Ortho-spergs often find themselves lost in performative displays and unrealistic expectations that lead to serious errors, mistakes and purity spiraling.
Excellent critiques. I too see this divide between psychological self-deception vs the true work of the Lord.
But one thing is bothering me; Is rejecting the classical liberal paradigm by holding to some beliefs from 'Radical Orthodoxy' make me fall under the autism/susceptible to covert manipulation label? I certainly do not see any validity in secular liberal democracies or Marxist vanguards — both are philosophically materilaist. Or do you mean "extremist," not in the sense of presupposing a liberal center?
While I don't have as much experience as Jay in these fields, from my own limited understanding, it is not necessarily bad to repudiate both 'liberal' democracy and Marxist vitriol, but as a Christian we are meant to be able to live in whatever system we find ourselves in. I'm sure St. Paul did not agree with the foundations of the Roman Imperial system, yet he still respected their authority since they pale in comparison to the authority of our Lord. By extremism I think he means any idealistic and zealous action that comes from emotional or ignorant places. It would be ignorant of us to try and revolt against the system the way that worldly people do under the guise of 'traditional Christian' outcomes.
St. Paul was reffering to adventurism, terrorism, or anarchy – not necessarily civil resistance — otherwise the early Christians would have surrendered their faith to Nero. Wanting good change does not mean any of those things — but Christians are not arbitrarily pacifists/centrist — this is a historical myth.
Throughout history Orthodoxy and the State were nigh indistinguishable until the rise of secular modernity. — To desire a revival of the sacredness in the old; to establish and preserve the good in the world; theocracy, justice, beauty, good; such things must be defended through prayer, deeds, the life of the church, and yes—even political involvement, God has different calls for each person, all involving spiritual and social work.
What matters is the works, the outcomes depends on the Lord. And the Lord does grant victories, even in a fallen world—this is faith centered around the goodnesses of God; idealism on the other hand, centers itself around the individual.
Time and again I see the same nonsense of people saying that we all must turn our brains off as if Christ did not give us our rational faculties and enlightened the God-bearing Saints to explain aspects of Him through REASONING AND RHETORIC. Of course none of us have an iota of love and piety compared to someone like St. Basil the Great or St. John Chrysostom, that's why they're the Holy Fathers, but that doesn't change the fact that the intellectual Fathers made impassioned, logical arguments for the Orthodox Faith FOR people like us to read and digest. This fake dichotomy between growing in piety and intellectual understanding is appalling and reveals a deep cope.
I appreciate all the work you guys do and I pray it bears more and more fruits in the years to come. Orthodoxy isn't a midwit religion, it is the truth of the world itself, and God allowed us to learn parts of the truth to help love and appreciate Him better so that we may walk in His commandments better. A God that hates intellect is not a loving God, for then how would we have the rational capacity to choose Him.
BSD ' TIME BETWEEN PURIM AND PESACH ? THE RED HEIFER IS THE TIKKUN FOR THE 72 NATIONS AROUND THE WORLD. THIS IS GODS WORLD ! READ THE PARSHA / TORAH THIS WEEK !
THE LIVING TORAH ! THE GREGORIAN CALENDAR IS INCORRECT MATHEMATICALLY !
Sober & to the point. Handily useful. So now remind us, the *fear* some have of your work (shall we say *you*) is due to what, exactly? Returning to the Church at age 73. Prima facie, not one of your "young male convert bros".
“While it’s certainly theologically correct to refer to the Triad as “god,” the term itself is not a singular referent, as it might pick out a number of distinct things: A Divine Person, a divine energeia, the divine ousia, an angel, a demon or even a human.”
The crux of the current Orthodox Christian vs Unitarian (Muslims, Arians) disputations is the meaning of the word “god” itself, which in Patristic era Greek and theology, can refer to:
1. Father, Son, Holy Spirit (each individually).
2. the Triad.
3. their actualization of a potential (energeia).
4. the divine substance (ousia).
5. Angels (Michael, Gabriel).
6. Demons (the Satan, Legion, gods of the nations).
7. Humans (Pharoah, Nebuchadnezzar, Caesar).
When Unitarians, Arians, Muslims read “god” they understand it to mean:
1. Yahweh as a unitary, species unique, non corporeal individual.
2. Allah as a unitary non corporeal individual
3. Jesus (JW’s)
4. Angels
5. Demons
6. Humans
That means that Unitarians as a collective, more or less, are lacking The Triad, the energeia, the ousia as belonging to the category of “god”
So glad you put this in written form!
Excellent critiques. I too see this divide between psychological self-deception vs the true work of the Lord.
But one thing is bothering me; Is rejecting the classical liberal paradigm by holding to some beliefs from 'Radical Orthodoxy' make me fall under the autism/susceptible to covert manipulation label? I certainly do not see any validity in secular liberal democracies or Marxist vanguards — both are philosophically materilaist. Or do you mean "extremist," not in the sense of presupposing a liberal center?
While I don't have as much experience as Jay in these fields, from my own limited understanding, it is not necessarily bad to repudiate both 'liberal' democracy and Marxist vitriol, but as a Christian we are meant to be able to live in whatever system we find ourselves in. I'm sure St. Paul did not agree with the foundations of the Roman Imperial system, yet he still respected their authority since they pale in comparison to the authority of our Lord. By extremism I think he means any idealistic and zealous action that comes from emotional or ignorant places. It would be ignorant of us to try and revolt against the system the way that worldly people do under the guise of 'traditional Christian' outcomes.
A couple of thoughts:
St. Paul was reffering to adventurism, terrorism, or anarchy – not necessarily civil resistance — otherwise the early Christians would have surrendered their faith to Nero. Wanting good change does not mean any of those things — but Christians are not arbitrarily pacifists/centrist — this is a historical myth.
Throughout history Orthodoxy and the State were nigh indistinguishable until the rise of secular modernity. — To desire a revival of the sacredness in the old; to establish and preserve the good in the world; theocracy, justice, beauty, good; such things must be defended through prayer, deeds, the life of the church, and yes—even political involvement, God has different calls for each person, all involving spiritual and social work.
What matters is the works, the outcomes depends on the Lord. And the Lord does grant victories, even in a fallen world—this is faith centered around the goodnesses of God; idealism on the other hand, centers itself around the individual.
Time and again I see the same nonsense of people saying that we all must turn our brains off as if Christ did not give us our rational faculties and enlightened the God-bearing Saints to explain aspects of Him through REASONING AND RHETORIC. Of course none of us have an iota of love and piety compared to someone like St. Basil the Great or St. John Chrysostom, that's why they're the Holy Fathers, but that doesn't change the fact that the intellectual Fathers made impassioned, logical arguments for the Orthodox Faith FOR people like us to read and digest. This fake dichotomy between growing in piety and intellectual understanding is appalling and reveals a deep cope.
I appreciate all the work you guys do and I pray it bears more and more fruits in the years to come. Orthodoxy isn't a midwit religion, it is the truth of the world itself, and God allowed us to learn parts of the truth to help love and appreciate Him better so that we may walk in His commandments better. A God that hates intellect is not a loving God, for then how would we have the rational capacity to choose Him.
Jerimiah 48:10 applies well to a lot of what you're talking about as well, "Cursed is the man that does the works of the Lord carelessly"
BSD ' TIME BETWEEN PURIM AND PESACH ? THE RED HEIFER IS THE TIKKUN FOR THE 72 NATIONS AROUND THE WORLD. THIS IS GODS WORLD ! READ THE PARSHA / TORAH THIS WEEK !
THE LIVING TORAH ! THE GREGORIAN CALENDAR IS INCORRECT MATHEMATICALLY !
Agree with much of this. A rarity.
Sober & to the point. Handily useful. So now remind us, the *fear* some have of your work (shall we say *you*) is due to what, exactly? Returning to the Church at age 73. Prima facie, not one of your "young male convert bros".
“While it’s certainly theologically correct to refer to the Triad as “god,” the term itself is not a singular referent, as it might pick out a number of distinct things: A Divine Person, a divine energeia, the divine ousia, an angel, a demon or even a human.”
The crux of the current Orthodox Christian vs Unitarian (Muslims, Arians) disputations is the meaning of the word “god” itself, which in Patristic era Greek and theology, can refer to:
1. Father, Son, Holy Spirit (each individually).
2. the Triad.
3. their actualization of a potential (energeia).
4. the divine substance (ousia).
5. Angels (Michael, Gabriel).
6. Demons (the Satan, Legion, gods of the nations).
7. Humans (Pharoah, Nebuchadnezzar, Caesar).
When Unitarians, Arians, Muslims read “god” they understand it to mean:
1. Yahweh as a unitary, species unique, non corporeal individual.
2. Allah as a unitary non corporeal individual
3. Jesus (JW’s)
4. Angels
5. Demons
6. Humans
That means that Unitarians as a collective, more or less, are lacking The Triad, the energeia, the ousia as belonging to the category of “god”
Thanks for the clarification Jay!