clownish behaviour is another matter.

This brings up an interesting question. At what point, if any, do extreme political views cross over into being counter to Orthodox Christian teachings.

He may fully understand and believe the Church's teachings on the Trinity and all theological doctrines. But let's hypothesize that he continues to push past his Jewish Conspiracy theories into Racism against Blacks and Hispanics. He is already condemning "Race Mixing". How bigoted can a tonsured person be and still be in communion with The Church?.. I don't know myself but it's an interesting question.

    
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on May 14, 2013, 11:13:45 AM
This brings up an interesting question. At what point, if any, do extreme political views cross over into being counter to Orthodox Christian teachings.

I think that depends on the nature of those extreme views. If those extreme views involve intentional dishonesty that's obviously a sin - but extreme views can be honestly held and propagated even if they're factually incorrect.

Quote
He may fully understand and believe the Church's teachings on the Trinity and all theological doctrines. But let's hypothesize that he continues to push past his Jewish Conspiracy theories into Racism against Blacks and Hispanics. He is already condemning "Race Mixing". How bigoted can a tonsured person be and still be in communion with The Church?.. I don't know myself but it's an interesting question.

On what grounds does he oppose race mixing? God giving Miriam leprosy after hers and Aaron's objection to Moses' marriage to an Ethiopian woman gives us a fairly clear indication of how God feels about the subject. However, if someone does not oppose "race mixing" per se, but considers the promotion thereof by the elites to be an attempt to undermine the cultural heritage of European/Western civilisation and thereby weaken the standing and influence of Christianity, this might be seriously misguided but I don't think one can call it heresy - it belongs to the realm of politics.

His comments on Race Mixing are typical of modern Neo Nazi ideology. He mushes it in with opposition to immigration reform.

Let's consider an extreme hypothetical. Let's say the national leader of the Ku Klux Klan decides to convert to Orthodoxy but does not change any of his other views and continues on as the head of the Klan. Would he be allowed communion? What of Nathanael if his position keeps getting more and more extreme and overtly racist?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on May 14, 2013, 11:21:47 AM
Bigotry is a relatively recently defined term and really has no theological basis unless it involves hatred.  Modern liberals cannot tell the difference between hatred and other emotions since anything that even slightly goes against what the feel good about is hatred.  Rational people, on the other hand,  can differentiate between not wanting your offspring to marry into another social / racial group and shunning them if they do.  There is nothing "non-Canonical" about recognizing that marriage is difficult enough without bringing in other differences and issues.  On the other hand, not accepting a person of another race into your family after the die has been cast is a completely other matter.

Whatever he is, and whatever nonsense he spews out and whatever he purports to be, is not of the same faith and from the same heart as the Orthodox Church in which I was brought up, try to serve faithfully and love. Keeping him in your prayers that he may find the true light is all that one can do.

Theologically, I have not heard him say anything incorrect (though I have only watched a few of his videos). His politics, Jewish conspiracy theories, weird dress, and clownish behaviour is another matter.

This brings up an interesting question. At what point, if any, do extreme political views cross over into being counter to Orthodox Christian teachings.

He may fully understand and believe the Church's teachings on the Trinity and all theological doctrines. But let's hypothesize that he continues to push past his Jewish Conspiracy theories into Racism against Blacks and Hispanics. He is already condemning "Race Mixing". How bigoted can a tonsured person be and still be in communion with The Church?.. I don't know myself but it's an interesting question.

    
You are fogging up the question. People are free to accept or reject other people as friends or into their family via marriage for example. It's a free country. Dislike whomever fails to please you.

On the other hand opposing Racism as a political formulation has nothing to do with "Feelings". It has  divided people in an unhealthy way and has a very sad history in this country. Calling out people like Nathanael who suggest old racist formulations about "Race Mixing" and promotes Anti-Jewish bigotry has concrete justification based on history and long experience with hate mongering in the USA. 
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Orthodox11 on May 14, 2013, 11:29:53 AM
Let's consider an extreme hypothetical. Let's say the national leader of the Ku Klux Klan decides to convert to Orthodoxy but does not change any of his other views and continues on as the head of the Klan. Would he be allowed communion?

The Klan has a history of violence, murder, blind hatred, etc. Even if one does not condone those, being the leader of a group with such a history is different to being a private individual representing only yourself.

I think there is a difference between opposing mixed-marriage because you think it will lead to some kind of social difficulties (I'm not suggesting I agree, btw) and opposing it out of hatred or because you consider other races inherently inferior.

Quote
What of Nathanael if his position keeps getting more and more extreme and overtly racist?

If his preaching becomes overtly racist, then the Church should take some kind of action.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on May 14, 2013, 11:38:07 AM
Let's consider an extreme hypothetical. Let's say the national leader of the Ku Klux Klan decides to convert to Orthodoxy but does not change any of his other views and continues on as the head of the Klan. Would he be allowed communion?

The Klan has a history of violence, murder, blind hatred, etc. Even if one does not condone those, being the leader of a group with such a history is different to being a private individual representing only yourself.

I think there is a difference between opposing mixed-marriage because you think it will lead to some kind of social difficulties (I'm not suggesting I agree, btw) and opposing it out of hatred or because you consider other races inherently inferior.

Quote


What of Nathanael if his position keeps getting more and more extreme and overtly racist?

If his preaching becomes overtly racist, then the Church should take some kind of action.

That makes sense. So let's back down one notch from leader of a group with a known history of violence to a public activist like Nathanael. He is representing only himself but he is a political activist publicly and aggressively promoting these theories.

 I think that is less than leader of a group ( though it appears he does have dedicated followers and an organization going) but something more than an individual sitting in his basement privately ruminating.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Orthodox11 on May 14, 2013, 11:41:59 AM
He is representing only himself but he is a political activist publicly and aggressively promoting these theories.

From what I have seen (and, as I said, I haven't seen all that much), while I may not agree with much of what he says, I can't say that any of the ideas he is pushing are overtly hateful or heretical.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Santagranddad on May 14, 2013, 11:57:46 AM
Whatever he is, and whatever nonsense he spews out and whatever he purports to be, is not of the same faith and from the same heart as the Orthodox Church in which I was brought up, try to serve faithfully and love. Keeping him in your prayers that he may find the true light is all that one can do.

Theologically, I have not heard him say anything incorrect (though I have only watched a few of his videos). His politics, Jewish conspiracy theories, weird dress, and clownish behaviour is another matter.

This brings up an interesting question. At what point, if any, do extreme political views cross over into being counter to Orthodox Christian teachings.

He may fully understand and believe the Church's teachings on the Trinity and all theological doctrines. But let's hypothesize that he continues to push past his Jewish Conspiracy theories into Racism against Blacks and Hispanics. He is already condemning "Race Mixing". How bigoted can a tonsured person be and still be in communion with The Church?.. I don't know myself but it's an interesting question.

   

In answer I recall a woman in the London congregation of ROCOR under Bishop Nikodem of blessed memory who was heavily involved in a circle of aristocrats who worked tirelessly to undermine the British war effort. This group nearly torpedoed covert American presidential support for isolated Britain's effort at the time. She was a wholehearted supporter of Third Reich policies and a rabid Jew hater. Their activities were stopped and arrests made, including that of a cypher clerk at the American Embassy. Anna was arrested, tried and jailed.

When I met her she had long been forbidden to approach the chalice on account of her rabid Jew hatred. Of course, in her case she had gone beyond simply expressing views and actively tried to support the Third Reich's war time ambitions, including those directed at Jews.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Jonathan Gress on May 14, 2013, 11:59:40 AM
How does Br Nathaniel conceive of the "white race"? If it's really a race, i.e. a genetic thing, then how can he claim to identify with it? You can't just convert to another gene pool; he will always be a racial Jew, regardless of his beliefs. Or does he conceive of it in purely cultural terms, i.e. as a proxy for "Christendom" or something like that?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Punch on May 14, 2013, 12:08:41 PM
"Feelings" tend to turn into political viewpoints.  You cannot say that a person has a right to believe a certain way, and then say that he cannot act upon that right.  I find it cute how some people acknowledge that it is a person's "right" to believe that two men should not get married, but to vote against law to allow such is "hatred" (and other issues likewise).  So, if a person does not think that races should mix, should we be at all shocked that he would speak against it?  It is OK to believe but not to speak?

Bigotry is a relatively recently defined term and really has no theological basis unless it involves hatred.  Modern liberals cannot tell the difference between hatred and other emotions since anything that even slightly goes against what the feel good about is hatred.  Rational people, on the other hand,  can differentiate between not wanting your offspring to marry into another social / racial group and shunning them if they do.  There is nothing "non-Canonical" about recognizing that marriage is difficult enough without bringing in other differences and issues.  On the other hand, not accepting a person of another race into your family after the die has been cast is a completely other matter.

Whatever he is, and whatever nonsense he spews out and whatever he purports to be, is not of the same faith and from the same heart as the Orthodox Church in which I was brought up, try to serve faithfully and love. Keeping him in your prayers that he may find the true light is all that one can do.

Theologically, I have not heard him say anything incorrect (though I have only watched a few of his videos). His politics, Jewish conspiracy theories, weird dress, and clownish behaviour is another matter.

This brings up an interesting question. At what point, if any, do extreme political views cross over into being counter to Orthodox Christian teachings.

He may fully understand and believe the Church's teachings on the Trinity and all theological doctrines. But let's hypothesize that he continues to push past his Jewish Conspiracy theories into Racism against Blacks and Hispanics. He is already condemning "Race Mixing". How bigoted can a tonsured person be and still be in communion with The Church?.. I don't know myself but it's an interesting question.

    
You are fogging up the question. People are free to accept or reject other people as friends or into their family via marriage for example. It's a free country. Dislike whomever fails to please you.

On the other hand opposing Racism as a political formulation has nothing to do with "Feelings". It has  divided people in an unhealthy way and has a very sad history in this country. Calling out people like Nathanael who suggest old racist formulations about "Race Mixing" and promotes Anti-Jewish bigotry has concrete justification based on history and long experience with hate mongering in the USA. 
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Fr.Aidan on May 14, 2013, 12:32:20 PM
Christ is risen!

I have a question for the anti-Br.-Nathanael persons on here (whose opinions I do not automatically dismiss, as I try to keep an open mind).

If there were an official policy statement issued, that an Orthodox Christian may not marry someone of a different race, would the bishops responsible for drafting this policy be in a category of people who should be deprived of Holy Communion? Or otherwise disciplined or silenced from having authority in the Church and deciding such questions? Should such clergy be defrocked?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Orthodox11 on May 14, 2013, 12:36:00 PM
If there were an official policy statement issued, that an Orthodox Christian may not marry someone of a different race, would the bishops responsible for drafting this policy be in a category of people who should be deprived of Holy Communion?

Unless you define 'race' in very broad terms, such a policy would make it pretty difficult for converts to get married  :)
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: mike on May 14, 2013, 12:52:48 PM
If there were an official policy statement issued, that an Orthodox Christian may not marry someone of a different race, would the bishops responsible for drafting this policy be in a category of people who should be deprived of Holy Communion? Or otherwise disciplined or silenced from having authority in the Church and deciding such questions? Should such clergy be defrocked?

Yes. ASAP. Ride on a wheelboard also seems a nice idea.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on May 14, 2013, 02:06:37 PM
"Feelings" tend to turn into political viewpoints.  You cannot say that a person has a right to believe a certain way, and then say that he cannot act upon that right.  I find it cute how some people acknowledge that it is a person's "right" to believe that two men should not get married, but to vote against law to allow such is "hatred" (and other issues likewise).  So, if a person does not think that races should mix, should we be at all shocked that he would speak against it?  It is OK to believe but not to speak?

Bigotry is a relatively recently defined term and really has no theological basis unless it involves hatred.  Modern liberals cannot tell the difference between hatred and other emotions since anything that even slightly goes against what the feel good about is hatred.  Rational people, on the other hand,  can differentiate between not wanting your offspring to marry into another social / racial group and shunning them if they do.  There is nothing "non-Canonical" about recognizing that marriage is difficult enough without bringing in other differences and issues.  On the other hand, not accepting a person of another race into your family after the die has been cast is a completely other matter.

Whatever he is, and whatever nonsense he spews out and whatever he purports to be, is not of the same faith and from the same heart as the Orthodox Church in which I was brought up, try to serve faithfully and love. Keeping him in your prayers that he may find the true light is all that one can do.

Theologically, I have not heard him say anything incorrect (though I have only watched a few of his videos). His politics, Jewish conspiracy theories, weird dress, and clownish behaviour is another matter.

This brings up an interesting question. At what point, if any, do extreme political views cross over into being counter to Orthodox Christian teachings.

He may fully understand and believe the Church's teachings on the Trinity and all theological doctrines. But let's hypothesize that he continues to push past his Jewish Conspiracy theories into Racism against Blacks and Hispanics. He is already condemning "Race Mixing". How bigoted can a tonsured person be and still be in communion with The Church?.. I don't know myself but it's an interesting question.

    
You are fogging up the question. People are free to accept or reject other people as friends or into their family via marriage for example. It's a free country. Dislike whomever fails to please you.

On the other hand opposing Racism as a political formulation has nothing to do with "Feelings". It has  divided people in an unhealthy way and has a very sad history in this country. Calling out people like Nathanael who suggest old racist formulations about "Race Mixing" and promotes Anti-Jewish bigotry has concrete justification based on history and long experience with hate mongering in the USA. 

You are not addressing the question at hand which is can you stay in communion with The Church and be an activist for a hate based ideology.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on May 14, 2013, 02:12:08 PM
Christ is risen!

I have a question for the anti-Br.-Nathanael persons on here (whose opinions I do not automatically dismiss, as I try to keep an open mind).

If there were an official policy statement issued, that an Orthodox Christian may not marry someone of a different race, would the bishops responsible for drafting this policy be in a category of people who should be deprived of Holy Communion? Or otherwise disciplined or silenced from having authority in the Church and deciding such questions? Should such clergy be defrocked?


Interesting queston.. I would say that they have a right to make such a policy if so moved by the Holy Spirit. I would also think it would cause a schism . It is also instructional to note that they have not and would not issue such a decree.

To turn the question around, would the Rocor heirachy every issue a statement in support of Br. Nathanael's various theories..?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: podkarpatska on May 14, 2013, 02:22:16 PM
This is absurdist. The man in question presents himself in clerical garb and thus adds a layer of "office" to his pronouncements. Frankly he can memorize the Rudder and the entire Synodikon of Orthodoxy for all I care, that doesn't make his "orthodoxy" Orthodox. Anti "race mixing", white supremacy beliefs and conspiracy delusions don't mesh with having love in one's heart...you know, the "empty vessel" and all that. I am well aware that some misguided Orthodox seemingly place more emphasis than it warrants on random, non contextual Patristic proof texting in support of this or that theory, but Scripture trumps that as well. I seem to recall learning of Christ's radicalism (NOT contemporary political radicalism but radical in terms of the Temple Judaism of His day) regarding the universal application of His teachings back in my Church School days. You remember...the Samaritan woman, the Good Samaritan, His acceptance of Mary Magdalene and so on. Coupled with St Paul's preaching the gospel to the Gentiles, I fail to understand any canonical context in which the man in question can espouse his views and remain obedient to the Church as a monk, novice or whatever.

Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Punch on May 14, 2013, 02:38:35 PM
But quite a few of us do not see it as "hate" based.  As such, he still remains Orthodox.

"Feelings" tend to turn into political viewpoints.  You cannot say that a person has a right to believe a certain way, and then say that he cannot act upon that right.  I find it cute how some people acknowledge that it is a person's "right" to believe that two men should not get married, but to vote against law to allow such is "hatred" (and other issues likewise).  So, if a person does not think that races should mix, should we be at all shocked that he would speak against it?  It is OK to believe but not to speak?

Bigotry is a relatively recently defined term and really has no theological basis unless it involves hatred.  Modern liberals cannot tell the difference between hatred and other emotions since anything that even slightly goes against what the feel good about is hatred.  Rational people, on the other hand,  can differentiate between not wanting your offspring to marry into another social / racial group and shunning them if they do.  There is nothing "non-Canonical" about recognizing that marriage is difficult enough without bringing in other differences and issues.  On the other hand, not accepting a person of another race into your family after the die has been cast is a completely other matter.

Whatever he is, and whatever nonsense he spews out and whatever he purports to be, is not of the same faith and from the same heart as the Orthodox Church in which I was brought up, try to serve faithfully and love. Keeping him in your prayers that he may find the true light is all that one can do.

Theologically, I have not heard him say anything incorrect (though I have only watched a few of his videos). His politics, Jewish conspiracy theories, weird dress, and clownish behaviour is another matter.

This brings up an interesting question. At what point, if any, do extreme political views cross over into being counter to Orthodox Christian teachings.

He may fully understand and believe the Church's teachings on the Trinity and all theological doctrines. But let's hypothesize that he continues to push past his Jewish Conspiracy theories into Racism against Blacks and Hispanics. He is already condemning "Race Mixing". How bigoted can a tonsured person be and still be in communion with The Church?.. I don't know myself but it's an interesting question.

    
You are fogging up the question. People are free to accept or reject other people as friends or into their family via marriage for example. It's a free country. Dislike whomever fails to please you.

On the other hand opposing Racism as a political formulation has nothing to do with "Feelings". It has  divided people in an unhealthy way and has a very sad history in this country. Calling out people like Nathanael who suggest old racist formulations about "Race Mixing" and promotes Anti-Jewish bigotry has concrete justification based on history and long experience with hate mongering in the USA. 

You are not addressing the question at hand which is can you stay in communion with The Church and be an activist for a hate based ideology.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Cyrillic on May 14, 2013, 02:47:14 PM
I always though that he just pretended to be an Orthodox monk.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Jonathan Gress on May 14, 2013, 02:48:51 PM
Whatever he is, and whatever nonsense he spews out and whatever he purports to be, is not of the same faith and from the same heart as the Orthodox Church in which I was brought up, try to serve faithfully and love. Keeping him in your prayers that he may find the true light is all that one can do.

Theologically, I have not heard him say anything incorrect (though I have only watched a few of his videos). His politics, Jewish conspiracy theories, weird dress, and clownish behaviour is another matter.

This brings up an interesting question. At what point, if any, do extreme political views cross over into being counter to Orthodox Christian teachings.

He may fully understand and believe the Church's teachings on the Trinity and all theological doctrines. But let's hypothesize that he continues to push past his Jewish Conspiracy theories into Racism against Blacks and Hispanics. He is already condemning "Race Mixing". How bigoted can a tonsured person be and still be in communion with The Church?.. I don't know myself but it's an interesting question.

   

In answer I recall a woman in the London congregation of ROCOR under Bishop Nikodem of blessed memory who was heavily involved in a circle of aristocrats who worked tirelessly to undermine the British war effort. This group nearly torpedoed covert American presidential support for isolated Britain's effort at the time. She was a wholehearted supporter of Third Reich policies and a rabid Jew hater. Their activities were stopped and arrests made, including that of a cypher clerk at the American Embassy. Anna was arrested, tried and jailed.

When I met her she had long been forbidden to approach the chalice on account of her rabid Jew hatred. Of course, in her case she had gone beyond simply expressing views and actively tried to support the Third Reich's war time ambitions, including those directed at Jews.

Was this Anna Wolkoff by any chance?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on May 14, 2013, 02:57:13 PM
But quite a few of us do not see it as "hate" based.  As such, he still remains Orthodox.

"Feelings" tend to turn into political viewpoints.  You cannot say that a person has a right to believe a certain way, and then say that he cannot act upon that right.  I find it cute how some people acknowledge that it is a person's "right" to believe that two men should not get married, but to vote against law to allow such is "hatred" (and other issues likewise).  So, if a person does not think that races should mix, should we be at all shocked that he would speak against it?  It is OK to believe but not to speak?

Bigotry is a relatively recently defined term and really has no theological basis unless it involves hatred.  Modern liberals cannot tell the difference between hatred and other emotions since anything that even slightly goes against what the feel good about is hatred.  Rational people, on the other hand,  can differentiate between not wanting your offspring to marry into another social / racial group and shunning them if they do.  There is nothing "non-Canonical" about recognizing that marriage is difficult enough without bringing in other differences and issues.  On the other hand, not accepting a person of another race into your family after the die has been cast is a completely other matter.

Whatever he is, and whatever nonsense he spews out and whatever he purports to be, is not of the same faith and from the same heart as the Orthodox Church in which I was brought up, try to serve faithfully and love. Keeping him in your prayers that he may find the true light is all that one can do.

Theologically, I have not heard him say anything incorrect (though I have only watched a few of his videos). His politics, Jewish conspiracy theories, weird dress, and clownish behaviour is another matter.

This brings up an interesting question. At what point, if any, do extreme political views cross over into being counter to Orthodox Christian teachings.

He may fully understand and believe the Church's teachings on the Trinity and all theological doctrines. But let's hypothesize that he continues to push past his Jewish Conspiracy theories into Racism against Blacks and Hispanics. He is already condemning "Race Mixing". How bigoted can a tonsured person be and still be in communion with The Church?.. I don't know myself but it's an interesting question.

    
You are fogging up the question. People are free to accept or reject other people as friends or into their family via marriage for example. It's a free country. Dislike whomever fails to please you.

On the other hand opposing Racism as a political formulation has nothing to do with "Feelings". It has  divided people in an unhealthy way and has a very sad history in this country. Calling out people like Nathanael who suggest old racist formulations about "Race Mixing" and promotes Anti-Jewish bigotry has concrete justification based on history and long experience with hate mongering in the USA. 

You are not addressing the question at hand which is can you stay in communion with The Church and be an activist for a hate based ideology.

Your personal approval of him is not what keeps him Orthodox..FYI

Racism is generally considered "Hate Based".. Your milage may vary.

How do you feel about his coziness with White Supremacist groups like StormFront?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: mike on May 14, 2013, 03:10:25 PM
Interesting queston.. I would say that they have a right to make such a policy if so moved by the Holy Spirit.

Yeah. They have right. And their flock would have duty to protest against it. Such a decision can't come from the Holy Spirit.

I always though that he just pretended to be an Orthodox monk.

It's not such a petty issue since many people fall for it. Even here.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: stanley123 on May 14, 2013, 03:24:53 PM
Christ is risen!

I have a question for the anti-Br.-Nathanael persons on here (whose opinions I do not automatically dismiss, as I try to keep an open mind).

If there were an official policy statement issued, that an Orthodox Christian may not marry someone of a different race, would the bishops responsible for drafting this policy be in a category of people who should be deprived of Holy Communion? Or otherwise disciplined or silenced from having authority in the Church and deciding such questions? Should such clergy be defrocked?

I don't know about Orthodox, but in the RCC, I would guess that some serious  disciplinary action would be in order.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Orthodox11 on May 14, 2013, 03:26:51 PM
Yeah. They have right. And their flock would have duty to protest against it. Such a decision can't come from the Holy Spirit.

+1
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Santagranddad on May 14, 2013, 03:59:09 PM
Whatever he is, and whatever nonsense he spews out and whatever he purports to be, is not of the same faith and from the same heart as the Orthodox Church in which I was brought up, try to serve faithfully and love. Keeping him in your prayers that he may find the true light is all that one can do.

Theologically, I have not heard him say anything incorrect (though I have only watched a few of his videos). His politics, Jewish conspiracy theories, weird dress, and clownish behaviour is another matter.

This brings up an interesting question. At what point, if any, do extreme political views cross over into being counter to Orthodox Christian teachings.

He may fully understand and believe the Church's teachings on the Trinity and all theological doctrines. But let's hypothesize that he continues to push past his Jewish Conspiracy theories into Racism against Blacks and Hispanics. He is already condemning "Race Mixing". How bigoted can a tonsured person be and still be in communion with The Church?.. I don't know myself but it's an interesting question.

   

In answer I recall a woman in the London congregation of ROCOR under Bishop Nikodem of blessed memory who was heavily involved in a circle of aristocrats who worked tirelessly to undermine the British war effort. This group nearly torpedoed covert American presidential support for isolated Britain's effort at the time. She was a wholehearted supporter of Third Reich policies and a rabid Jew hater. Their activities were stopped and arrests made, including that of a cypher clerk at the American Embassy. Anna was arrested, tried and jailed.

When I met her she had long been forbidden to approach the chalice on account of her rabid Jew hatred. Of course, in her case she had gone beyond simply expressing views and actively tried to support the Third Reich's war time ambitions, including those directed at Jews.

Was this Anna Wolkoff by any chance?

Yes, it was.....
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Jonathan Gress on May 14, 2013, 04:14:55 PM
Whatever he is, and whatever nonsense he spews out and whatever he purports to be, is not of the same faith and from the same heart as the Orthodox Church in which I was brought up, try to serve faithfully and love. Keeping him in your prayers that he may find the true light is all that one can do.

Theologically, I have not heard him say anything incorrect (though I have only watched a few of his videos). His politics, Jewish conspiracy theories, weird dress, and clownish behaviour is another matter.

This brings up an interesting question. At what point, if any, do extreme political views cross over into being counter to Orthodox Christian teachings.

He may fully understand and believe the Church's teachings on the Trinity and all theological doctrines. But let's hypothesize that he continues to push past his Jewish Conspiracy theories into Racism against Blacks and Hispanics. He is already condemning "Race Mixing". How bigoted can a tonsured person be and still be in communion with The Church?.. I don't know myself but it's an interesting question.

   

In answer I recall a woman in the London congregation of ROCOR under Bishop Nikodem of blessed memory who was heavily involved in a circle of aristocrats who worked tirelessly to undermine the British war effort. This group nearly torpedoed covert American presidential support for isolated Britain's effort at the time. She was a wholehearted supporter of Third Reich policies and a rabid Jew hater. Their activities were stopped and arrests made, including that of a cypher clerk at the American Embassy. Anna was arrested, tried and jailed.

When I met her she had long been forbidden to approach the chalice on account of her rabid Jew hatred. Of course, in her case she had gone beyond simply expressing views and actively tried to support the Third Reich's war time ambitions, including those directed at Jews.

Was this Anna Wolkoff by any chance?

Yes, it was.....

OK. She has a Wikipedia entry if anyone's interested in the history of that stuff.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Santagranddad on May 14, 2013, 05:00:30 PM
Whatever he is, and whatever nonsense he spews out and whatever he purports to be, is not of the same faith and from the same heart as the Orthodox Church in which I was brought up, try to serve faithfully and love. Keeping him in your prayers that he may find the true light is all that one can do.

Theologically, I have not heard him say anything incorrect (though I have only watched a few of his videos). His politics, Jewish conspiracy theories, weird dress, and clownish behaviour is another matter.

This brings up an interesting question. At what point, if any, do extreme political views cross over into being counter to Orthodox Christian teachings.

He may fully understand and believe the Church's teachings on the Trinity and all theological doctrines. But let's hypothesize that he continues to push past his Jewish Conspiracy theories into Racism against Blacks and Hispanics. He is already condemning "Race Mixing". How bigoted can a tonsured person be and still be in communion with The Church?.. I don't know myself but it's an interesting question.

   

In answer I recall a woman in the London congregation of ROCOR under Bishop Nikodem of blessed memory who was heavily involved in a circle of aristocrats who worked tirelessly to undermine the British war effort. This group nearly torpedoed covert American presidential support for isolated Britain's effort at the time. She was a wholehearted supporter of Third Reich policies and a rabid Jew hater. Their activities were stopped and arrests made, including that of a cypher clerk at the American Embassy. Anna was arrested, tried and jailed.

When I met her she had long been forbidden to approach the chalice on account of her rabid Jew hatred. Of course, in her case she had gone beyond simply expressing views and actively tried to support the Third Reich's war time ambitions, including those directed at Jews.

Was this Anna Wolkoff by any chance?

Yes, it was.....

OK. She has a Wikipedia entry if anyone's interested in the history of that stuff.

She was told by a member of the congregation that she was part Jewish and got the response, "You can't be, I like you". When pointed out to her that both Our Lord and his Holy Mother were Jewish said, "Nonsense, they came from a long lost Russian tribe". Such is blind hatred.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Jonathan Gress on May 14, 2013, 05:45:11 PM
Whatever he is, and whatever nonsense he spews out and whatever he purports to be, is not of the same faith and from the same heart as the Orthodox Church in which I was brought up, try to serve faithfully and love. Keeping him in your prayers that he may find the true light is all that one can do.

Theologically, I have not heard him say anything incorrect (though I have only watched a few of his videos). His politics, Jewish conspiracy theories, weird dress, and clownish behaviour is another matter.

This brings up an interesting question. At what point, if any, do extreme political views cross over into being counter to Orthodox Christian teachings.

He may fully understand and believe the Church's teachings on the Trinity and all theological doctrines. But let's hypothesize that he continues to push past his Jewish Conspiracy theories into Racism against Blacks and Hispanics. He is already condemning "Race Mixing". How bigoted can a tonsured person be and still be in communion with The Church?.. I don't know myself but it's an interesting question.

   

In answer I recall a woman in the London congregation of ROCOR under Bishop Nikodem of blessed memory who was heavily involved in a circle of aristocrats who worked tirelessly to undermine the British war effort. This group nearly torpedoed covert American presidential support for isolated Britain's effort at the time. She was a wholehearted supporter of Third Reich policies and a rabid Jew hater. Their activities were stopped and arrests made, including that of a cypher clerk at the American Embassy. Anna was arrested, tried and jailed.

When I met her she had long been forbidden to approach the chalice on account of her rabid Jew hatred. Of course, in her case she had gone beyond simply expressing views and actively tried to support the Third Reich's war time ambitions, including those directed at Jews.

Was this Anna Wolkoff by any chance?

Yes, it was.....

OK. She has a Wikipedia entry if anyone's interested in the history of that stuff.

She was told by a member of the congregation that she was part Jewish and got the response, "You can't be, I like you". When pointed out to her that both Our Lord and his Holy Mother were Jewish said, "Nonsense, they came from a long lost Russian tribe". Such is blind hatred.

Metropolitan Pavlos of HOTCA was supposedly explaining in a televised sermon many years ago that the Theotokos was Jewish, which provoked an angry Greek lady to come round to St Markella's to protest against this "slur". This seems to be a trope among some "traditionalist" Orthodox.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Santagranddad on May 14, 2013, 07:21:54 PM
Whatever he is, and whatever nonsense he spews out and whatever he purports to be, is not of the same faith and from the same heart as the Orthodox Church in which I was brought up, try to serve faithfully and love. Keeping him in your prayers that he may find the true light is all that one can do.

Theologically, I have not heard him say anything incorrect (though I have only watched a few of his videos). His politics, Jewish conspiracy theories, weird dress, and clownish behaviour is another matter.

This brings up an interesting question. At what point, if any, do extreme political views cross over into being counter to Orthodox Christian teachings.

He may fully understand and believe the Church's teachings on the Trinity and all theological doctrines. But let's hypothesize that he continues to push past his Jewish Conspiracy theories into Racism against Blacks and Hispanics. He is already condemning "Race Mixing". How bigoted can a tonsured person be and still be in communion with The Church?.. I don't know myself but it's an interesting question.

   

In answer I recall a woman in the London congregation of ROCOR under Bishop Nikodem of blessed memory who was heavily involved in a circle of aristocrats who worked tirelessly to undermine the British war effort. This group nearly torpedoed covert American presidential support for isolated Britain's effort at the time. She was a wholehearted supporter of Third Reich policies and a rabid Jew hater. Their activities were stopped and arrests made, including that of a cypher clerk at the American Embassy. Anna was arrested, tried and jailed.

When I met her she had long been forbidden to approach the chalice on account of her rabid Jew hatred. Of course, in her case she had gone beyond simply expressing views and actively tried to support the Third Reich's war time ambitions, including those directed at Jews.

Was this Anna Wolkoff by any chance?

Yes, it was.....

OK. She has a Wikipedia entry if anyone's interested in the history of that stuff.

She was told by a member of the congregation that she was part Jewish and got the response, "You can't be, I like you". When pointed out to her that both Our Lord and his Holy Mother were Jewish said, "Nonsense, they came from a long lost Russian tribe". Such is blind hatred.

Metropolitan Pavlos of HOTCA was supposedly explaining in a televised sermon many years ago that the Theotokos was Jewish, which provoked an angry Greek lady to come round to St Markella's to protest against this "slur". This seems to be a trope among some "traditionalist" Orthodox.

Being a 'traditionalist' and having a lot of time among Orthodox believers of all shades it is more likely to arise in the ignorant social club 'Orthodox'. Some of those I can recall being most welcoming were simple folk, strong in their faith with little English and of Old Ritualist background. The Jew haters I came across were often as not educated Russian tea room patrons. Metropolitan Philaret of blessed memory drew a distinction between patriotism which draws people's together and nationalism which excludes and separates.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Jonathan Gress on May 14, 2013, 07:28:42 PM
Thank you. I certainly didn't mean to disparage traditionalists (I'm one myself!) and in fact I have had the same impression. The most pious and traditional Orthodox have also been the most welcoming and free of prejudice, in my experience.

EDIT: This goes both for parishes that are convert-heavy, like St Maximus' parish in Owego, NY, and very ethnic ones, like St Markella's in Astoria, or St Mark of Ephesus in Boston (Greek), or Holy Assumption in Trenton, NJ, and Holy Trinity in Astoria (Russian). In the ethnic ones, I've never been made to feel unwelcome because I'm not Greek or Russian. And we have had a few notable converts from Judaism. :)

I imagine poor old Anna and the "tea room" Orthodox would not be sympathetic to Jewish converts. One of the great Catacomb saints of Russia was Jewish (St Alexander Jacobson).
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: mike on May 14, 2013, 07:34:49 PM
The most pious and traditional Orthodox have also been the most welcoming and free of prejudice, in my experience.

Internetz say otherwise. At least in this part of the world.

I have to say I was nicely surprised by the activities of the hyper-Orthodox on this board, especially Anastasios. I hadn't expected such from you guys.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Jonathan Gress on May 14, 2013, 07:51:39 PM
The most pious and traditional Orthodox have also been the most welcoming and free of prejudice, in my experience.

Internetz say otherwise. At least in this part of the world.

I have to say I was nicely surprised by the activities of the hyper-Orthodox on this board, especially Anastasios. I hadn't expected such from you guys.

Well if you base your knowledge of Orthodoxy off the internet, I don't know what to say.

For your part, I would say your smug and condescending tone entirely lives up to stereotypes we have about the World Orthodox. Fortunately, there are many others here who do not live up to such stereotypes.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Santagranddad on May 14, 2013, 07:55:27 PM
The most pious and traditional Orthodox have also been the most welcoming and free of prejudice, in my experience.

Internetz say otherwise. At least in this part of the world.

I have to say I was nicely surprised by the activities of the hyper-Orthodox on this board, especially Anastasios. I hadn't expected such from you guys.

We ain't got horns ::) And I too know of one traditionalist monastery that has managed to extend their property with the interest and encouragement of a Jewish councillor. And those converts Judaism I have met have left me with a good impression, to say nought of the number of times I have enjoyed bagels and banter in London's Golders Green. (Apparently they tell me I even double park like a Jew - not sure that feat draws any plaudits from the traffic wardens though). I try to rub along with my neighbour whosoever they are, but comprising Faith I try not to do. Nor will I indulge in politically motivated inter-Faith worship.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: mike on May 14, 2013, 08:07:03 PM
Well if you base your knowledge of Orthodoxy off the internet, I don't know what to say.

I don't. Only about hyperdoxy.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Shanghaiski on May 14, 2013, 08:09:30 PM
He is representing only himself but he is a political activist publicly and aggressively promoting these theories.

From what I have seen (and, as I said, I haven't seen all that much), while I may not agree with much of what he says, I can't say that any of the ideas he is pushing are overtly hateful or heretical.

It can be argued that racism of the kind Nathaniel preaches is, indeed, heresy.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Punch on May 14, 2013, 08:12:35 PM
But quite a few of us do not see it as "hate" based.  As such, he still remains Orthodox.

"Feelings" tend to turn into political viewpoints.  You cannot say that a person has a right to believe a certain way, and then say that he cannot act upon that right.  I find it cute how some people acknowledge that it is a person's "right" to believe that two men should not get married, but to vote against law to allow such is "hatred" (and other issues likewise).  So, if a person does not think that races should mix, should we be at all shocked that he would speak against it?  It is OK to believe but not to speak?

Bigotry is a relatively recently defined term and really has no theological basis unless it involves hatred.  Modern liberals cannot tell the difference between hatred and other emotions since anything that even slightly goes against what the feel good about is hatred.  Rational people, on the other hand,  can differentiate between not wanting your offspring to marry into another social / racial group and shunning them if they do.  There is nothing "non-Canonical" about recognizing that marriage is difficult enough without bringing in other differences and issues.  On the other hand, not accepting a person of another race into your family after the die has been cast is a completely other matter.

Whatever he is, and whatever nonsense he spews out and whatever he purports to be, is not of the same faith and from the same heart as the Orthodox Church in which I was brought up, try to serve faithfully and love. Keeping him in your prayers that he may find the true light is all that one can do.

Theologically, I have not heard him say anything incorrect (though I have only watched a few of his videos). His politics, Jewish conspiracy theories, weird dress, and clownish behaviour is another matter.

This brings up an interesting question. At what point, if any, do extreme political views cross over into being counter to Orthodox Christian teachings.

He may fully understand and believe the Church's teachings on the Trinity and all theological doctrines. But let's hypothesize that he continues to push past his Jewish Conspiracy theories into Racism against Blacks and Hispanics. He is already condemning "Race Mixing". How bigoted can a tonsured person be and still be in communion with The Church?.. I don't know myself but it's an interesting question.

    
You are fogging up the question. People are free to accept or reject other people as friends or into their family via marriage for example. It's a free country. Dislike whomever fails to please you.

On the other hand opposing Racism as a political formulation has nothing to do with "Feelings". It has  divided people in an unhealthy way and has a very sad history in this country. Calling out people like Nathanael who suggest old racist formulations about "Race Mixing" and promotes Anti-Jewish bigotry has concrete justification based on history and long experience with hate mongering in the USA.  

You are not addressing the question at hand which is can you stay in communion with The Church and be an activist for a hate based ideology.

Your personal approval of him is not what keeps him Orthodox..FYI

Racism is generally considered "Hate Based".. Your milage may vary.

How do you feel about his coziness with White Supremacist groups like StormFront?

Well, having actually read what StormFront has to say about him (not just carefully chosen excerpts, which is your calling card), I am not sure that they are all too impressed with him.  I call his relationship with them far from "cozy".  
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Shanghaiski on May 14, 2013, 08:13:20 PM
Christ is risen!

I have a question for the anti-Br.-Nathanael persons on here (whose opinions I do not automatically dismiss, as I try to keep an open mind).

If there were an official policy statement issued, that an Orthodox Christian may not marry someone of a different race, would the bishops responsible for drafting this policy be in a category of people who should be deprived of Holy Communion? Or otherwise disciplined or silenced from having authority in the Church and deciding such questions? Should such clergy be defrocked?


Such would be advocating heresy. They should be tried in an ecclesiastical court. Failing that, they should be shunned.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Shanghaiski on May 14, 2013, 08:15:00 PM
I always though that he just pretended to be an Orthodox monk.

Yes.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Punch on May 14, 2013, 08:16:04 PM
The most pious and traditional Orthodox have also been the most welcoming and free of prejudice, in my experience.

Internetz say otherwise. At least in this part of the world.

I have to say I was nicely surprised by the activities of the hyper-Orthodox on this board, especially Anastasios. I hadn't expected such from you guys.

This made me chuckle.  Most of the "real" Orthodox that I have know, Traditionalist and Modernist, are not on the Internet.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on May 14, 2013, 08:40:20 PM
But quite a few of us do not see it as "hate" based.  As such, he still remains Orthodox.

"Feelings" tend to turn into political viewpoints.  You cannot say that a person has a right to believe a certain way, and then say that he cannot act upon that right.  I find it cute how some people acknowledge that it is a person's "right" to believe that two men should not get married, but to vote against law to allow such is "hatred" (and other issues likewise).  So, if a person does not think that races should mix, should we be at all shocked that he would speak against it?  It is OK to believe but not to speak?

Bigotry is a relatively recently defined term and really has no theological basis unless it involves hatred.  Modern liberals cannot tell the difference between hatred and other emotions since anything that even slightly goes against what the feel good about is hatred.  Rational people, on the other hand,  can differentiate between not wanting your offspring to marry into another social / racial group and shunning them if they do.  There is nothing "non-Canonical" about recognizing that marriage is difficult enough without bringing in other differences and issues.  On the other hand, not accepting a person of another race into your family after the die has been cast is a completely other matter.

Whatever he is, and whatever nonsense he spews out and whatever he purports to be, is not of the same faith and from the same heart as the Orthodox Church in which I was brought up, try to serve faithfully and love. Keeping him in your prayers that he may find the true light is all that one can do.

Theologically, I have not heard him say anything incorrect (though I have only watched a few of his videos). His politics, Jewish conspiracy theories, weird dress, and clownish behaviour is another matter.

This brings up an interesting question. At what point, if any, do extreme political views cross over into being counter to Orthodox Christian teachings.

He may fully understand and believe the Church's teachings on the Trinity and all theological doctrines. But let's hypothesize that he continues to push past his Jewish Conspiracy theories into Racism against Blacks and Hispanics. He is already condemning "Race Mixing". How bigoted can a tonsured person be and still be in communion with The Church?.. I don't know myself but it's an interesting question.

    
You are fogging up the question. People are free to accept or reject other people as friends or into their family via marriage for example. It's a free country. Dislike whomever fails to please you.

On the other hand opposing Racism as a political formulation has nothing to do with "Feelings". It has  divided people in an unhealthy way and has a very sad history in this country. Calling out people like Nathanael who suggest old racist formulations about "Race Mixing" and promotes Anti-Jewish bigotry has concrete justification based on history and long experience with hate mongering in the USA.  

You are not addressing the question at hand which is can you stay in communion with The Church and be an activist for a hate based ideology.

Your personal approval of him is not what keeps him Orthodox..FYI

Racism is generally considered "Hate Based".. Your milage may vary.

How do you feel about his coziness with White Supremacist groups like StormFront?

Well, having actually read what StormFront has to say about him (not just carefully chosen excerpts, which is your calling card), I am not sure that they are all too impressed with him.  I call his relationship with them far from "cozy".  

He gave a very friendly interview to StormFront. They share many common political idea's with him. You are the one cherry picking. If you then read some comments about him on their message board, you will find negative comments along the line of him being some sort of too good to be true plant.
 

Coziness: Giving a Neo Nazi publication a friendly interview.

You will also find as I have pointed out that he is starting down their line of march in terms of further Racist formulations past Jewish Baiting. He has been warning lately about "Race Mixing"... Any good publicist/propagandist needs to know his target audience. If you read the comments on his message board you will see many people who appear to have Neo-Nazi type ideology.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Orthodox11 on May 14, 2013, 08:42:44 PM
Well, having actually read what StormFront has to say about him (not just carefully chosen excerpts, which is your calling card), I am not sure that they are all too impressed with him.  I call his relationship with them far from "cozy".  

I googled 'Nathanael Kapner' and a few StormFront entries and similar websites came up. The majority opinion seemed to be something along the lines of "once a Jew, always a Jew," though they on the whole seemed to agree with what he was saying.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Punch on May 14, 2013, 08:58:42 PM
Well, having actually read what StormFront has to say about him (not just carefully chosen excerpts, which is your calling card), I am not sure that they are all too impressed with him.  I call his relationship with them far from "cozy".  

I googled 'Nathanael Kapner' and a few StormFront entries and similar websites came up. The majority opinion seemed to be something along the lines of "once a Jew, always a Jew," though they on the whole seemed to agree with what he was saying.

Exactly.  No neo-Nazi will ever accept a Jew.  He may use a Jew, but never accept one.  And I probably know quite a bit more about Nazis than our resident liberal reactionary wannabe.  That is why the idea of Br. Nathaniel being "cozy" with StormFront is so ludicrous to me. 
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on May 14, 2013, 09:45:18 PM
Well, having actually read what StormFront has to say about him (not just carefully chosen excerpts, which is your calling card), I am not sure that they are all too impressed with him.  I call his relationship with them far from "cozy".  

I googled 'Nathanael Kapner' and a few StormFront entries and similar websites came up. The majority opinion seemed to be something along the lines of "once a Jew, always a Jew," though they on the whole seemed to agree with what he was saying.

Exactly.  No neo-Nazi will ever accept a Jew.  He may use a Jew, but never accept one.  And I probably know quite a bit more about Nazis than our resident liberal reactionary wannabe.  That is why the idea of Br. Nathaniel being "cozy" with StormFront is so ludicrous to me. 

Nice twist.. He gave a friendly interview to StormFront.What more does anyone really need to know ?

 They were in agreement.

I am sure he would not be able to join an actual Nazi organization. But no one is saying he could.

His interview reflected his ideological agreement with StormFront.

 Nothing about my characterization is ludicrous. 

You can name call me all you want. It doesn't change anything.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: podkarpatska on May 14, 2013, 09:57:39 PM
The most pious and traditional Orthodox have also been the most welcoming and free of prejudice, in my experience.

Internetz say otherwise. At least in this part of the world.

I have to say I was nicely surprised by the activities of the hyper-Orthodox on this board, especially Anastasios. I hadn't expected such from you guys.

I tend to agree with Michal and then I read a comment like "social club Orthodox" and I just shake my head and sigh.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: #1Sinner on May 14, 2013, 10:03:31 PM
Christ is risen.

There appears to be misuse of the word "Fascist." Do people understand what "Fascism" is? How in the world could it possibly relate to Br. Nathanael?

One thing is for sure - the issue of Br. Nathanael seems to provoke a drastic evaporation of rational thinking processes in many (not all!) of those who have strong reactions against him. I notice this strange phenomenon and I don't quite know what it means, but it appears that many of Br. Nathanael's messages or themes seem to run counter to things that people were taught by the secular educational system. It's a system which was and is designed to promote marxism and related anti-Christian thinking and values and weltanschauung, as Charlotte Isserby discovered and documented carefully. And when its planks which are meant to be swallowed whole as "givens" are challenged, then... woe betide.

I'm not painting everyone who really dislikes Br. Nathanael with the same brush.

By the way, it's really an awful slander and a grievous sin to ascribe to people sins which they don't have. So calling him hateful, or murderous, or fascist, or a nazi, or the various other absolutely outrageous and unhinged things he's been called in this thread, is not only dense, it's seriously sinful.

People mentioned the bizarre dress of Br. Nathanael (which doesn't sit well with me, by the way). But what did St. Xenia wear? Man's clothing. Do we accuse her, then, of cross-dressing, the overturning of society, confused gender or sexual identity, or any such nonsense? Of course not.

Could that one example (I could give others) somehow shed light on the case of Br. Nathanael?

Let's all show a certain elemental tolerance. Try to keep our minds open.

Completely agree with everything stated above.

People have been conditioned to react, condemn and call names (all liberal tactics when you have no argument) rather than confront and challenge points in a constructive way.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: pmpn8rGPT on May 14, 2013, 10:28:06 PM
This (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Xm2WLJwVMg) nonsense is the other end of the debate.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on May 14, 2013, 10:55:52 PM
I just found that StormFront has several of Br. Nathaneal's Video's on it's own You Tube channel

The Motto of the channel is "White folks NEED to WAKE UP"

http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLB0CD8D295F0DBB45
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Jonathan Gress on May 14, 2013, 11:06:49 PM
The most pious and traditional Orthodox have also been the most welcoming and free of prejudice, in my experience.

Internetz say otherwise. At least in this part of the world.

I have to say I was nicely surprised by the activities of the hyper-Orthodox on this board, especially Anastasios. I hadn't expected such from you guys.

I tend to agree with Michal and then I read a comment like "social club Orthodox" and I just shake my head and sigh.

There's piety and there's pseudo-piety. I think Michal's "hyperdox" are the latter; they're all talk, basically. They are particularly prominent on the Internet. I admit to being one of them now and then. But if you go to a real traditionalist parish and meet the people there, I think you would get a different impression.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Punch on May 14, 2013, 11:15:35 PM
Well, having actually read what StormFront has to say about him (not just carefully chosen excerpts, which is your calling card), I am not sure that they are all too impressed with him.  I call his relationship with them far from "cozy".  

I googled 'Nathanael Kapner' and a few StormFront entries and similar websites came up. The majority opinion seemed to be something along the lines of "once a Jew, always a Jew," though they on the whole seemed to agree with what he was saying.

Exactly.  No neo-Nazi will ever accept a Jew.  He may use a Jew, but never accept one.  And I probably know quite a bit more about Nazis than our resident liberal reactionary wannabe.  That is why the idea of Br. Nathaniel being "cozy" with StormFront is so ludicrous to me. 

Nice twist.. He gave a friendly interview to StormFront.What more does anyone really need to know ?

 They were in agreement.

I am sure he would not be able to join an actual Nazi organization. But no one is saying he could.

His interview reflected his ideological agreement with StormFront.

 Nothing about my characterization is ludicrous. 

You can name call me all you want. It doesn't change anything.

That is true. You will always be what you are.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Fr.Aidan on May 15, 2013, 04:06:39 PM
Christ is risen!

It was the hierarchy of the canonical Greek Archdiocese of North and South America (Ecumenical Patriarchate), which had a policy, several decades ago, of forbidding racially mixed marriages (this according to a priest who had written one of those "xx Questions on the Orthodox Church" books published in those days). Granted, the policy seems to have been retired or at least kept quiet, since then.

Those of you who want Br. Nathanael silenced or defrocked, are you saying that you also wish the bishops of the canonical Greek Orthodox Church in America to be silenced or defrocked? Or is what's good for the goose, not good for the gander?

The idea of a white Christian political bloc, and advocating for its strengthening, seems non-heretical and to be distinct from actual heresy. After all, if people from a group of African nations got together and said, "We want to formulate a powerful political bloc of African nations, to protect our peoples against inroads from European powers," absolutely no one would object. Even if it were an Islamic political bloc, with Islamist goals, few would object to their right to associate and organize to protect their interests, however ethnically and religiously narrow.

Being against "mixing of races" is a very unsound concept which has no basis ("race" as in "white" versus "judaic" versus "black" doesn't really exist, scientifically speaking, plus there is no previous example for this in the lives of the Saints or in historic church policy, short of Greek Orthodox American policy recently). I am very much against such talk and it is very disturbing to me. I have a number of racially mixed couples in my own parish of Holy Protection in Austin, Texas.

http://www.orthodoxaustin.org


Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: pmpn8rGPT on May 15, 2013, 04:25:10 PM
It was the hierarchy of the canonical Greek Archdiocese of North and South America (Ecumenical Patriarchate), which had a policy, several decades ago, of forbidding racially mixed marriages (this according to a priest who had written one of those "xx Questions on the Orthodox Church" books published in those days). Granted, the policy seems to have been retired or at least kept quiet, since then.
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_mftKB1Mwc2Q/TGy7LmHcIiI/AAAAAAAABis/45s9kR_Y8v8/s400/surprised.jpg)

("race" as in "white" versus "judaic" versus "black" doesn't really exist, scientifically speaking, plus there is no previous example for this in the lives of the Saints or in historic church policy, short of Greek Orthodox American policy recently
+1
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: mike on May 15, 2013, 04:32:08 PM
Those of you who want Br. Nathanael silenced or defrocked, are you saying that you also wish the bishops of the canonical Greek Orthodox Church in America to be silenced or defrocked? Or is what's good for the goose, not good for the gander?

If they did it know? Yes.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Orthodox11 on May 15, 2013, 05:20:02 PM
It was the hierarchy of the canonical Greek Archdiocese of North and South America (Ecumenical Patriarchate), which had a policy, several decades ago, of forbidding racially mixed marriages (this according to a priest who had written one of those "xx Questions on the Orthodox Church" books published in those days). Granted, the policy seems to have been retired or at least kept quiet, since then.

I figured this was what you were referring to. I don't know the details of that policy or the reason for it, but were they suggest something similar today, it would be completely unacceptable.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on May 15, 2013, 06:02:04 PM
Well, having actually read what StormFront has to say about him (not just carefully chosen excerpts, which is your calling card), I am not sure that they are all too impressed with him.  I call his relationship with them far from "cozy".  

I googled 'Nathanael Kapner' and a few StormFront entries and similar websites came up. The majority opinion seemed to be something along the lines of "once a Jew, always a Jew," though they on the whole seemed to agree with what he was saying.

Exactly.  No neo-Nazi will ever accept a Jew.  He may use a Jew, but never accept one.  And I probably know quite a bit more about Nazis than our resident liberal reactionary wannabe.  That is why the idea of Br. Nathaniel being "cozy" with StormFront is so ludicrous to me. 

Nice twist.. He gave a friendly interview to StormFront.What more does anyone really need to know ?

 They were in agreement.

I am sure he would not be able to join an actual Nazi organization. But no one is saying he could.

His interview reflected his ideological agreement with StormFront.

 Nothing about my characterization is ludicrous. 

You can name call me all you want. It doesn't change anything.

That is true. You will always be what you are.

What I meant was that your name calling habit doesn't make you weak arguments any stronger. But I bet you already know that.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on May 15, 2013, 06:07:26 PM
Christ is risen!

It was the hierarchy of the canonical Greek Archdiocese of North and South America (Ecumenical Patriarchate), which had a policy, several decades ago, of forbidding racially mixed marriages (this according to a priest who had written one of those "xx Questions on the Orthodox Church" books published in those days). Granted, the policy seems to have been retired or at least kept quiet, since then.

Those of you who want Br. Nathanael silenced or defrocked, are you saying that you also wish the bishops of the canonical Greek Orthodox Church in America to be silenced or defrocked? Or is what's good for the goose, not good for the gander?

The idea of a white Christian political bloc, and advocating for its strengthening, seems non-heretical and to be distinct from actual heresy. After all, if people from a group of African nations got together and said, "We want to formulate a powerful political bloc of African nations, to protect our peoples against inroads from European powers," absolutely no one would object. Even if it were an Islamic political bloc, with Islamist goals, few would object to their right to associate and organize to protect their interests, however ethnically and religiously narrow.

Being against "mixing of races" is a very unsound concept which has no basis ("race" as in "white" versus "judaic" versus "black" doesn't really exist, scientifically speaking, plus there is no previous example for this in the lives of the Saints or in historic church policy, short of Greek Orthodox American policy recently). I am very much against such talk and it is very disturbing to me. I have a number of racially mixed couples in my own parish of Holy Protection in Austin, Texas.

http://www.orthodoxaustin.org




I for one have not called for him to be defrocked. I did ask the question concerning how far out you can go politically and remain in communion. I dont really know where that line is, so that is why I asked.

He does use his Monk status as cover. It gives him some credibility which is a shame. 
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: podkarpatska on May 15, 2013, 07:42:05 PM
The most pious and traditional Orthodox have also been the most welcoming and free of prejudice, in my experience.

Internetz say otherwise. At least in this part of the world.

I have to say I was nicely surprised by the activities of the hyper-Orthodox on this board, especially Anastasios. I hadn't expected such from you guys.

I tend to agree with Michal and then I read a comment like "social club Orthodox" and I just shake my head and sigh.

There's piety and there's pseudo-piety. I think Michal's "hyperdox" are the latter; they're all talk, basically. They are particularly prominent on the Internet. I admit to being one of them now and then. But if you go to a real traditionalist parish and meet the people there, I think you would get a different impression.

Frankly one could say the same about almost any real Orthodox parish of any jurisdiction. After all ,all Orthodox are traditional, some are just more traditional than others!  We call tend to get full of our own opinions online online and tend towards hyperbole more than needed to make our points from time to time.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: rakovsky on May 15, 2013, 11:31:42 PM
It was the hierarchy of the canonical Greek Archdiocese of North and South America (Ecumenical Patriarchate), which had a policy, several decades ago, of forbidding racially mixed marriages (this according to a priest who had written one of those "xx Questions on the Orthodox Church" books published in those days). Granted, the policy seems to have been retired or at least kept quiet, since then.
That's weird. Alexander Pushkin the leading Russian classical poet- naturally an Orthodox- was 1/4 black from Ethiopia. Besides, Russians, Ukrainians, and Georgians, are largely mixed with Asians, not to mention that the Indo-Iranian group itself is half Asian and half European.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: pmpn8rGPT on May 15, 2013, 11:36:42 PM
It was the hierarchy of the canonical Greek Archdiocese of North and South America (Ecumenical Patriarchate), which had a policy, several decades ago, of forbidding racially mixed marriages (this according to a priest who had written one of those "xx Questions on the Orthodox Church" books published in those days). Granted, the policy seems to have been retired or at least kept quiet, since then.
That's weird. Alexander Pushkin the leading Russian classical poet- naturally an Orthodox- was 1/4 black from Ethiopia. Besides, Russians, Ukrainians, and Georgians, are largely mixed with Asians, not to mention that the Indo-Iranian group itself is half Asian and half European.
Greeks are also mixed with Turks a lot.  

I would like to know more about this ruling on Interracial Marriage, can anyone provide sources?

God help me, I am trying so hard not to turn this into an Old Calendarist discussion.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: NicholasMyra on May 16, 2013, 12:26:21 AM
Those of you who want Br. Nathanael silenced or defrocked, are you saying that you also wish the bishops of the canonical Greek Orthodox Church in America to be silenced or defrocked? Or is what's good for the goose, not good for the gander?

If they did it know? Yes.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Iconodule on May 16, 2013, 08:32:17 AM
It was the hierarchy of the canonical Greek Archdiocese of North and South America (Ecumenical Patriarchate), which had a policy, several decades ago, of forbidding racially mixed marriages (this according to a priest who had written one of those "xx Questions on the Orthodox Church" books published in those days). Granted, the policy seems to have been retired or at least kept quiet, since then.

Those of you who want Br. Nathanael silenced or defrocked, are you saying that you also wish the bishops of the canonical Greek Orthodox Church in America to be silenced or defrocked?

As Michal said, yes, if the policy were ongoing. BTW, it was Fr. Stanley Harakas who wrote the "questions" book you allude to- he bases his position on the bizarre premise that God created the "races" and that we are somehow interfering with God's plan by mixing them. I hope that Fr. Stanley's position has changed since then.

Quote
The idea of a white Christian political bloc, and advocating for its strengthening, seems non-heretical and to be distinct from actual heresy. After all, if people from a group of African nations got together and said, "We want to formulate a powerful political bloc of African nations, to protect our peoples against inroads from European powers," absolutely no one would object.

When Europe is colonized and enslaved by foreign powers for a while, then your argument might start to make sense.

You are also confusing geographic and religious alliances with alliances based on race.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on May 16, 2013, 12:11:26 PM
It was the hierarchy of the canonical Greek Archdiocese of North and South America (Ecumenical Patriarchate), which had a policy, several decades ago, of forbidding racially mixed marriages (this according to a priest who had written one of those "xx Questions on the Orthodox Church" books published in those days). Granted, the policy seems to have been retired or at least kept quiet, since then.

Those of you who want Br. Nathanael silenced or defrocked, are you saying that you also wish the bishops of the canonical Greek Orthodox Church in America to be silenced or defrocked?

As Michal said, yes, if the policy were ongoing. BTW, it was Fr. Stanley Harakas who wrote the "questions" book you allude to- he bases his position on the bizarre premise that God created the "races" and that we are somehow interfering with God's plan by mixing them. I hope that Fr. Stanley's position has changed since then.

Quote
The idea of a white Christian political bloc, and advocating for its strengthening, seems non-heretical and to be distinct from actual heresy. After all, if people from a group of African nations got together and said, "We want to formulate a powerful political bloc of African nations, to protect our peoples against inroads from European powers," absolutely no one would object.

When Europe is colonized and enslaved by foreign powers for a while, then your argument might start to make sense.

You are also confusing geographic and religious alliances with alliances based on race.


There was a BBC documentary on a few years ago that gave me some better clarity on this issue. It is called "The Incredible Human Jounery" about human migration out of Africa.

It turns out that every person except for a few groups of modern Africans are all descended from a band of about 150 people who left Africa and crossed the Red Sea into the Middle East about 60,000 years ago. Races are merely an accommodation to climate and sexual preference.
It you put a band of people from Norway into equatorial Africa, they will be black in 30 generations. If you but Black people into Russian they will be  White skinned in about 30 generations.

Chinese look the way they do based on sexual preference. The type became sexually appealing at some point and they reinforced the look over time. When DNA tests are done, they too are descended from that same original band that left Africa.

So bans on race mixing or racist ideologies are certainly not God-Pleasing or scientifically sound IMHO
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Jonathan Gress on May 16, 2013, 01:09:43 PM
It was the hierarchy of the canonical Greek Archdiocese of North and South America (Ecumenical Patriarchate), which had a policy, several decades ago, of forbidding racially mixed marriages (this according to a priest who had written one of those "xx Questions on the Orthodox Church" books published in those days). Granted, the policy seems to have been retired or at least kept quiet, since then.

Those of you who want Br. Nathanael silenced or defrocked, are you saying that you also wish the bishops of the canonical Greek Orthodox Church in America to be silenced or defrocked?

As Michal said, yes, if the policy were ongoing. BTW, it was Fr. Stanley Harakas who wrote the "questions" book you allude to- he bases his position on the bizarre premise that God created the "races" and that we are somehow interfering with God's plan by mixing them. I hope that Fr. Stanley's position has changed since then.

Quote
The idea of a white Christian political bloc, and advocating for its strengthening, seems non-heretical and to be distinct from actual heresy. After all, if people from a group of African nations got together and said, "We want to formulate a powerful political bloc of African nations, to protect our peoples against inroads from European powers," absolutely no one would object.

When Europe is colonized and enslaved by foreign powers for a while, then your argument might start to make sense.

You are also confusing geographic and religious alliances with alliances based on race.


Some would argue that mass third world immigration is a kind of colonization, against which native people (whites, at least in Europe) have a right to organize against collectively.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: J Michael on May 16, 2013, 01:31:39 PM
It was the hierarchy of the canonical Greek Archdiocese of North and South America (Ecumenical Patriarchate), which had a policy, several decades ago, of forbidding racially mixed marriages (this according to a priest who had written one of those "xx Questions on the Orthodox Church" books published in those days). Granted, the policy seems to have been retired or at least kept quiet, since then.

Those of you who want Br. Nathanael silenced or defrocked, are you saying that you also wish the bishops of the canonical Greek Orthodox Church in America to be silenced or defrocked?

As Michal said, yes, if the policy were ongoing. BTW, it was Fr. Stanley Harakas who wrote the "questions" book you allude to- he bases his position on the bizarre premise that God created the "races" and that we are somehow interfering with God's plan by mixing them. I hope that Fr. Stanley's position has changed since then.

Quote
The idea of a white Christian political bloc, and advocating for its strengthening, seems non-heretical and to be distinct from actual heresy. After all, if people from a group of African nations got together and said, "We want to formulate a powerful political bloc of African nations, to protect our peoples against inroads from European powers," absolutely no one would object.

When Europe is colonized and enslaved by foreign powers for a while, then your argument might start to make sense.

You are also confusing geographic and religious alliances with alliances based on race.


Some would argue that mass third world immigration is a kind of colonization, against which native people (whites, at least in Europe) have a right to organize against collectively.

Uh...oh... 8)
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Jonathan Gress on May 16, 2013, 01:33:10 PM
It was the hierarchy of the canonical Greek Archdiocese of North and South America (Ecumenical Patriarchate), which had a policy, several decades ago, of forbidding racially mixed marriages (this according to a priest who had written one of those "xx Questions on the Orthodox Church" books published in those days). Granted, the policy seems to have been retired or at least kept quiet, since then.

Those of you who want Br. Nathanael silenced or defrocked, are you saying that you also wish the bishops of the canonical Greek Orthodox Church in America to be silenced or defrocked?

As Michal said, yes, if the policy were ongoing. BTW, it was Fr. Stanley Harakas who wrote the "questions" book you allude to- he bases his position on the bizarre premise that God created the "races" and that we are somehow interfering with God's plan by mixing them. I hope that Fr. Stanley's position has changed since then.

Quote
The idea of a white Christian political bloc, and advocating for its strengthening, seems non-heretical and to be distinct from actual heresy. After all, if people from a group of African nations got together and said, "We want to formulate a powerful political bloc of African nations, to protect our peoples against inroads from European powers," absolutely no one would object.

When Europe is colonized and enslaved by foreign powers for a while, then your argument might start to make sense.

You are also confusing geographic and religious alliances with alliances based on race.


Some would argue that mass third world immigration is a kind of colonization, against which native people (whites, at least in Europe) have a right to organize against collectively.

Uh...oh... 8)

Not that I'm arguing this line. ;)
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Santagranddad on May 16, 2013, 01:56:56 PM
It was the hierarchy of the canonical Greek Archdiocese of North and South America (Ecumenical Patriarchate), which had a policy, several decades ago, of forbidding racially mixed marriages (this according to a priest who had written one of those "xx Questions on the Orthodox Church" books published in those days). Granted, the policy seems to have been retired or at least kept quiet, since then.

Those of you who want Br. Nathanael silenced or defrocked, are you saying that you also wish the bishops of the canonical Greek Orthodox Church in America to be silenced or defrocked?

As Michal said, yes, if the policy were ongoing. BTW, it was Fr. Stanley Harakas who wrote the "questions" book you allude to- he bases his position on the bizarre premise that God created the "races" and that we are somehow interfering with God's plan by mixing them. I hope that Fr. Stanley's position has changed since then.

Quote
The idea of a white Christian political bloc, and advocating for its strengthening, seems non-heretical and to be distinct from actual heresy. After all, if people from a group of African nations got together and said, "We want to formulate a powerful political bloc of African nations, to protect our peoples against inroads from European powers," absolutely no one would object.

When Europe is colonized and enslaved by foreign powers for a while, then your argument might start to make sense.

You are also confusing geographic and religious alliances with alliances based on race.


Some would argue that mass third world immigration is a kind of colonization, against which native people (whites, at least in Europe) have a right to organize against collectively.

The Leader of the United Kingdom Independence Party, Michael Farage, has said in a television broadcast that Britain has seen more in modern times than have come in total since the time of the Norman invasion (1066 AD). The party is both anti-EU and unfettered immigration. The problem they identity is that too many too quickly cannot be assimilated, the host community feels alienated and public services overstretched. Some point out British rule of India. But Britons in a huge sub-continent peaked in about 1922 at 21,000. Birmingham alone has over 300,000 from the sub-continent (India, Pakistan and Bangladesh).

Any concerns I may have based on this notion of far too many, too quickly. I guess some in the USA may have similar worries. But I would hate the debate to be one of a fearful 'white' population feeling hatred to others on some strange and perhaps unscientific notions of race. I certainly find the images of so-called 'white supremacists' who look more as if they are intellectually and culturally a couple of biscuits short of the packet.

As an Orthodox Christian Christ's commandment to go into the world and preach the gospel to all men informs my response to all regardless of skin pigmentation, language or nationality.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Punch on May 16, 2013, 02:03:43 PM
There is basis, however, for the argument.  This is how the Roman Empire fell.  If a bunch of Germans started moving into the UK, and the Tommys got their knickers in a wad, everything would be OK.  But when it is "Brown People" moving in, now the big R word enters the picture.  That is why I would not oppose putting mines around our borders.  A mine really does not care what color you are when you step on it.

It was the hierarchy of the canonical Greek Archdiocese of North and South America (Ecumenical Patriarchate), which had a policy, several decades ago, of forbidding racially mixed marriages (this according to a priest who had written one of those "xx Questions on the Orthodox Church" books published in those days). Granted, the policy seems to have been retired or at least kept quiet, since then.

Those of you who want Br. Nathanael silenced or defrocked, are you saying that you also wish the bishops of the canonical Greek Orthodox Church in America to be silenced or defrocked?

As Michal said, yes, if the policy were ongoing. BTW, it was Fr. Stanley Harakas who wrote the "questions" book you allude to- he bases his position on the bizarre premise that God created the "races" and that we are somehow interfering with God's plan by mixing them. I hope that Fr. Stanley's position has changed since then.

Quote
The idea of a white Christian political bloc, and advocating for its strengthening, seems non-heretical and to be distinct from actual heresy. After all, if people from a group of African nations got together and said, "We want to formulate a powerful political bloc of African nations, to protect our peoples against inroads from European powers," absolutely no one would object.

When Europe is colonized and enslaved by foreign powers for a while, then your argument might start to make sense.

You are also confusing geographic and religious alliances with alliances based on race.


Some would argue that mass third world immigration is a kind of colonization, against which native people (whites, at least in Europe) have a right to organize against collectively.

Uh...oh... 8)

Not that I'm arguing this line. ;)
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Jonathan Gress on May 16, 2013, 02:09:31 PM
White nationalism is in fact stupid, but it's grasping at something which is real and which we need to pay attention to. Basically, governments have to put the interests of natives over those of foreigners; the opposite, globalist argument is that governments should sacrifice the interests of their own citizens in favor of the global good. A closely related argument is that governments should sacrifice the needs and interests of the current generation for the sake of future generations. Both are morally misguided.

The Church, on the other hand, should not make it into a racial thing. It's one thing to say Orthodox believers cannot marry non-Orthodox; it's quite another to say they can't marry non-Greeks or whatever, even if they are Orthodox.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Punch on May 16, 2013, 02:11:07 PM
White nationalism is in fact stupid, but it's grasping at something which is real and which we need to pay attention to. Basically, governments have to put the interests of natives over those of foreigners; the opposite, globalist argument is that governments should sacrifice the interests of their own citizens in favor of the global good. A closely related argument is that governments should sacrifice the needs and interests of the current generation for the sake of future generations. Both are morally misguided.

The Church, on the other hand, should not make it into a racial thing. It's one thing to say Orthodox believers cannot marry non-Orthodox; it's quite another to say they can't marry non-Greeks or whatever, even if they are Orthodox.

Agree completely.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Deep Roots on May 16, 2013, 02:42:48 PM
Looks like we have some folks who'd support the Golden Dawn Party if they were voting Greeks. hmm
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: J Michael on May 16, 2013, 02:46:46 PM
White nationalism is in fact stupid, but it's grasping at something which is real and which we need to pay attention to. Basically, governments have to put the interests of natives over those of foreigners; the opposite, globalist argument is that governments should sacrifice the interests of their own citizens in favor of the global good. A closely related argument is that governments should sacrifice the needs and interests of the current generation for the sake of future generations. Both are morally misguided.

The Church, on the other hand, should not make it into a racial thing. It's one thing to say Orthodox believers cannot marry non-Orthodox; it's quite another to say they can't marry non-Greeks or whatever, even if they are Orthodox.

Agree completely.

+2
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: podkarpatska on May 16, 2013, 03:52:19 PM
White nationalism is in fact stupid, but it's grasping at something which is real and which we need to pay attention to. Basically, governments have to put the interests of natives over those of foreigners; the opposite, globalist argument is that governments should sacrifice the interests of their own citizens in favor of the global good. A closely related argument is that governments should sacrifice the needs and interests of the current generation for the sake of future generations. Both are morally misguided.

The Church, on the other hand, should not make it into a racial thing. It's one thing to say Orthodox believers cannot marry non-Orthodox; it's quite another to say they can't marry non-Greeks or whatever, even if they are Orthodox.

Agree completely.

+2

But... the development of corporate globalisation since the second world war war and the immense capital it controls and its consequent impact on public policy decision making, has had as much to with population shifts as the policy of any country's government. Consumerism is a seductive weapon, and while there is populist discontent in many nations, cultures and religions, what can realistically be done?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Jonathan Gress on May 16, 2013, 04:03:31 PM
Well we still have a democratic process, so you can start by voting for and campaigning for patriotic politicians.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: J Michael on May 16, 2013, 04:05:09 PM
White nationalism is in fact stupid, but it's grasping at something which is real and which we need to pay attention to. Basically, governments have to put the interests of natives over those of foreigners; the opposite, globalist argument is that governments should sacrifice the interests of their own citizens in favor of the global good. A closely related argument is that governments should sacrifice the needs and interests of the current generation for the sake of future generations. Both are morally misguided.

The Church, on the other hand, should not make it into a racial thing. It's one thing to say Orthodox believers cannot marry non-Orthodox; it's quite another to say they can't marry non-Greeks or whatever, even if they are Orthodox.

Agree completely.

+2

But... the development of corporate globalisation since the second world war war and the immense capital it controls and its consequent impact on public policy decision making, has had as much to with population shifts as the policy of any country's government. Consumerism is a seductive weapon, and while there is populist discontent in many nations, cultures and religions, what can realistically be done?

About what--consumerism?  Buy and get by on less, for starters.  Or did you mean something else?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: J Michael on May 16, 2013, 04:06:44 PM
Well we still have a democratic process, so you can start by voting for and campaigning for patriotic politicians.

Uh...oh... 8)

Doesn't every politician consider him(or her)self "patriotic"?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Jonathan Gress on May 16, 2013, 04:14:38 PM
Well we still have a democratic process, so you can start by voting for and campaigning for patriotic politicians.

Uh...oh... 8)

Doesn't every politician consider him(or her)self "patriotic"?

Patriotic in your own estimation, of course. ;)

I suppose this is getting political. Are we supposed to move it to another forum now?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: J Michael on May 16, 2013, 04:17:09 PM
Well we still have a democratic process, so you can start by voting for and campaigning for patriotic politicians.

Uh...oh... 8)

Doesn't every politician consider him(or her)self "patriotic"?

Patriotic in your own estimation, of course. ;)

I suppose this is getting political. Are we supposed to move it to another forum now?

I think the mods will do that for us if we don't behave ourselves  ;).
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Jonathan Gress on May 16, 2013, 04:51:06 PM
Well we still have a democratic process, so you can start by voting for and campaigning for patriotic politicians.

Uh...oh... 8)

Doesn't every politician consider him(or her)self "patriotic"?

Patriotic in your own estimation, of course. ;)

I suppose this is getting political. Are we supposed to move it to another forum now?

I think the mods will do that for us if we don't behave ourselves  ;).

That's good, because I'm too lazy to start another thread myself.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: rakovsky on May 17, 2013, 12:51:57 AM
It was the hierarchy of the Greek Archdiocese of North and South America (Ecumenical Patriarchate), which had a policy, several decades ago, of forbidding racially mixed marriages (this according to a priest who had written one of those "xx Questions on the Orthodox Church" books published in those days). Granted, the policy seems to have been retired or at least kept quiet since then.
That's weird. Alexander Pushkin the leading Russian classical poet- naturally an Orthodox- was 1/4 black from Ethiopia. Besides, Russians, Ukrainians, and Georgians, are largely mixed with Asians, not to mention that the Indo-Iranian group itself is half Asian and half European.
Greeks are also mixed with Turks a lot.  
I actually put that but then deleted it as giving too many examples against the stupid, alleged rule.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Gunnarr on May 17, 2013, 02:05:19 AM
Looks like we have some folks who'd support the Golden Dawn Party if they were voting Greeks. hmm

I hope not! Not ever Metropolitan Seraphim supports the Golden Dawn!
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Avdima on July 04, 2013, 09:29:02 AM
There is basis, however, for the argument.  This is how the Roman Empire fell.  If a bunch of Germans started moving into the UK, and the Tommys got their knickers in a wad, everything would be OK.  But when it is "Brown People" moving in, now the big R word enters the picture.  That is why I would not oppose putting mines around our borders.  A mine really does not care what color you are when you step on it.

Wow that is really sick, sad and dare I say unchristian like thinking. :-[
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Punch on July 04, 2013, 10:19:44 AM
There is basis, however, for the argument.  This is how the Roman Empire fell.  If a bunch of Germans started moving into the UK, and the Tommys got their knickers in a wad, everything would be OK.  But when it is "Brown People" moving in, now the big R word enters the picture.  That is why I would not oppose putting mines around our borders.  A mine really does not care what color you are when you step on it.

Wow that is really sick, sad and dare I say unchristian like thinking. :-[

Tell me about Christian Mr. one post, in seach of, jurisdiction nothing. 
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Agabus on July 19, 2013, 11:53:39 AM
FWIW

http://www.pravmir.com/statement-from-the-chancery-of-the-rocor-synod-of-bishops/

Quote
The Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia has recently received repeated complaints about the activities of and statements made by a certain Nathanael (Kapner), who lives on the territory of the Western American Diocese, but has no relation to it.

The clergymen and laity of the Russian Church Abroad are hereby informed that the actions of Nathanael (Kapner) do not have the blessing of the Synod of Bishops.

Profoundly saddened by the state of his soul, we call upon Nathanael (Kapner) to refrain from posting on the Internet, to a life of repentance of peace in Christ, “where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all” (Colossians 3:11).

+KYRILL,
Archbishop of Western America and San Francisco
Secretary of the Synod of Bishops.

July 17, 2013
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: rakovsky on July 19, 2013, 12:00:06 PM
Quote
The Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia has recently received repeated complaints about the activities of and statements made by a certain Nathanael (Kapner), who lives on the territory of the Western American Diocese, but has no relation to it.
Perhaps he was active in the eastern diocese and moved to the western one, but lives in the mountains and does not belong to a parish there?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Santagranddad on July 19, 2013, 12:11:51 PM
Quote
The Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia has recently received repeated complaints about the activities of and statements made by a certain Nathanael (Kapner), who lives on the territory of the Western American Diocese, but has no relation to it.
Perhaps he was active in the eastern diocese and moved to the western one, but lives in the mountains and does not belong to a parish there?

Suspect he is more of a Lone Ranger, minus a mount or Tonto. The latter probably turned out to be spying on him and got turned away.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Asteriktos on July 19, 2013, 12:22:45 PM
Oh, so you too are continuing to persecute that righteous man!
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on July 19, 2013, 01:17:04 PM
FWIW

http://www.pravmir.com/statement-from-the-chancery-of-the-rocor-synod-of-bishops/

Quote
The Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia has recently received repeated complaints about the activities of and statements made by a certain Nathanael (Kapner), who lives on the territory of the Western American Diocese, but has no relation to it.

The clergymen and laity of the Russian Church Abroad are hereby informed that the actions of Nathanael (Kapner) do not have the blessing of the Synod of Bishops.

Profoundly saddened by the state of his soul, we call upon Nathanael (Kapner) to refrain from posting on the Internet, to a life of repentance of peace in Christ, “where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all” (Colossians 3:11).

+KYRILL,
Archbishop of Western America and San Francisco
Secretary of the Synod of Bishops.

July 17, 2013

Good, they really needed to do that.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: J Michael on July 19, 2013, 02:31:48 PM
Oh, so you too are continuing to persecute that righteous man!

How do you figure that?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Asteriktos on July 19, 2013, 02:35:43 PM
Oh, so you too are continuing to persecute that righteous man!

How do you figure that?

That could have been in purple, if that helps explain it. A joke, in other words. :)  I took the line from this story (http://www.monomakhos.com/five-good-reasons-not-to-visit-a-monastery/), which has been circulating in online Orthodox circles for years and years.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: J Michael on July 19, 2013, 03:40:54 PM
Oh, so you too are continuing to persecute that righteous man!

How do you figure that?

That could have been in purple, if that helps explain it. A joke, in other words. :)  I took the line from this story (http://www.monomakhos.com/five-good-reasons-not-to-visit-a-monastery/), which has been circulating in online Orthodox circles for years and years.

Thought you'd forgotten about the purple.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Asteriktos on July 19, 2013, 03:47:22 PM
It just gets tricky. 95% of what I say isn't serious. But sometimes the purple gives the wrong idea, because I'm semi-serious. I really need to do a rainbow of about 12 different colors, depending on the intended seriousness/humor ratio of the post content. Mixed would work as well, for example...

The polemical literature states clearly that sufficiency of attrition is not enough for even the penitent confessor to overcome the antidisestablishmentarianism of one's dispensationalistic concept of theistic determinism
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: J Michael on July 19, 2013, 04:00:15 PM
It just gets tricky. 95% of what I say isn't serious. But sometimes the purple gives the wrong idea, because I'm semi-serious. I really need to do a rainbow of about 12 different colors, depending on the intended seriousness/humor ratio of the post content. Mixed would work as well, for example...

The polemical literature states clearly that sufficiency of attrition is not enough for even the penitent confessor to overcome the antidisestablishmentarianism of one's dispensationalistic concept of theistic determinism


How 'bout this:  since 95% of what you say is non-serious, why not use purple only for everything else.  Then we'll know you're being non-non-serious without damaging our eyesight.  Unless, of course, that is your ulterior motive.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Santagranddad on July 19, 2013, 04:02:57 PM
I think I must have got off the train a couple of stops back, and a little colour blindness doesn't help. :laugh:
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: rakovsky on July 19, 2013, 04:23:57 PM
The polemical literature states clearly that sufficiency of attrition is not enough for even the penitent confessor to overcome the antidisestablishmentarianism of one's dispensationalistic concept of theistic determinism
According to polemical literature, being meek and repentant is not enough to overcome being a strict Calvinist?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Asteriktos on July 19, 2013, 06:02:20 PM
According to polemical literature, being meek and repentant is not enough to overcome being a strict Calvinist?

It's from a song (http://youtu.be/1HstTVi-TdQ), I was just quoting it  ;D

(http://i0.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/000/341/i-dunno-lol_1_.jpg)
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Dionysii on July 19, 2013, 07:54:31 PM
The polemical literature states clearly that sufficiency of attrition is not enough for even the penitent confessor to overcome the antidisestablishmentarianism of one's dispensationalistic concept of theistic determinism
According to polemical literature, being meek and repentant is not enough to overcome being a strict Calvinist?

If I am not mistaken, strict Calvinists (such as Still Waters Revival Books, for example) are old school protestants that are opposed to dispensationalism (i.e. rapture theory) which is an historically more recent movement that began only in the nineteenth century.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: wainscottbl on July 21, 2013, 01:59:16 PM
I found this thread looking for the post on Brother Nathaniel being condemned by the ROCOR, but in any case in relation to Brother Nathaniel, I have my doubts about him, a big reason, he makes not clear mention of what monastery he is part of. That being said for some reason I do enjoy his videos, though I wonder  if I will continue to watch them. It is not because I think he is an "antisemite" or self-hating Jew--he himself admits he was a Jew, but the self-hating theory has been made against him. I just doubt if he really is a monk for one. His videos have some good points and though they come off a bit strange, I think people are too quick to turn away from that sort of thing in being superficial and not able to look at the depth of a person. That being said a lot of what he said is stuff I already know and is nothing particularly informing. If I do not know the facts from the news or something he might mention, it is nothing suprising. I do think he does a good job of reminding us of of the Zionist control of things and I really do not want to get into an argument with people who think this is a conspiracy theory.

I also listen to Alex Jones, who I do not agree with on many issues, particularly his Americansit mindset and his libertarianism. The American founding has many problems in terms of freedom of religion and so forth. I will not get into that here, but libertarianism, appealing as it is, is self-contradicting. It is part of the Enlightenment mindset of a person having the liberty to believe what they want. I know that is putting it in a very simple manner, but to get into the depths of it, one would have to get into deeper stuff. Simply put the libertarian seems to say liberty as far as possible and as small a state as possible. While I am not a statist, I do think the libertarian idea of the state and people has its problems. I am big on Aristotle's idea of politics. Also I think why laws should not be excessive, they should outlaw immoral things. That is not to say every immoral thing. Adultery might be tolerated, and even prostitution. Augustine even argues for tolerating prostitution rather than outlawing it interestingly.

Anyway, Alex Jones actually teaches me something, even if I have to stomach his libertarianism and glorifying our Masonic founders. Brother Nathaniel is interesting and charming, but I really do not learn to much form him. So I do not detest him as some seem to do, but I do think there are problems and I would not give him money.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Shiny on July 21, 2013, 07:33:50 PM
It just gets tricky. 95% of what I say isn't serious. But sometimes the purple gives the wrong idea, because I'm semi-serious. I really need to do a rainbow of about 12 different colors, depending on the intended seriousness/humor ratio of the post content. Mixed would work as well, for example...

The polemical literature states clearly that sufficiency of attrition is not enough for even the penitent confessor to overcome the antidisestablishmentarianism of one's dispensationalistic concept of theistic determinism

How long did it take you to do the coloring?

It is beautiful.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Incognito777 on July 21, 2013, 11:04:17 PM
I read that he's part of a schismatic sect (some sort of Russian Old Calenderist group) but unfortunately I can't site my sources.

You should be more critical in your thinking. Schism occurs when one leaves the Church. Leaving heretics does not constitute schism, because heretics are not part of the Church. Read canon 15 of the First-Second Council (861). It honors the Orthodox who forsake heretical leaders even before they are condemned. But the point I need to emphasize is that Ecumenism has been anathematized and condemned. Saint Paul tells us that heretics are self-condemned --Titus 3:10-11.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Asteriktos on July 21, 2013, 11:06:16 PM
How long did it take you to do the coloring?

It is beautiful.

I cheated. I googled for a colored-text generator. ;)
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: TheTrisagion on July 22, 2013, 10:15:07 AM
I read that he's part of a schismatic sect (some sort of Russian Old Calenderist group) but unfortunately I can't site my sources.

You should be more critical in your thinking. Schism occurs when one leaves the Church. Leaving heretics does not constitute schism, because heretics are not part of the Church. Read canon 15 of the First-Second Council (861). It honors the Orthodox who forsake heretical leaders even before they are condemned. But the point I need to emphasize is that Ecumenism has been anathematized and condemned. Saint Paul tells us that heretics are self-condemned --Titus 3:10-11.
::)
(http://i.qkme.me/35v9fp.jpg)
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Jonathan Gress on July 22, 2013, 11:50:28 AM
Brother Nathaniel used to be with Abp Gregory of Colorado, whose history is complicated, but it involved being deposed more than once by different jurisdictions, ultimately leading to him setting up his own vagante jurisdiction. Br Nathaniel later joined ROCOR-MP, although I don't know if he is still with them. He was formerly deeply involved in debates about True Orthodoxy, although disproportionately concerned with gossip and rumors about various clergy rather than issues of faith. The obsession with the Jews came later and I think this is where he started seeing Putin as some anti-Western hero; around that time I think he joined ROCOR-MP.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: LBK on July 22, 2013, 11:58:41 AM
Brother Nathaniel used to be with Abp Gregory of Colorado, whose history is complicated, but it involved being deposed more than once by different jurisdictions, ultimately leading to him setting up his own vagante jurisdiction. Br Nathaniel later joined ROCOR-MP, although I don't know if he is still with them. He was formerly deeply involved in debates about True Orthodoxy, although disproportionately concerned with gossip and rumors about various clergy rather than issues of faith. The obsession with the Jews came later and I think this is where he started seeing Putin as some anti-Western hero; around that time I think he joined ROCOR-MP.

You must have missed this thread:

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,52520.0.html

which links to: http://www.synod.com/synod/eng2013/20130719_enkapner.html

Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: rakovsky on July 22, 2013, 01:15:55 PM
[quote author=Jonathan Gress link=topic=49713.msg956728#msg956728
You must have missed this thread:
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,52520.0.html
which links to: http://www.synod.com/synod/eng2013/20130719_enkapner.html
[/quote]
The linked statement says that he does not represent the views of the church or belong to that diocese in the west. Two reasons suggest he belongs to ROCOR. First, why would ROCOR feel compelled to disagree with him in a statement if he was not a member of their church? Second, the statement says he does not belong to the western diocese- but what about any other diocese? He came from the east coast, after all.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Santagranddad on July 22, 2013, 01:41:10 PM
Perhaps they are simply fed up with every Tom, Dick and Waynetta speculating that there is a link between them. For myself the gentleman concerned appears for all intents and purposes as a parody of an Orthodox monastic.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: IoanC on July 22, 2013, 01:44:39 PM
There are many simple ways to look at this. One which is: Brother Nathanael needs immediate help.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Santagranddad on July 22, 2013, 02:21:18 PM
There are many simple ways to look at this. One which is: Brother Nathanael needs immediate help.

I said that a very long time ago. One problem is that you may only be helped if you agree to be helped.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: 88Devin12 on July 22, 2013, 02:30:19 PM
I checked his YouTube page and he hasn't released a video about it, unless he mentions it in his rants... I have no desire to watch his stuff though.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: jah777 on July 23, 2013, 09:31:29 AM
As I understand it, Nathaniel is a layman and last belonged to ROCOR.  I could only speculate on Abp Kyrril's statement regarding Nathaniel having "no relation" to the Western American Diocese of ROCOR.  He could mean that he has no official relation as a member of the clergy or as a registered monastic, as he appears to be, and is merely a layman.  Or, he could mean that while he was received last into ROCOR, he is not regularly receiving the mysteries from, or confessing his sins to, or being guided by, any priest or confessor in ROCOR.  According to the canons, if a person does not attend church for three consecutive weeks, this person has excommunicated himself unless the person could not attend due to sickness or some other adverse circumstance.

It would seem that if Nathaniel truly had "no relation" to ROCOR, then it perhaps be out of place for Abp Kyrril to call on him to refrain from posting on the Internet and to live a life of repentance.  Whatever the status of Nathaniel in ROCOR, its seems that Abp Kyrril recognizes that Nathaniel at least believes that he himself is a member of ROCOR.

I think the content and information provided by Nathaniel has some merit, but it is troubling that it comes from a man falsely posing as a monk of the Orthodox Church.  It is my opinion that he would do best following Abp Kyrril's advice, and that this material which is political in nature be presented instead by a layman who does not think of himself as more than a layman, and who does not claim to speak as an Orthodox Christian.  If Nathaniel wants to be a monk, he should humble himself and become a monk.  If he wants to be a political commentator, he should humble himself and pose simply as a political commentator.    

Quote
Canon 80 of the Sixth Ecumenical Council

In case any Bishop, or Presbyter, or Deacon, or anyone else on the list of the Clergy, or any layman, without any graver necessity or any particular difficulty compelling him to absent himself from his own church for a very long time, fails to attend church on Sundays for three consecutive weeks, while living in the city, if he be a Cleric, let him be deposed from office; but if he be a layman, let him be removed from Communion.
 
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on July 23, 2013, 10:08:36 AM
As I understand it, Nathaniel is a layman and last belonged to ROCOR.  I could only speculate on Abp Kyrril's statement regarding Nathaniel having "no relation" to the Western American Diocese of ROCOR.  He could mean that he has no official relation as a member of the clergy or as a registered monastic, as he appears to be, and is merely a layman.  Or, he could mean that while he was received last into ROCOR, he is not regularly receiving the mysteries from, or confessing his sins to, or being guided by, any priest or confessor in ROCOR.  According to the canons, if a person does not attend church for three consecutive weeks, this person has excommunicated himself unless the person could not attend due to sickness or some other adverse circumstance.

It would seem that if Nathaniel truly had "no relation" to ROCOR, then it perhaps be out of place for Abp Kyrril to call on him to refrain from posting on the Internet and to live a life of repentance.  Whatever the status of Nathaniel in ROCOR, its seems that Abp Kyrril recognizes that Nathaniel at least believes that he himself is a member of ROCOR.

I think the content and information provided by Nathaniel has some merit, but it is troubling that it comes from a man falsely posing as a monk of the Orthodox Church.  It is my opinion that he would do best following Abp Kyrril's advice, and that this material which is political in nature be presented instead by a layman who does not think of himself as more than a layman, and who does not claim to speak as an Orthodox Christian.  If Nathaniel wants to be a monk, he should humble himself and become a monk.  If he wants to be a political commentator, he should humble himself and pose simply as a political commentator.    

Quote
Canon 80 of the Sixth Ecumenical Council

In case any Bishop, or Presbyter, or Deacon, or anyone else on the list of the Clergy, or any layman, without any graver necessity or any particular difficulty compelling him to absent himself from his own church for a very long time, fails to attend church on Sundays for three consecutive weeks, while living in the city, if he be a Cleric, let him be deposed from office; but if he be a layman, let him be removed from Communion.
 

We clarified this earlier. I also thought he was not really affiliated with Rocor. But when I spoke to Bishop Jerome about him he assured me that he was and that has seen Met Hillarion  commune him personally... Their concern for him is pastoral and they extend mercy to him. That is not to say Rocor endorses his activities. As we can now see they have asked him to stop. Where or how often he communes is unknown, but on a personal basis, as of last year, he was in good standing.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: podkarpatska on July 23, 2013, 10:32:29 AM
[quote author=Jonathan Gress link=topic=49713.msg956728#msg956728
You must have missed this thread:
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,52520.0.html
which links to: http://www.synod.com/synod/eng2013/20130719_enkapner.html
The linked statement says that he does not represent the views of the church or belong to that diocese in the west. Two reasons suggest he belongs to ROCOR. First, why would ROCOR feel compelled to disagree with him in a statement if he was not a member of their church? Second, the statement says he does not belong to the western diocese- but what about any other diocese? He came from the east coast, after all.
[/quote]

How much more clarity is needed?

This : "The clergymen and laity of the Russian Church Abroad are hereby informed that the actions of Nathanael (Kapner) do not have the blessing of the Synod of Bishops" came from the Chancery of the ROCOR Synod in New York and was signed by the Secretary of the Synod on official Synodal letterhead.

Perhaps Mor was correct and we need to be more theatrical in such matters a la "Beckett."
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: LBK on July 23, 2013, 10:36:12 AM
[quote author=Jonathan Gress link=topic=49713.msg956728#msg956728
You must have missed this thread:
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,52520.0.html
which links to: http://www.synod.com/synod/eng2013/20130719_enkapner.html
The linked statement says that he does not represent the views of the church or belong to that diocese in the west. Two reasons suggest he belongs to ROCOR. First, why would ROCOR feel compelled to disagree with him in a statement if he was not a member of their church? Second, the statement says he does not belong to the western diocese- but what about any other diocese? He came from the east coast, after all.

How much more clarity is needed?

This : "The clergymen and laity of the Russian Church Abroad are hereby informed that the actions of Nathanael (Kapner) do not have the blessing of the Synod of Bishops" came from the Chancery of the ROCOR Synod in New York and was signed by the Secretary of the Synod on official Synodal letterhead.

Perhaps Mor was correct and we need to be more theatrical in such matters a la "Beckett."
[/quote]

THANK YOU!!
:-*

Now let's see how many folks will continue to insist Nathaniel is kosher. Pun intended.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Santagranddad on July 23, 2013, 11:19:11 AM
[quote author=Jonathan Gress link=topic=49713.msg956728#msg956728
You must have missed this thread:
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,52520.0.html
which links to: http://www.synod.com/synod/eng2013/20130719_enkapner.html
The linked statement says that he does not represent the views of the church or belong to that diocese in the west. Two reasons suggest he belongs to ROCOR. First, why would ROCOR feel compelled to disagree with him in a statement if he was not a member of their church? Second, the statement says he does not belong to the western diocese- but what about any other diocese? He came from the east coast, after all.

How much more clarity is needed?

This : "The clergymen and laity of the Russian Church Abroad are hereby informed that the actions of Nathanael (Kapner) do not have the blessing of the Synod of Bishops" came from the Chancery of the ROCOR Synod in New York and was signed by the Secretary of the Synod on official Synodal letterhead.

Perhaps Mor was correct and we need to be more theatrical in such matters a la "Beckett."

THANK YOU!!
:-*

Now let's see how many folks will continue to insist Nathaniel is kosher. Pun intended.
[/quote]

Oh, dear dear, a kashrut monk, whatever next bagels with bacon...?   :-*
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: wainscottbl on July 23, 2013, 02:47:54 PM
As I understand it, Nathaniel is a layman and last belonged to ROCOR.  I could only speculate on Abp Kyrril's statement regarding Nathaniel having "no relation" to the Western American Diocese of ROCOR.  He could mean that he has no official relation as a member of the clergy or as a registered monastic, as he appears to be, and is merely a layman.  Or, he could mean that while he was received last into ROCOR, he is not regularly receiving the mysteries from, or confessing his sins to, or being guided by, any priest or confessor in ROCOR.  According to the canons, if a person does not attend church for three consecutive weeks, this person has excommunicated himself unless the person could not attend due to sickness or some other adverse circumstance.

It would seem that if Nathaniel truly had "no relation" to ROCOR, then it perhaps be out of place for Abp Kyrril to call on him to refrain from posting on the Internet and to live a life of repentance.  Whatever the status of Nathaniel in ROCOR, its seems that Abp Kyrril recognizes that Nathaniel at least believes that he himself is a member of ROCOR.

I think the content and information provided by Nathaniel has some merit, but it is troubling that it comes from a man falsely posing as a monk of the Orthodox Church.  It is my opinion that he would do best following Abp Kyrril's advice, and that this material which is political in nature be presented instead by a layman who does not think of himself as more than a layman, and who does not claim to speak as an Orthodox Christian.  If Nathaniel wants to be a monk, he should humble himself and become a monk.  If he wants to be a political commentator, he should humble himself and pose simply as a political commentator.    

Quote
Canon 80 of the Sixth Ecumenical Council

In case any Bishop, or Presbyter, or Deacon, or anyone else on the list of the Clergy, or any layman, without any graver necessity or any particular difficulty compelling him to absent himself from his own church for a very long time, fails to attend church on Sundays for three consecutive weeks, while living in the city, if he be a Cleric, let him be deposed from office; but if he be a layman, let him be removed from Communion.
 


I think you said it perfectly. I always found it strange that Brother Nathaniel never mentioned where he was a monk, though I guessed somewhere in the west like the Pacific Northwest due to the landscape. And if he is intentionally lying there is something malicious to that that gives a lot of discredit to him. Besides, as much as I rant about the Jews among friends and family, I am not sure a monk should be doing so as his main mission since he should be more about prayer and the simplicity of a life dedicated to prayer and work.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Jonathan Gress on July 23, 2013, 04:18:28 PM
Brother Nathaniel used to be with Abp Gregory of Colorado, whose history is complicated, but it involved being deposed more than once by different jurisdictions, ultimately leading to him setting up his own vagante jurisdiction. Br Nathaniel later joined ROCOR-MP, although I don't know if he is still with them. He was formerly deeply involved in debates about True Orthodoxy, although disproportionately concerned with gossip and rumors about various clergy rather than issues of faith. The obsession with the Jews came later and I think this is where he started seeing Putin as some anti-Western hero; around that time I think he joined ROCOR-MP.

You must have missed this thread:

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,52520.0.html

which links to: http://www.synod.com/synod/eng2013/20130719_enkapner.html



I didn't say he was acting with the synod's blessing. That is a separate issue. What is not under dispute is that he did indeed join ROCOR-MP after being in various TO jurisdictions.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Dionysii on July 23, 2013, 10:43:01 PM
Brother Nathaniel ... he makes not clear mention of what monastery he is part of. That being said for some reason I do enjoy his videos, though I wonder  if I will continue to watch them. It is not because I think he is an "antisemite" or self-hating Jew--he himself admits he was a Jew, but the self-hating theory has been made against him. I just doubt if he really is a monk for one. His videos have some good points and though they come off a bit strange, I think people are too quick to turn away from that sort of thing in being superficial and not able to look at the depth of a person. That being said a lot of what he said is stuff I already know and is nothing particularly informing. If I do not know the facts from the news or something he might mention, it is nothing suprising. I do think he does a good job of reminding us of the Zionist control of things and I really do not want to get into an argument with people who think this is a conspiracy theory.

I also listen to Alex Jones, who I do not agree with on many issues, particularly his Americanist mindset and his libertarianism. The American founding has many problems in terms of freedom of religion and so forth. I will not get into that here, but libertarianism, appealing as it is, is self-contradicting. It is part of the Enlightenment mindset ...

Alex Jones actually teaches me something, even if I have to stomach his libertarianism and glorifying our Masonic founders. Brother Nathaniel is interesting and charming, but I really do not learn to much form him. So I do not detest him as some seem to do

Bravo.  Good words and a thoughtful post.  
Although I confess I do not regularly watch Brother Nathaniel's videos, I am not offended from those that I have seen.  
Nor do I find what he says to be inaccurate.  He speaks the truth.

http://www.synod.com/synod/eng2013/20130719_enkapner.html
This decree deliberately distances ROCOR from Brother Nathaniel's words and actions, and
the scripture quoted in the decree implies that Brother Nathaniel's words are racist.  
If the disgusting major American media ever connected Brother Nathaniel to ROCOR, then it is conceivable that they would publicly excoriate ROCOR big time.
Frankly, I think Brother Nathaniel is more in accord with the spirit of truth and righteousness than the ROCOR synod.  
ROCOR's condemnation strikes me as motivated for the sake of their public image and worldly reputation and to preempt any media condemnation.
Plainly speaking the truth in the west is politically incorrect, and Brother Nathaniel is paying the price for it.

--------------------------------------------------------

I also concur on Alex Jones.  I do not follow him, and I shook my head and smiled at a few absurdities he has looked into (Obama's alleged communist connection being one of the more daft).  Even if he is occasionally off track, Jone's questioning of the status quo exhibits healthy critical thinking regardless of whether his conservative bias is hip or not with the left.

Wayne Madsen is a muckraker that digs much deeper and lacks Jones's americanist/right of centre bias.
http://www.waynemadsenreport.com

EDIT:
I do think he does a good job of reminding us of the Zionist control of things, and I really do not want to get into an argument with people who think this is a conspiracy theory.
Peace, brother!
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Dionysii on July 23, 2013, 10:53:00 PM
He was formerly deeply involved in debates about True Orthodoxy, although disproportionately concerned with gossip and rumors about various clergy rather than issues of faith. The obsession with the Jews came later and I think this is where he started seeing Putin as some anti-Western hero; around that time I think he joined ROCOR-MP.

I didn't say he was acting with the synod's blessing. That is a separate issue. What is not under dispute is that he did indeed join ROCOR-MP after being in various TO jurisdictions.

I think you have made a good point that Brother Nathaniel's videos, cultural commentaries, and politics are a separate issue from his particular synod.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Ebor on July 23, 2013, 10:53:34 PM
How is the use of suggestion and innuendo in "accord with the spirit of truth" one wonders.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: ilyazhito on July 23, 2013, 11:25:05 PM
In the last few months I've started viewing the videos of Brother Nathaniel Kapner. I realize that he is a controversial figure, and that he also claims to be an Orthodox brother ( ROCOR I heard).  Is this true?  Does ROCOR actually sanction such a figure  controversial as him.in their monastic ranks?  Or is he more an independent monk?
No. ROCOR has actually issued a resolution condemning his message, and the resolution is signed by Archbishop Kyrill of San Francisco. The article is at  http://www.russianorthodoxchurch.ws/synod/eng2013/20130719_enkapner.html (http://www.russianorthodoxchurch.ws/synod/eng2013/20130719_enkapner.html). I read some of his content. Turns out he is a nutcase who wears an overlarge pectoral cross, a white skouphos :o, and seems to rant about Jews. Be careful about him.   
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: wainscottbl on July 23, 2013, 11:51:31 PM
I think it goes deeper than the Jews. I think people need to wake up about the Jews and stop being politically correct and many of his listeners are smart enough to listen to that, just like many of Alex Jones listeners are smart enough to look past his libertarian contradictions of principle. The Jews do have a relatively strong place in things compared to their small population, but it is more than that. Sort of like when Alex Jones talks about certain groups running things it is not a black and white conspiracy with men in secret rooms brainwashing us. I think Brother Nathaniel is useful and enjoyable, but I do admit he overdoes the Jewish thing to the point of not saying much in the end. At least Alex Jones gets to some key issues.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Dionysii on July 24, 2013, 03:42:07 AM
I confess I do not regularly watch Brother Nathaniel's videos

To be fair, neither do I follow Abraham Foxman (of the Anti-Defamation League), but I do give him credit for acquiring sobriety over time. 
A time existed not so long ago when the mere mention of Nazi-Zionist cooperation would enrage most pro-Israeli Jews like the ADL or the Simon Wiesenthal Centre.  However, having come to terms with historical facts, Foxman actually came around to acknowledging and even wholeheartedly supporting the 1934 Nazi-Zionist agreement and authored the Afterword to the 25th anniversary edition of Edwin Black's book on the subject 'The Transfer Agreement':
http://www.thecuttingedgenews.com/index.php?article=11614
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/289751-1

Unlike Edwin Black who is pro-Israel and thinks highly of the agreement made with the Nazis, Lenni Brenner (a Jewish Marxist) has written books on the same history from a perspective which is critical of the Nazis and the leaders of the Israeli statehood movement. 
http://www.marxists.org/history/etol/document/mideast/agedict/notice.htm

While I do not concur with condemnations of Brother Nathaniel's videos, by way of constructive criticism, I think that Brother Nathaniel's videos might come off as much more well rounded if he included a few more Jewish as well as leftist sources that consolidated and perhaps even developed his perspective.   

Other considerations of which he is aware and would do well to emphasize a bit more often: 

1) Demons are the enemies at the most fundamental level of conspiracy - not jews who are flesh and blood men just like us. 
2) Biblically, gentile power has ruled the world ever since Nebuchadnezzar conquered Jerusalem and God spake to the Jews through the Prophet Habakkuk saying "Ye are not my people, and I am not your God."  The world is still ruled by gentile power, and no amount of Jewish conspiracy (real or imagined) will change that until the appointed time when the Jews are regathered as outlined by the prophet Ezekiel. 
3) The distinction between Jews and Zionists should be emphasized.  Conservative critics of Zionism particularly come off as racist when they make crudely worded statements about the "Jews" behind a given problem when they could easily be more specific.
4) Many Jews and others consider it hypocritical to criticize the crimes of Israel while looking the other way at the crimes of other states such as Saudi Arabia, Armenia, or Greece among others.  I would agree with that.  We could go into details, but all modern states are evil - not merely Israel.  Saudi Arabia, for example, is easily more barbaric than Israel.  Nationalism and modern statehood is a part of world apostasy. 
5) I rather agree with the Jewish majority who disbelieves theories about Jewish genetics.  in 'War Against the Weak', Edwin Black wrote about the scientistic racist eugenics movement in America and Germany which is the direct father of the modern genetics which is so now touted as an exact and irrefutable science (i.e. DNA) just as eugenics was previously.
http://www.waragainsttheweak.com

I believe that the Protocols of Zion are genuine.  However, once these documents were endorsed as genuine by fascists like Adolf Hitler and Henry Ford, only a maverick anti-capitalist would bother to read them.  Critics of Zionism like Brother Nathaniel would do themselves a favor to become more familiar with the rich literature of the political left against Zionism that is more sophisticated and logical than the bone-headed racial theories of the 1920's that smack of Social Darwinism.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: jah777 on July 24, 2013, 08:11:02 AM
3) The distinction between Jews and Zionists should be emphasized.  Conservative critics of Zionism particularly come off as racist when they make crudely worded statements about the "Jews" behind a given problem when they could easily be more specific. 

There is an understandable need to make distinctions to show that one is not against Jews for being Jews; but is rather against certain anti-Christian, criminal, immoral, globalist, terrorist, and genocidal movements led predominantly by Jews and Jewish networks.  However, the Jews vs. Zionists distinction seems inadequate, particularly if the subject is examined historically and globally.  Authors such as E. Michael Jones, for instance, who wrote “The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit: And Its Impact on World History”, speak of the major role of Jews in various revolutionary and anti-Christian movements which pre-dated the Zionist movement.  Winston Churchill spoke of the conflict in his time between Zionist Jews and the Jewish-led movements towards international Communism, including Jewish Bolshevism (http://www.patriot.dk/churchill.html).  Zionism and Jewish Bolshevism are examples of major Jewish movements in our recent history which have had disastrous results, however it would be wrong to lump them both under the label of “Zionism”.   

When one refers to “Zionism”, one is typically referring to the movement which began in the 19th century to establish a nation state for people of Jewish heritage on the territory referred to as the Land of Israel.  “Zionists” are referred to as those Jews who belong to the State of Israel, support the State of Israel, and assist the State of Israel.  Many Zionists, however, occupy positions of economic and political power in governments throughout the world.  Whereas there was conflict prior to the establishment of the State of Israel between Zionists and Jews promoting international Communism, I wonder if these movements have now been combined?  Now that the State of Israel has been established, Zionists seem to be focused on expansion and global domination, both through the State of Israel and through the efforts of Zionists who occupy key positions of power in the US and in other countries.  This expansionist movement may satisfy both the historical Zionists and the objectives of Jewish globalists. 

I say this just to point out the problem with terminology.  Kapner and others point out the major Jewish role in media, politics, banking, social policies, and other movements that one could say tends to further the de-Christianization of society and the globalist objectives which prepare the way for the Antichrist.  To understand this phenomena, however, it is important to look at the subject of Jewish movements historically and globally which are much greater than simply the establishment of a nation state for Jews.  Also, the role of non-Jewish Zionists in serving the aims of Zionist Israel and the objectives of various Jewish movements in society and internationally has to be understood.  In other words, it is a very complex subject that doesn't lend itself to simple distinctions.       
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: podkarpatska on July 24, 2013, 09:52:10 AM
I normally wouldn't comment on conspiracy theories or try to persuade the true believers of the logical fallacies underlying all of them.

However, mixing them into Religious Faith is a grave error as the conflation of the two allows God's true enemies to argue effectively with many against religious belief.

Also, the science of genetics is not "pseudo-science" nor does it in any way connect itself to the ideologically motivated, noxious and thoroughly discredited process endorsed by the 20th century totalitarians called "eugenics." Of course since we had a "debate" earlier this year about geocentrism I suppose I should not be surprised.

Non Orthodox need to know that true Faith is not a crazed, anti thinking cult like some portray it to be.

 
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: jah777 on July 24, 2013, 12:32:10 PM
This is a response from Nathaniel, which he posted on another forum with the words "This Is A Public Statement and May Be Published On All Internet Venues".  So, I post it here for informational purposes:

Quote
In response to Abp Kyrill's `Statement' against me, first of all please SEE:
http://brothernathanaelfoundation.org/about -

"Brother Nathanael is a monastic with the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Of
Russia (ROCOR) where he is blessed by Bishop Jerome as a "poslushnik"/"novice"
monk and to pursue a public ministry."

Archbishop Kyrill of San Francisco did not censure me for any sin or sins on my
part but rather for exercising my God-given right of freedom of speech.(Please
note that I am a regular communicant in good standing at the Synodal Cathedral
in Manhattan.)

It's one thing for a hierarch to censure a member of the Church for sin but
quite another for a hierarch to attempt to muzzle the mouth of one exposing the
works of darkness.

Abp Kyrill over-stepped his ecclesial bounds with regard to me and the Brother
Nathanael Foundation of which I am responsible to and thus he was out of order.
(I have learned that the majority of the voting bishops knew nothing of the
'statement' until after it was posted.)

And as Abp Kyrill is not my Spiritual Father in no position to know the state of
my soul, he was out-of-order in stating that he deplored the state of my soul.

Thus, I continue my public ministry with a clear conscience, with the
acknowledgment of such by the chief hierarch of ROCOR, (Metropolitan Hilarion),
and most of all, with a strong sense of my calling from Christ, my God and my
Defender.

This Is A Public Statement and May Be Published On All Internet Venues.

+Brother Nathanael Kapner
"Poslushnik"/"Novice" Monk
Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia (ROCOR)
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: mike on July 24, 2013, 12:58:00 PM
Yawn...
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Santagranddad on July 24, 2013, 01:13:31 PM
My feeling was it would not shut him up, and now am sadly proved right. The humility of this guy is one of the most striking aspects of the press release, not!
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Dionysii on July 24, 2013, 01:16:21 PM
There is an understandable need to make distinctions to show that one is not against Jews for being Jews ...
:)
Discerning and charitable words.  Well said.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: mike on July 24, 2013, 01:17:52 PM
In my country novitiates peel potatoes instead of becoming internet celebrities.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Santagranddad on July 24, 2013, 01:31:40 PM
In my country novitiates peel potatoes instead of becoming internet celebrities.

Humble and hidden not an actor on a grand stage.........
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: TheTrisagion on July 24, 2013, 01:35:10 PM
I guess Metropolitan Hilarion needs to come out with a statement now...
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: stanley123 on July 24, 2013, 01:41:21 PM
The Jews do have a relatively strong place in things compared to their small population, ...

  Kapner and others point out the major Jewish role in media, politics, banking, social policies, and other movements ....       

"In Commentary in April 2007, Charles Murray, the coauthor of The Bell Curve (1994), again made the claim that “Jews are smarter” than everyone else (Murray, 2007)."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3190562/

"In the sciences, Jews have won 22 percent of all the Nobel Prizes ever awarded - 29 percent of the prizes since 1950, after the Holocaust destroyed a third of their numbers. Given their small population, Jews should have earned only one of the 502 Nobels awarded for physics, chemistry, medicine and physiology. They have won 123."
http://www.jewishachievement.com/about/about.html

Does the evidence show that Jews are smarter than everyone else?

Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Dionysii on July 24, 2013, 01:59:27 PM
Brother Nathaniel has prudently stated on his homepage that he "speaks and writes as a former Jew--now an Orthodox Christian--and not in any official capacity with ROCOR."
http://brothernathanaelfoundation.org/about

Quote from: Archbishop Kyrill
... the actions of Nathanael (Kapner) do not have the blessing of the Synod of Bishops. ...
+KYRILL,
Archbishop of Western America and San Francisco
Secretary of the Synod of Bishops.
July 17, 2013
http://www.synod.com/synod/eng2013/20130719_enkapner.html

Quote from: jah 777
... I have learned that the majority of the voting bishops knew nothing of the 'statement' until after it was posted. ...
+Brother Nathanael Kapner
According to Brother Nathaniel, Archbishop Kyrill has made a public condemnation of a laymen in the jurisdiction of another bishop while falsely claiming the consent of other bishops who in fact knew nothing about it at the time.  If this is true and consistent with Archbishop Kyrill's character, then it might be revealing to learn more about his history.  
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Dionysii on July 24, 2013, 02:03:46 PM
"In Commentary in April 2007, Charles Murray, the coauthor of The Bell Curve (1994), again made the claim that “Jews are smarter” than everyone else (Murray, 2007)."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3190562/

Does the evidence show that Jews are smarter than everyone else?
I remember when that particular book, 'The Bell Curve', was published in the 1990's.
I specifically remember that it was widely critiqued and denounced as racist because, among other factors, it used statistics in a biased way to assert that blacks were intellectually inferior.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: TheTrisagion on July 24, 2013, 02:04:45 PM
Brother Nathaniel has prudently stated on his homepage that he "speaks and writes as a former Jew--now an Orthodox Christian--and not in any official capacity with ROCOR."
http://brothernathanaelfoundation.org/about

Quote from: Archbishop Kyrill
... the actions of Nathanael (Kapner) do not have the blessing of the Synod of Bishops. ...
+KYRILL,
Archbishop of Western America and San Francisco
Secretary of the Synod of Bishops.
July 17, 2013
http://www.synod.com/synod/eng2013/20130719_enkapner.html

Quote from: jah 777
... I have learned that the majority of the voting bishops knew nothing of the 'statement' until after it was posted. ...
+Brother Nathanael Kapner
According to Brother Nathaniel, Archbishop Kyrill has made a public condemnation of a laymen in the jurisdiction of another bishop while falsely claiming the consent of other bishops who in fact knew nothing about it at the time.  If this is true and consistent with Archbishop Kyrill's character, then it might be revealing to learn more about his history.  

Ummm, if I was a betting man, I would probably take the Archbishop's word over some lunatic running around with his homemade pectoral cross and monk costume he bought online.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Dionysii on July 24, 2013, 02:15:38 PM
"In Commentary in April 2007, Charles Murray, the coauthor of The Bell Curve (1994), again made the claim that “Jews are smarter” than everyone else (Murray, 2007)."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3190562/

Endorsing Racism: The Story of The Bell Curve
By Aaron Swartz
http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/shifting3
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Asteriktos on July 24, 2013, 04:18:04 PM
The Jews do have a relatively strong place in things compared to their small population, ...

  Kapner and others point out the major Jewish role in media, politics, banking, social policies, and other movements ....       

"In Commentary in April 2007, Charles Murray, the coauthor of The Bell Curve (1994), again made the claim that “Jews are smarter” than everyone else (Murray, 2007)."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3190562/

"In the sciences, Jews have won 22 percent of all the Nobel Prizes ever awarded - 29 percent of the prizes since 1950, after the Holocaust destroyed a third of their numbers. Given their small population, Jews should have earned only one of the 502 Nobels awarded for physics, chemistry, medicine and physiology. They have won 123."
http://www.jewishachievement.com/about/about.html

Does the evidence show that Jews are smarter than everyone else?

I've said multiple times that the Jews were smarter than white people, but I generally just do this to poke fun at people making certain anti-Zionist or anti-Jewish claims. In reality I very much doubt there is much difference in terms of genetics. As I said recently (in this thread? I don't recall)  it's about culture (or subculture, or whatever). 
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Santagranddad on July 24, 2013, 04:24:42 PM
This is a response from Nathaniel, which he posted on another forum with the words "This Is A Public Statement and May Be Published On All Internet Venues".  So, I post it here for informational purposes:

Quote
In response to Abp Kyrill's `Statement' against me, first of all please SEE:
http://brothernathanaelfoundation.org/about -

"Brother Nathanael is a monastic with the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Of
Russia (ROCOR) where he is blessed by Bishop Jerome as a "poslushnik"/"novice"
monk and to pursue a public ministry."

Archbishop Kyrill of San Francisco did not censure me for any sin or sins on my
part but rather for exercising my God-given right of freedom of speech.(Please
note that I am a regular communicant in good standing at the Synodal Cathedral
in Manhattan.)

It's one thing for a hierarch to censure a member of the Church for sin but
quite another for a hierarch to attempt to muzzle the mouth of one exposing the
works of darkness.

Abp Kyrill over-stepped his ecclesial bounds with regard to me and the Brother
Nathanael Foundation of which I am responsible to and thus he was out of order.
(I have learned that the majority of the voting bishops knew nothing of the
'statement' until after it was posted.)

And as Abp Kyrill is not my Spiritual Father in no position to know the state of
my soul, he was out-of-order in stating that he deplored the state of my soul.

Thus, I continue my public ministry with a clear conscience, with the
acknowledgment of such by the chief hierarch of ROCOR, (Metropolitan Hilarion),
and most of all, with a strong sense of my calling from Christ, my God and my
Defender.

This Is A Public Statement and May Be Published On All Internet Venues.

+Brother Nathanael Kapner
"Poslushnik"/"Novice" Monk
Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia (ROCOR)

I have looked on his website and this missive is not to be found there....
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: stanley123 on July 24, 2013, 04:49:17 PM
The Jews do have a relatively strong place in things compared to their small population, ...

  Kapner and others point out the major Jewish role in media, politics, banking, social policies, and other movements ....       

"In Commentary in April 2007, Charles Murray, the coauthor of The Bell Curve (1994), again made the claim that “Jews are smarter” than everyone else (Murray, 2007)."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3190562/

"In the sciences, Jews have won 22 percent of all the Nobel Prizes ever awarded - 29 percent of the prizes since 1950, after the Holocaust destroyed a third of their numbers. Given their small population, Jews should have earned only one of the 502 Nobels awarded for physics, chemistry, medicine and physiology. They have won 123."
http://www.jewishachievement.com/about/about.html

Does the evidence show that Jews are smarter than everyone else?

I've said multiple times that the Jews were smarter than white people, but I generally just do this to poke fun at people making certain anti-Zionist or anti-Jewish claims. In reality I very much doubt there is much difference in terms of genetics. As I said recently (in this thread? I don't recall)  it's about culture (or subculture, or whatever). 
So Jews are smarter than everyone else, but this is not due to genetics, but to the Jewish culture?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Schultz on July 24, 2013, 04:50:16 PM
This is a response from Nathaniel, which he posted on another forum with the words "This Is A Public Statement and May Be Published On All Internet Venues".  So, I post it here for informational purposes:

Quote
In response to Abp Kyrill's `Statement' against me, first of all please SEE:
http://brothernathanaelfoundation.org/about -

"Brother Nathanael is a monastic with the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Of
Russia (ROCOR) where he is blessed by Bishop Jerome as a "poslushnik"/"novice"
monk and to pursue a public ministry."

Archbishop Kyrill of San Francisco did not censure me for any sin or sins on my
part but rather for exercising my God-given right of freedom of speech.(Please
note that I am a regular communicant in good standing at the Synodal Cathedral
in Manhattan.)

It's one thing for a hierarch to censure a member of the Church for sin but
quite another for a hierarch to attempt to muzzle the mouth of one exposing the
works of darkness.

Abp Kyrill over-stepped his ecclesial bounds with regard to me and the Brother
Nathanael Foundation of which I am responsible to and thus he was out of order.
(I have learned that the majority of the voting bishops knew nothing of the
'statement' until after it was posted.)

And as Abp Kyrill is not my Spiritual Father in no position to know the state of
my soul, he was out-of-order in stating that he deplored the state of my soul.

Thus, I continue my public ministry with a clear conscience, with the
acknowledgment of such by the chief hierarch of ROCOR, (Metropolitan Hilarion),
and most of all, with a strong sense of my calling from Christ, my God and my
Defender.

This Is A Public Statement and May Be Published On All Internet Venues.

+Brother Nathanael Kapner
"Poslushnik"/"Novice" Monk
Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia (ROCOR)

I have looked on his website and this missive is not to be found there....

It is on another site, "The Jews Who Rule America" - http://www.realjewnews.com/?p=836#comment-1458395
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Asteriktos on July 24, 2013, 04:52:29 PM
I wouldn't guess that Jews are actually smarter, just that they come from a background that pushes them to excel, and so more of them do so. They are pressured to "make something of themselves," so many do.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Santagranddad on July 24, 2013, 04:53:53 PM
This is a response from Nathaniel, which he posted on another forum with the words "This Is A Public Statement and May Be Published On All Internet Venues".  So, I post it here for informational purposes:

Quote
In response to Abp Kyrill's `Statement' against me, first of all please SEE:
http://brothernathanaelfoundation.org/about -

"Brother Nathanael is a monastic with the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Of
Russia (ROCOR) where he is blessed by Bishop Jerome as a "poslushnik"/"novice"
monk and to pursue a public ministry."

Archbishop Kyrill of San Francisco did not censure me for any sin or sins on my
part but rather for exercising my God-given right of freedom of speech.(Please
note that I am a regular communicant in good standing at the Synodal Cathedral
in Manhattan.)

It's one thing for a hierarch to censure a member of the Church for sin but
quite another for a hierarch to attempt to muzzle the mouth of one exposing the
works of darkness.

Abp Kyrill over-stepped his ecclesial bounds with regard to me and the Brother
Nathanael Foundation of which I am responsible to and thus he was out of order.
(I have learned that the majority of the voting bishops knew nothing of the
'statement' until after it was posted.)

And as Abp Kyrill is not my Spiritual Father in no position to know the state of
my soul, he was out-of-order in stating that he deplored the state of my soul.

Thus, I continue my public ministry with a clear conscience, with the
acknowledgment of such by the chief hierarch of ROCOR, (Metropolitan Hilarion),
and most of all, with a strong sense of my calling from Christ, my God and my
Defender.

This Is A Public Statement and May Be Published On All Internet Venues.

+Brother Nathanael Kapner
"Poslushnik"/"Novice" Monk
Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia (ROCOR)

I have looked on his website and this missive is not to be found there....

It is on another site, "The Jews Who Rule America" - http://www.realjewnews.com/?p=836#comment-1458395

Thank you very much for the information....
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Romaios on July 24, 2013, 05:02:36 PM
I've said multiple times that the Jews were smarter than white people, but I generally just do this to poke fun at people making certain anti-Zionist or anti-Jewish claims. In reality I very much doubt there is much difference in terms of genetics. As I said recently (in this thread? I don't recall)  it's about culture (or subculture, or whatever). 

They say Ashkenazi ladies have a genetic predisposition to breast cancer, whereas the males are predisposed to conditions like diabetes IIRC. I guess the gene that makes them smarter (if there is one) ought to compensate for all that.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on July 24, 2013, 05:11:15 PM
I wouldn't guess that Jews are actually smarter, just that they come from a background that pushes them to excel, and so more of them do so. They are pressured to "make something of themselves," so many do.

Jews were banned from owning land in many countries. Land was what conferred wealth. Then times changed. Jews had acquired the education and skills that made them more valuable in a urbanized society. Also, "Study" is considered a religious endeavor. Not much use on the farm but a very useful emphasis today.

Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Dionysii on July 24, 2013, 05:56:05 PM
I've said multiple times that the Jews were smarter than white people ...

They say Ashkenazi ladies have a genetic predisposition to ...
I consider all the racial genetic theory as so much rubbish. 
Ph.D's and MD's talking about DNA fabricate whatever history they want ignoring inconvenient contradictory historical records.   

I agree with Arthur Koestler's contention that the Ashkenazi Jews are Japhetic (non-Semitic) Europeans who in contradistinction to many Eastern and Sephardic Jews lack any descent from biblical Jews other than perhaps their religion. 
The historical origin of Ashkenazi Jewry is the Japhetic (non-Semitic) people of Poland and Russia (including Scythians and many others) who converted to Judaism during the Khazar Empire.

The Thirteenth Tribe: The Khazar Empire and Its Heritage
By Arthur Koestler
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/13trindx.htm

The Japhetic origin of Ashkenazi Jewry under the Khazar Empire is no different than the ancestors of Bosnians, Albanians, and Anatolian muslims who converted to Islam during the Ottoman period.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Dionysii on July 24, 2013, 06:11:01 PM
I've said multiple times that the Jews were smarter than white people

I approach the history of the world from the biblical division of seventy-two nations from the three sons of Noah. 
The Panarion of Saint Epiphanios of Cyprus listed and summarized the histories of these nations with the conclusion that the most ancient and authentic Christian tradition reckons only two races of men: the righteous and the wicked.

The concept of a "white" race evidently originates from europe's so-called enlightenment of the eighteenth century. 

'The Invention of the White Race'
By Theodore Allen
http://clogic.eserver.org/1-2/allen.html
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/05/21/the-invention-of-the-white-race/
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Asteriktos on July 24, 2013, 06:18:26 PM
Nah...
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: TheTrisagion on July 24, 2013, 06:26:19 PM
I've said multiple times that the Jews were smarter than white people ...

They say Ashkenazi ladies have a genetic predisposition to ...
I consider all the racial genetic theory as so much rubbish. 
Ph.D's and MD's talking about DNA fabricate whatever history they want ignoring inconvenient contradictory historical records.   

I agree with Arthur Koestler's contention that the Ashkenazi Jews are Japhetic (non-Semitic) Europeans who in contradistinction to many Eastern and Sephardic Jews lack any descent from biblical Jews other than perhaps their religion. 
The historical origin of Ashkenazi Jewry is the Japhetic (non-Semitic) people of Poland and Russia (including Scythians and many others) who converted to Judaism during the Khazar Empire.

The Thirteenth Tribe: The Khazar Empire and Its Heritage
By Arthur Koestler
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/13trindx.htm

The Japhetic origin of Ashkenazi Jewry under the Khazar Empire is no different than the ancestors of Bosnians, Albanians, and Anatolian muslims who converted to Islam during the Ottoman period.

(http://i.qkme.me/3pen0k.jpg)
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on July 24, 2013, 07:13:58 PM
I've said multiple times that the Jews were smarter than white people ...

They say Ashkenazi ladies have a genetic predisposition to ...
I consider all the racial genetic theory as so much rubbish. 
Ph.D's and MD's talking about DNA fabricate whatever history they want ignoring inconvenient contradictory historical records.   

I agree with Arthur Koestler's contention that the Ashkenazi Jews are Japhetic (non-Semitic) Europeans who in contradistinction to many Eastern and Sephardic Jews lack any descent from biblical Jews other than perhaps their religion. 
The historical origin of Ashkenazi Jewry is the Japhetic (non-Semitic) people of Poland and Russia (including Scythians and many others) who converted to Judaism during the Khazar Empire.

The Thirteenth Tribe: The Khazar Empire and Its Heritage
By Arthur Koestler
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/13trindx.htm

The Japhetic origin of Ashkenazi Jewry under the Khazar Empire is no different than the ancestors of Bosnians, Albanians, and Anatolian muslims who converted to Islam during the Ottoman period.

Been debunked, time and again. In a World of sophisticated DNA testing it's getting more difficult to get away with these tired old anti-Semitic myths.

http://www.algemeiner.com/2012/12/28/haaretz-resurrects-the-khazar-jews-theory/
 

Every number of years the theory is advanced that the Jews of Europe are actually descendants of the Khazar kingdom, a mostly Turkic people whose king and nobility converted to Judaism in the early eighth century, allowing them to become a buffer state between Islam and Christendom.

When the Khazar kingdom collapsed in the 13th century, according to the believers in the Khazar theory, its population fled into Eastern Europe and served as the core of European Jewry

In his monumental work, “Arab Attitudes to Israel,” written in the early 1970s, Professor Yehoshafat Harkabi described the Khazar theory as one of the arguments marshaled in the Arab world to assert that the Jews of the modern period were not the descendents of the biblical of children of Israel and hence had no historical right to recover their land. This position is also voiced in the Palestinian media today.

For example, Jarir al-Qidwa, who was an educational adviser to Yasser Arafat and later chairman of the Palestinian Authority Public Library, appeared on PA television on August 2, 2004 and explained that the original Jews of the biblical period were dispersed among the nations and that it was the “Khazar Jews who live in Palestine today.” Prominent voices within the Muslim Brotherhood have also advanced the idea that modern Jews are descendants of the Khazars, as well.

The Khazar theory was strange. If only a small number of Khazars in the court of their king converted to Judaism, then how could they become the basis for the masses of European Jewry? Arab historians in the 10th century reported that most of the Khazars were Muslims, in any case.

...there is another side to what genetics tell us about the origins of European Jews. It refers to the work of Professor Harry Ostrer, who is the author of “The Genetic History of the Jews,” a new book also published this year by Oxford University Press. Looking at his credentials, his work should have been at the top of the story. Ostrer served as the director of the Human Genetics Program at New York University School of Medicine, where he worked for more than two decades. Today he is head of genetic testing at Albert Einstein College of Medicine. Unlike Elhaik, he does not accept the argument that European Jewry comes from Central Asia but rather he says that Jews around the world can trace their genetic history to the Middle East 2,000 years ago. 

Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Santagranddad on July 24, 2013, 07:28:45 PM
I think the British fertility expert, Professor Robert Winston, would site his own ancestry as demonstrated by genetic testing as clearly indicating his Jewish roots go back to a Semitic origin rather than Khazar one.

This I recall from a television broadcast in which Professor Winston used his own genetic history to illustrate what it may reveal but also it's limitations.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on July 24, 2013, 07:41:33 PM
I think the British fertility expert, Professor Robert Winston, would site his own ancestry as demonstrated by genetic testing as clearly indicating his Jewish roots go back to a Semitic origin rather than Khazar one.

This I recall from a television broadcast in which Professor Winston used his own genetic history to illustrate what it may reveal but also it's limitations.

Only a small layer of Khazar nobility converted. The rest of the people were Muslim by the 10th century. Just the shear numbers don't add up. Not enough Khazars converted to replace or supplant all the Jews descended from Ancient times..
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: stanley123 on July 24, 2013, 07:54:31 PM
Only a small layer of Khazar nobility converted. The rest of the people were Muslim by the 10th century.
The 10th century Persian historian Ibn al-Faqih wrote  that all the Khazars were Jews.
http://www.radioislam.org/islam/english/toread/khazar-q.htm
http://www.khazaria.com/khazar-quotes.html
http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/Maps/Story800.html
http://books.google.com/books?id=hEuIveNl9kcC&pg=PA110&lpg=PA110&dq=Ibn+al-Faqih++all+khazars+are+jews&source=bl&ots=DIFxc8KeWv&sig=1JwARw7H0XxNOHE-UFBMuDgZlm0&hl=en&sa=X&ei=8WrwUY_lIc-vigLml4CgCg&ved=0CEcQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=Ibn%20al-Faqih%20%20all%20khazars%20are%20jews&f=false
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on July 24, 2013, 09:45:59 PM
Only a small layer of Khazar nobility converted. The rest of the people were Muslim by the 10th century.
The 10th century Persian historian Ibn al-Faqih wrote  that all the Khazars were Jews.
http://www.radioislam.org/islam/english/toread/khazar-q.htm
http://www.khazaria.com/khazar-quotes.html
http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/Maps/Story800.html
http://books.google.com/books?id=hEuIveNl9kcC&pg=PA110&lpg=PA110&dq=Ibn+al-Faqih++all+khazars+are+jews&source=bl&ots=DIFxc8KeWv&sig=1JwARw7H0XxNOHE-UFBMuDgZlm0&hl=en&sa=X&ei=8WrwUY_lIc-vigLml4CgCg&ved=0CEcQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=Ibn%20al-Faqih%20%20all%20khazars%20are%20jews&f=false

Guess again:
     

At some point in the last decades of the 8th century or the early 9th century, the Khazar royalty and nobility converted to Judaism, and part of the general population may have followed.[99] The extent of the conversion is debated. The 10th century Persian historian Ibn al-Faqih reported that "all the Khazars are Jews." Notwithstanding this statement, most scholars believe that only the upper classes converted to Judaism;[100] there is some support for this in contemporary Muslim texts.[101]

Contemporary historians provided much detail about the religion and daily life of Khazars. One of the most detailed descriptions of Khazars came from Arab historian Ahmed ibn Fadlan, who traveled to Khazaria in 922 as the emissary of the Baghdad caliph. According to his account the majority of Khazars were Muslims and Christians, while the Jewish population represented a minority in the kingdom. According to ibn Fadlan, contrary to non-Jewish Khazars, the king and his royal court were Jewish. Ibn Fadlan claimed that 100,000 Muslims lived in Khazaria, and thirty mosques were established there. He also described a strong pagan community consisting mostly of Slavic peoples. Regarding governance, Ibn Fadlan wrote that judges were elected equally from Christian, Jewish, Muslim, and Pagan communities.[102] Dmitry Vasilyev, a professor at Astrakhan State University who excavated sites associated with Khazars, states that after the fall of the Khazar empire, "Khazars were slowly assimilated by Turkic-speaking tribes, Tatars and Mongols."[103]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khazars
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Dionysii on July 24, 2013, 10:00:56 PM
Been debunked, time and again. In a World of sophisticated DNA testing it's getting more difficult to get away with these tired old anti-Semitic myths.

That the Ashkenazi Jews are primarily descendents of people who converted to Judaism during the Khazar centuries has been a well known historic fact continually attested to by historians for centuries regardless of whether one is either sympathetic or antipathetic to the Jews.  The modern DNA theories are the eugenics and Nazi oriented pseudoscience that are irrelevant to history.

Only a small layer of Khazar nobility converted. The rest of the people were Muslim by the 10th century.


That's absurd and indicates you don't know what you're talking about so well.  What historian says that?   
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on July 24, 2013, 10:22:15 PM
Been debunked, time and again. In a World of sophisticated DNA testing it's getting more difficult to get away with these tired old anti-Semitic myths.

That the Ashkenazi Jews are primarily descendents of people who converted to Judaism during the Khazar centuries has been a well known historic fact continually attested to by historians for centuries regardless of whether one is either sympathetic or antipathetic to the Jews.  The modern DNA theories are the eugenics and Nazi oriented pseudoscience that are irrelevant to history.

Only a small layer of Khazar nobility converted. The rest of the people were Muslim by the 10th century.


That's absurd and indicates you don't know what you're talking about so well.  What historian says that?  

The myth that modern Jews are really Khazars fails at ever point. Most scholars dismiss it out of hand..Catch up

The written accounts from the 10th century clearly indicate that only the nobility converted and just a small layer of the population. The majority of Khazars were Muslims, Christians and Pagan...

If there were so many Khazar converts that they totally overwhelmed the Jewish Population and subsumed them, their language would have left some trace. But rather Yiddish became the spoken language of Jews in Europe not Turkic..

This is an important fabrication for Anti-Semites. It is patently false and has little real evidence to back it up.. It's nonsense.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: stanley123 on July 25, 2013, 01:21:37 AM
Only a small layer of Khazar nobility converted. The rest of the people were Muslim by the 10th century.
The 10th century Persian historian Ibn al-Faqih wrote  that all the Khazars were Jews.
http://www.radioislam.org/islam/english/toread/khazar-q.htm
http://www.khazaria.com/khazar-quotes.html
http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/Maps/Story800.html
http://books.google.com/books?id=hEuIveNl9kcC&pg=PA110&lpg=PA110&dq=Ibn+al-Faqih++all+khazars+are+jews&source=bl&ots=DIFxc8KeWv&sig=1JwARw7H0XxNOHE-UFBMuDgZlm0&hl=en&sa=X&ei=8WrwUY_lIc-vigLml4CgCg&ved=0CEcQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=Ibn%20al-Faqih%20%20all%20khazars%20are%20jews&f=false

Guess again:
     

At some point in the last decades of the 8th century or the early 9th century, the Khazar royalty and nobility converted to Judaism, and part of the general population may have followed.[99] The extent of the conversion is debated. The 10th century Persian historian Ibn al-Faqih reported that "all the Khazars are Jews." Notwithstanding this statement, most scholars believe that only the upper classes converted to Judaism;[100] there is some support for this in contemporary Muslim texts.[101]

Contemporary historians provided much detail about the religion and daily life of Khazars. One of the most detailed descriptions of Khazars came from Arab historian Ahmed ibn Fadlan, who traveled to Khazaria in 922 as the emissary of the Baghdad caliph. According to his account the majority of Khazars were Muslims and Christians, while the Jewish population represented a minority in the kingdom. According to ibn Fadlan, contrary to non-Jewish Khazars, the king and his royal court were Jewish. Ibn Fadlan claimed that 100,000 Muslims lived in Khazaria, and thirty mosques were established there. He also described a strong pagan community consisting mostly of Slavic peoples. Regarding governance, Ibn Fadlan wrote that judges were elected equally from Christian, Jewish, Muslim, and Pagan communities.[102] Dmitry Vasilyev, a professor at Astrakhan State University who excavated sites associated with Khazars, states that after the fall of the Khazar empire, "Khazars were slowly assimilated by Turkic-speaking tribes, Tatars and Mongols."[103]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khazars
Why believe the Arab historian Ahmed ibn Fadlan over the Persian historian Ibn al-Faqih ?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: stanley123 on July 25, 2013, 01:27:16 AM
The written accounts from the 10th century clearly indicate that only the nobility converted and just a small layer of the population.
You are contradicting yourself because above you quote  the written account of the 10th century  Persian historian Ibn al-Faqih as saying "all the Khazars are Jews." 
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: rakovsky on July 25, 2013, 01:54:41 AM
Dionysii,
You wrote:
1) Demons are the enemies at the most fundamental level of conspiracy
Do you have any ideas about the origins of the Star of David? In ancient paleo-Hebrew script from David's time, the alphabet looked much like the Greek Alphabet. The letter D was written as a Greek Delta or triangle. David's name was written Delta Ypsilon Delta, as I recall, and one idea is that these three letters form the interlocking Deltas in the Star. In Byzantine times, Christians venerated a ring with the Seal of Solomon, which is supposedly the same thing.

An opposite idea points out that the Old Testament opposes the "star" of one of the pagan demigods used in the Holy Land. According to this idea, the star was passed down as a pagan symbol within the religious community there. One of the ideas- in the Talmud I think- is that the Star of David was used to manipulate demons, making it perhaps an occult symbol. Then in Medieval times a German or Czech king assigned the Star of David to the Rabbinical community. However, the traditional rabbis preferred using the menorah instead of having the other sign imposed on them by the nationalists.

So there are two opposite views about the history of the symbol.

The world is still ruled by gentile power, and no amount of Jewish conspiracy (real or imagined) will change that until the appointed time when the Jews are regathered as outlined by the prophet Ezekiel.
Perhaps your reading of Ezekiel is too physical. That is, the Church sees itself as Israel, and naturally the Jews will eventually be included in that. However, isn't it questionable whether the Jews as a national group will rule the world in the apocalypse?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Asteriktos on July 25, 2013, 01:58:11 AM
Holocaustianity (http://youtu.be/kXLoc6J4OgU). How did I miss this?  ;D
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Dionysii on July 25, 2013, 05:22:50 AM
Do you have any ideas about the origins of the Star of David?
I have heard that 'The Six Pointed Star' by O. J. Graham is an informative book which views the symbol as occult, but I have not yet read this book.
 
In Byzantine times, Christians venerated a ring with the Seal of Solomon, which is supposedly the same thing.
Could you mention more details or the source of this information?

isn't it questionable whether the Jews as a national group will rule the world in the apocalypse?
To answer your question precisely, I would have to say I do not know.  Nor do I specifically recall reading any Christian prophecy to the effect that Jews as a national group will rule the world. 

I have read more than one prophecy (such as Saint Methodius of Patara) that specifically states that the antichrist will be a Jew of the tribe of Dan who "will be born in the town of Chorazaim, nourished in Bethsaida, and reign in Capernaum" which are the three towns that our Lord Jesus curses in the Gospel of Luke. 

However, I do believe what I have read in the life of Saint Andrew the Fool for Christ that after the city of Constantinople is physically submerged in the sea bringing gentile power to an end the Jews as a national group will be regathered to the land of Israel from across the world as in the days when they fled Egypt.  It has been a while since I read this prophecy, but I do not specifically recall mention that the Jews as a nation will rule the world.  I'll have to take a look at it. 

(The Andreas Salos Apocalypse translated by Lennart Ryden, Dumbarton Oaks Papers Volume #28, 1974)
This is probably the best and most detailed Byzantine prophecy I have come across (although Saint Methodius is also worth mentioning.)
I photocopied this in both Greek and English translation a few years ago at a well stocked university library which has old annual volumes issued by the Dumbarton Oaks Centre for Byzantine Studies, but the only place I found this on the internet is JSTOR which does indicate it permits a free ten day registration for three downloads.  Otherwise, most university libraries subscribe to JSTOR meaning someone can simply walk in & bring it up on a computer and print it out or save it to their email.  It is about 20 to 25 pages total including the intro and both translations of about ten pages each.

http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1291359?uid=3739600&uid=2129&uid=2&uid=70&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=21102559568187
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: mike on July 25, 2013, 05:45:15 AM
They say Ashkenazi ladies have a genetic predisposition to breast cancer, whereas the males are predisposed to conditions like diabetes IIRC. I guess the gene that makes them smarter (if there is one) ought to compensate for all that.

Inbreeding is the cause IMO. Ashkenazi suffer from many genetic diseases.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Jonathan Gress on July 25, 2013, 06:18:22 AM
They say Ashkenazi ladies have a genetic predisposition to breast cancer, whereas the males are predisposed to conditions like diabetes IIRC. I guess the gene that makes them smarter (if there is one) ought to compensate for all that.

Inbreeding is the cause IMO. Ashkenazi suffer from many genetic diseases.

Cochran and Harpending advanced the hypothesis that the same genes responsible for diseases like Tay-Sachs are also responsible for higher Ashkenazi IQ.

Here is their paper:

http://stormchan.org/study/src/1347441770080.pdf

Here's a critique of their paper:

http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/culture/features/1478/index1.html
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: jah777 on July 25, 2013, 08:09:20 AM
According to Brother Nathaniel, Archbishop Kyrill has made a public condemnation of a laymen in the jurisdiction of another bishop while falsely claiming the consent of other bishops who in fact knew nothing about it at the time.  If this is true and consistent with Archbishop Kyrill's character, then it might be revealing to learn more about his history.

Nathaniel finds himself in a canonically problematic position with regard to the Synod's statement and his own claims regarding Bp. Jerome's blessing.  Nathaniel claims to belong to ROCOR and resides in the canonical territory of Abp Kyrril.  This statement was signed by Abp Kyrril as the secretary to the Synod, but he was blessed by the Synod to sign it on behalf of the Synod. 

As to the supposed blessing of Bp. Jerome, while there can exist stavropegial monasteries that are directly under the Metropolitan while being located in the diocese of another bishop, Bp. Jerome is not the Metropolitan and Nathaniel does not reside in a monastery.  A former novice who is not in a monastery, who is not living under monastic obedience, is not a monk.  Futhemore, Bp. Jerome was not even a diocesan bishop but an auxiliary bishop to the Metropolitan who has recently been forced into retirement for his uncanonical activities regarding the Western Rite Vicariate.  Part of what led to his retirement was the fact that he gave his blessing for things which he did not have the authority to bless without also having the Metropolitan's blessing.  While Nathaniel claims to be a "regular communicant in good standing at the Synodal Cathedral in Manhattan", even though he resides in the territory of Abp Kyrril, with the retirement of Bp. Jerome of Manhattan and this statement from the Synod he finds himself in a precarious position without much of an argument in his favor. 

As I mentioned before, Nathaniel should choose to either follow Abp Kyrril's advice and actually become a monk, retiring from the spotlight to live a life of prayer and repentance under monastic obedience; or, he should stop pretending to be a monk, he should abandon his monastic and hierarchical attire, and he should present himself as the mere lay political commentator that he is.  His claim to be a monk of the Orthodox Church does not lend credibility to his message but rather scandalizes the Orthodox faithful and opens up the holy order of Orthodox monasticism to the world's ridicule.  I say this not as one who disagrees with the factual content that he posts, but as one who objects to him deceiving people regarding his monastic state. 
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Santagranddad on July 25, 2013, 08:51:21 AM
Amen to that
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Dionysii on July 25, 2013, 09:00:30 AM
As I mentioned before, Nathaniel should choose to either follow Abp Kyrril's advice and actually become a monk, retiring from the spotlight to live a life of prayer and repentance under monastic obedience; or, he should stop pretending to be a monk, he should abandon his monastic and hierarchical attire, and he should present himself as the mere lay political commentator that he is.  His claim to be a monk of the Orthodox Church does not lend credibility to his message but rather scandalizes the Orthodox faithful and opens up the holy order of Orthodox monasticism to the world's ridicule.  I say this not as one who disagrees with the factual content that he posts, but as one who objects to him deceiving people regarding his monastic state. 

I think this part of what you post is at the very least worth consideration.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on July 25, 2013, 10:58:53 AM
Only a small layer of Khazar nobility converted. The rest of the people were Muslim by the 10th century.
The 10th century Persian historian Ibn al-Faqih wrote  that all the Khazars were Jews.
http://www.radioislam.org/islam/english/toread/khazar-q.htm
http://www.khazaria.com/khazar-quotes.html
http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/Maps/Story800.html
http://books.google.com/books?id=hEuIveNl9kcC&pg=PA110&lpg=PA110&dq=Ibn+al-Faqih++all+khazars+are+jews&source=bl&ots=DIFxc8KeWv&sig=1JwARw7H0XxNOHE-UFBMuDgZlm0&hl=en&sa=X&ei=8WrwUY_lIc-vigLml4CgCg&ved=0CEcQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=Ibn%20al-Faqih%20%20all%20khazars%20are%20jews&f=false

Guess again:
     

At some point in the last decades of the 8th century or the early 9th century, the Khazar royalty and nobility converted to Judaism, and part of the general population may have followed.[99] The extent of the conversion is debated. The 10th century Persian historian Ibn al-Faqih reported that "all the Khazars are Jews." Notwithstanding this statement, most scholars believe that only the upper classes converted to Judaism;[100] there is some support for this in contemporary Muslim texts.[101]

Contemporary historians provided much detail about the religion and daily life of Khazars. One of the most detailed descriptions of Khazars came from Arab historian Ahmed ibn Fadlan, who traveled to Khazaria in 922 as the emissary of the Baghdad caliph. According to his account the majority of Khazars were Muslims and Christians, while the Jewish population represented a minority in the kingdom. According to ibn Fadlan, contrary to non-Jewish Khazars, the king and his royal court were Jewish. Ibn Fadlan claimed that 100,000 Muslims lived in Khazaria, and thirty mosques were established there. He also described a strong pagan community consisting mostly of Slavic peoples. Regarding governance, Ibn Fadlan wrote that judges were elected equally from Christian, Jewish, Muslim, and Pagan communities.[102] Dmitry Vasilyev, a professor at Astrakhan State University who excavated sites associated with Khazars, states that after the fall of the Khazar empire, "Khazars were slowly assimilated by Turkic-speaking tribes, Tatars and Mongols."[103]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khazarpt
Why believe the Arab historian Ahmed ibn Fadlan over the Persian historian Ibn al-Faqih ?

Because at no point does the claim hold water. The DNA doesnt hold up. The linguistics don't hold up. The population migration doesnt hold up. And the contemporary observations don't hold up except for one you mentioned that could well have been an  observation of the Khazar Aristocracy and not an observation of the entire population.

The Khazar aristocracy was ethnically different from the general population. There were "White Khazars" and "Black Khazars"..... The "Black Khazars, the general population was a polyethnic and poly religious community comprised of Muslims, Christians and Pagans.. The White Khazars converted to Judaism... The statement may well have been meant as    "All the (White) Khazars are Jews"
That would have been a true statement .

But the DNA seals the deal. Here is a good article that gives both sides. I think you will find it fair but in the end, the proponents of the Khazar theory are not representative of the majority opinion among scientists..

http://forward.com/articles/175912/jews-a-race-genetic-theory-comes-under-fierce-atta/?p=all
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: podkarpatska on July 25, 2013, 11:06:15 AM
Why do we waste such bandwidth on the likes of this thread?  sigh?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: TheTrisagion on July 25, 2013, 11:07:44 AM
ITT:  We discuss the different historical perspectives of the Khazar people.

Without this information, it is impossible to achieve theosis.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Dionysii on July 25, 2013, 02:04:24 PM
ITT:  We discuss the different historical perspectives of the Khazar people.

Without this information, it is impossible to achieve theosis.
lol  :D
Point taken.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Asteriktos on July 25, 2013, 02:09:59 PM
ITT: 

I approve of your use of "ITT" on this forum, and hope it becomes more popular.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: rakovsky on July 25, 2013, 05:07:49 PM
It's interesting. Factually, ArBp. Kirill's statement agrees with Br. Nathaniel's.
Quote
NEW YORK: July 19, 2013
Statement from the Chancery of the Synod of Bishops
In other words, it is a statement by the chancery, rather than the full Synod itself. (To give an analogy of position, Kondratick occupied the chancery of the OCA). This could go along with B.Nathaniel's claim that the bishops were unaware of the announcement.

It continues:
Quote
Nathanael (Kapner)... lives on the territory of the Western American Diocese, but has no relation to it.
B. Nathan claims he belongs to ROCOR and lives in the Rockies, but doesn't mention activity in that diocese.

It continues:
Quote
The clergymen and laity of the Russian Church Abroad are hereby informed that the actions of Nathanael (Kapner) do not have the blessing of the Synod of Bishops.
B.Nathan mentions only a blessing by Met. Hilarion and Bp. Jerome, not by the Synod.

Just an interesting point.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Asteriktos on July 25, 2013, 05:20:29 PM
B. Nathan claims he belongs to ROCOR and lives in the Rockies, but doesn't mention activity in that diocese.

What exactly do you mean here? Is he in the Rockies, or in NY, as his comment about being a regular communicant  in Manhattan would seem to indicate?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Dionysii on July 25, 2013, 07:06:05 PM
As I mentioned before, Nathaniel should choose to either follow Abp Kyrril's advice and actually become a monk, retiring from the spotlight to live a life of prayer and repentance under monastic obedience; or, he should stop pretending to be a monk, he should abandon his monastic and hierarchical attire, and he should present himself as the mere lay political commentator that he is.  His claim to be a monk of the Orthodox Church does not lend credibility to his message but rather scandalizes the Orthodox faithful and opens up the holy order of Orthodox monasticism to the world's ridicule.  I say this not as one who disagrees with the factual content that he posts, but as one who objects to him deceiving people regarding his monastic state. 

I think this part of what you post is at the very least worth consideration.

On the other hand, what Brother Nathaniel does may be his calling.  He certainly seems natural at it. 
Ancient Jewish idolaters, kings, and priests thought the same evil of the prophets who boldly preached the truth to the sinful Jewish leaders.
I consider ROCOR to have always been heretical from the day it was founded by Archbishop Khrapovitsky who was a heretic on many levels including blatant oecumenism with the Anglicans, Onomaclasm (Name fighting), and Stavroclasm (war against the Cross). 
As far as ecclesiology is concerned, my personal belief is that ROCOR's union with the MP was a move from bad to worse, and Archbishop Kyrill helped facilitate this apostasy.
Brother Nathaniel is one of the best things the ROCOR have going for them, and his background in "true orthodox" jurisdictions indicates that he has at least had an interest in pursuing the truth.

The truth is that the ROCOR is lucky to even have Brother Nathaniel.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: TheTrisagion on July 25, 2013, 09:06:31 PM
As I mentioned before, Nathaniel should choose to either follow Abp Kyrril's advice and actually become a monk, retiring from the spotlight to live a life of prayer and repentance under monastic obedience; or, he should stop pretending to be a monk, he should abandon his monastic and hierarchical attire, and he should present himself as the mere lay political commentator that he is.  His claim to be a monk of the Orthodox Church does not lend credibility to his message but rather scandalizes the Orthodox faithful and opens up the holy order of Orthodox monasticism to the world's ridicule.  I say this not as one who disagrees with the factual content that he posts, but as one who objects to him deceiving people regarding his monastic state. 

I think this part of what you post is at the very least worth consideration.

On the other hand, what Brother Nathaniel does may be his calling.  He certainly seems natural at it. 
Ancient Jewish idolaters, kings, and priests thought the same evil of the prophets who boldly preached the truth to the sinful Jewish leaders.
I consider ROCOR to have always been heretical from the day it was founded by Archbishop Khrapovitsky who was a heretic on many levels including blatant oecumenism with the Anglicans, Onomaclasm (Name fighting), and Stavroclasm (war against the Cross). 
As far as ecclesiology is concerned, my personal belief is that ROCOR's union with the MP was a move from bad to worse, and Archbishop Kyrill helped facilitate this apostasy.
Brother Nathaniel is one of the best things the ROCOR have going for them, and his background in "true orthodox" jurisdictions indicates that he has at least had an interest in pursuing the truth.

The truth is that the ROCOR is lucky to even have Brother Nathaniel.

(http://assets.diylol.com/hfs/1af/50b/b29/resized/holz-meme-generator-i-really-don-t-think-so-7c6090.jpg?1316589310.jpg)
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Mor Ephrem on July 25, 2013, 09:28:10 PM
I consider ROCOR to have always been heretical from the day it was founded by Archbishop Khrapovitsky who was a heretic on many levels including blatant oecumenism with the Anglicans, Onomaclasm (Name fighting), and Stavroclasm (war against the Cross). 
As far as ecclesiology is concerned, my personal belief is that ROCOR's union with the MP was a move from bad to worse, and Archbishop Kyrill helped facilitate this apostasy.
Brother Nathaniel is one of the best things the ROCOR have going for them, and his background in "true orthodox" jurisdictions indicates that he has at least had an interest in pursuing the truth.

The truth is that the ROCOR is lucky to even have Brother Nathaniel.

What?  Onomaclasm?  Stavroclasm?  I've never heard of those asms before...
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: TheTrisagion on July 25, 2013, 09:32:46 PM
I consider ROCOR to have always been heretical from the day it was founded by Archbishop Khrapovitsky who was a heretic on many levels including blatant oecumenism with the Anglicans, Onomaclasm (Name fighting), and Stavroclasm (war against the Cross). 
As far as ecclesiology is concerned, my personal belief is that ROCOR's union with the MP was a move from bad to worse, and Archbishop Kyrill helped facilitate this apostasy.
Brother Nathaniel is one of the best things the ROCOR have going for them, and his background in "true orthodox" jurisdictions indicates that he has at least had an interest in pursuing the truth.

The truth is that the ROCOR is lucky to even have Brother Nathaniel.

What?  Onomaclasm?  Stavroclasm?  I've never heard of those asms before...
must...resist...inappropriate...orgasm comment.  :-X
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Mor Ephrem on July 25, 2013, 09:35:15 PM
I can always depend on you to take it to the next level. 
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: TheTrisagion on July 25, 2013, 09:53:26 PM
I can always depend on you to take it to the next level. 
I'm pretty sure I lower the intelligent discussion quotient around here by a good 20% all by myself.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: LBK on July 25, 2013, 11:13:08 PM
I consider ROCOR to have always been heretical from the day it was founded by Archbishop Khrapovitsky who was a heretic on many levels including blatant oecumenism with the Anglicans, Onomaclasm (Name fighting), and Stavroclasm (war against the Cross). 
As far as ecclesiology is concerned, my personal belief is that ROCOR's union with the MP was a move from bad to worse, and Archbishop Kyrill helped facilitate this apostasy.
Brother Nathaniel is one of the best things the ROCOR have going for them, and his background in "true orthodox" jurisdictions indicates that he has at least had an interest in pursuing the truth.

The truth is that the ROCOR is lucky to even have Brother Nathaniel.

What?  Onomaclasm?  Stavroclasm?  I've never heard of those asms before...

Onomaclasm sounds like the opposite to Name-worshipping, the latter is a declared heresy. If Dionysii is saying that ROCOR is against name-worship, then that is true, and it leaves him in a rather sticky situation.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Nephi on July 25, 2013, 11:21:56 PM
Stavroclasm?

Apparently "denying the efficacy of the Cross," or something along those lines.

Quote
"This one-sided interpretation of Redemption became the reigning one in Latin theology and it has remained so up to the present time.  In Protestantism it evoked the opposite reaction, which led in the later sects to the almost complete denial of the dogma of Redemption and to the acknowledgment of no more than a moral or instructive significance for Christ's life and His death on the Cross" [i.e., the heresy of stavroclasm-ed].  (Orthodox Dogmatic Theology, Platina, CA 1983, pp. 208-209.)

http://www.roca.org/OA/132/132b.htm
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Nephi on July 25, 2013, 11:24:56 PM
What?  Onomaclasm?  Stavroclasm?  I've never heard of those asms before...

Onomaclasm sounds like the opposite to Name-worshipping, the latter is a declared heresy. If Dionysii is saying that ROCOR is against name-worship, then that is true, and it leaves him in a rather sticky situation.

Chances are it is being used in relation to Name-worshipping, but the very few results that come up in Google include the ancient Jews being referred to as "onomoclasts" for their rejection of pronouncing "YHWH."
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: rakovsky on July 25, 2013, 11:50:10 PM
B. Nathan claims he belongs to ROCOR and lives in the Rockies, but doesn't mention activity in that diocese.

What exactly do you mean here? Is he in the Rockies, or in NY, as his comment about being a regular communicant  in Manhattan would seem to indicate?
What you said.

I think there were instances of holy people who lived in seclusion, and while they took communion as often as practicable, it was not every week. I don't know the answer to your question, or even if it is a correct situation.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Mor Ephrem on July 26, 2013, 12:29:45 AM
Are name fighters onomaclasts or onomatomachoi?  The latter sounds better. 

Anyway, people worshiping names is weird.  Real people worship persons: three to be exact.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Dionysii on July 26, 2013, 12:43:57 AM
what Brother Nathaniel does may be his calling.  He certainly seems natural at it. 

As I mentioned before, Nathaniel should choose to either follow Abp Kyrril's advice and actually become a monk, retiring from the spotlight to live a life of prayer and repentance under monastic obedience; or, he should stop pretending to be a monk, he should abandon his monastic and hierarchical attire, and he should present himself as the mere lay political commentator that he is.  His claim to be a monk of the Orthodox Church does not lend credibility to his message but rather scandalizes the Orthodox faithful and opens up the holy order of Orthodox monasticism to the world's ridicule.  I say this not as one who disagrees with the factual content that he posts, but as one who objects to him deceiving people regarding his monastic state. 

I think both of these are correct. 
His broadcasts are generally good, but he is not a monk and you are correct to criticize him for wearing monk's clothing.
He was never about money.  I think the underlying motivation of his actions is to draw attention.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Dionysii on July 26, 2013, 12:54:18 AM
Onomaclasm sounds like the opposite to Name-worshipping

That is imprecise. 
Name fighting is a heresy opposite to Name glorifying. 
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: LBK on July 26, 2013, 12:59:46 AM
Onomaclasm sounds like the opposite to Name-worshipping

That is imprecise. 
Name fighting is a heresy opposite to Name glorifying. 


Before we go any further, please explain what "name fighting" is, and why it is a heresy. Also please elaborate on how this ties in with ROCOR's "ecumenism", as you expressed here:

Quote
I consider ROCOR to have always been heretical from the day it was founded by Archbishop Khrapovitsky who was a heretic on many levels including blatant oecumenism with the Anglicans, Onomaclasm (Name fighting), and Stavroclasm (war against the Cross). 
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Dionysii on July 26, 2013, 01:42:01 AM
If Dionysii is saying that ROCOR is against name-worship, then that is true, and it leaves him in a rather sticky situation.
I was saying that the Epistle of the Russian Synod of 1913 is heretical since it officially endorses the Name fighting heresy.
Therefore, the (Tsarist) Synod of Russia was heretical from 1913 to the end of the empire - not merely schismatic, but full heresy on the same level as Franks and protestants.  
Furthermore, the All Russian Council of 1917-1918 which consecrated Metropolitan Tikhon as Patriarchate of Moscow also officially endorsed this heretical Epistle as did the Karlovtsy Synod (ROCOR) from its foundation.  I am not aware that either ROCOR or the Moscow Patriarchate ever rescinded their endorsements of the heretical Epistle of 1913.  Therefore, the both the Moscow Patriarchate and ROCOR have been heretical since the days of Metropolitan Antony Khrapovitsky and Patriarch Tikhon.  

For the record, I consider the Russian Synod to have been schismatic and outside of the Church since the seventeenth century.   Saint John of Damascus wrote that able Christians like bees who visit diverse flowers are not forbidden to extract something good from those outside the Church.  Used with discernment, some writings by Nikonians are profitable including the anonymous Russian pilgrim on the Jesus prayer, Monk Ilarion's 'In the Mountains of the Caucasus', and Fr. Antony Boulatovich's expositions of Metropolitan Khrapovitsky's heresies which the Russian synod officially adopted.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The most severe abandonment of Orthodox reasoning I see is in the so-called name-fighting, that is, in that peculiar message, which was articulated in the infamous epistle of the Synod “to all the brothers, struggling in monasticism”, published in May 1913, and the reports attached thereto."
...
"The name-fighting tempest poisoned our theological schools, our hierarchy, our pastors, and, naturally, it is poisoning the whole society of the Church. The fruits of this poisoning are evident to all. There is no need to explore the depths of Russia – right here, in Moscow, in Russia’s heart. Only a blind man, or somebody who has covered his own eyes, will fail to see the corruption that has entered into our Church and is the fruit of long-standing de facto name-fighting, and which was de jure adopted by the Holy and Patriarchal Synods [1913, 1918]. This protestant principle (which, in its essence, I repeat, is man-worshipping)  of religious relativism is being offered to us on an official level, as a norm of spiritual life. That [Synodal] decree provides the basis for the flowering apostasy of our days."


- Bishop Mark Novoselov
http://www.thewonderfulname.info/2013/03/letter-written-in-1918-by-michael.html
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Mor Ephrem on July 26, 2013, 01:46:03 AM
If Dionysii is saying that ROCOR is against name-worship, then that is true, and it leaves him in a rather sticky situation.
I was saying that the Epistle of the Russian Synod of 1913 is heretical since it officially endorses the Name fighting heresy.

What is the "name fighting heresy"? 
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Dionysii on July 26, 2013, 01:50:54 AM
I understand Name fighting to be a denial of the power of God.  
It is the heresy of Barlaam and the Frankish scholastics which denies the energy of God is God.

The Name of God is an Energy of God.  The Name of God is God Himself.
This is true since the energy of God is God Himself as Saint Gregory Palamas and others have truly said.

Metropolitan Khrapovitsky was considerably more ignorant of this than Fr. Boulatovich.
I recognize that some individuals in ROCOR do not blindly accept everything that Metropolitan Khrapovitsky wrote, and this is a good thing.
On this issue, many in the OCA (known as the Metropolitan Russian Synod prior to 1970) have historically been closer to the truth about recognizing this heresy than has ROCOR.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Mor Ephrem on July 26, 2013, 02:04:34 AM
I understand Name fighting to be a denial of the power of God. 
It is the heresy of Barlaam and the Frankish scholastics which denies the energy of God is God.

The Name of God is an Energy of God.  The Name of God is God Himself.
This is true since the energy of God is God Himself as Saint Gregory Palamas and others have truly said.

Oh.  So you're a heretic.  OK. 

How is the Name of God a divine energy?  Is an icon also a divine energy?  What about the Cross?  The Bible?  Are these things also God?

Idolatry. 

Just a reminder of the rules: please do not call others heretics. You can say that the belief the poster espouses is heresy, but you cannot call the poster directly a heretic, schismatic, or any equivalent of the term. We greatly appreciate your cooperation regarding this rule.

Thank you.

Mina

August 10, 2013
[/color]
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Dionysii on July 26, 2013, 02:12:48 AM
I understand Name fighting to be a denial of the power of God. 
It is the heresy of Barlaam and the Frankish scholastics which denies the energy of God is God.

The Name of God is an Energy of God.  The Name of God is God Himself.
This is true since the energy of God is God Himself as Saint Gregory Palamas and others have truly said.

Oh.  So you're a heretic.  OK. 
I'm not one to hang around and cast pearls at swine.  I'm outta here.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: LBK on July 26, 2013, 04:23:30 AM

The Name of God is an Energy of God.  The Name of God is God Himself.



Just as I suspected.  :(

This, my dear Dionysii, is Name-worshipping (Imiaslavie), which has been condemned as heresy by a council at Constantinople in 1912, presided by the Patriarch of Constantinople, and by the Holy Synod in Moscow in 1918, headed by Patriarch Tikhon.

Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Santagranddad on July 26, 2013, 05:52:04 AM
I am able to distinguish quite easily between cultured and natural pearls, but in a spiritual use of the word an authority is helpful.

"In your midst stands a great hierarch, Metropolitan Antony (Khrapovitsky),  who is an adornment of the universal Orthodox Church. He is a great spiritual man like the first hierarchs of the Church of Christ in Christianity's first years. Ecclesiastical truth is to be found in this man....."

Encyclical 9/22nd July, 1930: Patriarch Barnabas of Serbia

May this stand against the throwing out of terms, neither elaborated or supported, condemning this outstanding hierarch. Attempts to stain the name of confessing hierarchs of the Russian Church was a tactic of OGPU and it's successors in their campaign against the Orthodox Church. That it should still happen is sad but only condemns the accusers, surely?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on July 26, 2013, 09:53:55 AM
It's interesting. Factually, ArBp. Kirill's statement agrees with Br. Nathaniel's.
Quote
NEW YORK: July 19, 2013
Statement from the Chancery of the Synod of Bishops
In other words, it is a statement by the chancery, rather than the full Synod itself. (To give an analogy of position, Kondratick occupied the chancery of the OCA). This could go along with B.Nathaniel's claim that the bishops were unaware of the announcement.

It continues:
Quote
Nathanael (Kapner)... lives on the territory of the Western American Diocese, but has no relation to it.
B. Nathan claims he belongs to ROCOR and lives in the Rockies, but doesn't mention activity in that diocese.

It continues:
Quote
The clergymen and laity of the Russian Church Abroad are hereby informed that the actions of Nathanael (Kapner) do not have the blessing of the Synod of Bishops.
B.Nathan mentions only a blessing by Met. Hilarion and Bp. Jerome, not by the Synod.

Just an interesting point.

I have spoken to both Bp. Jerome and +Met. Hilarion about Br. Nathanael. In no way do they bless his political activities. They commune him and Bp. Jerome told me that Met. Hilarion likes him on a personal basis.. Br. Nathanael is very charming personally.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: jah777 on July 26, 2013, 10:33:31 AM
As far as ecclesiology is concerned...

Speaking of ecclesiology, just four months ago you said you were with the Matthewite Greek Old Calendarists under Abp Nicholas of Athens, though as a catechumen.  Now you list your affiliation as being under Metropolitan Cornelius of the Old Believers.  As you probably are aware, Met Cornelius has been criticized for his ecumenical activity and his openness to the MP.  Perhaps you can give an update on the other thread about how you came to join Metropolitan Cornelius, and whether you have in fact joined them: 

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,25531.270.html
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: TheTrisagion on July 26, 2013, 10:36:14 AM
Marc, how is it that you have all these direct connections to Bishops and Metropolitans?  You better watch out or they are going to force you into the episcopacy like they did w/ St. Gregory of Nyssa.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Romaios on July 26, 2013, 10:39:09 AM
Marc, how is it that you have all these direct connections to Bishops and Metropolitans?  You better watch out or they are going to force you into the episcopacy like they did w/ St. Gregory of Nyssa.

You mean St. Gregory of Nazianzus?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: TheTrisagion on July 26, 2013, 10:42:18 AM
Marc, how is it that you have all these direct connections to Bishops and Metropolitans?  You better watch out or they are going to force you into the episcopacy like they did w/ St. Gregory of Nyssa.

You mean St. Gregory of Nazianzus?
Perhaps.  Too many Gregories.  :D
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Asteriktos on July 26, 2013, 10:44:00 AM
He may be thinking of St. Gregory the Theologian, who was indeed essentially forced into becoming a bishop. St. Gregory of Nyssa was also pressured into the clergy, though that process was more about Sts. Basil and Gregory Nazianzen trying to guilt him into it, IIRC.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: rakovsky on July 26, 2013, 05:23:55 PM
What about The Bible?  Are these things also God?
Christ is God's Word, the Logos, incarnated.  I think it means Christ is the Logos in a metaphysical sense- God the Father "Speaking" the Word, or Begetting Christ in also that way.
The Bible is also God's word. Would that make them different "Words"?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Mor Ephrem on July 26, 2013, 05:45:00 PM
Christ is God's Word, the Logos, incarnated.  I think it means Christ is the Logos in a metaphysical sense- God the Father "Speaking" the Word, or Begetting Christ in also that way.
The Bible is also God's word. Would that make them different "Words"?

Not different in terms of revelation, though there is primacy of order: the Scriptures are God's word because they testify to the Word made flesh--their "Wordness" derives from Christ.  But Jesus is not a book, and neither is the book Jesus.  If I go to a Barnes and Noble and ask for the Bible section, I'm not in heaven when I get there: I'm in the Bible section of Barnes and Noble.   

ISTM that affirming that the Name of God is an energy of God (and thus God himself) takes something more "material" and makes it divine.  If the name "Jesus" is a divine energy, why not the book "Bible", or the wooden ornament "Cross", or the image "Icon"?  That sounds like idolatry to me. 

If the adherent of this belief wants to cease engaging this topic because it's not worth it to cast pearls before swine, then I'm quite happy to be a Christian pig.  Better that than an idolater.   
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Santagranddad on July 26, 2013, 05:47:47 PM
Me too, especially as the pearls are low value cultured ones.....
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on July 26, 2013, 10:40:39 PM
Marc, how is it that you have all these direct connections to Bishops and Metropolitans?  You better watch out or they are going to force you into the episcopacy like they did w/ St. Gregory of Nyssa.

Just lucky

Our Parrish is a small mission but with very experienced clergy and choir. Half the choir has degree's in musicology or some such. So lots of folks like to visit and take a break from the pressure of a high attendance Church... We even get most of the wonder working icons too.

The Kursk root icon was at our Parrish several times. The one that drew crowds of 800,000 or so in Russia when it visited. We had it all to ourselves..Drink some coffee... go up to it again at our leasure. People stood on line for hour after hour just for a momentary glimpse but we had it hour after hour, just 30 or 40 people... Bishops, Outlaw Mets, erstwhile nuns, streaming icons all show up..  
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: TheTrisagion on July 26, 2013, 10:50:38 PM
Marc, how is it that you have all these direct connections to Bishops and Metropolitans?  You better watch out or they are going to force you into the episcopacy like they did w/ St. Gregory of Nyssa.

Just lucky

Our Parrish is a small mission but with very experienced clergy and choir. Half the choir has degree's in musicology or some such. So lots of folks like to visit and take a break from the pressure of a high attendance Church... We even get most of the wonder working icons too.

The Kursk root icon was at our Parrish several times. The one that drew crowds of 800,000 or so in Russia when it visited. We had it all to ourselves..Drink some coffee... go up to it again at our leasure. People stood on line for hour after hour just for a momentary glimpse but we had it hour after hour, just 30 or 40 people... Bishops, Outlaw Mets, erstwhile nuns, streaming icons all show up..  
That does sound like a wonderful opportunity!  If it comes again, let us know because I would love to have the honor of venerating it.  DC isn't too far from me.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Shanghaiski on July 27, 2013, 12:10:54 AM
I consider ROCOR to have always been heretical from the day it was founded by Archbishop Khrapovitsky who was a heretic on many levels including blatant oecumenism with the Anglicans, Onomaclasm (Name fighting), and Stavroclasm (war against the Cross). 
As far as ecclesiology is concerned, my personal belief is that ROCOR's union with the MP was a move from bad to worse, and Archbishop Kyrill helped facilitate this apostasy.
Brother Nathaniel is one of the best things the ROCOR have going for them, and his background in "true orthodox" jurisdictions indicates that he has at least had an interest in pursuing the truth.

The truth is that the ROCOR is lucky to even have Brother Nathaniel.

What?  Onomaclasm?  Stavroclasm?  I've never heard of those asms before...

Onomaclasm sounds like the opposite to Name-worshipping, the latter is a declared heresy. If Dionysii is saying that ROCOR is against name-worship, then that is true, and it leaves him in a rather sticky situation.

He was quite sticky before.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Shanghaiski on July 27, 2013, 12:12:37 AM
Are name fighters onomaclasts or onomatomachoi?  The latter sounds better. 


Are you against onomatopoeia in liturgy?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Shanghaiski on July 27, 2013, 12:15:26 AM

The Name of God is an Energy of God.  The Name of God is God Himself.



Just as I suspected.  :(

This, my dear Dionysii, is Name-worshipping (Imiaslavie), which has been condemned as heresy by a council at Constantinople in 1912, presided by the Patriarch of Constantinople, and by the Holy Synod in Moscow in 1918, headed by Patriarch Tikhon.



And it's a heresy that post-dates the Nikonian schism, which makes it odd that an Old Believer would go for it. It wouldn't be their first oddity.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Shanghaiski on July 27, 2013, 12:17:34 AM
Marc, how is it that you have all these direct connections to Bishops and Metropolitans?  You better watch out or they are going to force you into the episcopacy like they did w/ St. Gregory of Nyssa.

You mean St. Gregory of Nazianzus?
Perhaps.  Too many Gregories.  :D

Stop your blasphemy. There can never be too many Gregories!
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Shanghaiski on July 27, 2013, 12:18:37 AM
He may be thinking of St. Gregory the Theologian, who was indeed essentially forced into becoming a bishop. St. Gregory of Nyssa was also pressured into the clergy, though that process was more about Sts. Basil and Gregory Nazianzen trying to guilt him into it, IIRC.

Every eligible man known to St. Basil was pressured into becoming a bishop. This is how we know the early Church did not have women bishops. If it did, St. Basil would've had his sister made a bishop as well.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: LBK on July 27, 2013, 12:24:21 AM
I consider ROCOR to have always been heretical from the day it was founded by Archbishop Khrapovitsky who was a heretic on many levels including blatant oecumenism with the Anglicans, Onomaclasm (Name fighting), and Stavroclasm (war against the Cross). 
As far as ecclesiology is concerned, my personal belief is that ROCOR's union with the MP was a move from bad to worse, and Archbishop Kyrill helped facilitate this apostasy.
Brother Nathaniel is one of the best things the ROCOR have going for them, and his background in "true orthodox" jurisdictions indicates that he has at least had an interest in pursuing the truth.

The truth is that the ROCOR is lucky to even have Brother Nathaniel.

What?  Onomaclasm?  Stavroclasm?  I've never heard of those asms before...

Onomaclasm sounds like the opposite to Name-worshipping, the latter is a declared heresy. If Dionysii is saying that ROCOR is against name-worship, then that is true, and it leaves him in a rather sticky situation.

He was quite sticky before.

... and this only adds to the stickiness.  :P
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: rakovsky on July 27, 2013, 02:32:36 PM
Our Parrish is a small mission but with very experienced clergy and choir. The Kursk root icon was at our Parrish several times.
Curious why you spelled it like the last name. Of course, we all make typos...
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Dionysii on August 21, 2013, 02:18:25 PM
I understand Name fighting to be a denial of the power of God. 
It is the heresy of Barlaam and the Frankish scholastics which denies the energy of God is God.

The Name of God is an Energy of God.  The Name of God is God Himself.
This is true since the energy of God is God Himself as Saint Gregory Palamas and others have truly said.

Oh.  So you're a heretic.  OK. 

How is the Name of God a divine energy?  Is an icon also a divine energy?  What about the Cross?  The Bible?  Are these things also God?

Idolatry. 

Mor Ephrem,

For what it's worth, I think you should have the right to state your beliefs as you have even if I think you are in error. 
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Dionysii on August 21, 2013, 02:53:58 PM
I understand Name fighting to be a denial of the power of God.  
It is the heresy of Barlaam and the Frankish scholastics which denies the energy of God is God.

The Name of God is an Energy of God.  The Name of God is God Himself.
This is true since the energy of God is God Himself as Saint Gregory Palamas and others have truly said.
How is the Name of God a divine energy?  Is an icon also a divine energy?  What about the Cross?  The Bible?  Are these things also God?

As I understand, unlike the Name of God, neither crosses nor icons are themselves energies of God.
My prayer books instruct me to pray every morning to the power of the holy cross rather than the cross itself.  
I understand this power to be God Himself, an uncreated energy of God.  
Canonical Christian ikons and crosses can convey certain of the energies of God if they have the Name of God inscribed upon them.  
Saint Gregory Palamas has in fact stated that it is pointless to venerate a cross that is void of the Name of God.  
Likewise, Saint John of Damascus has stated that holy ikons receive power when the Name of God is inscribed upon them.  
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) on August 21, 2013, 03:04:24 PM

The Name of God is an Energy of God.  The Name of God is God Himself.



Just as I suspected.  :(

This, my dear Dionysii, is Name-worshipping (Imiaslavie), which has been condemned as heresy by a council at Constantinople in 1912, presided by the Patriarch of Constantinople, and by the Holy Synod in Moscow in 1918, headed by Patriarch Tikhon.



And it's a heresy that post-dates the Nikonian schism, which makes it odd that an Old Believer would go for it. It wouldn't be their first oddity.

I am shocked that this heresy still continues. Lord have mercy.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: vamrat on August 21, 2013, 03:22:41 PM
Don't worship the Name of God.  Just don't take it in vain.  Now, the Word of God is to be worshiped.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Iconodule on August 21, 2013, 05:26:33 PM

The Name of God is an Energy of God.  The Name of God is God Himself.



Just as I suspected.  :(

This, my dear Dionysii, is Name-worshipping (Imiaslavie), which has been condemned as heresy by a council at Constantinople in 1912, presided by the Patriarch of Constantinople, and by the Holy Synod in Moscow in 1918, headed by Patriarch Tikhon.



And it's a heresy that post-dates the Nikonian schism, which makes it odd that an Old Believer would go for it. It wouldn't be their first oddity.

I am shocked that this heresy still continues. Lord have mercy.

Without taking sides on the question, I'll just point out that the imiaslavie controversy is far less cut-and-dried than folks here seem to believe.

Archimandrite Sophrony of blessed memory compared the controversy to one between poets and technocrats. Metropolitan Hilarion Alfeyev says:

Even though the movement of the “Name-worshippers” was crushed at the beginning of the century on the orders of the Holy Synod, discussion of the matter regained impetus in the years preceding the Moscow Council (1917-18), which was supposed to come to a decision about this but did not succeed in doing so. Thus the Church’s final assessment of Name-worshipping remains an open question to this day.

I would emphasise that this is by no means simply an issue of local concern, nor of merely historic interest, but a matter of no less theological significance than the argument between “Palamites” and “Barlaamites” in the middle of the fourteenth century. Name-worshipping was an expression of the centuries-old Athonite tradition of the activity (prayer) of the mind, while the “synodal” theologians were backed by the traditions of Russian academic scholarship. Study of the conflict on the worship of the Name could illuminate the mutual relations between the monastic theology of the experience and the “academic” theology of educational institutions.


Let that be a caution to someone who would characterize imiaslavie as "post-schism".

I have also seen, in a commentary on the "Our Father," the identification of the Name (as in, the name we hallow) with the Son:

For the name of God the father who subsists essentially is the only-begotten Son.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Dionysii on August 21, 2013, 05:43:22 PM
Without taking sides on the question, I'll just point out that the imiaslavie controversy is far less cut-and-dried than folks here seem to believe.

Archimandrite Sophrony of blessed memory compared the controversy to one between poets and technocrats. Metropolitan Hilarion Alfeyev says:

Even though the movement of the “Name-worshippers” was crushed at the beginning of the century on the orders of the Holy Synod, discussion of the matter regained impetus in the years preceding the Moscow Council (1917-18), which was supposed to come to a decision about this but did not succeed in doing so. Thus the Church’s final assessment of Name-worshipping remains an open question to this day.

I would emphasise that this is by no means simply an issue of local concern, nor of merely historic interest, but a matter of no less theological significance than the argument between “Palamites” and “Barlaamites” in the middle of the fourteenth century. Name-worshipping was an expression of the centuries-old Athonite tradition of the activity (prayer) of the mind, while the “synodal” theologians were backed by the traditions of Russian academic scholarship. Study of the conflict on the worship of the Name could illuminate the mutual relations between the monastic theology of the experience and the “academic” theology of educational institutions.


Let that be a caution to someone who would characterize imiaslavie as "post-schism".

I have also seen, in a commentary on the "Our Father," the identification of the Name (as in, the name we hallow) with the Son:

For the name of God the father who subsists essentially is the only-begotten Son.

beautiful post!
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Maria on August 21, 2013, 05:57:41 PM

The Name of God is an Energy of God.  The Name of God is God Himself.



Just as I suspected.  :(

This, my dear Dionysii, is Name-worshipping (Imiaslavie), which has been condemned as heresy by a council at Constantinople in 1912, presided by the Patriarch of Constantinople, and by the Holy Synod in Moscow in 1918, headed by Patriarch Tikhon.



And it's a heresy that post-dates the Nikonian schism, which makes it odd that an Old Believer would go for it. It wouldn't be their first oddity.

I am shocked that this heresy still continues. Lord have mercy.

Oh, yes, this heresy still continues, but the adherents are very deceptive as they try to give this heresy a new name and then deny that it is Name-Worshipping. Instead, they call it Name-Glorifying and accuse anti-Name Glorifiers (as they call us) of failing to give honor and glory to the Name of Jesus.

This heresy is being promoted in HOCNA, which is headquartered in Brookline, MA. Met. Ephraim gave his flock an ultimatum to accept the Name-Worshipping and Awake Sleepers' heresies or leave. Awake Sleepers is a form of universalism. About half the parishioners and parishioners left Met. Ephraim and his church in 2012 due to this heresy.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: ilyazhito on August 27, 2013, 07:17:46 PM
It is unfortunate that such kooks as Brother Nathaniel and HOCNA were ever part of ROCOR. Is Brother Nathaniel a self-hating Jew? If so, that would explain his anti-Zionist tirades. But the question is: why does Brother Nathaniel use ROCOR as his platform. HOCNA was a group that was formed when Archimandrite Panteleimon (Metropolous) was deposed from ROCOR, and has a very sordid history.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: rakovsky on September 02, 2013, 11:18:20 PM
I agree with the comments other posters have made here, and Br. Nathaniel's status is confusing. On one hand, he is Orthodox, belongs to a canonical diocese, and is a Novice monk. He has the approval of two hierarchs, including the primate and that of his home diocese, for his campaign.

On the other hand, he is living in a diocese whose hierarch, the chancellor, officially opposes his campaign. Plus, he over-dresses for a monk, considering the white kobluk, which a Novice would not wear. His dress is showy, and Novices are not supposed to be.

He cannot be in weekly communion in his home diocese for distance reasons. Even if he is living as a hermit and has approval for that, can he still be said to be in regular communion with his home parish as he claims?

Obviously he is Orthodox, but he is not following the normal rules in the Church.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: podkarpatska on September 03, 2013, 10:53:57 AM
I agree with the comments other posters have made here, and Br. Nathaniel's status is confusing. On one hand, he is Orthodox, belongs to a canonical diocese, and is a Novice monk. He has the approval of two hierarchs, including the primate and that of his home diocese, for his campaign.

On the other hand, he is living in a diocese whose hierarch, the chancellor, officially opposes his campaign. Plus, he over-dresses for a monk, considering the white kobluk, which a Novice would not wear. His dress is showy, and Novices are not supposed to be.

He cannot be in weekly communion in his home diocese for distance reasons. Even if he is living as a hermit and has approval for that, can he still be said to be in regular communion with his home parish as he claims?

Obviously he is Orthodox, but he is not following the normal rules in the Church.

This thread is a bad penny, which keeps resurfacing.

What part of this statement issued in July 2013 from the Chauncey of the Holy Synod of ROCOR is confusing?

"The Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia has recently received repeated complaints about the activities of and statements made by a certain Nathanael (Kapner), who lives on the territory of the Western American Diocese, but has no relation to it.
The clergymen and laity of the Russian Church Abroad are hereby informed that the actions of Nathanael (Kapner) do not have the blessing of the Synod of Bishops.

Profoundly saddened by the state of his soul, we call upon Nathanael (Kapner) to refrain from posting on the Internet, to a life of repentance of peace in Christ, “where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all” (Colossians 3:11).
+KYRILL,
Archbishop of Western America and San Francisco
Secretary of the Synod of Bishops."
http://www.pravmir.com/statement-from-the-chancery-of-the-rocor-synod-of-bishops/

The Synod does not indicate that Nathaniel (Kepner) has  any status in the ROCOR. Bishop Kyrill signed the document as Synodal Secretary speaking for, and on behalf of his Synod -not just as a Diocesan Bishop.

Nathaniel (Kepner's) actions, or "campaign" clearly do NOT have the current blessings of the ROCOR based on the plain, unambiguous wording of the Synod.

As to his status as an Orthodox Christian, I can not speculate, but we should pray that he need the advice offered him by the Synod.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: mike on September 03, 2013, 11:18:31 AM
"Novice monk" is an oxymoron.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Shiny on September 03, 2013, 11:31:05 AM
Br Nathaniel is our modern day Don Quixote.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Asteriktos on September 03, 2013, 11:43:27 AM
Br Nathaniel is our modern day Don Quixote.

Dostoevsky considered Don Quixote to be one of the few good attempts at a truly beautiful and Christlike character in fiction. Is Br. Nathaniel then a Christlike person to be emulated? And/or perhaps a modern day fool for Christ? Is that where you are going with this?  8)
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: rakovsky on September 03, 2013, 02:14:50 PM
What part of this statement issued in July 2013 from the Chauncey of the Holy Synod of ROCOR is confusing?

"The Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia has recently received repeated complaints about the activities of and statements made by a certain Nathanael (Kapner), who lives on the territory of the Western American Diocese, but has no relation to it.
The clergymen and laity of the Russian Church Abroad are hereby informed that the actions of Nathanael (Kapner) do not have the blessing of the Synod of Bishops.
Profoundly saddened by the state of his soul, we call upon Nathanael (Kapner) to refrain from posting on the Internet, to a life of repentance of peace in Christ, “where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all” (Colossians 3:11).
+KYRILL,
Archbishop of Western America and San Francisco
Secretary of the Synod of Bishops."

The Synod does not indicate that Nathaniel (Kepner) has  any status in the ROCOR. Bishop Kyrill signed the document as Synodal Secretary speaking for, and on behalf of his Synod -not just as a Diocesan Bishop. Nathaniel (Kepner's) actions, or "campaign" clearly do NOT have the current blessings of the ROCOR based on the plain, unambiguous wording of the Synod. As to his status as an Orthodox Christian, I can not speculate, but we should pray that he need the advice offered him by the Synod.
Good point, PodKarpatska. When the Chancellor writes "we", the most likely meaning is that he means "we," the Synod," not "we the chancery", right?

One of the two hierarchs who supported him was Bp. Jerome, who was recently censured and retired by the Synod in relation to his work in the Western Rite:
http://eadiocese.org/News/2013/july/synod.en.htm

That leaves Metr. Hilarion. His approval wouldn't carry over the disapproval of the Synod, would it?

The Mystagogy website comments:
Quote
He also wears a white skuphos which is only reserved for Metropolitans in the Slavic churches, and a pectoral cross which is forbidden to novices.

Further, he has a cross tucked under his belt. That is not correct, is it?

It is noteworthy that the statement does not call him "Brother" Nathanael. It seems to me he was only a Novice with a non-canonical sect.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Iconodule on September 03, 2013, 04:57:46 PM
I agree with the comments other posters have made here, and Br. Nathaniel's status is confusing. On one hand, he is Orthodox, belongs to a canonical diocese, and is a Novice monk. He has the approval of two hierarchs, including the primate and that of his home diocese, for his campaign.

On the other hand, he is living in a diocese whose hierarch, the chancellor, officially opposes his campaign. Plus, he over-dresses for a monk, considering the white kobluk, which a Novice would not wear. His dress is showy, and Novices are not supposed to be.

He cannot be in weekly communion in his home diocese for distance reasons. Even if he is living as a hermit and has approval for that, can he still be said to be in regular communion with his home parish as he claims?

Obviously he is Orthodox, but he is not following the normal rules in the Church.

This thread is a bad penny, which keeps resurfacing.

What part of this statement issued in July 2013 from the Chauncey of the Holy Synod of ROCOR is confusing?

"The Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia has recently received repeated complaints about the activities of and statements made by a certain Nathanael (Kapner), who lives on the territory of the Western American Diocese, but has no relation to it.
The clergymen and laity of the Russian Church Abroad are hereby informed that the actions of Nathanael (Kapner) do not have the blessing of the Synod of Bishops.

Profoundly saddened by the state of his soul, we call upon Nathanael (Kapner) to refrain from posting on the Internet, to a life of repentance of peace in Christ, “where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all” (Colossians 3:11).
+KYRILL,
Archbishop of Western America and San Francisco
Secretary of the Synod of Bishops."
http://www.pravmir.com/statement-from-the-chancery-of-the-rocor-synod-of-bishops/

The Synod does not indicate that Nathaniel (Kepner) has  any status in the ROCOR. Bishop Kyrill signed the document as Synodal Secretary speaking for, and on behalf of his Synod -not just as a Diocesan Bishop.

Nathaniel (Kepner's) actions, or "campaign" clearly do NOT have the current blessings of the ROCOR based on the plain, unambiguous wording of the Synod.

As to his status as an Orthodox Christian, I can not speculate, but we should pray that he need the advice offered him by the Synod.

Thanks for this.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on September 03, 2013, 09:01:12 PM
I agree with the comments other posters have made here, and Br. Nathaniel's status is confusing. On one hand, he is Orthodox, belongs to a canonical diocese, and is a Novice monk. He has the approval of two hierarchs, including the primate and that of his home diocese, for his campaign.

On the other hand, he is living in a diocese whose hierarch, the chancellor, officially opposes his campaign. Plus, he over-dresses for a monk, considering the white kobluk, which a Novice would not wear. His dress is showy, and Novices are not supposed to be.

He cannot be in weekly communion in his home diocese for distance reasons. Even if he is living as a hermit and has approval for that, can he still be said to be in regular communion with his home parish as he claims?

Obviously he is Orthodox, but he is not following the normal rules in the Church.

He has the approval of two hierarchs, including the primate and that of his home diocese, for his campaign.


Excuse me ? Source please

The clergymen and laity of the Russian Church Abroad are hereby informed that the actions of Nathanael (Kapner) do not have the blessing of the Synod of Bishops.

Is English not your first language?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Shanghaiski on September 03, 2013, 10:28:32 PM
Br Nathaniel is our modern day Don Quixote.

Dostoevsky considered Don Quixote to be one of the few good attempts at a truly beautiful and Christlike character in fiction. Is Br. Nathaniel then a Christlike person to be emulated? And/or perhaps a modern day fool for Christ? Is that where you are going with this?  8)

No. Dostoyevsky was simply on drugs at the time he made such comments, if he made such a comment. I remember it being someone else.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Shanghaiski on September 03, 2013, 10:29:47 PM
I agree with the comments other posters have made here, and Br. Nathaniel's status is confusing. On one hand, he is Orthodox, belongs to a canonical diocese, and is a Novice monk. He has the approval of two hierarchs, including the primate and that of his home diocese, for his campaign.

On the other hand, he is living in a diocese whose hierarch, the chancellor, officially opposes his campaign. Plus, he over-dresses for a monk, considering the white kobluk, which a Novice would not wear. His dress is showy, and Novices are not supposed to be.

He cannot be in weekly communion in his home diocese for distance reasons. Even if he is living as a hermit and has approval for that, can he still be said to be in regular communion with his home parish as he claims?

Obviously he is Orthodox, but he is not following the normal rules in the Church.

He has the approval of two hierarchs, including the primate and that of his home diocese, for his campaign.


Excuse me ? Source please

The clergymen and laity of the Russian Church Abroad are hereby informed that the actions of Nathanael (Kapner) do not have the blessing of the Synod of Bishops.

Is English not your first language?

Perhaps non-ROCOR hierarchs?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Opus118 on September 03, 2013, 10:51:34 PM
I agree with the comments other posters have made here, and Br. Nathaniel's status is confusing. On one hand, he is Orthodox, belongs to a canonical diocese, and is a Novice monk. He has the approval of two hierarchs, including the primate and that of his home diocese, for his campaign.

On the other hand, he is living in a diocese whose hierarch, the chancellor, officially opposes his campaign. Plus, he over-dresses for a monk, considering the white kobluk, which a Novice would not wear. His dress is showy, and Novices are not supposed to be.

He cannot be in weekly communion in his home diocese for distance reasons. Even if he is living as a hermit and has approval for that, can he still be said to be in regular communion with his home parish as he claims?

Obviously he is Orthodox, but he is not following the normal rules in the Church.

He has the approval of two hierarchs, including the primate and that of his home diocese, for his campaign.


Excuse me ? Source please

The clergymen and laity of the Russian Church Abroad are hereby informed that the actions of Nathanael (Kapner) do not have the blessing of the Synod of Bishops.

Is English not your first language?

I think he adequately addressed this above.

If  you disagree pm me.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Asteriktos on September 03, 2013, 10:57:50 PM
Br Nathaniel is our modern day Don Quixote.

Dostoevsky considered Don Quixote to be one of the few good attempts at a truly beautiful and Christlike character in fiction. Is Br. Nathaniel then a Christlike person to be emulated? And/or perhaps a modern day fool for Christ? Is that where you are going with this?  8)

No. Dostoyevsky was simply on drugs at the time he made such comments, if he made such a comment. I remember it being someone else.

Looking back at the letter again I have, perhaps, read my own interpretation into what he said. Or perhaps I am thinking of the interpretation of someone else and just don't remember who. Or perhaps I have understood his meaning. Regardless, here is what I was thinking of when I wrote that:

Quote
The idea of the novel is an old and favorite one of mine, but so difficult that for a long time I dared not tackle it, and if I have tackled it now, it was definitely only because my situation was almost desperate. The main idea of the novel [The Idiot] is to present a positively beautiful human being... There is only one positively beautiful character in the world--Christ, so that the appearance of this boundlessly, infinitely beautiful person is of course an infinite miracle in itself (the entire Gospel of St. John is [written] in this sense; he finds the whole miracle in the incarnation alone, the manifestation of the beautiful). But I have run on too far. I will only mention that of beautiful characters in Christian literature the most finished is Don Quixote. But he is beautiful only because he is at the same time ridiculous. Dicken's Pickwick (an infinitely weaker conception than Don Quixote but nevertheless immense) is also ridiculous, and succeeds because of this. There is compassion for the beautiful that is mocked and does not know its own value--and consequently there is sympathy in the reader. The awakening of compassion is the secret of humor. Jean Valjean is also a powerful attempt--but he awakens sympathy by his terrible unhappiness and the injustice of society towards him...

-- Fyodor Dostoevsky, Letter 106: To S.A. Ivanova (Geneva, 1/13 January 1868)
- Quoted in: Jessie Coulson, Dostoevsky: A Self-Portrait, (Oxford University Press, 1962), p. 169
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Iconodule on September 04, 2013, 07:19:37 AM
Where is the evidence that Met. Hilarion or Bishop Jerome supported Nathanael's antics?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: rakovsky on September 04, 2013, 10:11:36 AM
Where is the evidence that Met. Hilarion or Bishop Jerome supported Nathanael's antics?
N. Kapner claimed their approval on his website and elsewhere. It's not a baseless claim either, because he was making his public campaign for years while dressed in Orthodox-style regalia and a member of ROCOR, and those hierarchs did not deny his open announcement of their approval. Granted, none of those things are conclusive that they did, and it wouldn't have amounted to active support.

In any case, there are enough problems with his campaign based on Church standards, since doesn't "we" in the Chancellor's letter mean "we the Synod", not just "we, the chancellor's office"? He is not dressed to form and the hierarch where he lives opposes his campaign. So it's not something I care to argue at this point, Iconodule.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: podkarpatska on September 04, 2013, 10:18:20 AM
Where is the evidence that Met. Hilarion or Bishop Jerome supported Nathanael's antics?
N. Kapner claimed it on his website and elsewhere, although that does not mean they did. It's not a baseless claim either, because he was making his public campaign for years while dressed in Orthodox-style regalia and a member of ROCOR, and those hierarchs did not deny his open announcement of their approval. Granted, neither of those things are conclusive.

In any case, there are enough problems with his campaign based on Church standards, since doesn't "we" in the Chancellor's letter mean "we the Synod", not just "we, the chancellor's office"? He is not dressed to form either. So it's not something I care to argue at this point, Iconodule.

The original letter is on the Synod's letterhead, not that of the chancellor per se nor the Bishop who signed it in his diocesan capacity. He apparently signed the document as Secretary for the Synod in his legal capacity as the same.

Speaking with my lawyer hat on, rusty as it may be, the letter speaks for itself and were it authenticated in a court of law, it would stand as clear and convincing evidence of the intent of the Synod.

Case closed.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: rakovsky on September 04, 2013, 10:27:18 AM
The original letter is on the Synod's letterhead, not that of the chancellor per se nor the Bishop who signed it in his diocesan capacity. He apparently signed the document as Secretary for the Synod in his legal capacity as the same.

Speaking with my lawyer hat on, rusty as it may be, the letter speaks for itself and were it authenticated in a court of law, it would stand as clear and convincing evidence of the intent of the Synod.

Case closed.
It's pointless to argue. He's like a showman from his hippie musician days. It's a costume.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on September 04, 2013, 11:38:42 AM
Where is the evidence that Met. Hilarion or Bishop Jerome supported Nathanael's antics?

I have spoken to both the Met and Bishop Jerome personally, eye to eye about this. They are indeed very charitable towards him. They are only concerned about his salvation and have nothing what ever to do with his political antics. Their main problem is getting so many complaints about him, hence the official letter we have now all seen.

Bishop Jerome is on facebook.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on September 04, 2013, 11:41:02 AM
The original letter is on the Synod's letterhead, not that of the chancellor per se nor the Bishop who signed it in his diocesan capacity. He apparently signed the document as Secretary for the Synod in his legal capacity as the same.

Speaking with my lawyer hat on, rusty as it may be, the letter speaks for itself and were it authenticated in a court of law, it would stand as clear and convincing evidence of the intent of the Synod.

Case closed.
It's pointless to argue. He's like a showman from his hippie musician days. It's a costume.

(http://images.sodahead.com/profiles/0/0/2/3/0/8/8/5/7/Naziseverywhere-44988459285.jpeg)
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: yeshuaisiam on September 04, 2013, 12:30:53 PM
I like what he has to say most of the time.  His videos are good.

Issues such as "where he belongs, who he is with" has NOTHING to do with what he is saying.   That's just playing the control paradigm to see who "ranks" him... That way it would be easier to manipulate one's agenda against him if a person does not like what he is saying.

Obviously his abbot approves.

Despite anything else said, he certainly lives in a beautiful area of the country.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: rakovsky on September 04, 2013, 12:31:09 PM
I have spoken to both the Met and Bishop Jerome personally, eye to eye about this.

Their main problem is getting so many complaints about him

Bishop Jerome is on facebook.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: yeshuaisiam on September 04, 2013, 12:36:22 PM
I have spoken to both the Met and Bishop Jerome personally, eye to eye about this.

Their main problem is getting so many complaints about him

Bishop Jerome is on facebook.

Look at these people.... Going to somebody's bishop to complain.  That's weak and tattle-tale ish.  Why not make your own videos disproving what he is saying (if you can)?  Fight him with intellect rather than going to his "mommy" and telling.  Just seems so cowardly.  If he's wrong, make a video showing how his is wrong.    If you don't like his anti-zionist stances, fight him on his own platform.  You are more than free to make youtube videos.  Going and telling his bishop is childish.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Shanghaiski on September 04, 2013, 12:46:41 PM
I like what he has to say most of the time.  His videos are good.

Issues such as "where he belongs, who he is with" has NOTHING to do with what he is saying.   That's just playing the control paradigm to see who "ranks" him... That way it would be easier to manipulate one's agenda against him if a person does not like what he is saying.

Obviously his abbot approves.

Despite anything else said, he certainly lives in a beautiful area of the country.


He has no abbot.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Shanghaiski on September 04, 2013, 12:47:39 PM
I have spoken to both the Met and Bishop Jerome personally, eye to eye about this.

Their main problem is getting so many complaints about him

Bishop Jerome is on facebook.

Look at these people.... Going to somebody's bishop to complain.  That's weak and tattle-tale ish.  Why not make your own videos disproving what he is saying (if you can)?  Fight him with intellect rather than going to his "mommy" and telling.  Just seems so cowardly.  If he's wrong, make a video showing how his is wrong.    If you don't like his anti-zionist stances, fight him on his own platform.  You are more than free to make youtube videos.  Going and telling his bishop is childish.

Who is his bishop?

Actually going to the bishop is about good order, lest we have a free-for-all mob and confusion continue.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: yeshuaisiam on September 04, 2013, 12:52:20 PM
So this is how EO control works:

Brother Nathaniel makes youtube videos against Jewish Zionism
Many people like it, and he gets many views.
Some people don't like it.
Some EO despise it.
Many EO like it.

Those that despise say "Put that monk in his place".

Information:
Who is he - what jurisdiction?
Does abbot know - "can I tell the abbot to shut him up?"
Does bishop know - "can I tell the bishop to shut him up?"

Action:
I'm telling!  (yes like a 2 year old)
Person complains to the monastery abbot.  Abbot knows and allows.
Not good enough, mission not accomplished.
I'm telling again (like a 4 year old, knows to go to higher powers) so now to the bishop.  But the bishop knows.
Didn't work.

Manipulation:
Complain, over and over again to the bishop in hopes that he'll bend.

Dissonance:
Bishop does not bend.  Allows brother Nathaniel to keep making videos.  
EO Christian can't take this because they can't control a bishop.
EO Christian then looks into the bishop.

Start over:  Information
Who is the bishop?  Ah-HA! not part of world Orthodoxy
What did the bishop do? He's in HOCNA - Heretic
What is HOCNA - NEVER part of ROCOR, but they stage it at such!
(spontaneous bishop - probably spontaneous succession too right? LOL)
Invalidate bishop as heretic
Feel better

This is weak weak weak manipulation folks.  Seen it all way too many times.  You don't like what brother Nathaniel has to say, get off your natural seat, do some research, make some videos, stick them on youtube, and disprove what he is saying.   Don't be cowardly and manipulative through church hierarchy trying to feed your own need for control over another human being.  The funniest part is when that control need doesn't get fed, people then discredit the bishop and argue if he is real Orthodox or not, bringing "issues" to the table to distance them from Orthodoxy to further discredit.  (dissonance = Try to use the bishop to shut him up by recognizing the bishop's authority.  When agenda does not work, distance the bishop from Orthodoxy and YOUR TRUE church)

This is grammar school tattle-tale tactics, and honestly, childish.     A person who disagrees with him can simply show how he is wrong by making their own videos and showing it.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: yeshuaisiam on September 04, 2013, 12:53:10 PM
I have spoken to both the Met and Bishop Jerome personally, eye to eye about this.

Their main problem is getting so many complaints about him

Bishop Jerome is on facebook.

Look at these people.... Going to somebody's bishop to complain.  That's weak and tattle-tale ish.  Why not make your own videos disproving what he is saying (if you can)?  Fight him with intellect rather than going to his "mommy" and telling.  Just seems so cowardly.  If he's wrong, make a video showing how his is wrong.    If you don't like his anti-zionist stances, fight him on his own platform.  You are more than free to make youtube videos.  Going and telling his bishop is childish.

Who is his bishop?

Actually going to the bishop is about good order, lest we have a free-for-all mob and confusion continue.

NO it's not.  It's childish.   You don't like what he says, make some videos, post them, show how he is wrong.  ^read post above.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: yeshuaisiam on September 04, 2013, 12:54:35 PM
I like what he has to say most of the time.  His videos are good.

Issues such as "where he belongs, who he is with" has NOTHING to do with what he is saying.   That's just playing the control paradigm to see who "ranks" him... That way it would be easier to manipulate one's agenda against him if a person does not like what he is saying.

Obviously his abbot approves.

Despite anything else said, he certainly lives in a beautiful area of the country.


He has no abbot.

Does not matter same childish tactics apply with or without abbot.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Mor Ephrem on September 04, 2013, 01:06:18 PM
Look at these people.... Going to somebody's bishop to complain.  That's weak and tattle-tale ish.  Why not make your own videos disproving what he is saying (if you can)?  Fight him with intellect rather than going to his "mommy" and telling.  Just seems so cowardly.  If he's wrong, make a video showing how his is wrong.    If you don't like his anti-zionist stances, fight him on his own platform.  You are more than free to make youtube videos.  Going and telling his bishop is childish.

It's not childish, it's Orthodox.  What is the point of an "overseer" if you can't bring to his attention things that may require his oversight? 

What you advocate is Protestantism.  Yeah, that's worked out well. 
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: TheTrisagion on September 04, 2013, 01:10:07 PM

'Nuff said.

(http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20090219210924/wikiality/images/1/17/BrotherNathanaelLarge.jpg)
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Mor Ephrem on September 04, 2013, 01:13:45 PM
I never understood how "so many EO" (according to YiM) could look past the clownish appearance and demeanour of this fellow in order to watch his videos and become groupies.  Surely your Church doesn't really attract as many stupid people as the internet would lead us to believe?   
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: TheTrisagion on September 04, 2013, 01:18:19 PM
I never understood how "so many EO" (according to YiM) could look past the clownish appearance and demeanour of this fellow in order to watch his videos and become groupies.  Surely your Church doesn't really attract as many stupid people as the internet would lead us to believe?   
I'm sure there are plenty of wackjob EOs out there who think he is great, but I'm not so sure YiM's perspective of Eastern Orthodoxy is exactly accurate.  I don't think there is any groundswell of support for "Brother" Nathanael.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: mike on September 04, 2013, 01:21:23 PM
Those that despise say "Put that monk in his place".

He is not a monk.

It's not childish, it's Orthodox.  What is the point of an "overseer" if you can't bring to his attention things that may require his oversight?  

What you advocate is Protestantism.  Yeah, that's worked out well.  

Because yeshuaisiam IS a Protestant.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Mor Ephrem on September 04, 2013, 01:22:39 PM
But Trisagion, even two "wackjob EOs" is three too many.  This should never have required a synodal clarification.  All that should've been necessary in any reasonably normal human society was to take one look at the photo you posted and just say "no".  
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Shanghaiski on September 04, 2013, 01:24:18 PM
I never understood how "so many EO" (according to YiM) could look past the clownish appearance and demeanour of this fellow in order to watch his videos and become groupies.  Surely your Church doesn't really attract as many stupid people as the internet would lead us to believe?   

I think most of his groupies were not Orthodox.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Shanghaiski on September 04, 2013, 01:26:31 PM
But Trisagion, even two "wackjob EOs" is three too many.  This should never have required a synodal clarification.  All that should've been necessary in any reasonably normal human society was to take one look at the photo you posted and just say "no".  

I think, before everything went online, that no synod would have dealt with the matter at all. But the Internet has a way of blowing things out of proportion. And one has to be concerned for the brand name.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Mor Ephrem on September 04, 2013, 01:42:39 PM
I think, before everything went online, that no synod would have dealt with the matter at all. But the Internet has a way of blowing things out of proportion. And one has to be concerned for the brand name.

Then he should've been made into a meme.   
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Iconodule on September 04, 2013, 02:31:16 PM
Where is the evidence that Met. Hilarion or Bishop Jerome supported Nathanael's antics?
N. Kapner claimed their approval on his website and elsewhere. It's not a baseless claim either, because he was making his public campaign for years while dressed in Orthodox-style regalia and a member of ROCOR, and those hierarchs did not deny his open announcement of their approval. Granted, none of those things are conclusive that they did, and it wouldn't have amounted to active support.

I think a very simple and plausible explanation is that these have too much real stuff on their plate. And now we have Nathaniel's word versus a very official and public statement from the synod. Yes, case closed. Orthodox Christianity and white nationalism are not compatible... though we all knew that already.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: TheTrisagion on September 04, 2013, 02:58:31 PM
But Trisagion, even two "wackjob EOs" is three too many.  This should never have required a synodal clarification.  All that should've been necessary in any reasonably normal human society was to take one look at the photo you posted and just say "no".  
Theoretically, I agree with you, but after having spent far more time than I ought online, I have come to the realization that a good 50% of the online population are just stark raving mad lunatics.  Heck, there are people on here that I wonder how they were smart enough to descend the birth canal, yet here they are, spouting nonsense on a daily basis.  :-\
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: podkarpatska on September 04, 2013, 03:24:29 PM
Look at these people.... Going to somebody's bishop to complain.  That's weak and tattle-tale ish.  Why not make your own videos disproving what he is saying (if you can)?  Fight him with intellect rather than going to his "mommy" and telling.  Just seems so cowardly.  If he's wrong, make a video showing how his is wrong.    If you don't like his anti-zionist stances, fight him on his own platform.  You are more than free to make youtube videos.  Going and telling his bishop is childish.

It's not childish, it's Orthodox.  What is the point of an "overseer" if you can't bring to his attention things that may require his oversight? 

What you advocate is Protestantism.  Yeah, that's worked out well. 

Exactly, and if Mr. Kepner wishes to be a Protestant or anything else, just like Yeshuasisiasm , that's his business. But he holds himself out as somehow operating with the blessing of some  Orthodox authority and if he is not truthful in that regard with respect to the ROCOR, well the Synod acted appropriately as Orthodoxy is a hierarchical organization.

Those of you who take issue with the hierarchical nature of Orthodoxy, please leave the house  - figuratively - you are not Orthodox if you reject the structure of the Church. Be honest and be a modern day Bespopovtsy.

Yeshuaisiasm is honest about where he stands and I respect that, even though I have few points of agreement with him.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: podkarpatska on September 04, 2013, 03:30:10 PM
But Trisagion, even two "wackjob EOs" is three too many.  This should never have required a synodal clarification.  All that should've been necessary in any reasonably normal human society was to take one look at the photo you posted and just say "no".  

Amen.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: rakovsky on September 04, 2013, 09:03:32 PM
(http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20090219210924/wikiality/images/1/17/BrotherNathanaelLarge.jpg)
Why does he have a white glove and a black glove, or gloves at all?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Shanghaiski on September 04, 2013, 09:28:12 PM
(http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20090219210924/wikiality/images/1/17/BrotherNathanaelLarge.jpg)
Why does he have a white glove and a black glove, or gloves at all?

Symbolism. It's all about symbolism.

Or Michael Jackson, who was also all about symbolism.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Mor Ephrem on September 04, 2013, 09:30:13 PM
Maybe he finds inspiration in the King of Pop.  It don't matter if you're

(http://batmj.com/images/dirty_diana/dirty_diana_glove_black.JPG)

or

(http://resources0.news.com.au/images/2012/12/21/1225975/518660-michael-jackson.jpg)

Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Mor Ephrem on September 04, 2013, 09:30:37 PM
Or Michael Jackson, who was also all about symbolism.

You beat me to it!
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Gunnarr on September 04, 2013, 11:05:32 PM
Many fools for christ were naked, are we supposed to say "no" to them??

I dont think nathaniel is a fool for christ, I dont like his opinions very much he sounds like a nut job

but just saying "no" because of an image does not make much sense, "DONT JUDGE A BOOK BY ITS COVER" - St. Anonymous
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Ebor on September 04, 2013, 11:11:14 PM
I like what he has to say most of the time.  His videos are good.

His videos have much in the way of innuendo and suggestions without basis or real fact. He makes claims without supporting evidence. He puts pictures together with his words that may together create an impression of something that is not true.  The last I checked his site he had things on the loathsome "Protocols" which document is a forgery and a lie.  In the past he had a site with vile calumny against various EO hierarchs.  He was a novice at the monastery in Colorado which was at one time ROAC (Metropolitan Valentine of Suzdal) until the then head separated from that body and is now  Archbishop Gregory "of Denver and Colorado".  Mr. Kapner's leaving that place involved accusations and the local sheriff's department among other things.  Several persons here were also at the Euphrosynos Cafe in 2005 when information on this was posted by Mr. Kapner himself.  

Because one happens to like what someone else says does not make the statements true.  

Quote
Obviously his abbot approves.


How is it "obvious" please?  Particularly since as far as others who are EO have posted, Mr. Kapner does not have an abbot.

<edited to put the correct law enforcement unit in the sentence.  After nearly 8 years I had to check the E-cafe postings for the precise information>
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Mor Ephrem on September 04, 2013, 11:19:01 PM
Many fools for christ were naked, are we supposed to say "no" to them??

I've never met any fools for Christ, but I've known quite a few fools.  Definitely, just say no to those.  

Quote
I dont think nathaniel is a fool for christ, I dont like his opinions very much he sounds like a nut job

but just saying "no" because of an image does not make much sense, "DONT JUDGE A BOOK BY ITS COVER" - St. Anonymous

But a book's cover doesn't necessarily tell you anything about the quality of the book, which is why we have that saying.  A monastic novice, on the other hand, does not dress like "Brother" "Nathanael".  So if the latter presents himself the way he does, I'd say yes, in fact we can and should "judge" him.  Habitus non facit monachum, but it's a pretty good indicator.  
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Gunnarr on September 04, 2013, 11:35:47 PM
Many fools for christ were naked, are we supposed to say "no" to them??

I've never met any fools for Christ, but I've known quite a few fools.  Definitely, just say no to those.  

Quote
I dont think nathaniel is a fool for christ, I dont like his opinions very much he sounds like a nut job

but just saying "no" because of an image does not make much sense, "DONT JUDGE A BOOK BY ITS COVER" - St. Anonymous

But a book's cover doesn't necessarily tell you anything about the quality of the book, which is why we have that saying.  A monastic novice, on the other hand, does not dress like "Brother" "Nathanael".  So if the latter presents himself the way he does, I'd say yes, in fact we can and should "judge" him.  Habitus non facit monachum, but it's a pretty good indicator.  

That fancy latin phrase changed my mind, I think you are right

 I CHANGE MY OPINION

no fool for christ dressed up as a monk while not being one! tHEREFORE, all those dressed up as monks who are not monks must be ignored!

Therefor, bang! (although, that is restricting any future fools for christ... oh well, they should know better and stick to being naked like the stories told, those fools being foolish)

thank you, your dialogue has changed a mind

a good thing i did not keep my opinion for three times
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: podkarpatska on September 05, 2013, 09:48:25 AM
Many fools for christ were naked, are we supposed to say "no" to them??

I've never met any fools for Christ, but I've known quite a few fools.  Definitely, just say no to those.  

Quote
I dont think nathaniel is a fool for christ, I dont like his opinions very much he sounds like a nut job

but just saying "no" because of an image does not make much sense, "DONT JUDGE A BOOK BY ITS COVER" - St. Anonymous

But a book's cover doesn't necessarily tell you anything about the quality of the book, which is why we have that saying.  A monastic novice, on the other hand, does not dress like "Brother" "Nathanael".  So if the latter presents himself the way he does, I'd say yes, in fact we can and should "judge" him.  Habitus non facit monachum, but it's a pretty good indicator.  

Being a monk grants no man an entitlement to automatic life long respect. Perhaps you start with a presumption of respect, but like any gift, respect can be squandered. I took the time to research this particular fellow last night, he gets no respect in my mind and the statement of the ROCOR simply validated my conclusion.

Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: TheTrisagion on September 05, 2013, 09:55:26 AM
Many fools for christ were naked, are we supposed to say "no" to them??

I've never met any fools for Christ, but I've known quite a few fools.  Definitely, just say no to those.  

Quote
I dont think nathaniel is a fool for christ, I dont like his opinions very much he sounds like a nut job

but just saying "no" because of an image does not make much sense, "DONT JUDGE A BOOK BY ITS COVER" - St. Anonymous

But a book's cover doesn't necessarily tell you anything about the quality of the book, which is why we have that saying.  A monastic novice, on the other hand, does not dress like "Brother" "Nathanael".  So if the latter presents himself the way he does, I'd say yes, in fact we can and should "judge" him.  Habitus non facit monachum, but it's a pretty good indicator.  

Being a monk grants no man an entitlement to automatic life long respect. Perhaps you start with a presumption of respect, but like any gift, respect can be squandered. I took the time to research this particular fellow last night, he gets no respect in my mind and the statement of the ROCOR simply validated my conclusion.


I disagree, a long enough beard shall cover a multitude of sins.  Brother Nathanael's failing is the lack of a truly lengthy beard. It is more of a big fuzz patch sitting on his head. ;)
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: hecma925 on September 05, 2013, 10:14:46 AM
Ah, but he carries many crosses.  That must count for something.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on September 05, 2013, 10:24:24 AM
I like what he has to say most of the time.  His videos are good.

Issues such as "where he belongs, who he is with" has NOTHING to do with what he is saying.   That's just playing the control paradigm to see who "ranks" him... That way it would be easier to manipulate one's agenda against him if a person does not like what he is saying.

Obviously his abbot approves.

Despite anything else said, he certainly lives in a beautiful area of the country.

His Abbot? I am pretty sure he has no Abbot. If he does have one let us know who he is.

Loose cannon
(http://www.phrases.org.uk/images/loose-cannon.jpg)
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on September 05, 2013, 10:29:03 AM
Many fools for christ were naked, are we supposed to say "no" to them??

I've never met any fools for Christ, but I've known quite a few fools.  Definitely, just say no to those.  

Quote
I dont think nathaniel is a fool for christ, I dont like his opinions very much he sounds like a nut job

but just saying "no" because of an image does not make much sense, "DONT JUDGE A BOOK BY ITS COVER" - St. Anonymous

But a book's cover doesn't necessarily tell you anything about the quality of the book, which is why we have that saying.  A monastic novice, on the other hand, does not dress like "Brother" "Nathanael".  So if the latter presents himself the way he does, I'd say yes, in fact we can and should "judge" him.  Habitus non facit monachum, but it's a pretty good indicator.  

That fancy latin phrase changed my mind, I think you are right

 I CHANGE MY OPINION

no fool for christ dressed up as a monk while not being one! tHEREFORE, all those dressed up as monks who are not monks must be ignored!

Therefor, bang! (although, that is restricting any future fools for christ... oh well, they should know better and stick to being naked like the stories told, those fools being foolish)

thank you, your dialogue has changed a mind

a good thing i did not keep my opinion for three times

He is a tonsured novice monk. But he is not under anyone's obedience and is out in the World on his own. He does not belong to any Monastery..
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: LBK on September 05, 2013, 10:38:20 AM
Quote
He is a tonsured novice monk.

Novices are not tonsured. Tonsuring is done when the novice becomes a rassophore monk.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Marc1152 on September 05, 2013, 10:45:11 AM
Quote
He is a tonsured novice monk.

Novices are not tonsured. Tonsuring is done when the novice becomes a rassophore monk.

Thanks....Move to amend comment.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: LBK on September 05, 2013, 10:48:48 AM
Quote
He is a tonsured novice monk.

Novices are not tonsured. Tonsuring is done when the novice becomes a rassophore monk.

Thanks....Move to amend comment.

.... and once the monastic is thus received, he is bound to stay a monastic, obedient to his abbot.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: rakovsky on September 05, 2013, 11:38:45 AM
He was a novice at the monastery in Colorado which was at one time ROAC (Metropolitan Valentine of Suzdal) until the then head separated from that body and is now  Archbishop Gregory "of Denver and Colorado".  Mr. Kapner's leaving that place involved accusations and the local sheriff's department among other things.  Several persons here were also at the Euphrosynos Cafe in 2005 when information on this was posted by Mr. Kapner himself.  
If a person decides they do not want to go into the monashestvo (monks' organization), that means they are no longer a novice, right? Because the purpose of the novice level is to decide if they want to or not?  So that would mean he is not "Br." Nathanael?

Do you have a link to Eus. Cafe's site?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: hecma925 on September 05, 2013, 11:41:54 AM
He was a novice at the monastery in Colorado which was at one time ROAC (Metropolitan Valentine of Suzdal) until the then head separated from that body and is now  Archbishop Gregory "of Denver and Colorado".  Mr. Kapner's leaving that place involved accusations and the local sheriff's department among other things.  Several persons here were also at the Euphrosynos Cafe in 2005 when information on this was posted by Mr. Kapner himself.  
If a person decides they do not want to go into the monashestvo (monks' organization), that means they are no longer a novice, right? Because the purpose of the novice level is to decide if they want to or not?  So that would mean he is not "Br." Nathanael?

Do you have a link to Eus. Cafe's site?

This is correct. The key phrase of all this is he "was a novice."  He is under no authority but his own.
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: Ebor on September 05, 2013, 11:42:09 AM
He was a novice at the monastery in Colorado which was at one time ROAC (Metropolitan Valentine of Suzdal) until the then head separated from that body and is now  Archbishop Gregory "of Denver and Colorado".  Mr. Kapner's leaving that place involved accusations and the local sheriff's department among other things.  Several persons here were also at the Euphrosynos Cafe in 2005 when information on this was posted by Mr. Kapner himself.  
If a person decides they do not want to go into the monashestvo (monks' organization), that means they are no longer a novice, right? Because the purpose of the novice level is to decide if they want to or not?  So that would mean he is not "Br." Nathanael?

Do you have a link to Eus. Cafe's site?

Do you want one(s) to some of the particular threads from that time as well as others that Mr. Kapner wrote?
Title: Re: Brother Nathaniel
Post by: podkarpatska on September 05, 2013, 12:20:20 PM