www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Western Man

A frightening antinomy characterizes, Western man: it is the antithesis between the inward and outward man. Western man appears to be one thing, but is really something else. He lives and moves in the falsehood of compromises. His entire culture is a collection of conventional lies to which he has adapted himself. He is extremely egocentric, but he conducts himself with absolute and almost exaggerated courtesy.

In the "underdeveloped" countries where the people still lack the finesse Western culture, everyone more or less expresses his inner world with some freedom and simplicity which you cannot find in the West. Their manners are coarse, but the people are more genuine. In Europe this is considered a lack of culture and spiritual development.

In this way, the constant game of hypocrisy has come to be regarded as culture, where the white-washed tombs are full of stench, and the outside of the cup always cleaned for the sake of the appearance to the people.

But as it happens with Pharisees, that constant lie in which they live does not humble them. On the contrary, their outward perfection makes them certain of their superiority. The most characteristic mark of Western man is their conceit. They look down upon all the people whom they consider uncultured or underdeveloped.

A few of them might have a great concern for the needs of others, of persons, of groups, or even of nations, and especially the underdeveloped ones, towards whom they nurture compassionate sentiments, but deep down they are concerned for others the way an entomologist is concerned for insects. The sentiments they nurture for people are inferior to the love they have for their dogs.

They have the same high idea of their civilization as they have of themselves. Having critical minds, they do not accept anything unquestioned, and are proud of it. They consider all values relative, even those which they accept; and they discuss with apparent profundity all that humanity has ever believed.

Their customary position is that of well-disposed agnostics who are willing to agree with whatever you tell them, but let you understand that, of course, there is no way of proving anything you say, and therefore, it leaves them neither hot nor cold.

One thing, though, which these agnostics never think of doubting is the value of their own civilization. For them there never arose a higher civilization than their own. There might be sharp criticism about particular cultural problems and great disagreements over details, but the soundness of their culture�s general direction has never been questioned.

The civilization of the West is based upon a religion, but upon a religion which no one wishes to name as such, because this religion is not the worship of one or many gods, but the worship of man.

There might be disagreements about the ways in which the improvement of man�s life may be attained; there might be differences in the manner of worshipping man; there might be different conclusions drawn from man�s measurement; but for all and always, man is the center around which they revolve, the source of their inspiration and purpose of their actions.

This is Western man. Whatever religion he thinks he might have, deep down his religion is the worship of the idol "man". Western man has ceased to see the image of God in man, he sees only the image of himself.

In other words, the religion Western man is the old religion of humanity, the one which separated man from God. God�s purpose is to deify man. But man, deceived by the devil, thought that he could become god without the grace of his Creator, on his own initiative and with only his own powers. He rushed to eat of the tree of knowledge before he was mature enough for such food.

The religion of the Weste, then, is none other than that primordial idolatry in modern form. Papacy, Protestantism, humanism, atheism, democracy, fascism, capitalism, are expressions of the same humanistic spirit.

The civilization of the West is nothing but the result of man�s agonized and persistent effort to place his throne above the throne of God. It is nothing but the erection of a new tower of Babel; confusion about the method of erection may prevail, but the goal remains common for all concerned.

The ideal of the West is identical with the ideal of Lucifer. Deep down, it is the same contempt for the goodness of God, the same insult against His love, the same revolt and estrangement from His providence, the same ingratitude, the same desolate path which, instead of leading upward as man thinks he is going, leads to the abyss of death.

In Christ,

SinnerJohn

[This message has been edited by SinnerJohn (edited 09-08-2000).]

Well, I for one like it here in the West - nothin better than the good Ol USA as far as I'm concerned. So you know what they say " Love it or Leave It". No one is holding a gun to your head forcing you to stay here. Air fares are cheap these days - you could probably get out tonight. Too fast -take a slow boat to China. Find that Shangri-La that is so attractive - since Lucifer lurks around every corner here. What a bunch of baloney. Jim

Dear Sinner:

Your post seems to be rather one-sided. It seems to omit the great spiritual actions of the West. As with any one sided analysis it is, therefore, fatally flawed as nothing God created is one sided. In point of fact, the Tower of Bable was raised by Eastern man, not Western. The great heresies of the Church were developed by Eastern man, not Western. It would seem, therefore, that Lucifer is quite happily at work in both East and West.

Methinks thou doth protest too much.

Edward, deacon and sinner.

Glory to Jesus Christ.

At the risk of looking foolish if SinnerJohn is pulling our legs, there is some truth in what he is saying. There are cracks in Western civilization that exacerbated the Schism and caused the Protestant heresies and their end product, secular humanism. But isn�t much of the Christian East � Greece, the southern and eastern Slavic countries and Romania � also Europe and (compared to the Orient) �Western�? And don�t forget the manifest holiness in Western Catholicism (traditional).

http://oldworldrus.com

[This message has been edited by Rusnak (edited 09-09-2000).]

Gee....

Western Man sure is messed up.

I'm awfully glad to be a woman.




Sharon

Sharon Mech, SFO
Cantor & sinner
sharon@cmhc.com

FrDeaconEd,

I was not so much referring to the Western "Christian" as I was Western secularism. But to address your point of the "other side"...

When one studies carefully the labors of the religious organizations and "churches" that exist in the West, he will observe that these organizations have as their goal "a Christian Society" and not the Kingdom of Heaven. Their thirst for numbers, power, and supremacy and their involvement in the world, speak eloquently of the change in spiritual orientation. The faithful in the Western "church" have gradually been orientated toward a worldly kingdom of Christ of a millennial type, or more accurately, of a Jewish type. They have begun to long for and to struggle for a utopia, a better world, an environmentally freindly Christian, a Christian who will not speak out against Islam out of respect and the quest for peace. The phrase "Christian civilization," is perpetually on their lips.

However, true Christians "have here no abiding city, but seek the one to come" (Hebrews 13:14). This search for "an abiding city here" on the part of Western Christianty and by the faithful of the religious organizations is a result of a protracted spiritual poisoning of the faithful. Even though it has not affected many external characteristics, it has, in reality, corroded her very foundations. It is exceptionally difficult to find a person in the West who, in one way or another, has not become subject to this corrosion. Those who are left feel unsettled and alienated (ie. the Old Catholics); they become objects of scorn and are described as fanatics.

Thus the derision reveals the truth that there exists a deep difference of mentality, views, and faith between what is True Orthodoxy and what exists today in the West.

In Christ,

SinnerJohn

Dear SinnerJohn:

Hmmm...seems we read the Fathers and Scripture differently. Are we not to be about "building up the kingdom"? Do we not read: in the Apostolic Constitutions? We must live in the world, but not be of the world -- this means that we must always try to raise ourselves, and those around us, up. If we are to be "the light of the world" and "the salt of the earth" then we must be above reproach, we must always lead men and women to Christ in all we say and do.

While it is certainly true that there are Protestant groups who seek a "Christian community" on earth, this is certainly not a Catholic (Western or Eastern) view, nor is it an Orthodox view (although, one could easily be led into thinking it is when one hears that the United States cannot be Orthodox because it has no Orthodox heritage, or because it is not Greek, or any other reason...).

Edward, deacon and sinner

FrDeaconEd,

It is not a Roman Catholic view? Not only is it their view, it goes much further...

For those who have not experienced the presence of God, and whose heart has never leaped from the whisperings of divine grace, and whose eyes have never shed tears of divine love, for those who have never seen anything beyond the horizon of this earth, it is natural that Christ which denies the world should appear as something else.

Catholicism has perfected social Christianity in these days, a perfection which started long ago when the Lord was sent back into the heavens and His place filled by His "representative".

For proof of this, one need look no further than one tiny section of the Vatican II documents, which is a supurb representation of not only the prevailing "social christianity", but a disgusting look into Christ's denial. Nostra Aetate:

Sect. 2 para 2: "The Catholic Church rejects nothing of what is true and holy in these [Hinduism and Buddhism] religions".

Sect. 3 para 1: "The Church has also a high regard for the Muslims. They worship God, who is one, living and subsistent, merciful and almighty, the Creator of heaven and earth, who has spoken also to men...Although not acknowledging him as God, they venerate Jesus as a prophet, his Virgin mother they also honor."

But the bible says the Muslims, Jews, Hindus' and Buddist's are antichrist...

"Who is the liar? It is the man who denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a man is the antichrist--he denies the Father and the Son. No one who denies the Son has the Father; whoever acknowledges the Son has the Father also." (1 John 2:22-23)

"Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come. This is how we know it is the last hour. 19They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us." (1 John 2:18-19)

This denial, documented in the council records of the Vatican, is a continuation of Christ's crucification, what a shame.

This "theology" is not isolated to one error in Vatican Council II, these words are not new to Catholics as we have seen the pope on occasion kiss the Qu'ran, pray with Jews, and say these words...

"The Hebrew and Islamic peoples, and Christians... these three expressions of an IDENTICAL monotheism, speak with the most authentic and ancient, and even the boldest and most confident voices. Why should it not be possible that the name of the SAME God, instead of engendering irreconcilable opposition, should lead rather to mutual respect, understanding and peaceful coexistence? Should the reference to the same God, the same Father, without prejudice to theological discussion, not lead us rather one day to discover what is so evident, yet so difficult - that we are all sons of the same Father, and that, therefore, we are all brothers?" (Pope Paul VI, La Croix, Aug. 11, 1970)

"Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness? What harmony is there between Christ and Belial?"(2 Cor 6:14-15)

Indeed, Allah is the pagan god of the moon and is one of 350 "gods" that "existed" around 600 AD. Mohommed was a liar, a caravan raider, an adulterer, and a pedophile. There are over 250 contradictions in the Qu'ran and it has nothing to do with "an identical monotheism" and should not be looked at with "esteem".

Those chosen few must be careful, very careful. The devil does not always act as devil; most of the time he appears as an angel of light. He preaches a Christianity just a little different from the real one, and with this trap many more are caught in his net than he would have gained by sending forth an entire army of atheists or Diocletians.

He stigmatizes the faithful, characterizing them as intolerant, narrow-minded, fanatics, letter-worshippers. In this way he has aroused against the Church of Christ the most frightful persecution ever. People are often more afraid of characterizations which diminish their honor and reputation than of the persecutor�s sword. Very few are those who can accept the sacrifice of being considered stupid. But in today�s world it is inevitable that every true Christian will be characterized as a fool, or at least narrow-minded. Very few have the courage to advance with such a prospect which approaches martyrdom. That is why most people prefer the easy way of compromises, and they preach it with fanaticism. They prefer to pray with the Muslims than to pray with the ancient canons.

In this way, Catholicism is so much more than social christianity.

In Christ,

SinnerJohn




[This message has been edited by SinnerJohn (edited 09-11-2000).]

Dear SinnerJohn,
Please be careful of the word "Allah" since it was and is used by Orthodox Arab like me and in our Arabic churches. Before there was a Muhammed or Islam, Arab Christians referred to the God in the Arabic as El-elah or Allah. Islam borrowed much from Orthodoxy and threw away very important and essential Orthodox teachings. That's why they are known as a runaway ancient heresy with bits of Orthodoxy. It can be argued with the rest of the false religions of the world that have sparks of Orthodoxy but have not yet realized our truths and do not know about the fullness of the Orthodox Church.
If the Pope did kiss the Quran (I don't know if he did) I have to agree with you that is sad and unfortunate. You will never find one heretic amongst these Muslims that would venerate or kiss our Bible. On the other hand, I would not even offer them that privilege since they don't believe in its authenticity. They're still looking for the "original Bible" and claim Muhammed is in the Bible! Keeping looking you poor lost souls. LOL.
God gave humanity His gift of knowledge only to be corrupted and brought back from darkness to light in Christ. Israel was brought to light by God only to regress into paganism and then back to God and then back to their idolatry. It's like a never ending circle.
My point is we can and should acknowledge the Orthodox elements in the other religions but never accept or validate them in complete fullness as we do in our Orthodox Church. There must be unity in the faith. That's where we come in and present the fullness of our story. We do not judge them for being outside the fullness of the Orthodox Church. Perhaps, the Holy Spirit will bring people to their senses or reveal to them the mystery & fullness of Orthodoxy by His own time standards.
I hope my contribution added to your well-meaning post.

Dear SinnerJohn:

I, too, repeat Robert's caution about condemning the use of the word "Allah" -- we use it in our Melkite tradtion since we speak Arabic...

However, you write, apparently condemning: Does Truth cease to be Truth simply because a non-Christian believes it? Is Truth, then, subjective? Truth is Truth. It matters not where Truth is found since Truth cannot change, cannot mutate, cannot be altered! Muslims, while certainly not Christians believe in the same God Christians believe in, just not in the same way or with the same understanding.

When the Jews proclaim in their great prayer: "Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is One" or when the Muslim cires out, "There is no God but Allah!" do they not say the same thing we believe and profess in the Creed: "I believe in one God..."? A flawed understanding, certainly, but still the same God. Their God is not the Father for they do not know the Father, but rather it is the undifferentiated Trinity, the Godhead if you will.

As for social Christianity, the ones who have perfected that are the Mormons -- and they're not even Christian!

Let's look at Pope Paul's citation for a moment. I note that you highlight the word "identical" but I think you missed what it modified. It modifies the word "monotheism" in that all three religions believe in the same God and that there is only one God. Clearly the faith traditions are substantially different.

As for what Mohammed was -- can God not work through anyone? If God can only work throught the sinless then we are all in trouble for Paul claims to be the greatest of sinners (1 Tim 1:15)!

Perhaps I should stop here and let you reflect...

Edward, deacon and sinner

Robert,

I did not know the Antiochians used the word "Allah", that is interesting. There is a professor of theology at Harvard that spent 17 years studying Islam and traced the word "Allah" to Mecca and was one of the more powerful Arabian pagan god's (of the moon - hence the cresent moons). It was this information that I was refering to and presume the information is accurate. Do you have another perspective on it's origin which you could share? This may be a case of a word meaning one thing long ago, and coming to mean something else years later. There are many examples of that in English.

And by the way, the pope did indeed kiss the Qu'ran. It is in a video collection you can buy. The scene of the pope kissing the Qu'ran was shown all over the muslim world saying that the pope acknowledges Islam as the "real religion". What a shame indeed. I have a word for him and it is a word that can be found in the bible.

In Christ,

SinnerJohn

[This message has been edited by SinnerJohn (edited 09-12-2000).]

FrDeaconEd,

"Social Christians" do not want Christ as He is; they do not want the Christ Who refused to submit to the devil�s temptations in the desert. They want a Christ Who will submit to them. They want a Christ Who desires the Kingdoms of the earth, a Christ Who will turn the stones into bread so that men may be satiated, a Christ who will overwhelm the world with miracles that inspire awe and constrain men to submit.

The " Social Christians" who do not understand the message of Jesus do not want that kind of Christ. Like the Grand Inquisitor of Dostoyevsky, they are ready to cast Christ into the fire because He upsets their plans which they have been persistently cultivating for years. "You came and taught us a Christianity which is inhuman and hard", says the Inquisitor to Christ, "and we�ve labored for so many centuries now to make it a human religion. And now that we�ve succeeded, you�ve come to spoil our efforts of so many centuries? But you won�t accomplish it. Tomorrow I shall order them to burn you as a heretic".

For a right-believing (Orthodox) Christian the answer to this topic is as natural as putting your socks on before your shoes. The scriptures I posted above are clear enough, but for all those "social Christians" who have been raised thinking Jesus came to bring peace to the world, this does indeed come as a shock, that is, the Christian God is NOT the God of the Muslims or even the Jews.

The Jews awaited the Messiah for centuries, and when He came they did not accept Him; instead, they hung Him on the Cross. And why? Because Christ was not what they were waiting for. And that is why they were not able to recognize the Messiah in His person. They were waiting for an earthly king, a world conqueror. They awaited someone who would subject all the races of the world at the feet of the nation of Israel, who force the Roman rulers of the world to bow and worship him, who would give power and glory to his followers.

When they saw Him poor and humble, meek and full of peace, one Who offered no earthly goods but spoke of heavenly things, and not only that, but even asked them to deny the earthly and tangible so that liberated they could reach the heavenly and itangible, they realized that He was not for them. He was not the Messiah they awaited, but exactly the opposite. He Who refused to turn the stones into bread for all to be filled, Who refused to overwhelm the mobs with His power and did not agree to subjugate the kingdoms of the earth, was not the appropriate leader for them. That is why they crucified Him and began awaiting another. And they still await him. And along with the Jews are millions of people awaiting the Messiah of the Jews, and most of them are called Christians. And they have no idea that they await the same Messiah as the Jews.

The tragedy is that the Messiah whom the Jews await will come. It was said by the mouth of Christ and by the mouth of the Apostles; it is written in the books of the New Testament. The Messiah of the Jews shall come. He will give the bread which Christ refused to give, and along with that, all the material things which He refused to give. He will overwhelm them with signs and wonders which people unto the ends of the earth will fear and be amazed at, and they will come grovelling to fall at his feet. He will unite all the nations and races and kingdoms of the world into one state. He will fill the hearts of the Scribes of the law and the Pharisees with joy - the hearts of every race of "Jews". Yes, the Messiah of the Jews shall come. He will be what Christ is not, and he will not be what Christ is. He will be the Antichrist.

"Children, it is the last hours, and as ye have heard that the Antichrist cometh..." (I John 2:18).

Here is a nice Orthodox perspective I found for you....


It is a very widespread opinion that since we all lay claim to the posterity of Abraham, we all have as God the God of Abraham and all three of us worship the same God! And, this same God constitutes in some fashion our point of unity and of "mutual understanding," and this invites us to a "fraternal relation," as the Grand Rabbi Dr. Safran emphasized, paraphrasing the Psalm: "Oh, how good it is to see brethren seated together..."

In this perspective it is evident that Jesus Christ, God and Man, the Son Co-eternal with the Father without beginning, His Incarnation, His Cross His Glorious Resurrection and His Second and Terrible Coming - become secondary details which cannot prevent us from "fraternizing" with those who consider Him as "a simple prophet" (according to the Qu'ran) or as "the son of a prostitute" (according to certain Talmudic traditions)! Thus we would place Jesus of Nazareth and Mohammed on the same level. I do not know what Christian worthy of the name could admit this in his conscience.
One might say that in these three religions, passing over the past, one could agree that Jesus Christ is an extraordinary and exceptional being and that He was sent by God. But for us Christians, if Jesus Christ is not God, we cannot consider Him either as a "prophet " or as one sent by God, "but only as a great imposter without compare, having proclaimed Himself "Son of God," making Himself thus equal to God!" (St. Mark 14:61-62).

According to this ecumenical solution on the supra-confessional level, the Trinitarian God of Christians would be the same thing as the monotheism of Judaism, of Islam, of the ancient heretic Sabellius, of the modern anti-Trinitarians, and of certain Illuminist sects. There would not be Three Persons in a Single Divinity, but a single Person, unchanging for some, or successively changing "masks" (Father-Son-Spirit) for others! And nonetheless one would pretend that this was the "same God"

Here some might naively propose: "Yet for the three religions there is a common point: all three confess God the Father! "But according to the Holy Orthodox Faith, this is an absurdity. We confess always: Glory to the Holy, Consubstantial, Life-giving and Indivisible Trinity." How could we separate the Father from the Son when Jesus Christ affirms I and the Father are One (St. John 10:30); and St. John the Apostle, Evangelist, and Theologian, the Apostle of Love, clearly affirms: Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father (St. John 2:23).

But even if all three of us call God Father: of whom is He really the Father? For the Jews and the Moslems He is the Father of men in the plane of creation; while of us Christians He is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ by adoption (Eph. 1:4-5) in the plane of redemption. What resemblance is there, then, between the Divine Paternity in Christianity and in the other religions?
Others might say: "But all the same, Abraham worshipped the true God; and the Jews through Isaac and the Moslems through Hagar are the descendants of this true worshipper of God." Here one will have to make several things clear: Abraham worshipped God not at all in the form of the unipersonal monotheism of the others, but in the form of the Holy Trinity. We read in the Holy Scripture: And the Lord appeared unto him at the Oaks of Mamre... and he bowed himself toward the ground (Gen. 18:1-2). Under what form did Abraham worship God? Under the unipersonal form, or under the form of the Divine Tri-unity?

We Orthodox Christians venerate this Old Testament manifestation of the Holy Trinity on the Day of Pentecost, when we adorn our churches with boughs representing the ancient oaks, and when we venerate in their midst the icon of the Three Angels, just as our father Abraham venerated it! Carnal descent from Abraham can be of no use to us if we are not regenerated by the waters of Baptism in the Faith of Abraham. And the Faith of Abraham was the Faith in Jesus Christ, as the Lord Himself has said: Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day; and he saw it and was glad (St. John 8:56). Such also was the Faith of the Prophet-King David, who heard the heavenly Father speaking to His Consubstantial Son: The Lord said unto my Lord (Ps. 109:1; Acts 2:34).

Such was the Faith of the Three Youths in the fiery furnace when they were saved by the Son of God (Dan. 3:25); and of the holy Prophet Daniel, who had the Vision of the two natures of Jesus Christ in the Mystery of the Incarnation when the Son of Man came to the Ancient of Days (Dan. 7:13). This is why the Lord, addressing the (biologically incontestable) posterity of Abraham, said: "If ye were the children of Abraham, ye would do the works of Abraham" (St. John 8:39), and these "works" are to believe on Him Whom God hath sent (St. John 6:29).
Who then are the posterity of Abraham? The sons of Isaac according to the flesh, or the sons of Hagar the Egyptian? Is Isaac or Ishmael the posterity of Abraham? What does the Holy Scripture teach by the mouth of the divine Apostle? Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed: which is Christ (Gal. 3:16). And if ye be Christ Is, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise (Gal. 3:29). It is then in Jesus Christ that Abraham became a father of many nations (Gen. 17:5; Rom. 4:17). After such promises and such certainties, what meaning does carnal descent from Abraham have? According to Holy Scripture, Isaac is considered as the seed or posterity, but only as the image of Jesus Christ. As opposed to Ishmael (the son of Hagar; Gen. 16:1ff), Isaac was born in the miraculous "freedom" of a sterile mother, in old age and against the laws of nature, similar to our Saviour, Who was miraculously born of a Virgin. He climbed the hill of Moriah just as Jesus climbed Calvary, bearing on his shoulders the wood of sacrifice. An angel delivered Isaac from death, just as an angel rolled away the stone to show us that the tomb was empty, that the Risen One was no longer there. At the hour of prayer, Isaac met Rebecca in the plain and led her into the tent of his mother Sarah, just as Jesus shall meet His Church on the clouds in order to bring Her into the heavenly mansions, the New Jerusalem, the much-desired homeland.

No! We do not in the least have the same God that non-Christians have! The sine qua non for knowing the Father, is the Son: He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father; no man cometh unto the Father, but by Me (St. John 14:6,9). Our God is a God Incarnate, Whom we have seen with our eyes, and our hands have touched (1 John 1:1). The immaterial became material for our salvation, as St. John Damascene says, and He has revealed Himself in us. But when did He reveal Himself among the present-day Jews and Moslems, so that we might suppose that they know God? If they have a knowledge of God outside of Jesus Christ, then Christ was incarnate, died, and rose in vain!

No, they do not know the Father. They have conceptions about the Father; but every conception about God is an idol, because a conception is the product of our imagination, a creation of a god in our own image and likeness. For us Christians God is inconceivable, incomprehensible, indescribable, and immaterial, as St. Basil the Great says. For our salvation He became (to the extent that we are united to Him) conceived, described and material, by revelation in the Mystery of the Incarnation of His Son. To Him be the glory unto the ages of ages. Amen. And this is why St. Cyprian of Carthage affirms that he who does not have the Church for Mother, does not have God for Father!

May God preserve the Orthodox from such Apostasy and from the coming of the Antichrist, the preliminary signs of which are multiplying from day to day. May He preserve us from the great affliction which even the elect would not be able to bear without the Grace of Him Who will cut short these days. And may He preserve the Orthodox in the "small flock," the "remainder according to the election of Grace," so that we like Abraham might rejoice at the Light of His Face, by the prayers of the Most Holy Mother of God and Ever-Virgin Mary, of all the heavenly hosts, the cloud of witnesses, prophets, martyrs, hierarchs, evangelists, and confessors who have been faithful unto death, who have shed their blood for Christ, who have begotten us by the Gospel of Jesus Christ in the waters of Baptism. We are their sons - weak, sinful, and unworthy, to be sure; but we will not stretch forth our hands toward a strange god!

Sorry for the length.

In Christ,

SinnerJohn


[This message has been edited by SinnerJohn (edited 09-12-2000).]

SinnerJohn,

>>"Social Christians" do not want Christ as He is; they do not want the Christ Who refused to submit to the devil's temptations in the desert. They want a Christ Who will submit to them.<<

If you are attempting to condemn Roman Catholics as merely "Social Christians" then it becomes clear that you do not have even the basic understanding of the teachings of the Catholic Church. This is particularly sad since it appears that you are a convert to Orthodoxy from Roman Catholicism. If you were to limit your readings on Catholic Teaching only to the encyclicals, letters and other pubished writings of Pope John Paul II, you will see that one of the key elements in his teaching is the submission to Jesus Christ and the following of the Divine Will, rather than our own.

Regarding many of your other comments, they are riddled with misunderstanding and error. When Jesus Christ was on earth, he looked to God the Father in heaven. This God was acknowledged to be the same God as that of the Israelites and the incarnation, death and resurrection as the fulfillment of the Divine Promise. That the Jews do not accept what has been given to us through Jesus Christ does not mean that the God they worship has become another God.

Finally, unless you are portraying yourself as the only Orthodox Christian in the entire world, you should spend time studying the Church Fathers to see how far away from them your words are. Your source material is anything but Orthodox. Might I suggest you e-mail some of it to the OCA, Greek or Antiochian Orthodox websites for their comment and blessing?

Dear SinnerJohn:

As I read your lengthy reply to me I wondered if you had even read my reply to you! Not once did you address a single issue that I raised. In fact, from a different source you made the same point that I made -- that the understanding of the Jews of God is not the Father, but is the undifferentiated Trinity. That is, they do not know the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, only God. Now, unless you are defining a new god, the God of the Catholics and the Orthodox is a Triune God. When we address "God" there is no differentiation, we are addressing simultaneously Father, Son and Holy Spirit. There is no difference between our undifferentiated address of God and the address of God by those who do not know the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit but who acknowledge a single creating God. This is not an ecumenical statement so much as it is a statement of fact.

Thus, I ask you again: does Truth cease to be Truth because a non-Christian believes it? Is Truth, then, subjective?

I don't ask this in the spirit of meanness, but rather because I thought you wanted a dialog. Long-winded monologues I can get anywhere. Dialogs, however, require that each of us read the others notes and reply to the content of the note.

Edward, sinner and deacon

Moose,

Please point out where I condemned somebody and I will gladly retract.

Also, could I submit the text to the ROCOR or HOCNA for "approval"?

In Christ,

SinnerJohn