Shiny
Übermensch
Site Supporter
Moderated
Toumarches
 Offline
Faith: Groucho Marxist
Jurisdiction: Dahntahn Stoop Haus
Posts: 12,741
Paint It Red
|
 |
« Reply #90 on: September 23, 2012, 10:58:46 PM » |
|
His Wikipedia article has a picture of him censing an icon of Fr. Seraphim Rose. It's a sign of the end times.
Yet he is critical of the aerial toll houses. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Morality and nature are not related at all. Rape is natural yet, it is immoral. Morality isn't defined by nature nor is nature defined by morality. Morality is morality and nature is nature. JamesR pwns, for real |
|
|
|
Severian
|
|
« Reply #91 on: September 23, 2012, 10:59:36 PM » |
|
His Wikipedia article has a picture of him censing an icon of Fr. Seraphim Rose. It's a sign of the end times.
Why? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
These things I have spoken unto you, that in me you might have peace. In the world you shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world. -John 16:33
Please pray for me, an unworthy and despondent sinner. And please pray for Syria and Egypt. Thank you and God bless.
|
|
|
|
jckstraw72
|
|
« Reply #92 on: September 23, 2012, 11:02:22 PM » |
|
His Wikipedia article has a picture of him censing an icon of Fr. Seraphim Rose. It's a sign of the end times.
Yet he is critical of the aerial toll houses. he's far beyond "critical" about them -- it seems to have consumed him for the past 30 years. he's foaming-at-the-mouth nutso against them. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Iconodule
|
|
« Reply #93 on: September 23, 2012, 11:02:54 PM » |
|
This interview highlights his trademark schticks and obsessions: throwing words like "heresy" and "fundamentalist" around arbitrarily, making really simplistic remarks about Western Christianity, assuming empiricism as the only correct way of studying the natural world, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Just ignore iconotools delusions. He is the biggest multiculturalist globalist there is due to his unfortunate background.
|
|
|
|
Orthodox11
|
|
« Reply #94 on: September 23, 2012, 11:04:09 PM » |
|
I get a different impression- he seems to be promoting the crudest scientism with regard to the visible creation and seems utterly uncritical of modern materialist science. And, of course, if you disagree with him, you must be a Gnostic or a fundamentalist.
He is reacting to the anti-science stance of many fundamentalists that pushes so many, particularly youth, away from Christianity. In doing so he often lacks nuance and balance, but this does not equate a compromise of Orthodoxy. His Wikipedia article has a picture of him censing an icon of Fr. Seraphim Rose. It's a sign of the end times. People always make a big deal about that. He said he was serving in a church and they happened to have an icon of Fr. Seraphim. He didn't want to cause an uproar by skipping icons as he was censing (though given that Fr. Seraphim has yet to be canonised, he'd be right to do so even if he did believe he was a saint. That being said, he had nothing but good things to say about Fr. Seraphim when I talked to him, even though he disagreed with many of his positions. haha yeah, and yet he is the one who actually says Gnostic things. he said in one of his videos that science proves that you, yourself can be one gender, while your body is another. hmmmm, last i checked Orthodoxy teaches that the body IS you --- hello dualism.
Saying that a persons genitalia may not match the gender of that individual's personhood is not a form of dualism, but refers to a biological reality. We would not consider this idea at all odd if it referred to any other kind of physical deformity. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
3,000 posts. Time to take a break!
|
|
|
|
Shanghaiski
|
|
« Reply #95 on: September 23, 2012, 11:04:31 PM » |
|
His Wikipedia article has a picture of him censing an icon of Fr. Seraphim Rose. It's a sign of the end times.
Why? "Archbishop" Puhalo was a nemesis of Fr. Seraphim and opposed him over the toll houses, introducing soul sleep and general weirdness in dogma. (Not to say that some tolling is not weird.)  You are put on warning status for not using the correct title; "archbishop" is not a title. If you disagree with this decision, please PM me. Carl Kraeff |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
|
|
|
|
Orthodox11
|
|
« Reply #96 on: September 23, 2012, 11:06:23 PM » |
|
introducing soul sleep
Which he continues to deny ever having taught. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
3,000 posts. Time to take a break!
|
|
|
|
jckstraw72
|
|
« Reply #97 on: September 23, 2012, 11:07:04 PM » |
|
I get a different impression- he seems to be promoting the crudest scientism with regard to the visible creation and seems utterly uncritical of modern materialist science. And, of course, if you disagree with him, you must be a Gnostic or a fundamentalist.
He is reacting to the anti-science stance of many fundamentalists that pushes so many, particularly youth, away from Christianity. In doing so he often lacks nuance and balance, but this does not equate a compromise of Orthodoxy. His Wikipedia article has a picture of him censing an icon of Fr. Seraphim Rose. It's a sign of the end times. People always make a big deal about that. He said he was serving in a church and they happened to have an icon of Fr. Seraphim. He didn't want to cause an uproar by skipping icons as he was censing (though given that Fr. Seraphim has yet to be canonised, he'd be right to do so even if he did believe he was a saint. That being said, he had nothing but good things to say about Fr. Seraphim when I talked to him, even though he disagreed with many of his positions. haha yeah, and yet he is the one who actually says Gnostic things. he said in one of his videos that science proves that you, yourself can be one gender, while your body is another. hmmmm, last i checked Orthodoxy teaches that the body IS you --- hello dualism.
Saying that a persons genitalia may not match the gender of that individual's personhood is not a form of dualism, but refers to a biological reality. We would not consider this idea at all odd if it referred to any other kind of physical deformity. he opposed the person to the body ... you yourself vs. the body ... thats dualism. and i quite frankly dont believe him when he says nice things about Fr. Seraphim. he tries to say he was a righteous struggler or whatever, and yet in print he calls him a heretic. i think he's now trying to moderate how insane he has made himself look. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
jckstraw72
|
|
« Reply #98 on: September 23, 2012, 11:09:14 PM » |
|
introducing soul sleep
Which he continues to deny ever having taught. unfortunately for him he put it in print and so he can't just make it go away. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Shanghaiski
|
|
« Reply #99 on: September 23, 2012, 11:11:32 PM » |
|
introducing soul sleep
Which he continues to deny ever having taught. unfortunately for him he put it in print and so he can't just make it go away. He can claim what he wants to, but at his trial, everything will be weighed. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
|
|
|
|
Orthodox11
|
|
« Reply #100 on: September 23, 2012, 11:13:45 PM » |
|
he opposed the person to the body ... you yourself vs. the body ... thats dualism.
He has written extensively on Orthodox anthropology and he quite clearly does not hold any dualist notions of the body, but strongly opposes such ideas. unfortunately for him he put it in print and so he can't just make it go away.
Like many books, often talked about but never read. I'd like to see some actual references to Arch. Lazar's so-called soul sleep teaching. He can claim what he wants to, but at his trial, everything will be weighed.
That goes for all of us. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: September 23, 2012, 11:14:54 PM by Orthodox11 »
|
Logged
|
3,000 posts. Time to take a break!
|
|
|
|
jckstraw72
|
|
« Reply #101 on: September 23, 2012, 11:18:23 PM » |
|
he opposed the person to the body ... you yourself vs. the body ... thats dualism.
He has written extensively on Orthodox anthropology and he quite clearly does not hold any dualist notions of the body, but strongly opposes such ideas. unfortunately for him he put it in print and so he can't just make it go away.
Like many books, often talked about but never read. I'd like to see some actual references to Arch. Lazar's so-called soul sleep teaching. read Fr. Seraphim's Soul After Death, he quotes him several times from the Tlingit Herald. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Orthodox11
|
|
« Reply #102 on: September 23, 2012, 11:27:19 PM » |
|
read Fr. Seraphim's Soul After Death, he quotes him several times from the Tlingit Herald.
Thanks. I'll see if I can get hold of the whole article from Tlingit somehow. Interesting to note, though, that Fr. Seraphim (p.228) dismisses as irrelevant the quotes used by the 'critic' to demonstrate how man is composed of both soul and body, so even here is proof that he is not a dualist as you claim. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
3,000 posts. Time to take a break!
|
|
|
|
jckstraw72
|
|
« Reply #103 on: September 23, 2012, 11:28:34 PM » |
|
read Fr. Seraphim's Soul After Death, he quotes him several times from the Tlingit Herald.
Thanks. I'll see if I can get hold of the whole article from Tlingit somehow. Interesting to note, though, that Fr. Seraphim (p.228) dismisses as irrelevant the quotes used by the 'critic' to demonstrate how man is composed of both soul and body, so even here is proof that he is not a dualist as you claim. that was over 30 yrs ago -- things change. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Orthodox11
|
|
« Reply #104 on: September 23, 2012, 11:31:12 PM » |
|
that was over 30 yrs ago -- things change.
Obviously not since even his most recent works stress the importance of the Orthodox anthropology in this respect. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
3,000 posts. Time to take a break!
|
|
|
|
JamesRottnek
|
|
« Reply #105 on: September 24, 2012, 04:09:50 AM » |
|
i dont think there is anyone more dangerous in the Orthodox Church than Lazar Puhalo -- that is if anyone is actually listening to him.
That's Archbishop Lazar. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
I know a secret about a former Supreme Court Justice. Can you guess what it is?
The greatest tragedy in the world is when a cigarette ends.
American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.
Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011
|
|
|
|
jah777
|
|
« Reply #106 on: September 24, 2012, 10:29:05 AM » |
|
Years ago he came and gave a talk to our parish. The talk itself was on prayer, and I found it edifying. My conversation with him afterwards left me with a rather disturbed impression, though. Regarding his writings, I'm sure there is a gem or two in the piles of manure, but I think a person risks great harm to their soul by reading them. There is so much intellectual haughtiness there, to much crying out for attention and praise, and corresponding tendency to push right up against heresy in certain directions for the sake of attention, while carefully trying not to cross totally over the line. In some cases, the line has been crossed and he has retracted without admitting former error (soul sleep heresy, for instance), and in some cases it seems that which side of the line he is on depends on who he is speaking to and attempting to please (whether same gender sex is a sin, or whether the issue is more about HOW the Church treats those with same sex attraction).
Nobody should do obedience to anonymous people on the Internet who they have no relationship with, but that doesn't relieve me of the responsibility to express the warning that reading his works can greatly harm your soul regardless of how "patristic" you believe your phronema to be (he believes himself to be quite patristic). His writings and teachings need to be ignored, and his soul fervently prayed for.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Nigula Qian Zishi
|
 |
« Reply #107 on: January 01, 2013, 05:14:33 PM » |
|
Years ago he came and gave a talk to our parish. The talk itself was on prayer, and I found it edifying. My conversation with him afterwards left me with a rather disturbed impression, though. Regarding his writings, I'm sure there is a gem or two in the piles of manure, but I think a person risks great harm to their soul by reading them. There is so much intellectual haughtiness there, to much crying out for attention and praise, and corresponding tendency to push right up against heresy in certain directions for the sake of attention, while carefully trying not to cross totally over the line. In some cases, the line has been crossed and he has retracted without admitting former error (soul sleep heresy, for instance), and in some cases it seems that which side of the line he is on depends on who he is speaking to and attempting to please (whether same gender sex is a sin, or whether the issue is more about HOW the Church treats those with same sex attraction).
Nobody should do obedience to anonymous people on the Internet who they have no relationship with, but that doesn't relieve me of the responsibility to express the warning that reading his works can greatly harm your soul regardless of how "patristic" you believe your phronema to be (he believes himself to be quite patristic). His writings and teachings need to be ignored, and his soul fervently prayed for.
Good call! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
