Basic Principals of the Attitude Toward Other Christians

Feel free to tell our little section of the Internet why you're right. Forum rules apply.


Justin Kissel

Post by Justin Kissel »

I wonder if I would review it differently now. :) Might be somewhat different.

Regarding the workplace, I just try to keep to myself and keep my ears closed when the gossip starts. Also, every great once in a while controversial topics get discussed, like homosexuality, and everyone throws their two cents in. Normally, I find that unless you have a couple hours to talk about such subjects you're going to get misunderstood, or "boxed". If you the summary of Orthodox thought on, for one example, homosexuality, it's gonna get thrown into the "bigoted/archaic" box, or the "faithful, pious person" box (depending on the listener). It's hard to explain the complexities of situations when many different people are all vying for everyone elses attention (one of the key practical problems of the Ecumenical movement! How can you have 20 different people, who all believe to one degree or another different things, and come to a mutual understanding?) So... when things come up I normally just keep my mouth shut, even when I know that something that someone is saying is wrong (e.g., if they are misquoting a Bible verse). Our actions (like meekness and humility) will win more souls than workplace debates, IMO. Now, if only I could get some meekness and humility! :)

Joseph D
Member
Posts: 103
Joined: Thu 19 February 2004 9:49 am

Post by Joseph D »

The text is not offensive if read and understood in the linear progression in which it is written. Each given maxim is founded strictly upon the linear succession of preceeding maxims. Obviously, this isn't the Philokalia!

Sections 1 and 2 speak directly to the conscience of the Orthodox Christian, and even embarassed yours truly. Section 2 even negates the worst of what ecumenism has to offer. Very strong stuff.

Section 3 is typcally bland Orthodox evangelism. Not at all problematic, just weak, a glass of soy milk to a steak dinner.

Section 4, written in the linear progressive mode remember, ends at article 11 with an interesting peremptory criterion. The meaning of this device is that at its conclusion, "dialogue with the non-Orthodox" must be understood as proper and useful if it increase the prestige of the Orthodox Church (see also 5.4!).

Section 5 deals with what really amount to academic issues for clergy only. Most interesting from a ROCORist perspective is 5.2, which perempts anything that even remotely resembles Sergianism. No it is not a grovelling plea for forgiveness addressed to Met. Laurus et al. ... -- but don't let me get pedantic.

Section 6 is an absolute jewel. Brief but brilliant. It speaks volumes against the excesses of ecumenism of which the MP is often accused and it affords us a glimpse at the rare beauty of a Church assertively bold against heresies on her own soil.

Section 7 is an appendix on "Traditionalist Orthodoxy" as it is sometimes known. Let me remind any who might read this little commentary that ROCOR is recognized as canonical per se by SCOBA and even the five original Patriarchates, including Rome as of the Balamand agreement. So, for these and so many other reasons it is very unlikely that 7.3 applies to ROCOR. [Though in due time it may.]

To Section 7.3 (against the schizmatics), I would only add that in the second sentence where it says "canonical sanctions" I would like to see "and prison or exile when necessary" added. "Sacer," the Latin root of the word "sacred," means both "blessed" and "accursed" at once (see also 1.14).

Sincerely:
Joseph

Justin Kissel

Post by Justin Kissel »

Joseph,

I don't believe Serbia, Moscow, or Constantinople recognize ROCOR as anything but schismatics. In day to day life in America, though, I don't think this comes out all the time, though. Pat. Paul summed up world Orthodoxy's view of ROCOR, though, when he said that we were "schismatics" "worthy of every condemnation" in a letter to the MP.

How come we always seem to disagree? I guess we probably agree more than I realise and I'm just being disagreeable for some reason. :| :)

Joseph D
Member
Posts: 103
Joined: Thu 19 February 2004 9:49 am

Post by Joseph D »

Justin,

I will just have to take your word for it. I merely assumed that because of some anecdotal evidence relating to communion status... It is really no big deal.

I think we seem to disagree on finer nuances here and there. But facts is facts, and thus can scarcely be argued, except on epistemological grounds or through "language games," but who wants to go to all that trouble?

I am in such a good mood today about the Kursk-Root Icon coming to town that I can barely think. I am just really revved up, man, I feel alive right now (which means I probably don't usually... hmm).

The way I see it, if the MP is willing talk ROCOR reunion, if only hypothecially, I can only assume that "Schismatic" is applied here either as a derogatory remark directed all but subtley away from ROCOR, or it is being used first as a merely technical term, which is then followed with more narrow categorization for malefactors only. But here I am in a word game.... Who cares? The Kursk-Root Icon is coming to town!

--JOseph

Joseph D
Member
Posts: 103
Joined: Thu 19 February 2004 9:49 am

Post by Joseph D »

Calmer now.

Alright, if the section condemning "schizmatics" does apply to ROCOR throughout, then I think those who have a genuine Russian concern (or even a prentention thereto) oblige themselves to make some sense of it.

For me personally, I am uncomfortable with the idea of being a schizmatic. I am not yet compelled to resolve the situation as an individual, but my conscience does accuse me, albeit intermittantly, of bad variety Orthodoxy for having fallen in with ROCOR. You may say it is the devil talking to me; I doubt it, however. Not only has the Soviet State fallen, but the MP has glorified the Royal Martyrs, including the Passion-Bearer Tsar Nicholas II himself. Things could be worse... But this is the same old argument all over again. Ciao!

-Joseph

User avatar
Chrysostomos
Member
Posts: 285
Joined: Tue 17 June 2003 10:57 am
Contact:

Post by Chrysostomos »

Joseph D,

A group of us from our "OCA" Church went to Vashon Island ROCOR
Monastery to venerate the Kursk-Root Icon. It was a very special
time. Fr. Alexis from the Seattle Church brought it over and was
accompanied by a Deacon who was from Jordanville I believe and
was one of the individuals responsible for transporting it to the
various churches. It very well may have been our "once in a lifetime"
opportunity and I was glad to be able to venerate the icon.

With humble bow,

Rd. Chrysostomos

Post Reply