As a Protestant-minded Christian in-between denominations at the moment and learning more about the Eastern Orthodox church, anathematizing someone for not affirming that Mary never had sex after Christ had already been born seems to have nothing to do with being a true follower of Christ. When you try to keep someone out of God’s kingdom over such matters and declare separation from a true follower of Christ over an intellectual view about something that doesn’t directly affect our salvation and our proper understanding of God, YOU are separating YOURSELF from the church, breaking unity and communion of the Church AGAINST CHRIST’S WILL. I feel like the anathematizing is a key red flag that keeps Protestants from becoming EO or RC. It’s fine to condemn heretical views, but anathematizing over icons and Mary is wrong.
Views against icons stem from Bad theology which is to expunged from the Church and anyone who holds that the mary was not a perpetual virgin is absolutely no nicene Christian for the womb of God belongs to her alone protestants are a blasphemous group who have no magnitude of the incarnation
It also seems to me that the anathema against Oriental Orthodoxy is over such a fine point no one can actually explain it in a way that can be understood by anyone holding less than a PhD in theology. Is this right? I feel very uncertain
Yet it was Anathematized. Just because you don't understand the why and how doesn't mean you can pass judgment. There is also the Issue of the Monophysites not having Bishops for 2 Centuries post Council. So they aren't Apostolic.
The Nicea 2 anathemas for not wanting to venerate and kiss icons is an abuse of church authority. Given that icon use was not known to the apostles and apostolic fathers, how can rejection of their use in worship for reasons of personal piety be a sign of or lead to heretical theology? Note that this statement is true even if icon veneration is a right and good doctrinal development. The point is that given icon veneration's later origin in the history of the church, it is wrong to make it a matter of essential gospel truth.
I'm an Orthodox Catechumen and the thing i can't understand is this: Churches that lay an exclusive claim to relationship with Christ seem to me to have made exactly the same mistake as the Jews of Jesus time who thought they could be saved because of their religious association. Salvation so far as scripture is concerned has zero relationship to human structures and everything to do with our relationship with Christ himself.
Need to discuss with your Priest. No reason to go to Church at all under your paradigm. No reason to participate in the body and blood of Christ himself under your paradigm, or you would have said so. There is no closer relationship to Christ one can have during his life than in this. "Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and dine with him, and he with Me." Rev. 3:20 You have Protestant presuppositions you are still holding onto. The path is narrow. Lord Jesus Christ, son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner.
The Church, the Orthodox Church, is the only society that is divine and human. Christ established this society and He saves men not by belonging to it in an external or magical sense, but by incorporating them into His divine life that is lived on earth today and always through the Church. Saying “there is no salvation outside the Church” is really no different than saying “there is no salvation outside Christ” because the Church is Christ’s Body. As an Orthodox catechumen, I strongly encourage you: go deeper and in your learning and experience of the Church. Learn to love the Church deeply, for as St. Paisios said, “The Church is Christ.” If the foundation you’re setting for your life in the Church includes some kind of ecclesiological branch theory or a semi-Nestorian ecclesiology, the devil will whisper sweet nothings in your ear to keep you in a false peace or if he can, tempt you to leave the Church for another so-called church altogether. I know we don’t know each other and I’m speaking plainly here, but I believe you’re playing with fire being a catechumen and holding such beliefs.
I think it’s healthy to remember that Christ himself anathematized the Pharisees. The anathema is not a “We’re better than you because XYZ” it’s “We cannot forsake that which has been Divinely revealed truth to implore strange doctrines or false beliefs”
Anathema is preaching another Gospel that is no Gospel says St Paul in Galatians 1. Singing hymns anatgematising souls seems a far cry from Romans 10 and a world away from charity. Most converts i think dobt realise just how exclusive orthodoxy is. Scripture is my first rule, always. We are the church say the Catholics. No, we are retort the EOs. No, thats us, say the Copts!! And on and on it rolls. They hurl anathemas at each other and box Christ into to their visible structures and "infallible" councils...even when they plainly contradict scripture.
Was Christ being uncharitable when he said “unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man you have no life in you”? Was He being overly exclusive and keeping people away from salvation?
Orthodoxy is exclusive because the truth is exclusive. And truth is not something to take lightly, that is why in the Orthodox Church they have such a thing as anathematization. Don't misunderstand me though. I don't know if Orthodoxy "is" true. It is it something I have been attempting to discern with God's grace--may He lead me correctly. Pray for me: that God lead me to the truth, and to love, in Christ our Lord and God.
How do you account for the canon of scripture? If only scripture is infallible, and the only account you can give of the canon of scripture is that given in either a) councils or b) church fathers (Athanasius, Jerome etc) {all of which are thought of as fallible by protestants} then you hold to a fallible collection of infallible books... Sola scriptura is an impossible position because of an ahistorical understanding of the coming about of the biblical canon. Please consider this!
@@AlexanderP901 I want to preface this and say I have a tremendous respect for Orthodoxy and my intent is not to be an apologetic for Protestantism. That being said, my problem with that argument is that it seems a-spiritual. That is, that an emphasis upon history is an emphasis upon this world. No one group nor person can claim precedence over the scripture because scripture is the work of the Holy Spirit and each particular generation was given what was needed for them at their time. Scripture came about organically and in some sense, it’s a holy mystery to us all. To emphasize any one point in history as the arbiter for divine revelation is to conceptually dis-associate the spirit from the present moment. Yet the spirit of God is in no way limited, out of the abundance of his grace he uses history to reveal deeper truths of himself but history is not the arbiter to deeper truth. We are in this world but we are not from this world. Christ can make a church out of the rocks if he willed. It is only by grace that we have anything. “..do not think you can say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father.’ I tell you that out of these stones God can raise up children for Abraham.” The church is Israel, and all of the warnings, all of the broken history, the redemptive use of Israel is all a reflection of the church.
I appriciate so much that you share the wisdom of Saint Theofan, my patron saint. I hope there will be many more videos of his Godly wisdom for us.
Lord Jesus Christ Son of God Have Mercy on me a sinner. ☦️🕊️🕯️🙏
Amen 🙏 🙏 🙏
May God have mercy on us, and save us. ☦️
Thanks you brothers
To those who would top perfectly good pizza with pineapple, and who would madly claim it to be any sort of good, ANATHEMA!!
😏
My spiritual teacher has Anathema from orthodox church
and you think this is a good thing?
What do you mean?
As a Protestant-minded Christian in-between denominations at the moment and learning more about the Eastern Orthodox church, anathematizing someone for not affirming that Mary never had sex after Christ had already been born seems to have nothing to do with being a true follower of Christ. When you try to keep someone out of God’s kingdom over such matters and declare separation from a true follower of Christ over an intellectual view about something that doesn’t directly affect our salvation and our proper understanding of God, YOU are separating YOURSELF from the church, breaking unity and communion of the Church AGAINST CHRIST’S WILL. I feel like the anathematizing is a key red flag that keeps Protestants from becoming EO or RC. It’s fine to condemn heretical views, but anathematizing over icons and Mary is wrong.
Views against icons stem from Bad theology which is to expunged from the Church and anyone who holds that the mary was not a perpetual virgin is absolutely no nicene Christian for the womb of God belongs to her alone protestants are a blasphemous group who have no magnitude of the incarnation
It also seems to me that the anathema against Oriental Orthodoxy is over such a fine point no one can actually explain it in a way that can be understood by anyone holding less than a PhD in theology. Is this right? I feel very uncertain
Yet it was Anathematized.
Just because you don't understand the why and how doesn't mean you can pass judgment.
There is also the Issue of the Monophysites not having Bishops for 2 Centuries post Council. So they aren't Apostolic.
the beauty of it all, is that we do not go by your "it seems to me"
@@mariorizkallah5383 accepted
@@acekoala457 what happened to their Bishops?
@@stingra8 defrocked and deposed
The Nicea 2 anathemas for not wanting to venerate and kiss icons is an abuse of church authority. Given that icon use was not known to the apostles and apostolic fathers, how can rejection of their use in worship for reasons of personal piety be a sign of or lead to heretical theology? Note that this statement is true even if icon veneration is a right and good doctrinal development. The point is that given icon veneration's later origin in the history of the church, it is wrong to make it a matter of essential gospel truth.
Blessing same sex couples .
Yes, it’s anathema!
Almost got first comment 🎉
People that make first comment posts are ANATHEMA
I'm an Orthodox Catechumen and the thing i can't understand is this: Churches that lay an exclusive claim to relationship with Christ seem to me to have made exactly the same mistake as the Jews of Jesus time who thought they could be saved because of their religious association. Salvation so far as scripture is concerned has zero relationship to human structures and everything to do with our relationship with Christ himself.
Is there one Church, Holy and Apostolic you believe in or are there many?
Need to discuss with your Priest. No reason to go to Church at all under your paradigm. No reason to participate in the body and blood of Christ himself under your paradigm, or you would have said so. There is no closer relationship to Christ one can have during his life than in this. "Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and dine with him, and he with Me." Rev. 3:20
You have Protestant presuppositions you are still holding onto. The path is narrow.
Lord Jesus Christ, son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner.
The Church, the Orthodox Church, is the only society that is divine and human. Christ established this society and He saves men not by belonging to it in an external or magical sense, but by incorporating them into His divine life that is lived on earth today and always through the Church. Saying “there is no salvation outside the Church” is really no different than saying “there is no salvation outside Christ” because the Church is Christ’s Body. As an Orthodox catechumen, I strongly encourage you: go deeper and in your learning and experience of the Church. Learn to love the Church deeply, for as St. Paisios said, “The Church is Christ.” If the foundation you’re setting for your life in the Church includes some kind of ecclesiological branch theory or a semi-Nestorian ecclesiology, the devil will whisper sweet nothings in your ear to keep you in a false peace or if he can, tempt you to leave the Church for another so-called church altogether. I know we don’t know each other and I’m speaking plainly here, but I believe you’re playing with fire being a catechumen and holding such beliefs.
You got to get out of the protestant mind. Don't let those demons trick you. Let the pride go
I think it’s healthy to remember that Christ himself anathematized the Pharisees. The anathema is not a “We’re better than you because XYZ” it’s “We cannot forsake that which has been Divinely revealed truth to implore strange doctrines or false beliefs”
Anathema is preaching another Gospel that is no Gospel says St Paul in Galatians 1. Singing hymns anatgematising souls seems a far cry from Romans 10 and a world away from charity. Most converts i think dobt realise just how exclusive orthodoxy is. Scripture is my first rule, always. We are the church say the Catholics. No, we are retort the EOs. No, thats us, say the Copts!! And on and on it rolls. They hurl anathemas at each other and box Christ into to their visible structures and "infallible" councils...even when they plainly contradict scripture.
Was Christ being uncharitable when he said “unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man you have no life in you”? Was He being overly exclusive and keeping people away from salvation?
Orthodoxy is exclusive because the truth is exclusive. And truth is not something to take lightly, that is why in the Orthodox Church they have such a thing as anathematization. Don't misunderstand me though. I don't know if Orthodoxy "is" true. It is it something I have been attempting to discern with God's grace--may He lead me correctly.
Pray for me: that God lead me to the truth, and to love, in Christ our Lord and God.
How do you account for the canon of scripture? If only scripture is infallible, and the only account you can give of the canon of scripture is that given in either a) councils or b) church fathers (Athanasius, Jerome etc) {all of which are thought of as fallible by protestants} then you hold to a fallible collection of infallible books... Sola scriptura is an impossible position because of an ahistorical understanding of the coming about of the biblical canon. Please consider this!
@@AlexanderP901
I want to preface this and say I have a tremendous respect for Orthodoxy and my intent is not to be an apologetic for Protestantism.
That being said, my problem with that argument is that it seems a-spiritual. That is, that an emphasis upon history is an emphasis upon this world.
No one group nor person can claim precedence over the scripture because scripture is the work of the Holy Spirit and each particular generation was given what was needed for them at their time. Scripture came about organically and in some sense, it’s a holy mystery to us all.
To emphasize any one point in history as the arbiter for divine revelation is to conceptually dis-associate the spirit from the present moment. Yet the spirit of God is in no way limited, out of the abundance of his grace he uses history to reveal deeper truths of himself but history is not the arbiter to deeper truth.
We are in this world but we are not from this world.
Christ can make a church out of the rocks if he willed. It is only by grace that we have anything.
“..do not think you can say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father.’ I tell you that out of these stones God can raise up children for Abraham.”
The church is Israel, and all of the warnings, all of the broken history, the redemptive use of Israel is all a reflection of the church.
That's the reason I became Orthodox was that it's exclusive. The new testament was very exclusive especially in acts