[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Unz Review: The Vineyard Saker re: ZenNaziHoebag specifically



[Sidebar: It is ironical â?? and sad â?? that so many of those who today engage in â??hunting the Jewâ?? by means of putting silly parentheses around (((names))) and who call themselves Orthodox Christians completely fail to realize two thing: first, they are using categories which the Church has denounced as heresies and, second, they are using the exact same categories as many of the (Orthodox) Jews they are denouncing. Frankly, this is rather pathetic and only goes to show the fantastically low level of spiritual education of those who fancy themselves as â??defenders of the Christian faithâ?? and who, in reality, have not even the vaguest basic notions about the faith they pretend to defend]

The truth is that modern national/racial/ethnic/tribal categories are just re-hated pagan categories and that those who use them today,..


The abomination of desolation standing in the holy place
The Saker
28 Sept 2018
Warning: the following text was written specifically to help Christians make sense of the â??hijacked vocabularyâ?? used in the discussion of the current attempts by the Empire to take control of the Orthodox people of the Ukraine. For atheists/agnostics this discussion will offer just some irrelevant and boring mumbo-jumbo with no relevance to the lofty realms of enlightened modern positivism.

Introduction

The latest move by the Anglo-Zionist Empire in the Ukraine is truly an exceptionally ugly and dangerous one: it appears that the Patriarch of Constantinople will soon grant its full independence to the so-called â??Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Kyivan Patriarchateâ??. This move is openly directed against the current biggest ecclesiastical body in the Ukraine the â??Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchateâ?? and it will almost certainly lead to bloodshed and massacres similar to what took place in Odessa on May 2nd 2014: the Ukronazis will use force (riot police or even Nazi death squads) to forcibly seize the churches, cathedrals, monasteries and other buildings and properties currently owned by the Moscow Patriarchate.

There are many articles written about this development, but almost all of them are written from a secular point of view, even when written by supposedly Christian or Orthodox authors. The paradoxical element here is that a lot of theological terms are used by authors who have only a very vague idea of what these terms really mean. I have no desire to enter into this conversation and use the pseudo-spiritual reference framework typically used by such commentators and what I propose to do today is much more modest: I want to explain the original, Christian, meaning of the terms which are (mis-)used on a daily basis.

The reader will then decide how to apply them, or not, to the current crisis.

I will begin by the very basics.

The basics

The term â??Christianâ?? can mean one of two things: first, it can designate any person or group calling itself Christian. When used in this sense, the word â??Christianâ?? includes not only the all main Christian denominations, but also Sun Myung Moonâ??s Unification Church, the Mormons or even the 17% of British Christians who do not believe in the resurrection of Christ. Basically, in this context the term has no objective meaning whatsoever and this is how the term is mostly used nowadays.

There is also another use of the word â??Christianâ??. This second definition is based on two very ancient statements. The first by Saint Athanasius of Alexandria (4th century) and the second one by Saint Vincent of Lérins (5th century). The first one says that the Christian faith is the faith â??which the Lord gave, was preached by the Apostles, and was preserved by the Fathers. On this was the Church founded; and if anyone departs from this, he neither is nor any longer ought to be called a Christianâ??. The second one says that this faith only includes that â??which has been believed everywhere, always and by allâ??. By these definitions, â??Christianityâ?? is an objective category not a â??free for allâ??. The key words affirming this are â??if anyone departs from this, he neither is nor any longer ought to be called a Christianâ??. These ancient definition preclude not only any form of dogmatic innovation, they also imply that words can be used either in a truly Christian sense or not. There is no middle-ground here. This belief, which was shared by all the Church Fathers and all the members of the ancient, original, Christian Church has tremendous implications, especially for what is called â??ecclesiologyâ??.

The term â??ecclesiologyâ?? refers to the Christian theology concerning the Church. In other words, the teachings of Christianity about what is, or what is not, the Church (and what is, or is not, within the confines of the Church) is an objective corpus of beliefs, of key tenets, of dogmas.

What I will do next is to explain the meaning of a number of concepts when used in this second, original, context and contrast their original meaning with the basically secular and pseudo-Christian meaning which is so often attributed to them nowadays.

One more thing, for the sake of clarity: I will be writing the word church with a lower case â??câ?? when dealing with a building (as in â??the church of Saint Paul in the cityâ??s downtownâ??) and with a capital â??Câ?? when dealing with an ecclesiastical jurisdiction/body (as in the â??Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Kyivan Patriarchateâ??); in this latter case the use of the word â??Churchâ?? with a capital â??Câ?? will in no way imply any recognition of legitimacy.

1. Canonical, canonicity and â??recognizedâ??

Most authors nowadays speak of a â??canonicalâ?? Church as being a â??recognizedâ?? Church. This is a circular definition, by the way: a Church is canonical because it is recognized and it is recognized because it is canonical. This begs the obvious question: recognized by whom?! The answer is also obvious: either recognized by the countryâ??s civil/secular authorities or recognized by other â??canonicalâ?? Churches.