Debate/Discussion: Suaidan v Whiteford

[Suaidan]

[NektariosLopez]

Well it was a surprise to see Fr Peter make guest appearance but it was unfair that it became 3v1, to clarify I mean that the barrage of questions and not being able to expand on particular points by Fr Joseph. I’m glad Craig hosted this as this was a way to spread the Truth and hopefully more people opened their eyes but he did seem to have a bias.

[Barbara]

I didn't understand HOW Fr Peter suddenly popped in there ! Obviously it was prearranged that he be waiting in the wings, but does anyone understand how that came about so snappily ?

Was Fr Joseph warned before the broadcast that Fr Peter would likely appear on the show ?

I haven't listened to the whole thing, but it DID strike me, too, that Fr Joseph needs extra help to defend True Orthodoxy when confronted with the very verbal trio of Fr John Whiteford, Fr Peter and Craig Truglia. Together, these three could outtalk a parrot !

[eish]

Christ is born!

Together, these three could outtalk a parrot !

Maybe so, but...

I watched only about half an hour of the debate. The ambush and moderator bias, etc. may affect perceptions, and of course WO complaining about Fr. Joseph denouncing persecution in what they have decided is too emotional a way. (Because they are the persecutors, really.) But that's not what is important to me in this discussion and it seems like the most important thing has flown under the radar.

The whole debate should have ended in the beginning when Craig asked Fr. John whether Sergianism is heresy. Go listen to his answer again if you wish to smell the venom.

Fr. John freely invoked, on his own initiative, the traditors. He explained that they were not heretics as such but apostates and that this is the same thing Sergius did. Hence, he claimed, his side are not heretics.

Condensed into a sentence: “We can't be heretics because we left Christianity.” Hidden in rhetoric and verbiage, he heavily implies that if one is not a heretic but an apostate, Canon 15 (and others) do not apply and they continue to be the Grace-bearing Church making the TO schismatic*. That's quite the claim. Laughable. Satanic.

A (relatively) smaller point as well.

When Craig asked Fr. Joseph about Grace, he phrased his question as to whether someone needs to be in the exact TO jurisdiction of Fr. Joseph to have Grace. Fr. Joseph answered that question, stating that they must have the true confession of Faith in various jurisdictions. Craig then interpreted the answer as if it had been about all putative Orthodox jurisdictions, putting in Fr. Joseph's mouth the position that those with Orthodox beliefs in WO jurisdictions (a contradiction, unless it be temporary) have Sacramental Grace. Fr. Joseph did not seem to catch that. I don't think it was intentional, rather that Craig heard what he wanted to hear.

*Or in its absolute most charitable reinterpretation, maybe he is claiming that during a persecution apostates left the Church temporarily but that as soon as the persecution softened, apostates magically not only returned to the Church with no repentance at all, but received whichever leadership positions they had in the meantime decided to award themselves. (Instead of losing everything they may have previously held.)

That's at least as silly. I can't think of any ancient traditor who dared claim that the Little Peace or the Edict of Milan made him pope of Rome. I'm sure someone will point out that it happened, but my point is that we never took such seriously.

I lost all respect for Fr. John. He's a joke in bad taste to me now.

[Lazarún Zalónir]

Absolutely Deranged, Whiteford slanders my Vladyka Andrei almost daily and he's so pro Sergianist its not even funny.

[Barbara]

THANK YOU, EISH ! This is a BIG help in trying to sort thru that debate. I was discouraged from listening to more because i felt the unpleasant backdrop, which made the atmosphere more toxic than the earlier debate which was not so bad.

VERY VERY INTERESTING remarks. Readers REALLY need this perspective, since the average listener would never have picked either point you made.

I will listen again to that part you mentioned.

Lazarun, what do you mean, Fr John is attacking your Archbishop regularly ? But why, on what basis ? I wouldn't imagine Fr John would even disdain to pay attention to Abp Andrei' or his True Orthodox ideas. Please explain more.

[Barbara]

Given these observations, maybe it's a poor idea to have a rematch of Fr Joseph with Fr John Whiteford.

What about an alternative World Orthodox priest instead who is realistic, and has not apparently gone off the rails !?