OrthodoxChristianity.net
July 23, 2014, 01:15:29 AM *
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 2 3 All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Battle Royale  (Read 14474 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Antonious Nikolas
Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite, Anagnostis
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox
Posts: 1,703


Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra


WWW
« on: June 15, 2004, 08:59:56 PM »

I'm not trying to tell you guys how to run your site, but if I may I'd like to offer a few observations and maybe a suggestion or two.  It is obvious that the Non-Chalcedonian forum has become little more than a debate forum.  I would say that 8 out of 10 posts made here are either attacks on the Oriental Orthodox, or posts made in defense of those attacks.  The rest seem to be the kinds of questions which are posed in a way that will deliberately and inevitably lead us into debate.  I am not talking about the more innocuous inquiries either.  I am talking about the ones that seem to deliberately invite debate between Linus & Peter, etc.  Like I said before, I guess sitting back and watching the resulting fracas is easier than cracking the spine on some history books and doing some real old fashioned off-line research.  It is obvious to anyone who posts here that bad feelings have developed.  The forum seems to be poisoned.  Is it possible to divide the forum into a debate section and another section for more general posts?  I used to really enjoy posting here, and even taking part in the occasional debate, but now it seems like debate and bad feelings reign supreme.  I would really like to keep posting here, but I do not find it enjoyable under the present circumstances.  I know for a fact that I am far from the only one who feels this way.  Esteemed moderators, what changes are being considered?
Logged

“Nothing is better than to realize one’s weakness and ignorance and nothing is worse than not to be aware of them.” - St. Peter of Damascus
Ben
Unabashedly Pro-Life
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,260



« Reply #1 on: June 15, 2004, 09:09:13 PM »

I just want to say that I don't think its gotten that bad, and personally I have learned a great deal from the debates that have taken place in this forum. I can honestly say I have learned a lot, and now I just want to learn more.

Keep up the great work mods and admins!
Logged

"I prefer to be accused unjustly, for then I have nothing to reproach myself with, and joyfully offer this to the good Lord. Then I humble myself at the thought that I am indeed capable of doing the thing of which I have been accused. " - Saint
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Online Online

Posts: 15,189


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #2 on: June 15, 2004, 09:47:37 PM »

Dear Nik,

Rather than take the time to write what I'd really like to write, I am forced by my circumstances to keep this brief.  

At this point, I don't want to do anything without first consulting with the others.  Therefore, any plans--I have some ideas of my own--will be released only after I have a chance to talk to the rest of our admins/mods.  That's all I can say for now.
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
David
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of the South)
Posts: 1,952


Retired GM


WWW
« Reply #3 on: June 15, 2004, 09:57:20 PM »

Odium Theologicum.  It's a sad thing.
Logged

"When looking at faults, use a mirror, not a telescope."
-Yazid Ibrahim
Linus7
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,780



« Reply #4 on: June 15, 2004, 10:46:59 PM »

You all might want to consider the facts that the Eastern Orthodox and the Non-Chalcedonians really do not share the same faith and are not part of the same communion (and that is putting it mildly).

Therefore the attempt to run a web site as if they were - as if there were such a thing as "generic orthodoxy" - is bound to encounter problems, perhaps even insurmountable problems.

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
Ben
Unabashedly Pro-Life
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,260



« Reply #5 on: June 15, 2004, 10:49:41 PM »

I do somewhat agree with Linus. There seems to be too much issues with the OO/EO situation for this forum to run peacefuly. Just my opinion though.......
Logged

"I prefer to be accused unjustly, for then I have nothing to reproach myself with, and joyfully offer this to the good Lord. Then I humble myself at the thought that I am indeed capable of doing the thing of which I have been accused. " - Saint
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,397


« Reply #6 on: June 16, 2004, 12:59:24 AM »

You all might want to consider the facts that the Eastern Orthodox and the Non-Chalcedonians really do not share the same faith and are not part of the same communion (and that is putting it mildly).

Therefore the attempt to run a web site as if they were - as if there were such a thing as "generic orthodoxy" - is bound to encounter problems, perhaps even insurmountable problems.

 

Thank you Linus for letting us all know the exact opinion all of EOxy has towards the OO.   Roll Eyes

I definitely don't see this as heated as AN does, but agree with the negative vibe from the "debates" per se.  On a theological level, I'm definitely more inclined to agree with your points as opposed to Peter's but I have yet to see a shred of charity in ANY of your postings on the matter.  It's as if you're deliberately trying NOT to understand their view and see that it could possibly be in the correct patristic mindset.  Again, I don't have some preconceived notion of you as a bigot or have any grudge.  I've never met you and only know you from your online writings.   You seem to come off as if you're an expert on Orthodox Theology and Canon law and I've yet to see you spout any credentials.

Please make an effort.

Peter,
Going to get back to my questions?  Thanks.
Logged
Linus7
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,780



« Reply #7 on: June 16, 2004, 12:56:07 PM »

Quote
Elisha:
Thank you Linus for letting us all know the exact opinion all of EOxy has towards the OO.   Roll Eyes

Obviously, I cannot speak for all of "EOxy."

But what the Orthodox Fathers had to say on the subject is there for anyone to see, and in good English translations.

One can choose to endorse dialogues initiated, promoted, and sponsored through the WCC (an organization not known for its loyalty to or concern for the Patristic Consensus).

One can choose to believe persons who couch what they say in glowing terms of "unity" and "understanding" who at the same time attack councils regarded by the Orthodox Church as inspired by the Holy Spirit, persons who persist in assertions and terminology the Fathers declared heretical.

When Orthodox Christians insist upon acceptance of all of the ecumenical councils, when they insist that the Fathers are wiser and holier than we and understood these issues better, they are accused of being divisive by Non-Chalcedonians who, although unwilling to compromise their own positions, wish to portray themselves as the irenic emissaries of peace, love, and understanding.

Quote
Elisha: I definitely don't see this as heated as AN does, but agree with the negative vibe from the "debates" per se.

I agree. I don't think they are any more heated than the threads over on the Catholic Forum.

It seems that it's okay for all of us to jump on the Catholics (I've done it myself) and challenge them.

But when an EO disagrees with the NCs, he's being uncharitable, divisive, and mean.

Quote
Elisha: On a theological level, I'm definitely more inclined to agree with your points as opposed to Peter's but I have yet to see a shred of charity in ANY of your postings on the matter.

Your definition of charity and mine must differ.

I may at times have been too blunt, but I do not engage in the sorts of attacks that have been perpetrated against me.

It is highly charitable to tell the truth.

It sets men free.

Quote
Elisha: It's as if you're deliberately trying NOT to understand their view and see that it could possibly be in the correct patristic mindset.  Again, I don't have some preconceived notion of you as a bigot or have any grudge.  I've never met you and only know you from your online writings.   You seem to come off as if you're an expert on Orthodox Theology and Canon law and I've yet to see you spout any credentials.

Please make an effort.

Peter,
Going to get back to my questions?  Thanks.

I have never said I am an expert, nor have I spent much, if any, time citing canon law (a thing about which I know little).

As I said before, what the Orthodox Fathers had to say on the NCs and their doctrines is there for everyone to see.

If we stick with that, we will be right.

If we contradict them in order to please men, we will have gone astray.

And going astray leads to becoming lost.
« Last Edit: June 17, 2004, 11:32:12 AM by Linus7 » 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
Antonious Nikolas
Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite, Anagnostis
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox
Posts: 1,703


Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra


WWW
« Reply #8 on: June 16, 2004, 02:37:24 PM »

Thank you Linus for helping to drive home my point. :cwm17:

You see moderators?  Even in this thread, which had to do with the state of the forum and was not at all about Church history or theology, a thread which was in fact a call for changes in the forum, we are treated to a theological polemic!  Every single thread in this forum turns into the EXACT SAME ARGUMENT over and over again.

We could start a thread about a recipe for cupcakes, and Linus would take that as another opportunity to vent his spleen  :cwm8: about the evils of ecumenism and the dangerous monophysite heretics.  Thanks once again Linus for illustrating my point so eloquently.
Logged

“Nothing is better than to realize one’s weakness and ignorance and nothing is worse than not to be aware of them.” - St. Peter of Damascus
Ben
Unabashedly Pro-Life
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,260



« Reply #9 on: June 16, 2004, 02:50:17 PM »

I am sorry AN, but Linus was responding to a post. Elisha brought up such issues, and it was Linus's right to respond, is he susposed to sit back as others talk about him? or challenge him? or ask him questions? Linus was simply stated his opinions, and in this last post, in a very well civilized manner, you are way too sensitive. I have a questions AN, have you been to the Catholic-Orthodox forum?? The same thing happens - heated arguments, why should the OO forum be any different?
Logged

"I prefer to be accused unjustly, for then I have nothing to reproach myself with, and joyfully offer this to the good Lord. Then I humble myself at the thought that I am indeed capable of doing the thing of which I have been accused. " - Saint
Ben
Unabashedly Pro-Life
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,260



« Reply #10 on: June 16, 2004, 03:04:28 PM »

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to be rude in my last post, its just that I think some OO Christians around here are getting a little too sensitive. If one goes over to the Catholic-Orthodox forum they will see that there are heated discussions all the time, and a lot of time EOs jump all over RCs. I don't see why the OO forum needs to have special rules or that something needs to be done due to a few heated arguments, I just understand why the OO forum should be any different.
Logged

"I prefer to be accused unjustly, for then I have nothing to reproach myself with, and joyfully offer this to the good Lord. Then I humble myself at the thought that I am indeed capable of doing the thing of which I have been accused. " - Saint
Antonious Nikolas
Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite, Anagnostis
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox
Posts: 1,703


Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra


WWW
« Reply #11 on: June 16, 2004, 04:24:36 PM »

Actually Ben, Linus was responding to a post which was a response to an earlier post of his.  And whatever the case may be, the singular fact remains that even this thread has become a theological debate, as most others in this forum do.  Obviously, there need to be some changes in this forum.  If it really is a "general Orthodox" forum which includes both families like the admins claim, then the Oriental Orthodox need a place to discuss other issues besides Chalcedon.  If not, then perhaps Linus is right when he says:

"You all might want to consider the facts that the Eastern Orthodox and the Non-Chalcedonians really do not share the same faith and are not part of the same communion (and that is putting it mildly).

Therefore the attempt to run a web site as if they were - as if there were such a thing as "generic orthodoxy" - is bound to encounter problems, perhaps even insurmountable problems."

And Ben, you need to take your advice and not be so sensitive yourself.  When a Non-Chalcedonian takes a tone you don't like (often is response to some provocation) you are awfully quick to try to chastise them and offer some "sage advice" Roll Eyes .  Chill out buddy.  Don't be so sensitive! Grin
Logged

“Nothing is better than to realize one’s weakness and ignorance and nothing is worse than not to be aware of them.” - St. Peter of Damascus
Ben
Unabashedly Pro-Life
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,260



« Reply #12 on: June 16, 2004, 04:38:57 PM »

AN, may I ask why the OO forum need be any different? Why it can't be a theological discussion and debate forum, like the Catholic-Orhodox forum? Why should this forum be any different? Just because a few OO individuals, who have themselves made outrages claims and have slandered others, are upset?
Logged

"I prefer to be accused unjustly, for then I have nothing to reproach myself with, and joyfully offer this to the good Lord. Then I humble myself at the thought that I am indeed capable of doing the thing of which I have been accused. " - Saint
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,440


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #13 on: June 16, 2004, 06:41:45 PM »

You all might want to consider the facts that the Eastern Orthodox and the Non-Chalcedonians really do not share the same faith and are not part of the same communion (and that is putting it mildly).

According to you, and you are entitled to your view which is one out of two different opinions held by Orthodox in good standing with their Church, but not by the majority of the bishops of these communions (no one ever claimed they were the same communion though).


Quote
Therefore the attempt to run a web site as if they were - as if there were such a thing as "generic orthodoxy" - is bound to encounter problems, perhaps even insurmountable problems.

 

Before you and Peter Farrington started at it, we didn't seem to have such problems.  And in addition to that, the same issues do not seem to come up in the Orthodox-Catholic folder, where the two faiths are much more different.

anastasios
« Last Edit: June 16, 2004, 06:46:19 PM by anastasios » Logged

Met. Demetrius's Enthronement

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching.

I served as an Orthodox priest from June 2008 to April 2013, before resigning for personal reasons
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,397


« Reply #14 on: June 16, 2004, 07:51:00 PM »

According to you, and you are entitled to your view which is one out of two different opinions held by Orthodox in good standing with their Church, but not by the majority of the bishops of these communions (no one ever claimed they were the same communion though)

anastasios

Exactly one of my two points!  He's basically practicing Sola Scriptura toward them like Protestants but wrt the Fathers.
Logged
Antonious Nikolas
Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite, Anagnostis
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox
Posts: 1,703


Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra


WWW
« Reply #15 on: June 16, 2004, 09:01:02 PM »

AN, may I ask why the OO forum need be any different? Why it can't be a theological discussion and debate forum, like the Catholic-Orhodox forum? Why should this forum be any different? Just because a few OO individuals, who have themselves made outrages claims and have slandered others, are upset?

A few points for you Ben:

1. I don't post in the Catholic-Orthodox folder so I don't know what its like over there.  If you have an issue with that folder, that's your problem.  Bring it up with the mods/admins, but don't try to get me to act like you.  I'll say something to the mods if I want to, when I want to, whether I have your approval or not.  Believe it or not, every once in a while, entire days will go by where I don't worry about whether or not I have your approval for my actions! Grin

2. Why can't this forum be just a debate forum?  Because there is much more to our Faith than whether or not we accept a certain synod.  That is not the be-all-end-all for us, and we do not define ourselves exclusively in relation to that synod.  Not every discussion has to come back to that issue.

3. The mods/admins have repeatedly stated their belief that this is a "general Orthodox" forum for both familes, who they believe are both Orthodox, and share the same Faith.  They have NEVER made that statement about the Roman Catholics.  So, since the mods/admins run the forum, and not you and Linus, it behooves them to act according to their stated beliefs, and in this context, the Oriental Orthodox forum should be much different than the Orthodox-Catholic forum.  Notice that this forum is described by those who built it as being The Non-Chalcedonian Forum: For Issues Pertaining to the Oriental Orthodox.  It is not described as the Orthodox-Non-Chalcedonian forum, juxtaposing the two traditions, as is the other forum you mentioned (i.e. the Orthodox-Catholic forum).
Logged

“Nothing is better than to realize one’s weakness and ignorance and nothing is worse than not to be aware of them.” - St. Peter of Damascus
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #16 on: June 16, 2004, 09:15:30 PM »

A good point, AntoniousN.
I think the Oriental board should be named "For Oriental Orthodox Topics" - not "issues" which encourages challenge.

Demetri
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #17 on: June 16, 2004, 09:21:43 PM »

According to you, and you are entitled to your view which is one out of two different opinions held by Orthodox in good standing with their Church, but not by the majority of the bishops of these communions (no one ever claimed they were the same communion though).

<Bold added by this poster>

Emperor Dustinian,
Is this "majority" you cite hyperbole, conjecture, hopeful speculation, or fact? Just curious.

Demetri
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Ben
Unabashedly Pro-Life
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,260



« Reply #18 on: June 16, 2004, 09:22:30 PM »

Quote
I don't post in the Catholic-Orthodox folder so I don't know what its like over there.  If you have an issue with that folder, that's your problem.
 

I don't have a problem with debate or heated discussion. I don't mind discussing the major issues at hand, but obviously you do, no offense, but from your posts, I gather you prefer a peaceful and happy environment, where the real issues aren't discussed or debated.

Quote
but don't try to get me to act like you.

lol...how am I trying to get you to act like me?

Quote
I'll say something to the mods if I want to, when I want to, whether I have your approval or not.


Thats what I've said all along, but Stavro old me to keep my opinions to myself, but since he is a OO Christian and there is a double standard, you don't care about his outrages and insulting comments, esp those directed at Linus.

 
Quote
Because there is much more to our Faith than whether or not we accept a certain synod.


But see to the Chalcedonians Chalcedon is more than just a certain synod, it is and Ecumenical Council guided by the Holy Ghost.

Quote
The mods/admins have repeatedly stated their belief that this is a "general Orthodox" forum for both familes, who they believe are both Orthodox, and share the same Faith.
 

Well thats where problems start, many don't feel that the EO and OO Churches share the same faith. I also do wonder why this forum was named "Non-Chalcedonian" and not "Oriental Orthodox" if the admins are so set on this site being one for "both familes" of Orthodoxy.

Quote
They have NEVER made that statement about the Roman Catholics.

I know, I never said they did.  Smiley
Logged

"I prefer to be accused unjustly, for then I have nothing to reproach myself with, and joyfully offer this to the good Lord. Then I humble myself at the thought that I am indeed capable of doing the thing of which I have been accused. " - Saint
Antonious Nikolas
Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite, Anagnostis
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox
Posts: 1,703


Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra


WWW
« Reply #19 on: June 16, 2004, 09:52:27 PM »

 

I don't have a problem with debate or heated discussion. I don't mind discussing the major issues at hand, but obviously you do, no offense, but from your posts, I gather you prefer a peaceful and happy environment, where the real issues aren't discussed or debated.lol...how am I trying to get you to act like me?


Benny, Benny, Benny, are you being contentious, or do you just not get it?  I don't have a problem with discussing or debating the issues at hand, blah blah blah.  If you'd read my posts, you'd see I called for a specific forum in which to do just that, separate from the main OO forum.  The reason I said "If you have a problem with the Orthodox-Catholic forum..." was not because I assumed you had a problem with it, but because you brought up this forum, whereas I have never seen it and could not care less about it.  Therefore, any gripes you did or didn't have about it would be your problem and irrelevent.  Your comparing it to this forum is not valid because of the POV expressed by the admins/mods.  I said you were trying to get me to act like you in that you were basically telling me I shouldn't complain to the mods/admins.

Thats what I've said all along, but Stavro old me to keep my opinions to myself, but since he is a OO Christian and there is a double standard, you don't care about his outrages and insulting comments, esp those directed at Linus.

Stavro told you he didn't need your advice or approval.  Now I'm telling you the same thing.  Don't sweat what you can't control, Ben.  I'm just making a suggestion to the mods/admins (the guys who can control stuff).  Its not my place to correct Stavro, and I wouldn't have even spoken to you about any of your posts if you weren't trying to correct me, so put your ruler away, you can't smack my knuckles.

 
But see to the Chalcedonians Chalcedon is more than just a certain synod, it is and Ecumenical Council guided by the Holy Ghost

Yeah, so?  Does that mean it has to be the subject of every single thread in this forum?

Well thats where problems start, many don't feel that the EO and OO Churches share the same faith. I also do wonder why this forum was named "Non-Chalcedonian" and not "Oriental Orthodox" if the admins are so set on this site being one for "both familes" of Orthodoxy.I know, I never said they did.  Smiley

Who cares what "many" think?  I addressed this thread to the admins/mods encouraging them to act on their stated beliefs, not to "many".  I'm not trying to convince anyone who doesn't think we're Orthodox  that we are.  I couldn't care less what they think.  I'm suggesting to the mods/admins some things about the administration of the forum.  Why was the forum named what it was named?  Who knows?  Ask them.  It does kinda seem like a compromise doesn't it, and I mentioned this same point before (even though it does say "Oriental Orthodox" underneath in smaller letters).  Oh, and you may not have said that the mods/admins regarded the RCs as Orthodox, but you're comparisons implied that the RC-EO and OO forums should be run the same way, and that runs contrary to the stated opinions of the mods concerning the RCs and the OO respectively.

In the end, the mods/admins either will revise the forum, or they won't.  They've already read my suggestions and know how a lot of the OO posters (and some of the EO posters) feel.  My discussing this with you is merely academic, as you can do nothing one way or the other.  So....

TTFN
« Last Edit: June 16, 2004, 09:56:46 PM by Antonious Nikolas » Logged

“Nothing is better than to realize one’s weakness and ignorance and nothing is worse than not to be aware of them.” - St. Peter of Damascus
Ben
Unabashedly Pro-Life
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,260



« Reply #20 on: June 16, 2004, 10:02:13 PM »

AN, I am not going to respond, best to keep my mouth shut, but please my name is Ben, not Benny.
Logged

"I prefer to be accused unjustly, for then I have nothing to reproach myself with, and joyfully offer this to the good Lord. Then I humble myself at the thought that I am indeed capable of doing the thing of which I have been accused. " - Saint
Stavro
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox
Posts: 1,112



« Reply #21 on: June 16, 2004, 10:16:36 PM »

Peace,
thanks Antonious Nikolas for expressing our frustrations.
Quote
Thats what I've said all along, but Stavro old me to keep my opinions to myself, but since he is a OO Christian and there is a double standard, you don't care about his outrages and insulting comments, esp those directed at Linus.
Does Ben care about those outrages, racist and insulting comments made by Linus ? No.

Why does a thread that discusses rules, and approaches to a better discussion, have to be hijacked by BEN, and Linus into the same old discussion ?

I think it needs a definition of what the site owners want to accopmlish by this forum. If some think we (OO) are Orthodox, your treatment to OO does not reflect this. If you think we are not Orthodox, make an effort to show us what is Orthodoxy, because the repeated insults by Linus are not helping much in this cause.You might even discover we have the same faith after all, even if we do not venerate the same people. If you extend love to RC, and rightly so, and to Protestants, and that is praised, at least show us the same by stopping the likes of Linus from his repeated misrepresentation of our faith. That is all what we ask for. Let ONLY OO talk about what OO believe in without Linus and others interrupting. If they absolutely need to, I think another forum for debate can be opened.
This is for the coming posters to enjoy a better experience in this site.

Peace,
Stavro  


 

« Last Edit: June 16, 2004, 10:17:20 PM by Stavro » Logged

In that day there will be an altar to the LORD in the heart of Egypt, and a monument to the LORD at its border. (Isaiah 19:19)

" God forbid I should see the face of Judah or listen to his blasphemy" (Gerontius, Archmanidrite of the monastery of St. Melania)
Ben
Unabashedly Pro-Life
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,260



« Reply #22 on: June 16, 2004, 10:36:33 PM »

Quote
Does Ben care about those outrages, racist and insulting comments made by Linus ? No.


Why stavro thanks for answering for me. I can always use a good friend to put words in my mouth..thanks!

As for Linus, in the "Would a Council be Nessecary" thread, I have asked you again and again to please point out where Linus has made racist comments. And you have yet to back up your attacks.

He made ONE comment that did seem a little racist, but he explained himself, it may have been a careless mistake on his part, but he did not mean to be racist, but that doesn't seem to matter to you. You seem to want to condemn Linus as a racist instead of listening to why he made that comment, and what he meant when he made it.

Quote
Why does a thread that discusses rules, and approaches to a better discussion, have to be hijacked by BEN, and Linus into the same old discussion ?


Read over this thread again, I haven't hijacked it. But once again you are more interesting in pointing the finger. You don't care what me or Linus have to say, you just want to bad mouth us, which I find extremely un-Christian.

 
Quote
If you think we are not Orthodox, make an effort to show us what is Orthodoxy, because the repeated insults by Linus are not helping much in this cause.

Please list Linus's "repeated insults". Any one can read through your posts and see that you have non-stop attacked Linus for his "racism", which you have yet to prove!

Logged

"I prefer to be accused unjustly, for then I have nothing to reproach myself with, and joyfully offer this to the good Lord. Then I humble myself at the thought that I am indeed capable of doing the thing of which I have been accused. " - Saint
Antonious Nikolas
Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite, Anagnostis
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox
Posts: 1,703


Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra


WWW
« Reply #23 on: June 17, 2004, 08:00:32 AM »


Read over this thread again, I haven't hijacked it...


You defended its hijacking though.  This thread was started to ask the moderators what new kinds of policies could be considered in the forum.  Theological debate over Chalcedon had absolutely no place in this thread.  And yet, there it was again, rearing its ugly head.  And you defended those who hijacked it.  The phenomenon is somewhat akin to fillibustering.  The OO will have no place in which to discuss any issue besides Chalcedon.  The discussion will always be dragged back to that topic no matter what its original subject was.  As long as every thread in this forum, no matter what its topic, goes back to a discussion of Chalcedon, we will have a problem.

I am not surprised that you are a defender of the current status quo.  You have said yourself that the discourses have been of great benefit to you, no matter how much they have disrupted this forum.  I'll bet it has saved you many man-hours of doing real research.  Much easier to have Linus and Peter chew your food for you.
« Last Edit: June 17, 2004, 08:12:47 AM by Antonious Nikolas » Logged

“Nothing is better than to realize one’s weakness and ignorance and nothing is worse than not to be aware of them.” - St. Peter of Damascus
Linus7
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,780



« Reply #24 on: June 17, 2004, 11:16:00 AM »

A good point, AntoniousN.
I think the Oriental board should be named "For Oriental Orthodox Topics" - not "issues" which encourages challenge.

Demetri

I would be absolutely thrilled if this forum could be limited to non-controversial discussion among NCs and those curious about their liturgy, customs, etc.

The problem is that it regularly breaks out into criticisms of the Orthodox Faith; i.e., the ecumenical councils (especially Chalcedon), and the Fathers (especially Pope St. Leo the Great). It also seems to elicit ill-considered statements about our "shared faith," our need for "union," and the supposed "mistakes in terminology" that led to the separation between our communions.

If those who post here would simply avoid such controversial topics, then, well, there would be no controversy.

Believe it or not, I really do not like arguing all the time.

But I also find claims that we "share the same faith" a bit hard to swallow while those who are making those claims simultaneously attack the Council of Chalcedon, claim that one of our martyrs was not really a martyr, and post criticisms of Pope St. Leo the Great.
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
Linus7
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,780



« Reply #25 on: June 17, 2004, 11:52:39 AM »

Quote
anastasios:
According to you, and you are entitled to your view which is one out of two different opinions held by Orthodox in good standing with their Church, but not by the majority of the bishops of these communions (no one ever claimed they were the same communion though).

I think you are wrong.

I do not believe that the majority of Orthodox bishops believe that NCs and EOs share the same faith.

Since you have made such a claim, perhaps you would care to support it.

Even if you were right, and a majority of EO bishops believe as you say, how would that alter the truth?

Such things have happened before. In fact, every time there was an imperial attempt at conciliating the NCs through heretical compromise, it seems the majority of Eastern bishops went along with it. Such attempts led only to tragedy, confusion, and the martyrdom of Orthodox saints who stood up for the truth.

Quote
anastasios: Before you and Peter Farrington started at it, we didn't seem to have such problems.  And in addition to that, the same issues do not seem to come up in the Orthodox-Catholic folder, where the two faiths are much more different.

anastasios

I disagree again. I remember a few of those who used to post here who spoke out against equating Non-Chalcedonians with the Orthodox. Paradosis comes to mind, but there were others. They all seem to have gone away.

You could ban both Peter and me. That might solve the problem for awhile.

Quote
Elisha: Exactly one of my two points!  He's basically practicing Sola Scriptura toward them like Protestants but wrt the Fathers.

Well, I don't believe in "the Fathers alone," if that's what you mean.

But I also don't believe in "What the majority of the bishops say is always right."

First off, I don't think anastasios is correct in saying that a majority of Orthodox bishops believe NCs share our faith.

Secondly, "majority episcopal rule" never has been the rule in the Church.

If it were, we would all be Arians now.

Read the history of the Church. There have been a number of times when the majority of bishops, ever pliable in the hands of their Emperor, endorsed heresy.

Such a situation - minus the Emperor - might occur again.

Undoubtedly it will occur again in the future, with the part of the Emperor taken by the Antichrist.

Bishops - like every other Orthodox Catholic Christian - are obligated to follow the faith of the Fathers.

When they do not follow it - even when a majority of them do not follow it - they are wrong.

You accused me of a version of Protestantism in adhering to what the Fathers taught concerning the Non-Chalcedonians.

What are you offering in its place?

Belief in a "magisterium" composed of a simple majority of bishops?
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
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,440


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #26 on: June 17, 2004, 02:09:37 PM »

Linus,

I am basing my observation that the majority of EO and OO hierarchs beleive this way based on official statements I have read from the majority of the patriarchates and on the way that in my observation the majority of EO hieararchs commune Non-Chalcedonians.  At SVS it is taught--without at least public protest from anyone in the Synod--that Oriental and Eastern Orthodox are both Orthodox. This is what my professors teach us and what bishops know is being taught.

You are right, just because the majority of the bishops beleive something doesn't mean it is necessarily right, but it could also mean that this is the consensus of the Church.  Conciliarity is a double-edged sword: sometimes it takes time to sort these matters out.

anastasios
Logged

Met. Demetrius's Enthronement

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching.

I served as an Orthodox priest from June 2008 to April 2013, before resigning for personal reasons
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,440


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #27 on: June 17, 2004, 02:12:20 PM »

PS

Linus, to be honest with you yes we could ban you and Peter Farrington but you know what? Despite the controversy Phil (Mor Ephrem) and I like you and him otherwise so that's not something we are really considering. And there will be others like you two so that's why we want to restructure things.

anastasios
Logged

Met. Demetrius's Enthronement

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching.

I served as an Orthodox priest from June 2008 to April 2013, before resigning for personal reasons
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,397


« Reply #28 on: June 17, 2004, 03:02:29 PM »

Linus,
It is good (and expected!) to not compromise your faith - and no one is expecting you too.  Noone here is directly advocating immediate communion with NCs or rushing to some sort of false ecumenism.  All that is going on is trying to understand exactly what the issues are and understand what they (NCs) are saying from their POV.

You seem to be stubborn as hell and refusing to even try and understand.  Instead of saying, "Hmmmm, I think I understand what you are saying about X, but I disagree that Y=Z."  You are stating the issues empirically, as if you both understand the cultures and historical context to a 't' and are speaking as if you are the spokesperson of EOxy.  You are not disagreeing/debating in charity, but being deliberately polemnical.

Furthermore, if the EO and OO are two different faiths, then why are they so similar in rites and praxis historically speaking?  Why has there actually been so much recent (past few years) positive dialogue between major Orthodox groups (e.g. SCOBA and SCOOCH locally and EO and other OO Churches abroad)?  Why did that Vespers at the GOA cathedral in NY happen?  The only theological issue, big as it it, is the Chalcedonian issue.  As opposed to the many differences between the EO and RCC (post schism issues at least), the EO and OO are small in comparison.

Logged
Father Peter
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: British Orthodox Church within the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate
Posts: 2,605



WWW
« Reply #29 on: June 17, 2004, 05:42:33 PM »

Hiya

I have a busy life. I'd love to spend time here writing things that made a difference, but I guess from Linus' comments here that there is no point me reading any of the (more) controversial threads where I thought he wanted to talk without terminology.

I don't like arguing, I'd love to know what Elisha's questions were - send me an email - but I can't afford to spend hours each day trying to counter what I do consider misinformation coming from Linus all the time. I just have to leave it to God. Believe it or not I am on other forums where EO and OO don't have to argue all the time. If I start reading the forums I'll get sucked back in and I feel at the moment that this is of the devil not of God (I don't mean the forum, but the way everything keeps working out).

I know you could ban me but I would consider that iniquitous since I am only responding to posts accusing me of believing blasphemies - I believe I have tried hard not to refer to any EO controversial figure even as a heretic, an I certainly haven't gone through some of Linus' posts which could be understood in a Nestorian sense quite easily. That is not what I am interested in.

I like your post just above Elisha and wish that Linus could take that tone.

Ce la vie. Till I need to pop in for a PM again

You all know my email address
Logged

Lord have mercy upon me a sinner
http://www.orthodoxmedway.org

My blog - http://anorthodoxpriest.blogspot.co.uk

The poster formerly known as peterfarrington
Linus7
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,780



« Reply #30 on: June 17, 2004, 06:40:43 PM »

Quote
peterfarrington: I believe I have tried hard not to refer to any EO controversial figure even as a heretic, an I certainly haven't gone through some of Linus' posts which could be understood in a Nestorian sense quite easily.

Very good.

Imply that I am a Nestorian while painting yourself as the persecuted emissary of peace.

Your constant criticisms of the Council of Chalcedon began this conflict.

Ending them through your own initiative is the least you can do.
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
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,397


« Reply #31 on: June 17, 2004, 07:06:49 PM »

Very good.

Imply that I am a Nestorian while painting yourself as the persecuted emissary of peace.

Your constant criticisms of the Council of Chalcedon began this conflict.

Ending them through your own initiative is the least you can do.

Get over it.  He never implied anything of the sort.  You are the one who is always on the attack and always with haughty, negative tone.  It amazes me how everyone but you realizes it.
Logged
Linus7
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,780



« Reply #32 on: June 17, 2004, 07:14:55 PM »

Quote
Elisha: Linus,
It is good (and expected!) to not compromise your faith - and no one is expecting you too.  Noone here is directly advocating immediate communion with NCs or rushing to some sort of false ecumenism.  All that is going on is trying to understand exactly what the issues are and understand what they (NCs) are saying from their POV

I don't think you have kept up with these threads.

That is not "all that is going on."

What has gone on is this: a particular member presented himself as the advocate of peace, compromise, and unity while simultaneously attacking the Council of Chalcedon and Orthodox Fathers like Pope St. Leo the Great.

This person ranged throughout the entire web site, giving advice and answering questions for new converts and enquirers, often with a decidedly NC spin, leaving the false impression that whether one becomes Coptic or EO is simply a matter of taste and/or convenience.

Quote
Elisha: You seem to be stubborn as hell and refusing to even try and understand.  Instead of saying, "Hmmmm, I think I understand what you are saying about X, but I disagree that Y=Z."  You are stating the issues empirically, as if you both understand the cultures and historical context to a 't' and are speaking as if you are the spokesperson of EOxy.  You are not disagreeing/debating in charity, but being deliberately polemnical.

We disagree.

I am stubbornly adhering to what I know is right.

I appear to be "polemical" because I seem to be the only one here willing to disagree with Peter Farrington.

Quote
Elisha: Furthermore, if the EO and OO are two different faiths, then why are they so similar in rites and praxis historically speaking?

Do you actually know that is the case, or are you assuming it is so?

I imagine the Arians were also very similar to the Orthodox "in rites and praxis" (and no, I am not trying to equate NCs with Arians).

Did such things make them orthodox?

Quote
Elisha: Why has there actually been so much recent (past few years) positive dialogue between major Orthodox groups (e.g. SCOBA and SCOOCH locally and EO and other OO Churches abroad)?  Why did that Vespers at the GOA cathedral in NY happen?

What kind of a century was the 20th century, Elisha?

One of steadfast loyalty to the Apostolic Tradition, or one of increasing modernism, secularism, and ecumenism?

In which century did many of the Orthodox churches join themselves with the sponsor of many of these dialogues, the World Council of Churches?

Are you saying that such meetings negate what the Orthodox Fathers had to say?

If the GOA says vespers with some Non-Chalcedonians, does that unsay and unwrite what men and women full of the Holy Spirit had to say and write?

Do these men-pleasers and compromisers know more than the Fathers did?

It is not surprising that erroneous ideas would infiltrate even the Orthodox Church during the 20th century.

Look at what was happening in so many other denominations once thought conservative.

Quote
Elisha: The only theological issue, big as it it, is the Chalcedonian issue.  As opposed to the many differences between the EO and RCC (post schism issues at least), the EO and OO are small in comparison.

I really disagree.

At least one major Non-Chalcedonian leader has said the Sixth Council (Constantinople III, 680-81) is even more problematic for Non-Chalcedonians than Chalcedon.

We share a Trinitarian faith (and that is good), some Eastern approaches to mysticism, and some external appearances.

But we differ on Christology, on ecclesiology, on the councils, and on the saints and fathers.

That's a lot.

It seems to me that an EO who says of Non-Chalcedonians and the EO, "We are both Orthodox," is wrong. If he says it innocently in his ignorance and desire to heal what he sees as a lamentable schism, that is excusable.

On the other hand, it seems inexcusable to me that an EO who knows what the Fathers had to say would dare to contradict them.

We don't hate Non-Chalcedonians.

That's why we must tell them the truth.

The door of the Church is open to them.

But it lies at the end of the path of repentance and acceptance of the full Orthodox faith, including the ecumenical councils.
« Last Edit: June 17, 2004, 07:20:07 PM by Linus7 » 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
Linus7
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,780



« Reply #33 on: June 17, 2004, 07:18:21 PM »

Get over it.  He never implied anything of the sort.  You are the one who is always on the attack and always with haughty, negative tone.  It amazes me how everyone but you realizes it.

Do you visit this site often enough to know that?

You have a history of dislike for me, although I have only tried to be friendly toward you.

You are hardly a dispassionate observer.

Your negative remarks do not trouble me.

If it is your desire to badmouth me, take a number and stand in line.

There are many more ahead of you.
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
Antonious Nikolas
Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite, Anagnostis
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox
Posts: 1,703


Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra


WWW
« Reply #34 on: June 17, 2004, 07:30:40 PM »

You are the one who is always on the attack and always with haughty, negative tone.  It amazes me how everyone but you realizes it.

Me too.  I've said this before.  Its NOT the content, its the tone.  It must be nice to believe its the content, then you can believe you are being persecuted for standing up for Orthodoxy, but its not, its the arrogant, petulant, self-righteous tone.
Logged

“Nothing is better than to realize one’s weakness and ignorance and nothing is worse than not to be aware of them.” - St. Peter of Damascus
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


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


« Reply #35 on: June 17, 2004, 07:38:02 PM »

I want to say something:

Even though you might not agree with what Linus says -- and may object to his tone, if you read the history of Eastern Orthodoxy you will find that he is conducting himself as strongly and as passionately as the EO Fathers did in defense of what they considered a Heresy.

I just find it interesting that people object to Linus' "tone" when he is simply passionate about what he (and his Orthodox Fathers) considered a Heresy.

I don't think many EO would go back and condemn the Church Fathers for their passion, do you?
Logged
Linus7
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,780



« Reply #36 on: June 17, 2004, 07:39:28 PM »

Me too.  I've said this before.  Its NOT the content, its the tone.  It must be nice to believe its the content, then you can believe you are being persecuted for standing up for Orthodoxy, but its not, its the arrogant, petulant, self-righteous tone.

You are likewise hardly a dispassionate observer.

Speaking of content, attacking the "tone" of one's opponent is often a smokescreen for the absence of content in one's own arguments. When you run out of argument, attack the person of your opponent.

At least Farrington occasionally attempts to argue the actual facts.

BTW, the only "tone" you guys would like would be the tone of submission and acquiescence.

You won't hear that from me.



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
Linus7
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,780



« Reply #37 on: June 17, 2004, 07:41:12 PM »

I want to say something:

Even though you might not agree with what Linus says -- and may object to his tone, if you read the history of Eastern Orthodoxy you will find that he is conducting himself as strongly and as passionately as the EO Fathers did in defense of what they considered a Heresy.

I just find it interesting that people object to Linus' "tone" when he is simply passionate about what he (and his Orthodox Fathers) considered a Heresy.

I don't think many EO would go back and condemn the Church Fathers for their passion, do you?


Thanks, Tom.

Your post was like a cup of cool water to one crossing a terrible desert.
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
Antonious Nikolas
Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite, Anagnostis
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox
Posts: 1,703


Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra


WWW
« Reply #38 on: June 17, 2004, 07:41:16 PM »

I understand what you are saying Tom, but how far can you take this logic?  St. Nicholas the Wonderworker punched Arius in the chops if I'm not mistaken.  Would you advocate me, or Linus, or whoever else, adopting that kind of behavior today?
Logged

“Nothing is better than to realize one’s weakness and ignorance and nothing is worse than not to be aware of them.” - St. Peter of Damascus
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


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


« Reply #39 on: June 17, 2004, 07:42:25 PM »

I understand what you are saying Tom, but how far can you take this logic?  St. Nicholas the Wonderworker punched Arius in the chops if I'm not mistaken.  Would you advocate me, or Linus, or whoever else, adopting that kind of behavior today?

Yes. Sorry.

Heresies against the Faith must be stopped at any cost.
« Last Edit: June 17, 2004, 07:44:02 PM by Tom+ú » Logged
Antonious Nikolas
Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite, Anagnostis
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox
Posts: 1,703


Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra


WWW
« Reply #40 on: June 17, 2004, 07:50:14 PM »

You are likewise hardly a dispassionate observer.

Speaking of content, attacking the "tone" of one's opponent is often a smokescreen for the absence of content in one's own arguments. When you run out of argument, attack the person of your opponent.

At least Farrington occasionally attempts to argue the actual facts.

If it makes you feel better to think that is the case, be my guest.  I "argued the facts" with you several times early on,  but saw that it was a pointless endeavor.  If you'll notice, I've hardly posted at all here recently, because I truly believe that interracting with you is generally bad for my soul.  One simply tires of arguing with you, whether they have more points to make or not, because they get sick of your internet tough guy persona.


BTW, the only "tone" you guys would like would be the tone of submission and acquiescence. You won't hear that from me.

My, aren't we tough?  And dramatic too!  :cheeky:



Logged

“Nothing is better than to realize one’s weakness and ignorance and nothing is worse than not to be aware of them.” - St. Peter of Damascus
Linus7
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,780



« Reply #41 on: June 17, 2004, 07:56:23 PM »

If it makes you feel better to think that is the case, be my guest.  I "argued the facts" with you several times early on,  but saw that it was a pointless endeavor.  If you'll notice, I've hardly posted at all here recently, because I truly believe that interracting with you is generally bad for my soul.  One simply tires of arguing with you, whether they have more points to make or not, because they get sick of your internet tough guy persona.My, aren't we tough?  And dramatic too!  :cheeky:

It must be bad for your soul.

It's led you into mockery (see Isaiah 28:22).

I don't know anything about any "internet tough guy persona."

Face it: you just don't like what I have to say.
« Last Edit: June 17, 2004, 07:57:08 PM by Linus7 » 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
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,440


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #42 on: June 17, 2004, 08:07:29 PM »

Hi Linus,

I can always tell when you are in attack mode because instead of paragraphs you write short sentences with spaces in between Wink

anastasios
Logged

Met. Demetrius's Enthronement

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching.

I served as an Orthodox priest from June 2008 to April 2013, before resigning for personal reasons
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,440


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #43 on: June 17, 2004, 08:08:05 PM »

"Face it, you just don't like what I have to say."

Why does it have to always been about what your opponents "like", Linus?  Sometimes people don't agree with your reasoning.

anastasios
Logged

Met. Demetrius's Enthronement

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching.

I served as an Orthodox priest from June 2008 to April 2013, before resigning for personal reasons
Antonious Nikolas
Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite, Anagnostis
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox
Posts: 1,703


Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra


WWW
« Reply #44 on: June 17, 2004, 08:09:07 PM »

It must be bad for your soul.

It's led you into mockery (see Isaiah 28:22).

Thank you, starets.  It is comforting to know that you are fit to judge the condition of my soul.  Not mockery.  Just trying to keep the mood light, as a counter to your super-dramatic routine.

I don't know anything about any "internet tough guy persona."

You wouldn't would you?  I'm not the only one who has told you that you have and arrogant and belligerent tone.  If one guy tells you your breath stinks, maybe he's just being a jerk.  If three or four guys tell you that, chances are you need a tic-tac.  Even if we aren't dispassionate observers.


Face it: you just don't like what I have to say.

I've heard what you have to say from others, both in academic journals and here on-line, and I never have a problem with them like I do with you.  Face it.  I just don't like the way you express yourself.

BTW, you may have noticed that from time to time I even agree with you.  I'm not one of these OO who wants to rush into communion with you guys.  I'm fine where I am.  I think we need an honest discussion, and some of the points you've brought up do need to be addressed.  Like I said, I'm just not a big fan of the way come off.
Logged

“Nothing is better than to realize one’s weakness and ignorance and nothing is worse than not to be aware of them.” - St. Peter of Damascus
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,440


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #45 on: June 17, 2004, 08:09:44 PM »

Tom,

In that case when should we start beating you up? lol j/k

Seriously, though, that was the culture back then.  Violence in our day and age has no place, and we conduct ourselves in a more somber manner.  Sobriety is a value that is respected in Christians.

The Fathers may have been right doctrinally but is it perhaps conceivable that they pushed some people away by their rough style?  I would say, "it's conceivable." Not all of the Fathers acted that way anyway.  So it seems to me to be a cultural thing.

anastasios
Logged

Met. Demetrius's Enthronement

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching.

I served as an Orthodox priest from June 2008 to April 2013, before resigning for personal reasons
Linus7
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,780



« Reply #46 on: June 17, 2004, 08:10:46 PM »

"Face it, you just don't like what I have to say."

Why does it have to always been about what your opponents "like", Linus?  Sometimes people don't agree with your reasoning.

anastasios

Fine.

But that's not what they say.

Instead they talk about my "tone" or accuse me of "racism" (which was absolutely silly).

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
Antonious Nikolas
Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite, Anagnostis
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox
Posts: 1,703


Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra


WWW
« Reply #47 on: June 17, 2004, 08:13:03 PM »

Yes. Sorry.

Heresies against the Faith must be stopped at any cost.

Wow, even the use of violence is permissable?  Sounds like the Inquisition is to me.  But I'm down.  Let me get my boxing gloves out of the garage, and let us all agree to abide by the Queensbury rules.  Are we using headgear, or just cups & mouthpieces?   Grin
Logged

“Nothing is better than to realize one’s weakness and ignorance and nothing is worse than not to be aware of them.” - St. Peter of Damascus
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,440


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #48 on: June 17, 2004, 08:13:03 PM »

Linus,

More than one person wondered why you brought up that man's ethnicity, so it wasn't silly for the concern to exist.  However, I did give you the opportunity to clarify your position before I rushed to judgement, for what it is worth.  I am not sure if you responded publicly as I was out of town, but one of your supporters private messaged me in your favor and I found his explanation that you allegedly gave to him to be satisfactory which is why we did not pursue this.

anastasios
Logged

Met. Demetrius's Enthronement

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching.

I served as an Orthodox priest from June 2008 to April 2013, before resigning for personal reasons
Linus7
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,780



« Reply #49 on: June 17, 2004, 08:13:38 PM »

Hi Linus,

I can always tell when you are in attack mode because instead of paragraphs you write short sentences with spaces in between Wink

anastasios

I don't think I have attacked anyone.

I would say I have been in "defense mode" all evening.

I like spaces between my sentences because I don't like reading the densely-organized posts of others. I try to make reading my posts easy.
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
Linus7
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,780



« Reply #50 on: June 17, 2004, 08:15:55 PM »

Linus,

More than one person wondered why you brought up that man's ethnicity, so it wasn't silly for the concern to exist.  However, I did give you the opportunity to clarify your position before I rushed to judgement, for what it is worth.  I am not sure if you responded publicly as I was out of town, but one of your supporters private messaged me in your favor and I found his explanation that you allegedly gave to him to be satisfactory which is why we did not pursue this.

anastasios

I am amazed that there was ever any concern.

How is referring to a person as "a man from the Caribbean" suspect?

I think some people (not you, obviously) would sink to almost anything to try to get rid of me.

You may find that paranoid, but I can think of no other way to explain such silliness.
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
Antonious Nikolas
Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite, Anagnostis
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox
Posts: 1,703


Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra


WWW
« Reply #51 on: June 17, 2004, 08:17:00 PM »

Anastasios,

Since you're here, and since this thread was originally about the state of the fourm, how close are you guys to a solution?
Logged

“Nothing is better than to realize one’s weakness and ignorance and nothing is worse than not to be aware of them.” - St. Peter of Damascus
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


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


« Reply #52 on: June 17, 2004, 08:26:32 PM »

Seriously, though, that was the culture back then.  Violence in our day and age has no place, and we conduct ourselves in a more somber manner.  Sobriety is a value that is respected in Christians.

The Fathers may have been right doctrinally but is it perhaps conceivable that they pushed some people away by their rough style?  I would say, "it's conceivable." Not all of the Fathers acted that way anyway.  So it seems to me to be a cultural thing.

It's things like this that confuse me.

If God is never changing and the Holy Spirit was guiding the Church and the Holy Fathers - then why did these violent things occur? Why was it accepted back then yet not now? Has God and the Holy Spirit changed his way of doing things of handling those whe attack the Church?  

Did Constantine REALLY have a vision of Christ telling him to put the CROSS of emblem? How can this be true?

Curiouser and curiouser.


Logged
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


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


« Reply #53 on: June 17, 2004, 08:28:46 PM »

 Are we using headgear, or just cups & mouthpieces?   Grin

No cups -- I have not found one big enough yet  Grin

Make Love Not War, Dude!
« Last Edit: June 17, 2004, 08:32:35 PM by Tom+ú » Logged
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,397


« Reply #54 on: June 17, 2004, 08:34:40 PM »

It's things like this that confuse me.

If God is never changing and the Holy Spirit was guiding the Church and the Holy Fathers - then why did these violent things occur? Why was it accepted back then yet not now? Has God and the Holy Spirit changed his way of doing things of handling those whe attack the Church?  

Did Constantine REALLY have a vision of Christ telling him to put the CROSS of emblem? How can this be true?

Curiouser and curiouser.




Tom,
For example, IIRC, I think St. Nick was deposed or punished somehow after he punched Arius out.  It's the old easier to ask for forgiveness than permission.  St. Nick wasn't lauded for the violence, but the stance on the issue.
Logged
Antonious Nikolas
Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite, Anagnostis
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox
Posts: 1,703


Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra


WWW
« Reply #55 on: June 17, 2004, 08:38:54 PM »

No cups...

Just hearing that makes me cringe.  You must never have been in a boxing ring.  I'd give up my mouthpiece before I'd give up my cup!  Teeth can be capped. Grin

Make Love Not War, Dude!

Wait a minute, aren't you the guy who was calling for church-sanctioned violence against the heretics?   Huh  But seriously, boxing isn't "war", its just a sport like any other.  More people get hurt playing football than boxing.  I box all the time, and I'd NEVER play tackle football.
Logged

“Nothing is better than to realize one’s weakness and ignorance and nothing is worse than not to be aware of them.” - St. Peter of Damascus
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


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


« Reply #56 on: June 17, 2004, 08:50:14 PM »

a minute, aren't you the guy who was calling for church-sanctioned violence against the heretics?   Huh  

Not really. I was speaking from an historical perspective. Personally, what anyone else chooses to believe is their business.

"Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice!" (Probably way before your time)
Logged
Linus7
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,780



« Reply #57 on: June 17, 2004, 09:00:51 PM »

Who besides me remembers when this was the deadest forum (the one with the least activity) on this web site?

The thing seemed not to move for months at a time.

I can remember Anastasios practically begging people to post here.

Things sure have changed.

Perhaps the coming policy changes will restore peace only by eliminating the controversy that has made this forum more active.

The effect may be the return of this forum to what it was before.
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
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


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


« Reply #58 on: June 17, 2004, 09:01:59 PM »

The effect may be the return of this forum to what it was before.

(yawn)
Logged
Antonious Nikolas
Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite, Anagnostis
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox
Posts: 1,703


Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra


WWW
« Reply #59 on: June 17, 2004, 09:02:08 PM »


"Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice!" (Probably way before your time)


Ah, Barry Goldwater.  A little before my time, but in addition to boxing, I also read sometimes.  I like to think of myself as something of a "Renaissance man".  And an internet geek!  Time to get power down now.  My eyes hurt.  'Night all!
Logged

“Nothing is better than to realize one’s weakness and ignorance and nothing is worse than not to be aware of them.” - St. Peter of Damascus
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,440


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #60 on: June 17, 2004, 09:39:34 PM »

Anastasios,

Since you're here, and since this thread was originally about the state of the fourm, how close are you guys to a solution?

We are discussing this behind the scenes every day. Each option has some unfortunate consequences, so we are taking our time to make sure we come up with the right solution.

anastasios
Logged

Met. Demetrius's Enthronement

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching.

I served as an Orthodox priest from June 2008 to April 2013, before resigning for personal reasons
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,440


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #61 on: June 17, 2004, 09:41:12 PM »

Linus,

So are you saying I got my wish? Wink LOL

anastasios
Logged

Met. Demetrius's Enthronement

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching.

I served as an Orthodox priest from June 2008 to April 2013, before resigning for personal reasons
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,397


« Reply #62 on: June 18, 2004, 02:41:48 AM »

Well I guess all the Orthodox leaders (at least in the US) have sucumbed to Ecumenism while Linus alone holds fast to the Orthodox faith.  It sounds like you are the biggest candidate here for ROAC.  

No, I don't assume so - I know so that the rites and praxis are similar.  And I have followed the threads enough to know that you just refuse to even try and look at the issues w/o bias and with any sort of an open mind or charity.

I think everyone here, and most especially Linus could do with a good dose of Fr. Seraphim Rose.  I'm no disciple - I just appreciate his love for everyone.  To quote him, "I myself fear the cold hearts of the "intellectually correct" far more than any errors you might find (in Augustine).  I sense in these hearts a preparation for the work of the Antichrist (whose imitation of Christ must also extend to
"correct theology".  I feel in Augustine the love of Christ."  (from a letter of his in 1981)
Logged
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #63 on: June 18, 2004, 04:05:07 AM »

Way to go, Elisha. Just keep going after Linus7.
Sorry I was working yesterday while he was he was mugged here for holding views not popular but more prevalent than you might think.
The ideas being imparted in one seminary or jurisdiction do not necessarily follow at others - for sure they do not.
Who are you to give sanctimonious pastoral advice to Linus, me, or anyone else?
Demetri
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Antonious Nikolas
Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite, Anagnostis
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox
Posts: 1,703


Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra


WWW
« Reply #64 on: June 18, 2004, 07:50:58 AM »


Who are you to give sanctimonious pastoral advice to Linus, me, or anyone else?
Demetri


In fairness to Elisha, I've received some "sanctimonius pastoral advice" from the other side as well, and more than once at that.

Oh, and Anastasios, thanks for the reply.  Hope you guys are able to reach a consensus soon.
« Last Edit: June 18, 2004, 07:53:45 AM by Antonious Nikolas » Logged

“Nothing is better than to realize one’s weakness and ignorance and nothing is worse than not to be aware of them.” - St. Peter of Damascus
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #65 on: June 18, 2004, 09:39:19 AM »

AntoniousNikolas,

Nothing wrong with being fair.

Demetri
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Linus7
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,780



« Reply #66 on: June 18, 2004, 10:10:20 AM »

Quote
Elisha:
Well I guess all the Orthodox leaders (at least in the US) have sucumbed to Ecumenism while Linus alone holds fast to the Orthodox faith.  It sounds like you are the biggest candidate here for ROAC.

Make up your mind, please!

Am I a Sola Scriptura Protestant or a ROAC fanatic?  Grin

Who said "all the Orthodox leaders (at least in the US) have succumbed to Ecumenism?"

Some of them may have. Others have not.

But even if a majority of them do succumb to ecumenism, that will not alter the truth, will not rewrite what the Fathers wrote or undecree what the ecumenical councils decreed.  

Quote
Elisha: No, I don't assume so - I know so that the rites and praxis are similar.  And I have followed the threads enough to know that you just refuse to even try and look at the issues w/o bias and with any sort of an open mind or charity.

And I know you have long held some sort of personal dislike for me that colors your perception. You have displayed it often enough in other contexts and long before this present discussion began.

You would have to remove the bias in your own eye before you could begin to see the bias in mine.

Quote
Elisha: I think everyone here, and most especially Linus could do with a good dose of Fr. Seraphim Rose.  I'm no disciple - I just appreciate his love for everyone.  To quote him, "I myself fear the cold hearts of the "intellectually correct" far more than any errors you might find (in Augustine).  I sense in these hearts a preparation for the work of the Antichrist (whose imitation of Christ must also extend to
"correct theology".  I feel in Augustine the love of Christ."  (from a letter of his in 1981)

I think you are taking Fr. Seraphim's words out of context to support something he would not have supported.

Are you saying he endorsed compromise with the Non-Chalcedonians or that he viewed loyalty to the Fathers and their councils as hyper-correctness?

I've read enough Seraphim Rose to know that is not the case.

As for "preparation for the work of Antichrist," what is that if not dialogues sponsored by the WCC, a blurring of the lines between old heresies and Orthodoxy, a denial of the words of the Fathers?

We are not talking about hyper-correctness in liturgical nuances or the rules of fasting here.

We are talking about the solemn, Holy Spirit-inspired decrees of the ecumenical councils and the consensus of the Orthodox Fathers.

Without them, the very foundation of Orthodoxy is destroyed.

Contradict them to "make friends," and there will be no Orthodoxy.
« Last Edit: June 18, 2004, 10:12:01 AM by Linus7 » 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
mourad
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 49


Mia, not mono!


« Reply #67 on: June 18, 2004, 10:22:25 AM »

Linus7,

as a matter of fact, however, inasmuch as Fr. Seraphim was, and in a good sense, 'hyper-orthodox' why did he never write regarding the unoffical meetings held by the joint commission?

Another thing you gotta keep in mind is the fact that when it comes to WCC, many many Overseers and priests do keep away since Theology seems secondary there. But when you read the minutes of the unoffcial and official dialogues, somehting beautiful is there, THEOLOGY is discussed in an atmosphere i am sure most of us would have liked to see all ecumenical councils discussed in. Please remember, i am a person totally unwilling to compromise truth. I know what monophysitism is, and i know i am not a monophysite (not just on the Eutychian level) but on all levels.

Praying that you be praying for me,
in Christ's Love,
mourad
Logged
Linus7
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,780



« Reply #68 on: June 18, 2004, 10:40:40 AM »

Quote
mourad:
Linus7,

as a matter of fact, however, inasmuch as Fr. Seraphim was, and in a good sense, 'hyper-orthodox' why did he never write regarding the unoffical meetings held by the joint commission?

I do not know that he did not write about them.

I have not read everything written by Fr. Seraphim.

Arguments from silence are a bit weak, though, mourad.

One could ask why Fr. Seraphim never wrote about the problem of auto theft in Miami.

Perhaps he thought it was okay then?

Quote
mourad: Another thing you gotta keep in mind is the fact that when it comes to WCC, many many Overseers and priests do keep away since Theology seems secondary there. But when you read the minutes of the unoffcial and official dialogues, somehting beautiful is there, THEOLOGY is discussed in an atmosphere i am sure most of us would have liked to see all ecumenical councils discussed in. Please remember, i am a person totally unwilling to compromise truth. I know what monophysitism is, and i know i am not a monophysite (not just on the Eutychian level) but on all levels.

Praying that you be praying for me,
in Christ's Love,
mourad

I don't want to argue about whether or not you are a Monophysite; obviously, in your own view you are not.

But I don't see anything beautiful in participation in the WCC or NCC.
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
mourad
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 49


Mia, not mono!


« Reply #69 on: June 18, 2004, 12:44:51 PM »

That's just my point, the joint comission dialogue has nothing to do with WCC.

As for the arguing out of silence regarding the Fr. Seraphim issue: you got a solid point there, i can't argue.

However, one would think that someone so involved in writting about all the theological issues and trends of his tim, Fr. Seraphim would have at least touch a bit on the issue of the OO / EO dialogues, especially when he wrote TONS about ecumenism, always about RC / EO issues though, not the other way around... let me know what you think,

yours in Love,
mourad
Logged
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,397


« Reply #70 on: June 18, 2004, 12:45:20 PM »

Way to go, Elisha. Just keep going after Linus7.
Sorry I was working yesterday while he was he was mugged here for holding views not popular but more prevalent than you might think.
The ideas being imparted in one seminary or jurisdiction do not necessarily follow at others - for sure they do not.
Who are you to give sanctimonious pastoral advice to Linus, me, or anyone else?
Demetri

Demetri,
If Linus wouldn't:  keep posting in a tone as if his opinion is that of all EOxy and he alone interprets the Fathers correctly, continually misrepresent what the other person is saying and most importantly, doing all of this in such a haughty tone, I wouldn't keep "going after" Linus.  Nevermind the fact that he has twice as many posts as the next non admin.  He's almost (especially of late) as bad as romanbyzantium!  If several people have told someone that what they wrote was inflammatory and/or rude - the it is!  The problem is with the person who wrote what was perceived as inflammatory/rude.
Logged
Fr. David
The Poster Formerly Known as "Pedro"
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA, Diocese of the South
Posts: 2,828



WWW
« Reply #71 on: June 18, 2004, 03:17:48 PM »

Who besides me remembers when this was the deadest forum (the one with the least activity) on this web site?

The thing seemed not to move for months at a time.

Sounds like the Discusi+¦n en espa+¦ol forum now.  Wink Sad
Logged

Priest in the Orthodox Church in America - ordained on March 18, 2012

Oh Taste and See (my defunct blog)

From Protestant to Orthodox (my conversion story)
Fr. David
The Poster Formerly Known as "Pedro"
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA, Diocese of the South
Posts: 2,828



WWW
« Reply #72 on: June 18, 2004, 03:20:27 PM »

"Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice!" (Probably way before your time)

Hey, now, sir!  Just because we're young-ins doesn't mean we don't read!
Logged

Priest in the Orthodox Church in America - ordained on March 18, 2012

Oh Taste and See (my defunct blog)

From Protestant to Orthodox (my conversion story)
Fr. David
The Poster Formerly Known as "Pedro"
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA, Diocese of the South
Posts: 2,828



WWW
« Reply #73 on: June 18, 2004, 03:33:54 PM »

The Fathers may have been right doctrinally but is it perhaps conceivable that they pushed some people away by their rough style?  I would say, "it's conceivable." Not all of the Fathers acted that way anyway.  So it seems to me to be a cultural thing.

Good call, hermano.  The Fathers were right doctrinally -- this was the Holy Spirit moving through the Church -- yet not right in their treatment of their fellow man -- which would be, IMO, the Holy Spirit working in spite of the Church.

We're promised doctrinal integrity through the safeguard of the HS; the fact that we sometimes act like burros to each other is not something the HS is responsible for, nor is it something that should be lauded, upheld, or repeated.

I must say, Linus7 -- your defense of the preferring of Chalcedonian terminology is wonderful, even though I personally think that the OO ultimately believe and are making an honest attempt at saying the same thing, imprecise terminology aside.  I must agree, however, that your tone is unnecessarily alienating.  From one Chalcedonian to another: it's your tone folks object to, not your message.

Que Dios Nos Bendiga,

Pedro.
Logged

Priest in the Orthodox Church in America - ordained on March 18, 2012

Oh Taste and See (my defunct blog)

From Protestant to Orthodox (my conversion story)
Linus7
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,780



« Reply #74 on: June 20, 2004, 03:06:09 PM »

Frankly, Pedro, I don't see anything wrong with my tone.

It is direct, blunt, and to the point.

I never engage in the sorts of personal attacks that have been used against me.

The real problem is that I will not say the sorts of things so many seem to want me to say out of the sort of pseudo-politeness which is the mask of unacceptable compromise.

I do not think the Non-Chalcedonians mean the same things we mean but with different terminology.

If they do, then the Orthodox Fathers were mistaken, the councils from Chalcedon onward were lies, and the Orthodox Church is not the Church.

If the Non-Chalcedonians are Orthodox, then the ecumenical councils are optional and Orthodoxy is divided like Protestantism into denominations, each of which has an equal claim to the title, "One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church."

If the Church is actually divided into "branches" or "church families" (the last term has been used in the NC-EO dialogues), then perhaps the Protestants are right and no one can really tell what, who, or where the true Church is.

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
Linus7
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,780



« Reply #75 on: June 20, 2004, 03:18:01 PM »

Demetri,
If Linus wouldn't:  keep posting in a tone as if his opinion is that of all EOxy and he alone interprets the Fathers correctly, continually misrepresent what the other person is saying and most importantly, doing all of this in such a haughty tone, I wouldn't keep "going after" Linus.  Nevermind the fact that he has twice as many posts as the next non admin.  He's almost (especially of late) as bad as romanbyzantium!  If several people have told someone that what they wrote was inflammatory and/or rude - the it is!  The problem is with the person who wrote what was perceived as inflammatory/rude.

"Rude" is in the eye of the beholder.

Frankly, I have found many of your posts rude.

For example, there is the following unjustified and unsupported remark you made about me:

Quote
Elisha: It sounds like you are the biggest candidate here for ROAC.

And then there is this response to one of my posts:

Quote
Elisha: Get over it.  He never implied anything of the sort.  You are the one who is always on the attack and always with haughty, negative tone.  It amazes me how everyone but you realizes it.

You have posted in a similar style - with intro statements very much in the same vein as "Get over it" - in other threads and in response to persons other than I.

Perhaps you would do well to take some of your own advice before giving it out to others.


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
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,440


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #76 on: June 20, 2004, 03:22:41 PM »

Linus,

Your assessment of the situation is as blunt as your tone.  And I don't see the virtue in being blunt with fellow Christians of good will.  If you were not blunt you would not feel yourself under constant attack.  I myself hate being under attack or being on the attack and do everything possible to avoid it by being very polite and respectful.  Sometimes we all fall short but we shouldn't avoid trying to be gentle.  I just don't see how you enjoy posting on this forum, because you always seem agitated.  You also made a false dichotomy between being polite and being truthful, it appears to me, when you talk about pseudo-politeness. One of my favorite authors, Bishop Auxentios of Photiki (True Orthodox Church of Greece) is uncompromising but exceptionally polite and always trying to reach out to the Non-Eastern Orthodox in a way that is loving, in the manner of Christ.

Thankfully, though, it's not an either/or situation as you have presented it.  That's why there is an ongoing dialogue between the two families of Orthodox. Have you read any of the proceedings, which hierarchs of your own Church have signed on to?

Why are you even a member of the Ecumenical patriarchate when you hold such views? I would think you would be happier in the end in one of the Greek Old Calendar Churches.  But that's your business I guess.  Still, I wonder what your reasoning is.

anastasios
Logged

Met. Demetrius's Enthronement

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching.

I served as an Orthodox priest from June 2008 to April 2013, before resigning for personal reasons
Linus7
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,780



« Reply #77 on: June 20, 2004, 03:30:01 PM »

It is interesting that those who are most vocal in condemning my "tone" and accusing me of impoliteness are those who disagree with me to one degree or another.

I do not see anything wrong with talking to other Christians, although I do not believe any group condemned and anathematized by the Orthodox fathers and councils can be considered as Orthodox. The only "Orthodox families" are those that accept the fullness of the Orthodox faith.

I don't think I have been impolite.

Regarding the whole jurisdiction issue: in whose jurisdiction did St. Maximus the Confessor find himself?

I am not equating myself with or comparing myself to St. Maximus, but he certainly opposed the Monophysites and the Monothelite compromisers despite his being under the successive patriarchates of Sergius, Pyrrhus, and Paul at Constantinople.

Oh, by the way, I don't get "agitated." That is probably part of what irritates some people here about my posts.
« Last Edit: June 20, 2004, 03:51:44 PM by Linus7 » 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
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,440


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #78 on: June 20, 2004, 04:43:01 PM »

Linus,

It's true that St Maximus was alone.  But so were the heretics such as Nestorius, who thought that he alone was right.  Playing the isolation game is a very precarious game to play.  That's why God gave us bishops who are usually right.  Not always, but usually.  We laypeople need shepherds to guide us.

anastasios
Logged

Met. Demetrius's Enthronement

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching.

I served as an Orthodox priest from June 2008 to April 2013, before resigning for personal reasons
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #79 on: June 20, 2004, 07:21:04 PM »

Linus,

<...snipped....>

Why are you even a member of the Ecumenical patriarchate when you hold such views? I would think you would be happier in the end in one of the Greek Old Calendar Churches.  But that's your business I guess.  Still, I wonder what your reasoning is.

anastasios

I am sorry, anastasios, but you confuse me here. When did the OEcumenical Patriarch alter his statement that ALL Seven Councils are a requirement for re-union?

Demetri
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,440


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #80 on: June 20, 2004, 09:00:58 PM »

Demetri,

Read the agreed statement at Chambesy and see what would appear to some to be a waffling on the issue.

anastasios
Logged

Met. Demetrius's Enthronement

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching.

I served as an Orthodox priest from June 2008 to April 2013, before resigning for personal reasons
Linus7
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,780



« Reply #81 on: June 20, 2004, 11:34:30 PM »

Linus,

It's true that St Maximus was alone.  But so were the heretics such as Nestorius, who thought that he alone was right.  Playing the isolation game is a very precarious game to play.  That's why God gave us bishops who are usually right.  Not always, but usually.  We laypeople need shepherds to guide us.

anastasios

Nestorius ended up alone, but he had the support of Theodosius II at first.

And Nestorius was also Patriarch of Constantinople, was he not?

"Bishops are usually right" only when they are actually right, not merely by virtue of their positions as bishops.

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
Rustaveli
Constant In Opal... Ultramarine
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Eastern Church
Posts: 126


Saint Shota Rustaveli


« Reply #82 on: June 20, 2004, 11:39:20 PM »

Linus7,

Glory to Jesus Christ!

I was wondering if you could explain this statement:

Personally, I think it is a mistake to let discussions of this sort spill over into forums like this one.


-½ Last Edit: Sun, June 13, 2004, 09:11:16 AM by Linus7 -+

... posted as a reponse to the thread I began under the hopeful title, "Nature, Will, and a Hope for Being Outrageously Agreeable..." -

and which I deliberately began in the (presumably) aptly named "Free-For-All" forum section?

[the guidelines state: "Free-For-All

This is where you can discuss hot topics that might degenerate... if you don't like polemics, you are advised not to read this forum."]


I'm a bit confused by your statement in that arena, given both the context and your defense of your own defenses ... Wink

P.S. - you-'uns might want to check out the 3rd and 4th pages of "Nature, Will, and a Hope for Being Outrageously Agreeable... (Faith / Theology)";

I'm not having any luck turning up more than one Will in St. Matthew's Gospel.
Logged
Ben
Unabashedly Pro-Life
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,260



« Reply #83 on: June 20, 2004, 11:45:07 PM »

I'm not having any luck turning up more than one Will in St. Matthew's Gospel.

Whoa!

I pray we are just using different terminology.

If you honestly believe that Christ only has one will, and that this is clear in scripture, then you are embracing a heresy. I am not attacking you, but saying Christ only has one will is pure heresy.
« Last Edit: June 20, 2004, 11:46:01 PM by Ben » Logged

"I prefer to be accused unjustly, for then I have nothing to reproach myself with, and joyfully offer this to the good Lord. Then I humble myself at the thought that I am indeed capable of doing the thing of which I have been accused. " - Saint
Linus7
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,780



« Reply #84 on: June 20, 2004, 11:53:33 PM »

Rustaveli -

I made that statement because I was hoping we could limit the EO-NC conflict to one forum and not let it expand into several others, that's all.

Regarding the two wills of our Lord, how do you interpret Christ's words in Matthew 26:39:

". . . not as I will, but as You will" ?

He asked that, if possible, the cup of suffering pass from Him, but then freely submitted His own human will to the will of the Father.

If our Lord Jesus Christ had but one will - the divine will - such a prayer would make no sense.

Likewise, if the will comes from the person and not the natures, then there are three separate wills in the Holy Trinity.

You might want to read the Disputation With Pyrrhus of St. Maximus the Confessor. A copy in English can be had here.
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
Rustaveli
Constant In Opal... Ultramarine
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Eastern Church
Posts: 126


Saint Shota Rustaveli


« Reply #85 on: June 20, 2004, 11:54:30 PM »

... well, I never was quite sure what the Scriptural reference to "Will" with regard to Father and Son had to do with too much of anything;

I had only hoped to find where the seminal form of the Chalcedonian doctrine might be found in the NT...

cf. this post:

All of those verses which assert both the complete humanity and divinity of our Lord contain the teaching of Chalcedon in seminal form.

Of particular interest is Jesus' prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane on the night He was betrayed, in which He petitioned His Father, "Not as I will, but as You will" (Matt. 26:39).Naturally.
Logged
Ben
Unabashedly Pro-Life
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,260



« Reply #86 on: June 20, 2004, 11:57:56 PM »

Quote

If our Lord Jesus Christ had but one will - the divine will - such a prayer would make no sense.

Likewise, if the will comes from the person and not the natures, then there are three separate wills in the Holy Trinity.

I totally agree.....100%  Grin
Logged

"I prefer to be accused unjustly, for then I have nothing to reproach myself with, and joyfully offer this to the good Lord. Then I humble myself at the thought that I am indeed capable of doing the thing of which I have been accused. " - Saint
Rustaveli
Constant In Opal... Ultramarine
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Eastern Church
Posts: 126


Saint Shota Rustaveli


« Reply #87 on: June 21, 2004, 12:05:47 AM »

Rustaveli -

I made that statement because I was hoping we could limit the EO-NC conflict to one forum and not let it expand into several others, that's all.

Regarding the two wills of our Lord, how do you interpret Christ's words in Matthew 26:39:

". . . not as I will, but as You will" ?

O.K., I can see that [limiting EO-OO virtual "fisticuffs"]... there's enough conflict in that arena without opening new doors!  Cool

I did make the unexpected discovery that the Greek text of St. Matthew 26:39 does not seem to contain the term for "Will" (Thelo, long final "o"; sorry that my font and diacritical marks are lacking from the computer I am using...) except for the fist initial mention (relating to the Father, cf. prior posts above)...

It still seems to me that a two-will definition can't be based on this text alone,  in translation. [nor a single one; I wouldn't suggest that, as it may derive from the sentence structure in koine Greek, or one of a thousand other variables...]

... but your exposition is most helpful; as also the recommendation of the "Pyrrhus" text -  

I'll look into it!

Thanks for sharing your knowledge & insights.

Not a Monothelite, just seeking understanding...,

Rustaveli
« Last Edit: June 21, 2004, 12:09:02 AM by Rustaveli » Logged
Linus7
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,780



« Reply #88 on: June 21, 2004, 12:15:49 AM »

Here's another bit of Scripture to ponder:

"I can of Myself do nothing. As I hear, I judge, and My judgment is righteous, because I do not seek My own will but the will of the Father who sent Me" (John 5:30).

Once again, that doesn't make much sense if our Lord Jesus has but a single, divine will.
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
Ben
Unabashedly Pro-Life
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,260



« Reply #89 on: June 21, 2004, 12:33:23 AM »

Amen Linus!
Logged

"I prefer to be accused unjustly, for then I have nothing to reproach myself with, and joyfully offer this to the good Lord. Then I humble myself at the thought that I am indeed capable of doing the thing of which I have been accused. " - Saint
Rustaveli
Constant In Opal... Ultramarine
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Eastern Church
Posts: 126


Saint Shota Rustaveli


« Reply #90 on: June 21, 2004, 12:39:34 AM »

.. I still am unsure about how "will"-words and proof-texts relate to the wider discussion, which should perhaps be silence in awe of the Incarnational Mystery...

Well, "so long, and thanks for all the fish"...

Peace - out, ya'll!!!

« Last Edit: June 21, 2004, 12:40:01 AM by Rustaveli » Logged
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #91 on: June 21, 2004, 04:11:18 AM »

O.K., I can see that [limiting EO-OO virtual "fisticuffs"]... there's enough conflict in that arena without opening new doors!  Cool

I did make the unexpected discovery that the Greek text of St. Matthew 26:39 does not seem to contain the term for "Will" (Thelo, long final "o"; sorry that my font and diacritical marks are lacking from the computer I am using...) except for the fist initial mention (relating to the Father, cf. prior posts above)...

It still seems to me that a two-will definition can't be based on this text alone,  in translation. [nor a single one; I wouldn't suggest that, as it may derive from the sentence structure in koine Greek, or one of a thousand other variables...]

... but your exposition is most helpful; as also the recommendation of the "Pyrrhus" text -  

I'll look into it!

Thanks for sharing your knowledge & insights.

Not a Monothelite, just seeking understanding...,

Rustaveli

Rustaveli,
I am not sure of exactly what you are trying to say above, but +++¦++-ë (the/lo) was one of the first words I learned in Greek as a tyke, and it has always meant in my understanding "I want" as in the active volition sense of will. There are other words to say "I want"(am in need of) or "I want"(simple statement of lack).

Demetri
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #92 on: June 21, 2004, 04:30:11 AM »

Demetri,

Read the agreed statement at Chambesy and see what would appear to some to be a waffling on the issue.

anastasios

anastasios,

The statement and conference you reference in are prior to H.A.H. Bartholomeos I's elevation to partriarch by three to four years. He has since stated 7 Councils must be recognized, and so the "waffling" really seems to be this EP making a definitive statement about the previous patriarch's "waffling".

Don't get me wrong; it's obvious that he wants re-union, but he's set the requirement at exactly where Linus7 sees it. I haven't read that he has changed his mind from his original 1994 statement.

Demetri
« Last Edit: June 21, 2004, 04:30:43 AM by +æ-ü+¦-â-ä+++¦+++«-é » Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Augustine
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 565

pray for me, please


WWW
« Reply #93 on: June 21, 2004, 09:38:43 AM »

Elisha,

Quote
I think everyone here, and most especially Linus could do with a good dose of Fr. Seraphim Rose.  I'm no disciple - I just appreciate his love for everyone.  To quote him, "I myself fear the cold hearts of the "intellectually correct" far more than any errors you might find (in Augustine).  I sense in these hearts a preparation for the work of the Antichrist (whose imitation of Christ must also extend to
"correct theology".  I feel in Augustine the love of Christ."  (from a letter of his in 1981)

Of course, to be fair, Fr.Seraphim (of blessed memory) could say this while at the same time recognizing that those who have built entire theologies upon St.Augustine's more peculiar speculations/imprecisions (Roman Catholics and certain confessional Protestant groups) have now found themselves outside of the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church.  I also have my doubts that he would have communed non-Chalcedonians.

Does this make Fr.Seraphim a hypocrite?  No, and for some simple reasons...

Whatever his errors, St.Augustine reposed in the peace of the Church, and had he been confronted with the seriousness of them, would undoubtedly have recanted.  This is not only the opinion of the Orthodox consensus throughout the ages (in particular the consensus of other Fathers, liturgical calendars of both the Western and Eastern Orthodox Churches), but manifest in the apologetical qualifications of St.Augustine himself, who was actually careful to submit all he wrote to the judgement of the Church.

On the other hand, unfortunately, this is not the case of the non-Chalcedonians.  Their "imprecision" (if we use the major miaphysite/monophysite position as the object of our consideration in dialogues/debates like this, and not it's more extreme manifestations, like Eutycianism which I understand the non-Chalcedonians themselves reject) has set itself at odds with the judgement of the Church, and her theological symbols.

Like anyone of good will, I really would like to see the separation of the non-Chalcedonians from the Orthodox Church be resolved - but not at any price.  Without a formal acceptance of the Council of Chalcedon and later Oecumenical Synods, there will be no real union, but simply more schisms.

For the "Eastern" Orthodox who equivocate on this subject, or propose a union lacking a clear confession of the faith of Chalcedon and subsequent Oecumenical Synods, I ask the following - what would such do to our belief in the inspiration/propriety of our Church's dogmatic statements in general?  On what basis can we really say to the Roman Catholics "we love you, but you err and you must rectify this before we can share the same Chalice", if we treat Orthodox symbols and undisputedly Oecumenical Synods with such contempt?

I fear that the answer is actually already manifest in our day - though not quite as popular, the phenomenon of obfuscating "agreed statements", concelebrations and open communion toward Roman Catholics is already quite alive and well in many parts of the Orthodox world, particularly in the west where it has quite a scholarly sounding apologia attached to it (though the statements themselves tend to be a little more moderate than the consequences they have at the parish level.)

Frankly, some are creating a "church" without any authority - or at least, without any authority save for what happens in the present moment (a sort of legal positivism perhaps?).

Logged
Rustaveli
Constant In Opal... Ultramarine
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Eastern Church
Posts: 126


Saint Shota Rustaveli


« Reply #94 on: June 21, 2004, 09:47:33 AM »

Rustaveli,
I am not sure of exactly what you are trying to say above, but +++¦++-ë (the/lo) was one of the first words I learned in Greek as a tyke, and it has always meant in my understanding "I want" as in the active volition sense of will. There are other words to say "I want"(am in need of) or "I want"(simple statement of lack).

Demetri

An excellent point!

I'm therefore unsure of using such a text as a proof-text of the theological definition of the "diophysite" & / or "diothelyte" school...

(although, the root "+++¦++-ë (the/lo)" is clearly used in the latter...)

Logged
Linus7
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,780



« Reply #95 on: June 21, 2004, 11:41:17 PM »

An excellent point!

I'm therefore unsure of using such a text as a proof-text of the theological definition of the "diophysite" & / or "diothelyte" school...

(although, the root "+++¦++-ë (the/lo)" is clearly used in the latter...)

Huh?

If I understood Aristokles correctly, he just said that word means "will."

Those verses, Matthew 26:39 and John 5:30, definitely show our Lord Jesus deferring to the Father's will over His own. Since in His divinity He shares the divine will with the Father, Jesus must have been speaking of some will of His other than the divine will.

That could only be His human will.

[divine] will + [human] will = 2 wills
« Last Edit: June 21, 2004, 11:44:07 PM by Linus7 » 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
Rustaveli
Constant In Opal... Ultramarine
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Eastern Church
Posts: 126


Saint Shota Rustaveli


« Reply #96 on: June 22, 2004, 10:38:19 AM »

Huh?

If I understood Aristokles correctly, he just said that word means "will."


... oops, you're right...

I misread Aristokles's post!  :blushing:

mea culpa!

 Cool
« Last Edit: June 22, 2004, 10:39:10 AM by Rustaveli » Logged
Raouf
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 97



« Reply #97 on: June 22, 2004, 11:49:05 AM »


[divine] will + [human] will = 2 wills

It seems here Linus confesses that Christ is in two hypostases. You say that the Will is associated with Nature. Therefore was Christ's human will the will of the entire human nature? Just as Christ's Divine Will is the common Will of the Godhead, so then you must believe that the human will is the common Will of the whole human race!

If on the other hand Christ's human will was His own unique instance of a human will, then that human will must be hypostatic.  If Christ's human will is hypostatic and you say Christ is IN TWO WILLS, then He must be in TWO hypostases.

Is this really what EO believe?

In Christ who is One,
Raouf

« Last Edit: June 22, 2004, 11:50:16 AM by Raouf » Logged

Flog your enemies with the Name of Jesus and let the remembrance of Jesus be present with each breath. - St. John Climacus
Ben
Unabashedly Pro-Life
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,260



« Reply #98 on: June 22, 2004, 05:47:02 PM »

Christ has two natures and two wills, that is othodox teaching, the teaching of the Ecumenical Councils.
Logged

"I prefer to be accused unjustly, for then I have nothing to reproach myself with, and joyfully offer this to the good Lord. Then I humble myself at the thought that I am indeed capable of doing the thing of which I have been accused. " - Saint
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #99 on: June 22, 2004, 05:51:52 PM »

It seems here Linus confesses that Christ is in two hypostases. You say that the Will is associated with Nature. Therefore was Christ's human will the will of the entire human nature? Just as Christ's Divine Will is the common Will of the Godhead, so then you must believe that the human will is the common Will of the whole human race!

If on the other hand Christ's human will was His own unique instance of a human will, then that human will must be hypostatic.  If Christ's human will is hypostatic and you say Christ is IN TWO WILLS, then He must be in TWO hypostases.

Is this really what EO believe?

In Christ who is One,
Raouf



Welcome back and PEACE Raouf,

I will post later a definition of "hypostasis" ( or a link to one) in the classical Greek sense that will help clear this definition bottle-neck.

Demetri
« Last Edit: June 22, 2004, 05:53:07 PM by +æ-ü+¦-â-ä+++¦+++«-é » Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Raouf
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 97



« Reply #100 on: June 22, 2004, 06:14:56 PM »

Welcome back and PEACE Raouf,

I will post later a definition of "hypostasis" ( or a link to one) in the classical Greek sense that will help clear this definition bottle-neck.

Demetri

Hello Demetri,

I can't yet say it's good to be back but we'll see! Smiley

I am not sure a definition of hypostasis will help us...I think you need to better define "physis".

The EO confess that Christ is IN two physis and IN two Wills. It seems you link "physis" with "ousia". "Ousia" is that which is common, like the Divine Essence or Human Nature.  Ousia does not conotate an individuated instance. So if you say Christ is in two ousia and two wills then He must have the entire human nature and human will within Him. But if Christ's human will is His own human will then it must be hypostatic. If so, then to say Christ is IN two wills must leave room for an interpretation that He is IN two hypostases.

I know that is not what EO say they believe but it is a perfectly logical extension and example of the limitations of language and terminology.  As such, I think the expression Christ is OF two natures and OF two wills (without confusion, alteration, separation, etc...) is much better!

It seems the WHOLE point of all our formulas and terminologies is to reject certain heresies...those being Eutychianism and Nestorianism.  As long as we keep on insisting on a single formula to the exclusion of all others, we will never get anywhere.

Consider St. Cyril, our common Father, who wrote the following AFTER the formula of reunion:

[Cyril] We say there is one Son, and that He has one nature even when he is
considered as having assumed flesh endowed with a rational soul. As I have
already said, He has made the human element His own. And this is the way,
NOT OTHERWISE, that we must consider that the same one is at once God and
man.

[Questioner] Then he does not have two natures? that of God and that of man?

[Cyril] Well, Godhead is one thing, and manhood is another thing, considered
in the perspective of their intrinsic beings, BUT in the case of Christ they
came together in a mysterious and incomprehensible union without confusion
or change. The manner of this union is entirely beyond conception.

[Questioner] But how from these two things, that is Godhead and manhood, can
we envisage a single Christ?

[Cyril] I think in no other way than as things which come together with each
other in an indivisible union beyond all conception, as I have already said.

[Questioner] Such as what?

[Cyril] Well, do we not say that a human being like ourselves is one, and
has a single nature, even though he is not homogenous but really composed of
two things, I mean soul and body?

[Questioner] We do.

[Cyril] And if someone takes the flesh on its own, separating its unity with
its own soul, and divides what was one into two, have they not destroyed the
proper conception of man?

[Questioner] But if we say that the Son (even considering his as
incarnate)has a single nature surely in is inevitable that we must admit a
confusion and a mixture here, as if he had hidden away a human nature in
Himself. For what would the nature of man be in the face of the pre-eminence
of the Godhead?

[Cyril] My friend, if anyone says that when we speak of the single nature of
God the Word incarnate and made man, we imply that a confusion or mixture
has occurred, then they are talking utter rubbish. No one could convict us
of saying this by the force of proper arguments...

St. Cyril "On the Unity of Christ (SVS Press)

I just don't understand how the EO can consider St. Cyril a great saint and Father of the Church and yet insist that his Christology is heretical and that his terminology ceased to be Orthodox in 451 AD.

In Christ,
Raouf
« Last Edit: June 22, 2004, 06:16:35 PM by Raouf » Logged

Flog your enemies with the Name of Jesus and let the remembrance of Jesus be present with each breath. - St. John Climacus
Raouf
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 97



« Reply #101 on: June 22, 2004, 06:19:26 PM »

Christ has two natures and two wills, that is othodox teaching, the teaching of the Ecumenical Councils.

Dear Ben,

No offense but if you don't have much to reply to, then better not! I don't see how what you said above advances our discussion in any way. I posted a question that showed a logical conclusion to the EO formula "IN two wills" and your reply was meant to say what???

In Christ,
Raouf
Logged

Flog your enemies with the Name of Jesus and let the remembrance of Jesus be present with each breath. - St. John Climacus
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #102 on: June 22, 2004, 08:42:55 PM »

Raouf,
At the risk of confusing these defintions further the link below to a post by Hieromonk Andrew Kostadis gives a good treatment of "hypostasis". I say confusion because his post is addressing the Trinity rather than Christology, but I have always felt the use of 'hypostasis' here or at least it's intended meaning was not understood by all -and that means some from both 'sides' Smiley

http://www.euphrosynoscafe.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1882&highlight=hypostasis+seraphim&sid=df67a4989a62b3c312de9dd072f84fcb

You bring up -å-à -â++ and +Ö will have to ponder what you're saying when I'm not so tired. Perhaps tomorrow morn.

Demetri
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Raouf
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 97



« Reply #103 on: June 23, 2004, 01:34:30 PM »

Dear Demetri,

I read the text at the link you provided. It seems to confirm my use of these terms in relation to Chalcedonian usage.

Did Christ carry within Him the Will of the entire/common human nature, or was His human Will his very own unique Will?  I assume you will answer the latter.

Then, if Christ is IN two physis (by which you mean ousia), and yet His will is His own, which means it must be hypostatic (otherwise He has the will and nature of all humanity), then your formula could be read that Christ is IN two Hypostases.

If our Fathers saw that there is no unhypostatic physis, then do you blame them for rejecting "IN two physis"? Did they misunderstand the Chalcedonians use of these terms? If you say yes, then is it POSSIBLE that the Chalcedonians also didn't QUITE understand the use of these terms by the Non-Chalcedonians?  Is the terminology holy and sacred or the truth being expressed?  What truth do the NC reject?  All Chalcedon has shown is a rejection of terms not truth.

Why do you reject "from two natures" or "of two natures" as being unorthodox? Or "one incarnate nature" as used by our common Father, St. Cyril - and not only our common Father but one precisely known for his great Christological contributions to the Church?

Why did Chalcedon reject these existing formulas and insist that the NEW formula is the ONLY Orthodox expression?

Can we today explain both these forumulas in a way that is Orthodox to both sides, in a way that fully rejects ALL forms of Eutychianism and Nestorianism?

If so, why is that a BAD thing? Do you believe the Holy Spririt is still active in the Church? Not is a way to introduce new doctrines or conflicting doctrines but in a way to help us preserve and understand what was always believed - although in a new time and in a new place?

In Christ,
Raouf
« Last Edit: June 23, 2004, 01:35:50 PM by Raouf » Logged

Flog your enemies with the Name of Jesus and let the remembrance of Jesus be present with each breath. - St. John Climacus
Rustaveli
Constant In Opal... Ultramarine
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Eastern Church
Posts: 126


Saint Shota Rustaveli


« Reply #104 on: June 23, 2004, 02:14:23 PM »

I've just received a copy of Fr. V.C. Samuel's volume The Council of Chalcedon Re-Examined, which was quite highly recommended in another thread.

     Hee, hee![/b]    Cheesy

Should be a good read...
Logged
Linus7
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,780



« Reply #105 on: June 23, 2004, 11:28:23 PM »

Raouf -

Does any human being possess a human nature that is "the nature of all humanity" (in the sense of "every last individual, concrete human nature")?

He possesses a human nature, which is a set of qualities common to all human beings, but he possesses it in concrete reality: in other words, it is his uniquely. He shares the natural qualities with all other human beings, but his possession of them makes them his.

Our Lord Jesus possesses a human nature in the same way.

If the will must be hypostatic, then surely there are three wills in the Holy Trinity, right?

These questions were dealt with by St. Maximus the Confessor in his Disputation with Pyrrhus, which is available here.

« Last Edit: June 24, 2004, 12:07:18 AM by Linus7 » 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
Rustaveli
Constant In Opal... Ultramarine
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Eastern Church
Posts: 126


Saint Shota Rustaveli


« Reply #106 on: June 23, 2004, 11:41:02 PM »

By the way, Raouf -

I have very much been well-instructed by your intelligent and well-phrased presentation of the Coptic / Oriental Orthodox Christology, particularly in your inclusion of the teachings of Our Holy Father, St. Cyril.

Thanks, and do keep it up!

Your contributions are of great benefit to myself, who am a theological neophyte, and I wager to say to many who view this site ...  Cool

Logged
Linus7
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,780



« Reply #107 on: June 23, 2004, 11:56:01 PM »

Quote
Raouf: Why did Chalcedon reject these existing formulas and insist that the NEW formula is the ONLY Orthodox expression?

Because "one nature" is incorrect.

Our Lord is one Divine Person and Hypostasis with two natures, human and divine.

To speak of one nature from two implies mixture or confusion, despite protests to the contrary.

To say "it is impossible to speak of two natures after the union" implies a "before the union" for the humanity of Christ, a thing which in effect tears our Lord in two.

There was no "before the union" for our Lord's human nature. How could there be?

The humanity of our Lord came into being as a result of the hypostatic union. Its existence is due to it; its center and subject is the One Person and Hypostasis of the Word.

For our Lord's human nature there is nothing but "after the union."

Thus, if it is impossible to speak of our Lord's human nature after the union, then it is impossible to speak of our Lord as a human being at all.

"One nature" is also incorrect in terms of Trinitarian theology.

Our Lord Jesus, as the Second Person of the Trinity, shares His divine nature with the Father and the Holy Spirit. How could he make that nature divino-human in His case alone without rendering himself different in essence from the other two Persons of the Holy Trinity?

The answer is that our Lord united the two natures in His Hypostasis, that which is unique to Himself in His Person.

The two natures are inseparably united in the One Divine Person of our Lord Jesus Christ, but they remain unmixed and unconfused: in other words, distinct.

They have not disappeared or dissolved in solution.

The Christology of Chalcedon was not new, as you claim. Its language had been anticipated by both Tertullian and St. Augustine in the West.

It was a further and correct development of what St. Cyril meant and should have said.

If, as Peter Farrington has written repeatedly, Non-Chalcedonians really mean hypostasis when they say nature, then how is one to avoid the conclusion that they believe our Lord is one Hypostasis from two hypostases?

If nature=hypostasis, then "one nature from two natures" = one hypostasis from two hypostases.



« Last Edit: June 23, 2004, 11:57:36 PM by Linus7 » 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
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,440


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #108 on: June 24, 2004, 12:27:56 AM »

Dear Linus,

First of all I would like to say that this is exactly the kind of posting style I envisioned as "polite and respectful yet firm."  Thank you for making the effort--I am sure it will go a long way to helping foster sincere dialogue.

here are some thoughts I threw together for discussion, and a disclaimer: I don't know if this is what I believe actually but I am tryign to sort out this confusing terminology, etc.

Quote
Because "one nature" is incorrect.

Our Lord is one Divine Person and Hypostasis with two natures, human and divine.

Right, but that's because the Fathers at Chalcedon chose that vocabulary: they could have chosen another.

Quote
To speak of one nature from two implies mixture or confusion, despite protests to the contrary.

I don't know if this is so; I think it suggests that the Logos took flesh to himself, and this assumed flesh is the same "substance" as the Logos before the incarnation.  If there were two natures, I could see how one might think that there was a change in the Godhead at the incarnation, but if there is one incarnate nature that seems to protect this.  Disclaimer: I am a Chalcedonian and think Chalcedon is fine, but I am just trying to see this from the Non-Chalcedonian point of view.

Quote
To say "it is impossible to speak of two natures after the union" implies a "before the union" for the humanity of Christ, a thing which in effect tears our Lord in two.

On the one hand, St Cyril would never say there was a "before the union" because Jesus Christ is the eternal Son of God, the eternal God-man.  On the other hand, at a certain point according to the economy, the Logos took flesh. So in a sense there was a before chronologically but not in the sense of identity.

Quote
There was no "before the union" for our Lord's human nature. How could there be?

I think you are on to something here.  Jesus Christ is the creator of the world, not the "disincarnate Logos."  While the incarnation happened in time at a specific location and time, it was an eternally-prefigured event (lest there be a change in the Godhead).

Quote
The humanity of our Lord came into being as a result of the hypostatic union. Its existence is due to it; its center and subject is the One Person and Hypostasis of the Word.

Not sure we can go there.  The humanity of the Word always existed, but in a prefigurement.  We can't think about this in a chronological way, lest we introduce change into the Godhead.  

Quote
For our Lord's human nature there is nothing but "after the union."

But the human nature is dependent on the divinity, and is of the same "thing" because there is only one subject. So I could see one nature here, one incarnate nature, that is.

Quote
Thus, if it is impossible to speak of our Lord's human nature after the union, then it is impossible to speak of our Lord as a human being at all.

The Neo-Chalcedonians would make this very assertion, as did Fr John Meyendorff: The Logos took FLESH, the flesh of mankind, not an inviduated HUMAN BEING.  I don't necessarily agree, but it comes from Leontius of Byzantium, an influential Church writer of the 6th century.

Quote
"One nature" is also incorrect in terms of Trinitarian theology.

Our Lord Jesus, as the Second Person of the Trinity, shares His divine nature with the Father and the Holy Spirit. How could he make that nature divino-human in His case alone without rendering himself different in essence from the other two Persons of the Holy Trinity?

Because he took flesh, a flesh into which was imputed his already-existing properties as Jesus Christ, the eternal God-man.  Look at any icon of the creation of Adam: it's Jesus Christ creating him.

anastasios
Logged

Met. Demetrius's Enthronement

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching.

I served as an Orthodox priest from June 2008 to April 2013, before resigning for personal reasons
Rustaveli
Constant In Opal... Ultramarine
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Eastern Church
Posts: 126


Saint Shota Rustaveli


« Reply #109 on: June 24, 2004, 12:35:21 AM »

I like this right here, ya'll...


[Cyril] Well, Godhead is one thing, and manhood is another thing, considered
in the perspective of their intrinsic beings, BUT in the case of Christ they
came together in a mysterious and incomprehensible union without confusion
or change. The manner of this union is entirely beyond conception.

Ah, but for a sense of mystery beyond mortal conception!!

Saint Cyril, pray for us!

Logged
Linus7
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,780



« Reply #110 on: June 24, 2004, 01:07:05 AM »

I've just received a copy of Fr. V.C. Samuel's volume The Council of Chalcedon Re-Examined, which was quite highly recommended in another thread.

     Hee, hee![/b]    Cheesy

Should be a good read...

You might want to balance that read by checking out the following articles:

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05019a.htm

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05495a.htm

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03555a.htm

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05633a.htm

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06098c.htm

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10489b.htm

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14597a.htm

The primary source documents for the articles are generally listed at the bottom of the page.
« Last Edit: June 24, 2004, 01:08:23 AM by Linus7 » 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
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,440


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #111 on: June 24, 2004, 01:19:28 AM »

Disclaimer: Anything in the Catholic Encyclopedia is outdated (from 1913) and does not reflect the 81 years of serious scholarship that has occurred since then.  This is the encyclopedia that claims that St Photios died out of communion with Rome, for instance, which was only disproved in 1948 by Fr Francis Dvornik. So use with caution.  I read the Catholic Encyclopedia online for "beginner's level" stuff but you really need to read the stuff published since then by serious academic folks.

anastasios
Logged

Met. Demetrius's Enthronement

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching.

I served as an Orthodox priest from June 2008 to April 2013, before resigning for personal reasons
Rustaveli
Constant In Opal... Ultramarine
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Eastern Church
Posts: 126


Saint Shota Rustaveli


« Reply #112 on: June 24, 2004, 10:43:25 AM »

... Not to mention that such a source gushes forth from the Seven-Headed Beast Which Sits Upon The Hills of Rome!

 Wink

... just playin', Brethren and Sistrums...  Grin

Thanks for the references and advisement, Linus and Anastasios.
Logged
mourad
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 49


Mia, not mono!


« Reply #113 on: June 24, 2004, 10:52:35 AM »

the spirit of this forum is becoming quite quite enjoyable and pleasant, may God keep hearing the prayers of all those praying and working to make it a more profitable experience to all who visit.

God keep you all.
Logged
Raouf
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 97



« Reply #114 on: June 24, 2004, 11:37:04 AM »

Linus,

Rather than a line by line commentary, I believe the following addresses all of your points. Please let me know if I missed anything:

Hypostatic Union

St. Cyril insisted in the “hypostatic union”. What does it mean? It means a perfect and natural union between the Hypostasis of the Word and human nature. That is, the human nature was united to the Divine Hypostasis of the Word in a natural union.  The humanity became His own, or as we say in our Liturgy, “He made it ONE with His divinity”, not that humanity ceased to be humanity, but it is ONLY in the union that the humanity of Christ came to be.  There is no concept of Christ’s humanity apart from the hypostatic union.  Therefore, St. Cyril insisted that after the union, there can be no speak of two in Christ, since the union (the hypostatic, natural union) removes all division in Christ, although the properties of humanity and divinity are never confused. As such to say Christ IS two natures or IN two natures, according to St. Cyril goes directly against the concept of the hypostatic union.  FROM or OF two natures does NOT imply a time before the union but only speaks of the union itself - it is a union OF or FROM two natures, a hypostatic union. As such, since the two have come together into a hypostatic union, a natural union, then we can only speak of the one incarnate hypostasis of Christ or His one Incarnate nature.  

Again, “from” two does not imply in any way a pre-existent humanity in Christ.  There is no separate humanity in Christ either before OR after the unionGǪthere is no humanity in Christ APART from the union.  As such, how can we separate the two and speak of them independently when in reality such does not exist apart from the union?  Again, for St. Cyril the union abolishes all talk of separation.

Consider St. Severus' words:

"
Quote
Enough has, I think, been said about essence and hypostasis. But the name 'nature' is sometimes taken in place of essence', sometimes in place of hypostasis. For even the whole of mankind we call comprehensively 'nature', as it is indeed written: -½For all natures of beasts and of birds, and of reptiles and of things that are in the water are subjected and are made subject to human nature-+: and again we speak of one nature in reference to a single man, Paul for example or Peter, or maybe James. Where therefore we name all mankind one nature, we use the name 'nature' generically in place of 'essence'; but, where we say that there is one nature of Paul, the name 'nature' is employed in place of 'individual hypostasis'. So also we call the Holy Trinity one nature, employing the term 'nature' in place of the general designation 'essence'; as Gregory the Theologian the bishop of Nazianzus also said in the sermon on the Holy Pentecost: -½Confess the Trinity to be of one Godhead, my friends; or, if you like, of one nature; and we will ask for you from the Spirit the expression 'God'-+. But, when we say 'one incarnate nature of God the Word', as Athanasius the prop of the truth and the apostolic faith said in the books on the Incarnation of the Word, we use 'nature' in place of 'individual designation', denoting the one hypostasis of the Word himself, like that of Peter also or of Paul, or of any other single man. Wherefore also, when we say 'one nature which became incarnate', we do not say it absolutely, but by adding 'one nature of the Word himself clearly denote the one hypostasis. But the very men who blasphemously call the one Christ two natures use the name 'nature' in place of 'individual designation', saying that the Word of God is one nature, and the man as they say from Mary another. For they do not reach such a height of fatuity as to say that they are using the name 'natures' in place of 'general designation', I mean in the same sense as essence: for, if the Holy Trinity is one nature, and all mankind one nature, in the same sense as anything which is shown to be so on this principle, the Holy Trinity will be found (to say a very absurd thing) to have become incarnate in all mankind, that is the human race."

and again:

Quote
"Do you call the flesh possessing an intelligent soul, which God the Word voluntarily united to himself hypostatically without any change, a specimen or a generality, that is one soul-possessing hypostasis, or the whole human generality? It is manifest that, if you wish to give a right-minded answer, you will say one soul-possessing body. Accordingly we say that from it and the hypostasis of God the Word the ineffable union was made: for the whole of the Godhead and the whole of humanity in general were not joined in a natural union, but special hypostases. And the holy and wise Cyril plainly witnesses to us in that in the third chapter or anathema he spoke thus: -½Whoever divides the one Christ into hypostases after the union, associating them in association of honour or of authority only, and not rather in junction of natural union, let him be anathema-+. And again in the Scholia the same says: -½Hence we shall learn that the hypostases have remained without confusion-+. Accordingly the natural union was not of generalities, but of hypostases of which Emmanuel was composed. And do not think that hypostases in all cases have a distinct person assigned to them, so that we should be thought, like the impious Nestorius, to speak of a union of persons, and to run counter to the God-inspired words of the holy Cyril, who in the second letter to the same Nestorius speaks thus: -½But that it should be so will in no way help the right principle of faith, even if some men spread about a union of persons. For the Scripture did not say that God the Word united to himself the person of a man, but that he became flesh-+. When hypostases subsist by individual subsistence, as for instance, those of Peter and of Paul, whom the authority of the apostleship united, then there will be a union of persons and a brotherly association, not a natural junction of one hypostasis made up out of two that is free from confusion. For this is what those who adhere to the foul doctrines of Nestorius are convicted of saying with regard to the divine Humanization also. They first make the babe exist by himself separately, so that a distinct person is even assigned to him, and then by attaching God the Word to him impiously introduce a union of persons into the faith. This Gregory the Theologian also rejected by saying in the great letter to Cledonius: -½Whoever says that the man was formed, and God afterwards crept in is condemned: for this is not a birth of God, but an escape from birth-+. But, when hypostases do not subsist in individual subsistence, as also in the case of the man among us, I mean him who is composed of soul and body, but are without confusion recognised in union and composition, being distinguished by the intellect only and displaying one hypostasis made out of two, such a union none will be so uninstructed as to call one of persons. Though the hypostasis of God the Word existed before, or rather  was before all ages and times, being eternally with God both the Father and the Holy Spirit, yet still the flesh possessing an intelligent soul which he united to him did not exist before the union with him, nor was a distinct person assigned to it. And the great Athanasius bears witness, who in the letter to Jovinian the king says: -½As soon as there is flesh, there is at once flesh of God the Word; and, as soon as there is soul-possessing and rational flesh, there is at once soul-possessing rational flesh of God the Word: for in him also it acquired subsistence-+. And the holy Cyril also testifies, addressing the impious Diodorus as follows: -½My excellent man, I say that you are shooting forth unlearned words much affected with what is abhorrent. For the holy body was from Mary, but still at the very beginning of its concretion or subsistence in the womb it was made holy, as the body of Christ, and no one can see any time at which it was not his, but rather simple as you say and the same as this flesh of other men-+. Following these God-inspired words of the holy fathers, and confessing our Lord Jesus Christ to be of two natures, regard the distinct hypostases themselves of which Emmanuel was composed, and the natural junction of these, and do not go up to generalities and essences, of the whole of the Godhead and humanity in general: for it is manifest that the whole of the Godhead is seen in the Trinity, and humanity in general draws the mind to the whole human race. How therefore is it anything but ridiculous and impious for us to say that the Trinity was united in hypostasis to the race of mankind, when the holy Scriptures say more plainly than a trumpet, -½The Word became flesh and dwelt in us-+, that is that one of the three hypostases who was rationally and hypostatically united to soul-possessing flesh? But neither do we deny, as we have also written in other letters on different occasions, that we often find men designating hypostases by the name of essence. Hence Gregory the Theologian named hypostatic union union in essence in the letter to Cledonius which we have just mentioned, speaking thus: -½Whoever says that he worked by grace as in a prophet, but not that he was united and fashioned together with him in essence, may he be bereft of the excellent operation, or rather may he be full of the contrary-+. And the wise Cyril in the second letter to Succensus calls the manhood which was hypostatically united to God the Word essence, saying: -½For, if after saying 'one nature  of the Word' we had stopped and not added 'incarnate', but set the dispensation as it were outside, they would perhaps in a way have a plausible argument when they pretend to ask, 'Where is the perfection in manhood? or how was the essence after our model made up?' But, since the perfection in manhood and the characteristic of our essence has been introduced by the fact that we said 'incarnate', let them be silent, since they have leaned upon the staff of a reed-+"

Our Human Nature

I am a union of flesh and soul and both are unique ousias, but it is in their union, a natural union, that I am a person.  It is MY flesh and MY soul, and as such it would be ridiculous to speak of two, since I am one hypostasis OF or FROM two natures.  Both my flesh and my soul become hypostatic in the union since they are MINE.  In the same way the humanity of Christ became His own!  It became His own, however, only in the union with the Hypostasis of the Word.  If physis means ousia and ousia only refers to the common not the personal then how can Christ be one divine hypostasis IN two ousia, humanity and divinity?  How then has the ousia of the Christ’s humanity become His own humanity, there by becoming the Flesh of the Hypostasis of the Word?  Again, this terminology is weak in confessing the “hypostatic union” which was for St. Cyril crucial to Christ’s unity and our salvation.

The Trinity

There is only One Divine Ousia, which belongs to the Godhead and as such the three hypostasis of God each share the One Will of the Divine Essence. But there is no Divine Essence apart from the three Hypostasis of the Godhead. There is no divine ousia apart from Father, Son and Holy Spirit. In the case of humanity however, the ousia of the flesh does not exist apart from its union with the soul and in this union, every human being becomes a hypostasis with his own will.  There can be no human ousia apart from a human hypostasis. So if you say Christ is in the ousia of man and in the ousia of God, you are implying the Christ is in two hypostasis since Christ’s humanity was flesh endowed with a rational soul, including a human will. How then can we speak of Christ’s humanity apart from its natural union with His divinity without implying two hypostases?  Rather, Christ’s humanity is made one with His divinity and only in the union does Christ’s humanity become hypostatic, in its union with the hypostasis of the Word.  From two natures does not imply a time before the union or a pre-existent hypostatic humanity of Christ (hence your objection), but rather quite the contrary, it implies that the union is a hypostatic union, a union of (or from) the hypostasis of the Word, pre-existing in all eternity, with a flesh endowed with a rational soul, in the womb of the Holy Theotokos!  In that very union, Christ’s humanity becomes HIS humanity and is therefore a real and hypostatic humanity, that is, not a generic humanity, but His very own, the flesh of God!  If then, the two have come together in a perfect hypostatic and natural union, that how can we separate the one Christ and say He is two or operating in two?

In Christ,
Raouf
« Last Edit: June 24, 2004, 11:41:50 AM by Raouf » Logged

Flog your enemies with the Name of Jesus and let the remembrance of Jesus be present with each breath. - St. John Climacus
Tags: Chalcedon Chalcedon polemics cheval mort 
Pages: 1 2 3 All   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 0.302 seconds with 141 queries.