Why the Strong Anti-Western Bias Among Orthodox?
#11
(01-29-2021, 05:29 PM)Justin Tertius Wrote: It is, for all intents and purposes, treated as "Catholic divorce."

I'm not going to give up on this point because intent matters. Christian morality is not consequentialist.

To a consequentialist, the difference between divorce and annulment is paperwork--trivial details.

To a Christian, the difference between divorce and annulment is one's eternal salvation.

We can demand reform of marriage tribunals and annulment procedure, but that doesn't validate EO divorce any more than demanding reform of the Church validates the schismatic churches.
ūü§° There's no such thing as a Catholic Democrat¬† ūü§°
[-] The following 3 users Like ChairmanJoeAintMyPresident's post:
  ‚ÄĘ Augustinian, HailGilbert, jovan66102
Reply
#12
(01-29-2021, 05:52 PM)SeekerofChrist Wrote:
(01-29-2021, 02:25 PM)Evangelium Wrote: Justin, I was Orthodox for a time.  Your take on their hostility to the West is correct.  When I had my fill of it as an Orthodox Christian, I returned to Rome.

I was a schismatic for a time, wandering among the arid spiritual desert otherwise known as Protestantism.  One thing was common in all these denominations, from Episcopalians to Baptists: anti-Catholic bias and sentiments.

(01-29-2021, 02:41 PM)Justin Tertius Wrote: I can appreciate this attitude of mysticism and accepting that certain things are beyond the grasp of human reason. Catholicism is full of these mysteries. Even the greatest Scholastic theologians were profound mystics (St. Thomas and St. Bonaventure). And the Carmelite and Cistercian traditions are deeply mystical.

I think, however, that an appeal to mystery as a way to avoid providing some explanation of a doctrine is a cop-out. Philosophy enters into theology as the tool in which to frame the mysteries of the Christian faith. Trinitarian theology and Christology are two prime examples of that. One can't speak about these mysteries without an appeal to philosophic language like essence, energy, hypostasis, substance, cause, etc.

And I think the recent trend to downplay St. Augustin is unfortunate. St. Augustine is recognized as a Saint by the Orthodox, so far as I am aware. Though, to be fair, I have seen Vladimir Lossky use some of St. Augustine's thought before.

I once heard "mysteries of faith" described as something we can only incompletely speak about and explain, with room for development of our understanding (genuine development of doctrine, that is).  This tendency to denigrate reason among the Orthodox has always been off-putting to me.  If something isn't subject to at least basic reasoning and rationality, I've got no reason to accept it as true.  It very much reminds me of the Mormons.  They HATE philosophy and base everything on their religious experiences.  I get that the Holy Ghost bears witness to us of the Truth and calls us to conversion but that doesn't mean we can't rationally explain and defend the Faith, albeit only in an incomplete manner.

I became a Catholic by means of philosophical and theological argument. I mean, Christ is literally the Logos, the Exemplar of Reason and Order in creation. How can you be against reason without simultaneously being against Christ? It doesn't make sense to claim to be Christian while hating the very thing that strengthens the Christian position.
"The Heart of Jesus is closer to you when you suffer, than when you are full of joy." - St. Margaret Mary Alacoque

Put not your trust in princes: In the children of men, in whom there is no salvation. - Ps. 145:2-3

"For there shall be a time, when they will not endure sound doctrine; but, according to their own desires, they will heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears: And will indeed turn away their hearing from the truth, but will be turned unto fables." - 2 Timothy 4:3-4
[-] The following 2 users Like Augustinian's post:
  ‚ÄĘ MacPasquale, SeekerofChrist
Reply
#13
(01-29-2021, 05:55 PM)ChairmanJoeAintMyPresident Wrote:
(01-29-2021, 05:29 PM)Justin Tertius Wrote: It is, for all intents and purposes, treated as "Catholic divorce."

I'm not going to give up on this point because intent matters.  Christian morality is not consequentialist.

To a consequentialist, the difference between divorce and annulment is paperwork--trivial details.

To a Christian, the difference between divorce and annulment is one's eternal salvation.

We can demand reform of marriage tribunals and annulment procedure, but that doesn't validate EO divorce any more than demanding reform of the Church validates the schismatic churches.

This misses the point of what I am saying. I'm not trying to validate the EO practice. I am pointing out that this is a matter of getting one's house in order before we go looking elsewhere. I agree that the EO practice is wrong and understand the distinction between divorce and annulment.
"Especially will I do this if the Lord make known to me that you come together man by man in common through grace, individually, in one faith, and in Jesus Christ... so that you obey the bishop and the presbytery with an undivided mind, breaking one and the same bread, which is the medicine of immortality, and the antidote to prevent us from dying, but which causes that we should live for ever in Jesus Christ." St. Ignatius of Antioch

"But Polycarp... waving his hand towards them, while with groans he look up to heaven, said, 'Away with the Atheists.'" Martyrdom of Polycarp
Reply
#14
(01-29-2021, 05:59 PM)Augustinian Wrote:
(01-29-2021, 05:52 PM)SeekerofChrist Wrote: I once heard "mysteries of faith" described as something we can only incompletely speak about and explain, with room for development of our understanding (genuine development of doctrine, that is).  This tendency to denigrate reason among the Orthodox has always been off-putting to me.  If something isn't subject to at least basic reasoning and rationality, I've got no reason to accept it as true.  It very much reminds me of the Mormons.  They HATE philosophy and base everything on their religious experiences.  I get that the Holy Ghost bears witness to us of the Truth and calls us to conversion but that doesn't mean we can't rationally explain and defend the Faith, albeit only in an incomplete manner.

I became a Catholic by means of philosophical and theological argument. I mean, Christ is literally the Logos, the Exemplar of Reason and Order in creation. How can you be against reason without simultaneously being against Christ? It doesn't make sense to claim to be Christian while hating the very thing that strengthens the Christian position.

Again, to be fair, I think most of them would say that they are trying to be "above" reason, which would get back to an idea of illumination by the Holy Ghost through asceticism and prayer.
"Especially will I do this if the Lord make known to me that you come together man by man in common through grace, individually, in one faith, and in Jesus Christ... so that you obey the bishop and the presbytery with an undivided mind, breaking one and the same bread, which is the medicine of immortality, and the antidote to prevent us from dying, but which causes that we should live for ever in Jesus Christ." St. Ignatius of Antioch

"But Polycarp... waving his hand towards them, while with groans he look up to heaven, said, 'Away with the Atheists.'" Martyrdom of Polycarp
[-] The following 1 user Likes Justin Tertius's post:
  ‚ÄĘ Augustinian
Reply
#15
(01-29-2021, 09:15 PM)Justin Tertius Wrote: I am pointing out that this is a matter of getting one's house in order before we go looking elsewhere.

I'll argue with you on this point also.

First of all, it's a tu quoque.

Secondly, it imputes the sins of the group to every member of the group. There are hundreds (or thousands) of nominally Catholic marriage tribunal functionaries spread all over the world, and they're handing out nullity decrees like candy. But their crime doesn't mean that I can't speak the truth. If perfect adherence by the entire group is a requirement before any of us can evangelize, then we'll never evangelize.
ūü§° There's no such thing as a Catholic Democrat¬† ūü§°
[-] The following 1 user Likes ChairmanJoeAintMyPresident's post:
  ‚ÄĘ Marmot
Reply
#16
(01-29-2021, 09:25 PM)ChairmanJoeAintMyPresident Wrote:
(01-29-2021, 09:15 PM)Justin Tertius Wrote: I am pointing out that this is a matter of getting one's house in order before we go looking elsewhere.

I'll argue with you on this point also.

First of all, it's a tu quoque.

Secondly, it imputes the sins of the group to every member of the group.  There are hundreds (or thousands) of nominally Catholic marriage tribunal functionaries spread all over the world, and they're handing out nullity decrees like candy.  But their crime doesn't mean that I can't speak the truth.  If perfect adherence by the entire group is a requirement before any of us can evangelize, then we'll never evangelize.

Not even remotely close to what I am suggesting.

First, in the eyes of perspective converts, a matter like the annulments scandal is going to come up, especially if you are relying strongly on the "up to but not exceeding three marriages" apologetic. I get it. It is plainly against Sacred Scripture. But an informed Orthodox could just through it back at you and argue that the distinction is only a technicality with no practical effect. 

If I were trying to offer good reasons why an EO should accept the Catholic Church, I would want to start with the Papacy. Every other issue, though important, is secondary and would naturally line up if the Catholic Church's claims about the Roman Primacy were shown to be true.

Second, I am not saying that we have to wait for perfection to be achieved before evangelization can occur. There will always be sinners in the Church and there will always be abuses and scandals. And woe to him through whom they come. But the annulment scandal is that, a scandal.
"Especially will I do this if the Lord make known to me that you come together man by man in common through grace, individually, in one faith, and in Jesus Christ... so that you obey the bishop and the presbytery with an undivided mind, breaking one and the same bread, which is the medicine of immortality, and the antidote to prevent us from dying, but which causes that we should live for ever in Jesus Christ." St. Ignatius of Antioch

"But Polycarp... waving his hand towards them, while with groans he look up to heaven, said, 'Away with the Atheists.'" Martyrdom of Polycarp
Reply
#17
(01-29-2021, 09:18 PM)Justin Tertius Wrote:
(01-29-2021, 05:59 PM)Augustinian Wrote:
(01-29-2021, 05:52 PM)SeekerofChrist Wrote: I once heard "mysteries of faith" described as something we can only incompletely speak about and explain, with room for development of our understanding (genuine development of doctrine, that is).  This tendency to denigrate reason among the Orthodox has always been off-putting to me.  If something isn't subject to at least basic reasoning and rationality, I've got no reason to accept it as true.  It very much reminds me of the Mormons.  They HATE philosophy and base everything on their religious experiences.  I get that the Holy Ghost bears witness to us of the Truth and calls us to conversion but that doesn't mean we can't rationally explain and defend the Faith, albeit only in an incomplete manner.

I became a Catholic by means of philosophical and theological argument. I mean, Christ is literally the Logos, the Exemplar of Reason and Order in creation. How can you be against reason without simultaneously being against Christ? It doesn't make sense to claim to be Christian while hating the very thing that strengthens the Christian position.

Again, to be fair, I think most of them would say that they are trying to be "above" reason, which would get back to an idea of illumination by the Holy Ghost through asceticism and prayer.

There's "above reason" and then there's "against reason."  One needs a solid philosophical theology in order to make a reasonable case that what one is doing is "above reason" but not contrary to it.
"For the true friends of the people are neither revolutionaries nor innovators, but traditionalists."
- Pope St. Pius X

"For there shall be a time, when they will not endure sound doctrine; but, according to their own desires, they will heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears: And will indeed turn away their hearing from the truth, but will be turned unto fables."
- 2 Timothy 4:3-4

"Therefore God shall send them the operation of error, to believe lying: That all may be judged who have not believed the truth, but have consented to iniquity."
- 2 Thessalonians 2:11-12
Reply
#18
(01-29-2021, 09:41 PM)SeekerofChrist Wrote:
(01-29-2021, 09:18 PM)Justin Tertius Wrote: Again, to be fair, I think most of them would say that they are trying to be "above" reason, which would get back to an idea of illumination by the Holy Ghost through asceticism and prayer.

There's "above reason" and then there's "against reason."  One needs a solid philosophical theology in order to make a reasonable case that what one is doing is "above reason" but not contrary to it.

Who would be a good Orthodox voice claiming that the Faith is against reason? 

I'm willing to be corrected on this, but I haven't encountered anything so far that seems to be so anti-Reason. Schmeman was about the closest I have read so far, but I think that his anti-rationalism is stemming more from a distrust of the West and the Catholic Church.
"Especially will I do this if the Lord make known to me that you come together man by man in common through grace, individually, in one faith, and in Jesus Christ... so that you obey the bishop and the presbytery with an undivided mind, breaking one and the same bread, which is the medicine of immortality, and the antidote to prevent us from dying, but which causes that we should live for ever in Jesus Christ." St. Ignatius of Antioch

"But Polycarp... waving his hand towards them, while with groans he look up to heaven, said, 'Away with the Atheists.'" Martyrdom of Polycarp
Reply
#19
(01-29-2021, 09:44 PM)Justin Tertius Wrote:
(01-29-2021, 09:41 PM)SeekerofChrist Wrote:
(01-29-2021, 09:18 PM)Justin Tertius Wrote: Again, to be fair, I think most of them would say that they are trying to be "above" reason, which would get back to an idea of illumination by the Holy Ghost through asceticism and prayer.

There's "above reason" and then there's "against reason."  One needs a solid philosophical theology in order to make a reasonable case that what one is doing is "above reason" but not contrary to it.

Who would be a good Orthodox voice claiming that the Faith is against reason? 

I'm willing to be corrected on this, but I haven't encountered anything so far that seems to be so anti-Reason. Schmeman was about the closest I have read so far, but I think that his anti-rationalism is stemming more from a distrust of the West and the Catholic Church.

I'm not here to argue they actually do.  However, I am not Eastern Orthodox, I am not obligated to defend them, and I am only asking questions and asking about potential (though not certain) problems that might be present.  At the end of the day, they could be identical to Catholicism in everything except the Papacy, and I'd reject them for that reason.  I think you're right that this is the primary issue.
"For the true friends of the people are neither revolutionaries nor innovators, but traditionalists."
- Pope St. Pius X

"For there shall be a time, when they will not endure sound doctrine; but, according to their own desires, they will heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears: And will indeed turn away their hearing from the truth, but will be turned unto fables."
- 2 Timothy 4:3-4

"Therefore God shall send them the operation of error, to believe lying: That all may be judged who have not believed the truth, but have consented to iniquity."
- 2 Thessalonians 2:11-12
Reply
#20
(01-29-2021, 09:39 PM)Justin Tertius Wrote: First, in the eyes of perspective converts, a matter like the annulments scandal is going to come up

I get it, but I'm already in a position of having to explain:

1. Why we have the Real Presence when 75% of the people (formerly) in the pews don't believe or treat it that way.
2. Why we have to go to confession when (seemingly) nobody bothers anymore.
3. Why any of our sexual morality is important when 90%+ of "Catholics" contracept, self-abuse, and worse.
4. Why the indissolubility of marriage matters when large numbers of "Catholics" don't even bother seeking annulments before re-"marrying".

It's nothing personal, and you make good points, but I'm long past caring about what everybody else is doing or getting distracted by arguments related to it.
ūü§° There's no such thing as a Catholic Democrat¬† ūü§°
[-] The following 1 user Likes ChairmanJoeAintMyPresident's post:
  ‚ÄĘ SeekerofChrist
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)