Eastern Orthodox fundamentalism/hyperdoxy

  • Thread starter Thread starter Spyridon
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
AlNg said:
so, why does Mr. Voris have such a large following?
Click to expand...
Because men prefer darkness to light because their deeds are evil.

Also, his following is a tiny group of Radical Traditionalists - the people who follow Voris are the Roman Catholic equivalent to Eastern Orthodox hyperdox fundies.

It just seems like in my online experience, Catholic rad trads are like 1 in 100 whereas Eastern Orthodox hyperdox are like 1 in 5 - in other words, you’re more likely to interact with EO hyperdox in an EO context than you are to interact with Catholic rad trads in a RC context.
 
Last edited:
RyanBlack said:
We Catholics have that too. There’s a Melkite Catholic Church, an Armenian Catholic Church, a Coptic Catholic Church, an Eritrean Catholic Church, an Ethiopian Catholic Church, a Ruthenian Catholic Church, a Romanian Catholic Church, a Ukrainian Catholic Church, and so on.
Click to expand...
They’re relatively small though compared to the big polyglot Roman Catholic Church that contains French, Italians, Irish, Spanish, Portuguese, Latin Americans, Mexicans, Canadians, US citizens, Poles, Vietnamese, Filipinos, etc. none of whom are interested in having their own sect of the Catholic Church. They will have “national parishes” where perhaps there is Mass in the language of their home country and their own home country saints and devotions are represented, and that’s about it.

Edited to add, I am well aware what a “national parish” is and that it is not the same as the Melkites, Copts, Ruthenians etc. so there is no need for people to explain the difference to me. The point is that we have a very large main body church. I am restating this because someone below seems to have misunderstood and thought this needed to be explained to me.
 
Last edited:
I am actually glad that both these “hyperdox” Eastern Orthodox and fundamentalist Protestants are that way. They both believe that Truth with a capital “T” actually exists.

I am much closer to both types of groups than I am to some of my fellow Catholics who occasionally say that it doesn’t matter which church you go to. That being said, I don’t go spewing out on other Christians precisely because I wish to win some of them into full communion with the Holy Catholic Church, since the disunity of Christians is obvious to my agnostic friends and is a wound in Christ’s body, both mystical, as well as at His cruxificion.

(And I will not be satisfied either until Catholics and Orthodox may freely partake of the Lamb in parishes and chapels of the other.)
 
Last edited:
The Eastern Catholic churches which Ryan Black writes about above are not just like “national parishes” of the Roman rite. They are recognized in canon law as Catholic churches sui juris, equal to the Latin Church sui juris which over ninety percent of Catholics belong to.

As a Latin Catholic, I take great pains to inform my fellow Catholics that Eastern and Latin Catholics are equal in the sight of the Holy Catholic Church; that the East has spiritual riches of its own to share.
 
Last edited:
angelic06 said:
The Eastern Catholic churches which Ryan Black writes about above are not just like “national parishes” of the Roman rite.
Click to expand...
Yes, I know. My point, which I think you missed, is that the main body of the Roman Catholic Church includes many nationalities who are not interested in having their own separate church equivalent to “Eastern Catholics”, and that the body of people of all nationalities joined in the one main body church is much larger than any of these separate churches.

I think it would be better if you would not just assume that everyone you meet is not knowledgeable about the Eastern Catholic Churches. I grew up with a large number of them in my immediate area due to the ethnic makeup of the city, and several of my friends belong to them, so I am not the right audience for you to take great pains explaining this to me when that has nothing to do with the point I was making.
 
Last edited:
Saxum said:
Imagine a bycicle wheel with a hub in the middle. God is the hub and we are the spokes. Near the hub, the spokes are close together. The same is true for Catholics and Orthodox. The closer we are to God the closer we are together. The fundies are far from God.
Click to expand...
Re: The fundies are far from God.

I do not quite agree.

They actually profess Truth to actually exist, as opposed to those Christians (some Catholic, some Protestant, quite possibly some Orthodox) who believe that everyone has part of the truth but no one professes all.
 
Last edited:
angelic06 said:
That being said, I don’t go spewing out on other Christians precisely because I wish to win some of them into full communion with the Holy Catholic Church, since the disunity of Christians is obvious to my agnostic friends and is a wound in Christ’s body, both mystical, as well as at His cruxificion.
Click to expand...
That comment shows you in fact do NOT think like the people I have in mind.

Hyperdox fundamentalists do not care about nor do they seek reunion - they are perfectly content to do absolutely nothing and expect the whole world to “convert” to the Byzantine Rite. They are somewhat similar to Sunni Islamists who despise anything that is not their particular brand of spirituality.

In their estimation the Byzantine Rite is the only “orthodox” rite - all others are demonic.

Most of them even condemn “Western Rite Orthodoxy” in their own Church.
 
Last edited:
angelic06 said:
They actually profess Truth to actually exist, as opposed to those Christians (some Catholic, some Protestant, quite possibly some Orthodox) who believe that everyone has part of the truth but no one professes all.
Click to expand...
I don’t remember Jesus saying that was the indicator of someone who is close to God.

Also, it’s actually official Church teaching that all religions possess some level of Truth, although the Catholic Church holds the fullness of Truth.

Mark 12:28-

“One of the scribes, when he came forward and heard them disputing and saw how well he had answered them, asked him, “Which is the first of all the commandments?” Jesus replied, “The first is this: ‘Hear, O Israel! The Lord our God is Lord alone! You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength.’ The second is this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.” The scribe said to him, “Well said, teacher. You are right in saying, ‘He is One and there is no other than he.’ And ‘to love him with all your heart, with all your understanding, with all your strength, and to love your neighbor as yourself’ is worth more than all burnt offerings and sacrifices.” And when Jesus saw that [he] answered with understanding, he said to him, “You are not far from the kingdom of God.” And no one dared to ask him any more questions”

And Nostra Aetate #2

“The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions. She regards with sincere reverence those ways of conduct and of life, those precepts and teachings which, though differing in many aspects from the ones she holds and sets forth, nonetheless often reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men.”
 
Last edited:
I agree that all Christians possess some degree of truth. But there are some Christians out there who deny that Christ built one church who possesses the entirety of His truth, which is the point I am trying to make.
 
Tis_Bearself said:
Yes, I know. My point, which I think you missed, is that the main body of the Roman Catholic Church includes many nationalities who are not interested in having their own separate church equivalent to “Eastern Catholics”, and that the body of people of all nationalities joined in the one main body church is much larger than any of these separate churches.
Click to expand...
“interest” has nothing to do with it; it’s not like, for example, the Poles could have their own church without a schism (such as the PNC).

In the West, a single church and Patriarchy formed, while in the East, many did. It has nothing to do with “interest”, nor would it be appropriate to carve up the West by such preference, nor to consolidate the east (though there have been interesting recent proposals to split the RCC into regional patriarchies, more for administrative management than anything else).

Perhaps it has to do with the western empire collapsing shortly after the legalization of Christianity, and reading the Church as the only remaining form of central authority. shrug. But local preference or interest simply wan’t a factor.

hawk
 
There is a book, I want to say “The Other Catholics; Faithful and True”, by a Russian-Catholic priest (I own it, but can’t find it on the internet).

He describes Christian life in the gulag. Among the more memorable is the loss of distinction between Orthodox and Catholic, with all attending any furtive service without distinction.

Divine Liturgy in four hurried minutes, using the priest’s hand for the Holy Table, with wine made from a couple of grapes hidden away, and a saved scrap of bread.

Noone reading this knows persecution the way the they did . . .

hawk
 
dochawk said:
“interest” has nothing to do with it; it’s not like, for example, the Poles could have their own church without a schism (such as the PNC).
Click to expand...
I’m not sure how you can say “interest” has nothing to do with it. These countries could have had a schism if they had wished to do so for either doctrinal or national interest reasons. The English pretty much did that in order to be free of Rome. Those in said countries, or at least those in power who made decisions, did not wish to do so.
 
If the political powers that be have enough control, or if substantially all of the bishops want it, yes, there could be a schism, a la England. But that would take them out of the Catholic communion,

It’s not like Germany can decide that the German Catholic Church will now be its own entity, but remain in communion with Rome.

The multiple Churches in the East, however, need no schism to be independent; there was never a time in which they, whether Catholic or Orthodox, were part of the church headquartered in Rome; they have been separate since their Apostolic (e.g., Byzantium) or other (eg., the Slavs) founding.

Some of those (Maronite) never left Communion with Rome. In some cases, (Ukraine, including Ruthenia) the Church reentered communion with Rome (in the Ukraine’s case, it had never formally been broken).

hawk
 
Interesting. My (incredibly sweet and ecumenically-minded) friend who is converting to Orthodoxy from Protestantism has told me that her Orthodox priest has warned her to stay away from the Internet because Orthodox on the internet are “very mean.”

Very odd. Even the Orthodox priest is seeing this. I do not know why it is. I think it’s a certain type of people that are more likely to be absorbed in the online world of religious blogging and forums.
 
In those countries where Putin’s regime can not do political confrontation and division in society,it is performed(and not without success)by a honorary Chairman of"ROC MP" Mr. Gundyaev,rector Patriarch Kirill,and…can we say - the part-time agent of the KGB-FSB Mikhailov?
 
Last edited:
Interesting spiritual trends are taking place in Greece. There, of course, the status of the Orthodox Church is enshrined in the Constitution, but nevertheless, freedom of religion is proclaimed there, the dominant Church does not mean the only one… there all the rest of the confessions are not competitors at all.🤔

“Greek Priests Protest New Religious Textbooks”

 
Last edited:
catholic1seeks said:
her Orthodox priest has warned her to stay away from the Internet because Orthodox on the internet are “very mean.”
Click to expand...
I think you can say the same about a lot of Protestants and Catholics on the internet as well.

In real time, a Catholic can have a lively discussion with people of different religious persuasions, but on the internet, some people just don’t know when to stand down. You don’t have to win every argument.

When I bought my first PC in 1995, Gateway included a brochure on netiquette, which I think went under the same time that Gateway went out of business.
 
Right everyone can be mean on the Internet…

But I still think it’s interestig to see a thread like this after my friend told me her Orthodox priest said that Orthodox online were mean.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top