/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.20814810]

Anyone has an Eastern Orthodox reading list?

[Anonymous No.20814815]

>>20814810
bishop velimirovic is the best (((((((((((((((((((((((((:

[Anonymous No.20814823]

The Orthodox Church by Timothy Ware

[Anonymous No.20814829]

>>20814810
Books by Hierotheos Vlachos

[Anonymous No.20814833]

The Bible.

[Anonymous No.20814843]

If you are a new convert or just interested, trust me start with
Nihilism - Fr Seraphim Rose
then
Reasonable faith - William Craig

[Anonymous No.20814858]

>>20814843
>Fr Seraphim Rose
I've seen his name on here few times. Wiki says he's affiliated with Serbian Orthodox Church.
What can you tell me about him, what's Nihilism about?

[Anonymous No.20815016]

bump

[Anonymous No.20815022]

>>20814810
St Justin Popovich - Orthodox Faith and Life in Christ
>>20814858
Not that anon the Fr Seraphim Rose was a convert to Orthodoxy after being involved in New Age stuff for a while before that. He became a heiromonk after becoming a monk and wrote extensively on the spirit of the age and was quite prescient in this regard. Many call for his canonisation as a Saint. Nihilism is about the philosophical shortfalls in the modern ethos of the revolution. The revolution comes in various forms, all of which being outgrowths of Enlightenment thought - liberalism, realism, vitalism and pure destruction. Because all of these movements are fundamentally materialist and/or have sequestered God from the systems, the lack the necessary philosophical grounds for being coherent. I found it especially interesting when Fr Seraphim Rose talks about liberalism and how it effectively present itself as a well-mannered and well-meaning philosophy that desires to make transcendental claims such as human rights etc. but in the same breath denies universals - it's basically lying to itself about what it believes in.

[Anonymous No.20815031]

>>20814858
Dont listen to that guy. Rose is quite fringe. Just read The Bible, join an Orthodox and start attending weekly if you want to convert.

If youre interested in theology, the best introduction is Dogmatic Orthodox Theology by Dumitru Staniloae but Idk how easy that is to get a hold of. My life in Christ by St. John of Kronstadt, The Way of the Pilgrim and the books of Timothy Ware would also make for great introductory readings.
Otherwise, in terms of more primary sources, you have the works of the Three Holly Hierarchs (St. Basil the Great, St. John Chrysostom, and St.Gregory the Theologian) who are considered to be the most important of the Church Fathers. There is the Philokalia if youre interested in the "mysticism" of the Eastern Church. But keep in mind we dont distinguish between mysticism and the more mainstream theology, it is just as essential. Of the Fathers included in the Philokalia, St. Maximus the Confessor, St. Symeon the New Theologian, St. John Climacus, St Isaac the Syrian, and St. Gregory Palamas would be the most important I think.
Finally Ill bring up the the Desert Fathers, their lives and wise words are collected in the Egyptian Paterikon (paterikon = lives of the fathers). If you dont want to read the whole thing Im sure you can find a smaller anthology of their sayings. Another important paterikon would be that of the Kiev Caves, so this way you would also get a look at the early Christian tradition in Russia.

t. Im Orthodox from and Orthodox country. Converts are of course more than welcome, just dont be a retard who does it because muh Eastern Church is so trad(tm) and zased and redpilled.

[Anonymous No.20815123]

>>20815031
I was born into the Orthodox Church but in a Western country. Orthodox people here use the religion for ethnic identification and most are ignorant of the actual faith. Anglosphere authors on the faith are very beneficial for us, too, because there must be a paradigm shift to even begin to understand our own religion. We are too Westernized and Secularized to just jump in. Many of my own extended family converted to different forms of Protestantism as a means of social climbing. These people never cared about religion, it's just the one they were born into.

[Anonymous No.20815154]

I am interested in this book but it is very expensive. Have you read it?
I know about the author, he was martyred by the Soviets.

[Anonymous No.20815365]

I went to an Orthodox parish and almost converted when I was 15. it's all a bunch of fat liberals and former anglicans that just couldn't accept the papacy and got involved before the Anglican Ordinariate was made. It's the most cucked religion. Honestly if your going in because its "so trad" etc youd unironically do better not being religious, it's a false conversion you arent doing it for Jesus and also nobody in the Orthodox church is really based. It's all propaganda.

The visiting Bishop (wont name names but Antiochian) fell asleep during Liturgy. That's my experience with this shit schismatic sect and sums up the Orthorox experience perfectly.

[Anonymous No.20815386]

>>20815365
yeah yeah, go molest children elsewhere

[Anonymous No.20815412]

>>20814833
This
If you need anything else it's either
a) Religion is bullshit and you need others to convince you
b) It's enough for you to accept god

[Anonymous No.20815418]

>>20815386
Calling Catholics child molesters won't wake the Bishop up or win you any other schizophrenic converts Russophile

[Anonymous No.20815431]

>>20814843
I was born in an Eastern Orthodox country and I cannot fathom why anyone with a working brain would want to convert to that shitshow. The church in my country is one of the most decrepit, corrupt, and parasitic institutions I have ever encountered, existing only to siphon public money.

Someone explain this to me.

[Anonymous No.20815452]

>>20815031
>Rose is quite fringe.
Not my experience. Fr. Seraphim Rose seems to be quite well-known. Almost every inquirer I’ve met at my church is familiar with Fr. Seraphim Rose and finds his work to be insightful. At my parish the priest is very familiar with Fr. Seraphim and even stocks his books in the library. Stop going to a GOArch church

[Anonymous No.20815456]

>>20814843
I second Seraphim Rose Nihlism, I’d also reccomend "Indication of the Pathway into the Kingdom of God" by St. Innocent of Alaska, “The Gurus, the young man, and Elder Paisos" by Dionysius Faraitkos, and "Athonite Fathers and Athonite Matters" by St Paisios the Athonite.

Now, at the same if you are looking into joining any church, I have an obligation to say Roman Catholicism is the True Church, and you should strive to join it. Read the "Cathechism of the Council of Trent", "Rome Sweet Home" by Scott Hahn, "Apologia pro vita sunt" by John Henry Newman and "Letter to Confused Catholics" by Marcel Lefebvre to learn more.

[Anonymous No.20815458]

>>20815456
>I have an obligation to say Roman Catholicism is the True Church
You WILL venerate the Pachamama, Orthod*g!

[Anonymous No.20815470]

>>20815365
The reading of 1204 here is really poor, didn't bother with the rest after that
The Crusaders and Byzantines came into open conflict almost immediately when they arrived in the 1090s, and contemporary Latin accounts of the Fourth Crusade mention nothing whatsoever about the Massacre of the Latins despite dedicating considerable attention to justifying the attack. They don't even seem to be aware of it, they instead cite an appeal from Alexios IV (who was in exile in Italy at the time) and his subsequent betrayal

[Anonymous No.20815477]

>>20815031
>>20815365
Both of these perspectives are pretty good, from opposite directions but meeting in the middle. Being Orthodox is a life’s work, and it’s one that I’m only starting to pick up again after being strong armed by some friends into being Catholic. Your faith is something God will expect from you long after it stops being cool or glamorous or mystical. It would be better if you had one icon of Christ, one Bible (I like the Lexham+EOBNT combo just because it’s from the Greek and in modern English, but any Bible with “the apocrypha”/Deuterocanon is more than good enough), went to Liturgy every Sunday and feasts, and prayed daily, you would be a fine orthodox Christian.
Guys like this >>20814843 are larpers and would probably get an eye roll from any preist that’s been working more than 10 years. Rene Gueyon ended up becoming Muslim, Seraphim and Spyridon are controversial figures who went beyond the stated aims of their work into tangents (how does knowing UFO’s are demons or the Tollhouse controversy really help someone grow in their faith?), and Sherrard seems to be writing from a very scholarly standpoint that, while interesting, also doesn’t really touch on the basics of the faith that a convert needs to know. The fact that reading list also contains swearing should be a clue to where the heart of the creator is, and I’m sure any preist would say the same.
TL;DR: if you don’t want to be a larper, a well translated New Testament and pic rel would be a good starting point, since Theopan writes mainly for the average person, and you would be following along with the actual readings that are read in church (with some slight differences if you’re not in a Russian parish). More importantly, get involved in your church and pray daily, as much as you can for where you’re at.

[Anonymous No.20815478]

>>20815458
We have had bad Popes before, we shall have bad Popes again. What will never change is the truth of the catholic faith.

I have nothing against the orthodox: I believe we are brothers, that we will one day reunite, and I pray for that reunification.

But I tell you, with all my heart and all my soul that the bishop of Rome is first among the apostles, successor to Peter, and Vicar of Christ. He is the leader of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

[Anonymous No.20815491]

>>20815478
>What will never change is the truth of the catholic faith.
Your ‘church’ is reliant on forgeries for the creation of its papal supremacist claims, and has continuely flip-flopped throughout history on its teachings. The Vatican’s own website admits that the first millennium of the church was nothing like the church today, and because of this, Catholic apologists desperately cope with ideas like ‘seminal doctrines’.

[Anonymous No.20815501]

>>20815470
Yea for the sake of full transparency I'll admit that was a pretty bad telling of that unfortunate situation idk where they got that version of the story from.

[Anonymous No.20815523]

>>20815477
>with some slight differences if you’re not in a Russian parish
why are you implying that the ROC junior hierarchy is the default Orthodox hierarchy?

[Anonymous No.20815524]

>>20815491
I don’t look at the Vatican website to get my information: I look at the 21 valid Ecumenical Councils, the writings of the Saints and Church fathers, the Bible and papal encyclicals.

Guess what?

They all line up.

Seethe Zealot, your own hierarchy’s denounce you.

[A Pneumatic !Yk65a4/uHI No.20815548]

>>20814810
>Anyone has an Eastern Orthodox reading list?
I dont have to read Eastern Orthodox texts to know that:
>Eastern Orthodoxy isn't Catholic
>Eastern Orthodoxy isn't Apostolic
>Christianity has not a single original idea that isn't legitimacy/continuity-cope
>all christcucks are, ultimately, pathetic hylics who can never approach Truth so long as they remain christ-cucked

[A Pneumatic !Yk65a4/uHI No.20815559]

>>20815523
russians have a grandiose self-image based on absolutely nothing. ultimately no one even cares about russians (except they themselves) unless they themselves cause international ruckus, just to bring attention upon them. this is all known. a pathetic people with no history and no future. culturally, chink-adjacent but inferior

[Anonymous No.20815564]

>>20815431
>Someone explain this to me
Most of the people on here are from the west, so they don't know what an abomination the orthodox church is. It's like trying out a new flavor of ice cream, now that they are done sucking on the catholic and protestant flavor.

[Anonymous No.20815574]

>>20815524
> I look at the 21 valid Ecumenical Council
Vatican II’s Dignitatis Humanae defends freedom of conscience and choice in religion. This is a complete 180 from Vatican I’s Syllabus of Errors, which in §15 and §78 is directly condemned. Both of these come from your ‘ecumenical councils’.

We can also point out that ecumenism is massively condemned in papal encylicals such as Mortalium Animos by Pope Pius XI, which says that the Roman Catholic Church alone has true worship, and alone has salvation within it, meanwhile documents such as Lumen Gentium say that other churches ‘subsist’ in the Roman Catholic church, are mere ‘seperated brethren’, and that some of these even have ‘valid sacraments’.

The Council of Chalcedon’s canons make clear that Rome and the New Rome were equal, and that Rome only had primacy as a result of being the Imperial City.

Your popes kiss the Qur’an and claim that Jews and Muslims worship the same God as Christians. Come out of Babylon. Cardinal Newman’s ‘development of doctrine’ cope was directly condemned in Pascendi Dominici Gregis, yet it has been embraced by your Qur’an-kissing, Pachamama-worshiping ecumenist popes.

[Anonymous No.20815592]

>>>20815478
>Your ‘church’ is reliant on forgeries for the creation of its papal supremacist claims, and has continuely flip-flopped throughout history on its teachings. The Vatican’s own website admits that the first millennium of the church was nothing like the church today, and because of this, Catholic apologists desperately cope with ideas like ‘seminal doctrines’.

Not who your arguing with but this is a damnable lie. The donation of Constantine was disproven by CATHOLICS before anyone else, and it was disproved because it was false and because we did not need false proof for our claims when there is proof found in the Early Church Fathers and literally in 2 ecumenical councils. The donation was solely pushed in order to have land, it was not the defining moment where all of a sudden a new dogma was proclaimed that nobody knew about and there was no proof for until that very moment. That wouldn't even make sense.

Pope Gregory I:
"“Your most sweet holiness, [Bishop Eulogius of Alexandria], has spoken much in your letter to me about the chair of Saint Peter, prince of the apostles, saying that he himself now sits on it in the persons of his successors. . . . And, though special honor to myself in no wise delights me . . . who can be ignorant that holy Church has been made firm in the solidity of the prince of the apostles, who derived his name from the firmness of his mind, so as to be called Peter frompetra” (Letters40 [A.D. 597])."

Tertullien:
"For though you think that heaven is still shut up, remember that the Lord left the keys of it to Peter here, and through him to the Church, which keys everyone will carry with him if he has been questioned and made a confession [of faith]." Antidote against the scorpion 10 AD 211.

Even Origen has spoken in favor of papal primacy and supremacy. I'd quote more but I'm not attempting to prove papal supremacy right or wrong, I'm only proving that the concept is not "reliant on forgeries" like you claimed. I have a list of probably 60 pro panelist statements from early fathers in a tract and I'm not posting all of them.

In the Bible every time the apostles are mentioned Peter is always mentioned first because he has Primacy. He is not "First among equals" or some other bullshit title because he was given the keys by Our Lord. He in no way shape or form then cut up the keys and gave them to the others apostles in order that they all shared the same authority. He is the shephard and his successors are to maintain that role.

You can say that it is a stretch, you surely can, or you can say that there are quotes that are clearly anti Papalist by other fathers from the same time, maybe there are I'm not an academic, but you absolutely cannot say that the posistion of papal supremacy is found solely in forgeries. You are lying. You also aren't arguing in good faith.

[Anonymous No.20815610]

>>20815559
good thanks, yourself?

[Anonymous No.20815629]

>>20815523
No? I’m saying the readings given in the book will follow the Russian order of readings for the day. The fact you made it political shows why internet Orthodoxy is one of the worst things you can engage in and why differing to your preist is the best thing to do. Seek Christ above all.

[Anonymous No.20815666]

>>20815574
Lol the Sylabus of Errors is an encyclical by Pope Pius IX why are you lying about very easily verified things? It isn't in Vatican 1. Stop lying. You made that up.

As for Vatican II it's probably bunk. It does not claim papal infallibility and Paul VI did that on purpose because it's a "pastoral council", whatever the hell that means. You'd know that if you did more research then "I vaguely remember hearing Orthodox Grifter #6969 say it's a theological mess so let's mention it!" Literally nothing in that council is authoritative. That's why there are organizations like the SSPX that have valid priests recognized by Rome and not excommunicated but in a weird state of limbo that just pretend it never happend. But that's not how papal supremacy works, a Pope being a mental midget and having a get together with fellow retards then calling the result a "council" in no way invalidates the papacy. Vatican II is a seperate theological topic and I'm more interested in getting to the root of why you, and why most Orthodox Convergs, are seen repeatedly lying during religious debates.

Why are you making things up? What is the reason for purposefuly lying in a debate with an anon on 4chan? Do you think lying for the lord is a valid theological belief? Are you a Mormon? Do you really think lying about easily verifiable things will make catholic anons convert and become Orthodox? Because here's what happens: when they realise you lied to them not only will they think you are a retard but believe every Orthodox is a retard. Like I do after experiencing this same thing every time I see an Eastern Orthodox convert. Is it on purpose to sabotage the Orthodox faith?

I actually think Orthodox converts are possessed and are trying to make Christianity look stupid to non Christians. I doubt you became an Orthodox Christian because you love Jesus Christ; this whole debate in bad faith is proof. You aren't saving a soul, you want to feel good. I OWNED HIM HAHA at the expense of him hating your religion. I haven't read what the other Catholic anon is saying so maybe he's arguing in bad faith too, if so I disavow him, but this is a repeat offense every time I see an Orthodox Christian have a religious debate and it makes me feel bad for cradle Orthodox lol. And if your cradle Orthodox then dear God help us all there is no rest and my experience with the sleeping Orthodox bishop during liturgy is more systemic to the Orthodox then I thought.

[Anonymous No.20815667]

>>20815592
The Donation might have been exposed as a forgery, but no one in your ‘church’ ever backed up on the damage done and reeled back the papal overreach. There are many more Latin forgeries. Must I mention the Decretals of Pseudo-Isidore? Or the fact that Aquinas’ Contra Errores Graecorum is chock-full of patristic fabrications? Your ‘church’ is built on a foundation of lies.

The church was conciliar from the very beginning. The bishops of Rome never even showed up at any of the seven ecumenical councils, and popes were even anathematized at some of the councils. You are so desperate that you are already appealing to Tertullian and Origen, who are NOT saints and NOT among the Holy Fathers.

You interpret every statement of papal primacy through your ahistorical papal supremacist lens. I again point to the canons of Chalcedon, and to the statements of the Holy Fathers, which you cherrypick.

>For neither does any of us set himself up as a bishop of bishops, nor by tyrannical terror does any compel his colleague to the necessity of obedience; since every bishop, according to the allowance of his liberty and power, has his own proper right of judgment, and can no more be judged by another than he himself can judge another. But let us all wait for the judgment of our Lord Jesus Christ, who is the only one that has the power both of preferring us in the government of His Church, and of judging us in our conduct there.
https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0508.htm

>Now I confidently say that whosoever calls himself, or desires to be called, Universal Priest, is in his elation the precursor of Antichrist, because he proudly puts himself above all others.
https://biblehub.com/library/gregory/the_epistles_of_saint_gregory_the_great/epistle_xxxiii_to_mauricius_augustus.htm

We only need to look at the rash actions of Pope Victor in the Easter Controversy. His unilateral action was harshly condemned by the bishops, and he was not permitted to succeed. Conciliarism is the true tradition of the Church, and always resurfaces when one of your system built on the traditions of men goes bonkers— just thinks of the *ecumenical* Council of Constance, which declared the supremacy of the council above the popes, only to have this part be condemned as heretical a few decades later, coveniently. More papist flip-flopping

[Anonymous No.20815698]

>>20815452
Read the whole post. Im Romanian. I lived for a while in France but Ive never even been to the Americas. Rose is mostly popular in the anglosphere. He was a former new ager so I have my doubts about him. His books on nihilism and ufos were pretty good but I wouldnt go to him for theology and spiritual guidance.

[OP No.20815708]

>>20815698
I am also romanian. Do you have discord?

[Anonymous No.20815715]

>>20815698
>He was a former new ager
I've noticed that people now only discuss "Seraphim" Rose as a "former new age" faggot and not as the literal faggot that he was.

[Anonymous No.20815726]

>>20815708
teodor#3378

[Anonymous No.20815730]

>>20815666
Encylicals demand assent, it doesn’t matter. The rest of your post is ‘it’s n-n-not dogmatic’ cope

Humani Generis:
>It is not to be thought that what is set down in Encyclical Letters does not demand assent in itself, because in this the popes do not exercise the supreme power of their magisterium. For these matters are taught by the ordinary magisterium, regarding which the following is pertinent: "He who heareth you, heareth me." [Luke 10:16]; and usually what is set forth and inculcated in the Encyclical Letters, already pertains to Catholic doctrine. But if the Supreme Pontiffs in their acts, after due consideration, express an opinion on a hitherto controversial matter, it is clear to all that this matter, according to the mind and will of the same Pontiffs, cannot any longer be considered a question of free discussion among the theologians.

Pius IX:
>For even if it were a matter concerning that subjection which is to be manifested by an act of divine faith, nevertheless, it would not have to be limited to those matters which have been defined by express decrees of the ecumenical Councils, or of the Roman Pontiffs and of this See, but would have to be extended also to those matters which are handed down as divinely revealed by the ordinary teaching power of the whole Church spread throughout the world, and therefore, by universal and common consent are held by Catholic theologians to belong to faith.

Worship the Pachamama. This is the living and unerring magisterium’s demand.

[Anonymous No.20815738]

>>20815715
Why do you care if he was a faggot? Does that make him wrong? Does that make him incapable of being a Christian? Anyone who says this is a LARPer and do not understand the forgiveness of sins, repentance, or anything about Christ.

[christcuck !BRtcYR7eHM No.20815746]

>>20814810
BASED
BASED
BASED
BASED
JESUS IS LORD

[Anonymous No.20815774]

>>20815715
what an ironically heretical post lmfao

[A Pneumatic !Yk65a4/uHI No.20815783]

>>20815629
>day. The fact you made it political shows why internet Orthodoxy is one of the worst things you can engage in
funnily enough, it also shows why orthodoxy is a failure as a christian church from the start:
>it's not catholic
>it's not apostolic
hence the ethnocentrism and political bullshit

[Anonymous No.20815815]

>>20814810
I sure do!

[Anonymous No.20815987]

>>20815783
There are definite problems in the Orthodox Church, and it’s not by any means the best it could be. My own reasons for choosing it are mainly due to some personal events that happened in the Catholic Church, as well as the fact that the Orthodox are concidered Schismatic and not heretics by the Catholics, meaning, as far as I understand it, in the event there is a reunification, taking the sacrements in that church would not be invalid. Cant say that for the Anglicans or Methodists. I want to stress again that if your Religon is subservient to your political stances or national affiliation, you’re not following the Christianity of the Fathers and Scriptures.

[Anonymous No.20816249]

>>20815365
you're a Catholic yourself?

[Anonymous No.20816317]

>>20815715
God’s love for the biggest sinner is greater than the love of the holiest man for God

[A Pneumatic !Yk65a4/uHI No.20816344]

>>20815987
if you are a christcuck, the only honest way out is the Catholic Church. but it's a bit of a paradox because cuckianity is an inherently dishonest religion

[Anonymous No.20816367]

>>20816344
>”Christianity is a dishonest Religon but begome gadlig anyways”
I feel like you have a motive here, Fr. X SJ

[Anonymous No.20816501]

>>20814843
People like you are why "orthobros" are despised by Orthodox Christians
>Read Guenon to understand Orthodoxy
You're retarded

[Anonymous No.20816776]

>>20814810
Read Sergius Bulgakov's The Bride of the Lamb. I

[Anonymous No.20816968]

>>20815431
Instruments of Satan (pic-related) abound in the West, especially after the gates of mass migration from eastern europe opened up allowing for the influx of eastern religious practitioners, proselytizers and schismatics.

[Anonymous No.20817175]

>>20816776
I haven't read this but from an initial glance I don't think it's a good introductory work for new Orthodox Christians. I would advise to hold off on Bulgakov due to his sophiological opinions.
I'm curious as to why you suggested this book as I have not read it.

[Anonymous No.20817276]

>>20815456
>you don't need the blood just the bread but our "priests" get both

[Anonymous No.20817383]

>>20817276
>implying the blood can be separated from Christ's body
Communion under one kind is tradition, and Communion under both kinds has never been a principle of the Church, as demonstrated in such cases as communion for the sick for example, where the consecrated bread is received alone by those too ill to receive Communion in a Church. Filthy Schismatic, you are of the same mind as the heretics of Protestantism. I pity you.

[Anonymous No.20817492]

>>20815559
>if I pretend not to notice thing, it can't hurt me
That's some weapon-grade copium right there, my dude

[Anonymous No.20817585]

>>20817175
I'm reading Bulgakov lately and he's based. I still wouldn't consider myself a sophiologist nor less a universalist but I like a lot of his takes on theology.

[A Pneumatic !Yk65a4/uHI No.20817602]

>>20817492
how can i "pretend" not to notice it. there's nothing to notice. a non-entity that is neither part of everyday nor sunday life

herbing dumb hylic thread

[A Pneumatic !Yk65a4/uHI No.20817612]

>>20816367
there's no motive and my message is not incoherent:
>1. cuckianity is an inherently dishonest religion
>2. setting this inherent dishonesty aside, the most honest and authentic way out, within cuckianity, is Catholicism
the rationale is simple. i'd rather follow the Pope and not KGBman

[Anonymous No.20817670]

>>20817602
Once the head is positioned far enough inside the ass, there is no object or event big or loud enough to reach, I just didn't expect this cognitive approach on this board of all places

[Anonymous No.20817705]

>>20815365
Everything about post-tsar russian orthodox is 100% true. But fun fact - here, in Russia, ultra-orthodox (all this fuckers from siberia) still a thing, but due to 200 years of being under radars they even more fucked. And yes, 100% of high ranked church clergs are agents of/worked with KGB. You clearly cant get a church parish without signing documents with your "freindly security agency"

[Anonymous No.20817868]

>>20817705
Pic Rel, and also there’s known proof the World Council of Churches that almost every Protestant church is either part of or in dialogue with a member of is full of commies as well. Unless you’re some Independent Primitive Baptist, Sedevecantist or Old Calendarist (all of which are either heretics or basically irrelevant, and even then it’s possible
for infiltration), you run the risk of the higher ups of your organization being Masons/Commies. Pray with the laity and good clergy, and keep the true faith

[Anonymous No.20817877]

>>20817705
The government doesn't let an huge organisation with land, cash and a horde of devout followers run wild and do whatever it pleases, what a shocker. What about our freedoms, and what not

[Anonymous No.20817915]

>>20817868
>aa-1025
Hmm, interesting. Worth reading? Or another fairytale, because description sounds like fraud.

[Anonymous No.20817975]

>>20817915
The author seems to be quoted a lot by anti-VII people and Sedes, a former communist spy into the church who got out and wrote a tell all What she says basically is an extension of Alta Vendita’s claims, that the Catholic Church has been filled with priests and bad actors seeking to destroy it. Here’s a link for the WCC claim: https://www.pravoslavieto.com/docs/eng/gospel_accord_marx.htm
To repeat myself, all churches are basically pozzed, and I don’t think that trying to make a breakaway church and electing your own Pope Michael or Patriarch is gonna do anything. If these are the end times, just get right with God however you can and try to do good in your existing church. I actually don’t have anything against Catholics or anyone, since we’re all in the same boat.
Love Christ and he will protect you.

[Anonymous No.20818782]

>>20814810
Isn't it just the bible?

[Anonymous No.20818795]

just do what your priest says

[Anonymous No.20818876]

>>20818795
This is the only properly Orthodox answer.

Lay Orthodox flock aren't even supposed to read the Bible without their Priest.

[Anonymous No.20818970]

>>20815738
>>20816317
THESE!!!

[Anonymous No.20818994]

>>20815452
>Fr. Seraphim Rose seems to be quite well-known
Among American converts (whom I view as no lesser than those faithful in or from the old countries. Though they may tend to be naive at times, to look down on them and question their faithfulness is arrogant. Their are brothers in Christ, same as any of the faithful). Being a Georgian expat, I haven't met a single person from the old country that has more than a passing awareness of him, and even that is rare

[Anonymous No.20819109]

>>20815715
Seraphim Rose was seriously studying Taoism under an actual Taoist master, and not the Alan Watts stuff that he quickly got out of. It's a far cry to call a student of an orthodox tradition a new ager.