4 ms·

A former student of Alan Watts, then a Taoist monk, found Orthodox Christianity after his searching, and has become a revered Priestmonk across the Orthodox wor

by salemh 5y ago

A former student of Alan Watts, then a Taoist monk, found Orthodox Christianity after his searching, and has become a revered Priestmonk across the Orthodox world - he offers his own journey and offers the Eastern Orthodox Christian perspective of seeking God and His revelation. https://orthochristian.com/81732.html https://orthochristian.com/81732.html https://www.ancientfaith.com/podcasts/illuminedheart/father_seraphim_rose_spiritual_father https://www.ancientfaith.com/podcasts/illuminedheart/father_... >The impersonal concept of deity was actually an experience of the non-being from which we have come [already], and that the true understanding of God - the highest, fullest understanding of God is God as person, as I AM - He has revealed Himself as I AM. Archimandrive Sophrony, from His Life is Mine Small short booklet Fr Seraphim Rose wrote: https://www.amazon.com/Gods-Revelation-Human-Heart-Seraphim/dp/0938635034 https://www.amazon.com/Gods-Revelation-Human-Heart-Seraphim/... In my own journey out of buddhism, taoism, stoicism, psychadelics, Fr Seraphims writings helped clarify why their was still a hole in my soul, and why western Christianity made no sense to me. In the Orthodox Christian perspective, they are the Church that followed the Council of Jerusalem (the Book of Acts), the earliest writings of the Church (St Ignatius, the Didache, etc.) then all the councils which codified the canon of scripture, the Ecumenical Councils, etc. Every council must affirm previous dogma; believed everywhere, by all (Orthodox Christians), and at all times - so the below article on the Essence and Energy distinction of God, by St Gregory Palamas, affirms the early writings of St Basil and the Cappadocian Fathers of the Church who were fighting heretical notions of what God is - the Church defined what He is not. The Cappadocian Church fathers affirm the Apostles and scriptures, etc. http://orthodoxinfo.com/phronema/florov_palamas.aspx http://orthodoxinfo.com/phronema/florov_palamas.aspx This is a nice comparison video of Tabernacle and Jewish Temple worship, and its continuation in the Orthodox Christian temples. The western church in Rome was of the same One Mind of Christ in worship, Creed and sacrament until 1054, and then subsequently the Protestant revolted against their dogmatic innovations, and yet now are splintered into thousands on thousands of beliefs. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkmh68urI6A https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkmh68urI6A WHAT IS THE NOUS AND HOW IS IT DISTINCT FROM THE SOUL? https://orthochristian.com/79038.html https://orthochristian.com/79038.html

scoopdewoop 5y ago
This just sent me down such a hole reading about Fr Seraphim Rose, thanks.
throwawaygal7 5y ago
One of the major problems with American 'orthodox' are that they embrace only the easy parts of orthodoxy. Often I've heard that 'orthodox dont believe in original sin' and other such nonsense. These beliefs are widespread in westenized, modern orthodox but aren't true of much of orthodox practice in the east. St Gregory Palamas was a wonderful theologian, but we have tried , only in the last century to built a system of thought around him that his works simply dont and cant support. This is obviously due to an awareness of the more codified thought of the western church. Sometimes, I've even heard orthodox claim that the latin fathers are manifest heretics when they have been saints in the east for centuries! One of my American friends almost treats St AUGUSTINE as someone to be dismissed. The consensus of the fathers includes all of the fathers, if you must cherry pick a subset or an individual to make a point its simply not in the apostolic tradition.
dragonwriter 5y ago
> The western church in Rome was of the same One Mind of Christ in worship, Creed and sacrament until 1054 The political/administrative disputes of 1053-1054 that directly produced the Great Schism didn't involve theological change on either side, so this (or the inverse, painting the Orthodox as the moving party, which I’ve also seen) position is simple factional-identity reinforcing revisionism. > and then subsequently the Protestant revolted against their dogmatic innovations Quite a few of the things Protestants objected to in the Roman Catholic Church were features it still shared with the Eastern Orthodox Churches (and many of them, both in the shared category and not, were not issues of dogma), so no, that’s not true in much the same way as the preceding claim about 1054 wasn't, even before any debates about which issues of dogma or other doctrine may or may nor have been innovations.
rdtsc 5y ago
Thanks for sharing, lots of good references and well written. I especially like the one from Florovsky. I'd just like to leave a reference to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hesychasm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hesychasm for those who may be wondering what this is all about.

by salemh 5y ago

scoopdewoop 5y ago

This just sent me down such a hole reading about Fr Seraphim Rose, thanks.

throwawaygal7 5y ago

One of the major problems with American 'orthodox' are that they embrace only the easy parts of orthodoxy. Often I've heard that 'orthodox dont believe in original sin' and other such nonsense. These beliefs are widespread in westenized, modern orthodox but aren't true of much of orthodox practice in the east. St Gregory Palamas was a wonderful theologian, but we have tried , only in the last century to built a system of thought around him that his works simply dont and cant support. This is obviously due to an awareness of the more codified thought of the western church. Sometimes, I've even heard orthodox claim that the latin fathers are manifest heretics when they have been saints in the east for centuries! One of my American friends almost treats St AUGUSTINE as someone to be dismissed. The consensus of the fathers includes all of the fathers, if you must cherry pick a subset or an individual to make a point its simply not in the apostolic tradition.

dragonwriter 5y ago

> The western church in Rome was of the same One Mind of Christ in worship, Creed and sacrament until 1054 The political/administrative disputes of 1053-1054 that directly produced the Great Schism didn't involve theological change on either side, so this (or the inverse, painting the Orthodox as the moving party, which I’ve also seen) position is simple factional-identity reinforcing revisionism. > and then subsequently the Protestant revolted against their dogmatic innovations Quite a few of the things Protestants objected to in the Roman Catholic Church were features it still shared with the Eastern Orthodox Churches (and many of them, both in the shared category and not, were not issues of dogma), so no, that’s not true in much the same way as the preceding claim about 1054 wasn't, even before any debates about which issues of dogma or other doctrine may or may nor have been innovations.

rdtsc 5y ago

Thanks for sharing, lots of good references and well written. I especially like the one from Florovsky. I'd just like to leave a reference to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hesychasm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hesychasm for those who may be wondering what this is all about.