On immigration >Such an important aspect of modern life like mass migration is not left unattended. Unlike the Catholic approach that unduly favors migrants, particularly in Europe, the Orthodox notices the negative nature of the process, as well as the fact that it leads to confrontation of different identities and value systems. In addition, the Orthodox Church propose to look at the roots of this phenomenon. The reason for the migration is the liberal, hedonistic ideology bleeding the peoples of Europe and the interests of the capitalist elite, who need a cheap and disenfranchised workforce:
>Attempts by indigenous people of the rich countries to stop the migration flow are futile, because come in conflict with greed of their own elites who are interested in the low-wage workforce.
On usury > The only alternative to the global fictitious liberal economy can only be a real Christian economy.
>Business expectations in lending, often ghostly becomes more profitable than the production of tangible goods. In this regard, it must be remembered about the moral ambiguity of the situation, when money is "make" new money without the application of human labor. Declaring credit sphere to be the main engine of the economy, its predominance over the real economic sector comes into conflict with the moral principles, reveled by God condemning usury.
orthodox church my ass . they stopped being orthodox when the priests started blessing weapons
Brody Fisher
Not the Church - just a personal opinion from one uneducated priest.
Orthodox Church has pretty much nothing to do with politics - if it had countries where it was a majority would flourish right? Instead all of them are shit compared to secular / non-orthodox countries.
Matthew Morales
>occupied by Muslims for hundreds of years >never submitted >meanwhile, with Catholics...
>The Church regards with esteem also the Moslems. They adore the one God, living and subsisting in Himself; merciful and all- powerful, the Creator of heaven and earth,(5) who has spoken to men; they take pains to submit wholeheartedly to even His inscrutable decrees, just as Abraham, with whom the faith of Islam takes pleasure in linking itself, submitted to God. Though they do not acknowledge Jesus as God, they revere Him as a prophet. They also honor Mary, His virgin Mother; at times they even call on her with devotion. In addition, they await the day of judgment when God will render their deserts to all those who have been raised up from the dead. Finally, they value the moral life and worship God especially through prayer, almsgiving and fasting.
-Nostra aetate
>But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator. In the first place amongst these there are the Muslims, who, professing to hold the faith of Abraham, along with us adore the one and merciful God, who on the last day will judge mankind. -Lumen gentium
Gavin Roberts
Redpill me on Christianity please. Show me the light
Jose Rogers
>the negative nature of the process How can helping the poor be negative?
Tyler Turner
>Not the Church - just a personal opinion from one uneducated priest. No, it's a draft for an official declaration being worked on by many clergy, and published by the Patriarchate of Moscow
Aren't you that layman who said globalism is a good thing?
I think you're the one who needs to shut his mouth and stop speaking for the Church
You're probably also a secularist who says the Church shouldn't speak out against gay marriage
Bentley Young
it has to go back to its desert t. not varg
Luke Nelson
One patriarchate does not represent the whole Church tho - there are many patriarchates.
If they want to split from Church let them, Russian church done lots of stupid shit lately - and it's understandable - the political machine is using the church and abusing it.
It's a political stand not a spiritual stand.
This is not Catholic church - there is no Pope to have the supreme word or opinion - unless there is communion in the whole Church - there's no decision or dogmatic truth in what one member says.
Chase Nelson
>Muh Usury
way to stop progress
Elijah Brown
>orthodox church has nothing to do with politics Have you even looked at the political power of our patriarch?
Hunter Reyes
>You're probably also a secularist who says the Church shouldn't speak out against gay marriage
I'm an active member of the body of Christ. You seem to just insult me, and act superior - are you a Christian? You seem to also be against what Jesus preached. Do no judge and you will be not judged, I forgive you.
He cannot use his political power to modify the Church dogmas - it would just split the Church up.
If he as a person - is corrupt - that's his problem, trough taking the role of clergy - you're not becoming instantly saint and incorruptible.
Also it's the rest of clergy fault for not kicking them out once they do acts of corruption - that's what canons state.
What in your brain patriarchate political power translates into - what do you imagine you think he can do?
Isaac Morgan
>nothing to do with politics
t. Daniel
Lucas Lee
Basically "degeneracy", as Sup Forums likes to call it, is not just a meme, it is metaphysical poison that is harming all creation, it is what causes all death and decay, and you yourself don't need to sin to suffer from it. So God literally became flesh to be a living physical counterbalance to it. By eating him, so to speak, your body is taking the literal red pill of God himself, at medicine, that fortifies your spirit and body against death, because God took his own body through death and raised it up, and by doing so physically conquered it, and provided us the physical and spiritual nourishment that could do the same for us.
Christ founded a single Church to protect this most important process, and 2000 years later, many more groups sprouted up claiming to be this Church, but his Church is no new, it is ancient, and has always been here, it is the Orthodox Church
Aiden Rodriguez
Quality post.
Luke Price
>politics shouldn't be aligned with the spiritual Get the hell out, you Freethinker. You sound like a Protestant
Evan Ward
>Abrahamic religion >Nothing to do with politics They were specifically designed to be about politics
Aiden Ramirez
>all of them are shit compared to secular / non-orthodox countries.
Envy is one hell of a drug
The Church is based. Stop envying the decadent West
Alexander Miller
You don't speak for Jesus, you're the one who came here insulting trying to pretend you're wiser than the clergy that wrote this, attributing it to "one, uneducated priest", which is is many, educated clergy.
It's not tho - first Christians split up from society - they gave all their life savings to Apostles, and lived a cheap, poor life for Christ.
Romania is 87% orthodox - and was like that for 2000 years, yet it's pretty much one of Europe shitholes - and also other countries that are in majority orthodox are shitholes.
If simply having the true faith - would've influenced life in this world - we would've observed that.
Jesus said who doesn't hate the world cannot love Him. Jesus said his Kingdom is not of this world.
Ayden Gray
>influence politician with money >make priests promote a politician in the churches in exchange for money >buy land for cheap using bribes and influence >meddling in the state affairs using money >not paying taxes >not being verified by ANAF >using religion as a pretext to stop some laws from passing (see homosexual marriage)(while I don't promote it it's not the church business what laws are passed or not) >gaining a lot of land using "le communist stole it meme" and bribes
And they did and still do all of the above. For every one of this you need someone in politics, like a mayor, deputy, senator or any politician in charge of the things they want.
Hunter Diaz
Jesus speak for Himself in the gospels, and tradition of the Church also speak for Jesus - trough what saints claimed to be from the Holy Spirit and trough what councils decided to be dogmatic truth and standard.
Truth is councils decided that if clergy - if a patriarch does even a small stupid thing - such as being saw around bars, he should be excommunicated for a period if not permanently.
Yet that's not respected, nor here nor in Russia and I bet in many other orthodox countries - it is respected anyway inside some monasteries, where the word of God, the dogmas, the teachings of saints are considered precious and have the first place in spiritual life.
Since the layman and clergy don't respect the basic dogmas, and some of them don't even believe in some aspects of Christianity - what makes you think that their personal opinions should be treasured.
When Church has a opinion that should not be changed it'll be known.
Easton Martin
All of that is vague, and maybe inacurate, but nevetheless, true.
Michael Murphy
The first Christians were not split up from society, churches were established everywhere. They had goods in common, but they weren't cut off from society around them by any means.
Christ's kingdom (Church) being not of this world (doesn't mean earth, for we are the salt of the earth), doesn't mean keep the state pagan.
Thomas Gray
>t. albo terrorist
Camden Taylor
Why do you go to such priests, why do you give them their money - it's pretty obvious if they're corrupt - they don't know shit about theology - and they don't believe what they say.
It's your duty to find the remains of Church and help that there.
You're implying that priests should be in direct control of God - and they cannot be corrupt ever.. because magic.
It's not the case - it's our duty in the Church to put them down, and point out where they are wrong and non-dogmatic.
Christopher Gutierrez
Read the early history until late 300 - Christian were constantly persecuted, even when lived outside the city in their own camps - they were still massacred.
Church inside the city where people gathered singing psalms - and preaching One faith in public happened only after Constantine.
Jackson Nelson
>see homosexual marriage)(while I don't promote it it's not the church business what laws are passed or not) What are you talking about, how is it not the business of the Church? If a law gets passed saying enslaving and prostituting little boys is okay, should the Church also be silent on that?
Evan King
It means to split up from this world - because there will always be people who decide to ignore the good news.
You can't force them, Jesus - God himself did not force anyone to believe. Couldn't he summon legions of angels and kill all kings of the world and become the One emperor and ruler? Couldn't He just think about it and suddenly the world would've changed?
He was not a politician - and Jesus is the absolute role model for a human.
He was loved by everyone - He could've lived a rich life and became a king just because people wanted to make Him a king - He constantly ran away from that and lived a poor life.
Our priests today in His position just accept all the glory and wealth and in turn forget about faith and turn to corruption.
Camden Brooks
>I'm going to speak as a higher authority than even the clergy when it comes to Orthodoxy, though I don't even grasp the difference between canon and doctrine
Ryder Garcia
They were in streaks, but most of the time they weren't fugitives, they just kept the holiest part of the liturgy (Communion and the confession that Christ is God, "Guard the doors") secret and only open to the baptized.
Daniel Rodriguez
East Europeans are poor mate. They envy and demonise anyone even slightly better off
But they especially have themselves and think the West is the land of milk and honey (like do all immigrants)
Dominic Price
>doctrine Has nothing to do with Church my friend. The canons were imposed trough all Patriarchs meeting together and having common approval of one idea - then the King made sure it was going to be followed across whole empire with his army.
They are meant even for today in 21st century to be respected 100%, and followed.
Doctrine has to do with politics.
Grayson Gonzalez
You can't force anyone to believe, but a state that actively supports the Church is definitely ideal.
Carter Allen
Medieval times are long gone. And the democratic state tolerates the Church. It did not force any church to accept homosexuals in or to modify their canons to do so. We have a comfortable Christianity.
Carter Gutierrez
They also forget that atheist communism is what screwed over Eastern Europe, not Christianity.
Doctrine is the same as dogma, please stop posting.
Jaxon Myers
Except immigration and usurry have nothing to do with dogmas... Jesus ressurection is a dogma for exemple.
Why do you even talk about shit you don't know a thing about ?
Grayson Price
So? homosexuality is immoral and it is being pushed in society, laws are to regular morality and protect society. Should we say child molesting shouldn't be illegal because otherwise we're being too worldly?
Christian Taylor
Geez all I was getting all inspired then he quoted this guy. The quote was more poignant than anything the preacher said. This actually turned me towards atheism...I'd never even heard of Ludwig Feuerbach until now.
it doesn't have anything to do about it - and that's what I was saying, why are you implying I was saying something else then insulted me. Are you a kid?
Sebastian Bell
Marx's greatest influence.
Brandon Davis
A Christian should not molest a Children and has it written in the scriptures that degeneracy is wrong - if you as a Christian need state laws to follow Christian ones - something is really wrong.
Nathaniel Harris
>It did not force any church to accept homosexuals in or to modify their canons to do so
Give the secular state a finger and it will take your hand
Grayson Walker
>orthodoxwiki.org/Dogma >Dogma (plural either dogmata or dogmas; Greek δόγμα, plural δόγματα) is the established belief or doctrine which is authoritative and is not to be disputed or doubted.
Christian King
So as a Christian should you support laws against molesting children, yes or no?
Samuel Stewart
Thanks mate. Is that the full document in English, or is it a summary of some selected excerpts? Is the commentary prefacing the quotations part of the official document/draft? Or is the commentary just someones elses view?
Angel Reyes
He means if you're a Christian you yourself should not molest children
It's up to everyone else to decide for themselves
Dis-fucking-gusting
Carter Sullivan
Here, an Orthodox Christian made this, it address a lot of the arguments made by atheists: pastebin.com/bN1ujq2x
Kevin Robinson
Dogma: a dogma is now understood to be a truth appertaining to faith or morals, revealed by God, transmitted from the Apostles in the Scriptures or by tradition, and proposed by the Church for the acceptance of the faithful
SURE THE WORD HAS A MEANING OUTSIDE IN SECULAR CONTEXT - BUT INSIDE THE CHURCH IT WAS THE MEANING IT IS CLEARLY POINTED OUT.
And here we discuss in the context of Church not the context of secular state.
When you say dogmas in the Church you talk about everything which should be the substance, the fundamentals of your Christian life on earth - something which cannot be broken because not even under the Holy Spirit not being aware of dogmas you would break a single one!
Our Church has God in it - it's our supreme guidance, no man philosophy - no random reformation and split. If a new dogma is written down it's trough complete communion of all patriarchs - all of them have to agree upon it, and the process of such a council takes at least one century to be prepared.
Jaxon Anderson
In a democratic state you have to support and follow the laws - regardless of being Christian or not - it's punishable otherwise.
So if you want to propose a new law you can do so - you can become a politician, you're free to do w/e you want.
Church just doesn't get involved, because Church has its things going on parallel to political system world wide - Church dogmas cannot change any time - based on political context.
Brandon Carter
I am glad there are no Calvinists on Sup Forums
Zachary Murphy
It's just part of the document, the full one will be much longer. The Church is preparing recommended strategies for confronting the problems, and that will be included as well
The commentary is summary by one of the priests working on the document.
Jeremiah Reyes
>Church dogmas cannot change any time - based on political context
Nor should they EVER change
Some things (eg. child rape) are not meant to change regardless of their context
Political ideologies come and go. Attitudes shift an wane
But God's morality can never change. And it must be imposed on the unbelievers
Aaron Price
Dogma and doctrine have the same meaning in Church context.
No patriarch, not even all of them, have the power to write new dogma, that is a Catholic idea. They can only uphold and defend dogma. Canons are not the same as dogma, dogma is unalterable.
>Church just doesn't get involved It actually does, your idea that it shouldn't voice an opinion on a political matter has zero patristic precedence and comes out of the Reformation
Logan Mitchell
Thanks mate. Will follow with interest.
Benjamin Morris
katehon.com/ru/article/ekonomika-v-usloviyah-globalizacii-pravoslavnyy-eticheskiy-vzglyad Some other theses: 1 You, Americans, consume too much resources, entire world can't live by such standard. You (and all other developed countries) should step back in consumption and consumerism propaganda because this is not sustainable. 2. World need world currency issued proportionally and justly by world wide organisation with all countries cooperation.
>World need world currency issued proportionally and justly by world wide organisation with all countries cooperation.
Josiah Morris
Your Christian opinion cannot be political - how could you generate new ideas if God gave you all the ones you need? Unless the Holy Spirit tells you tell people something new you should not invent new concepts and ideas.
Saying what Jesus said to others is not political, it's just preaching the good news and the laws of God.
Jesus although said in His kingdom no degenerate have a room - also did not advocate for degenerates to be marginalized in this world, He actually spent time with them.
A Christian should not spend his time or energy to advocate against limiting other humans rights and freedom.
The Church cannot be harmed by the state allowing gay people to marry.
Colton Russell
Look I am really open to religion, I love the aesthetic of it, and the idea that there's some sort of order to the universe. I was talking to a Muslim guy today and he explained to me the idea is that you open your heart a little and God will "run towards you", but if you deny him he will blind you. I know Muslim isn't Christianity but I believe they're based on this same premise, that God kind of amplifies your heart's desire. I have tried to open my heart but then the arguments of the other side make way too much sense and destroy any faith i may want to have. I really feel like this idea of "opening your heart" is a manipulative tactic by religion. I know how it feels to open your heart to divinity but I don't believe that it's genuine. It's more like some primordial desperate feeling of wanting to belong to something.
Jose Sanders
Doesn't actually say that, it says
>In contrast to the immutability and universality of moral commandments, the economy cannot have a universal solution for all peoples and all times.
You're not a priest, you have no business speaking as an authority here.
Homosexuality is not a human right.
Jayden Ward
>A Christian should not spend his time or energy to advocate against limiting other humans rights and freedom.
My humanist friend, you may not have absolute freedom to sin
Some sins are absolutely unpermissible
>The Church cannot be harmed by the state allowing gay people to marry.
It encourages sin and normalises it
Lincoln Adams
I'm not asking you to open your heart, the arguments are mainly intellectual
Austin Lopez
My gosh, the Orthodox Church is SO, SO on point.
Seriously, everyone should go Orthodox now. If we all came together under that banner we'd get some serious power and momentum going.
>(like do all immigrants) Hmm, like yourself? Seriously, Ahmed, better start improving your English... "Like do", ffs...
Blake Lee
>Doesn't actually say that It does. katehon.com/ru/article/ekonomika-v-usloviyah-globalizacii-pravoslavnyy-eticheskiy-vzglyad >Ecли чeлoвeчecтвy нeoбхoдимы дeнeжныe eдиницы, cвoбoднo oбpaщaющиecя пo вceй тeppитopии плaнeты и cлyжaщиe yнивepcaльным мepилoм пpи экoнoмичecких pacчётaх, выпycк тaких eдиниц дoлжeн нaхoдитьcя пoд cпpaвeдливым мeждyнapoдным кoнтpoлeм, в кoтopoм бyдyт пpoпopциoнaльнo yчacтвoвaть вce гocyдapcтвa Зeмнoгo шapa. Boзмoжныe выгoды oт тaкoй эмиccии мoжнo былo бы нaпpaвлять нa paзвитиe бeдcтвyющих peгиoнoв плaнeты. What is even more funny: cryptocurrencies (that are best possible in reality approach to justly currency emission) are banned in Russia.
katehon.com/ru/node/29478 >5. As one of the ways to solve this problem (dollar hegemony), the Church proposes to establish international control over global currencies:
>If mankind needed freely traded currencies throughout the world to serve as a universal yardstick for economic calculations, the production of such units should be under fair international control, where all states of the world will proportionally participate. Possible benefits of such emissions could be channeled to the development of the poverty-stricken regions of the planet.
Brody Thomas
It's not about controlling all currencies, it's about creating international currencies that can be used in countries whose currency is unreliable. See the paragraph directly preceding, which makes this clear and CONDEMNS "monopoly" of currency.
Carter Murphy
>In this case the money received in wages or non-renewable natural resources, often taken in the literal sense "from the air", due to the work of the printing press - thanks to the monopoly position of issuers of world currency. As a result of the abyss in the socio-economic status among the nations and entire continents becoming increasingly profound. This one-sided globalization, giving undue advantages to some of its participants at the expense of the other entails a partial and, in some cases, virtually complete loss of sovereignty.
Xavier Cook
>it's about creating international currencies that can be used in countries whose currency is unreliable. And how it would look in reality? Like not a central international bank with proportional countries participation? Literally Euro 2.0.
Benjamin Walker
It's not suggesting such currencies being, it says IF such currencies are used, "the production of such units should be under fair international control", in order to protect sovereignty, which the prior paragraph says is endangered by any international currency which isn't controlled by many of the countries it's used in.
Gavin Perez
And how about that? >Globalization has accelerated the consumer race disproportionate to earth resources granted to mankind. Volumes of consumption of goods in those countries, which are recognized worldwide for the samples and which are equal to billions of people, have long gone beyond the resource capabilities of these "model" countries. There is no doubt that, if the whole of humanity will absorb the natural wealth of the intensity of the countries that are leaders in terms of the consumption, there will be an environmental disaster on the planet. So how do we solve problem of excessive US consumption? By international organisation setting justly limits fro resource using and personal consumerism? Really makes you think...
Lincoln Taylor
ffs, the Orthodox Church says Russia should withdraw from the IMF, you should know this
By breaking up the globalist treaties that structures that facilitate it.
Alexander Reed
Are you one of those liberal Russian furries?
Alexander Turner
>it says IF such currencies are used, There is no IF. Because international trade already exist and demand for internationally accepted currencies is already here.
>in order to protect sovereignty Yeah sure lets ""''protect national sovereignty""" by uniting countries in Eurozone 2.0. How it is working for Europe, sempai?
Cameron Ward
>Because international trade already exist and demand for internationally accepted currencies is already here. t. bitcoin supporter
The only international currencies states will be will to depend on would be those backed by the IMF and tied to the dollar, and that is exactly what is being condemned here, because it erodes sovereignty.
Ethan Bennett
>By breaking up the globalist treaties that structures that facilitate it. But this is voluntary agreements between countries. You can't break and prohibit them unless you have organisation standing above countries and having authority over them. Otherwise countries in such structures just will say ''no'' to your proposition.
Camden Gray
Did you even read the whole thing, or are you intentionally trying to distort it? It says the causes of these treaties are often transnational elites who avoid being subject to any individual country's oversight. The problem is that states don't have *enough* sovereignty, not too much sovereignty.
Cooper Flores
>It says the causes of these treaties are often transnational elites who avoid being subject to any individual country's oversight. And how do you suggest fighting it in practical terms? "Hey, US and Vietnam, leave TPP." "Fuck you." What is your next move?
Sebastian Sanders
>And how do you suggest fighting it in practical terms? Hold public referendums in member states.
Gavin Ward
So do it. As far as i know referendums are not prohibited in US and Vietnam. Legal procedures exist.
