Orthodox Christianity books and literature

[Anonymous No.19545189]

Books discussing the path for the modern Orthodox man? Is going full St. Augustine the best path? I can't see how comforts of a normal family life would be helpful in such times, if even possible.

[Anonymous No.19545252]

>>19545189
>With those children, he thought, that wretched woman must lead a life of terror. Another year, two years, and they would be watching her night and day for symptoms of unorthodoxy. Nearly all children nowadays were horrible. What was worst of all was that by means of such organizations as the Spies they were systematically turned into ungovernable little savages, and yet this produced in them no tendency whatever to rebel against the discipline of the Party. On the contrary, they adored the Party and everything connected with it. The songs, the processions, the banners, the hiking, the drilling with dummy rifles, the yelling of slogans, the worship of Big Brother — it was all a sort of glorious game to them. All their ferocity was turned outwards, against the enemies of the State, against foreigners, traitors, saboteurs, thought-criminals. It was almost normal for people over thirty to be frightened of their own children. And with good reason, for hardly a week passed in which The Times did not carry a paragraph describing how some eavesdropping little sneak — ’child hero’ was the phrase generally used — had overheard some compromising remark and denounced its parents to the Thought Police.

[Anonymous No.19545288]

>>19545189
The Orthodox hate St Augustine and name him as the root of western error

[Anonymous No.19545296]

>>19545189
I've been reading the brothers karamazov lately and I'm interested in some non-fiction on the orthodox religion

[Anonymous No.19545310]

>>19545296
Segius Bulgakov is the best Orthodox theologian of the modern era. I recommend his writings in this order:

>Unfading Light
>Sophia: The Wisdom of God
>The Lamb of God
>The Comforter

Also look into Vladimir Solvyov and Nikolai Berdyaev.

[Anonymous No.19545317]

>>19545310
thank you!

[Anonymous No.19545323]

>>19545189
"0rthodox™"

[Anonymous No.19545375]

>>19545310
>Bulgakov
Didn't he literally preach a fourth hypostasis in God? And Origenistic apocatastasis? Serious question. All information around him seems to be clouded in a weird way.

>>19545288
The ecumenical councils name him as a teacher of the church and many saints speak positively of him. Also St. Gregory Palamas used his wording in describing the Holy Trinity.

[Anonymous No.19545390]

>>19545375
>Didn't he literally preach a fourth hypostasis in God?
No, that's a severe misrepresentation of his theology.

>The ecumenical councils name him as a teacher of the church and many saints speak positively of him.
Yes but many Orthodox use Augustine as a wedge against the west. Seraphim Rose had to write a book defending Augustine such was the polemic against him within the traditionalist Orthodox sphere.

>When Fr. Seraphim found out that the early Western Father, Blessed Augustine of Hippo, was being attacked in contemporary Eastern Orthodox circles, then he--himself a Western convert to Orthodoxy--rose in his defense. This book is the outcome. Fr. Seraphim said he wrote it in the hope that it would help remove Augustine as a scapegoat for today's academic theologians, and thus "help free us all to see his and our own weaknesses in a little closer light--for his weaknesses, to a surprising degree, are indeed close to our own."

The attacks on Augustine are ongoing among the online Orthodox who use the same polemic against him.

[Anonymous No.19545400]

>>19545390
>No, that's a severe misrepresentation of his theology.
Can you explain shortly what his theology is? Is it something distinct from Orthodoxy? It's not a good sign to me that it's hard to find out what he genuinely believed without fully reading his works.

That post said "the Orthodox". I would say some people in modernity with decisively modern views contradicting tradition do not constitute "the Orthodox".

[Anonymous No.19545779]

>>19545390
>academic theologians,
> traditionalist Orthodox sphere
pick one.

[Anonymous No.19545815]

>>19545189
>I can't see how comforts of a normal family life would be helpful in such times, if even possible.
I feel this tension as well. I have always wanted to settle down and have children with a nice woman, and to raise them together, but the world is increasingly evil–I don’t know what the children would suffer

[Anonymous No.19545851]

>>19545815
Read some church fathers anon, they were bemoaning the great evil of the world in the 4th and 5th century (and predicting an impending end to it in some cases). Don’t think the times we’re living in are somehow special, and don’t let that thought prevent you from living your life

[Anonymous No.19545977]

>>19545189
WOAH! Orthodoxy?! So foreign and adventurous! What are your favorite collectible icons??? Wanna share some with me!?
Level up!

[Anonymous No.19546008]

>>19545977
Checked thisness
Jay Dyer destroys everyone no one can stop Him
join His discord

[Neither Catholic nor Orthodox.(...) No.19546873]

What is the justification the Orthodox church has to the claim of the True Church?

What did Rome do to void theirs? Also if the Orthodox claim that Rome is first among equals and has no authority to excommunicate other bishops, why was it ok for Constantinople to excommunicate Rome?

[Anonymous No.19546927]

How does ortho get around Exodus 20:4

[Anonymous No.19547210]

>>19546927
Read 1 Kings 6:29. Solomon’s Temple is filled with beautiful artwork of palm trees, flowers, cherubim and similar things. This was in the very center of God’s own Temple. The ark too had cherubim ontop of it as well. If one looks into the Huqoq and Dura-Europos synagogues one will see that they were filled with brightly colored works of art. No one ‘worships’ icons as deities. Only God alone is worthy of worship. Iconography was also vital in a time when not everyone could read.

[Anonymous No.19547234]

I am so, so tired of being a coomer.
How do I escape the temptation, bros?

[Anonymous No.19547272]

>>19547234
Personally I started to get a lot better after I started to regularly attend Church and to interact with people more. I still stumbled occasionally though but I didn’t let it get me down, I just redoubled my efforts. I also frequently prayed to God that He keep me from sinning against Him. Doing things such as this, and keeping my self out of situations where I am prone to slip up are all very important. It’s a struggle

[Anonymous No.19547501]

>>19547234
You need to start truly hating the sin and pray to Christ so he grants the power to overcome the temptation anytime you feel it.
And you need to get baptizd and participate in the sacraments in the Orthodox Church. This is the only real way to fight it. Other secular ways just sidestep the problem.

[Anonymous No.19547517]

>>19547234
Stop browsing 4chan

[Anonymous No.19548645]

Bump

[Anonymous No.19549407]

>>19547517
Always good advice

[Anonymous No.19549450]

>>19547234
>How do I escape the temptation, bros?
Say:
>Lord Jesus Christ son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner.
Until it goes away.

[Anonymous No.19549503]

Any real Russian Orthobros redpill me on the Lestovka.

[Anonymous No.19549737]

>>19545189
For my brothers: http://www.traditionalcatholic.co/free-catholicbooks/

May we again be one as our Lord is.

[Anonymous No.19549845]

>>19549503
It's just a type of prayer rope. It's more used in the Russian tradition, there is also the Byzantine-style usual prayer rope with beads. You can use whichever one you like.

>>19549737
If 'heretics' like St. Palamas could be saved while being in 'schism' with the 'one Church' and knowingly calling your heresies demonic, then I am in good company and you undermine your own position. There is zero logical reason for you to proselytize your schism if you believe people outside of it and opposed to it can be saved.

[Anonymous No.19550022]

>"Theology without practice is the theology of demons."
- St. Maximus the Confessor

>He who dabbles in theology while still in the passions is like one who tries to swim with his clothes on.”
- St. John Climacus

A very important article:
https://www.pravmir.com/academic-theology-swimming-with-your-clothes-on/

[Anonymous No.19550557]

>>19549845
Love, which is the ultimate truth, can save us all. To you your way and me mine but let us be of accord in our hope in Christ's promises. As long as we can share at least the Apostle's Creed we can surely find concord.

[Anonymous No.19550674]

>>19550557
>To you your way and me mine
>ultimate truth
There is one truth, one way and one life. Not multiple contradicting truths which are invisibly somehow reconciled. That's basically the perennialism of Guenon, which is a false demonic teaching, so is Nestorianism, so is Arianism, so is Filioquism. Anyone abiding in falsehoods about God does not abide in Love, because he prefers constructs of his fallen mind to God's revealed truth due to pride. You can't obstinately choose falsehoods and still pretend to truly love God who is Truth.
>can save us all
Yes, under the condition of our repentance in this life. Our hope and love is realized in doing His commandments. Teaching falsehoods about Christ and His Body as being broken up or essentially invisible isn't part of that. Also affirming words does nothing without also affirming the real objective meanings behind the words. Even a Muslim can affirm "Christ is a word from God and the Messiah". A Hinduist can also pretend to affirm that Christ is the incarnate Logos, but we know him to be dishonest in his interpretation.

[Anonymous No.19550693]

>>19550022

[Anonymous No.19551447]

Reminder that when encountering gatekeepers in Orthodox threads, just ask them who their bishop is.

[Anonymous No.19551486]

>>19551447
how do you mean?
His name is George but I'm more familiar with our Despot

[Anonymous No.19551632]

>>19545288
Those are only some modern orthodox who base their whole identity off of a rebellion against everything Latin, stemming from their fratricidal hatred of the pope.

That said, OP should just become orthodox. And one should become a priest or monk because he discerns a vocation, not because he simply hates his life or even (dare I say), because he sees the dangers to salvation in it. Though I may be wrong…

[Anonymous No.19551645]

>>19545375
Bulgakov, Florovsky, Solovyov… all these guys off the top of my head are guilty of the Sophianic error. They speak of her as if she was a real being above creatures but not the same as the creator. If this is just poetic language, fine (I guess). Otherwise it’s novelty and clear heresy. And it seems to be the latter

[Anonymous No.19551653]

>>19545851
Their times were, in fact, objectively evil, although not as evil as our own. Consider the parable of the seven demons. While it’s true that the world will always be in enmity with Christ, it’s untrue to say that mankind as a whole has not been collectively more or less faithful to God in certain countries in certain parts of history. Just as it was among the ancient Israelites.

[Anonymous No.19551670]

>>19549845
The promises and power Christ gave to St. Peter are very clear

[Anonymous No.19551684]

>>19551632
*become Catholic

Which I suppose is what it means to “become orthodox,” in the fullest sense.

Reminder that the Catholic Church includes eastern churches and has a plan to reconcile all of them into a single body.

The orthodox have no such plan.

If two brothers are fighting, and one provides a plan for the two to come to unity, however misguided the other brother thinks it might be, yet if the other brother in fact, has no plan for unity whatsoever—which of the two brothers shows more love?

The one who has a plan for togetherness, or the one who has no plan?

[Anonymous No.19551698]

>>19551670
Yes, and if you don't follow a protestant mindset of interpreting Holy Scripture subjectively, the holy fathers both East and West teach that these powers were given to all bishops.

[Anonymous No.19551710]

>>19551684
>reconcile all of them into a single body
A purely political union with differing theology and faiths, not one faith which St. Paul speaks about and which was given once to the saints. It's a union based on wordly power, not on truth and single-mindedness. This union will in 20-30 years include Muslims and other pagan groups as per teachings in papal encyclicals that other "Abrahamic religions" share the same God as them.

[Anonymous No.19551717]

>>19551645
Shouldn't Sophia just mean pre-incarnate Christ? And so is Creator, Wisdom of Solomon speaks about this.

[Anonymous No.19551745]

>>19551645
Florovsky is not Florensky

[Anonymous No.19551764]

>>19551698
Powers to bind and loose, but not the keys to the Church itself. Christ also asks Peter to feed His sheep. It is not Protestantism to cite scripture… see the fathers themselves.

>>19551710
Purely political? Talk about the pot calling the kettle black!

When properly understood, the teaching about Muslims and Jews is not heresy. They don’t have the fullness of God, but God hears their prayers, and their prayers are addressed to God. They are in error about Him. Yet Holy Scripture itself says that God is One. Is He not one? He is both one and three.

It’s absurd to think that the Church is somehow by this ecumenical gesture (however imprudent you may think that it is) affirming some kind of relativism, particularly when the Catholic Church has been in the forefront fighting against it since it began to plague our world.

[Anonymous No.19551771]

>>19546008
Where there are 20 silent retards, listing to their cult leader?

[Anonymous No.19551772]

>>19551764
To be clear. What the Church teaches, and what I believe, is that Muslims and Jews should give up their falsehoods in exchange for the fullness of Christ. But it’s not true that they don’t worship God. They just don’t have the fulness of His revelation and thus are deprived of many spiritual gifts and ultimately of Truth itself.

[Anonymous No.19551776]

>>19551717
I believe that that is the traditional interpretation. But IIRC in some of the authors’ works they seem to assert some feminine presence in God, an actual fourth person.

>>19551745
Glad I qualified… darn Russians

[Anonymous No.19551850]

>>19551670
And yet noone seemed to take them very seriously
Including the Roman church until 1k years after the very clear promises were made
Even the Roman church has admitted that this argument is horseshit and instead relies on muh tradition (political anachronism)
>>19551684
>The Roman church wants to dominate all other churches and enforce its vile doctrine of God as loanshark on all
>The Roman church shows more love
Go fuck yourself

[Anonymous No.19551955]

>>19550693
Everything I’ve read from this man is on-point.

[Anonymous No.19551971]

>>19551764
>When properly understood, the teaching about Muslims and Jews is not heresy. They don’t have the fullness of God, but God hears their prayers, and their prayers are addressed to God. They are in error about Him. Yet Holy Scripture itself says that God is One. Is He not one?
Go away, heretic. Muslims and Jews reject the Son, therefore they reject the Father. They do not know the Son, therefore they do not know the Father. Know one comes to the Father except through the Son.

[Anonymous No.19551981]

>When properly understood, the teaching about Muslims and Jews is not heresy. They don’t have the fullness of God, but God hears their prayers, and their prayers are addressed to God. They are in error about Him. Yet Holy Scripture itself says that God is One. Is He not one?
Muslims and Jews reject the Son, therefore they reject the Father. They do not know the Son, therefore they do not know the Father. No one comes to the Father except through the Son. Whatever Muslims and Jews pray to is not God. This is why we do not pray with these people. My priest sits on an interfaith council, but he doesn’t pray with Muslims, Jews and Hindus, because he knows Christ is the only Way. I’m sure this is not unusual.

[Anonymous No.19551984]

>>19551981
meant for >>19551764

[Anonymous No.19551993]

>almost 2022 still believe in magic sky daddy
lmao kys retard

[Anonymous No.19551999]

>>19551684
>and has a plan to reconcile all of them into a single body.

Where is this plan? Point me to it.

[Anonymous No.19552023]

>>19549737
Indeed brother.

[Anonymous No.19552050]

>>19551955
Yeah he's a very interesting example of a marty converting Muslims in the modern world. I'm thankful to have found him when I just came to the church.

[Anonymous No.19552067]

>>19551993
We know better. Go study.
Or stay in the dark, your choice.

[Anonymous No.19552078]

>>19551981
This. You can find easily find saints who directly say that they pray to Satan instead of God and patiently await their king's, the antichrist's coming. It doesn't matter what you call your god when it is in reality an evil spirit. If that's a description of someone who is merely misguided then I guess Baal cultists had their own way of worshipping God too and should not be excluded from potential salvation through invincible ignorance.

If they were truly praying to God, He would bring them to the Church and not let them persist in their confusion. It's only because of an ill disposition of their will and a distaste for truth that they persist in error, there are cases of Muslims in Russia converting to Christ from Him directly appearing to them and telling them to get baptized, same for Christian heretical groups in Africa. God is all-powerful and will lead people to truth if they desire it.

[Anonymous No.19552092]

>>19549845
>Palamas
How? He didn't know how to read Latin? Did he read a translation by another scholar? I know Planoudes translated some Latin works in Greek

[Anonymous No.19552201]

>>19552092
I would assume so, or someone with knowledge of Latin relayed it to him since that would be helpful in polemics against the Latin church. In his work against John Bekkos he lists some accepted views about the Son's and Holy Spirit's relation, among which is St. Augustine (without naming him) saying the Holy Spirit is the love and communion of the Father and the Son, and he actually uses this as an argument against filioque to show the Holy Spirit has unmediated existence from the Father.

The only people I've seen dispute that he knew of St. Augustine rely on the presupposition that St. Augustine's triadology is deviant/heretical and St. Gregory wouldn't accept it, so he couldn't have quoted it.

[Anonymous No.19552391]

>>19546873
it wasn’t, the great schism is a spook

[Anonymous No.19552687]

>>19551981
Based. Wishy-washy people online hate to read stuff like this, but what is said here is basically the opinion of people like St. John Chrysostom. Look what he said about the Jews:
>If, then, the Jews fail to know the Father, if they crucified the Son, if they thrust off the help of the Spirit, who should not make bold to declare plainly that the synagogue is a dwelling of demons? God is not worshipped there. Heaven forbid! From now on it remains a place of idolatry. But still some people pay it honor as a holy place.
https://www.tertullian.org/fathers/chrysostom_adversus_judaeos_01_homily1.htm

If the saints call synagogues dwelling places of demons, the same goes for mosques. This anon >>19552078 is also spot-on in what he says. The Muslim world is terrified of jinn and other evil entities and is forced to rely on amulets and ‘evil eyes’ to ward them off. This is because they’ve been led off into falsehood by Muhammad and ‘Jibreel’. I’ve read several stories talking about how unclean spirits have been exorcised from Muslims coming into Christianity

[Anonymous No.19552751]

>>19551981
This. Anyone praying to "Mary" or "saints" is not reaching the Father, because no one comes to the Father except through the Son. Period.

[Anonymous No.19552753]

>>19552687
Evil eye is common belief among Orthodox Christian, anon.

[Anonymous No.19552761]

>>19552751
The saints are the limbs of Christ.
Denial of their participation in Christ's work amounts to some kind of Nestorianism, where the humanity of Jesus is nothing more than a vessel for the divine Son to act, and so being a limb of His Body doesn't really mean anything in practice.

[Anonymous No.19552837]

Fuck heretics, Orthodoxy Or Death

[Anonymous No.19552840]

>Give up un-Christian things and recognize that my path was wrong
>Matthew 25:14-30
How am I supposed to use my talents to do good Christian work? It's practically impossible to do anything that isn't un-Christian in this time and age, outside of working directly within the Church.

[Anonymous No.19552845]

My best friend is about to become a monk, he was an absolute chad in 'cosmic life'. All monks i know are literal chads.

Take the monkpill anons. I told my self if i don't marry this girl im dating i will become a monk aswell

[Anonymous No.19552852]

>>19552753
>Evil eye is common belief among Orthodox Christian, anon.
Yeah but saints are saying that they are the smallest demon and tiny in front of others.
St. Paisios said that if an Orthodox has repented his sins he has nothing to fear. Also you should wear a cross and you will get the 1/3 of the damage on things that the 'other'guy (devil) is sending in your way

[Anonymous No.19552902]

>>19552845
I’ve been pondering it. I haven’t explored it yet though. I’ve been thinking that there’s nothing real worth doing in this except for completely focusing on God. I’m not sure if I’d even have the discipline though.

[Anonymous No.19552916]

>>19552902
>there’s nothing real worth doing in this
*really worth doing in this life

[Anonymous No.19552941]

>>19552902
the reason they go monks is that is 'easier' to be saved, but don't think that you will find peace there because you will go to a cave. Is still a battlefield. You leave your family your friends...your life. But at the end God will let you know if you can become a monk or not, trust me.

[Anonymous No.19553522]

People will look at you like you're crazy if you tell them the world is literally ruled by demons, but every day I'm more convinced it's the truth.

[Anonymous No.19553672]

>>19552391
>the great schism is a spook
sounds like you don't know what you're talking about

[Anonymous No.19553680]

>>19552845
is there an age limit to becoming a monk? I know that for catholics you can't become a Franciscan past 35 or something

[Anonymous No.19553685]

>>19553522
Thats retarded, youre retarded

[Anonymous No.19553693]

>>19553522
Slave morality

[Anonymous No.19553720]

>>19547234
Get on the Exodus90 app, it's catholic but shouldn't be a problem for orthos, just replace going to mass with going to divine liturgy and such, it helps you to build a character through ascetic challenges

[Anonymous No.19553729]

>>19553522
It’s literally becoming more obvious with every passing year

[Anonymous No.19553733]

On a related not, what is the best Bible to read? I'm talking an English translation that is thought to be closest to the original texts.

[Anonymous No.19553737]

>>19550693
Then shouldn't it be theophilia?

[Anonymous No.19553749]

>>19550674
I don't claim there is any falsehood in Orthodoxy. I don't see why we should let the single word filoque divide us. Surely it is more important to pass over the unimportant differences and find reconciliation in our similarities?
After all if we don't love we don't know God.
Seriously, basically the only reason I'm not trying to convert to orthodoxy is because I'm a westerner in a western country. If I was Greek or Russian I would join the Church there.
I just think its sad to be so insistent on such a narrow interpretation of such a seemingly insignificant point. If we agree the Father and Son are of the same Essence then I can agree with you if you only want to say the Spirit proceeds from the Father. I don't understand why the orthodox see us as demonic heratics just because we say the Spirit proceeds from the Son also, especially when we have things like:
>But I tell you the truth, it is for your benefit that I am going away. Unless I go away, the Advocate will not come to you; but if I go, I will send Him to you (St John 16:7).
All this said, I do appreciate your commitment to the Truth and I agree that there is only one way, truth and life. St John sums that up as Love though as I see it and I think too strict an adherence, to the point of division and condemnation, to a minor difference can separate us from charitable and loving relations. I'd like to end with St Paul's words:
>I therefore, a prisoner for the Lord, urge you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling to which you have been called, with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another in love, eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. (Ephesians 4:1-3

[Anonymous No.19553809]

>>19553733
Orthodox Study Bible. The NT is NKJV though, so if you don’t want that look into the EOB

[Anonymous No.19553816]

>>19553809
cheers

[Anonymous No.19553993]

>>19553749
>. I don't understand why the orthodox see us as demonic heratics just because we say the Spirit proceeds from the Son
Because logically it creates a communion between Father and Son the Holy Spirit is excluded from, and this is impossible according the the holy fathers. It logically that means either the Holy Spirit is a creature, or He creates a fourth person. This is evil and demonic. Repent of it and all the other innovated theology and we will have no problem.

[Anonymous No.19554055]

>>19553749
>unimportant
Who decides what is important and unimportant and why is it liberalized people in modernity? Did we suddenly discover something contrary to the pre schism universal knowledge and teaching that heresy & schism removes one from salvation?

[Anonymous No.19554057]

I read Bulgakov's essay on Judas not too long ago and in the second half he started talking about the "supratemporal" creation of man, is this an actual Orthodox idea (or at least, acceptable to the Church) or is this more weirdness in the vein of Sophiology?

[Anonymous No.19554102]

Read the Bible dozens of times and memorise parts of the Bible first before deciding to participate in Orthodox Spirituality. And do so in a Holy way, not secretly with your face hidden on this image board/chan culture wicked juvenile idolatry full of hate and disgusting things.

It’s better even to do it physically, in person. That is the most ideal and you have to do the Will of Christ’s first calling, to take care of the poor, sick, needy and widows at the same time, since that is the innate duties/responsibilities of christians

[Anonymous No.19554146]

>>19553749
>I don't claim there is any falsehood in Orthodoxy. I don't see why we should let the single word filoque divide us. Surely it is more important to pass over the unimportant
differences and find reconciliation in our similarities?

In the Orthodox understanding, the Latin filioque is a heresy. It they were correct in their understanding, they'd be right to make a fuss about it; it would in fact be a big deal. But in fact there is no heresy, there is merely a misunderstanding that arises from translating Greek into Latin and Latin into Greek. The gist of the matter is explained briefly here: >>/lit/thread/S19145820#p19147173

And at length here (including a discussion of the fathers): https://catholicbridge.com/downloads/response-on-the-filioque.pdf

[Anonymous No.19554610]

>>19551684
Well said. I've often thought this but you've expressed it in a good manner.

[Anonymous No.19554640]

>>19545977
literally me

[Anonymous No.19554648]

>>19551999
>Unitatis Redintegratio calls for the reunion of Christendom and is similar to a previous call for unity by Pope Leo XIII in the 1894 encyclical Praeclara gratulationis publicae.
>the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity.

[Anonymous No.19554707]

>>19552687
As a Catholic I'd certainly defer to St Chrysostom, may he pray for us. Its pity though the charitable impulse within me would like to believe that jews and muslims worship the Father, but rationally I have to concede Chrysostom's point. Then again Jesus Himself only worshipped the Father... Having come to Christ through Islam and Judaism (having studied and worshipped in the manner of both) I can certainly see where this >>19551772 >>19551764 anon is coming from. I don't think its fair to go as far as this anon >>19552078 there are other, purely human factors acting to prevent peopld from embracing the totality of Christian revelation, particularly fear of ostracisation.

[Anonymous No.19554742]

How do I stop being borderline demonic? I believe God exists yet I can’t stop sinning and hardly feel guilt when I do. I know this is a bad thing but every time I pray for forgiveness I feel like I’m being insincere because I know I’ll just wallow in sin again in a day or two.

[Anonymous No.19554776]

>>19554742
Bumping because i probably will come short of a nice answer.
Ask, in earnest, for forgiveness, and to receive the Holy Spirit. Ask God to open your eyes, and help you live in His light.
And then quit whatever sin you're doing, cold turkey. Any time you feel its tug, pray for strength to resist it.
If you don't already, go to church. Go ask a priest about that aswell.

[Anonymous No.19554778]

>>19553693
>slave morality
Yes

[Anonymous No.19554796]

How do Orthodox Christians reconcile Nietzsche's critique of Christianity? I find myself agreeing with his points but I don't want to

[Anonymous No.19554838]

>>19553993
>Because logically it creates a communion between Father and Son the Holy Spirit is excluded from
The creed does say that the Son is ὁμοούσιον τῷ Πατρί, the Only-begotten, that is of the essence of the Father. The Father and the Son do have a unique relationship (or communion if you like) that is distinction from the relationship They have with the Spirit.
>It logically that means either the Holy Spirit is a creature, or He creates a fourth person.
I don't see how this follows. It seems to be really creating deliberate hairsplitting and pointless factionalism.
>>19554055
As I understand it the filoque arose as a way of combating misunderstandings that arose in the western Church. It was not and is not intended to have any theological difference from the creed without the filoque but, as I said, arose merely out of the need to clarify heretical understandings.

[Anonymous No.19554851]

>>19545288
St Augustine Ironically led me to Orthodoxy. I have him to thank.

[Anonymous No.19554866]

>>19554707
Muslims and Jews seem to have a misconception that ‘the God of the Old Testament’ is just the Father though, and this is false and a misunderstanding. Even the Old Testament teaches God as the Trinity, and throughout we see the Son in the figure of the Angel of the Lord, as identified by Justin Martyr. Pre-Christian Jews such as Philo of Alexandria identified this same figure with the Logos as well. Plus, one prays to Father through the Son and in the Holy Spirit according to Ephesians 2:18, and we know that in everything the Trinity works together. Where one hypostasis works, the other two are there working as well. When a Muslim or a Jew thinks they are worshiping God, one can only wonder how they are doing it, given they reject the Son and the Holy Spirit. Only God knows of course

[Anonymous No.19554891]

>>19554796
All of Nietzsche’s critiques fall apart if God exists, and He does. It’s like his critique of Platonism and Christianity, and how they are ‘decadent’ because they have a bifurcation of the world into a ‘real’ and ‘apparent’, and this is bad because it devalues and trivializes this life—the assumption that this is based off of again is that such other realities don’t exist and are a product of psychological impulses of various kinds. Given that that is nonsense, Nietzsche’s critique is embarrassing. It’s just him spouting childish rhetoric.

>>19554778
Based

[Anonymous No.19554906]

>>19554776
Thank you, anon. I will do all of these. I was flip-flopping about showing up tomorrow but you’re right that I need to.

[Anonymous No.19554911]

>>19554838
To clarify what I was trying to say:
>Although the Eastern Fathers were aware that the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son was taught in the West, they did not generally regard it as heretical. According to Sergei Bulgakov "a whole series of Western writers, including popes who are venerated as saints by the Eastern church, confess the procession of the Holy Spirit also from the Son; and it is even more striking that there is virtually no disagreement with this theory." In 447, Leo I taught it in a letter to a Spanish bishop and an anti-Priscillianist council held the same year proclaimed it. The argument was taken a crucial step further in 867 by the affirmation in the East that the Holy Spirit proceeds not merely "from the Father" but "from the Father alone".

>The Filioque was inserted into the Creed as an anti-Arian addition, by the Third Council of Toledo (589), at which King Reccared I and some Arians in his Visigothic Kingdom converted to orthodox, Catholic Christianity. The Toledo XI synod (675) included the doctrine but not the term in its profession of faith.

[Anonymous No.19554938]

>>19554891
What do you think about Rene Girards critique of Nietzsche? That Nietzsche knew that there was something inherently unique about Christ but that drove him further into opposition with Him.

[Anonymous No.19554964]

>>19554906
Good luck brother!
Remember, persistence is key. I still catch myself falling into sin, for which i am ashamed. We'll always be tempted.
Have you ever had a vision, or some experience with God? I didn't quite feel guilt either before i truly saw what i was doing.

[Anonymous No.19555017]

>>19554964
In truth, it’s not that I feel completely cold when I do something sinful. Oftentimes I get fairly upset after the fact, often due to the fact that I will think of God, but I will ignore it and keep doing what I am doing. I’ve done that a lot, and it is a horrible thing, really. What makes it worse is that I have had some minor experiences during prayer that have made me believe in more than just a bare and cold intellectual sense. But even then I still persist more often than not. I used to wish I believed in God when I was an atheist because I naively thought that I would be perfect then, but that was certainly foolish. I’m not giving up though.

[Anonymous No.19555028]

>>19554742
Specific sins require specific remedies in my opinion. I think the most general remedy though is to think of how good God is to us, how much He loves us and is willing to forgive us, and how little He is really asking from us (not to deny we have crosses to carry, more to affirm that Jesus' yoke is light). I think this is what it was for me. I wanted to cease to offend and betray my King. You wouldn't betray a friend or fail to follow the advice of someone you respected, how much less so should you turn aside from God. Obviously I agree with everything here. If you truly seek reconciliation with the Church (Ortho/Cath) God will aid you to avoid sin. You have to truly want to be with unified with Him more than diffused into the abyss of sin, for this you must understand that He is "my first beginning and last end", who in love has "thought of me for all eternity".
Lastly I'll say as a summation, when temptation assails you and you feel the pain of desire and craving try to remember this verse, which, week by week is becoming my favourite in all scripture:
>I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me. (Galatians 2:20)
Long to make your body a pure temple for our Lord and cherish to have Him dwell with you, in you and take pride that "you might decease that He might increase" and live through you.

[Anonymous No.19555047]

>>19554938
Ive often thought that a lot of Nietzche is just a rehashing of Christianity that Nietzche failed to comprehend. Not exactly in the sense of the screen cap but something like that.

[Anonymous No.19555055]

>>19555028
>Obviously I agree with everything here >>19554776

[Anonymous No.19555057]

>>19555017
Have faith and go forth, brother.
You can overcome it in Him.
>>19555028
Also what this anon said might help. What a beautiful verse.

[Anonymous No.19555059]

what does the general think about Bataille?

[Anonymous No.19555061]

>>19555055
we just agreed with each other seconds apart, nice

[Anonymous No.19555087]

>>19554938
I haven’t read Girard’s critique, but I intend to now that you have brought it to my attention, so I appreciate you bringing it to my attention. I think Christianity is key to Nietzsche’s insanity. I think pic related basically sums up the case with Nietzsche. He was full of ressentiment towards Wagner, and it seems like Nietzsche desperately didn’t want Christianity to be true, but still had some sense of discernment of how catastrophic the so-called ‘Death of God’ would be—of course unlike atheists think, this section of The Gay Science is presented essentially as a horrible thing that people have not yet truly grasped. Christ lived rent-free in Nietzsche’s head until the very end, when he began to literally sign letters as ‘the Crucified’ or ‘the Christ’. It’s pretty tragic.

Nietzsche to F. Overbeck, June 23, 1881:
> “As far as Christianity is concerned, I hope you will believe this much: in my heart I’ve never held it in contempt and, ever since childhood, have often struggled with myself on behalf of its ideals”

From Will to Power §1038:
> (...) As for myself, in whom the religious, that is to say god-forming, instinct occasionally becomes active at impossible times--how differently, how variously the divine has revealed itself to me each time! (...)

Nietzsche to Cosima Wagner, January 3, 1889:
> . . . this time I shall come as victorious Dionysus, who will make this world a holiday...Not that I have much time... [...] I have been hanged on the cross, too...
Nietzsche’s to Jean Bourdeau in January 1889:
>“I am the Christ, Christ in person, Christ crucified.”

[Anonymous No.19555113]

>>19555028
>>19555057
Thank you

[Anonymous No.19555194]

>>19555113
Deo gratias.

[Anonymous No.19555221]

This isn't about books specifically but has anyone here got any experience/advice on dealing with gay urges? I've spoken to my priest about it and he's good, but obviously he can only help so much without having experienced them himself. I've been mostly able to keep myself in check but I am scared that one day I won't be able to.

[Anonymous No.19555230]

>>19555221
Prayer.
Do you happen to watch porn or something? Great odds of that warping you.

[Anonymous No.19555260]

>>19554838
>The Father and the Son do have a unique relationship
Correct, and this is the relation of being Father and Son. It is the only unique relation between them since it's just their hypostatic properties. All properties of God are either natural or hypostatic, hypostatic properties cannot be shared unless you confuse the persons. The Son has everything the Father has excepting causation, i.e. what makes the Father the Father, His hypostatic property.
>I don't see how this follows.
If the Father and Son share in the property "involved in causing a divine person", then we have two possibilites: either the Holy Spirit lacks this, then it is of a different substance from the Father and Son, or the Holy Spirit also shares in this property then He causes a forth person, and so on into infinity.

>not intended to have any theological difference from the creed
Intention is irrelevant in this case, what matters are the credal statements they affirmed as a whole body/church, namely double hypostatic procession which is pure heresy and anathematized by Orthodoxy. Monophysites also rejected the holy council of Chalcedon with the intention of not appearing Nestorian, but this doesn't make them correct.

[Anonymous No.19555264]

>>19554707
>purely human factors
Fear is not a human factor, it is not natural but a result of demonic corruption of human nature. It is their cooperation with demons/spirit of the world which does not allow them to accept Christ, since they value it more than Him and His truth.

[Anonymous No.19555282]

>>19555230
I haven't watched porn or masturbated in almost 6 months. I still like some gay books and music, but nothing graphic. I just get lonely desu and things like that make me feel a little less isolated

[Anonymous No.19555313]

>>19555282
I'd drop those. what would be "gay books and music" though?

[Anonymous No.19555315]

>>19555221
See Catechism of the Catholic Church 2357-2359. https://www.usccb.org/sites/default/files/flipbooks/catechism/568/
And >>19555028
when temptation assails you and you feel the pain of desire and craving try to remember this verse, which, week by week is becoming my favourite in all scripture:
>I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me. (Galatians 2:20)
There is nothing good about disordered sexual acts, they are only a corruption of Satan. Strive to be holy and you can surely overcome it for "all things are possible with God."

[Anonymous No.19555323]

>>19554911
>procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son was taught in the West, they did not generally regard it as heretical
Because it was not heretical when the Western saints taught it, what was heretical is Carolingian versions of it which speak of Son as in any way a cause of the Holy Spirit. Eternal manifestation of the Holy Spirit through the Son and Him eternally resting in the Son was always accepted and still is.
>Sergei Bulgakov
It does not matter what a single modern priest or even group of bishops says when there are universal Orthodox councils officialy condemning filioque, we always rely on the universal mind of the Church, not on opinions of given priests. It is anathema according to the Council of Blachernae (1285), which is accepted by the fullness of Orthodoxy and all Orthodox patriarchs. Truth doesn't suddenly change and the Church cannot err in proclaiming truth which is received universally.

[Anonymous No.19555328]

>>19555313
Oscar Wilde, Yukio Mishima, and some Greco Roman mythology, and then Morrissey/The Smiths and Death in June for music

[Anonymous No.19555342]

>>19555323
Bulgakov is the greatest Orthodox mind of the 20th Century. I would surely trust his understanding of the universal mind of the Church over an online orthodox

[Anonymous No.19555347]

>>19554796
Very easily.
>The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.
In my language it says "mind-less" instead of "fool". Atheism is a denial of the intellect and is manifest insanity, it's self-refuting.

[Anonymous No.19555350]

>>19555328
mythology makes me uneasy personally.
Mishima is a certain drop.
Not sure about Wilde. He's gay but i know nothing of his work.
Can't help in music either. Better safe than sorry, still.
Try getting a new hobby, like playing an instrument, or art. Maybe chess.

[Anonymous No.19555363]

>>19555328
I believe in you Anon. You can overcome these temptations.

[Anonymous No.19555372]

>>19555260
>If the Father and Son share in the property "involved in causing a divine person", then we have two possibilites: either the Holy Spirit lacks this, then it is of a different substance from the Father and Son, or the Holy Spirit also shares in this property then He causes a forth person, and so on into infinity.
This is some very strange logic, I'm not sure it holds up. If the Holy Spirit doesn't share in this property then the Holy Spirit is a different substance? So the Son, who does not share the same property of causing a divine Person like the Father is a different substance to the Father?

The persons of the Trinity are defined by RELATION. If the Holy Spirits only differentiae from the Father is being generated from the Father then the Spirit is the same as the Son. There must be a relational difference that separates the Son from the Spirit and this difference is in the following formula

Father who is ungenerated
Son who is generated and generates
Holy Spirit who proceeds from both but does not generate

In this way the relations between the persons of the Trinity are distinguished. If the Father is the sole cause of both the Son and Spirit and there are no further relations between the Son and Spirit except the property of coming from the Father which they share then the Son and Spirit are identical and this is obviously heresy. Thus the Filioque must be true.

[Anonymous No.19555398]

>>19555342
You yourself are an online-Orthodox who trusts your mind more than universally accepted Orthodox councils it appears. We don't elevate a single priests above anathemas of ecumenical councils, ecumenical in the sense of universally received by the Church which is an infallible way of proclaiming truth. Filioque is anathema, see the Council of Blachernae and later Palamite councils which confirm it.

>To them, also for the fact that they claim that from the Son and through the Son the Comforter proceeds from the Father, and in confirmation of this they cite the writings of some "fathers" that the "Spirit" comes through the Son and from the Son, while it (the scripture) reveals the shining-through and appearance of Him (the Holy Spirit) from Him (from the Son and through the Son); for, undoubtedly, the Comforter eternally shines forth and appears through the Son, as light from the sun through a ray; also reveals the mission, gifts and sending-forth of His (Spirit) to us; but not at all that He comes through the Son and from the Son, and receives being through Him and from Him; Because, indeed, He (the Holy Spirit) would have had the Son as the Culprit and the Beginning as well as the Father, not to say - more of the Son than the Father, since from what the origin comes, that is considered both the beginning and the cause of being. And since they think and speak in this way, then, announcing the above-described verdict and condemnation of them, we cut them off from the host of Orthodox Christians and excommunicate them from the Church of God and the flock.

[Anonymous No.19555401]

>>19555350
>>19555363
Thanks anons. God willing I'll get over this

[Anonymous No.19555420]

>>19555260
But doesn't the Father have the dual hypostatic properties of begetting (the Son) and processing (the Spirit)? What I took to be unique about each Person, (and, I just want to say I appreciate your counsel because I admit I am only relatively new to understanding this,) was the Father begets and spirates (makes to proceed), the Son is begotten and spirates (and at any rate, surely you have to admit that the Spirit must proceed through the Son, even if the Son is not the source?), and the Spirit is spirated.
This would agree with what you say
>The Son has everything the Father has excepting causation (what I call begetting).
>either the Holy Spirit lacks this, then it is of a different substance from the Father and Son,
The Nicene creed doesn't say that the Spirit is of the same substance. We all believe that It is one in essence or substance of course but It's lacking the ability to "cause a Divine person" doesn't seem to me to necessarily imply that It is of a different substance, only that It has different functions/relations/attributes.
I appreciate your statements though. I still don't think this should be enough to server a limb of Christ's body over though.

[Anonymous No.19555427]

>>19555372
>So the Son, who does not share the same property of causing a divine Person like the Father is a different substance to the Father?
Causing a person is a hypostatic property, solely the Father's. All properties are either unique to one person (hypostatic), or common to all persons. Otherwise you mix the persons or split the Holy Trinity.

>The persons of the Trinity are defined by RELATION
Not according to the theologians who defended the Holy Trinity in the ecumenical councils. See St. John of Damascus who just quotes the Cappadocians. The persons are known by their unique attributes, the Father is uncaused cause, the Son is begotten, the Holy Spirit is spirated.

>All then that the Son and the Spirit have is from the Father, even their very being: and unless the Father is, neither the Son nor the Spirit is. And unless the Father possesses a certain attribute, neither the Son nor the Spirit possesses it: and through the Father, that is, because of the Father's existence, the Son and the Spirit exist, and through the Father, that is, because of the Father having the qualities, the Son and the Spirit have all their qualities, those of being unbegotten, and of birth and of procession being excepted. For in these hypostatic or personal properties alone do the three holy subsistences differ from each other, being indivisibly divided not by essence but by the distinguishing mark of their proper and peculiar subsistence.

>there are no further relations between the Son and Spirit
False presupposition that all relations are on the same level of being. The hypostatic procession of the Holy Spirit is ontologically distinct from say the mission in time, or from eternally manifesting the Father's love, where there are relations which do not exist in causation/origin.
>which they share
Nope. The Son is begotten, the Holy Spirit is spirated. These are revealed to be distinct, if you read basic Trinitarian theology you will see this.

[Anonymous No.19555445]

>>19555427
>Not according to the theologians who defended the Holy Trinity in the ecumenical councils
St Augustine in De Trinitae explicitly says the persons of the Trinity are distinguished by opposition / relation. The ONLY thing that distinguishes them are mutual relations so if the Son and Holy spirit do not have an oppositional property and they both come from the Father then they are identical.

As much as I respect the cappadocians Augustine was the most brilliant Christian mind of the first millennium.

[Anonymous No.19555450]

>>19555420
That is His one hypostatic property, that He is uncased cause. Fatherhood includes spirating the Holy Spirit, but spiration is distinct from generation of the Son.

>Spirit must proceed through the Son
That is heresy. Only divine actions proceed through the Son and from the Father, the Holy Spirit is not a mediated creation through the Logos, but God. The Holy Spirit has unmediated being from the Father, just like the Son does since He is not less than the Son.

>lacking the ability to "cause a Divine person" doesn't seem to me to necessarily imply that It is of a different substance
Is causing a divine person hypostatic, or natural? If hypostatic, then the Son and Father are identical since they share the unique causal property of the Father. If natural, then all three persons have it in virtue of the same nature.

[Anonymous No.19555459]

Aquinas expounds Augustines view thoroughly

I answer that, It must be said that the Holy Ghost is from the Son. For if He were not from Him, He could in no wise be personally distinguished from Him; as appears from what has been said above (28, 3; 30, 2). For it cannot be said that the divine Persons are distinguished from each other in any absolute sense; for it would follow that there would not be one essence of the three persons: since everything that is spoken of God in an absolute sense, belongs to the unity of essence. Therefore it must be said that the divine persons are distinguished from each other only by the relations. Now the relations cannot distinguish the persons except forasmuch as they are opposite relations; which appears from the fact that the Father has two relations, by one of which He is related to the Son, and by the other to the Holy Ghost; but these are not opposite relations, and therefore they do not make two persons, but belong only to the one person of the Father. If therefore in the Son and the Holy Ghost there were two relations only, whereby each of them were related to the Father, these relations would not be opposite to each other, as neither would be the two relations whereby the Father is related to them. Hence, as the person of the Father is one, it would follow that the person of the Son and of the Holy Ghost would be one, having two relations opposed to the two relations of the Father. But this is heretical since it destroys the Faith in the Trinity. Therefore the Son and the Holy Ghost must be related to each other by opposite relations. Now there cannot be in God any relations opposed to each other, except relations of origin, as proved above (Question 28, Article 44). And opposite relations of origin are to be understood as of a “principle,” and of what is “from the principle.” Therefore we must conclude that it is necessary to say that either the Son is from the Holy Ghost; which no one says; or that the Holy Ghost is from the Son, as we confess.

[Anonymous No.19555460]

>>19555445
St. Augustine was not the theologian used by the ecumenical councils (you claim to accept) to refute the evil heresies of Arius and other trinitarian heretics, it is the Cappadocian theology and wording that is dogmatized. Also St. Augustine doesn't teach filioque as the Latins later started doing, see but it's a long read.
https://orthodoxchristiantheology.com/2020/03/04/augustine-the-filioquist-a-preface/

>the ONLY thing that distinguishes them are mutual relations Son and Holy spirit do not have an oppositional property
Correct. They are distinguished by the Son being begotten and the Holy Spirit being spirated. The relations are not identical.

[Anonymous No.19555462]

>>19555459
Furthermore, the order of the procession of each one agrees with this conclusion. For it was said above (27, 2,4; 28, 4), that the Son proceeds by the way of the intellect as Word, and the Holy Ghost by way of the will as Love. Now love must proceed from a word. For we do not love anything unless we apprehend it by a mental conception. Hence also in this way it is manifest that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Son.

We derive a knowledge of the same truth from the very order of nature itself. For we nowhere find that several things proceed from one without order except in those which differ only by their matter; as for instance one smith produces many knives distinct from each other materially, with no order to each other; whereas in things in which there is not only a material distinction we always find that some order exists in the multitude produced. Hence also in the order of creatures produced, the beauty of the divine wisdom is displayed. So if from the one Person of the Father, two persons proceed, the Son and the Holy Ghost, there must be some order between them. Nor can any other be assigned except the order of their nature, whereby one is from the other. Therefore it cannot be said that the Son and the Holy Ghost proceed from the Father in such a way as that neither of them proceeds from the other, unless we admit in them a material distinction; which is impossible.

Hence also the Greeks themselves recognize that the procession of the Holy Ghost has some order to the Son. For they grant that the Holy Ghost is the Spirit “of the Son”; and that He is from the Father “through the Son.” Some of them are said also to concede that “He is from the Son”; or that “He flows from the Son,” but not that He proceeds; which seems to come from ignorance or obstinacy. For a just consideration of the truth will convince anyone that the word procession is the one most commonly applied to all that denotes origin of any kind. For we use the term to describe any kind of origin; as when we say that a line proceeds from a point, a ray from the sun, a stream from a source, and likewise in everything else. Hence, granted that the Holy Ghost originates in any way from the Son, we can conclude that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Son.

[Anonymous No.19555463]

>>19555459
>Aquinas
Literally irrelevant what he thought.

[Anonymous No.19555467]

>>19555450
>Fatherhood includes spirating the Holy Spirit, but spiration is distinct from generation of the Son.
This means the Father has TWO properties the Son does not the power to generate and the power to spirate which is inconsistent with proper Trinitarian theology that the only difference between the Son and the Father is that the Son is generated and the Father is not.

[Anonymous No.19555471]

>>19555462
>by way of the will as Love
Literal polytheism. Proceeding from divine will is the same as being a creation. I didn't think Aquinas was this pure and blatant in his demonism.

[Anonymous No.19555487]

>>19555467
The Father is uncaused cause, the Son is begotten, the Holy Spirit is spirated.
Uncaused cause is His hypostatic property, which is reflected in the divine actions as well since are actions are from Him. The heretics assign a causal property to the Son, mixing the divine persons and creating an abomination instead of a trinity.
>God is One, that is to say, one essence; and that He is known, and has His being in three subsistences, in Father, I say, and Son and Holy Spirit; and that the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit are one in all respects, except in that of not being begotten, that of being begotten, and that of procession;
>God is also Father, being ever unbegotten, for He was born of no one, but hath begotten His co-eternal Son: God is likewise Son, being always with the Father, born of the Father timelessly, everlastingly, without flux or passion, or separation from Him. God is also Holy Spirit, being sanctifying power, subsistential, proceeding from the Father without separation, and resting in the Son, identical in essence with Father and Son.

[Anonymous No.19555488]

>>19555323
>Eternal manifestation of the Holy Spirit through the Son and Him eternally resting in the Son was always accepted and still is.
! This is what I meant here >>19555420 when I said:
>and at any rate, surely you have to admit that the Spirit must proceed through the Son, even if the Son is not the source?
>>19555450
2 things. First, what i quote above about manifestation through the Son seems to contradict what you claim is hersey in the post I'm responding to now. Second, I do appreciate, I think, what your saying in your second point but
>then the Son and Father are identical
Not so though. They dont have the same unique causal property because one is begotten and the othe begets, both share in spirtation which is a different causal property to begetting as I understand it. I could be erring here, nonetheless I agree with this anon >>19555372 , distinction based on relation in this way makes more sense as I see it.
Again I thank you all and God for the discussion. Its very interesting. May the Holy Spirit guide us to ever closer union.

[Anonymous No.19555506]

When I went to Divine Liturgy last, the choir sang a piece consisting of a line that went something like "let us lay aside all earthly cares" to a very beautiful tone. When I looked in the service book, I didn't find this piece in there. It was a Saturday, and part of the service included the memorial for a recently departed member of the parish. Can anyone tell me what that piece was?

[Anonymous No.19555519]

>>19555488
>manifestation through the Son
Manifestation is distinct from hypostatic origin. The Holy Spirit is solely spirated from the Father, but rests eternally in the Son and shines through eternally the glory of the Father, through the Son. All eternal (and temporal) energies/activities are manifest in this way, from the Father, through the Son and in the Holy Spirit.

>We call the Holy Spirit as being the Spirit of Jesus in this sense, not of having cause in the Son, but because of energetic manifestation.nd we do not speak of the Son as Cause or Father, but we speak of Him both as from the Father, and as the Son of the Father. And we speak likewise of the Holy Spirit as from the Father, and call Him the Spirit of the Father. And we do not speak of the Spirit as from the Son: s but yet we call Him the Spirit of the Son. For if any one hath not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His, saith the divine apostle. And we confess that He is manifested and imparted to us through the Son. For He breathed upon His Disciples, says he, and said, Receive ye the Holy Spirit. It is just the same as in the case of the sun from which come both the ray and the radiance (for the sun itself is the source of both the ray and the radiance), and it is through the ray that the radiance is imparted to us, and it is the radiance itself by which we are lightened and in which we participate. Further we do not speak of the Son of the Spirit, or of the Son as derived from the Spirit.

>guide us to ever closer union
You can easily be in full union with us, just accept the Orthodox theology and anathematize the false teaching of the Son having a causal role in the being of the Holy Spirit. I would be very happy if you did so upon researching this further.
>both share in spirtation
Double spiration from both means the Holy Spirit has being from both, but the Son is not cause or a Father. This is very simple, only the Father has causal ontological role.

[Anonymous No.19555528]

>>19555463
How can you deny the logic though? The orthodox side said above >>19550674
>You can't obstinately choose falsehoods and still pretend to truly love God who is Truth.

[Anonymous No.19555531]

>>19554146
>>>/lit/thread/S19145820#p19147173
St. John of Damascus plainly did not teach the filioque which is shown in that very thread, just read his Exposition of the Orthodox Faith cover to cover before saying such things.

[Anonymous No.19555537]

>>19555528
>How can you deny the logic though
False premises lead to false conclusions. I don't believe in elevating human logic above revelation. The hypostatic properties are revealed pre-schism teaching, it is a revealed teaching that the only distinction in the Holy Trinity is the hypostatic properties, which are not shared in any way lest the persons be mixed.

[Anonymous No.19555548]

>>19555506
https://youtu.be/z5eEne_gcKY
Every liturgy has it in some form, it's the cherubic hymn, a reference to Isaiah's vision of God's throne.

We who mystically represent the Cherubim,
and who sing to the Life-Giving Trinity the thrice-holy hymn,
let us now lay aside all earthly cares
that we may receive the King of all,
escorted invisibly by the angelic orders.
Alleluia

[Anonymous No.19555564]

>>19555548
Beautiful performances on that channel. Thanks for posting

[Anonymous No.19555598]

I recommend any RC trying to discuss filioque to at least grasp the distinction between energetic manifestation and hypostatic origin. How you manifest your being is different from how you obtain it. The Holy Spirit obtains being solely from the Father in spiration, but gloriously manifests it through the Son in all eternity. Every single time there is a discussion of filioque it reduces to the RC side collapsing these two concepts into one, which leads to their confusion.

>>19555528
>How can you deny the logic though?
>the Holy Ghost [proceeds] by way of the ***will*** as Love
I don't think I need to add anything here, Aquinas refutes himself. The Holy Spirit is not a result of willing, as if He was an action and not True God. This teaching truly is an invention of Satan as St. Palamas says many times over in his treatise on the Holy Spirit.
>Now the relations cannot distinguish the persons except forasmuch as they are opposite relations;
False dialects. The distinction is in inherent in the relations not being the same, the Son is inherently different simply in virtue of being begotten, it is a different ineffable relation from spiration. Not that they exist in some kind of opposition inherently.

[Anonymous No.19555600]

>>19555519
You say the Spirit manifests, shines and is imparted through the Son, is breathed from the Son and that the Son said Receive the Holy Spirit and yet you condemn us when we agree with you and call that procession. Why can we not just have union by agreeing that the Spirit proceeds through the Son and agreeing that the Son does not create/cause the Spirit but makes It to proceed?
>This is very simple, only the Father has causal ontological role.
Do they not say this in your Church every weekend?
>In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and God was the Word.
>He was with God in the beginning.
>>All things were made through Him, and nothing that was made was made without Him.
St John 1:1-3.

[Anonymous No.19555626]

>>19555600
>yet you condemn us
The condemnation is for adding onto this and saying this means the Son causes the Holy Spirit.
>Spirit proceeds through the Son
In energy/glory, and in temporal mission, not in being.

>All things were made through Him
>were made
Anon... The Holy Spirit is not a creation. He was never made, He is True God. He is spirated eternally from the Father. What you have is basically a form of Arianism for the Holy Spirit, where He is a sort of secondary procession of the Logos, where the Father needed the Logos to emanate the Holy Spirit as if the Holy Spirit is a construction/creation the Father builds with the Logos.

[Anonymous No.19555632]

>>19555548
Cherubim / Hymn / care / share / king / angel's wings. I would have used these rhymes. Very beautiful though thanks. Its stuff like this that makes me acknowledge I'd gladly be orthodox but I'm not greek or what have you.

[Anonymous No.19555646]

>>19555626
The Spirit is dependent on the mutual relationship between the Father and the Son in the same way that the Son is dependent on the Father. Father generates Son then the mutual love between Father and Son is the Holy Spirit.

[Anonymous No.19555656]

>>19555632
>>19555564
Yeah I liked it too, didn't even know there were such good chants in English.

[Anonymous No.19555662]

>>19555626
I see what you mean. But then why are we to agree with you when you say only the Father has the causal role? This has to do with the hypostatic origin thing? Where is this defined? Thanks for your patience.

[Anonymous No.19555666]

https://youtu.be/Ur39cbcr_pk
This is now an Orthodox hymns thread. One of my favorite hymns about the prodigal son.

Hasten to open Thy Fatherly embrace to me,
For I have wasted my life as the Prodigal.
In the unfailing wealth of Thy mercy O Saviour,
Do not reject my heart in its poverty.
For I cry to Thee with compunction, O Lord:
Father, I have sinned against heaven, and before Thee!

[Anonymous No.19555674]

>>19555646
This also fits with the idea that the Father plays the sole causal role because the Love bwtween the Father and Son (which is the Spirit) is dependant on the begetting of the Son, which is the Father alones power.

[Anonymous No.19555679]

https://youtu.be/07xDqFovnT8

[Anonymous No.19555693]

>>19555674
Precisely. To be perfectly honest the Orthodox sperging over the Filioque is nothing more than political posturing and splitting hairs to try and create insurmountable walls between themselves and the Catholic Church because just like Protestantism modern Orthodoxy is primarily defined by negative opposition to the Catholic Church. Nothing will convince them because they've constructed an artificial dichotomy for the express purpose of claiming that Catholic Theology is irredeemably erroneous.

[Anonymous No.19555732]

>>19555646
>The Spirit is dependent on the mutual relationship between the Father and the Son
Nobody says this. This is pure philosophical speculation. See St. John of Damascus' quotes above, the Holy Spirit is never defined as a relation in his being, but as spirated from the Father. He manifests the love of Father and Son eternally, even St. Gregory Palamas says this but at the same time anathematizes filioque.

>because the Love bwtween the Father and Son (which is the Spirit)
He is not hypostatically the Love, because Love is common to all three persons. He is Love in the sense of uniquely manifesting the divine energy of love common to all in a specific mode peculiar to the Holy Spirit. THe Father manifests this same energy of love in a Fatherly way, as being the Source of love, and the Son does it in a filial way, being the Beloved. Once again you are mixing energy and its manifestation with origin of the hypostasis.

>>19555662
>Where is this defined?
It's just the consistent triadology of the saints. Nobody speaks of Son as cause, but explicitly specify that He is distinct from the Father and Spirit precisely because of this. St Gregory the Theologian:

>But if all that the Father has belongs likewise to the Son, except Causality; and all that is the Son's belongs also to the Spirit, except His Sonship, and whatsoever is spoken of Him as to Incarnation for me a man, and for my salvation, that, taking of mine, He may impart His own by this new commingling; then cease your babbling, though so late, O you sophists of vain talk that falls at once to the ground; for why will you die O House of Israel? Ezekiel 18:31 — if I may mourn for you in the words of Scripture.

[Anonymous No.19555747]

>>19555693
>sperging over the Filioque is nothing more than political posturing
I'm sure you would say the same about the great saints who fought Arius, Nestorius and the monophysites, and about St. Maximus the Confessor, who was willing to die over anathematizing a single will in Christ. Is this also "hair-splitting"? Where and by which metric does one draw the line when it is the most important topic at hand, the nature of God and of preserving the apostolic faith given once and for all to the saints. It is clear how the saints acted towards heresy in the 1st millennium Church, we just follow them in their teaching that heresy is a serious sin. It is your problem that you fell into perennialism and do not care about actual truth with precise meaning and language anymore.
>Nothing will convince them
Because it is a falsehood and a refuted innovation. We care about truth and the gates of hell shall never prevail against Orthodoxy. There will never be a full-on Orthodox acceptance of filioque or a union based on falsehood. If anything falsely ecumenical arises, it will not be accepted by all and will crumble like Florence.

[Anonymous No.19555772]

>>19555674
>This also fits
Theology is not something you construct to fit with your ideas or try to mix and match. That would be pagan philosophy. Theology is revealed descriptions about God to the saints, and most importantly it is a direct saying of Jesus that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Father sends Him through Christ. One cannot stray from these revelations, try to collapse real distinctions and then not fall into error and sin.

[Anonymous No.19555779]

>>19555747
>and about St. Maximus the Confessor, who was willing to die over anathematizing a single will in Christ
St Maximus is a Catholic Saint who got martyred for siding with the Pope over the heretical Bishop of Constantinople so maybe not the best example to use Orthobro.

[Anonymous No.19555799]

>>19555779
As long as they hold the true apostolic faith they are our brother, if they hold false faith they are not. This applies to all bishops. The Pope's orthodoxy is what makes him have primacy and respect. We don't worship Constantinople or any other bishop.

[Anonymous No.19555976]

>>19555282
>I still like some gay books and music
That's as worse anon, if not worse since it is more hidden. I haven't had that specific urge, but God helped me overcome the list and constant masturbation I was slave to. You need to hate the sin, distance yourself from temptation and go to confession and communion often.

[Anonymous No.19555977]

So what all catholics go to hell then do they orthbro?

[Anonymous No.19556007]

>>19555977
Heresy is mortal sin, if they don't repent then of course, just like the fornicators or drunks who do not repent. Filioque is anathema, which means anyone professing it is in separation from the Body of Christ, and salvation is exclusively inside His Body.
It's not a Christian idea that you can believe whatever and still be saved by works.

[Anonymous No.19556023]

>>19556007
The body of christ is faith in him, not a church

[Anonymous No.19556050]

Any Western Rite Orthodox Christians in this thread? Were are my Latin bros at?

[Anonymous No.19556066]

>>19556023
>body of christ is faith in him
Christ's Body is incarnate, real and physical, not a mental construction or abstraction. We are joined to His Body like a man is joined to his wife, mystically being one flesh (Eph. 5:32).

[Anonymous No.19556138]

>>19556007
Man this is depressing, not gonna lie.

[Anonymous No.19556163]

>>19556138
It is sad, but you should remember that there is no automatic judgement to hell without the person's will. If a person does not care for truth then God cannot force him to, even the pharisees saw Lazarus rise from the grave and still persisted in error. You can't love God without seeking Him above all else, and all who truly seek Him shall find Him without fail.

[Anonymous No.19556181]

>>19556163
I just find it hard to believe that God is going to consign to hell all these nice Catholics that I've met in the last few months because a group of men decided this one idea is heretical especially when the idea is only added to be an anti arian clarification.
Its enough to make me abandon it all and just role with the idea of the Church invisible.

[Anonymous No.19556249]

>>19556181
>nice
This idea of nice is subjective and doesn't just include Roman Catholics, but also pagans, Talmudic Jews and Muslims. You're just judging people instead of letting God judge them. We should simply follow what He told us about salvation, if there is a disagreement between our feelings and Christ's words, then too bad for our feelings.
>group of men decided
Truth is not decided, but proclaimed by the Church infallibly in councils or in the consensus of its holy teachers. It was always a revealed teaching from the apostles that the Father is sole cause of the Holy Spirit, the Church just established it firmly when heresy arose. All ecumenical councils followed the same model. People didn't just decide that the Son is of the same essence as the Father, it was always the teaching of the apostles and Arianism was always false.

Also, arguably someone with decidedly false triadology worships God as much as the Jews worship God. They might use the same name but if their conception is different they end up worshipping something nonexistent. This is why unity of faith is so heavily stressed in the early church.

[Anonymous No.19556258]

>>19556181
>all these nice Catholics that I've met in the last few months
Also, why do you presume that none of them will repent? It's once again trying to judge people with our own logic. Being Roman Catholic doesn't damn you immediately, Christ still waits for repentance and many Roman Catholics convert to Orthodoxy just as protestants do.

[Anonymous No.19556371]

>>19556249
>>19556258
If God cares about the difference I pray that He will guide me to the fulness of the truth that He desires for me. I don't believe He will let me go to hell for such a thing but I will remain open to God's prompting. Thanks again. Pray for me please. I'll continue to pray for our unity.

[Anonymous No.19556559]

[1]
By nature the Holy Spirit in his being takes substantially his origin from the Father through the Son who is begotten (Questions to Thalassium 63 [A.D. 254]).
Gregory the Wonderworker
"[There is] one Holy Spirit, having substance from God, and who is manifested through the Son; image of the Son, perfect of the perfect; life, the cause of living; holy fountain; sanctity, the dispenser of sanctification; in whom is manifested God the Father who is above all and in all, and God the Son who is through all. Perfect Trinity, in glory and eternity and sovereignty neither divided nor estranged" (Confession of Faith [A.D. 265]).
Hilary of Poitiers
"Concerning the Holy Spirit . . . it is not necessary to speak of him who must be acknowledged, who is from the Father and the Son, his sources" (The Trinity 2:29 [A.D. 357]).
"In the fact that before times eternal your [the Father’s] only-begotten [Son] was born of you, when we put an end to every ambiguity of words and difficulty of understanding, there remains only this: he was born. So too, even if I do not grasp it in my understanding, I hold fast in my consciousness to the fact that your Holy Spirit is from you through him" (ibid., 12:56).
Didymus the Blind
"As we have understood discussions . . . about the incorporeal natures, so too it is now to be recognized that the Holy Spirit receives from the Son that which he was of his own nature. . . . So too the Son is said to receive from the Father the very things by which he subsists. For neither has the Son anything else except those things given him by the Father, nor has the Holy Spirit any other substance than that given him by the Son" (The Holy Spirit 37 [A.D. 362]).
Epiphanius of Salamis
"The Father always existed and the Son always existed, and the Spirit breathes from the Father and the Son" (The Man Well-Anchored 75 [A.D. 374]).
Basil The Great
"Through the Son, who is one, he [the Holy Spirit] is joined to the Father, one who is one, and by himself completes the Blessed Trinity" (The Holy Spirit 18:45 [A.D. 375]).
"[T]he goodness of [the divine] nature, the holiness of [that] nature, and the royal dignity reach from the Father through the only-begotten [Son] to the Holy Spirit. Since we confess the persons in this manner, there is no infringing upon the holy dogma of the monarchy" (ibid., 18:47).
Ambrose of Milan

[Anonymous No.19556562]

[2]
"Just as the Father is the fount of life, so too, there are many who have stated that the Son is designated as the fount of life. It is said, for example that with you, Almighty God, your Son is the fount of life, that is, the fount of the Holy Spirit. For the Spirit is life, just as the Lord says: ‘The words which I have spoken to you are Spirit and life’ [John 6:63]" (The Holy Spirit 1:15:152 [A.D. 381]).
"The Holy Spirit, when he proceeds from the Father and the Son, does not separate himself from the Father and does not separate himself from the Son" (ibid., 1:2:120).
Gregory of Nyssa
"[The] Father conveys the notion of unoriginate, unbegotten, and Father always; the only-begotten Son is understood along with the Father, coming from him but inseparably joined to him. Through the Son and with the Father, immediately and before any vague and unfounded concept interposes between them, the Holy Spirit is also perceived conjointly" (Against Eunomius 1 [A.D. 382]).
The Athanasian Creed
"[W]e venerate one God in the Trinity, and the Trinity in oneness. . . . The Father was not made nor created nor begotten by anyone. The Son is from the Father alone, not made nor created, but begotten. The Holy Spirit is from the Father and the Son, not made nor created nor begotten, but proceeding" (Athanasian Creed [A.D. 400]).

[Anonymous No.19556566]

[3]
Augustine
"If that which is given has for its principle the one by whom it is given, because it did not receive from anywhere else that which proceeds from the giver, then it must be confessed that the Father and the Son are the principle of the Holy Spirit, not two principles, but just as the Father and the Son are one God . . . relative to the Holy Spirit, they are one principle" (The Trinity 5:14:15 [A.D. 408]).
"[The one] from whom principally the Holy Spirit proceeds is called God the Father. I have added the term ‘principally’ because the Holy Spirit is found to proceed also from the Son" (ibid., 15:17:29).
"Why, then, should we not believe that the Holy Spirit proceeds also from the Son, when he is the Spirit also of the Son? For if the Holy Spirit did not proceed from him, when he showed himself to his disciples after his resurrection he would not have breathed upon them, saying, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit’ [John 20:22]. For what else did he signify by that breathing upon them except that the Holy Spirit proceeds also from him" (Homilies on John 99:8 [A.D. 416]).
Cyril of Alexandria
"Since the Holy Spirit when he is in us effects our being conformed to God, and he actually proceeds from the Father and Son, it is abundantly clear that he is of the divine essence, in it in essence and proceeding from it" (Treasury of the Holy Trinity, thesis 34 [A.D. 424]).
"[T]he Holy Spirit flows from the Father in the Son" (ibid.).
"Just as the Son says ‘All that the Father has is mine’ [John 16:15], so shall we find that through the Son it is all also in the Spirit" (Letters 3:4:33 [A.D. 433]).
The letter of Patriarch St. Cyril…, his third letter to Nestorius, "For even though the Spirit exist in His Own Person, and is conceived of by Himself, inasmuch as He is the Spirit and not the Son, yet is He not therefore alien from Him; for He is called the Spirit of truth [John 15:26], and Christ is the Truth [John 14:6], and He proceedeth from Him, just as from God the Father. The Spirit therefore working miracles by the hand too of the holy Apostles after that our Lord Jesus Christ had gone up into Heaven, glorified Him; for He Himself again working through His own Spirit, was believed in, that He is God by Nature. Wherefore He said also, He shall receive of Mine and declare it unto you. [John 16:14]"

[Anonymous No.19556653]

>>19556258
you imbecile. what know you of the nature of the trinity that makes you believe that you can judge the truth of it against others? imbecile. your lands have fallen to muslim hoardes and atheistic-communism yet you have the gall to point a finger at the powerful West? No, Putin's empty Orthodox Churches are not an example of 'resurgence.' You are arrogant, buffoonish and dare I say a schismatic, heretic, destined for eternal hell, both in this world and the next.

[Anonymous No.19556975]

>>19555632
>I'd gladly be orthodox but I'm not greek or what have you.
There are many more normal Catholic / Prot converts in Orthodox churches than you’d think

[Anonymous No.19557015]

>>19556163
Many people don't even have the option of choosing. All those Africans that are getting converted to Catholicism probably don't even know that Orthodoxy or Protestantism exist. What of them?

[Anonymous No.19557131]

Why is there prayer to saints?
It's black and white not praying to God, especially seeing how they're worded. It's like you're praising them instead of God.

[Anonymous No.19557173]

>>19557131
You're not worshipping the actual person, you're worshipping God by recognizing His actions through another person and asking the Saint to pray for you

[Anonymous No.19557183]

>>19557173
How about John 14:6? Are you sure you're reaching Him through someone else?

[Anonymous No.19557195]

>>19557183
So you never ask someone you trust and look up to to pray for you?

[Anonymous No.19557216]

>>19557195
I do. But i do not praise them to such a degree. There's people who actually think they saints are the ones who can help, even.

[Anonymous No.19557830]

>>19557015
There are many accounts of whole sects in Africa converting to Orthodoxy because Christ directly told them it is the true Church. Africans are not in some kind of forgotten position, they are God's creation just as we are.

[Anonymous No.19557843]

>>19557131
Essentially it is praying to God because the saint has become god by grace. He can only hear the prayer because of God's eternal uncreated life overflowing in him.
>>19557216
They can, but only in virtue of the gifts of God. It's a synergy and cooperation without dissolving the identity of the saint. Those with Christ in the resurrection shall all be by grace what God is by nature, Christ did say those who believe in Him shall do even more than what He did.

[Anonymous No.19557860]

>>19557843
>has become God
and then i get asked why i'm Protestant.

[Anonymous No.19557869]

>>19557860
becoming as much as possible like Christ is the literal purpose of Christianity.

[Anonymous No.19557907]

>>19557869
Yes, but you said that in a way that means it confers powers to them.

[Anonymous No.19557928]

>>19557131
Do not take my words for granted since I am not Orthodox but this gripe about intercession seems very puerile to me. The Trinity is absolutely central to Orthodoxy, this isn't even vaguely debatable, much less so than in Catholicism where Marian intercession becomes kind of weird.
In Orthodoxy it is all very transparent. You regard the saints as middlemen. Any study Bible will talk about the importance of mediums over and over. The old Prophets were middlemen, Jesus was himself a middleman between God and mankind. The Theotokos was a further bridge between Christ and mankind through her birth of the Savior. Christianity is shaped like a complex tree that all goes back to the roots of God. When you ask for the intercession of a Saint you are simply channeling your prayer through a branch that is closer to the roots than you. There is absolutely nothing blashpemous or resembling idolatry in the way Saints or the Theotokos are treated in Orthodoxy. It's bizarre that someone would be cross with this concept when union is a central point of Christianity itself. If anything seeing the intercession of Saints as idolatry seems to be like some individualistic distortion of Christianity, where one's relationship with God is with God alone, and not with God and also between people.

[Anonymous No.19557959]

>>19557928
My biggest turndowns are the catholic Marian stuff, and the concept of a pope. Orthos apparently doesn't have those issues.
I still directing my prayer elsewhere though.

[Anonymous No.19557962]

>>19557959
*still dislike
oops

[Anonymous No.19558052]

>>19557959
I think seeing it this way is a bit warped. You are not "sending your prayers elsewhere". As I said, you belong to a tree. Whether you send your prayer to the roots, or upwards through a branch that feeds into them, it is very much the same thing. As I said, unity is a central point of being a Christian, and if God did not care about unity the whole religion would be very different. Why gather together with other Christians to begin with?
>“For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.” (Mat 18:20, KJV)
Again I am still new so take this with a bit of salt.

[Anonymous No.19558082]

>>19558052
On the tree metaphor, I feel it's wrong for me to water a branch and have it drop to the roots, instead of watering them directly.

[Anonymous No.19558086]

>>19557907
>I have been crucified with Christ; yet I live; and yet no longer I, but Christ liveth in me
Christ is not powerless and confered powers to the apostles so that even the cloth St. Paul used to wipe his forehead healed people. Gods power is not some distance force, but in virtue of the incarnation is available to us so we may participate in it fully.

[Anonymous No.19558099]

>>19557959
https://endtimes.video/st-gregory-nazianzen-papacy/
If you care about actual "Orthodoxy" at all then you will recognize that the Papacy is an Apostolic Institution instituted by Christ himself.

[Anonymous No.19558118]

>>19558099
I'm protestant.

[Anonymous No.19558142]

>>19555531
I disagree. Likewise, among the Alexandrians, St. Cyril of Alexandria taught that the Spirit proceeds from the Father "through the Son", as did St. Didymus the Blind, and St. Athanasius; and among the Cappadocians, St. Basil the Great, St. Gregory Nazianzus, and St. Gregory of Nyssa; and among the Antiochians, St. Gregory the Wonder Worker and St. Ephiphanius. See discussion on pages 27-32 of this article: https://catholicbridge.com/downloads/response-on-the-filioque.pdf

And by the way, Photius's extreme position is wrong and dangerous, as it threatens to occlude the Spirit's status as 'the Spirit of Sonship'. See discussion on pp. 40ff. of the above linked article.

[Anonymous No.19558151]

>>19558118
no shit. did I ask?

[Anonymous No.19558195]

>>19558142
Also, when John of Damascus writes in his Exposition on the Orthodox Faith (12, 1): “He is the Spirit of the Son, not as being from Him but as proceeding through Him from the Father,” that is precisely the Catholic understanding of the filioque. Specifically, Jesus is not a source or Cause (Aition / Principium) of the Spirit.

[Anonymous No.19558268]

>>19555976
Yeah I know it's bad. I read/listen to those things because I know I can never have love in this life and they make feel either less alone or at least less alone in my loneliness

[Anonymous No.19558274]

>>19557860
Theosis is right in the Bible—it is to partake in the divine nature (2 Peter 1:4). Jesus’ prayer to the Father in John 17 is a prayer for the deification of His followers, to become what He is by nature by grace, so that they may paetake in the uncreated love of the Trinity. We are created in the image of God, but we must grow into the likeness of God. You will always be a created being. You will never become part of the Trinity, etc.

[Anonymous No.19558307]

>>19557959
>Orthos apparently doesn't have those issues
They literally pray to "Mary" (actually Ishtar) to save them, and have a long, repetitive prayer begging her for saving and running to her for refuge. Their "liturgical year" both begins and ends with "celebrations of (supposed) Mary"...Mary literally bookends their entire ritual cycle. Who is the Alpha & Omega? Well, the "Orthodox™" read the entire New Testament aloud in services over the course of their "liturgical year" with the exception of...REVELATION, which happens to outright state near its opening that those who both read aloud and hear it read are blessed.

They were fooled by Satan so long ago that they worship how long they've been doing the wrong things, worship their own "aesthetics", and refuse to repent, instead doubling down on being the "One True Church™" with "The Fullness of Truth™".

"Orthodox™"

[Anonymous No.19558376]

>>19558268
>I can never have love in this life
That's false. Christ loves you in this life, giving you His body physically, and will forever if you try to serve Him.
Even love in a family is possible with Christ's healing, he can heal you from the affliction since He has full power over the spirits which cause this corrupted inclination of our nature. But He might not if that is His plan for your salvation.

[Anonymous No.19558427]

>>19558307
>They literally pray to "Mary" (actually Ishtar)
Since you'd rather dedicate your Sundays to arguing acidically on the internet, at least, please, get new material.

[Anonymous No.19558601]

>>19558427
Do not give schizos attention

[Anonymous No.19558613]

>>19558427
I'd rather "argue acidically" than Satanically worship Babylonian deities on Sunday, heathen.

[Anonymous No.19558766]

>>19558082
Look dude, its not complicated. We pray to God, we ask saints to pray for us to God. Huge difference. Veneration is not worship. I respect the saints but I don't worship them. They are in Heaven and they, like God, want only for us to join Heaven. I think of it like asking the King's favourites to ask the King to have mercy and show favour on me.

[Anonymous No.19558816]

>>19558268
A) You are loved because you exist. God loves and has been thinking about you for eternity. You will feel loved the more you recognise this and return that love. Every breath you take is a gift from God.
B) "homosexuality" is not and has nothing to do with love, its disordered lust. Only the love between a man and women, which is a reflection of God's love for His faithful, is properly love.
C) >>19558376 this. We all have crosses to bare. Do you think Christ didn't feel abandoned when we cried out "why have you forsaken me?" That particular temptation is probably God's way of purifying you of disordered attachment to anything besides Him.

[Anonymous No.19558861]

>>19558766
Yes, but I wouldn't bow before the favorites as i do before the King.
also veneration and worship are literally synonyms.

[Anonymous No.19558898]

>>19558861
But you don't do that in Orthodoxy. There's Christ at the center of everything. The icon that you kiss at the altar is Christ. In your daily prayers there are a dozen prayers to Jesus for every one mentioning the Theotokos or the Saints. I don't get this idea that Christ is not put far above everyone else in Orthodoxy just because you have intercession.

[Anonymous No.19558942]

>>19558898
Why do you kiss the icon?

[Anonymous No.19558984]

>>19558942
It's like when you kiss the photo of a person you hold dear. That's the point of the icons, they are explicitly made to be representations, not the actual person.

[Anonymous No.19559020]

>>19558984
>when you kiss the photo of a person you hold dear
Only downies do such things.

[Anonymous No.19559095]

>>19558861
>I wouldn't bow before the favorites
You would bow before officials exercising the King's authority as well, this is not to say their authority is something separated from the King's.
>>19558942
Because the love/veneration passes to the person depicted. Like Christ is the icon of Father, all worship of Christ passes to the Father.

[Anonymous No.19559096]

>>19559020
Guess I'm a downie then!

[Anonymous No.19559471]

Why do I get a feeling like a thumb pressing between my eyes when attending Divine Liturgy? I’ve noticed it in prayer too. It doesn’t hurt, it’s just odd.

[Anonymous No.19559591]

>>19545288
Modern Western Orthodox converts tend to hate him. Blessed Augustine was considered a lower tier teacher to the Western Church. A saint, no doubt, and a wise man, but not on the same level at St. John Cassian, St. Hilary, St. Jerome, and the like. Generally St. Augustine is considered a flawed but ultimately good man. His non-theological works are regarded as his most influential in the East.
>>19545390
Read this. Good balance of criticism and praise, and an easy read. Wish Father Rose went into the theology a little more though.
>>19545189
I don't have a lot of literature to suggest per say but I found this site which cross references scripture with the writings of the early Fathers. Very useful for researching how the first Christians thought of certain enigmatic verses and verifying that they were a part of the canon even in the first days of the faith https://www.catholiccrossreference.online/fathers/index.php/

[Anonymous No.19559646]

>>19552845
Based.

[Anonymous No.19559660]

>>19558307
>actually Ishtar

[Anonymous No.19559726]

>>19558942
Because otherwise I am forever cut off from the Father, Son and Holy Spirit by the power to bind and lose and forgive sins given to the apostles and their successors. You can't be saved without venerating icons.

>The holy Synod cried out: So we all believe, we all are so minded, we all give our consent and have signed. This is the faith of the Apostles, this is the faith of the orthodox, this is the faith which has made firm the whole world. Believing in one God, to be celebrated in Trinity, we salute the honourable images! Those who do not so hold, let them be anathema. Those who do not thus think, let them be driven far away from the Church. For we follow the most ancient legislation of the Catholic Church. We keep the laws of the Fathers. We anathematize those who add anything to or take anything away from the Catholic Church. We anathematize the introduced novelty of the revilers of Christians. We salute the venerable images. We place under anathema those who do not do this. Anathema to them who presume to apply to the venerable images the things said in Holy Scripture about idols. Anathema to those who do not salute the holy and venerable images. Anathema to those who call the sacred images idols. Anathema to those who say that Christians resort to the sacred images as to gods. Anathema to those who say that any other delivered us from idols except Christ our God. Anathema to those who dare to say that at any time the Catholic Church received idols.

>If anyone shall not confess the Holy Ever-Virgin Mary, truly and properly the Mother of God, to be higher than every creature whether visible or invisible, and does not with sincere faith seek her intercessions as of one having confidence in her access to our God, since she bore him, let him be anathema.

>If anyone denies the profit of the invocation of Saints, let him be anathema.

>If anyone denies the resurrection of the dead, and the judgment, and the condign retribution to everyone, endless torment and endless bliss, let him be anathema.

>If anyone does not accept this our Holy and Ecumenical Seventh Synod, let him be anathema from the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost, and from the seven holy Ecumenical Synods!

[Anonymous No.19559733]

>>19558307
>so long ago
When?

[Anonymous No.19559754]

>>19559733
Literally the day after Pentecost

[Anonymous No.19559792]

>>19559096
Yes

[Anonymous No.19559863]

>>19559733
It was first brought into the church when Jerome got upset that Mary would be lower than lifelong actual virgins according to heavenly hierarchy schemes they'd been sitting around making up. His argument in the debate was not "but this is what we've always known straight from the Apostles", it was "I don't like the thought of other women being higher than Mary". The first mistake there was thinking that men could figure out the actualities of heavenly hierarchies based on their own logic and desires. Anyway, that was in the 4th century, and they used the 2nd century fan fictional "Gospel of James" as source material knowing full well it wasn't legitimate Scripture.

[Anonymous No.19559889]

>>19559863
Scripture supports perpetual virginity. Learn Greek

[Anonymous No.19559917]

>>19559889
No it doesn't, my wife's dad is from Crete.

[Anonymous No.19559927]

>>19559917
Titus 1:12—“One of Crete’s own prophets has said it: “Cretans are always liars, evil brutes, lazy gluttons.”

[Anonymous No.19560182]

>>19559927
He's far from a liar or lazy glutton but not so distant from evil brute.

[Anonymous No.19560339]

>>19559863
There was more going on than just the Gospel of James, e.g.: “This gate shall remain shut; it shall not be opened, and no one shall enter by it; for the Lord, the God of Israel, has entered by it; therefore it shall remain shut.” (Ez 44:1-2)

See analysis here: https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=9758

[Anonymous No.19560376]

>>19560339
>Jesus went back out through Mary's pussy
Satan can only serpent twist a single verse but it all falls apart when you read the rest.

[Anonymous No.19560400]

>>19560376
Even in your vulgarity, you fail to understand the teaching of the early Church. But I will treat with you no further. Begone.

[Anonymous No.19560409]

>>19560376
The way Prots talk about the Mother of God is demonic

[Anonymous No.19560461]

>>19560400
If the "early church" built a doctrine around verses 1 and 2 but left out 3 then their teachings were retarded at best. Fortunately for the legitimate early church they taught no such thing.

[Anonymous No.19560536]

>>19560409
Don't bunch us up with him.

[Anonymous No.19560572]

>>19545189
What do you think of the catechism?

[Anonymous No.19560642]

>>19560376
This is the ultimate result of rejecting true doctrine, it turns you into something like an incarnate demon. I can't even imagine the suffering someone like this will experience in hell if he fails to repent.

[Anonymous No.19560670]

>>19555221
Convincing evidence that homosexuality is caused by parasites. 70% of gay men in the US are infected with an intestinal parasite compared to just 10% of straight men. So, some anti parasite or deworm medication might help out. Anecdotally, some people have reported taking things like this for other reasons and suddenly lose attraction to men. Worth looking into.

[Anonymous No.19560676]

>>19560642
Incarnate demons fool people with doctrines built on 2 verses that leave out the very next verse which renderers the basis utterly retarded, and that's not even getting into the fact that Ezekiel himself came through the gate, so Ezekiel was born to Mary before Christ?

>1 Then He brought me back by way of the outer gate of the sanctuary, which faces east; and it was shut
>2 And the LORD said to me, “This gate shall be shut; it shall not be opened, and no one shall enter by it, for the LORD God of Israel has entered by it; therefore it shall be shut.
>3 As for the prince, he shall sit in it as prince to eat bread before the LORD; he shall enter by way of the porch of the gate and shall go out by the same way.”

[Anonymous No.19560688]

>>19560676
The next verse does no such thing. The 'porch gate' is a different gate than 'the outer gate of the sanctuary' (which latter gate 'shall be shut', *not* the 'porch gate').

[Anonymous No.19560720]

>>19560688
* 'porch gate' should be 'porch of the gate'

[Anonymous No.19560816]

>>19560461
>legitimate early church
>taught
Where can I read its teachings? Name some writers of the legitimate early church.

[Anonymous No.19560849]

>>19560816
Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter, Paul, James, Jude.

[Anonymous No.19560876]

>>19560849
And after them? This is all before 100 A.D.

[Anonymous No.19560895]

>>19560876
>This is all before the Apostles died and Satan corrupted the institution just like Peter and Paul outright warned would happen
FTFY

[Anonymous No.19560904]

>>19560895
>Satan corrupted the institution
Which "institution"?

[Anonymous No.19561013]

>>19560876
Ireneaus.

[Anonymous No.19561233]

What is the justification the Orthodox church has to the claim of the True Church?

What did Rome do to void theirs? Also if the Orthodox claim that Rome is first among equals and has no authority to excommunicate other bishops, why was it ok for Constantinople to excommunicate Rome?

[Anonymous No.19561325]

>>19558376
>>19558816
I know Christ loves me and that should be enough, but I don't want to be so lonely. I have friends that I've made at church, but to tell the truth I don't think they'd want to see me anymore if they knew that I'm gay.

[Anonymous No.19561787]

>>19561325
>I'm gay
There is no such thing. There are only ordered and disordered sexual acts. Its a demonic fabrication to say that someone's actions define them. God has revealed you are made in His image. Your essence is a soul that is like an angel without sex, which is why the Master says in Heaven we wont marry. Stop thinking you are your actions, you are a beloved soul called forth from nothing by Love to dwell in the unity of God.

The Saints love you too. Ask them to pray for you.

[Anonymous No.19562193]

>>19561233
>What is the justification the Orthodox church has to the claim of the True Church?

[Anonymous No.19562261]

>>19545189
Has anybody mentioned the way of the pilgrim to you yet? I thought that was great.

[Anonymous No.19562404]

>>19561325
I'm straight but perpetually horny. It's a struggle, anon. But it has nothing to do with love or being alone.

[Anonymous No.19562420]

>>19559591
Augustine was the greatest theological mind of the first millennium. Denying that is pure cope.

[Anonymous No.19562422]

>>19560670
The dreaded RAINBOW TAPEWORM. It's kind of terrifying that no matter how true this is, it would never be allowed to surface in the media.

[Anonymous No.19562581]

>>19561787
>There is no such thing.
This. It's very unhelpful to make attributes of yourself which have no basis in Christ. Gayness is purely a post-fall corruption

>>19561325
Have you tried praying about God healing you from this? Or at least showing you His will for you experiencing this?

[Anonymous No.19562806]

>>19562420
And who's of the second millenium?

[Anonymous No.19563198]

>>19562806
Probably St Thomas of Aquinas imho

[Anonymous No.19563243]

>>19563198
>St

[Anonymous No.19563595]

>>19562193
>"a lotta people are saying", the argument
Orthodox Christianity is a meme and every one who takes it seriously is either an imbecile or a collector of all sorts of objects (hoarder). There is literally no other reason. The Orthobros can have 'em desu.

[Anonymous No.19563689]

>>19563595
>a collector of all sorts of objects (hoarder)
You mean like Prots have 200 Bibles in every color? What does that have to do with doctrine?

[Anonymous No.19564213]

>>19554851
based. can you elaborate more, anon?

[Anonymous No.19564431]

>Idolatry
No thanks