Is anyone else having problems at OrthodoxChristianity.net?

[EkhristosAnesti]

I can't and won't debate or judge anyone's faith or religion because it is not only bad taste, but against Holy Scripture. On the other hand, I can speak to my belief and faith and with Holy Scripture defend its Orthodoxy.

But you are attempting to defend truths that the Church already admits. That's what you're not realising. The reason you don't realise this is because the centuries of lies promoted by Chalcedonian Fathers against our Church is now imbedded in the Chalcedonian conscience.

I'm not asking you to debate, or judge, or anything. I am asking you to merely LISTEN. Listen to what I am saying to you: the Oriental Orthodox Church, of which the Ethiopian Orthodox is and always has been apart of, has NEVER denied the perfect humanity of Christ, and has NEVER denied the unconfused union of Christ's divinity and humanity. Your Fathers made these lies up against us because they were badly losing polemical debates in the fifth century, that they felt deception to be their only resort. I am sorry, but that is the truth.

believe Holy Scripture and the examples of Saints such as St. Maximos bear witness to the fullness of truth. There is great emphasis on the unconfused, inseparable union of Jesus nature.

As I said, the very FIRST person at Chalcedon to declare the unconfused union of Christ's divinity and humanity, was St Dioscoros, the Coptic Patriarch who was falsely ex-communicated. He declared this before anyone else. In fact he used FOUR adverbs in describing this union: "without mingling (1), without confusion (2), without alteration (3), and without transmutation (4)". The Chalcedonian formula faith only employs three. So he even stressed the unconfused union of Christ's divinity and humanity to a greater emphasis than the Chalcedonian formula of faith itself! Yet your Fathers betrayed him, and then lied about him after his death, claiming he confused Christ's natures. HE DIDN'T. We have clear historical evidence - the minutes of Chalcedon, and his own writings!

[Priest Siluan]

Dear EkhristosAnesti and others:

Please calm your spirits or we will put under an obligation to moderate.

With love in Christ

P. Siluan

[Kollyvas]

I want to say something about a forum (orthodoxchristianity.net), supposedly moderated by "Traditionalists," which finds it necessary to pigeonhole denunciations of the Non Chalcedonians as heretical and at the same time empower rabble with a sense of victimhood in doing so. Is the Holy Community of Mt. Athos wrong in its condemnations?! While, I can appreciate the fact that Non Chalcedonian christologies have morphed over the centuries and now seem more Ephesine than anything else, a doctrinal formula disconnected from the life in the Church does not make for a Confession of Orthodoxy. This fellow, Lauro, while not pursuing the most fruitful of approaches, was stating one view held by MANY which should not in ANY way have been treated so as to imply that he was being censored or "placed in a peanut gallery" to inspire sectarian perceptions of "weakness." There are many who can adequately show that Non-Chalcedonian dogmatics divorced from the pleroma of Orthodoxy do indeed lead one to imprecisions and errors, Fr. Matthew the Poor's excursis on Orthodox spirituality, ORTHODOX PRAYER LIFE, is muddled with an unclear and unpatristic understanding of theosis, viz. is purification a prerequisite to illumination or contemplation possible without purification? These types of muddled theologies arise after centuries of schism and are not at all atypical of Non Chalcedonian excursis. And I am sure someone could have risen to greet Mr. Lauro's challenge and at the same time lent the Non Chalcedonian positions all due accuracy. I bring this up for in future I hope the responsibility to assess the weight of speech and not just gauge its "degree of popularity" will be fully appreciated and steps taken to not propel things into senseless infernos.
R

[EkhristosAnesti]

There are many who can adequately show that Non-Chalcedonian dogmatics divorced from the pleroma of Orthodoxy do indeed lead one to imprecisions and errors, Fr. Matthew the Poor's excursis on Orthodox spirituality, ORTHODOX PRAYER LIFE, is muddled with an unclear and unpatristic understanding of theosis

I find this particular comment amusing (but then again, what comments have you made that are not amusing?) for many reasons.

The first reason, is the absurd implication that conversely every excursis written by a theologian of your own Church is devoid of imprecisions and errors. We can refer to works written by prominent figures of your own Church, including Fr. Sergius Bulgakov, Fr. Meyendroff, Fr. Romanides, Fr. Schemman, Bishop Kallistos Ware etc. all of which have come under fire within your Church, even though each figure undoubtedly has its supporters.

Secondly, theosis is one of those topics where a precise and inerrant excursis would be impossible in any event. As St Cyril of Alexandria proclaims concerning such mysteries, we can only hope to come as close as the human mind allows us, but it seems that the closer we get the more lost we become in the depths of such mysteries. I highly doubt there is a uniform trend of perfectly precise and inerrant works on the doctrine of theosis within ANY church.

Thirdly, Fr. Matthew the Poor is not even in good standing with the Church, particularly because of his understanding of theosis. His Holiness Pope Shenouda III has written against him on numerous occasions in the Al-Karaza magazine. Although Fr. Matthew is not officially ex-communicated, any and every Copt knows to approach him with much caution. Would you like to continue in your line of absurdity by proclaiming that your Church does not have any figures who are in a situation within your church akin to this? Don’t even try, I just gave you a whole list of them, from Fr. Bulgakov to Fr. Schemman.

According to your logic, I have just produced evidence of the fact your Church has been in schism for centuries.

Fortunately, I have a grasp on basic logic and would never employ such absurd reasoning; it would be an insult to my God-given intellect. I conclude that your Church has been in schism for centuries through a study of the very schismatic council by which it severed itself from the One True Church - Chalcedon, the Council which exonerated Nestorian heretics, falsely ex-communicated a legitimate Orthodox patriarch (and hence in turn ex-communicated itself), and which dogmatised Nestorian formulas. A Council that revived a large crypto-Nestorian movement, and was even praised by Nestorius himself - these are all documented historical facts which prove that your Council was a council of schism.

[Kollyvas]

Again, you AREN'T THE MODERATOR OF THE GROUP I ADDRESSED. Your logic implies that by answering the concerns I brought up and you decontextualized that you are. That is clearly pathological. Fr. Matthew the Poor is most certainly not some sort of apostate but a revered monk of the Coptic church and one who lives a very austere life. But, really, the point was to illustrate what you present to the world and how it is spiritually in error and illustrative of groups in schism, who are unable to perceive things as they really are. And would you accept the avalanche if it fell at your feet, for I'd bring it shuffling down if it were worth the time. YOU ARE A SCHISMATIC. The fact that you insist on personally assaulting me clearly illustrates the poverty of your gravitas and the lack of your logic. You would make me into a vilefied strawman in order to hope to suppress the Truth I present. goebbels and the ayatollahs are clapping. No amount of vitriole or your paradigms of "logic" and "context" lends you any credence. Your land lies through a dhimmi looking glass...LOL!
R

[EkhristosAnesti]

Again, you AREN'T THE MODERATOR OF THE GROUP I ADDRESSED.

AND AGAIN, I REITERATE:

I don’t care who you were addressing. Such is the nature of internet forums. Who do you think you are? We know you're a liar, and a deceiver etc. but you are no authority figure over me. If you insist on making stupid remarks in public, then you leave yourself open to valid criticism from anyone and everyone who may want to take advantage of that. The opportunities you present are too golden for me to simply ignore. If you want to make stupid remarks in a specific address to someone without being open to valid criticism, then I believe this forum has a private messaging system – use it.

Fr. Matthew the Poor is most certainly not some sort of apostate but a revered monk of the Coptic church

The problem with you is not only that you are a liar, but that you are too arrogant to be humbled by the truth; you presume to know it all even concerning issues that have nothing to do with you. I REFERRED YOU TO AL-KARAZZA, THE MOST POPULAR PERIODICAL of the COPTIC CHURCH , which is in fact the OFFICIAL magazine of the COPTIC PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. SEVERAL TIMES in this periodical, His Holiness Pope Shenouda III, and the GENERAL SECRETARY OF THE HOLY SYNOD HIS EMINENCE METROPOLITAN BISHOY have cautioned people of Fr. Matthew and written against him, particularly with respect to his ideas on Biblical criticism and THEOSIS. It’s a FACT. He is NOT revered, by the Coptic Church; this sweeping generalization lacks ANY BASIS IN FACT, it is just another lie promulgated to serve your satanic agenda against the ORTHODOX CHURCH.

I Never said Fr. Matthew was an APOSTATE, but like other theologians OF YOUR OWN CHURCH (BULGAKOV, SCHEMANN, ROMANIDES, MEYENDROFF ETC ETC) he is not in good standing with the Church; he is a controversial figure, and the Bishops warn us to approach his works with CAUTION. Just as I have seen your Bishops warn readers to be wary of BULGAKOV's material.

But, really, the point was to illustrate what you present to the world and how it is spiritually in error and illustrative of groups in schism

And my point was that your absurd line of reasoning actually BACKFIRES ON YOU; you prove yourself to be a schismatic according to your OWN FLAWED LOGIC. I made this point when I brought up prominent theologians of your own Church who have been outright accused of heresy by many within your own communion: BULGAKOV, SCHEMANN, MEYENDROFF etc.

Even acknowledging the blatant truth that the Oriental Orthodox Church is THE Orthodox Church I am not stupid enough to imply that every doctrinal work produced by every theologian is INERRANT, as you seek to imply concerning your own Church. If every doctrinal work produced within your Church was inerrant THEN WHY DO YOU HAVE PROBLEMS WITH BULGAKOV? WHY DO YOU HAVE INTRA-COMMUNION DISPUTES OVER ISSUES LIKE TOLL-HOUSES?

The fact that you insist on personally assaulting

The fact you CONTINUE to cry about being personally assaulted whilst in the SAME BREATH personally assaulting me, reveals just how deep satan has penetrated your mind. Not only are you a liar, but you are a hypocrite. Just look at the following comments made in the VERY SAME post that you claim to being personally assaulted:

goebbels and the ayatollahs are clapping.

Your land lies through a dhimmi looking glass...LOL!

Has satan made you this oblivious to your own blatant hypocricy?

[Kollyvas]

How many more decades before you are all forced to beome janissaries in a restored caliphate? Either way your schism will end. LOL!
R