Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Neofugue (neofugue@annihilation.social)'s status on Friday, 14-Feb-2025 11:49:44 JST Neofugue
   Happy New Year to all frens on Gab and Fedi!!!
   
   I hope everyone is enjoying a nice New Year’s dinner with friends and family.
   
   For New Year’s Day, I would like to introduce Russian Orthodox priest Father Oleg Stenyev.
   
   Archpriest Oleg Stenyev is one of many great Russian priests whose writings and speeches are not all translated into English. One may find many of his articles on some of the official sites such as OrthoChristian, but most of his best work is hidden to Western audiences.
   
   One of my contacts is the spiritual son of a priest who translated one of Oleg Stenyev’s lectures into English. His speech was on the family, of the families of Adam and Eve, Abraham and Sarah, and Ruth the Moabite. The Invidious YT link to the full discussion is linked as follows:
   
   https://inv.nadeko.net/watch?v=Bh0zLCyur9M
   
   As there is no official translation of Father Stenyev’s lecture, copying and pasting my friend’s priest’s translation carries an opsec risk. Here are some insightful quotations from the translation, slightly altered for opsec purposes:
   
   On heretics/sectarians/unbelievers:
   
   “The devil deliberately distorts the words of God; he wants to draw our ancestor Eve into some kind of useless discussion. Did God say, 'Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?' The same goes for [heretics] who ask Orthodox Christians provocative questions, not to hear the right answer but to confuse us, to throw us out of spiritual balance and draw us into useless discussion. [For example, sectarians] ask, "is it true that the Trinity is Jesus Christ, the Virgin Mary, and St. Nicholas?" When an Orthodox Christian hears this, he begins to explain what the Trinity is and is drawn into a useless discussion with those who do not want to hear the right answer, but want to confuse a person in order to undermine his spiritual world. In this sense, the "ancient serpent" is the first sectarian and the first heretic who works against God, His laws and principles.”
   
   On feminism:
   
   “Saint John Chrysostom writes, 'Eve was created in order to converse with Adam.' Why did she find herself alone without Adam when she converses with the serpent? She violated the principle of conciliarity. That is, the great-mother Eve was the first feminist. She was the first emancipated woman who challenged the authority of her husband and as a result the serpent took advantage of this situation.”
   
   On accusing others:
   
   “Adam should have said, ‘Yes, I have eaten from the tree from which you forbade me to eat.’ If Adam had said this, the first man would have repented before God and the fallen human race would have been restored. Saint John Chrysostom writes, 'If you were the only man living on earth, for your sake alone the Son of God would have become incarnate on earth and ascended upon the cross to wash you with His Blood.' That is, in the eyes of God, every person is of the greatest value and the Lord always provides for our salvation. But instead of repenting, Adam shifts the blame onto another person and indirectly accuses God.”
   
   On the foolishness of believing that sin has no consequence:
   
   “Sin is never your or my personal business. Sin always has serious consequences for all our descendants. Exodus says, 'I am the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me' (Ex. 20:5), and God said to Abraham, 'But in the fourth generation they shall come hither again' (Genesis 15:16). We can learn a very important lesson from this. We must refrain from sins at least out of the desire that our children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren will not end up without God’s blessing, with the consequences of our sins. Abraham, descending into Egypt, goes to Egypt where he and his people are sold into slavery.”
   
   On bringing unbelieving family into the Church:
   
   “In the Law of God it is said, 'A Moabite shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord, neither shall the tenth generation of them enter into the congregation of the Lord forever' (Deuteronomy 23:3). [However, Ruth] goes with [Naomi], and when they enter Bethlehem, this city, the whole city comes to a stir. They remembered how Elimelech [late husband of Naomi] left this city loaded with all kinds of wealth; and now Naomi walks on foot, according to tradition, barefoot, and leads a Moabite woman by the hand behind her, a woman named Ruth. There are no more children of Naomi, no husband, she lost all this living with them in the fields of Moab. But she gained one soul, the soul of Ruth, and she becomes the great-grandmother of King David...therefore, if modern Canaanite women, Moabites, non-churchgoers, maybe even atheists appear in your families, do not rush to create some kind of scandal, try to do everything to correct and convert them. Naomi did it; she converted Ruth.”
   
   Icon is of Ruth and Naomi; Picture is of Father Oleg Stenyev
   Ruth.jpg
   Oleg Stenyev.jpg
   • BowserNoodle ☦️ likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     Neofugue (neofugue@annihilation.social)'s status on Friday, 14-Feb-2025 11:50:45 JST Neofugue

     in reply to

     • Plotinus Enjoyer
     @plotinus_enjoyer Two main points to consider:
     
     First point is that Saints in the Orthodox Church are saints by their virtue, not because they are infallible and always correct about every little detail. What matters is not what they say, but rather the spirit of what they say and how it fits within the complete total Orthodox system and worldview. So while we may not accept all of Saint Augustine’s theological propositions, we still respect and hold to most of what he said.
     
     Second point is trying to fit Western secular logic into Orthodoxy is the origin of all heresy. Divine simplicity (DS), which is Orthodox, means in this case that we cannot know or understand the Divine Essence. ADS posits that anything we experience from God must be created, but the Orthodox understanding is that we can experience and take part in the real Divine Energies of God.
     
     You comment on Divine Simplicity (DS) being no different from ADS is the inevitable conclusion using secular logic, but in our system we do not do dialectics. Just because Moses saw the Divine Energies and not the Divine Essence does not mean we say Moses did not see God, as the Charlton Heston movie would have you believe. Just because Christ had a human nature and a divine nature does not mean that he was two persons, or that Christ was created, or any other similar heresy.
     
     Distinction does not entail division in our system, so our goal is not about finding a way to fit secular logic and models into our system, our goal is to redefine secular logic from the starting point of Revelation and incorporate it into Christianity. Just because God has a Divine Essence and Energies does not mean we believe He is with “separate parts”—we believe He has Simplicity, we just simply do not and can not under stand the Divine Essence and as such we are not justified in calling them distinct.
     
     TL;DR: stop trying to fit Orthodoxy into secular "logic." There is a reason why we sent all the pagan philosophers into Persia.
     BowserNoodle ☦️ likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     Plotinus Enjoyer (plotinus_enjoyer@poa.st)'s status on Friday, 14-Feb-2025 11:50:46 JST Plotinus Enjoyer

     in reply to
     @neofugue Not sure where to post this, but I thought you should know this.
     
     I’ve very recently purchased Seraphim Rose’s book on St Augustine. While it is true he is most known for his piety, the sources that Fr. Seraphim uses show that he is also an Orthodox theologian of high authority - in the Fifth Ecumenical Council he is considered a theologian of first rank, commanding the same respect as Gregory the Theologian. The sources that Fr. Seraphim used suggest that Augustine‘s “errors“ for the most part aren’t really errors, but exaggerations due to Augustine living in a specific time and space. People tend to forget that Augustine was at that time combatting the Pelagians.
     
     And on the question of “absolute“ divine simplicity - another reason for thinking that ADS is no different from DS if Augustine is claimed to teach ADS is that what he said about God’s attributes in the sense that they are internal is a logical conclusion from DS. This means: “to the extent that God has any ’internal attributes’, they must be the same as His essence.” This is exactly what must be said if it is admitted that God is not made of differentiated parts. What has no differentiated parts must be self-same so everything within Him, if there is anything at all, must be the same as each other.
     
     This also has other implications. If God is simple, God in Himself can have no name, which automatically means any name of God must apply to the “things around God”. God cannot be knowable by the natural activities of creatures, for creatures are complex and thus their activities are also complex and not simple like God.
   • Embed this notice
     BowserNoodle ☦️ (bowsacnoodle@poa.st)'s status on Friday, 14-Feb-2025 11:58:16 JST BowserNoodle ☦️

     in reply to

     • Plotinus Enjoyer
     @neofugue @plotinus_enjoyer Perhaps it would be hempful to be a bit more charitable towards one another on this discussion. The Eastern Church's emphasis of the spiritual and mystical is beautiful, and it is one of many things I adore about my faith. The Western church's emphasis on logic, Logos even, is incredible and has formed the backbone of Western philosophy until postmodernism and materialism chiseled away through government sponsored indoctrination. Just as a man has two lungs, so does The Church. All metaphors are imperfect, a rather topical and meta point here.
   • Embed this notice
     Plotinus Enjoyer (plotinus_enjoyer@poa.st)'s status on Friday, 14-Feb-2025 11:58:39 JST Plotinus Enjoyer

     in reply to
     @neofugue Energies is merely talking about presence or manifestation of God’s essence. This already means this does not touch upon God “internally” (to use a metaphor) at all. The usage of the exemplar argument by even Jay Dyer of all people supports this. Claiming that this contradicts the fact that God is without differentiated parts is irrelevant because they’re both touching on two different points in the first place. And if anything, the fact that God ”internally” is entirely simple also tells us why God must be known through energies, or presence, or manifestation.
     
     Also, Jay Dyer’s coherentism is ultimately wrong. It makes reason self-referential. So telling me “in this system this works” is not going to convince me. It basically means “accept any system as long as it internally coheres”. Saying that only Orthodoxy offers a fully coherent system is an entirely ad hoc sleight of hand to mask the fact that in principle, coherentism means any system can be chosen as long as it internally coheres.
     BowserNoodle ☦️ likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     Plotinus Enjoyer (plotinus_enjoyer@poa.st)'s status on Friday, 14-Feb-2025 14:11:04 JST Plotinus Enjoyer

     in reply to

     • BowserNoodle ☦️
     @BowsacNoodle @neofugue Two lungs I’m wary of, but I think logic and reason plays an important role in any faith
     
     This isn’t to invalidate any sort of mystical experience, but logic and reason IMHO is needed as a sort of “counter-balance” of sorts. Relying solely on experience (it is important to remember that I don’t think Orthodoxy does this, btw) is a recipe for disaster and invites the most extreme subjectivism.
     BowserNoodle ☦️ likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     BowserNoodle ☦️ (bowsacnoodle@poa.st)'s status on Friday, 14-Feb-2025 14:19:43 JST BowserNoodle ☦️

     in reply to

     • Plotinus Enjoyer
     @plotinus_enjoyer @neofugue >Two lungs I’m wary of
     Why? A body can survive with one lung but is better with both.
     
     Agreed on the rest of your post. Charismaticism and the search for experience can lead people to a lot of weird places. When Christ is truly the "North star" guide, it sometimes leads people back towards tradition. Most of us don't thrive in an environment without the guardrails of The Church, and that's okay.
   • Embed this notice
     Plotinus Enjoyer (plotinus_enjoyer@poa.st)'s status on Friday, 14-Feb-2025 14:28:12 JST Plotinus Enjoyer

     in reply to

     • BowserNoodle ☦️
     @BowsacNoodle @neofugue The two lungs bit is usually said in the context of ecumenism (AFAIK anyway) which I must say I don’t agree with
     BowserNoodle ☦️ likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     BowserNoodle ☦️ (bowsacnoodle@poa.st)'s status on Friday, 14-Feb-2025 14:37:23 JST BowserNoodle ☦️

     in reply to

     • Plotinus Enjoyer
     @plotinus_enjoyer @neofugue I think there ought to be a better word than ecumenism, because that's been tainted by people pushing for us to accept female bishops and rainbow flag weirdos as valid Christians who should have a seat at the table for theological discussion. Obviously I don't mean that, which I'm sure you understand. I try to not make heresy mountains out of heterodox molehills, but perhaps I shouldn't be so lax.