We at Monomakhos have mentioned before one joy about hosting this blog is that a growing number of our readers not only provide new ideas and content but often do a significant percent of the research as well.
This latest essay was generated thanks to the diligence and arguments of one such correspondent who goes by the name of Andrew. He pointed out that the Episcopal Assembly’s funding seems to have dried up. Judge for yourself whether they’re rattling the tin cup or not.
We’ll leave alone for the moment the subtleties inherent in this admission of failure but for the moment I would ask the readers to allow me to get a preliminary dig in if you don’t mind: many of us predicted that the uber-wealthy among the Archons would soon tire of funding this clunky contraption that the foreign patriarchates desperately hobbled together in Chambesy some three years ago. Of course the economy has something to do with this. It hasn’t recovered and this means that the portfolios of the lay elites of the GOA haven’t probably haven’t either.
But there’s more to it than simply dollars and cents. Funding from the vast majority ordinary Orthdox Christians could ensure solvency for the Episcopal Assembly. However there is no desire nor enthusiasm among the ordinary Orthodox Christians to open up their pocketbooks and do so. This it becanse ovious from the outset that there was neither leadership nor vision coming from this body.
Loss of Vision is Due to Loss of Moral Certitude
This loss of vision has dire consequences, not only for the Church but for society. John Couretas, one of Orthodoxy’s leading opinion-makers, eloquently pointed out the cowardice of our bishops in a recent essay. It certainly gave me new insights that I hadn’t considered before. In retrospect, my only criticism of his fine jeremiad is that he didn’t go far enough.
In reading his analysis, I couldn’t help but think that the bishops who make up the Episcopal Assembly are little more than agents of influence for foreign powers. Their concern for bolstering Greek foreign policy makes them no better than AIPAC (and certainly far less effective). Instead of addressing the moral collapse facing our nation, they spend the precious few resources they do possess on position papers concerning the burning issue of what to call some breakaway republic in the Balkans that are less than meaningless. If this is all we can expect then we could reasonably ask what are our bishops for?
Clarity is called for. Loss of vision is due to loss of moral certitude. Our nation suffers from this, but why should our Church?
Though the charge of foreign influence cannot (thankfully) be laid at the door of the OCA (my Church), triumphalism on our part would be wasted as it was hobbled by moral failures that almost called into question its very legitimacy. As is well known to readers of Monomakhos, the OCA recently confronted several crises, all of which were due to abject moral failures on the part of leaders and decision-makers within our Church.
Among them were secret conspiracies to topple the Metropolitan, renegade priests who bore false witness him, and rogue “journalists” who used their inside knowledge of the inner workings of the central Church administration to control its machinery for the benefit of a few. There was even a disinformation campaign by the some of these same actors to hide the salary of the disgraced former Chancellor in a slush fund.
And if this wasn’t enough, there was a concerted effort by some theologians and priests to overturn the Orthodox Church’s moral tradition in favor of homosexuality. One such cabal operates openly under the auspices of Fr Robert Arida at the Cathedral of the Diocese of Boston, while the other operates in a more discrete fashion under the leadership of Fr Denis Bradley at the Cathedral of St Nicholas in Washington, DC.
Fortunately, this deceitful coup against our Metropolitan was stopped. The Holy Spirit protected His Church. The same cannot be said for our nation however. The forces of licentiousness are still gaining the upper hand in our civilization. What was once unthinkable is now acceptable, even lauded. Our Secretary of State is forcing the homosexual agenda on Islamic countries. (Is it any wonder we are hated by that civilization? Perhaps Ron Paul does have a point.) Even Christian chaplains in the Armed Forces are openly worrying about what accommodations they are going to be forced to make in the future. And the Obama adminisration is doing everything in its power to force the Catholic Church to overturn one of its fundmental doctrines.
Sounding the Alarm
Things are dire indeed. Nevertheless, all is not lost. Presently, several hundred Christian ministers, priests, and bishops are sounding the alarm. They are pushing back, especially in regards to the erosion of freedom of religion which is being forced on their respective denominations by the dictates of Obamacare. Unfortunately, not one Orthodox bishop has joined the fray. The silence from the Episcopal Assembly is deafening. And embarrassing. Is it possible this is because the Orthodox Health Plan we provide to our priests includes elective abortion? Only one courageous priest (Fr Peter Preble) who serves on the committee that the Assembly has tasked to speak to cultural issues has dared to criticize his colleagues for their timidity.
Make no mistake: this is not because of the traditional ethnic ineptitude that has traditionally plagued our jurisdictions but because of a simple lack of moral clarity. Indeed, one could go further and state that it is because there is no moral concensus among the fifty-five bishops that comprise that body regarding these fundamental issues of human sexuality or the sanctity of life.
In previous essays and in endless back-and-forth correspondence on this and other websites, we have noted that there is very little uniformity among the various jurisdictions regarding some essential canonical questions and liturgical practices. Left to themselves this is bad enough, however given that the Episcopal Assembly functions as a type of de facto American Orthodox Holy Synod, this silence is amplified exponentially. Orthodox moral teaching is being “dumbed down,” appealing to the least common denominator.
Orthodox Moral Teaching is Being ‘Dumbed Down’
Part of the reason for this of course is that some of the bishops on this Assembly are morally compromised men themselves. The various Lavender Mafias that exist in our Church as well as the society at large knows who they are. As long as they keep silent, they get to keep their six-figure salaries. Most of the rest are not so compromised. But in any conciliar body, it is rather easy to steer discussion away from sensitive topics. There are many subtle ways of doing so but one “principled” and vocal way of is to trot out the old hobby-horse of political neutrality. This tired old chestnut tells us that getting involved in cultural issues would violate it and make the Orthodox Church a vehicle of the Republican Party.
Let us dispense with this canard forthwith: moral issues cut across party and ideological lines in more ways than the Progessive punditocracy would like for us believe.
For example, in 2008, when Sen Barack Obama won 53% of the popular vote, he carried California by 60.94 percent. That’s a stunning politcal landslide by any measure. Yet in that same election, a proposition which would ban same-sex “marriage” in that state passed by a significant majority as well. It would have gone down to defeat if it were not for the African-American and Latino populations who voted for it 70% and 54% respectively. (Only a minority –49%–of Asians and Caucasians voted for it.)
This means that blacks, who gave 96% of their votes to Obama made a concerted effort to vote in landslide proportions the other way for a traditionally conservative proposition. This is a staggering consideration. Besides showing surprising political sophistation among African-Americans, it gives the lie to the thesis that liberal voters are blase when it comes to matters of cultural import.
Can we not see that? Of course the issue of pastoral discretion and the Orthodox Church’s traditional premium on mercy are valid. One of our strengths is an aversion to legalism and Bible-thumping. But the private considerations worked out between a priest-confessor and his penitent spiritual child are just that –private. They cannot be used to politicize the personal.
Nor can they be universalized and then used as a hammer to work out a new moral code. That this is not readily apparent to some of our bishops and leading theologians is troubling to say the least. Given such circumstances, it is hard to overstate the moral complicity of our episcopate in the assault on our fundamental values.
Some of course may counter that the Assembly is hobbled because it is dominated by the GOA, perhaps the least orthopractic of the jurisdictions –an arguable point. The leaden foot of Istanbul, poised as a jackboot on the neck of American Orthodoxy, is a reality that must be taken into consideration. But even this cannot restrain the Gospel from being preached.
Recently, Bishop +Demetrios of Mokissos, an auxiliary bishop in the Metropolis of Chicago, gave a thoughtful homily at Vespers for the Sanctity of Lfe, which was celebrated in a GOA church with bishops and congregations from other jurisdictions. It was a tour de force.
He has also teamed up with Bishop +Matthias of Chicago (OCA) to support OCLife, an Orthodox ministry dedicated to helping unwed mothers. This is not small feat and it speaks well of both men that they would reach across the jurisdictional aisle to work together for such a wonderful cause.
Where is the Resolute Leadership?
We laymen have been waiting for such resolute leadership. The words of +Demetrios’ homily were not the thin gruel that we are used to getting. Other examples of boldness took place the very next day, when at the annual March for Life in Washington, Metropolitan +Jonah was invited by the Roman Catholic bishops to give the opening prayer. To our mind, this wiped away the tears of the past year, when his antagonists tried their best to remove him.
They tried, but they failed. The Hand of the Lord was upon him as it will be on all Orthodox hierarchs who preach the Word in Truth. As for the Catholic bishops, their invitation was not an empty gesture but was carefully planned out. The Roman Church knows what it is doing and it was signalling to all concerned who they believe to be the premier Orthodox ecclesiarch in North America. Having gone to the well and needing nourishment for the moral struggle, the Catholics know which wells have water and which don’t.
Is there a lesson in all this? Clearly few in the Episcopal Assembly have the stomach for the fight. It would be uncharitable to force them to enter the arena when they are not equipped to do so. Let us then propose this modest solution: let the Episcopal Assembly meet, see who shows up and who doesn’t and then after a few months, just let inertia take over and put it out of its misery.
In the meantime, those bishops (of whatever jurisdiction) can go on doing what their Graces +Matthias and +Demetrios are doing in Chicago and +Basil is doing in Wichita. Who knows? They might like it.
This is an excellent article. I pick up on one tidbit:
Amen. Amen. Amen. That is absolutely true of three of the four Serbian bishops in the North American Episcopal Assembly. All are more concerned about the geopolitically lost cause that is Kosovo than they are about anything else. The morally compromised Bishop George of Canada would have nothing of the EA. For him, his diocese is simply the northwestern most part of Greater Serbia.
The exception may be Maxim of the West. He seems to “get it,” but one is left to wonder the extent to which he’d rather be a bishop in Serbia or one of the new made for TV, sixth world banana republic “countries” directly adjacent to it. A momentary bout with discretion precludes discussion of the other two beyond stating the obvious: they ain’t interested in the EA.
As there are folks from the gamut of malfunctioning jurisdictions in the US who comment on this site, it would be interesting to develop a roster of North American bishops — including those in the OCA — who are even remotely interested in making the EA work.
My guess: not many. And that’s why the EA will not.
“or one of the new made for TV, sixth world banana republic “countries” directly adjacent to it…”
More American arrogance, humbug and condescension towards countries they can’t even name.
Is it really true that the health care plan for the OCA’s employees covers elective abortion? How is that possible? Were the folks involved in the benefits selection disinterested in such matters or willfully supportive of the culture of death? This is yet another instance that shows how much further advanced the Latins are when it comes to engaging a post-Christian culture in practical ways.
Though tangential to the point of this post, I want to address the following statement:
I think that these words manage to be naive and condescending at the same time (unintentionally, of course). The “surprising political sophistication” of black Americans? “Why, George, bless my soul, Old Jesse’s over there reciting the Pledge of Allegiance! Isn’t that precious?”
Moreover, how is it a mark of political sophistication to disagree with a radical social platform of your chosen team but still to remain on the team because your support assures you many unearned goodies? While there are blacks on the “New Left” who go along with the sexual revolution and all that it entails, I do not think that black preachers often extol the splendors of diversity of sexual identity, lesbian literary criticism, or the dogmas of PETA. Rather, the Left has successfully recruited the vast majority of American blacks to support a racialized version of Marx, where ethnicity has supplaced class based on labor. It is the Old Left in blackface — Labor without the labor. Johnny-come-lately conservatives, like Glenn Beck, for example, fail to understand how leftist black Americans are. Conservatives fret over their “intolerable whiteness,” worrying that such makes them racist, whereas the truth is that proportionally few blacks hold conservative principles. Tea Parties and Republican conventions are overwhelmingly white because American whites are the only ethnic group to support traditional American notions of the state’s role in our lives, justice, social order, and the like.
The economic leftism of American blacks does not make them the typical San Francisco voters of Nancy Pelosi’s district. Black leaders hobnob with the other constituents of the Democratic coalition from necessity. They tolerate the glorification of sodomy and feminism in order to grease the rails of the statist gravy train. And they do so in good conscience, having bought into the racial Marxist explanation of blacks’ lower class status in America. If only Whitey did not keep them down, they would be doing fine in the Land of Milk and Honey. So, while it might be unpleasant to mobilize politically in arms with NAMBLA sympathizers, it is what one has to do for his “community.” Ethnic interests almost always trump other principles in normal human affairs. Yet, when an opportunity comes along where one can vote his disagreement, as in referenda, he does so. Yet, at the end of the day when it comes to whom average American black Mr. Jones puts in power, he remembers who butters his bread. That is what Democrats mean when they say that people vote their economic interests. It means that they support government managed theft as long as they are the recipients of that transaction. You know, that “social justice” beloved of the Left that is neither social nor just.
Joseph, if you will permit me to flesh what you wrote about the black community and the black preachers, you will notice what an uphill battle this is.
first of all, you’re right: the black preachers are definately a conservative bunch and they do exhort their congregations to vote this way or that. When I was living in Houston in 1981, there was a ballot initiative that had something to do with gays. I can’t remember what it was. Things were lively. The black pastorate was lock-step in unison about this. Anyway, the local media started upholding the pro-gay initiative but they were taken aback by the black pastors. So what did they do? They lumped the black ministers in with the KKK. Almost every news report on the TV, radio or newspaper said words to this effect:
“Black pastors find themselves agreeing with the KKK which also opposes this measure…” Literally, almost every day on every newscast the three letters “KKK” were put in the same sentence with “black pastors.”
Now, I’m not black, but that’s gotta hurt.
The point is that the liberal, left-wing media (1) have no shame, and (2) will pull out all the stops to do whatever it takes to make life uncomfortable for those who dare to stand in their way. Eventually, it wears you down.
Joseph, thank you for pointing that out. I was merely pointing out that in retail politics, strategists place ballot measure to maximize turnout for their candidates. In know this is gross and simplistic, but it happens on both sides of the political divide. Certain ballot initiatives tend to come from the Left or Right, and depending on whether it’s an off-year election or not, can make the difference for putting Candidate X over the top. Lots of people pull the lever for just one party on down the line and instinctively “know” which initiatives are in accord with their values or the values of their elites.
Case in point, in the 2004 election, the anti-gay marriage initiative in Ohio increased Bush’s share of the black electorate to 11% for that state (whereas it was just 8% nationwide as a whole). If memory serves, Bush only carried Ohio by 160,000 that year.
Anyways, ordinarily, conservative ballot initiatives tend to make the differnce for conservative politicians while liberal ones do for liberals. Waht was stunning about Prop 8 was that the Left was rock-solid against Prop 8. Normally, the Democratic coalition (blacks, hispanics, Jews, urban whites) hang together on left-friendly issues, especially ones that have been vetted by outlets like MSNBC, NPR, etc. (The Right does the same thing by the way, they get their issues are vetted by mega-churches, FOX news, etc.)
News Flash: EPISCOPAL ASSEMBLY ACTUALLY DOES SOMETHING.
Its about time. However, they should mandate that all their priests read it from the pulpit this coming Sunday after the Divine Liturgy.
Peter
That’s a very good idea, Peter! As glad as I am about this official statement, I’m more concerned about the follow-up.
Once it is posted on ACOBNCA’s Facebook, we should all make sure it gets lots of “Likes.”
http://www.facebook.com/pages/The-Assembly-of-Canonical-Orthodox-Bishops-of-North-and-Central-America/119344704804905
Peter, Helga, George,
You make a good suggestion but in so offering you reveal the absolute weakness we Orthodox suffer here in the USA. How would such a suggestion, or mandate be facilitated? Who makes the call? Certainly the Statement by the EA is good, but unless and until we are ONE united Church, with a First Hierarch who can direct all Bishops to instruct their clergy to read such a statement, we just limp along and throw stones at the attempt at baby steps that is the Episcopal Assembly.
We decry that the Catholics and others got out their protest statement in a timely manner yet who actually is covering the day-to-day work of the EA? What staff of workers? Check it out? There is no staff, just a couple of people. So if we really are serious about administrative unity in the land, should we not put our money where out mouth is?
I can tell you that this Statement had to be drafted, then sent to every bishop, then that bishop had to check with his Primate, then wait for a response then hand those all around until we have what we have. That takes time and in the meantime we wring our hands that we are so slow. We are slow because we are not united.
Will we be one united Church here in the USA? God knows, I don’t. But lets not be surprised when the EA is slow on the uptake when we don’t wish to fund it properly so that people can respond in as timely a manner as possible.
Amos, if you will permit me to disagree. I don’t believe that this statement followed the protocol you described. I think it was drafted on the fly because they were embarrassed by several factors:
1. +Jonah being chosen by the Catholics to lead the March for Life,
2. the searing indictment from Fr Peter Preble who is a member of +Savvas’ committee, and
3. you people.
Amos, of course, if I’m wrong and in truth all 65 bishops did indeed sign off on this, then I will gladly apologize and correct the record.
There is no inter-jurisdictional fast track in Orthodoxy in general and in particular in the USA. None!
Helga, I wish I could take credit for this, but it’s all because of John Couretas. AXIOS!
AXIOS! JOHN! How many Orthodox Christians out there can move the entire EA to act with one simple yet truthful essay. Keep writing John we need you more than ever!
John, would you consider taking up the question of whether or not the Orthodox Health Plan covers elective abortions and the moral implications of this for the Church? I would love to see you tackle that subject!
Andrew, it does. Go to http://www.orthodoxhealthplans.com/index.htm
I don’t get anything with the link.
That said, abortion has no place in an Orthodox Health Plan. Or any health plan for that matter.
Isa, Helga, et al: my bad, try http://www.orthodoxhealthplans.com/indem.htm
geo
George, the link works and it sure looks to me like The Orthodox Health Plan covers voluntary abortion. Peoples’ donations and parish money will pay for 80% of the cost of an elective abortion.
I say its time to bring this uncomfortable fact to light and demand some change. Oh and I wonder if one can find out how many voluntary abortions the Orthodox Health Plan has paid for since its inception? I bet the info is available somewhere.
So lets get this straight in the end, my weekly stewardship can be used to support a health plan for Orthodox Christians that will pay for 80% of a voluntary abortion that takes an innocent human life.
Really, my stewarship money is now tied to possibly keeping abortion clinics in business……..
I have emailed the various benefits people in the diocese that use this health plan and asked them why “voluntary abortion” is covered in an Orthodox health plan. I have also emailed the plan itself to find an answer. I will post their responses when and if they respond.
This is an outrage!
Thank you, Fr!
I received a reply from Archpriest Eric Tosi of the OCA regarding the issue of abortion coverage in the Orthodox Helth Plan. I thank Fr. Eric for his prompt reply and clarification. The link we have been concerned about is for what is called an intermediate plan for those who cannot be covered by the main plan that OHP offers. Fr. Eric thinks there is only one person covered by this and it is becasue they live out of the country.
The main insurance policy does not specifically state that it does or does not cover abortions or sterilization. He said this is common as if they say they will cover it or not then they would have to cover it or not. Fr. Eric said more research is needed on this and will find an answer.
Thanks again to Fr. Eric for taking time to answer this questions. This has put my mind at ease as I hope it does yours.
I don’t see anything about abortions, but it does say contraceptives and in-vitro fertilization are covered. Ew!
I’ll try to fix the link but all I did this morning was google “Orthodox health plans.” Bingo, it was on page two.
Oh, sick! That’s disgusting! Let the letter-writing commence!
Wow.
Unbelievable.
Thank you very much to you all. I look forward to the corrected link and the email address to write.
This is all part of the Health Care Reform. Insurance carriers will have no choice but to include these items.
I thought the OCAs position on contraception was that it was ok if you got an ok from your spiritual father.
Artificial insemination is ok, as long as husband/wifes sperm/egg are used.
In vitro if no eggs are destroyed.
http://oca.org/PDFs/christianwitness/2004-PMConf-LScheean.pdf
I am not an OCA priest but as I understand things contraception is allowed, as you mention with consultation with your spiritual father. The idea is that the door to children is closed forever that the married couple is open to having children.
I was taught that if there is a reason to use contraception, for example, you are spacing children out or economic situations are difficult, then with consultation it can be used. As with all things in the church economia can be used.
Fr. Stanley Haraakas write about many of these issues.
Fasting, as taught and expected by the Church, includes the “marital fast”. It works so well that no other “control” method is needed but this “self control” approach to family planning. Of course, legitimate health considerations must be discussed with the spiritual father or confessor. As for “economic considerations”, in this country, that generally is selfish baloney.
Since the Fasts are timed according to the Church calendar, and not a woman’s cycyle, there is no correlation of it “working so well.” Were it so, we would see a surplus of children born in March, given the relative lack of fasting days in July. Btw, the inclusion of the “marital fast” gained general acceptance only with the rise of Moscow as the Orthodox center, and even then it was not universal.
There are four major fasts, plus two fasting days of every week (more, depending upon how one is counseled to prepare for receiving Holy Communion) (and fewer, if there is a fast-free week). That adds up to a great deal of time.
In nearly thirty years of marriage, God granted us only four living children, and one other who died before birth. Ours is not a huge family. I do consider the Church’s teaching reasonable and compassionate.
Isa: do you mean July in the OC or the New? (groan).
Antonia: As do I. Anyway, as someone who is in the medical field, I must tell you that I’m worried about the long-term effects on a woman’s body of BCPs and how they monkey around with her natural constitution. (To say nothing about the environmental impact.)
My server doesn’t like your website George.
The first post above should be deleted. The second is the post I tried to post. And it should be “100 million,” not “100 000 million.”
It’s fairly presumptuous and rude to suggest that if everyone followed the marital fast then they’d no need for birth control or nfp because their family would naturally be small. My husband and I do follow the marital fast and we had 3 child in 36 mo. That’s great that simply following the marital fast meant you never otherwise had to avoid pregnancy and only had 4 children in your entire married life but that’s seriously not the norm for couples of normal fertility. I have family members who never avoided in any way shape or form and only had 2-4 children. But if we hadn’t started using NFP then we’d have more like 10 children now and not just 6. I’m happy with it. I always wanted a big family. And I’m not sure 6 is all we’ll be blessed with.
But I know how a woman’s cycle works and while Wed and Fri might be a fast day it doesn’t mean a hill of beans regarding the life span of sperm on Tue or Thur or when a woman ovulates. Orthodox before the advent of the acceptance of birth control didn’t all have small families and it’s not because they all failed to fast. That said I am truly disturbed the wide spread acceptance of bc among most Orthodox I know and the intentions to only have a small family. Birth control is not the exception it’s the norm. Yes many people in this country ARE poor. But most of families aren’t. I consider my children the greater blessing personally and choose happily to have more children vs greater retirement or savings for college.
Turnip’s post is difficult to untangle, with so much of what sounds like perplexing hostility. The initial problem I detect is her error of thinking that I naively believe that following the marital fast always results in a small family. There also is an implied slur that I know nothing of biology.
I would have loved to have more children. My husband and I simply chose to adhere to Church teaching, and left God to decide His will for us. It was not for us to dictate to Him.
I don’t see that hostility you claim is obscuring Turnip’s post, Antonia. You claimed “Fasting, as taught and expected by the Church, includes the “marital fast”. It works so well that no other “control” method is needed,” and Turnip called you on it. You compounded your error by including the weekly fasts, and Turnip explained how that doesn’t matter, as it has nothing to do with the life of a sperm nor the timing of ovulation. Only the 4 major fasts have any effect on that, and at BEST, that would only knock out 8 out of 13 cycles per year. Even going by the most rigorous, Russian interpretation of fasting, it leaves 5 cycles, more than enough to conceive, if timing was the only thing that mattered. That fact might be supported by the fact that over the 19th century, when the Russian fasts will at the height of vigor, the population exploded with the fastest rate of increase of the major countries of the world except the US (whose increase was fueled by immigration), going from just over 35 million in 1800 to over 100, 000 million in 1900 just counting the Orthodox populace, doubling in the second century alone. And that is only counting births which survived childhood. The Orthodox Romanians were what caught Margaret Sanger’s attention to dream up Planned Barenhood and its family banning mission, and the Romanians can put the Russians to shame on fasting (they don’t even like non-dairy creamer). The Copts are also hardline fasters (although since they retain the old Orthodox practice of forbidding fasting during Paschaltide, that might give a slight edge to fertility), but it hasn’t dented their increase (unfortunately, Islamic persecution makes up for that), even given the Coptic Church’s official sponsorship of contraception.
As for dictating to God, if someone managed the household finances the same way as is advocated by some under the rubric of “being open to life” and “leaving it to God,” they might be called improvident.
George:your worries are well founded, and shared.
I don’t see that hostility you claim is obscuring Turnip’s post, Antonia. You claimed “Fasting, as taught and expected by the Church, includes the “marital fast”. It works so well that no other “control” method is needed,” and Turnip called you on it. You compounded your error by including the weekly fasts, and Turnip explained how that doesn’t matter, as it has nothing to do with the life of a sperm nor the timing of ovulation. Only the 4 major fasts have any effect on that, and at BEST, that would only knock out 8 out of 13 cycles per year. Even going by the most rigorous, Russian interpretation of fasting, it leaves 5 cycles, more than enough to conceive, if timing was the only thing that mattered. That fact might be supported by the fact that over the 19th century, when the Russian fasts will at the height of vigor, the population exploded with the fastest rate of increase of the major countries of the world except the US (whose increase was fueled by immigration), going from just about 35 million in 1800 to over 100, 000 million in 1900 just counting the Orthodox populace, doubling in the second century alone. And that is only counting births which survived childhood. The Orthodox Romanians were what caught Margaret Sanger’s attention to dream up Planned Barenhood and its family banning mission, and the Romanians can put the Russians to shame on fasting (they don’t even like non-dairy creamer). The Copts are also hardline fasters (although since they retain the old Orthodox practice of forbidding fasting during Paschaltide, that might give a slight edge to fertility), but it hasn’t dented their increase (unfortunately, Islamic persecution makes up for that), even given the Coptic Church’s official sponsorship of contraception.
As for dictating to God, if someone managed the household finances the same way as is advocated by some under the rubric of “being open to life” and “leaving it to God,” they might be called improvident.
George:your worries are well founded, and shared.
As previously ignored by those who have the freedom to disagree with me, the salient points are the following:
_______________________________________________________________________
My husband and I simply chose to adhere to Church teaching, and left God to decide His will for us. It was not for us to dictate to Him.
There also is an implied slur that I know nothing of biology.
______________________________________________________________________
Turnip and Isa make bold (and specious) claims about my ignorance; however, that is a freedom inherent to message boards.
Unlike Turnip and Isa, I had read Antonia’s statement to say that the marital fast=abstinence and thus is the best BC method. I know that I am splitting hairs here but that’s me I guess. ::)
No, we read it correctly. Btw, fasting is no more BC then it is dieting. It might result in no conception or weight loss, but that is off label use.
Antonia, we can only go by what you post:since the facts of biology have been posted for all to see, any alleged claims of your ignorance would be neither bold nor specious as the documenation is laid bare for all to see.
“My husband and I simply chose to adhere to Church teaching, and left God to decide His will for us. It was not for us to dictate to Him.”
If God’s will was the only thing involved, one could engage in marital embrace but once (and not even that, according to some monastic literature) to conceive, or engage several times a day year after year with no fruit of the womb.
We haven’t ignored your point: we just demonstrated its irrelevance.
If you want to engage in a philosophical discussion on the matter, fine. Just don’t confuse that with an account of the mechanics of biology. On that, you and husband’s piety has no salience.
The greater oddity remaining is that someone would insist that I (a) wrote things which I did not write, (b) implied things which my words did not imply, (c) believe things which I do not believe, and (d) do not know things which I do know.
I do not claim piety. I am a sinner who struggles to follow the faith [of the Church] despite ongoing failures.
Wishing all here a prayerful and fruitful Great Fast.
Please forgive me, but Fr Peter Preble started this ball rolling. AXIOS!!!
Yes AXIOS! Fr. Peter. I t should be noted that clergy risk much when confronting hierarchs with tough questions. I pray Fr. Peter is well and not suffered much because of speaking his conscience.
Well, he’s under the Romanians. They didn’t seem to bother him too much way back when this very same priest came out in favor of open communion, although that posting has long been deleted from his blog.
Helga,
I did not come out in favor of open communion as you say I said we should not be using communion as a weapon as we were at that time. I said I had a hard time refusing communion to anyone but understand why we have too and that our non communion saddens me. It was in reference to my own family who are all Roman Catholic and how we cannot share commuion.
It is essential to put things in context when speaking about them and not just dropping the “he came out in favor of open commuion” line. you make it sound like i want to give communion to anyone who comes. This is not the case and I believe my writings will show this to be true.
Thank you Fr for clearing that up. And also for your resolute witness. Keep up the good work.
Fr. Peter, I know it has been quite a long time in internet-years since that blog post was made, and it may be ancient history to you, but it’s colored my impression of everything you’ve written since then. Unless my mind is playing tricks on me, what you said was that you saw turning people away from the chalice as refusing them Christ.
Helga,
That maybe perhaps what i said but as I said in my comments it was more about the sadness of our separation than anything else. We believe that Jesus is actually present in the chalice so in essence we are refusing people Christ when we turn them away. There are reasons yes, but it makes me sad. It saddens me that as Christians we are separate but that is the way it is at the moment. I hope we are all praying for a day when we will be one, but until that day it is sad that we cannot all share from the same cup. That was what I was trying to say, it might not have come across that way and I am sorry if you interpreted it wrong. Perhpas asking question at the time would have resolved this for you. I hope I am able to regain your your trust as my intention is to never lead anyone astray and if I have done that I ask for your forgiveness.
As a convert, I have been told by various folks that public witness is foreign to Orthodoxy. A former priest in my parish once shared that he believed publicizing pro-life activities or holding public prayer for such was not appropriate for several reasons. Thus it was a beautiful moment for Pro-Life Orthodox, and hopefully an encouraging one for your readers, when Fr Seraphim Hipsh (OCA) and Fr Seraphim Holland (ROCOR) both led the first-ever Orthodox prayer shift in Dallas TX in front of the late-term abortion clinic in the October 2011 40 Days for Life effort.
Multiple OCA priests across the country as well as laypersons of several jurisdictions requested the Rachel Lamenting prayer icon card donated to us by GOA priest and long-time pro-life advocate Fr Demetrios Carellas for home prayer during the shift.
Available to the Orthodox volunteers who prayed lovingly were the Akathist of Repentance for One Who Has Aborted A Child (St. Paisius Orthodox Monastery 2006), Akathists to the Theotokos and other prayers.
Fr Seraphim Holland posted a moving account of his experience there on his blog at http://www.orthodox.net/redeemingthetime/2011/10/21/2005-a-spiritual-reflection-regarding-prayer-of-an-orthodox-christian-priest-in-front-of-a-late-term-abortion-clinic-during-the-dallas-40-days-for-life-campaign/ well worth hearing. Both priests were described to me by year-long sidewalk counselors and prayer volunteers as remarkable for their holy, loving, serious, and keen intent on prayer, facing East, a boon to the Pro-Life effort. During the prayer shift they were accompanied by their Matushkas, one deacon, one reader, and parishioners.
The ever-memorable Vladika Dmitri Royster once personally told me that “everything must be done to save babies from being killed” including public prayer and activity, thus blessing participation. How beautiful it was to honor his request officially in the month after his repose, led by one of his devoted spiritual sons in the priesthood. Memory Eternal for him and for all the innocents he cherished.
Do keep watch for the pro-life October Baby film due in theaters in March 2012.
Unfortunately “contraceptive” methods and medications are often misnamed — they truly are “birth control” but cause abortions after conception, at which time human development quickly begins. So they are chemical or mechanical abortions in fact though they are not procedures involving a medical staff. Abstinence and condoms are the only 100% truly nonabortive “contraceptive” methods…And of course in-vitro fertilization leads to calculated deaths of developing humans…Likely this group is completely aware, but I have been surprised how often intelligent folks believe the corrupted language used, including physicians, who learned differently in embryology and ob/gyn…
How are vasectomies and the”pill” abortive?
PS: no axe to grind, just want to understand
Logan,
Sterilization is not abortive, but the pill can be. In a small percentage of cases, it doesn’t stop ovulation but does prevent the fertilized egg or zygote (I’m not sure how long the trip takes) from implanting. In those cases, the developing human being gets flushed out.
Joseph A. is correct re how “the pill” works when ovulation takes place – it has been shown that the woman’s endometrium lining can be thinned (it is normally at optimal thickness for implantation a few days after ovulation) to the extent that the fertilized egg cannot attach.
Btw Natural Family Planning – abstaining during ovulation – is 100% effective when done properly, and that is not hard to do.
Dear Basil:
How I wish it were true that NFP is 100% effective…Even conscientious folks find otherwise at times…Condoms break or are faulty too…But at least the action of both is not abortive and highly increases the chances of preventing conception…
I read the below article which included the following:
“Inhibiting ovulation may be the only mechanism of action for levonorgestrel-only ECPs. Recent studies have found no effect on the endometrium.16-18 In one study, levonorgestrel 1.5 mg had no effect on the quality of cervical mucus or on the penetration of spermatozoa in the uterine cavity.”
“This question of postfertilization effect may never be answered unequivocally because no test exists for fertilization; however, the best available evidence indicates that levonorgestrel does not interfere with any postfertilization events.”
http://www.arhp.org/Publications-and-Resources/Clinical-Proceedings/EC/MOA
All hormonal contraceptives (pills, patches, etc) are abortive because they make the mother’s uterus hostile to implantation, so if breakthrough ovulation occurs and a child is conceived, he or she dies instead of implanting. This includes the regular pill and the “morning after” pill.
All IUDs do the same thing so they are also out.
Barrier methods without hormones (condoms, diaphragm, etc) are allowable with the consent of the couple’s spiritual father.
Dear Logan46:
Sorry I can’t get to blogs often. My gender had me thinking about the females! You are correct about vasectomies of course. The birth control pill can cause abortion while IUDs always do…Planned Parenthood even has a video on youtube describing IUDS and listings of every PP so-called “health center” which will implant one for a mere $500 to $1,000.
Embryology, a radiology and an ob/gyn rotation taught me all I and every other physician need to know. I pray all Orthodox priests counseling their spiritual children on contraception truly understand what is true contraception and what is abortive but mislabeled contraception. Evil is deceptive.
Another point about Planned Parenthood is the absolute damage “free sex” does to the personhood of young women made in the image of God. Being treated as an “it” who is used has long-lasting effects. I just read Archimandrite Luke’s excellent analysis of Flaubert through Patristic eyes and her confusion and descent into despair and confusion is what I have seen from those without the beauty of the Orthodox faith and without a pursuit of restraint. The young man using the girl loses his soul and intended role as honorable protector as well. It’s all lose with Planned Parenthood and a profit which is only monetary and strictly theirs.
Right you are Nicole. Not only are women affected, but men two. Both sexes have lost their priestly vocation because of the evils unleashed on society by Margaret Sanger.
George, it is not a loss of the priestly function–far worse, it is a demonic inversion of the priestly function–the anti-sacrament that is far worse than any ‘Black Mass’ could ever be.
Nicole is quite correct. The woman instead of magnifying the gift of God and incarnating it, destroys it. The man, instead of holding off the passions and the world so that the miraculous can flower and grow, descends into those passions and the murderous selfishness that spawns them.
True that.
Peter
Actually, the hispanics were against gay marriage as a whole, granted they are younger than whites and if they are born in the US they would favor gay marriage since younger people do as a group. Hispanics would vote for Obama in La, or Anahiem or Santa Ana where they make up about 48 up to 78 precent in those towns and vote for prop 8. Mexico does have gay bars though.
Cynthia, Mexico City as well has legalized gay marriage. Even though the rest of Mexico hasn’t, all of the other states are beholden to accept such “marriages” as were contracted in the Federal District. It’s like their equivalent of the Fourteenth Amendment,, by which West Virginia must accept a marriage performed in Nevada (or visa versa).
That’s true, Mexican City has rules different from the rest of Mexico and abortion.
True, George, in fact the liberals believe that poor whites vote more Republican. In a state like Texas and most of the south and even Kentucky or West Virginia poor white states, the higher income vote Republican among whites and the lower income vote Democratic since lower income whites are more likely to have kids out of wedlock and need welfare more. Texas poverty issues are mainly the result of a much higher than average hispanic population not white poverty.Poverty in Houston and Dallas is lower than New York City and Boston among whites. Maybe one reason why white vote is more Democratic in New York or Boston. Upper-middle class whites in the South usually outvote lower income whites hence why the Repblicans win the south. Most of the south poverty issues are the arfo-american population only Ky or Wv or out west Montona fit the lower income white state.