"Orthodoxy": Myths and Realities

[paleodoxy]

This is a blog entry from a Lutheran minister on the contemporary state of Orthodoxy and charges of "inconsistency". What are your thoughts?

http://cyberbrethren.typepad.com/cyberbrethren/2007/05/orthodoxy_myths.html

[Jacob4707]

This is a blog entry from a Lutheran minister on the contemporary state of Orthodoxy and charges of "inconsistency". What are your thoughts?

http://cyberbrethren.typepad.com/cyberbrethren/2007/05/orthodoxy_myths.html

I was never Lutheran, so my comments come as an outsider. Some thoughts:

1. Everything he says is true.

2. Everything he says is wrong.

3. This is another confirmation for me that most new converts to Orthodoxy, including myself, should wait a long, long time before criticizing their former denominations, especially to current members and past associates of those denominations. Until they have become Orthodox - and I don't mean simply baptized and/or chrismated - they really can't say that Orthodoxy is this or that versus what their former church/denomination was, because all they can say about what Orthodoxy is and believes is what they've read or been told or only recently or for a short time experienced. Give it a few years and see if/how it is working in their lives; then they can talk about what THEIR Orthodoxy is, which is hopefully in concert with what Orthodoxy has been for generations.

[SeekingTheLight]

3. This is another confirmation for me that most new converts to Orthodoxy, including myself, should wait a long, long time before criticizing their former denominations, especially to current members and past associates of those denominations. Until they have become Orthodox - and I don't mean simply baptized and/or chrismated - they really can't say that Orthodoxy is this or that versus what their former church/denomination was, because all they can say about what Orthodoxy is and believes is what they've read or been told or only recently or for a short time experienced. Give it a few years and see if/how it is working in their lives; then they can talk about what THEIR Orthodoxy is, which is hopefully in concert with what Orthodoxy has been for generations.

Good advice - I'll have to remember that.

[SeraphimSarov]

Seems to me that his arguments are more against people in the Orthodox faith than the Church Herself. Some of what he says isn't necessarily untrue, but he misses the point somewhat, at least in my opinion.

[paleodoxy]

KjellBjarne, that was the distinct impression I got...

[SeraphimSarov]

I'd also say it's a reactionary article - people are leaving the Lutheran faith for Orthodoxy, and he seems to think there's no good reason for it. I'm good friends with a guy who left Lutheranism for Orthodoxy, and it had nothing to do with problems with the people in Lutheranism, but in the Lutheran faith. It's been a few hours since I've read the article and it's not totally clear in my mind now, but I'd almost say that he might have set up a strawman...

[paleodoxy]

Yes, it was (a) reactionary (due to departures), and (b) he fallaciously attempts to undermine the Orthodox claim to infallibility by pointing out problems, errors, mistakes in judgment, and sins that have been committed.

Problem is, infallibility isn't defined by moral perfection or the lack of judgment or mistakes or errors, or even differences of opinion.

Total straw man. Orthodoxy understands infallibility within a context: conciliar ecumenical debate, resolution and reception in the form of dogmas. The core of Infallible Tradition are the councils.

Also, in picking at tangents (e.g., imperfections in character), he fails to deal with the truly central issues (such as Trinitarian views).

His comments on unity were rather pathetic. I see people appeal all the time to the fact that there are so many jurisdictions in America. Well, what else does one expect from the phenomena of mass migrations from foreign countries? It takes TIME to form new jurisdictions. And again, it betrays ignorance of the essential Apostolic meaning of unity in Orthodoxy.

He states that there are practices in Orthodoxy that are incompatible with "Apostolic tradition", but then he subsequently goes on to define the tradition in sola scriptura terms. So he fails to argue against us on our own ground here.

There's too much to respond to here, but when it came right down to it, the best he could do was point out the obvious: the Orthodox church isn't perfect. To which all good Orthodox Christians should be able to say: "Tell us something we don't already know!"

[SaintPhotios]

What are your thoughts?

My thoughts are basically that I read two thirds of it and had ingested enough to discard the rest. He argues like a politician. He admits that there are "problems" within Lutheranism and then cautiously leads the reader into admitting problems within Orthodoxy. The problem is... no, there isn't. There are problems with Orthodox Christians, no one will deny this. But this isn't his premise. No one leaves Lutheranism because of inconsistent followers.... they do so because of internal, that is doctrinal, problems. The entire article jumbles together concessions and accusations of all hosts of problems. And while this is true of both groups concerning unorthodox practices, it is by no means true of Orthodox doctrine, and this is where he tries to cloud the issue with ambiguity... he never makes that distinction. And it is precisely that distinction that makes all the difference in the world.... it is precisely that distinction that separates Orthodoxy from all other factions of Christendom.

[PrincessMommy]

His comments on unity were rather pathetic. I see people appeal all the time to the fact that there are so many jurisdictions in America. Well, what else does one expect from the phenomena of mass migrations from foreign countries? It takes TIME to form new jurisdictions. And again, it betrays ignorance of the essential Apostolic meaning of unity in Orthodoxy.

Especially considering how much unity there is within Lutheranism. How many Synods are there nowadays?

I'm probably the only one, but I wonder if this jurisdictional "mess" may be a good thing in the long run. Now, yes, the whole Bishop issue and leadership could be better organized. But I often wonder if the differing jurisdictions help to preserve Orthodoxy in a way that if we were homogenized it would not (okay, I'm not saying this very well - please forgive me).

And certainly trying to force something before its time is very dangerous.

I have to admit- I saw who the author was and didn't read very much. Consider the source as they say. If only he would spend that much effort and anger towards the problems within his own tradition (but he should leave out the name calling - it really does a disservice to his arguments). Why doesn't he go annoy the "church growthy" people within Lutheranism?

[eoe]

A Lutheran saying we are inconsistent? Hello Pot? This is Kettle... We gotta talk.

[Sokol]

What are your thoughts?


A long winded rant from a man with an ax to grind. It gave me a headache. I'll keep the Rev Dr Pastor in my prayers.

[eoe]

I recall for instance watching as the head of one of the Orthodox communions in this country attended a service in the National Cathedral in Washington, DC at which event there was worshiped Allah, the Jewish god, and of course the Blessed and Most Holy Trinity was acknowledged.

Perhaps it was an Antiochian parish?

What is this guy thinking?

[fuerein]

Perhaps it was an Antiochian parish?

What is this guy thinking?
No... he is refering to the National Cathedral here in DC. An Episcipal cathedral. However National Cathedral has been named the National House of Prayer (or something similar) and they occasionally have non-religion specific prayer services. They'll have priests, rabbis, imams, etc come in and offer prayer to their respective gods for the good of the nation.

[eoe]

Still it is patently absurd to call "Allah" "the Jewish God".

Who is Christ but the God of the Jews? Who is the Trinity but the God of the Jews?

This plays on fear uncertainty and doubt based upon racial and cultural prejudice.

[disasm]

Still it is patently absurd to call "Allah" "the Jewish God".

Who is Christ but the God of the Jews? Who is the Trinity but the God of the Jews?

This plays on fear uncertainty and doubt based upon racial and cultural prejudice.
I think it's a list saying Allah, and the Jewish God, and the Trinity.

[MamaBug]

The entire article jumbles together concessions and accusations of all hosts of problems.

Back when I was investigating the claims of the LDS I used to call this the buck-shot approach - throw enough random bits at an argument and maybe one of them will take it down. I got very good at recognizing this type of polemic (from both sides).

My current favorite leap of logic he made is towards the end when he is trying to present Orthodoxy as a big bowl full of green jello. First he uses a letter from an Orthodox person to bolster his argument ("they even admit..."), then it turns out the writer is schismatic. At this point he asserts that the main reason someone warned against taking the writer's words as a true reflection of Orthodoxy is because the writer's sect is riddled with scandalous behavior in the hierarchy. Logical conclusion, since cannonical Orthodox churches have had scandals then obviously nobody is really Orthodox. :scratch:

[paleodoxy]

This is what I was going to ask. Who was the cleric representing the OC who went to D.C.? And what was the point of participating? And was this approved by most Orthodox? Or considered aberrant behavior by a straying bishop? Or what?

[paleodoxy]

My thoughts are basically that I read two thirds of it and had ingested enough to discard the rest. He argues like a politician. He admits that there are "problems" within Lutheranism and then cautiously leads the reader into admitting problems within Orthodoxy. The problem is... no, there isn't. There are problems with Orthodox Christians, no one will deny this. But this isn't his premise. No one leaves Lutheranism because of inconsistent followers.... they do so because of internal, that is doctrinal, problems. The entire article jumbles together concessions and accusations of all hosts of problems. And while this is true of both groups concerning unorthodox practices, it is by no means true of Orthodox doctrine, and this is where he tries to cloud the issue with ambiguity... he never makes that distinction. And it is precisely that distinction that makes all the difference in the world.... it is precisely that distinction that separates Orthodoxy from all other factions of Christendom.

Right on, Photios... :thumbsup:

[disasm]

No dissenting comments... Complete moderation of comments before they post... He must really be scared of the Truth being revealed.

Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me the sinner.

[disasm]

Completely took Fr. Alexander Schmemann out of context:

http://www.jacwell.org/Fall_Winter99/Fr_Schmemann_The%20_spiritual_problem.htm

[fuerein]

This is what I was going to ask. Who was the cleric representing the OC who went to D.C.? And what was the point of participating? And was this approved by most Orthodox? Or considered aberrant behavior by a straying bishop? Or what?
I'm not sure exactly which prayer service was being mentioned by the writer but I did come up with one instance:
http://www.wf-f.org/0301steichen.html
Greek Orthodox Bishop Demetrios was stated to be in attendance as well a Catholic archbishop, several protestant ministers, and a jewish Rabbi.

[paleodoxy]

I was under the impression it was a post 9-11 service.

[Mary of Bethany]

IIRC, Met. Herman attended one of the national religious gatherings after 9/11. Frankly I have no problem with a bishop's presence at those kind of things, to represent Orthodoxy. It's simply showing that Orthodox people are part of a nation that's grieving and praying.

Mary

[Lukaris]

No... he is refering to the National Cathedral here in DC. An Episcipal cathedral. However National Cathedral has been named the National House of Prayer (or something similar) and they occasionally have non-religion specific prayer services. They'll have priests, rabbis, imams, etc come in and offer prayer to their respective gods for the good of the nation.
Does the cathedral contain an altar that might say, "TO THE UNKNOWN GOD" ?

[Shubunkin]

What a bunch of made up excuses for continued blindness. I am a former Lutheran, remember. The fact is the remaining "Lutheran" churches today have no right to call themselves Lutheran. They no longer hold to the liturgical services, they no longer teach the confessions, etc. They do not teach what Luther originally taught. They are a 20th-21st century invention of their imaginations. They have no room to talk. :(

[paleodoxy]

Well, in the article he recognized and acknowledged that Lutherans had their fair share of problems. He didn't specify what they all were, but he acknowledged their presence. My problem with the article was that it could basically be reduced to: "Orthodoxy has problems, too!" To which I'm going, "Okay. And your point?"

The issue isn't that we are sinners and that all churches have problems. That's a given. It fails to adddress the question of authority and apostolic continuity in any discernibly substantial way.

[authiodionitist]

On the paragraph about some primate in the DC cathedral (+Herman as Mary of Bethany says?), he doesn't really clarifiy what's going on or what's wrong with the presence of His Beautitude (or Eminence, if it is Met +Phillip or any of the Greek Mets). I'll keep reading. And I'll probably say hi to the pastor. I'll be back with more comments....

[authiodionitist]

This is the classically satanic way to approach Christ: let's look for him through the scandals! What foolishness.

If one seeks to understand Orthodoxy, attend Church every Sunday, take care to go to the Vigils and Liturgies of the TWELVE great feasts, take up a basic prayer rule under the guidance of a priest and spiritual father, and ease your way into fasting.

The Reverend must engage in honest discussion towards communion and Truth.

[rusmeister]

The thing that strikes me is how much this must ignore the concept of a Church established by Christ that has withstood all the blasts of time. He says:

converts to Orthodoxy would have us believe that Lutheranism believes the church is invisible, and therefore we Lutherans are not as concerned about the reality of the church.

but fails to further define the issue. He would have to subscribe to the 'ethereal Church' concept and admit that the Holy Spirit was unable to protect the Church from breaking into pieces - that the gates of Hell did somehow manage to prevail.

I can nail this minister in making broad and uninformed statements on Russia (hah! They don't call me the Rusmeister for nothing!)
The Church is certainly doing everything in its power to stand against abortion. You have to understand that most politicians in the government are not Christian at all, or merely give lip service to it. To accuse the Orthodox Church in Russia of remaining silent on abortion is an accusation invented out of thin air.

He clearly doesn't know the nature of the immorality of schismatic groups.

I tried posting a comment on his blog detailing my knowledge of the situation in Russia (and correcting the serious misunderstanding there), but had multiple problems with the 'type what you see in the box' defenses - I think it swallowed my post.

[vanshan]

I'm really surprised that on one hand he condemns Orthodox converts who criticise Lutheran church practice rather than it's confession, then proceeds to attack Orthodoxy using the same approach. As if evidence that fallible men exist within Orthodoxy should be a shock to us, or make inquirers think the better of coming home?

It seems we really have him running scared based on the number of entries he has written against the Orthodox. Is this a trickle of the greater persecution against the Church that surely will come? Maybe he's just reacting to someone within Orthodoxy who's particularly obnoxious, but if we honestly make our position known, those who fail to see the light of the truth will hate us, like those who hated Christ, while looking directly at Him. The Church, which is here to save sinners, for some will be a stumbling block. Lord have mercy on us.

Basil

[buzuxi02]

Is this guy for real? He claims that Orthodox liturgical rites have no grounding in scripture. Would he say the same for the Trinity?

He claims theres no such praying to the saints yet by revelation it is revealed in Rev 5.8.

I guess he has forgotten that the unity of the church both on Earth and in Heaven regardless of space and time is found in the Eucharist, the center of worship. Perhapd he should take a look at his bible (1 Cor 10.16-17)

Now lets take a look at Lutheranism. Are they not the original protestants? Thus there existence was based on protesting what they percieved was the Church. It claims the gates of Hades shall not prevail over Her. The only logical conclusion is that lutheranism are agents of the devil, being used to destroy the church. After all they set up a parallel organization to convert the romans to their belief. This is their own acknowledgment.

[paleodoxy]

Protestantism would have been far less insidious if it had sought refuge in Constantinople upon casting off Rome. They had many legitimate reasons for protesting Rome. They wouldn't have cared about popery in principle had the papacy not been so corrupt during mediaevalism. If they had recognized the problem with the western Creed's Trinitarianism, that would have been a legitimate reason for getting the heck out of Dodge...but they chose to reinvent the wheel - and THAT'S what got them into serious trouble. Predictably, as a result, Protestantism has become far less stable than Rome, and more prone to heresy, individualism, relativism and innovative worship.