I know its takey to add to ones own post (pun intended), but please read St. Maximos the Confessor 4 centuries on love.
When he goes to trial, he basically outs the whole bunch of hierarchs and it isn't pretty - he pulls no punches on serious sins. Also, his four centuries on love are intellectually breathtaking.
So love is tough. It took a tough God to get nailed to a tree for our sakes. Jesus was a tough guy and his friends, the fishermen, were tough guys too.
andy
Andy:
I am very much against censorship, but I believe that as Orthodox christians we are called to censor ourselves.
How often has it been stated that words are a powerful thing. They have the power to kill a soul. For an Orthodox person this is something tremendously important. Also, important is that we will be judged for our words, spoken and unspoken. Keeping this in mind, I can see why Brother Nathaniel's posts would be such an affront to some people. They serve no purpse but the evil one's own.
St Maximos had the guidance of God at his back. Brother Nathaniel does not. St. Maximos's purpose was truth. Brother Nathaniel spreads lies. You cannot compare the two. While I believe that God uses people to "inspire", to "nudge", to "point the way", we nevertheless see the effect of such usage.....it never harms. In the case of Brother Nathaniel, his effect has been nothing but negative, nothing positive, and not from GOD.
Milla
Personally I find Fr. John Whiteford's, Fr,.John Shaw's & Fr. Alexander's words MUCH MORE OFFENSIVE AND SOUL DESTROYING (ecumenism is not heresy according to them) for they distort Truth to put foward lies, but I have no inclination to call for their censorship..."+Archbishop John Maximovitch was not a Saint but a sick man...our diocese has the most grace in ROCOR..."--vintage Fr. Komarovsky (Lebedeff) anyone?! Yes, SELF CENSORSHIP is a good idea...I RECOMMEND IT FOR ROCOR as a corporate organism.
r
The moderators have decided to notice once again to Br Nathaniel to not using hard and mocking words, if he continue using this kind of speech he will be prohibited definitively, since he has already been prohibited temporarily.
We also want to notice to the other ones, to all those that incite Br. Nathaniel and other, knowing that they have irritable personalities, with the objective of sowing the discord in the Cafe. It is noticed to these people that if they continue sowing discord they will be prohibited temporarily and if they continue they will be prohibited definitively.
Priest Siluan
Moderator
Dear Ludmilla,
Much of what you say is absolutely correct - we must self sensor and we are judged by what we say and don't say.
However, to the pure all things are pure - we Christians are fundamentally ignorant. St. Maximos book is excellent, and somewhat suprising. His answers before the Senate sounded more like Milton than anything I would have dared utter.
We lack information and ability to judge motivation, hearts and for the most part - whether something is or is not of God. That takes a special Grace we should not claim too soon. It takes patience and time - and with respect to Milton, I have no idea. There is a process spoken of in the Holy Gospels that goes from privately informing, and gently speaking - to going with witnesses, to then going to the Church.
However, exposing a past medical condition is frowned upon, even by the law courts - and was beyond any bounds of propriety.
your in Christ Jesus,
andy - the fundamentally ignorant
Priest Siluan wrote:I don't know which it is the situation of Br Nathaniel, but up to where I know, he is not in ROAC.
Then why, as both a moderator of this forum and a ROAC Priest yourself, do you permit him to continue to sign his posts as:
Brother Nathaniel wrote:+ROAC SUBDEACON nathanael kapner
Confessor - +ROAC Archimandrite Andre' (Maklakov)
Why, dear Father? WHY do you permit this? If he is not ROAC clergy, why do you permit him to claim to speak as one?
Priest Siluan wrote:All clergyman of ROAC should have an Ukaz of the Holy Synod that enables him as such.
And if he has no Ukaz, are you going to demand that he stop claiming to be a ROAC subdeacon on this forum? And if not, why not?
"As long as it depends on Monothelitism, then Miaphysitism is nothing but a variant of Monophysitism."
