You read the fathers? I'm glad. 
On Headcoverings and Modesty of Women in Church
Justin:
First of all, I do not take offense at your "words". I know the difficulty of trying to express yourself with the written word. The inflections you use in your mind as you write never seem to translate onto paper and as a result the reader injects his/her own inflections within their understanding of your words. All I can say is "OY!". 
Of all the discussions so far on this forum I must say this has been the most interesting to me. I wish we had had some imput from the clergy who sometimes post but they have been silent so far.
Our enemy in this modern world is confusion. Discussions such as this help bring us closer together, helps us to a better understanding what it means to be Orthodox. Not all of us may have the strength to follow the strictest of paths, however, friends such as yourself help move things along. :mrgreen:
I have come to the conclusion that you and I would probably have some pretty heated discussions. Most of my dinner parties last a long time. I think with you at the table it might even last longer than the usual five plus hours. 
Seraphim Reeves:
Having been at the but-end of prejudice most of my life, I have never found much good in the word. To me it has always carried the negative connotation as listed in the dictionary. I acknowledge the meaning you infer, however, in my own usage I generally find better words to convey the same meaning.
Milla
I have been thinking about the posts to this thread this evening and I have come to startling thought. One of the hidden problems in this sort of discussion is the danger of falling into a sort of "Holier than thou" or perhaps "Better than thou" .... hmmm (thinking very hard)...inference(?). I don't think that anyone means to come off that way, but it does seem to appear in some posts.
Not all of us have the strength to follow the narrowest of paths, mostly we just plod along as best we can on the road with the potholes. Sometimes we manage to avoid the holes and sometimes we fall in... huge sigh (no smiley 
).
-
Seraphim Reeves
- Member
- Posts: 493
- Joined: Sun 27 October 2002 2:10 pm
- Location: Canada
I have been thinking about the posts to this thread this evening and I have come to startling thought. One of the hidden problems in this sort of discussion is the danger of falling into a sort of "Holier than thou" or perhaps "Better than thou" .... hmmm (thinking very hard)...inference(?). I don't think that anyone means to come off that way, but it does seem to appear in some posts.
Perhaps. It's also possible that some people are overly defensive.
Not all of us have the strength to follow the narrowest of paths, mostly we just plod along as best we can on the road with the potholes. Sometimes we manage to avoid the holes and sometimes we fall in... huge sigh (no smiley ).
Very few people these days (myself included) would have the mettle to walk according to "exactitude" - just look at the ancient penances for (from our very slack, modern understanding - not objectively speaking) so called "common sins". This is where the often spoken of "economy" comes in.
However, what is not "economy" is to pretend that the condescending, lightened way that most of us moderns tread, is the objective "norm" - by this I mean, to pretend that what is in fact slack, is anything close to evangelical perfection. I'll give some examples of what I mean by this.
As a matter of grave condescension, in traditional Orthodox settings some confessors will allow a couple to use contraception (for a grave reason, like say, the wife may die if she conceives due to some illness, and it's obvious that strict chastity is unlikely to happen with that couple due to this condition.) It's quite clear, what the Fathers say about "birth control" of any sort. OTOH, if you look at "world Orthodoxy" and other secularized variants of the truth, this slack (which, if it should happen at all, happens as a matter of condescension) is transformed into approval - thus if you, for example, read treatments on this subject coming out of the Greek Archdiocese, you'll be told outright that contraception is acceptable in Orthodoxy and left as a matter of "personal conscience".
Take the example of heterodox baptisms. According to the teaching of the Church, the exact means of receiving a convert from a non-Orthodox "church" is to receive them by baptism, since there are no baptisms, or sacramental acts outside of the Church (for these mysteries are the work of Christ's Body, and the Church is His Body.) However, as a matter of condescension, if the proper "form" of a true baptism is there, there is the idea that this graceless rite can be corrected, via chrismation and confession - this has been typically done in the cases of mass conversions, or conversion of the simple who may be scandalized unneccessarily by being baptized (from their point of view) "again." However, in "world Orthodoxy" this "slack" is taken to be normative...and it didn't take long for this to be interpreted as meaning that non-Orthodox "baptisms" were in fact valid, true baptisms (or, as some would say in world Orthodoxy, they are "sort of" baptisms - I don't know how one can be "sort of" regenerated, but then again it's not my teaching.)
In the same vein, it's a matter of humility on our part to not be deluded into believing we are better than we really are, as this can end up distorting the truth - almost as bad, it can cause us to believe we are superior to the Saints, whose doctrine is now mocked in "world Orthodoxy" as being the foolishness of ascetics, not at all applicable to us sophisticated moderns. This opens the door to all sorts of lewdness and heterodox doctrines, both about the actual path to salvation, and regarding how we should conduct ourselves while taking that path.
Seraphim
On a similar note, I would say that probably all of us here read the church fathers. (going back to the "two types of people" comment) I think the real difference of opinion here is the difference between idealism and practicality. We're all at different points in our spiritual journey. Some people may be able to apply the teachings of the fathers to their lives more strictly than others. Of course, we should all strive to become, with the help of God, better Christians. My priest has quoted a certain saint as saying, "You can't eat a pear in one bite," meaning that one shouldn't try to take on too much at once, lest he fall. I'm not saying that people should feel free to indulge in lust, but one shouldn't get worked up if he/she happens to observe an attractive person of the opposite sex.
The comments posted here have been interesting. But I would caution some of you more "fundamentalist" commenters. When the rules begin to over shadow the faith,when they and ritual become more important than believing -- then you begin to have a problem. With some of the comments made, you reminded me of the person who claims to be pious but stands in church in "judgement" of his/her fellow man.
He doesn't cross himself enough... or... he doesn't do his prostrations right...or Her dress is too short... or he doesn't stand still...or He doesn't fast??? Why not?? he's supposed too (without knowing if there is a health reason or not)... or he doesn't come to church often enough... or He/She really should know better. The list is endless.
Most of these "judgements are swift and happen almost without being aware of it. But remember this...the yard stick you use to measure your brother is the yard stick you will be measured by.
miriam
-
Seraphim Reeves
- Member
- Posts: 493
- Joined: Sun 27 October 2002 2:10 pm
- Location: Canada
Miriam
Miriam,
I don't think I'm going out on much of a limb by guessing me (and probably Justin as well) are amongst the "fundamentalist" types you have in mind (or at least "fundamentalist like" types).
Without speaking in my own personal defence, I will say that I think this is a grave mischaracterization of the content of what both me, and Justin have written thus far in this thread. This isn't about "judging" anyone - it's about not being deluded that our mediocrity (mine included) is anywhere close to evangelical perfection, which is what many "liberalizing" or "let it be" attitudes disguising themselves as "practical Orthodoxy" amount to. There is nothing mediocre at all about the Saints - and they should be our example, and we should at least try to assimilate their "way" as our own (as miserably as we may fail at following it.)
Seraphim