• Please remember: Pray for Ukraine in the Prayer forum; Share news in the Christian News section; Discuss religious implications in FFA: Religious Topics; Discuss political implications in Politics (and if you don't have access, PM me) Thank you! + Fr. George, Forum Administrator

Fr. Josiah Trenham's funeral for America

AntoniousNikolas

Taxiarches
Joined
Dec 4, 2002
Messages
7,237
Reaction score
9
Points
0
Location
East Coast, USA
Faith
Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction
Oriental Orthodox Church
Sam G said:
My question was rhetorical.
Oh, I know.  I'm just saying, if such a thing had ever occurred, it would make more sense to me contextually than this.  :)
 

Clemente

Elder
Joined
Mar 16, 2009
Messages
466
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Faith
Orthodox
Tikhon29605 said:
I never said anything about Father Josiah being involved in a conspiracy.  Where on earth did you get that?
Tracing his actions as an Orthodox priest to a handful of "Christian Dominionists" in his former denomination?

How would you have treated St. Paul, another one of those awful "Convertodox"? His former co-religionists were a lot worse than Father Trenham's.

 

Tikhon29605

High Elder
Joined
May 20, 2003
Messages
670
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Mor Ephrem said:
Tikhon29605 said:
The whole idea of "national" repentance seems quite strange to me since nations do not have souls. I firmly believe that individuals can repent.  I am not so sure about entire nations.
Book of Jonah
That's Old Testament.  And, if one is given to believing that the USA is the New Israel, then perhaps you may have a point.  However, I don't see it in the New Covenant.
 

Sam G

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Oct 15, 2013
Messages
1,212
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
28
Faith
Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction
ACROD
Tikhon29605 said:
The whole idea of "national" repentance seems quite strange to me since nations do not have souls. I firmly believe that individuals can repent.  I am not so sure about entire nations.
St. John of Shanghai and San Francisco begs to differ.
 

Tikhon29605

High Elder
Joined
May 20, 2003
Messages
670
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Clemente said:
Tikhon29605 said:
I never said anything about Father Josiah being involved in a conspiracy.  Where on earth did you get that?
Tracing his actions as an Orthodox priest to a handful of "Christian Dominionists" in his former denomination?

How would you have treated St. Paul, another one of those awful "Convertodox"? His former co-religionists were a lot worse than Father Trenham's.
Clemente:  We all have to work hard to develop an Orthodox mindset, an Orthodox phronema.  I do not find it outrageous to suggest that he may have retained some of his Calvinistic baggage. 
 

Mor Ephrem

Hypatos
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Oct 3, 2002
Messages
36,445
Reaction score
341
Points
83
Age
41
Location
New York!
Website
www.orthodoxchristianity.net
Faith
Mercenary Freudianism
Jurisdiction
Texas Feminist Coptic
Tikhon29605 said:
Mor Ephrem said:
Tikhon29605 said:
The whole idea of "national" repentance seems quite strange to me since nations do not have souls. I firmly believe that individuals can repent.  I am not so sure about entire nations.
Book of Jonah
That's Old Testament. 
So what?  It's not like the entire thing was nullified by Jesus.  Jesus himself refers to the example of the Ninevites' repentance to chastise the lack thereof among his own nation. 

And, if one is given to believing that the USA is the New Israel, then perhaps you may have a point.
Non-sequitur.

However, I don't see it in the New Covenant.
Matthew 23.37-39
Romans 11
 

podkarpatska

Merarches
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
9,732
Reaction score
3
Points
0
Location
Northeast United States
Website
www.acrod.org
Mor Ephrem said:
Sam G said:
Justin Kissel said:
I like the theatricality of it. I can seriously imagine reading about this happening with some saint from centuries ago (though perhaps one that leans towards a 'fool for christ'). You can only have so many "strongly worded statements" and yada yada before it starts becoming all yada yada mush in your memory. This is like the anchovy in the mush. I will remember this anchovy.
Did St. Tikhon of Moscow have a funeral for Imperial Russia after the Tsar abdicated and was murdered?
Your question prompts me to ask if there are any photos or videos from Fr Josiah's homily and Requiem Liturgy.
"Requiem Liturgy"? Reminds me of the good old, post Unia days in certain jurisdictions.... ;)
 

podkarpatska

Merarches
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
9,732
Reaction score
3
Points
0
Location
Northeast United States
Website
www.acrod.org
Tikhon29605 said:
Clemente said:
Tikhon29605 said:
I never said anything about Father Josiah being involved in a conspiracy.  Where on earth did you get that?
Tracing his actions as an Orthodox priest to a handful of "Christian Dominionists" in his former denomination?

How would you have treated St. Paul, another one of those awful "Convertodox"? His former co-religionists were a lot worse than Father Trenham's.
Clemente:  We all have to work hard to develop an Orthodox mindset, an Orthodox phronema.  I do not find it outrageous to suggest that he may have retained some of his Calvinistic baggage.
I do since he is an Orthodox priest with a media platform online and through AFR- not some hybrid. I have never tuned into him over the years. I have tried, but...
 

Clemente

Elder
Joined
Mar 16, 2009
Messages
466
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Faith
Orthodox
Tikhon29605 said:
Mor Ephrem said:
Tikhon29605 said:
The whole idea of "national" repentance seems quite strange to me since nations do not have souls. I firmly believe that individuals can repent.  I am not so sure about entire nations.
Book of Jonah
And, if one is given to believing that the USA is the New Israel, then perhaps you may have a point.
Malicious calumny based on a patent use of the genetic fallacy. Do you actually have any evidence that Father Trenham believes that the USA is the New Israel or that he is a "Christian Dominionist"? If so, produce it.

Otherwise, what you are propagating is shameful defamation.
 

orthoreader

High Elder
Joined
Sep 14, 2012
Messages
755
Reaction score
0
Points
16
C'mon guys. It's obvious Father Josiah was just kidding. We all know that priests were brights for Orthodox funerals ;)

However,  on behalf of my Archdiocese let me extend my sincerest of apologies for a priest doing his job in speaking to and undertaking the task of informing us of a sick society. Why would he care about his country, priests aren't allowed to. Espcially if it offends the parishoners of the secular church... 

So I understand how some of you would be offended.
 
Joined
May 6, 2014
Messages
2,391
Reaction score
39
Points
48
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction
EOTC, but Coptic for now
orthoreader said:
C'mon guys. It's obvious Father Josiah was just kidding. We all know that priests were brights for Orthodox funerals ;)

However,  on behalf of my Archdiocese let me extend my sincerest of apologies for a priest doing his job in speaking to and undertaking the task of informing us of a sick society. Why would he care about his country, priests aren't allowed to. Espcially if it offends the parishoners of the secular church... 

So I understand how some of you would be offended.
It understood he was doing what he thought as priest he was suppose to be doing and again I don't want to cross the line into politics but America been sick for a long time and like I said earlier I approve the message the tactic  and also add seem like something some Evangelical in politics would do.
 
Joined
May 6, 2014
Messages
2,391
Reaction score
39
Points
48
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction
EOTC, but Coptic for now
approve the message not the tactic*
 

NicholasMyra

Merarches
Joined
Sep 19, 2010
Messages
8,839
Reaction score
3
Points
38
Website
hyperdoxherman.tumblr.com
Faith
Orthodox
Jurisdiction
Partially-overlapping
orthoreader said:
However,  on behalf of my Archdiocese let me extend my sincerest of apologies for a priest doing his job in speaking to and undertaking the task of informing us of a sick society. Why would he care about his country, priests aren't allowed to. Espcially if it offends the parishoners of the secular church... 

So I understand how some of you would be offended.
Are you saying that your archdiocese is the "non-secular" faction?

You want to go down that road?
 

orthoreader

High Elder
Joined
Sep 14, 2012
Messages
755
Reaction score
0
Points
16
NicholasMyra said:
orthoreader said:
However,  on behalf of my Archdiocese let me extend my sincerest of apologies for a priest doing his job in speaking to and undertaking the task of informing us of a sick society. Why would he care about his country, priests aren't allowed to. Espcially if it offends the parishoners of the secular church... 

So I understand how some of you would be offended.
Are you saying that your archdiocese is the "non-secular" faction?

You want to go down that road?
No. I'm saying my Church is.

But then again some of us have remained too silent for too long
 

NicholasMyra

Merarches
Joined
Sep 19, 2010
Messages
8,839
Reaction score
3
Points
38
Website
hyperdoxherman.tumblr.com
Faith
Orthodox
Jurisdiction
Partially-overlapping
orthoreader said:
NicholasMyra said:
orthoreader said:
However,  on behalf of my Archdiocese let me extend my sincerest of apologies for a priest doing his job in speaking to and undertaking the task of informing us of a sick society. Why would he care about his country, priests aren't allowed to. Espcially if it offends the parishoners of the secular church... 

So I understand how some of you would be offended.
Are you saying that your archdiocese is the "non-secular" faction?

You want to go down that road?
No. I'm saying my Church is.

But then again some of us have remained too silent for too long
The actions in the OP are more secular than anything else we've talked about here. Yes, some of us have remained silent for too long. And God will approve whom he will.
 

orthoreader

High Elder
Joined
Sep 14, 2012
Messages
755
Reaction score
0
Points
16
seekeroftruth777 said:
orthoreader said:
C'mon guys. It's obvious Father Josiah was just kidding. We all know that priests were brights for Orthodox funerals ;)

However,  on behalf of my Archdiocese let me extend my sincerest of apologies for a priest doing his job in speaking to and undertaking the task of informing us of a sick society. Why would he care about his country, priests aren't allowed to. Espcially if it offends the parishoners of the secular church... 

So I understand how some of you would be offended.
It understood he was doing what he thought as priest he was suppose to be doing and again I don't want to cross the line into politics but America been sick for a long time and like I said earlier I approve the message the tactic  and also add seem like something some Evangelical in politics would do.
It's not Fr. Josiah's fault that no one had the stones to speak up until now. And we have to be honest - very, very few have said anything about this until the "stuff" hit the fan. In fact, there are far too many that STILL think this is no big deal. Some actually think that gay marriage is a right. Some in our church celebrate it.

So I say, Fr. Josiah's "tactic" was called for..

 

orthoreader

High Elder
Joined
Sep 14, 2012
Messages
755
Reaction score
0
Points
16
NicholasMyra said:
orthoreader said:
NicholasMyra said:
orthoreader said:
However,  on behalf of my Archdiocese let me extend my sincerest of apologies for a priest doing his job in speaking to and undertaking the task of informing us of a sick society. Why would he care about his country, priests aren't allowed to. Espcially if it offends the parishoners of the secular church... 

So I understand how some of you would be offended.
Are you saying that your archdiocese is the "non-secular" faction?

You want to go down that road?
No. I'm saying my Church is.

But then again some of us have remained too silent for too long
The actions in the OP are more secular than anything else we've talked about here. Yes, some of us have remained silent for too long. And God will approve whom he will.
Hi Nicholas. Let' s keep on topic. Open up another thread if you want to spin this in that direction.
 

Tikhon29605

High Elder
Joined
May 20, 2003
Messages
670
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Clemente said:
Tikhon29605 said:
Mor Ephrem said:
Tikhon29605 said:
The whole idea of "national" repentance seems quite strange to me since nations do not have souls. I firmly believe that individuals can repent.  I am not so sure about entire nations.
Book of Jonah
And, if one is given to believing that the USA is the New Israel, then perhaps you may have a point.
Malicious calumny based on a patent use of the genetic fallacy. Do you actually have any evidence that Father Trenham believes that the USA is the New Israel or that he is a "Christian Dominionist"? If so, produce it.

Otherwise, what you are propagating is shameful defamation.
Clemente: Please be rational.  I never said Father Josiah was a Christian Dominionist.  I said that he was a pastor in a denomination, namely the Presbyterian Church in America, in which that group is a faction.  It is not the only faction in the PCA, but it is there.  Obviously he is not a Christian Dominionist otherwise he would quote Rushdooney (one of their chief theologians). 

I don't know if Father Josiah now believes that the USA is the New Israel.  Most probably, he doesn't. But given his background, it is reasonable to think that he may have in the past.

He does use historic term "the City set on the Hill" in his sermon to describe the United States as it used to be.  This term was used by the Calvinistic Governor of Massachusetts Bay Colony, George Winthrop, to describe the Calvinist Theocracy of Massachusetts.  So it sounds at least like Father Josiah believes in America as the Chosen Nation.  Neither one of us can read his mind, so the question itself will have to remain a mystery at best.

Father Josiah also goes on saying,"We don't like God's law being attacked."  This, to me, betrays a very naive understanding of the separation of Church and State.  The United States of America is not a theocracy and never has been.  When our President takes the oath of office, he places his hand on the Bible and swears to uphold the Constitution.  He does not place his hand on the Constitution and swear to uphold the Bible. When the Supreme Court considered the gay marriage issue, they did not sit down and say, "Hmm. Let's see what the Bible says about this?  What does Leviticus say?  What does Romans 1 say? "  They didn't do that because we are not a theocracy. When they go about making a ruling on the constitutionality of gay marriage, they have to look at the Constitution itself, legal precedents, and the fact that gay marriage was already legalized in 37 states by the time the case arrived at the Supreme Court.  Its a complex matter.

It we are so upset about "God's law" being attacked, where is our outrage over divorce?  Or adultery? Or re-marriage after divorce? Jesus had some pretty strong language about those subjects.  What about charging interest on money?  That's condemned in the Bible too.  Its called usury.  All of us stay clear of mentioning that one.

I just think expecting a Secular Court in a Secular Nation to makes rulings in accordance with Christian ethics is hopeless and naive.

I think Father Josiah would have done far better to simply state that the Orthodox Church's teaching and practice on the Sacrament of Marriage will remain unchanged. Marriage is a sacrament, and our secular state does NOT tell the Orthodox Church what Sacraments it can perform or who may be joined in a sacramental marriage.  Caesar will continue to be Caesar.  And if Caesar now approves of gay marriage performed by a justice of the peace, well, we may not like it, but there is nothing we can do about that. The world will continue to be the world and it permits a whole lot of things the Church would never permit or bless.
 

Tikhon29605

High Elder
Joined
May 20, 2003
Messages
670
Reaction score
1
Points
0
seekeroftruth777 said:
orthoreader said:
C'mon guys. It's obvious Father Josiah was just kidding. We all know that priests were brights for Orthodox funerals ;)

However,  on behalf of my Archdiocese let me extend my sincerest of apologies for a priest doing his job in speaking to and undertaking the task of informing us of a sick society. Why would he care about his country, priests aren't allowed to. Espcially if it offends the parishoners of the secular church... 

So I understand how some of you would be offended.
It understood he was doing what he thought as priest he was suppose to be doing and again I don't want to cross the line into politics but America been sick for a long time and like I said earlier I approve the message the tactic  and also add seem like something some Evangelical in politics would do.
+1
 

NicholasMyra

Merarches
Joined
Sep 19, 2010
Messages
8,839
Reaction score
3
Points
38
Website
hyperdoxherman.tumblr.com
Faith
Orthodox
Jurisdiction
Partially-overlapping
orthoreader said:
NicholasMyra said:
orthoreader said:
NicholasMyra said:
orthoreader said:
However,  on behalf of my Archdiocese let me extend my sincerest of apologies for a priest doing his job in speaking to and undertaking the task of informing us of a sick society. Why would he care about his country, priests aren't allowed to. Espcially if it offends the parishoners of the secular church... 

So I understand how some of you would be offended.
Are you saying that your archdiocese is the "non-secular" faction?

You want to go down that road?
No. I'm saying my Church is.

But then again some of us have remained too silent for too long
The actions in the OP are more secular than anything else we've talked about here. Yes, some of us have remained silent for too long. And God will approve whom he will.
Hi Nicholas. Let' s keep on topic. Open up another thread if you want to spin this in that direction.
I think I'll keep going until I'm stopped.

This is not the bullet we have to bite to remain faithful to the Gospel, to the Church. We do not have to drag Christ's name through the mud by taking up the worst tactics of corporate marketing evangelicalism, of sacrilegious public appeals, platitudes, hooks. We don't need to make a deal with the devil to save the Church.

You talk about standing up for the truth. You talk about not being silent. Well, I think this way of attempting to witness and defend the Church is evil. And so I'm obligated to stand against that way.
 

Iconodule

Hoplitarches
Joined
Jan 2, 2010
Messages
16,486
Reaction score
23
Points
38
Age
40
Location
PA, USA
Faith
Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction
Patriarchate of Johnstown
NicholasMyra said:
orthoreader said:
NicholasMyra said:
orthoreader said:
NicholasMyra said:
orthoreader said:
However,  on behalf of my Archdiocese let me extend my sincerest of apologies for a priest doing his job in speaking to and undertaking the task of informing us of a sick society. Why would he care about his country, priests aren't allowed to. Espcially if it offends the parishoners of the secular church... 

So I understand how some of you would be offended.
Are you saying that your archdiocese is the "non-secular" faction?

You want to go down that road?
No. I'm saying my Church is.

But then again some of us have remained too silent for too long
The actions in the OP are more secular than anything else we've talked about here. Yes, some of us have remained silent for too long. And God will approve whom he will.
Hi Nicholas. Let' s keep on topic. Open up another thread if you want to spin this in that direction.
I think I'll keep going until I'm stopped.

This is not the bullet we have to bite to remain faithful to the Gospel, to the Church. We do not have to drag Christ's name through the mud by taking up the worst tactics of corporate marketing evangelicalism, of sacrilegious public appeals, platitudes, hooks. We don't need to make a deal with the devil to save the Church.

You talk about standing up for the truth. You talk about not being silent. Well, I think this way of attempting to witness and defend the Church is evil. And so I'm obligated to stand against that way.
+1
 

Jeffrey

Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2013
Messages
76
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Mor Ephrem said:
DeniseDenise said:
A Priest with a flair for drama......
I'm open to learning more and keeping an open mind regarding why he expressed himself in this way, but I'm disappointed in this. 

I don't necessarily disagree with his views, at least in general terms, but I'm not sure hijacking the Church's liturgy in order to protest Supreme Court decisions is acceptable.  I feel the same way about using the liturgical homily to speak more about Kennedy and Scalia than about SS Paul and Matthew.  "Jesus" was only mentioned in passing.  It's an unacceptable way of presenting what might otherwise be sound teaching or at least a valid opinion. 
+100!

Someone very close to happened to hear his sermon the Sunday after Lawrence vs Texas in 2003, when the SCOTUS struck down sodomy laws.  It included, I believe, warm references to the Justinian Code and its penalty of execution for sodomy.  She thought it rather hard to "lay aside all earthly cares" right after such a homily that wasn't about the Sunday lections at all.  She felt that the least such a cleric could do is make sure to take the Ektenia and Litanies of the Catechumens and Faithful after such a speech, as a sort of "palate cleanser". 

Also, I think that one should strive to make the homily during Liturgy very heavy on the sound teaching and  light on opinion, even valid opinion.
 

orthoreader

High Elder
Joined
Sep 14, 2012
Messages
755
Reaction score
0
Points
16
Tikhon29605 said:
Clemente said:
Tikhon29605 said:
Mor Ephrem said:
Tikhon29605 said:
The whole idea of "national" repentance seems quite strange to me since nations do not have souls. I firmly believe that individuals can repent.  I am not so sure about entire nations.
Book of Jonah
And, if one is given to believing that the USA is the New Israel, then perhaps you may have a point.
Malicious calumny based on a patent use of the genetic fallacy. Do you actually have any evidence that Father Trenham believes that the USA is the New Israel or that he is a "Christian Dominionist"? If so, produce it.

Otherwise, what you are propagating is shameful defamation.
Clemente: Please be rational.  I never said Father Josiah was a Christian Dominionist.  I said that he was a pastor in a denomination, namely the Presbyterian Church in America, in which that group is a faction.  It is not the only faction in the PCA, but it is there.  Obviously he is not a Christian Dominionist otherwise he would quote Rushdooney (one of their chief theologians). 

I don't know if Father Josiah now believes that the USA is the New Israel.  Most probably, he doesn't. But given his background, it is reasonable to think that he may have in the past.

He does use historic term "the City set on the Hill" in his sermon to describe the United States as it used to be.  This term was used by the Calvinistic Governor of Massachusetts Bay Colony, George Winthrop, to describe the Calvinist Theocracy of Massachusetts.  So it sounds at least like Father Josiah believes in America as the Chosen Nation.  Neither one of us can read his mind, so the question itself will have to remain a mystery at best.

Father Josiah also goes on saying,"We don't like God's law being attacked."  This, to me, betrays a very naive understanding of the separation of Church and State.  The United States of America is not a theocracy and never has been.  When our President takes the oath of office, he places his hand on the Bible and swears to uphold the Constitution.  He does not place his hand on the Constitution and swear to uphold the Bible. When the Supreme Court considered the gay marriage issue, they did not sit down and say, "Hmm. Let's see what the Bible says about this?  What does Leviticus say?  What does Romans 1 say? "  They didn't do that because we are not a theocracy. When they go about making a ruling on the constitutionality of gay marriage, they have to look at the Constitution itself, legal precedents, and the fact that gay marriage was already legalized in 37 states by the time the case arrived at the Supreme Court.  Its a complex matter.

It we are so upset about "God's law" being attacked, where is our outrage over divorce?  Or adultery? Or re-marriage after divorce? Jesus had some pretty strong language about those subjects.  What about charging interest on money?  That's condemned in the Bible too.  Its called usury.  All of us stay clear of mentioning that one.

I just think expecting a Secular Court in a Secular Nation to makes rulings in accordance with Christian ethics is hopeless and naive.

I think Father Josiah would have done far better to simply state that the Orthodox Church's teaching and practice on the Sacrament of Marriage will remain unchanged. Marriage is a sacrament, and our secular state does NOT tell the Orthodox Church what Sacraments it can perform or who may be joined in a sacramental marriage.  Caesar will continue to be Caesar.  And if Caesar now approves of gay marriage performed by a justice of the peace, well, we may not like it, but there is nothing we can do about that. The world will continue to be the world and it permits a whole lot of things the Church would never permit or bless.
You know everyone has a right to their opinion. But what are we insinuating here? Shall we go into every single convert's past and insinuate what they still hold onto while they preach or work out their salvation? Does this make them "less than" in your expectation? How about what cradle orthodox? Perhaps the myriads of nationalistic sermons that we don't think twice about by these astute theologians?

With all do respect. He has spoken to divorce and adultry, and actually mentioned this in reference to the falleness of our culture in the very sermon we're discussing. He equated them rather appropriately and even mentioned that gay marriage isn't something that happened yesterday and that adultry, porn, fornication, and divorce lead to this very ruling.

Did you listen to the sermon? Did anyone actually listen to the sermon, or where they too focused on his vestments?

The Supreme Court ruled on gay marriage, not on the other issues, which we're talking about this specific topic.
 

orthoreader

High Elder
Joined
Sep 14, 2012
Messages
755
Reaction score
0
Points
16
NicholasMyra said:
orthoreader said:
NicholasMyra said:
orthoreader said:
NicholasMyra said:
orthoreader said:
However,  on behalf of my Archdiocese let me extend my sincerest of apologies for a priest doing his job in speaking to and undertaking the task of informing us of a sick society. Why would he care about his country, priests aren't allowed to. Espcially if it offends the parishoners of the secular church... 

So I understand how some of you would be offended.
Are you saying that your archdiocese is the "non-secular" faction?

You want to go down that road?
No. I'm saying my Church is.

But then again some of us have remained too silent for too long
The actions in the OP are more secular than anything else we've talked about here. Yes, some of us have remained silent for too long. And God will approve whom he will.
Hi Nicholas. Let' s keep on topic. Open up another thread if you want to spin this in that direction.
I think I'll keep going until I'm stopped.

This is not the bullet we have to bite to remain faithful to the Gospel, to the Church. We do not have to drag Christ's name through the mud by taking up the worst tactics of corporate marketing evangelicalism, of sacrilegious public appeals, platitudes, hooks. We don't need to make a deal with the devil to save the Church.

You talk about standing up for the truth. You talk about not being silent. Well, I think this way of attempting to witness and defend the Church is evil. And so I'm obligated to stand against that way.
I guess it depends on what you're looking at.

But then again, there will come a time when they will call evil good, and good evil ....
 

Tikhon29605

High Elder
Joined
May 20, 2003
Messages
670
Reaction score
1
Points
0
orthoreader said:
Tikhon29605 said:
Clemente said:
Tikhon29605 said:
Mor Ephrem said:
Tikhon29605 said:
The whole idea of "national" repentance seems quite strange to me since nations do not have souls. I firmly believe that individuals can repent.  I am not so sure about entire nations.
Book of Jonah
And, if one is given to believing that the USA is the New Israel, then perhaps you may have a point.
Malicious calumny based on a patent use of the genetic fallacy. Do you actually have any evidence that Father Trenham believes that the USA is the New Israel or that he is a "Christian Dominionist"? If so, produce it.

Otherwise, what you are propagating is shameful defamation.
Clemente: Please be rational.  I never said Father Josiah was a Christian Dominionist.  I said that he was a pastor in a denomination, namely the Presbyterian Church in America, in which that group is a faction.  It is not the only faction in the PCA, but it is there.  Obviously he is not a Christian Dominionist otherwise he would quote Rushdooney (one of their chief theologians). 

I don't know if Father Josiah now believes that the USA is the New Israel.  Most probably, he doesn't. But given his background, it is reasonable to think that he may have in the past.

He does use historic term "the City set on the Hill" in his sermon to describe the United States as it used to be.  This term was used by the Calvinistic Governor of Massachusetts Bay Colony, George Winthrop, to describe the Calvinist Theocracy of Massachusetts.  So it sounds at least like Father Josiah believes in America as the Chosen Nation.  Neither one of us can read his mind, so the question itself will have to remain a mystery at best.

Father Josiah also goes on saying,"We don't like God's law being attacked."  This, to me, betrays a very naive understanding of the separation of Church and State.  The United States of America is not a theocracy and never has been.  When our President takes the oath of office, he places his hand on the Bible and swears to uphold the Constitution.  He does not place his hand on the Constitution and swear to uphold the Bible. When the Supreme Court considered the gay marriage issue, they did not sit down and say, "Hmm. Let's see what the Bible says about this?  What does Leviticus say?  What does Romans 1 say? "  They didn't do that because we are not a theocracy. When they go about making a ruling on the constitutionality of gay marriage, they have to look at the Constitution itself, legal precedents, and the fact that gay marriage was already legalized in 37 states by the time the case arrived at the Supreme Court.  Its a complex matter.

It we are so upset about "God's law" being attacked, where is our outrage over divorce?  Or adultery? Or re-marriage after divorce? Jesus had some pretty strong language about those subjects.  What about charging interest on money?  That's condemned in the Bible too.  Its called usury.  All of us stay clear of mentioning that one.

I just think expecting a Secular Court in a Secular Nation to makes rulings in accordance with Christian ethics is hopeless and naive.

I think Father Josiah would have done far better to simply state that the Orthodox Church's teaching and practice on the Sacrament of Marriage will remain unchanged. Marriage is a sacrament, and our secular state does NOT tell the Orthodox Church what Sacraments it can perform or who may be joined in a sacramental marriage.  Caesar will continue to be Caesar.  And if Caesar now approves of gay marriage performed by a justice of the peace, well, we may not like it, but there is nothing we can do about that. The world will continue to be the world and it permits a whole lot of things the Church would never permit or bless.
You know everyone has a right to their opinion. But what are we insinuating here? Shall we go into every single convert's past and insinuate what they still hold onto while they preach or work out their salvation? Does this make them "less than" in your expectation? How about what cradle orthodox? Perhaps the myriads of nationalistic sermons that we don't think twice about by these astute theologians?

With all do respect. He has spoken to divorce and adultry, and actually mentioned this in reference to the falleness of our culture in the very sermon we're discussing. He equated them rather appropriately and even mentioned that gay marriage isn't something that happened yesterday and that adultry, porn, fornication, and divorce lead to this very ruling.

Did you listen to the sermon? Did anyone actually listen to the sermon, or where they too focused on his vestments?

The Supreme Court ruled on gay marriage, not on the other issues, which we're talking about this specific topic.
I not only listened to his sermon, I took notes on it.  I notice a couple things:

1.  It had NOTHING to do with the appointed liturgical readings for the day.
2.  It did not contain any real mention of Jesus Christ.
3.  It was political tirade masquerading as a sermon.
4.  And it was all LAW, just like a Presbyterian/Calvinist sermon.

It really does make me wonder what kind of spiritual formation this man received in seminary.  Did he even go to an Orthodox seminary at all after his conversion?  I see an emphasis on Law, rules, and a harshness that I have not seen from St. Vladimir's or St. Tikhon's graduates.
 

NicholasMyra

Merarches
Joined
Sep 19, 2010
Messages
8,839
Reaction score
3
Points
38
Website
hyperdoxherman.tumblr.com
Faith
Orthodox
Jurisdiction
Partially-overlapping
I come from an area where coercion, intimidation, stunts, hooks, gimmicks, abusive, heartless rhetoric, platitudes, false dichotomies, profanation, ecstatic retreats, etc. were used to perpetuate and mask all manner of abuse by a major protestant church. The defenses always ran along these lines: At least they're doing something. At least they're charismatic, getting people involved. At least they're standing up for X Y Z when everyone else is afraid to say it. And though I was not personally a part of this, I heard much from those who were, and took the lesson of that church's fall to heart.

And I know that many of you came from churches where you saw every manner of absurdity and endorsement of the societal status quo gradually given church backing (or, as in virtually every case, the church backing was typical of the church in question from the beginning). And you took the lesson of your former church's fall to heart.

We must take both lessons to heart. Neither method will "save" the Church by making her something she isn't, and taking refuge in the one from the other or the other from the one is folly.
 

orthoreader

High Elder
Joined
Sep 14, 2012
Messages
755
Reaction score
0
Points
16
Tikhon29605 said:
orthoreader said:
Tikhon29605 said:
Clemente said:
Tikhon29605 said:
Mor Ephrem said:
Tikhon29605 said:
The whole idea of "national" repentance seems quite strange to me since nations do not have souls. I firmly believe that individuals can repent.  I am not so sure about entire nations.
Book of Jonah
And, if one is given to believing that the USA is the New Israel, then perhaps you may have a point.
Malicious calumny based on a patent use of the genetic fallacy. Do you actually have any evidence that Father Trenham believes that the USA is the New Israel or that he is a "Christian Dominionist"? If so, produce it.

Otherwise, what you are propagating is shameful defamation.
Clemente: Please be rational.  I never said Father Josiah was a Christian Dominionist.  I said that he was a pastor in a denomination, namely the Presbyterian Church in America, in which that group is a faction.  It is not the only faction in the PCA, but it is there.  Obviously he is not a Christian Dominionist otherwise he would quote Rushdooney (one of their chief theologians). 

I don't know if Father Josiah now believes that the USA is the New Israel.  Most probably, he doesn't. But given his background, it is reasonable to think that he may have in the past.

He does use historic term "the City set on the Hill" in his sermon to describe the United States as it used to be.  This term was used by the Calvinistic Governor of Massachusetts Bay Colony, George Winthrop, to describe the Calvinist Theocracy of Massachusetts.  So it sounds at least like Father Josiah believes in America as the Chosen Nation.  Neither one of us can read his mind, so the question itself will have to remain a mystery at best.

Father Josiah also goes on saying,"We don't like God's law being attacked."  This, to me, betrays a very naive understanding of the separation of Church and State.  The United States of America is not a theocracy and never has been.  When our President takes the oath of office, he places his hand on the Bible and swears to uphold the Constitution.  He does not place his hand on the Constitution and swear to uphold the Bible. When the Supreme Court considered the gay marriage issue, they did not sit down and say, "Hmm. Let's see what the Bible says about this?  What does Leviticus say?  What does Romans 1 say? "  They didn't do that because we are not a theocracy. When they go about making a ruling on the constitutionality of gay marriage, they have to look at the Constitution itself, legal precedents, and the fact that gay marriage was already legalized in 37 states by the time the case arrived at the Supreme Court.  Its a complex matter.

It we are so upset about "God's law" being attacked, where is our outrage over divorce?  Or adultery? Or re-marriage after divorce? Jesus had some pretty strong language about those subjects.  What about charging interest on money?  That's condemned in the Bible too.  Its called usury.  All of us stay clear of mentioning that one.

I just think expecting a Secular Court in a Secular Nation to makes rulings in accordance with Christian ethics is hopeless and naive.

I think Father Josiah would have done far better to simply state that the Orthodox Church's teaching and practice on the Sacrament of Marriage will remain unchanged. Marriage is a sacrament, and our secular state does NOT tell the Orthodox Church what Sacraments it can perform or who may be joined in a sacramental marriage.  Caesar will continue to be Caesar.  And if Caesar now approves of gay marriage performed by a justice of the peace, well, we may not like it, but there is nothing we can do about that. The world will continue to be the world and it permits a whole lot of things the Church would never permit or bless.
You know everyone has a right to their opinion. But what are we insinuating here? Shall we go into every single convert's past and insinuate what they still hold onto while they preach or work out their salvation? Does this make them "less than" in your expectation? How about what cradle orthodox? Perhaps the myriads of nationalistic sermons that we don't think twice about by these astute theologians?

With all do respect. He has spoken to divorce and adultry, and actually mentioned this in reference to the falleness of our culture in the very sermon we're discussing. He equated them rather appropriately and even mentioned that gay marriage isn't something that happened yesterday and that adultry, porn, fornication, and divorce lead to this very ruling.

Did you listen to the sermon? Did anyone actually listen to the sermon, or where they too focused on his vestments?

The Supreme Court ruled on gay marriage, not on the other issues, which we're talking about this specific topic.
I not only listened to his sermon, I took notes on it.  I notice a couple things:

1.  It had NOTHING to do with the appointed liturgical readings for the day.
2.  It did not contain any real mention of Jesus Christ.
3.  It was political tirade masquerading as a sermon.
Great a cogent argument based upon pastoral need of the flock instead of backhanded ad hominem. This I can chew on.

Normally, if a priest does this sermon after sermon after semon, then I would be concerned. But from time to time, when the times call for it, a priest can speak to the culture that surrouds his parish. EVEN if it involves politics. But in this case,  these are spiritual issue(s) that have been taken over by politics. That ain't Fr. Josiah's fault, and it certainly doesn't provide excuse NOT to speak on these pressing issues. There is a time for everything ...

And I vehementy DISAGREE with you that Christ was not the central topic of the sermon. In fact, I have problem that you cannot see this.
 

Second Chance

Merarches
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 13, 2009
Messages
8,025
Reaction score
5
Points
36
Age
76
Location
South Carolina
Faith
Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction
Diocese of the South (OCA)
Minnesotan said:
"every country and every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty ... they have perverted the purest religion ever preached to man into mystery and jargon, unintelligible to all mankind, and therefore the safer for their purposes." - Thomas Jefferson

The American elites have pretty much always been hostile to every form of Christianity that isn't radically-individualistic Protestantism. Obergefell (which Thomas Jefferson would almost certainly have supported were he alive today) isn't so much the death of America as a sign that "American ideals" (which are not the same as Christian ones) are as alive and well as ever.

To quote Chicago, "you can't really say it's over, when it never had begun".
I think otherwise. I think it is the death of one nation in one country. We now have two nations, one respecting the law and the other lawless and increasingly anthropocentric. It is time to separate or at least to tame that unconstitutional beast called the SCOTUS.
 

orthoreader

High Elder
Joined
Sep 14, 2012
Messages
755
Reaction score
0
Points
16
NicholasMyra said:
I come from an area where coercion, intimidation, stunts, hooks, gimmicks, abusive, heartless rhetoric, platitudes, false dichotomies, profanation, ecstatic retreats, etc. were used to perpetuate and mask all manner of abuse by a major protestant church. The defenses always ran along these lines: At least they're doing something. At least they're charismatic, getting people involved. At least they're standing up for X Y Z when everyone else is afraid to say it. And though I was not personally a part of this, I heard much from those who were, and took the lesson of that church's fall to heart.

And I know that many of you came from churches where you saw every manner of absurdity and endorsement of the societal status quo gradually given church backing (or, as in virtually every case, the church backing was typical of the church in question from the beginning). And you took the lesson of your former church's fall to heart.

We must take both lessons to heart. Neither method will "save" the Church by making her something she isn't, and taking refuge in the one from the other or the other from the one is folly.
Woah Nicholas, I get it.

This isn't it.
 

Clemente

Elder
Joined
Mar 16, 2009
Messages
466
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Faith
Orthodox
Tikhon29605 said:
Clemente said:
Tikhon29605 said:
Mor Ephrem said:
Tikhon29605 said:
The whole idea of "national" repentance seems quite strange to me since nations do not have souls. I firmly believe that individuals can repent.  I am not so sure about entire nations.
Book of Jonah
And, if one is given to believing that the USA is the New Israel, then perhaps you may have a point.
Malicious calumny based on a patent use of the genetic fallacy. Do you actually have any evidence that Father Trenham believes that the USA is the New Israel or that he is a "Christian Dominionist"? If so, produce it.

Otherwise, what you are propagating is shameful defamation.
Clemente: Please be rational.  I never said Father Josiah was a Christian Dominionist.  I said that he was a pastor in a denomination, namely the Presbyterian Church in America, in which that group is a faction.  It is not the only faction in the PCA, but it is there.  Obviously he is not a Christian Dominionist otherwise he would quote Rushdooney (one of their chief theologians). 

I don't know if Father Josiah now believes that the USA is the New Israel.  Most probably, he doesn't. But given his background, it is reasonable to think that he may have in the past.

He does use historic term "the City set on the Hill" in his sermon to describe the United States as it used to be.  This term was used by the Calvinistic Governor of Massachusetts Bay Colony, George Winthrop, to describe the Calvinist Theocracy of Massachusetts.  So it sounds at least like Father Josiah believes in America as the Chosen Nation.  Neither one of us can read his mind, so the question itself will have to remain a mystery at best.

Father Josiah also goes on saying,"We don't like God's law being attacked."  This, to me, betrays a very naive understanding of the separation of Church and State.  The United States of America is not a theocracy and never has been.  When our President takes the oath of office, he places his hand on the Bible and swears to uphold the Constitution.  He does not place his hand on the Constitution and swear to uphold the Bible. When the Supreme Court considered the gay marriage issue, they did not sit down and say, "Hmm. Let's see what the Bible says about this?  What does Leviticus say?  What does Romans 1 say? "  They didn't do that because we are not a theocracy. When they go about making a ruling on the constitutionality of gay marriage, they have to look at the Constitution itself, legal precedents, and the fact that gay marriage was already legalized in 37 states by the time the case arrived at the Supreme Court.  Its a complex matter.

It we are so upset about "God's law" being attacked, where is our outrage over divorce?  Or adultery? Or re-marriage after divorce? Jesus had some pretty strong language about those subjects.  What about charging interest on money?  That's condemned in the Bible too.  Its called usury.  All of us stay clear of mentioning that one.

I just think expecting a Secular Court in a Secular Nation to makes rulings in accordance with Christian ethics is hopeless and naive.

I think Father Josiah would have done far better to simply state that the Orthodox Church's teaching and practice on the Sacrament of Marriage will remain unchanged. Marriage is a sacrament, and our secular state does NOT tell the Orthodox Church what Sacraments it can perform or who may be joined in a sacramental marriage.  Caesar will continue to be Caesar.  And if Caesar now approves of gay marriage performed by a justice of the peace, well, we may not like it, but there is nothing we can do about that. The world will continue to be the world and it permits a whole lot of things the Church would never permit or bless.
Nice of you to now backtrack. Your argument rests squarely on little more than the genetic fallacy, seeking to implicate him for the actions of some in a denomination that he left years ago.

Yes, let's be rational. Your argument is pure calumny: you defame him by showing a tenuous red line from a well-respected Orthodox priest to Dominionists.

Produce the evidence or cease your spurious attack on an Orthodox priest in good standing.
 

augustin717

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 15, 2006
Messages
7,083
Reaction score
165
Points
63
Faith
Higher Criticism
Jurisdiction
Dutch
Orthodoxy in America will be Calvinist or it won't be at all ;)
 
Joined
May 6, 2014
Messages
2,391
Reaction score
39
Points
48
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction
EOTC, but Coptic for now
orthoreader said:
augustin717 said:
Orthodoxy in America will be Calvinist or it won't be at all ;)
I always thought Calvinits were Orthodox  ;)
I know that was joke but is there a throw up emotion around this site.  there a st. john calvin? what have done lord :'(
 

Tikhon29605

High Elder
Joined
May 20, 2003
Messages
670
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Concerning Father Josiah's funeral for America, when the Liturgy was over where was America buried?
 

Mor Ephrem

Hypatos
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Oct 3, 2002
Messages
36,445
Reaction score
341
Points
83
Age
41
Location
New York!
Website
www.orthodoxchristianity.net
Faith
Mercenary Freudianism
Jurisdiction
Texas Feminist Coptic
orthoreader said:
So I say, Fr. Josiah's "tactic" was called for..
orthoreader said:
Did anyone actually listen to the sermon, or where they too focused on his vestments?
I didn't "listen" to the sermon, but I did read the transcript given at the link in the OP thrice, and I listened to the first minute or so in order to see if I could tell whether it was a podcast or a liturgical homily.  I take offence at the insinuation that my opposition to "Fr Josiah's 'tactic'" is a matter of narrowly focusing on vesture. 

As I stated above, I don't really disagree with Fr Josiah's teaching generally speaking.  But I do object to the use of the liturgical homily as a place to exegete Supreme Court Justices' opinions rather than explain how the gospel can be brought to bear on our lives, both individual and communal (in all its forms).  That, ultimately, is what he's railing against: the rejection of evangelical (gospel, not Protestant) principles in his country.  The solution is to teach and preach the gospel.  But he doesn't.  There are no references to the readings of the day or to other readings except for two or three allusions to the apocalyptic literature in Scripture or the example of the Maccabees which are told more as a heads-up on coming attractions and a call to action.  But no evangelical teaching. 

The name of Christ is not even mentioned once in his homily except in the form of a passing reference to "our Common Master".  In contrast,

Kennedy: mentioned six times
Roberts:  mentioned three times
Scalia:  mentioned three times
Thomas: mentioned two times 

Those are not the four evangelists people go to church to hear.  Yet, their names and words are allowed to drown out the name and word of God.  This is not really "a priest doing his job".  This is a priest doing something other than his job in order to do his job as he understands it.  If all he did was give a five minute homily on one line of either of the liturgical readings and then asked his parishioners not to leave at the end of the Liturgy because he would like to speak at length on an important matter, "Fr Josiah's 'tactic'" wouldn't have bothered me in this regard.  But thus far, no one has been able to demonstrate that anything like this happened.  So, on that particular Sunday, neither the Kingdom of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit nor the Kingdom of Caesar were blessed, and the gospel was silenced in favour of legal opinions.  This is not an "ends justify the means" situation.  This is wrong. 

Regarding being "too focused on his vestments", the very first person to be focused on Fr Josiah's vestments was Fr Josiah himself.  He is the one who decided to use black vestments instead of gold or white or whatever the seasonal colour might be.  He is the one that made the link between the situation in the country today and "funerals" and the Passion of Christ.  He is the one who opened his "homily" by talking about why he chose to wear them.  He chose to use the Liturgy of the catholic Church as an opportunity to dramatically stage his protest.  If he can do that, why not others?  Maybe some of the "respected, senior priests, deans of cathedrals, on the east coast, who have written in support of same-sex marriage" could stage a "pro-gay Liturgy" with rainbow-themed vestments, or maybe a "patriotic Liturgy" with flag-themed vestments to celebrate the SC verdict.  But they would all be wrong to use the mystery of the age to come as the occasion to celebrate or protest the spirit of the age which is already here.  There is a time and a place for that.  This was not that time or that place. 

I like and respect the man, and I don't disagree with his basic views, but this was and is an abomination.  And if you think these words are too dramatic and over the top, maybe you didn't listen to Fr Josiah's homily. 
 

Tikhon29605

High Elder
Joined
May 20, 2003
Messages
670
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Mor Ephrem said:
orthoreader said:
So I say, Fr. Josiah's "tactic" was called for..
orthoreader said:
Did anyone actually listen to the sermon, or where they too focused on his vestments?
I didn't "listen" to the sermon, but I did read the transcript given at the link in the OP thrice, and I listened to the first minute or so in order to see if I could tell whether it was a podcast or a liturgical homily.  I take offence at the insinuation that my opposition to "Fr Josiah's 'tactic'" is a matter of narrowly focusing on vesture. 

As I stated above, I don't really disagree with Fr Josiah's teaching generally speaking.  But I do object to the use of the liturgical homily as a place to exegete Supreme Court Justices' opinions rather than explain how the gospel can be brought to bear on our lives, both individual and communal (in all its forms).  That, ultimately, is what he's railing against: the rejection of evangelical (gospel, not Protestant) principles in his country.  The solution is to teach and preach the gospel.  But he doesn't.  There are no references to the readings of the day or to other readings except for two or three allusions to the apocalyptic literature in Scripture or the example of the Maccabees which are told more as a heads-up on coming attractions and a call to action.  But no evangelical teaching. 

The name of Christ is not even mentioned once in his homily except in the form of a passing reference to "our Common Master".  In contrast,

Kennedy: mentioned six times
Roberts:  mentioned three times
Scalia:  mentioned three times
Thomas: mentioned two times 

Those are not the four evangelists people go to church to hear.  Yet, their names and words are allowed to drown out the name and word of God.  This is not really "a priest doing his job".  This is a priest doing something other than his job in order to do his job as he understands it.  If all he did was give a five minute homily on one line of either of the liturgical readings and then asked his parishioners not to leave at the end of the Liturgy because he would like to speak at length on an important matter, "Fr Josiah's 'tactic'" wouldn't have bothered me in this regard.  But thus far, no one has been able to demonstrate that anything like this happened.  So, on that particular Sunday, neither the Kingdom of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit nor the Kingdom of Caesar were blessed, and the gospel was silenced in favour of legal opinions.  This is not an "ends justify the means" situation.  This is wrong. 

Regarding being "too focused on his vestments", the very first person to be focused on Fr Josiah's vestments was Fr Josiah himself.  He is the one who decided to use black vestments instead of gold or white or whatever the seasonal colour might be.  He is the one that made the link between the situation in the country today and "funerals" and the Passion of Christ.  He is the one who opened his "homily" by talking about why he chose to wear them.  He chose to use the Liturgy of the catholic Church as an opportunity to dramatically stage his protest.  If he can do that, why not others?  Maybe some of the "respected, senior priests, deans of cathedrals, on the east coast, who have written in support of same-sex marriage" could stage a "pro-gay Liturgy" with rainbow-themed vestments, or maybe a "patriotic Liturgy" with flag-themed vestments to celebrate the SC verdict.  But they would all be wrong to use the mystery of the age to come as the occasion to celebrate or protest the spirit of the age which is already here.  There is a time and a place for that.  This was not that time or that place. 

I like and respect the man, and I don't disagree with his basic views, but this was and is an abomination.  And if you think these words are too dramatic and over the top, maybe you didn't listen to Fr Josiah's homily.
+100 

Brilliant!  You said everything that needed to be said and you did it eloquently and with style. 
 

Iconodule

Hoplitarches
Joined
Jan 2, 2010
Messages
16,486
Reaction score
23
Points
38
Age
40
Location
PA, USA
Faith
Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction
Patriarchate of Johnstown
FatherGiryus said:
Mor Ephrem said:
Sam G said:
Justin Kissel said:
I like the theatricality of it. I can seriously imagine reading about this happening with some saint from centuries ago (though perhaps one that leans towards a 'fool for christ'). You can only have so many "strongly worded statements" and yada yada before it starts becoming all yada yada mush in your memory. This is like the anchovy in the mush. I will remember this anchovy.
Did St. Tikhon of Moscow have a funeral for Imperial Russia after the Tsar abdicated and was murdered?
Your question prompts me to ask if there are any photos or videos from Fr Josiah's homily and Requiem Liturgy.
Not that I know of.  However, this is this one, which I think speaks for itself:

http://www.pe.com/pictures/2013__01__FatherJosiah.jpg

This is from the 'Mount Rubidoux cross' controversy.  During it, he threatened to chain himself to the cross to prevent its removal.

"In the video, he doesn't mention his vow at a November City Council meeting - when he also brought a chain as a visual aid - to affix himself to the cross if necessary, but he said by phone Friday that he's still prepared to do it, and like-minded leaders from other area churches have pledged to join him.

"I actually went up and practiced chaining myself to the cross, how best to do it so that I don't get hurt," he said with a laugh."


IIRC, I offered at one point to buy the chain...  :p

By the way, he pales in comparison to his father, Noble Trenham, when it comes to a flare for publicity:

Noble Trenham is not amused. A tough-talking, 69-year-old former Navy jet pilot who claims he slipped into Moscow’s Red Square in 1960 to lecture the Communists about free enterprise, Trenham runs a small investment firm near Pasadena, Calif.

You can read the whole article, A Patent on Porn, here.

Anyway, he lacks any kind of self-doubt, that's for sure.  He is probably the most ambitious clergyman I have met in the Church, and has plenty of evidence to prove it.

Now, I just need to figure out what I'm going to do with 300' of 25,000lbs.-load-limit chain...  :-X

Thanks. This picture is fantastic.

 
Joined
May 6, 2014
Messages
2,391
Reaction score
39
Points
48
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction
EOTC, but Coptic for now
Iconodule said:
FatherGiryus said:
Mor Ephrem said:
Sam G said:
Justin Kissel said:
I like the theatricality of it. I can seriously imagine reading about this happening with some saint from centuries ago (though perhaps one that leans towards a 'fool for christ'). You can only have so many "strongly worded statements" and yada yada before it starts becoming all yada yada mush in your memory. This is like the anchovy in the mush. I will remember this anchovy.
Did St. Tikhon of Moscow have a funeral for Imperial Russia after the Tsar abdicated and was murdered?
Your question prompts me to ask if there are any photos or videos from Fr Josiah's homily and Requiem Liturgy.
Not that I know of.  However, this is this one, which I think speaks for itself:

http://www.pe.com/pictures/2013__01__FatherJosiah.jpg

This is from the 'Mount Rubidoux cross' controversy.  During it, he threatened to chain himself to the cross to prevent its removal.

"In the video, he doesn't mention his vow at a November City Council meeting - when he also brought a chain as a visual aid - to affix himself to the cross if necessary, but he said by phone Friday that he's still prepared to do it, and like-minded leaders from other area churches have pledged to join him.

"I actually went up and practiced chaining myself to the cross, how best to do it so that I don't get hurt," he said with a laugh."


IIRC, I offered at one point to buy the chain...  :p

By the way, he pales in comparison to his father, Noble Trenham, when it comes to a flare for publicity:

Noble Trenham is not amused. A tough-talking, 69-year-old former Navy jet pilot who claims he slipped into Moscow’s Red Square in 1960 to lecture the Communists about free enterprise, Trenham runs a small investment firm near Pasadena, Calif.

You can read the whole article, A Patent on Porn, here.

Anyway, he lacks any kind of self-doubt, that's for sure.  He is probably the most ambitious clergyman I have met in the Church, and has plenty of evidence to prove it.

Now, I just need to figure out what I'm going to do with 300' of 25,000lbs.-load-limit chain...  :-X

Thanks. This picture is fantastic.

Agreed it a beautiful picture.
 

podkarpatska

Merarches
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
9,732
Reaction score
3
Points
0
Location
Northeast United States
Website
www.acrod.org
Iconodule said:
NicholasMyra said:
orthoreader said:
NicholasMyra said:
orthoreader said:
NicholasMyra said:
orthoreader said:
However,  on behalf of my Archdiocese let me extend my sincerest of apologies for a priest doing his job in speaking to and undertaking the task of informing us of a sick society. Why would he care about his country, priests aren't allowed to. Espcially if it offends the parishoners of the secular church... 

So I understand how some of you would be offended.
Are you saying that your archdiocese is the "non-secular" faction?

You want to go down that road?
No. I'm saying my Church is.

But then again some of us have remained too silent for too long
The actions in the OP are more secular than anything else we've talked about here. Yes, some of us have remained silent for too long. And God will approve whom he will.
Hi Nicholas. Let' s keep on topic. Open up another thread if you want to spin this in that direction.
I think I'll keep going until I'm stopped.

This is not the bullet we have to bite to remain faithful to the Gospel, to the Church. We do not have to drag Christ's name through the mud by taking up the worst tactics of corporate marketing evangelicalism, of sacrilegious public appeals, platitudes, hooks. We don't need to make a deal with the devil to save the Church.

You talk about standing up for the truth. You talk about not being silent. Well, I think this way of attempting to witness and defend the Church is evil. And so I'm obligated to stand against that way.
+1
I agree.
 
Top