OrthodoxChristianity.net
July 29, 2014, 07:04:42 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Orthodox Controversialism  (Read 1735 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,376



« on: November 25, 2003, 05:41:57 PM »

OK, so here it is another week and we have yet another off-the-wall topic: whether or not England was Orthodox in 1066. I'm not going to go into the arguments here; go read the other thread if you really must know.

Why there is an argument at all is pretty easy to figure out. For the most part, this is a convert issue; it allows American and English converts-- especially Anglican converts-- to indulge in the fantasy that they are somehow recovering a lost past. (It also seems to allow some Russians/Russophiles to indulge in the "Russia invented everything" shtick, from what I can see. Presumably there is a Greek version too.)

But then we go off into all these other arguments-- labor pains, the epyclesis (or lack thereof), trans/cons, and so forth. Too much of the time it seems to me that this "discussion" is far too deadly serious (and at least in the "trans/cons" discussion, the "why worry?" position seems to be gaining support).

To me this is one of the most off-putting aspects of Orthodoxy. People argue vituperatively over every little thing, glossing over the viciousness of the discussion by saying "we must believe The Truth(tm)!" And if that isn't good enough, they turn their credulity up to eleven and dig out (or make up) a lot of tendentious "tradition" which seems to consist of anything they can find some fruitcake to say long enough ago.

On a bad day, it makes Orthodoxy look more like "right squabble" than "right belief". At least in the Episcopal Church the things we are fighting over are worth fighting over.
Logged
The young fogey
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,522


I'm an alpaca, actually


WWW
« Reply #1 on: November 25, 2003, 05:44:25 PM »

Re: 'Orthodox England in the Dark Ages', amen.

We agree to disagree re: the importance of the Real Presence.
« Last Edit: November 25, 2003, 05:46:01 PM by Serge » Logged

Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Online Online

Posts: 15,447


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #2 on: November 25, 2003, 05:54:09 PM »

To me this is one of the most off-putting aspects of Orthodoxy. People argue vituperatively over every little thing, glossing over the viciousness of the discussion by saying "we must believe The Truth(tm)!"

ISTM the opposite of this is the idea that you can have a lot of leeway on almost anything, and still remain in communion.  I don't know which is better, but I side with the Orthodox.
 
Quote
On a bad day, it makes Orthodoxy look more like "right squabble" than "right belief". At least in the Episcopal Church the things we are fighting over are worth fighting over.

Because there is so much that is important that has been lost?
« Last Edit: November 25, 2003, 05:55:36 PM by Mor Ephrem » Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,376



« Reply #3 on: November 25, 2003, 06:02:45 PM »

To me this is one of the most off-putting aspects of Orthodoxy. People argue vituperatively over every little thing, glossing over the viciousness of the discussion by saying "we must believe The Truth(tm)!"

ISTM the opposite of this is the idea that you can have a lot of leeway on almost anything, and still remain in communion.  I don't know which is better, but I side with the Orthodox.

But the problem with saying that is precisely the word "opposite". We don't have to choose between opposites; we can apply some descernment and determine that some issues are worth fighting over and that some are not.

And worse, people are inventing issues. Arguing about 1066 as a religious issue is completely wrong-headed, for instance. It is simply a matter of history, and the Orthodox position must either be indifference or submission to the historians. When it is not (and in the thread I linked to, it certainly is not), it is not Truth.

Quote
Quote
On a bad day, it makes Orthodoxy look more like "right squabble" than "right belief". At least in the Episcopal Church the things we are fighting over are worth fighting over.

Because there is so much that is important that has been lost?  

It doesn't help to invent losses that never happened, or to portray every change as a loss!
Logged
Justinianus
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 255



« Reply #4 on: November 25, 2003, 06:03:12 PM »

Keble,

Maybe you should post this question over there.  

I do not think the topic or the discussion it generated amounts to much.  From a historical standpoint, the whole debate on the Varangian guard in the link seems incredibly superfluous.
Logged

"If we truly think of Christ as our source of holiness, we shall refrain from anything wicked or impure in thought or act and thus show ourselves to be worthy bearers of his name.  For the quality of holiness is shown not by what we say but by what w
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Online Online

Posts: 15,447


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #5 on: November 25, 2003, 06:14:00 PM »

But the problem with saying that is precisely the word "opposite". We don't have to choose between opposites; we can apply some descernment and determine that some issues are worth fighting over and that some are not.

And worse, people are inventing issues. Arguing about 1066 as a religious issue is completely wrong-headed, for instance. It is simply a matter of history, and the Orthodox position must either be indifference or submission to the historians. When it is not (and in the thread I linked to, it certainly is not), it is not Truth.

I personally don't care about the question of the Orthodoxy of England in 1066 because it doesn't affect my salvation, and because it is something better addressed by historians.  In this, I agree with you.  

Why do these guys invent issues?  I don't know.  Maybe you are right on this one, and it is done to make Orthodoxy look less foreign.  But I would hesitate to take any of the goings on there as representative of Orthodoxy on the whole, as your post seemed to say to me.  I, of course, don't agree with that.  I even take a little offence at that.  Tongue
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
carpo-rusyn
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 383



« Reply #6 on: November 25, 2003, 07:00:39 PM »

Keble

Well of course England was Orthodox in 1066 it was in communion with the See of Peter wasn't it.  Wink  The bit about the Varangian Guard was true but the few English that went went because England became unhealthy for adherents of the Saxon line not because of faith.

[I personally don't care about the question of the Orthodoxy of England in 1066 because it doesn't affect my salvation,]

Very true.  I hope this arcane question doesn't affect anyone's salvation but it probably does

Carpo-Rusyn
Logged
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #7 on: November 25, 2003, 07:54:20 PM »

Keble

Well of course England was Orthodox in 1066 it was in communion with the See of Peter wasn't it.  Wink


Everyone wants to be a comedian...

Demetri
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


"Look At Me! Look At Me Now! " - Bono


« Reply #8 on: November 25, 2003, 09:15:00 PM »

Why there is an argument at all is pretty easy to figure out. For the most part, this is a convert issue; it allows American and English converts-- especially Anglican converts-- to indulge in the fantasy that they are somehow recovering a lost past.

Stop fighting it. Come home Keble!
Logged
carpo-rusyn
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 383



« Reply #9 on: November 25, 2003, 10:25:41 PM »

Demetri

Was I being funny?Huh

Seriously though the idea of England prior to the Norman Conquest being Orthodox in the Eastern Orthodox sense is laughable.  If you would've taken Harold Godwinson or St Edward the Confessor and plunked them down in Hagia Sophia they would've promptly left and looked for the nearest Latin chapel.  The episcopacy of Saxon England as well as the laity were thoroughly RC in communion with Rome.  True the Roman rite was used along side the uses of Hereford, Sarum and others but they were RC.  This is not a commercial for the RCC it's just historical fact.  Read Bede's history!  

[Stop fighting it. Come home Keble!]

Keble IS  home. Rather than invalidating his position within ECUSA he should be supported and prayed for.

[But the problem with saying that is precisely the word "opposite". We don't have to choose between opposites; we can apply some descernment and determine that some issues are worth fighting over and that some are not.]

Keble, I quite agree but figuring out what the issues to fight over is tricky.

Carpo-Rusyn
Logged
Linus7
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,780



« Reply #10 on: November 26, 2003, 01:50:13 AM »

Re: 'Orthodox England in the Dark Ages', amen.

We agree to disagree re: the importance of the Real Presence.

What he said.

How about a new thread: Catholic Greece before the Visit of Cardinal Humbert ?   Grin
Logged

The first condition of salvation is to keep the norm of the true faith and in no way to deviate from the established doctrine of the Fathers.
- Pope St. Hormisdas
Tags:
Pages: 1   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.074 seconds with 39 queries.