Comments on: Fr. Preble: Duties to the State from a Romanian Orthodox Church Perspective

By: Fr. Preble: Duties to the State from a Romanian Orthodox Church Perspective « Sowing Seeds of Orthodoxy

Fri, 17 Sep 2010 10:33:55 +0000

[…] source […]

By: Eliot Ryan

Eliot Ryan — Tue, 07 Sep 2010 04:54:34 +0000

In reply to Antiochian.

St. John, Archbishop of Shanghai and San Fransisco too came here to US to enjoy "the fruits of the western culture". This is how who lived, this is my idea of paradise: Vladika officiated in the cathedral every morning and evening, even when sick. He celebrated the Divine Liturgy daily, as he was to do for the rest of his life, and if for some reason he could not serve, he would still receive Holy Communion. No matter where he was, he would not miss a service. Once, according to a witness, "Vladika's leg was terribly swollen and the concilium of doctors, fearing gangrene, prescribed immediate hospitalization, which Vladika categorically refused. Then the Russian doctors informed the Parish Council that they released themselves of any responsibility for the health and even the life of the patient. The members of the Parish Council, after long pleas for mercy and threats of taking him by force, compelled Vladika to agree, and he was sent to the Russian Hospital in the morning of the day before the Feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross. By six o'clock, however, Vladika came limping to the cathedral on foot and served. In a day all the swelling was gone.

Considering tribal those who had to fight for centuries against the Gates of the Hell, and boasting of the pleasant and equitable way of living in the West is not Orthodoxy. It just means that the devil wasn't yet bothered enough by the people living here to fight against them. When we'll live the orthodox way, the "battle zone" will move over here.

By: Antiochian

Antiochian — Mon, 06 Sep 2010 19:31:10 +0000

I wish people who came from countries without rule of law (middle east, Slavic countries, Central and South America, Africa, etc.) understood that what makes living in western countries so pleasant and equitable is the fact we do have rule of law. They just do not understand. They think they can come here and enjoy the fruits of the western culture but still govern churches, parishes, or neighborhoods like fiefdoms with clan leaders, thugs, and gangs. We need an autocephalous church on this continent to free us from the tyranny of the old world. I wish we had some sort of assimilation plan that would encourage immigrants to let go of their old world way of thinking. A long time ago, our grandparents were able to do it. They came here to North America, learned the language, became American citizens and left behind the chaotic form of governance from the second and third world countries they came from. My one grandmother said over and over again that she would NEVER go back to Syria. The United States was paradise to her.

By: cynthia curran

cynthia curran — Mon, 06 Sep 2010 05:24:10 +0000

True but sometimes Orthodox misunderstand what Orthodox thought in either the Byzantine or Russian Empires. Case in point, I have the Chronicle of Theophanes, critical of certain Byzantine emperors, so some Byzantines also thought the ruler should also be held accountable for their actions, not a modern concept like the rule of Law but close enough.

By: Fr. Johannes Jacobse

Fr. Johannes Jacobse — Tue, 31 Aug 2010 16:18:45 +0000

Yes. This too is why Orthodoxy has problems organizing itself in the West. The internal problems are due in some, probably significant, measure to the transition from a tribal/medieval model of self-governance dominant in the east to the model of the rule by law dominant in the west. Put another way, two mentalities, two different ways of perceiving authority, are in conflict.

By: Fabio L. Leite

Fabio L. Leite — Tue, 31 Aug 2010 15:21:50 +0000

I like the use of the generic word “rulers” because it allows for different forms of government, including democratic ones. In countries where rule of law exists, the law is the “ruler”, which is the case of all constitutional countries and, as I understand it, it is also the case in most, if not all, Western monarchies where no king is above the supreme “ruler”: the law of the land.