ananda student

Archpriest George Gorodentsev on the rejection of the Orthodox Catholic teaching of Christ’s satisfactory atonement for our sins & its erroneous labelling as a mere “juridical theory” in academic theology as spiritual Judaism, its deniers being the real juridists, & monastic asceticism presupposing it rather than contradicting it.

“What is slander? It is every sort of wicked word we would dare not speak in front of the person whom we are complaining about.” St. Anthony the Great, Apophthegmata Patrum

This is genuinely so good I have to share it to the latiniser community ἐγκλημάτων-charges/crimes/accusations (in the legal sense) used here by Saint Cyril a clear use of the legal sense to the penalty held against us inherited from Adam. Therefore He truly became man, taking hold of the seed of Abraham (σπέρματος Ἀβραὰμ ἐπιλαμβάνεται) and sharing with us blood and flesh (αἵματος καὶ σαρκὸς μετέσχεν), so that He might truly be God with us. For if He had not been born like us according to the flesh,and had not shared the same things as we do (τῶν αὐτῶν ἡμῖν παραπλησίως), He would not have freed human nature from the accusations belonging to Adam (οὐκ ἂν τὴν ἀνθρώπου φύσιν τῶν ἐν Ἀδὰμ ἀπηλλάξεν ἐγκλημάτων),nor would He have driven corruption away from our bodies, nor would the power of the curse have ceased which came upon the first woman when it was said to her: “In sorrow thou shalt bring forth children.” But the nature of man (ἡ ἀνθρώπου φύσις), which had fallen into the disease of disobedience in Adam (τὸ ἀπειθὲς ἐν Ἀδὰμ γένος),has now been shown acceptable in Christ through perfect obedience. `Saint Cyril first tome against nestorius`

‘And truly bad, very bad is the position of those of us who say in our souls, “We could not be as was that son of sin, Judas; we would never have allowed ourselves to do anything like that.” True, sincere, holy self-examination arouses each one of us to say: “Have not even I sometimes been unfaithful to the Lord, although I enjoy all the gifts of His love? Do I not sell His love for the pleasures of the flesh, for the sound of earthly glory, for the weight of coins?” Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves, teaches the Apostle (2 Cor. 13:5). Is it humiliation for a sinner to suspect himself of sin? Oh, no! It is a matter of truth for him. On the contrary, he would fall into destructive self-delusion if he considered himself right in everything.’ –St. Philaret (Gumilevsky), Homily 4 On the Passion of our Lord Jesus Christ

St Paisios said you need to either be married or a monk by 25. He spoke strongly to women. Stop playing games, stop making excuses, time is short “The proverb says, “Either get married young, or become a monk young.” Young women, especially, should decide on a path of life by the time they reach the age of twenty-five. After that age, it becomes more difficult for a woman to get married, because she thinks that she will have to submit to someone else. In the meantime, as she grows older, she acquires peculiar habits – and then, who would have her? Then she will be seeking marriage primarily for security and protection rather than for creating a family.”

@frevagoras Love GOARCH! Sense of humor is almost as funny as the ecumenism!

So bros…. Go or no go?

Saint seraphim sobolev on ecumenism and “Orthodox” ecumenists In this manner, Orthodox ecumenists have the unity of the Church, or one Church, as their main objective. However, their understanding of "One Church" is incorrect, for they comprehend thereby not only Orthodox Christians, but also all Christians of every other creed—i.e., heretics as being included in Her. This ecumenical point of view is at complete variance with an Orthodox outlook.The Orthodox viewpoint always defines the One Church as consisting only of right-believing Orthodox Christians. Our Church has never considered heretics to be included in Her ranks, as members of the Body of Christ. And how else could the Orthodox regard this matter, given that the cumenical Synods always anathematized heretics, i.., excommunicated them? Obviously, in their ecclesiological doctrines, ecumenists no longer recognize the authority of the cumenical Synods. But their refusal to recognize the authority of the Synods is tantamount to a denial of the authority of the whole Orthodox Church and to an acknowl-edgement, in this case, of personal intellect as the sole criterion of truth-which is a denial of the Orthodox dogma of the Church.Using rationalizations and their disbelief in the True Church of Christ, Orthodox ecumenists furthermore give their own interpretation to the term "Catholic Church." Together with the Holy Fathers, we Orthodox call the Church "One," "Catholic," or "Œcumenical" because "She is not limited to any place, time, or na-tionality, but contains within Herself right-believers of all places, times, and nations." Ecumenists misunderstand the ecumenical Church to include not only all right-believing Orthodox Chris-tians, but also all heterodox Christians. `Saint seraphim sobolev does the Russian Orthodox Church need to participate in the ecumenical movement delivered in Moscow July 13 1948`

@aristomenispapa @FordhamOrthodox Having an inclusion insinuates not having any issues with LGBTQ+ couples and or marriages. I think that affirming this position is a big issue. There should be no inclusion of any homosexual acts as in same-sex marriage. Or blessing of couples, This is against the church fathers.

LGBTQ+ Orthodox Christians exist. So do their families and friends. That’s why @FordhamOrthodox is hosting a weekend in NYC focused on critical questions, prayer, and community 🙏 🏳️‍🌈 ☦️ The event is free and open to the public. For more information and registration, contact the Orthodox Christian Studies Center at Fordham University.

This may be the quote to end all quotes on this topic a hidden gem from Saint Nectarios of aegina my own patron may his prayers be over us confessing PSA in clear and explicit terms that every punishment due to man was punished in the Son for propitiation ie appeasement of divine justice As the Great High-Priest, Our Lord Jesus Christ offered Himself as a spotless sacrifice unto God the Father, a propitiatory sacrifice, becoming both sacrificer and sacrificed; He both propitiated and offered sacrifice to the divine righteousness which was offended by the sin of men through the transgression of the divine law, taking upon Himself every punishment as a sinless advocate of the human race before God the Father, every punishment which sinful man deserves, and pouring out His own precious salvific blood upon the Cross and ratifying the New Covenant which is made with the Father, through which everyone who believes in Him is saved, confessing His propitiatory death on the Cross.This sacrifice is the purifying spring of humanity, which cleanses and washes away all the filth of sin from the human race, and sanctifies those who believe in Him and are baptised in the name of the Holy Trinity, Which ratifies the New Testament. Saint Nectarios theological studies First study on the Church of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ Chapter 2

@kseniaofptrs Nicholai can’t engage at all and just insults when he knows he’s gonna get baked 😂😂 best dyerite

Although I am not sure of the church’s position on this in its entirety I have never seen a Dyerite win an argument on this. They always choose the goofiest hills to die on.

@lightinrepose @Tawadros15 High iq

@StudentOfAnanda @Tawadros15 What intellectual malady prevents you from understanding what I’m saying?

I’m finding the Church of the East and Oriental Orthodox are significantly more interesting to explore than Eastern Orthodoxy, and I’ve barely scratched the surface. The “which Orthodox?” meme grows increasingly valid. Change my mind.

@lightinrepose @Tawadros15 It’s absurd. Affirming a prosopic union is utter heresy.

@StudentOfAnanda @Tawadros15 Do you understand WHY they believe what they do regarding Christology? That’s more what’s interesting (not appealing, these words convey different things). Their whole history likewise. Very neat to read.

@lightinrepose @Tawadros15 Yea, sure i dont have an issue saying maybe they said one or two things right. But the main contention is the Christology, hence why i asked how you find the church of the east appealing.

@StudentOfAnanda As @Tawadros15 mentioned in his reply, their reasons for why they (and the Orientals, for different reasons) are better articulated as well as theologically and historically grounded than a lot of what EO provides (online, anyway). Which isn’t to say I agree with them.

@lightinrepose Alr finally good job for responding. So why is the church of the east more interesting than eo? Do you just like heretical stuff?

@StudentOfAnanda Holy moly, can you speak English?

Hieromartyr Daniel Sysoev’s warning to us all about some of the heresies of “neo-Marcionism”—the Modernist mockery of Orthodoxy: ‘In the middle of the 2nd century, the heresy of Marcion, who rejected the Old Testament and the justice of God, arose in the Church. St. Polycarp of Smyrna called Marcion the firstborn of Satan and excommunicated all followers of this heresy from the Church. Since then, this teaching has occupied one of the places of honour in any list of condemned heresies. But the most amazing thing is that now this heresy is considered almost an expression of authentic Orthodoxy. The very notion of the knowledge of God held by these heretics is utterly wild. They imagine that they may construct their own ideas about God, and whatever in Scripture or the Fathers displeases them they label “pedagogical devices.” Most surprising of all, the partisans of this heresy style themselves zealous missionaries and declare that unless we accept their position, we shall drive people away from the Church. Yet no one asks them the obvious question: does the Church stand in need of their missionary activity if they proclaim another God, preach another Jesus, and impart another spirit? Of what use to us within the bosom of the Church are crowds of unbelievers, however numerous? I say nothing of the fact that those who hear their preaching console themselves with the thought that everything is now permitted them and that salvation is guaranteed in any case. From my own observation there has arisen an entire new ideology of “neo-Christianity” that is creating an alternative dogmatics and an alternative ethic. Let us examine point by point what remains of patristic Orthodoxy in their teaching. Their very doctrine of God is different. Their god is neither righteous nor omnipotent (for it is not he who punishes men; everything in this world happens by chance). He does not govern the elements or the nations, nor does he teach the Church (indeed, all Modernists hasten to seek help from various secular doctrines: psychoanalysis, NLP, scientism, cultural studies, and the like). He is a kindly grandfather who pities everyone and only repeats: “Children, it is not good to do that; it will hurt. There, you have hurt yourselves; did I not tell you?” Nothing could be further from the God of the Bible and of the Church: the mighty and merciful, jealous and forgiving, living Lord and Father who upholds all things and rules this world by His Word and Spirit. [...] Their anthropology is different. Man, for them, is a transfigured ape. He has no original sin only mortality rooted in the heart. Hence they assert that all will be saved except the most obstinate. Their doctrine of Scripture is different. The Bible is not for them the Word of God but the product of a “theandric activity.” Their god proved incapable of transmitting His will accurately, and errors have crept into the Bible. All the more so since most biblical books were not written by the authors whose names they bear. In reality, we have before us a collection of apocrypha ratified by an arbitrary decision of the Church. Their doctrine of the Saviour is different. They claim that His human nature was subject to sinful passions, that He gradually overcame sin within Himself and so saved us. Many Modernists hold a Nestorian separation of Jesus from the Son of God. They assert that in Christ there are three Hypostases: the Son of God, the Man, and the Hypostasis of Christ (the “person of union” in Nestorius). Without exception, Modernists reject the expiatory sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ, which He offered in propitiation for our sins. For them, the notion that Divine Righteousness demanded the punishment of sinners, which the innocent Christ voluntarily took upon Himself, is a mark of “paganism.” [...] Modernists deny that salvation is possible only within the historic Apostolic Church. They are convinced that salvation is available to all men of good will. Even in hell a soul may repent and pass to paradise. It is not surprising that they reject the application of canonical norms to the Church. [...] Modernists reject or distort the teaching concerning most of the Sacraments. They do not advise the baptism of infants (and assert that unbaptised infants will be saved), and they are convinced that the validity of baptism depends upon the degree to which their doctrine is understood. They blaspheme the supreme Mystery of the Eucharist, asserting that we do not partake of the transubstantiated (пресуществленного), historic Body of Christ. but of bread and wine “enhypostasized” into the Divinity of God the Son; in this way they deny the teaching of the Council of Chalcedon that Christ abides in two natures (not four). When one thinks it through, this teaching rejects the whole historic work of Christ. For if we partake of bread and wine, why was it necessary for God to become incarnate as a man? He could simply have appeared to a prophet and said: “I am incarnate in bread and wine eat thereof for your healing.” The Cross of Christ becomes superfluous. Modernists reject priesthood as a unique gift of God. They do not believe that priesthood possesses the grace to forgive all sins. For them, the priest is merely some president of the community. Likewise, the Eucharist is not communion with Christ, but participation in a human fellowship. Finally, their eschatology differs radically from that of Orthodoxy. They do not believe in the possibility of eternal perdition for non-Christians; they are persuaded that at the moment of the general resurrection. God will restore not only the body but also the will of man, and a second choice will be granted him. Thus, they wholly devalue our earthly labours and struggles for piety. [...] We see that before us is a skilful counterfeit of the Gospel, which has nothing in common with the faith that the Lord gave us, which the Apostles handed down, the martyrs confessed, and the hierarchs and venerable fathers proclaimed. It is needful that we examine ourselves in the faith and cast out the evil person from our midst. I call all faithful Orthodox to a great crusade for the truth of Christ the Redeemer.’ –St. Daniel Sysoev, “Thoughts on neo-Marcionism”

Communism is the ideology of the Jewish revolutionary spirit and is an enemy to Christ, His Church and His Saints. An estimated 106,000 Orthodox clergy and monastics were killed in Stalin's Great Purge of 1937-1938 alone.

@jaydyer The Fathers CLEARLY taught pure act. Stop vomiting heresy.

Again btw i am NOT ananda idk why people clipped alex calling me ananda lol, i clarified two or three times *anandas student. I call myself that because he's the goat. All dyerites are jokes and craig truglia is going down hill..

Why do all dyerites make fun of people when they say a “western” term but never engage in any dialogue? Hmmm maybe they are scared. Because i’m the Dyerite king.