• For users new and old: the forum rules were streamlined when we transitioned to the new software. Please ensure that you are familiar with them. Continued use of the forum means that you (a) know the rules, and (b) pledge that you'll abide by them. For more information, check out the OrthodoxChristianity.Net Rules section. (There are only 2 threads there - Rules, and Administrative Structure.)

Orthodoxy's social niche in America...

Serge

Archon
Joined
Oct 3, 2002
Messages
3,308
Reaction score
35
Points
48
Age
54
Website
sergesblog.blogspot.com
Orthodoxy's social niche in America is as a nearly invisible ethnic old-fashioned but mainline denomination, I think partly because of its smallness in the US and partly because of longstanding policy to blend in as much as possible and not to make waves. (But liturgically that’s not so... an advantage of not being on the radar?) This has good and bad points; respectively, normal parish life not a cult and being weak on teaching moral theology. (Roman Catholic moral theology is my gold standard.)

If you're interested, read and discuss in the combox over there!
 

Punch

Taxiarches
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Messages
5,799
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
59
Location
Omaha, Nebraska
The young fogey said:
Orthodoxy's social niche in America is as a nearly invisible ethnic old-fashioned but mainline denomination, I think partly because of its smallness in the US and partly because of longstanding policy to blend in as much as possible and not to make waves. (But liturgically that’s not so... an advantage of not being on the radar?) This has good and bad points; respectively, normal parish life not a cult and being weak on teaching moral theology. (Roman Catholic moral theology is my gold standard.)

If you're interested, read and discuss in the combox over there!
Pedobear approves!
 

Serge

Archon
Joined
Oct 3, 2002
Messages
3,308
Reaction score
35
Points
48
Age
54
Website
sergesblog.blogspot.com
What?

If that's a crack about the molestation scandal, what those few priests did was a mortal sin and a sacrilege according to RC moral theology.
 

Iconodule

Hoplitarches
Joined
Jan 2, 2010
Messages
16,486
Reaction score
10
Points
38
Age
38
Location
PA, USA
I can't speak for Punch, but it seems to me that you're comparing Orthodox moral theology in practice with RC moral theology on paper.
 

ICXCNIKA

OC.Net Guru
Joined
May 28, 2010
Messages
1,537
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Lincoln, Nebraska
Thats an offensive comment. You must not have noticed but we have plenty of differences with Rome. I doubt you will win any support for Roman moral theology especially with all their problems.
 

augustin717

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 15, 2006
Messages
6,859
Reaction score
6
Points
38
Our moral theology sounds an awful lot like Rome's in the old manuals.
 

ICXCNIKA

OC.Net Guru
Joined
May 28, 2010
Messages
1,537
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Lincoln, Nebraska
augustin717 said:
Our moral theology sounds an awful lot like Rome's in the old manuals.
Oh look who it is! Augustin, I thought you disappeared. After your diatribes in the other posting you didn't seem to answer the numerous points put to you by either myself or others. We may have common ground with Romans and other Christians we also are not in union with them due to their heresies. If you want to accept the Papal dictates on contraception by all means feel free.
 

augustin717

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 15, 2006
Messages
6,859
Reaction score
6
Points
38
Fr. Cleopa and others like him had the same view on contraception as the popes.
And I would give him more credit than to the "neo" gang;)
 

ICXCNIKA

OC.Net Guru
Joined
May 28, 2010
Messages
1,537
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Lincoln, Nebraska
augustin717 said:
Fr. Cleopa and others like him had the same view on contraception as the popes.
And I would give him more credit than to the "neo" gang;)
Please let me know when Fr Cleopa's theological opinion becomes dogma. Perhaps your hierarch can bring it up in the Great and Holy Council. Until then I will submit to those that have spiritual authority over me. Seems strange that you are willing to accept an aberrant ecclesiology even if it violates Tradition, the Fathers, or the Canons but one Elder's belief is more than enough. And you qoute old (you probably meant inaccurate) manuals. Didn't these manuals cover ecclesiology?
 

ialmisry

Strategos
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
41,813
Reaction score
6
Points
38
Location
Chicago
augustin717 said:
Fr. Cleopa and others like him had the same view on contraception as the popes.
And I would give him more credit than to the "neo" gang;)
Did Fr. Cleopa cite the Fathers on that, as Humanae Vitae evidently wasn't able to.
 

Punch

Taxiarches
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Messages
5,799
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
59
Location
Omaha, Nebraska
The young fogey said:
What?

If that's a crack about the molestation scandal, what those few priests did was a mortal sin and a sacrilege according to RC moral theology.
Those "few" priests?  Yeh, sure!  That scandal goes all the way to the Pope, who is at a minimum guilty of trying to hide the mess.  I have no respect for Roman morals.  None.  The entire history of the Latin Church is nothing more than "do what I say and not what I do".  The Roman church has not been a "gold standard" but a black mark on Christendom since the Great Schism.  Even hearing the term "morals" in the same sentence as "Roman Catholic" makes me want to hurl.  When the "RC moral theology" is put into practice, let me know.  Because for something that is a "mortal sin", the RC church sure tolerated it, persecuted those that tried to bring it into light, and protected those who were guilty.  And it did this as an organization, not just in isolated incidents.  Your theory is worthless without practice.  And that is just on this topic.  We could go further with the Crusades, the Inquisition, the conversion by murder in South and Central America, the Ustasha, and many other abominations.  The "moral theology" of the Roman Catholic Church is known the world over in blood, molestation and destruction.  Virtually every atheist that I know who is not Jewish is a former Roman Catholic.  Their hatred for God was planted, nurtured and developed in the Roman Catholic Church.  The stories that they tell me almost make me ashamed to be called a Christian, until I remember that those of whom they speak were separated from Christianity for a good 1000 years.  I truly have sympathy for those within the RC church that are honestly trying to find their Salvation.  May God have mercy on them and protect them!  Those that find Salvation in spite of the RC church are truly Saints (to me, even if this not the teaching of my Church).

It should be obvious that I am neither a believer in the "Branch Theory" or the "Left and Right Lung Theory".  Perhaps it is my Lutheran background that causes me to hate the RC organization (not its people) with such a vengeance.  Or perhaps it is seeing with my own eyes how that organization has soiled the name "Christian" in the eyes of the people of other faiths.  If this causes me to be moderated, so be it.  As Luther once said when on trial by the Antichrist, "Here I stand, I can do none other.  God help me!".  It has always saddened me that Luther did not turn to the "Church of the East" that he wrote of so respectfully in his writings.  Thankfully the Church of the East was there for me, and it is that Church's "theology" that I confess.

 
 

IXOYE

Archon
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 21, 2006
Messages
2,984
Reaction score
22
Points
38
Very good post, Punch! (I'm a former Roman Catholic).
 

Serge

Archon
Joined
Oct 3, 2002
Messages
3,308
Reaction score
35
Points
48
Age
54
Website
sergesblog.blogspot.com
ICXCNIKA said:
augustin717 said:
Fr. Cleopa and others like him had the same view on contraception as the popes.
And I would give him more credit than to the "neo" gang;)
Please let me know when Fr Cleopa's theological opinion becomes dogma. Perhaps your hierarch can bring it up in the Great and Holy Council. Until then I will submit to those that have spiritual authority over me. Seems strange that you are willing to accept an aberrant ecclesiology even if it violates Tradition, the Fathers, or the Canons but one Elder's belief is more than enough. And you quote old (you probably meant inaccurate) manuals. Didn't these manuals cover ecclesiology?
Thanks, augustin717.

Old manuals are no good, ICXCNIKA? I thought Orthodoxy was the church that never changes/doesn't believe in development of doctrine. Not a bad position BTW; it's just that it proves the Pope and the old manuals right on this and many modern Orthodox wrong.

Who's willing to bet that those spouting defensive anti-Roman posts here are, like ICXCNIKA, converts?
 

Heorhij

Merarches
Joined
May 2, 2007
Messages
8,574
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
63
Location
Columbus, MS, USA (Originally from Ukraine)
Website
www.muw.edu
I, for one, am all for the Orthodox pastoral/non-dogmatic approach to contraception and I am all against the RC "dogmatization" of contraception.

Also, I do not understand the term "Orthodox social niche in America." I am Orthodox, and my brother Basil320 on this forum is Orthodox. I am liberal, he is conservative. What is "social niche" for him, is not a "social nuche" for me by any stretch. I love him nonetheless, and I believe he is Orthodox, and I believe I am Orthodox. Why making up all these "common" niches for people who might have absolutely polar views on politics and society and maybe even morals? I think what makes us all Orthodox is that we all confess our common faith before approaching the Chalice, and then approach it and take in One King of All. Not that we think this or this or that about contraception, gay rights, attitude to left-handed redhead Iranian-Americans, etc.
 

ICXCNIKA

OC.Net Guru
Joined
May 28, 2010
Messages
1,537
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Lincoln, Nebraska
As you well know Serge from your studies at ST Vlads ( the ones you just slandered as wrong modern Orthodox) there were many times when western concepts that have no basis in Orthodoxy crept in, these must be rejected and have been for the most part,  but I guess a return to Patristics is an unorthodox approach for those that love latinizations, calvinizations et al. As for whether i am a convert is immaterial as all Orthodox are converts unless they have started a new practise of baptizing, communing, and Chrismating at the moment before conception. Perhaps they were immaculately conceived! I guess I never understand why a Roman like your self is concerned with our Moral Theology as if you have some vested interest. Worry about the sad state of affairs in your organization, how many Romans use contraception? how many believe in the real presence? The UGCC and the Melkites  seem totally unaware that they are suppose to believe in all of the roman innovations. Patriarch Husar doesn't even ask Rome for permission anymore to ordain bishops. I will not even touch upon the sex scandal and other scandals such as the turning of a blind eye to the married roman priests throughout Africa while celibacy is strictly enforced in Western countries that don't want it. That all being said I apologize to Augustin for the tone of my comments though I still feel that my points were valid. And just for the sake of full disclosure I have no ill will towards Rome. I actually think they do alot of good in the world however I will not sit by and let people pretend that we are the same. We weren't the same a 1,000 years ago and we are even more estranged theologically now. Rome knows what is required of it to return to the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.  Peace to you.

The young fogey said:
ICXCNIKA said:
augustin717 said:
Fr. Cleopa and others like him had the same view on contraception as the popes.
And I would give him more credit than to the "neo" gang;)
Please let me know when Fr Cleopa's theological opinion becomes dogma. Perhaps your hierarch can bring it up in the Great and Holy Council. Until then I will submit to those that have spiritual authority over me. Seems strange that you are willing to accept an aberrant ecclesiology even if it violates Tradition, the Fathers, or the Canons but one Elder's belief is more than enough. And you quote old (you probably meant inaccurate) manuals. Didn't these manuals cover ecclesiology?
Thanks, augustin717.

Old manuals are no good, ICXCNIKA? I thought Orthodoxy was the church that never changes/doesn't believe in development of doctrine. Not a bad position BTW; it's just that it proves the Pope and the old manuals right on this and many modern Orthodox wrong.

Who's willing to bet that those spouting defensive anti-Roman posts here are, like ICXCNIKA, converts?
 

augustin717

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 15, 2006
Messages
6,859
Reaction score
6
Points
38
ialmisry said:
augustin717 said:
Fr. Cleopa and others like him had the same view on contraception as the popes.
And I would give him more credit than to the "neo" gang;)
Did Fr. Cleopa cite the Fathers on that, as Humanae Vitae evidently wasn't able to.
Besides quoting the Bible ( a mostly Protestant sport) and quoting the Fathers ( a mostly formerly Protestant sport) one should have a gut-sense of the faith and of the church-sensus ecclesiae/fidelium.
I bet Fr. Cleopa had it, so no need for quotes.
 

FatherHLL

Archon
Joined
Sep 18, 2008
Messages
2,680
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Iconodule said:
I can't speak for Punch, but it seems to me that you're comparing Orthodox moral theology in practice with RC moral theology on paper.
I see the same thing.  You can compare praxis to praxis, implimentation to implimentation, and constitution to constitution, but you cannot cross them about without confusion. 
 

FatherHLL

Archon
Joined
Sep 18, 2008
Messages
2,680
Reaction score
0
Points
0
To add to the discussion, the following was approved by the 2000 Sobor of the Russian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate):

XII. 3. Among the problems which need a religious and moral assessment is that of contraception. Some contraceptives have an abortive effect, interrupting artificially the life of the embryo on the very first stages of his life. Therefore, the same judgements are applicable to the use of them as to abortion. But other means, which do not involve interrupting an already conceived life, cannot be equated with abortion in the least. In defining their attitude to the non-abortive contraceptives, Christian spouses should remember that human reproduction is one of the principal purposes of the divinely established marital union (see, X. 4). The deliberate refusal of childbirth on egoistic grounds devalues marriage and is a definite sin.

At the same time, spouses are responsible before God for the comprehensive upbringing of their children. One of the ways to be responsible for their birth is to restrain themselves from sexual relations for a time. However, Christian spouses should remember the words of St. Paul addressed to them: «Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency» (1 Cor. 7:5). Clearly, spouses should make such decisions mutually on the counsel of their spiritual father. The latter should take into account, with pastoral prudence, the concrete living conditions of the couple, their age, health, degree of spiritual maturity and many other circumstances. In doing so, he should distinguish those who can hold the high demands of continence from those to whom it is not given (Mt. 19:11), taking care above all of the preservation and consolidation of the family.

The Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church in its Decision of December 28, 1998, instructed the clergy serving as spiritual guides that «it is inadmissible to coerce or induce the flock to… refuse conjugal relations in marriage». It also reminded the pastors of the need «to show special chastity and special pastoral prudence in discussing with the flock the questions involved in particular aspects of their family life».
http://orthodoxeurope.org/page/3/14.aspx
 

ialmisry

Strategos
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
41,813
Reaction score
6
Points
38
Location
Chicago
augustin717 said:
ialmisry said:
augustin717 said:
Fr. Cleopa and others like him had the same view on contraception as the popes.
And I would give him more credit than to the "neo" gang;)
Did Fr. Cleopa cite the Fathers on that, as Humanae Vitae evidently wasn't able to.
Besides quoting the Bible ( a mostly Protestant sport) and quoting the Fathers ( a mostly formerly Protestant sport) one should have a gut-sense of the faith and of the church-sensus ecclesiae/fidelium.
I bet Fr. Cleopa had it, so no need for quotes.
And yet he did. Are you better than Fr. Cleopa? (we'll return to him).

If you read the Fathers, you would see they constantly quote the Scriptures, and did so long before Protestantism was ever dreamt up. If you knew the Scriptures or the services, you would know that most of the latter is taken from the former.

That "gut-sense of the Faith and the Church-sensus ecclesiae/fidelium" doesn't come from the DNA of the Orthodox: the gut is not the lips, as St. Matthew ( 15:8 ) and St. Mark (7:6) quoting our Lord Jesus Christ quoting Isaiah (29:13) points out. You do know who Isaiah, Matthew, Mark and Our Lord Jesus Christ are, no? It comes from "those who hear God's word and obey it" who "let these words sink down into [their] ears" and "treasured all these things in [their] heart," from Fathers who beget "not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God, and "have begotten [them] through the gospel." I let you figure out who/Who said all that.

As for Fr. Cleopa, I did a google.ro (if I did it in English, that would be the first thing you would howl about) search for "Cleopa"  The first link that came up was this:
http://www.sfaturiortodoxe.ro/pcleopa/viata_p_cleopa.htm

I took the first one just on the basis that if I looked around, you'd be screaming that I was skewing the data.

I looked past the biography, since he didn't write it (although it repeatedly conects Fr.Cleopa to the Scriptures) and you'd be the first to point that out, and went to the list of quotations from him.  No. 2 says this:
2. Spunea Părintele Cleopa: ''Stiti voi cine-i Maica Domnului? Ea este Împărăteasa Heruvimilor, Împărăteasa a toată făptura, cămara întrupării lui Dumnezeu-Cuvântul, usa luminii, că lumina cea neapropiată gânditoare prin ea a venit în lume. Ea este usa vietii, că Viata Hristos prin ea a intrat în lume. Ea este poarta cea încuiată prin care n-a trecut nimeni decât Domnul, cum spune Proorocul Iezechiel''
2 . Father Cleopas used to say: ''Do you know who the Mother of God is? She is the Queen of the Cherubim, Queen of all creation, the chamber of the incarnation of God the Word, the door of the light, that the light beyond comprehension through her came into the world. She is the door of life, that the Life Christ through her entered the world. She is the gate locked through which none but the Lord did pass, as says the Prophet Ezekiel" [43:27-44:4
Fr. Cleopa's full sermon is here:
http://sfinx777.wordpress.com/2010/08/15/de-la-marginile-lumii-din-prohodul-adormirii-maicii-domnului/
Care to count how many direct quotes from Scripture, let alone allusions?

Anyways, all one has to do is attend the services: the Church reads the Prophecy of Ezekiel for the Vigil of the Dormition.  This year the Dormitiion was on a Sunday, so even the nominal Orthodox would be there, that is, if they go to Church on Sundays. Then again, do the nominal Orthodox go to Vigil? Perhaps not: their ancestors did, so why should they?  Then again the phyletist probably would be doing the reading in a language they don't understand anyways.

There is about a dozen direct quotations from the Scriptures, not counting allusions etc., in the hundred and a half sayings collected there from Fr. Cleopa, along with quotations from the Fathers (Fr. Cleopa seems to favor St. Basil).

It takes a certain sickness of the soul to hate Protestants so much as to hold the Scriptures and the writings of the Fathers in utter disdain.  Such thought is beyond the thinking of the Fathers and Elders.



Post edited to override the smiley bug that turns "8 )" into "8)"  -PtA
 

Gorazd

Archon
Joined
Jul 14, 2009
Messages
2,571
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Ok, so we have one theolgian's opinion against contraception, and the whole MP sobor's differenciated opinion.

Well, there is no dogma on the issue, so it seems to be like theolgical points for both opinions can be made. Anyway, we should all agree on the importance of having children.
 

ialmisry

Strategos
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
41,813
Reaction score
6
Points
38
Location
Chicago
Gorazd said:
Ok, so we have one theolgian's opinion against contraception, and the whole MP sobor's differenciated opinion.

Well, there is no dogma on the issue, so it seems to be like theolgical points for both opinions can be made. Anyway, we should all agree on the importance of having children.
Who was the theologian?

augustin717 said:
Our moral theology sounds an awful lot like Rome's in the old manuals.
Can we cough up some quotes from the "old manuals," or is it too Protestant to ask for documentation?
 

FatherHLL

Archon
Joined
Sep 18, 2008
Messages
2,680
Reaction score
0
Points
0
augustin717 said:
Besides quoting the Bible ( a mostly Protestant sport) and quoting the Fathers ( a mostly formerly Protestant sport) one should have a gut-sense of the faith and of the church-sensus ecclesiae/fidelium.    I bet Fr. Cleopa had it, so no need for quotes. 
So let me get this straight:  the Holy Fathers were playing protestant sports most of their lives because they were constantly quoting the Bible.  Fr. Cleopa had a gut sense of the faith but still decided to play protestant and formerly Protestant sports by quoting not only Scripture, but also the Fathers frequently.  Given this post and other information from you, we should therefore stay away from Scripture and the Holy Fathers and instead rely on a phyletistic gut-sense of the faith (in a pub?) until we die?  Also, Fr. Cleopa is "safe" so long as we don't actually quote him and ignore his constant quotations from Scripture and the Fathers, because it is too protestant?     
 
 

FormerReformer

Archon
Site Supporter
Joined
Nov 24, 2009
Messages
2,761
Reaction score
1
Points
38
Age
40
Location
Santa Fe, NM
Website
mcommini2.blogspot.com
FatherHLL said:
augustin717 said:
Besides quoting the Bible ( a mostly Protestant sport) and quoting the Fathers ( a mostly formerly Protestant sport) one should have a gut-sense of the faith and of the church-sensus ecclesiae/fidelium.    I bet Fr. Cleopa had it, so no need for quotes. 
So let me get this straight:  the Holy Fathers were playing protestant sports most of their lives because they were constantly quoting the Bible.  Fr. Cleopa had a gut sense of the faith but still decided to play protestant and formerly Protestant sports by quoting not only Scripture, but also the Fathers frequently.  Given this post and other information from you, we should therefore stay away from Scripture and the Holy Fathers and instead rely on a phyletistic gut-sense of the faith (in a pub?) until we die?  Also, Fr. Cleopa is "safe" so long as we don't actually quote him and ignore his constant quotations from Scripture and the Fathers, because it is too protestant?     
 
How about we quote the Scriptures and the Holy Fathers... in a pub?  There's nothing Protestant 'bout pubs, at least not here in America (shoot, there's nothing American 'bout pubs, either.  American bars are downright depressing).  I'm really liking this pub idea.
 

FatherHLL

Archon
Joined
Sep 18, 2008
Messages
2,680
Reaction score
0
Points
0
ialmisry said:
Gorazd said:
Ok, so we have one theolgian's opinion against contraception, and the whole MP sobor's differenciated opinion.
Well, there is no dogma on the issue, so it seems to be like theolgical points for both opinions can be made. Anyway, we should all agree on the importance of having children.
  Who was the theologian?
augustin717 said:
Our moral theology sounds an awful lot like Rome's in the old manuals.
Can we cough up some quotes from the "old manuals," or is it too Protestant to ask for documentation?
Why get weighed down with pesky things like facts when you have the concrete treasury of his gut-sense of the faith? 
 

PeterTheAleut

Hypatos
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 8, 2006
Messages
37,280
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
49
Location
Portland, Oregon
augustin717 said:
ialmisry said:
augustin717 said:
Fr. Cleopa and others like him had the same view on contraception as the popes.
And I would give him more credit than to the "neo" gang;)
Did Fr. Cleopa cite the Fathers on that, as Humanae Vitae evidently wasn't able to.
Besides quoting the Bible ( a mostly Protestant sport) and quoting the Fathers ( a mostly formerly Protestant sport) one should have a gut-sense of the faith and of the church-sensus ecclesiae/fidelium.
I bet Fr. Cleopa had it, so no need for quotes.
I have to think, though, that the only way to develop what you call a "gut-sense of the faith" is precisely by reading the Scriptures and the Fathers and by attending services regularly and frequently.  I can't imagine it possible to acquire this "gut-sense" purely by osmosis from the surrounding culture, no matter how Orthodox it may be.
 

augustin717

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 15, 2006
Messages
6,859
Reaction score
6
Points
38
The so-called "Indreptar pentru spovedanie" (Manual/Guide for Confession) of the Romanian Church, printed with the blessing of the Holy Synod, at the printing house of the Patriarchate (many times in the Euchologion or Aghiasmatarion itself) lists the use of condoms and diaphragm as sins, under the general category of "onanism".
So, when we sleep with our wives using these barriers we actually, according to the manual, what we do only amounts to mutual masturbation, not the gravest of sins, but a sin nonetheless, for which the canons prescribe a punishment/censure/penance.
 

ialmisry

Strategos
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
41,813
Reaction score
6
Points
38
Location
Chicago
augustin717 said:
The so-called "Indreptar pentru spovedanie" (Manual/Guide for Confession) of the Romanian Church, printed with the blessing of the Holy Synod, at the printing house of the Patriarchate (many times in the Euchologion or Aghiasmatarion itself) lists the use of condoms and diaphragm as sins, under the general category of "onanism".
So, when we sleep with our wives using these barriers we actually, according to the manual, what we do only amounts to mutual masturbation, not the gravest of sins, but a sin nonetheless, for which the canons prescribe a punishment/censure/penance.
Printed when?

Btw, there is the question that the diaphragm may work as an abortifacient, and hence a grave sin.

I am interested in the argument against "onanism." What are the specifics?
 

augustin717

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 15, 2006
Messages
6,859
Reaction score
6
Points
38
91. Am facut pacatul onaniei ca sa nu fac copii, adica: am folosit prezervativ sau am varsat samanta afara ca barbat, iar ca femeie am folosit diafragma.
"I have committed the sin of onanism in order to avoid having children, that is: i used a condom or I spilled my semen outside as a man, or, as a woman, I used the diaphragm."
Well, of course, it's more comfortable to harshly condemn the sins of a few tiny minorities, and update outdated stuff that happens to be quite convenient  to the majority.
I myself am far from fulfilling the commandments of the Church in my life, yet I never dream of changing the standard just because it causes me some uncomfortable feelings and thoughts.
But that is what many here are trying to do. Go ahead; even if the whole world would say otherwise, I won't believe it. And one can be quite a sinner, at the same time.
 

augustin717

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 15, 2006
Messages
6,859
Reaction score
6
Points
38
FatherHLL said:
ialmisry said:
Gorazd said:
Ok, so we have one theolgian's opinion against contraception, and the whole MP sobor's differenciated opinion.
Well, there is no dogma on the issue, so it seems to be like theolgical points for both opinions can be made. Anyway, we should all agree on the importance of having children.
  Who was the theologian?
augustin717 said:
Our moral theology sounds an awful lot like Rome's in the old manuals.
Can we cough up some quotes from the "old manuals," or is it too Protestant to ask for documentation?
Why get weighed down with pesky things like facts when you have the concrete treasury of his gut-sense of the faith?   
Both you father, and ialmisry distort my words so much that it is not even worth trying to add anything new.
 

ialmisry

Strategos
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
41,813
Reaction score
6
Points
38
Location
Chicago
augustin717 said:
91. Am facut pacatul onaniei ca sa nu fac copii, adica: am folosit prezervativ sau am varsat samanta afara ca barbat, iar ca femeie am folosit diafragma.
"I have committed the sin of onanism in order to avoid having children, that is: i used a condom or I spilled my semen outside as a man, or, as a woman, I used the diaphragm."
Well, of course, it's more comfortable to harshly condemn the sins of a few tiny minorities, and update outdated stuff that happens to be quite convenient  to the majority.
I myself am far from fulfilling the commandments of the Church in my life, yet I never dream of changing the standard just because it causes me some uncomfortable feelings and thoughts.
But that is what many here are trying to do. Go ahead; even if the whole world would say otherwise, I won't believe it. And one can be quite a sinner, at the same time.
When was it printed?

As for "varsat samanta...pacatul onaniei" any reason given why that is a bad thing. You mentioned "mutual masturbation," is that also condemned, and why is that?
 

augustin717

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 15, 2006
Messages
6,859
Reaction score
6
Points
38
It takes a certain sickness of the soul to hate Protestants so much as to hold the Scriptures and the writings of the Fathers in utter disdain.  Such thought is beyond the thinking of the Fathers and Elders.
"Cand auzi un blestemat de sectar ca nu crede in Maica Domnului, fugi, ca acesta este fiu al iadului. Vor vedea in ziua judecatii ceea ce spune la Psalmul 44 : De fata a statut imparateasa de-a dreapta Ta, imbracata in haina aurita si prea infrumusetata ( vers. 11 )."
"When you hear an accursed sectarian that he doesn't believe in the Lord's Mother , flee, for he is a son of hell..." (Fr. Cleopa)
When they translated Fr. Cleopa into English I suppose they did a lot of editing so as to not hurt the Evangelical inquirers' sensibilities.


 

augustin717

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 15, 2006
Messages
6,859
Reaction score
6
Points
38
ialmisry said:
augustin717 said:
91. Am facut pacatul onaniei ca sa nu fac copii, adica: am folosit prezervativ sau am varsat samanta afara ca barbat, iar ca femeie am folosit diafragma.
"I have committed the sin of onanism in order to avoid having children, that is: i used a condom or I spilled my semen outside as a man, or, as a woman, I used the diaphragm."
Well, of course, it's more comfortable to harshly condemn the sins of a few tiny minorities, and update outdated stuff that happens to be quite convenient  to the majority.
I myself am far from fulfilling the commandments of the Church in my life, yet I never dream of changing the standard just because it causes me some uncomfortable feelings and thoughts.
But that is what many here are trying to do. Go ahead; even if the whole world would say otherwise, I won't believe it. And one can be quite a sinner, at the same time.
When was it printed?
Nineties.
 

ialmisry

Strategos
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
41,813
Reaction score
6
Points
38
Location
Chicago
augustin717 said:
It takes a certain sickness of the soul to hate Protestants so much as to hold the Scriptures and the writings of the Fathers in utter disdain.  Such thought is beyond the thinking of the Fathers and Elders.
"Cand auzi un blestemat de sectar ca nu crede in Maica Domnului, fugi, ca acesta este fiu al iadului. Vor vedea in ziua judecatii ceea ce spune la Psalmul 44 : De fata a statut imparateasa de-a dreapta Ta, imbracata in haina aurita si prea infrumusetata ( vers. 11 )."
"When you hear an accursed sectarian that he doesn't believe in the Lord's Mother , flee, for he is a son of hell..." (Fr. Cleopa)
When they translated Fr. Cleopa into English I suppose they did a lot of editing so as to not hurt the Evangelical inquirers' sensibilities.
Unde-i dovada ta?

Where's your proof?
 

augustin717

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 15, 2006
Messages
6,859
Reaction score
6
Points
38
I only suppose, and my gut feeling tells me it is more likely my supposition is right.
I can produce quotes from Fr. Cleopa where he calls the Baptists "hornless devils".
Fun, no?
 

ialmisry

Strategos
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
41,813
Reaction score
6
Points
38
Location
Chicago
augustin717 said:
ialmisry said:
augustin717 said:
91. Am facut pacatul onaniei ca sa nu fac copii, adica: am folosit prezervativ sau am varsat samanta afara ca barbat, iar ca femeie am folosit diafragma.
"I have committed the sin of onanism in order to avoid having children, that is: i used a condom or I spilled my semen outside as a man, or, as a woman, I used the diaphragm."
Well, of course, it's more comfortable to harshly condemn the sins of a few tiny minorities, and update outdated stuff that happens to be quite convenient  to the majority.
I myself am far from fulfilling the commandments of the Church in my life, yet I never dream of changing the standard just because it causes me some uncomfortable feelings and thoughts.
But that is what many here are trying to do. Go ahead; even if the whole world would say otherwise, I won't believe it. And one can be quite a sinner, at the same time.
When was it printed?
Nineties.
Any evidence/reference to being based on earlier material?  The nineties isn't old.
 

augustin717

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 15, 2006
Messages
6,859
Reaction score
6
Points
38
Peasants didn't quite know about condoms either, before the nineties.
 
Top