More Eastern "Orthodox" Nonsense: Theophany Eve’s Blessing of the Water Ritual!

[PointyHaired Calvinist]

Most loathe Augustine. I remember Bishop Jonah Paffhausen once saying that "Augustine would have been declared a heretic had he written in Greek!"

It's also very telling how their rejection of PSA and their talk of how humans aren't really THAT bad...is no different from what all the modernists and liberals have been selling for the past two centuries.

1) Augustine was affirmed by at least two “infallible“ ecumenical councils. (Third and Fifth.) In fact, the latter (Constantinople II) says “We further declare that we hold fast to the decrees of the four Councils, and in every way follow the holy Fathers, Athanasius, Hilary, Basil, Gregory the Theologian, Gregory of Nyssa, Ambrose, Theophilus, John (Chrysostom) of Constantinople, Cyril, Augustine, Proclus, Leo and their writings on the true faith.”

2) EO is practically Pelagian. The Roman and Arminian view of our sin nature is far closer to the truth.

 

[Brian T]

1) Augustine was affirmed by at least two “infallible“ ecumenical councils. (Third and Fifth.) In fact, the latter (Constantinople II) says “We further declare that we hold fast to the decrees of the four Councils, and in every way follow the holy Fathers, Athanasius, Hilary, Basil, Gregory the Theologian, Gregory of Nyssa, Ambrose, Theophilus, John (Chrysostom) of Constantinople, Cyril, Augustine, Proclus, Leo and their writings on the true faith.”

2) EO is practically Pelagian. The Roman and Arminian view of our sin nature is far closer to the truth.

Indeed...how absurd is that that they uphold conciliar infallibility while also declaring Augustine wrong.... simultaneously! Talk about squaring a circle!

They really are Pelagian through-and-through. This really hit home to me once when I was watching a biography on YouTube on one of those modern-day monks on Mount Athos who was recently canonized (I believe it was "Joseph the Hesychast"). The narrator actually declared that Joseph had attained a state of sinlessness in this life because of all his ascetic practices.

HUH?!?

That video also explained (and I have read the same thing in other works written by the monks of the HOLY MOUNTAIN of Mt. Athos) that the chief goal of Christianity is to become a man of apatheia in order to eliminate all sinful passions. And it was completely doable...if you just tried hard enough!

So, this is the goal of Christianity!? To engage in ascetic practices that will lead to apatheia, so that sinful passions will not have an effect on you anymore?!

That is not Christianity. That is Stoicism, which is blatant Pelagianism.

 

[Brian T]

1) Augustine was affirmed by at least two “infallible“ ecumenical councils. (Third and Fifth.) In fact, the latter (Constantinople II) says “We further declare that we hold fast to the decrees of the four Councils, and in every way follow the holy Fathers, Athanasius, Hilary, Basil, Gregory the Theologian, Gregory of Nyssa, Ambrose, Theophilus, John (Chrysostom) of Constantinople, Cyril, Augustine, Proclus, Leo and their writings on the true faith.”

2) EO is practically Pelagian. The Roman and Arminian view of our sin nature is far closer to the truth.

Even better: their Ninth Ecumenical Council (1351) where they anathematize Barlaam and dogmatize Palamas, is a blatant rejection of Augustine. John Romanides admitted that because Barlaam’s teachings are anathematized by the Ninth Ecumenical Council, then, by extension, so are St. Augustine’s.

And they have no problem with this.

 

[Brian T]

Even better: their Ninth Ecumenical Council (1351) where they anathematize Barlaam and dogmatize Palamas, is a blatant rejection of Augustine. John Romanides even admitted that because Barlaam’s teachings are anathematized by the Ninth Ecumenical Council, then, by extension, so are St. Augustine’s.

And they have no problem with this.

It's probably the case that a lot of Westerners don't know who Barlaam is, but the whole Barlaam vs. Palamas debate is worth looking into. What's even worse: EO's will literally tell you that he was some agent sent by Rome to spy on the Monks on Mt. Athos. In their account, upon arriving on the Holy Mountain from his own monastery, he sees all these monks engaging in weird breathing techniques and claiming to have "experienced the uncreated light of Mt. Tabor." He then cried "blasphemy!" but Palamas ended up defeating him in debate through his razzle-dazzle theology of uncreated energies. I can't help but think that his debates were similar to the debates I and others have now had with those lovely EO apologists online, who appeal to the same "mystical" razzle-dazzle theology of the "uncreated energies." When you simply ask them "what does this have to do with anything?!?", they immediately declare victory and call you a retard for being so ignorant.

The truth of the matter is, however, that Barlaam was also an orthodox monk and was in no way an "agent" sent by Rome to spy on the monks on the Holy Mountain. He simply recognized how far off-the-rails many of his fellow monks had gone with all this new-fangled hesychast stuff, cried foul, tried to refute it, and ended up being anathematized for his efforts. He did flee to the West and ended up joining the Roman Church...so there is a tiny bit of truth in their account: yes, he was Roman Catholic...eventually.

 

[Brian T]

The constant kissing, prostrating and wafting of incense towards icons is either idolatry or the term has lost all meaning. Icon veneration is an absolute essential of Orthodox worship.

Speaking of constant kissing, another element that outsiders to EO might not know is that you also have to kiss the priest's hand when you greet him. (And the bishop too, if you ever meet one). I remember my first time. After doing the obligatory bow, my priest then thrusted his hand out before my face all expectantly. Initially I was like, um, what now?!? And he then explained "now you must KISS THE HAND!"

Oof.

That is so damned cringey in retrospect. But, as he went on to explain (not quite in these words), that hand was MAGICKAL, being infused with all sorts of magickal power by his priestly ordination and the apostolic succession behind that ordination, which now enables him to channel the Holy Spirit into physical objects, infusing them with grace or literally transforming bread and wine into the literal body and blood of Christ.

Cringe is actually an understatement. How bloody arrogant is it to think that a human being can literally channel the Holy Spirit with his own mortal hand!?!

 

[Rome2Geneva]

Speaking of constant kissing, another element that outsiders to EO might not know is that you also have to kiss the priest's hand when you greet him. (And the bishop too, if you ever meet one). I remember my first time. After doing the obligatory bow, my priest then thrusted his hand out before my face all expectantly. Initially I was like, um, what now?!? And he then explained "now you must kiss THE HAND!"

Oof.

That is so damned cringey in retrospect. But, as he went on to explain, that hand was MAGICKAL, being infused with all sorts of magickal power by his priestly ordination and the apostolic succession behind that ordination.

Cringe is actually an understatement.

In the jurisdiction I attended (OCA) you also kissed the chalice AND the priest's hand when you received communion. This always bothered me since, if the bread and wine are truly and physically the body and blood of Christ, wasn't the outside of the chalice AND the priest's hand covered in the sacred species after liturgy every Sunday?

Having grown up in the roman church I felt comfortable with liturgy and ritual. But the orthodox really go to some weird extremes. There is a formula for how many times you make the sign of the cross and bow before reverencing an icon. There is a formula to how you greet a bishop (cross yourself, bow and touch the ground, kiss the bishop's hand, cross yourself again). It never came natural for me and I always felt a bit like I was play acting at being Orthodox.

I don't want to pile on the orthodox since there are good people and some good aspects of their theology. I just wish that the many Evangelicals that flow into the OC would be a bit more grounded in the Scriptures and good confessional theology before being wooed by the "smells and bells."

 

[Brian T]

In the jurisdiction I attended (OCA) you also kissed the chalice AND the priest's hand when you received communion. This always bothered me since, if the bread and wine are truly and physically the body and blood of Christ, wasn't the outside of the chalice AND the priest's hand covered in the sacred species after liturgy every Sunday?

Having grown up in the roman church I felt comfortable with liturgy and ritual. But the orthodox really go to some weird extremes. There is a formula for how many times you make the sign of the cross and bow before reverencing an icon. There is a formula to how you greet a bishop (cross yourself, bow and touch the ground, kiss the bishop's hand, cross yourself again). It never came natural for me and I always felt a bit like I was play acting at being Orthodox.

I don't want to pile on the orthodox since there are good people and some good aspects of their theology. I just wish that the many Evangelicals that flow into the OC would be a bit more grounded in the Scriptures and good confessional theology before being wooed by the "smells and bells."

One of the major takeaways for me this past year....so much of what I saw and experienced in EO was just a mechanical, repetitive list of do's and don't that you had to do over and over, whether it's waking up on Wednesdays and Fridays and reminding yourself that you can't eat any meat or dairy products that day, to the prescribed daily prayer regimen, to very way you're supposed to interact with priests, bishops, go to confession, behave before the eucharist, etc.

It becomes robotic. But all those externals lure people in and then capture them.

Now just compare all that to actually hearing the Gospel preached on Sunday morning.

That's the difference between darkness and light.

 

[RamistThomist]

It becomes robotic. But all those externals lure people in and then capture them.

I think that is probably true in most denominations; its just more noticeable in EO.