Elsewhere on the Orthodox Web...

[Nektarios14]

Good post Justin!

I just want to add that I agree with all the points Justin brought up as someone else who posts over at the other board in question frequently. Anastasios is a good admin and allows all the traditionalists and non-traditionalists to have their views and express them in a civil manner. Sure I don't look some of the conclusions by some of the less traditionalists minded posters but even saints disagreed about about things not central to the faith. And a lot times the discussions there resemble Orthodoxy a lot more than a certain spirit of hyper-correctness here of a certain few that anathamatize all but themselves of heretics. If people put as much into their spiritual lives as they do into blasting the MP, the new calendar etc. then Orthodoxy would be in much better shape. People will go on and whine about Father Schmemann (I admit I'm a closet Schmenann fan...I think "By Water and Spirit" and "Great Lent" are both very good) and completely overlook parts of his work that are very good. Even a saint like Blessed Augustine made mistakes - are the super-Orthodox so high and mighty as anathamatize him as well? But then again they'd probably reject the One who dared to eat with taxcollectors and sinners.

[尼古拉前执事]

But I love it when the heterodox call me non-Orthodox. It gives me the giggles.

I think you two have already had that conversation on another thread before, no?

[Lounger]

I am curious about myself, though. I'm a "break-away" Monophysite church member? I can understand why you might call me a Monophysite (obviously, as an Orthodox Christian, I disagree with your conclusion, and think that, unless you have studied our Liturgies and prayers, our fathers, our theology, and prove to me from those sources, and from the fathers preceding Chalcedon that our Christology, that of Saint Cyril, is heretical, you are simply ignorant on the subject and not worth taking seriously on theological matters), but I don't get the "break-away" part. Care to explain?

We Orthodox Christians have many saints showing how the monophysites are wrong. The monophysites disagreed with the OEcumenical Council of Chalcedon and broke away. Your church broke away from Orthodox Christianity by denying Chalcedon and calling it heretical.

[Nektarios14]

Now to be fair here are some of the points about that other forum that I don't like:

Monophysites are assumend to be 100% Orthodox

Latins are understood to have some degre of legitimacy

Saint Vladimir's in unquestionly held up as the pinnacle of Orthodoxy

Some posters in particular have called Elder Ephraim and the Fathers "guru cult leaders" and those posts still stand

Some admins are dead set against reception of converts via anything other than profession of faith

[Anastasios]

Dear Friends,

I will address Peter's concerns about my statements about Sergianism.

I should have asked that we agree on what Sergianism IS first--Nicholas and I had this problem when we privately debated the issue a month or two ago.

Basically, I had a more restrictive view of what Sergianism is while he and others seem to have a broad view.

For me, Sergianism is the act of the religious authorities in playing politics with the government: sometimes resisting, sometimes giving in, playing the cards. Basically, I see this is acceptable for hierarchs to do if:

1) It keeps many Churches open serving an unaltered Divine Liturgy (I believe the prayers of our Liturgy kept alive many Christians' faith). Pospielovsky reports that after Sergius, the number of open Churches went from 100 to 10,000 or so.

2) It is done in a way that the faithful know it's a political thing: the bishops are busy making the deals but in their pronouncements they are clever, such as Sergius himself, who referred to the "motherland" in opposotion to the Soviet state in his war speech, which clued in the faithful what he REALLY meant.

3) It is used as a way that bishops will suffer from having to do the politics while priests are shielded from the brunt of the persecution. Sergius's dealings led to priests being fed again.

4) It is restricted to sucking up (for example again, Sergius's war declaration, or when the Anglican bishops visited they made a speech where they said "we aren't persecuted!" [wink wink!!!], etc).

What I do NOT consider "Sergianism" but rather I consider sinful behavior is the infiltration of the ranks of the clergy by communists who turned people in. That is graham and I would never support that. That was a major issue for many refugees--their loved ones were informed upon and died. I would NEVER EVER support that.

Finally, I do not in any way say that Sergianism/cooperation/sucking up is equal to martyrdom. Martyrdom is the ideal. There were places for both types of behavior. Having a church open allowed for the underground to have a nexus, a meeting place; sorta like an underground railroad network.

[Lounger]

try to derail me and my site but we're the biggest, best, [snip] so I am not worried.

How very Catholic of you. We're the biggest, so it doesn't matter what anyone says about us, what is right and wrong, we still have the numbers.

[bogoliubtsy]

Thank you for the reply Anastasios. I don't entirely agree with your definition of Sergianism, but since the term "Sergianism" has really
always been open to some interpretation, there is room for different views.