Why I Reject Protestantism- Guest Contributor

JTO Readers: Here is another challenging statement from JTO Guest Contributor, Timothy Kwoh, from the land down under. They make them tough down there and Timothy is no exception. It is clear that Timothy is less concerned with offending than he is with rescuing souls from the maze and mire that is Protestantism. For some in need of rescue, that requires confrontation and manumit not cookies and milk. But in case manumit takes you too much out of your comfort zone, I have provided a photo of cookies and milk below for you to visualize as you read. Just ignore the fiery sword to the right. I said ignore it...

Dear Orthodox Brethren,

I wish to state some reasons as to why I reject Protestantism. It may be disturbing to say the least.

1. Protestantism allows for private interpretation before Truth. Whilst claiming to believe in the "infallibility of Scripture" or "Bible Only", what it really reads as is personal private interpretation as becoming the standard of Truth rather than the whole counsel of God as revealed in Scripture and Holy Tradition. In fact, it has often lead to total negation of fundamental Christian doctrines altogether and even to pseudo-Christian and heretical cults. Whilst Papists/Latins already elevate private interpretation in the form of the rantings of one hierarch speaking in "ex-cathedra", Protestants have taken the other extreme and tried to make it look more pious. Is it no wonder that one of our saints of our time, Saint Justin Popovich, stated: "Papism is the first Protestantism".

2. Protestantism has encouraged anti-Christian and anti-Biblical sentiments in both doctrine and social issues all in the name of "the grace of God" which is really gracelessness. It is within Protestantism that we discovered liberalism, communism, gay/lesbian liberation theology, ecumenism/pan-heresy movement, so called "Emergent Church" Movement and so on. To add insult to injury, you can include the World Council of "Churches" (really World Council of Heretics and Antichrists) as well as evangelists in universalism such as Robert Schuller, Billy Graham, John Stott and so on.

3. [CAUTION: THIS IS ONE THAT EVEN A NUMBER OF OUR ORTHODOX BRETHREN EVEN FALL GUILTY OF]. Anti-Jewishness and Israel bashing at every turn seems to be promoted in classical Protestantism. (Shame on any Orthodox, both layman or hierarch, who has engaged in the same!). It was Martin Luther who gave a precursor for Nazism to persecute the Jews out of existence. Even though a number of Lutherans today might find this an embarrassing fact, many Lutheran bishops and pastors welcomed Adolf Hitler and his Third Reich. In addition to this, both the Nazis (including neo-Nazis today) and the Lutheran 'church' published Martin Luther's rants against the Jews. Today in the world of Protestantism, even though the facts are obvious to all, there is much bashing of Israel and 'Zionism' but nothing said against the godless anti-Christian Muslim terrorists in the Hamas and Hezbollah movements as well as PLO. It seems convenient to ignore the fact that these people stated: "First the Saturday people. (Jews) Next the Sunday People (Christians)." [SHAME ON ANY ORTHODOX LEADER OR LAYMAN WHO HAS DONE EXACTLY THE SAME. YOU DO NOT REPRESENT THE FAITH BUT YOUR OWN PERSONAL, ETHNOCENTRIC BIAS!]. As much as the Jews and Judaism may be wrong for rejecting the Messiah, yet we must always bear in mind that since they are the original people of God, we the Church have the mission of bringing them back into the fold through both correct teaching of the Old Testament and also through out love. Like it or not, only the state of Israel has guaranteed the protection and freedoms of the Christians in the Middle East, not to mention the fact that they have even allowed Jews or Israeli citizens to convert to Christianity. We must love them into the Church, since it is inevitable after much suffering, that they will repent and accept the Messiah, Jesus Christ.

4. [CAUTION: THIS IS ANOTHER THAT EVEN OUR ORTHODOX BRETHREN HAVE FALLEN GUILTY OF]. Collaboration with Islam and Muslim terrorists. Protestantism is the worst culprit in this regards. In fact, Martin Luther and John Calvin, whilst criticizing Islam theologically, on the other hand, were keen on having their followers being buried with Islamic ritual and also at times collaborated with the godless Ottoman Turks to overthrow their Catholic counterparts. Today we have official hierarchs and well-renowned evangelists and leaders seeking to collaborate with these Christ-deniers and murderers of the brethren. Whether it is the World Council of 'Churches' (Heretics and Antichrists) or the likes of Rev. Gordon Moyes, Rev. Billy Graham, Rev. John Stott, Robert Schuller and others. In fact, Robert Schuller was caught on camera stating that he did not object to his children converting to Islam! [SHAME ON ANY ORTHODOX HIERARCH AND LAYMAN WHO HAS DONE THE SAME. GREATER SHAME ON A NUMBER OF HIERARCHS WITHIN THE ANTIOCHIAN CHURCH AS WELL AS THE RUSSIAN AND GREEK CHURCHES WHO HAVE DONE SIMILARLY. THEY PUT ST. JOHN OF DAMASCUS TO SHAME AND TRAMPLE ON THE BLOOD OF OUR BRETHREN.]

5. Protestantism created the impetus for left-wing ideologies of Communism, liberal-Bible denying theories and the pseudo-science of Darwin's evolution theory. Both Marx and Engels came from Protestant backgrounds. Marx from Lutheranism via his father's conversion and Engels from the Huguenots who immigrated to Germany. When they totally rejected any vestige of Christianity altogether, they changed the "natural law of God" to the law of man. Protestantism gave enough impetus for them to write their accursed "The Communist Manifesto". Bible-deniers were prominent in the Lutheran circles via the Jesuit theories adopted.(It seems that Khomyakov was correct in stating that: "Both Papism and Protestantism are two sides of the same coin."). It is interesting to note that Luther called for the removal of the book of James altogether from the New Testament in the name of "defending grace" (really 'gracelessness'). Charles Darwin never had a degree in science whatsoever and was simply coming from the background of negating God because of his disillusionment with Christianity. Darwin, despite negating his own theories, on his deathbed, never repented to the God of the Bible and yet was granted an Anglican burial! Protestantism created his rebelliousness since it allowed for private interpretation to be superior to Truth. It is also interesting to note that the accursed "Biblical Criticism" came from Protestantism and even gave birth to the negation of the Byzantine Text of Scripture to the point of replacing it with 2 manuscripts that were never used by the Church, and in fact, were meant to be thrown out by the monks in the Sinai monastery, only to be discovered by rationalist Germans and furthered by 2 Christ-denying, heretical Anglican clergymen: Brooke Foss Westcott and Fenton John Anthony Hort. All the modern translations, both Protestant and Catholic, are based on these perverted manuscripts.

6.Protestantism was the first to promote accommodation with the world to the point of allowing rock music and questionable material and practices to penetrate their 'churches'. They made the excuse of "making the church relevant" and 'following the times' to bring people into church. If that is the case, then they have failed miserably because the West is apostatizing and most are avoiding 'churches' or anything to do with Christianity for Eastern religions and heresies. Thus, Protestantism has made itself the enemy of God by seeking to be friends with the world. (James 4)

7. Protestantism is the biggest revisionist of history. In the name of 'purifying the church', they make base accusations saying that Christianity was lost for thousands of years until the arrival of the Protestant Reformation. They accuse the Fathers of various sins and denigrate certain saints. They are thus accusing Christ of not being able to keep his promise that the Church will always be there unto the end of the world and that the gates of hell will not prevail against her. I wish to tell any serious minded Christian person within Protestantism to come out of her and be not a partaker of her plagues. Entering the Orthodox Church does not mean you will lose any real Christian convictions you may have learnt. It will only clarify them further and strengthen your faith, small as it may be. If anything, you will learn more not less to support your Christian convictions if you have any. Orthodoxy has not changed whilst both Papism and Protestantism have often been subject to change.

Yours in Christ, Timothy Kwoh

[JTO Note: Click here or on the artwork of the sword on fire to read about the astonishing work of the artist- a believer and man of faith.]

A Good Man

It is not difficult to commend Metropolitan Philip. In the current conversation concerning the demoting of Bishops in North America, priests and laymen alike have referred to His Eminence as a "good man". His years of pastoral devotion, his dialogue in SCOBA, his acceptance of converts, and his stated desire to work to preserve unity in the Antiochian Archdiocese are commendable and good. His Eminence's recent decision to write a letter of explanation concerning the Holy Synod's decision to change the status of the Antiochian Bishops is also commendable, but one could wonder why this came after only much pressure from his sheep. Much of the current tumultuous response to the decision was due to the cryptic nature of the announcement. Now, some of the reasons have been stated and some of the cryptic elements made clear-some. Now comes the aftermath of his stated support of the decision that changed the status of all Antiochian Bishops.

Is "good man" a title for life? History is filled with good men who spent their entire life as such only to make a bad decision toward the end. Unfortunately, or rightfully, some might argue, a late turning of this sort can eclipse an entire lifetime of goodness. One can be remembered for the good he does, but the harm he does is always more resounding. Since cryptic elements of The Decision still remain, it is a challenge to fully judge the motives as good or bad. But, one must divine between intention and action in this matter. An intention can be good but an action unwise. That the Metropolitan's intention has elements of goodness is clear:

"One of the greatest assets that we have been blessed with in this Archdiocese is our strong unity. We cannot take any chance that disunity would occur in the Antiochian Archdiocese. I believe that this decision supports maximum unity and guards against any fracture in the future."

The stated intent is unity but is it possible that The Decision itself will cause the fracture that it is intended to prevent? Accusations of "Papalism" and "power grab" are being leveled at what one can only interpret as an attempt to quell some Bishops who are the inferred subjects of the disunity. Without knowing the details or the determining factors, the sheep are relegated to rumors and conjecture. Were the Bishops too liberal or too conservative? Were there personality conflicts? Were the Bishops given to doctrinal errors or were they just fulfilling their role as good men within the arena of Orthodox consensus government by Synod and expressing opinions that differed from that of the Metropolitan? Was the church in America becoming too... American? Were too many speaking out against Islam? Was the diocese slipping further away from Arab, ethnic control? Has Ecumenicalism, Papalism, or Protestantism finally come to roost? What has not been asked is whether the Metropolitan instigated the issue with the Patriarch or Vice Versa. In any case, cryptisism breeds cryptisism and questions abound.

I, for one, would like to think that the Metropolitan has uncovered some sinister plot by the disunifiers to usurp and harm the church and that he is not at liberty to give details, however, on its face, The Decision was divisive and suspect. In the minds of many, The Decision itself has become the sinister plot. It was seemingly done in the shadows, not the light, and without the consensus of the Bishops themselves nor of the people under their care. The question remains as to what the parish roots uprising will bring. Whether or not the Metropolitan's latter days will be worse that the former pales in comparison to the days ahead for the Self-Ruled Antiochian Orthodox Church in North America. By the Metropolitan's own words, The Decision was opposed to the very constitution by which the church in North America is governed:

"As you are all aware, there are still some differences that exist between the Archdiocese Constitution that was approved in Pittsburgh, and the constitution that was proposed by the Holy Synod of Antioch as an alternative. These differences will be addressed with the Patriarch, myself, and the Holy Synod in due time."

It seems that the "due time" should have been before the demotion of the Bishops so as not to be seen as a usurper of the very rules that gave the Metropolitan his Bishopric. Forgive any assumption that may come from the contagious cryptinitis bug, but could it be that those pesky, ununited, bothersome Bishops stood in the way of one good man's view of the future of the church in North America? Is it not unseemly, unorthodox and unscriptural that, what was in every interpretation a political move, has in essence, defrocked Bishops who are in every way each as good a man as the Metropolitan and the Patriarch? After all, these Bishops were equipped with Shepherd's staffs as well, rightfully given, rightfully bestowed through the Holy Sacrament of Ordination. Yet, the Metropolitan seems to downplay the effects of The Decision:

"Most importantly, I do not see the action of the Holy Synod of Antioch as making that much practical change in the way we operate. Most of the auxiliary bishops will remain where they are. The auxiliary bishops will administer the dioceses on behalf of the Metropolitan. It is now clear that in the few instances in which the Metropolitan disagrees with the action of a bishop, that the Metropolitan has the authority to reverse that decision. While we have vacancies in some of the dioceses, it is important that the Metropolitan have the flexibility of moving a bishop to a place where the best interests of the Archdiocese can be served."

This seems the equivalent of removing a Shepherd's staff from him and delegating to him just the occasional filling of the feed trough. Oh, and by the way, if a destaffed, delegated, former Bishop is sent by the last remaining Bishop to fill your trough, you can mention his name, otherwise, he is not to be mentioned. Not much "practical change"?

That the Metropolitan may be a good man is moot in light of of Christ's admonition:

"Why do you call me good? No one is good but One, that is God. But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments."

If there be any good thing in any of us, it is because we reflect our Creator. Those who are truly good in this matter are yet to be determined. Whether or not the sheep continue to follow the last remaining Antiochian Shepherd on the North American continent is also yet to be determined. It certainly should not be presumed. It is a wide church with optional jurisdictions (though such options still remain outside of the Canon). The Church is a body with many parts. She belongs to no man and God is a jealous God. This is why the bishops, priests and deacons of the Antiochian Archdiocese, in order to be Good, even as He is Good, must value righteousness over their own career paths, fearing God over man, even a good man. This is why they too must speak to this matter outside of anonymity. This is why I, as a layman, must speak, for according to the Orthodox faith, the Layman is the fourth order of the priesthood. We do honor those who have rule over us as the scripture teaches, but lest we forget, let us all gaze upon the icons in the temples and ponder those martyrs who stood for righteousness in opposition to those who would rule in error.

His Eminence, speaks the truth when he says,

"If we do not learn from the mistakes of history, we will be condemned to repeat the same mistakes. "

But, has history not taught us that usurping sole authority over a part of the existing church and its Bishops causes great schism? Are we being condemned to repeat the Great Schism? Is The Decision and the Metropolitan's support of it another in the "mistakes of history" to which he refers?

All men are mortal and in that mortality good men, turned bad, should become to us as dust in the wind and leaven in the loaf. God grant that our Bishops and Patriarchs remain free from such error but God also grant that any who fall into such error will repent or

"Let his days be few and let another take his office".

God give us wisdom in this matter to discern which should be the case and God be merciful to all of us for we are all sinners.

Metropolitan Philip Responds To Questions

Metropolitan PHILIP writes:
March 4, 2009
Beloved Hierarchs and Clergy, Members of the Board of Trustees of the Archdiocese, Parish Councils and Faithful of this God-Protected Archdiocese:
Greetings and blessings during this Holy Lenten Season!
There have been some questions raised regarding the February 24th decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch which addressed the status of bishops across the entire See of Antioch. The purpose of this letter is to try to answer these questions so that confusion may be avoided.
The first question deals with whether or not I am supportive of the decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch which was taken on February 24, 2009. I am supportive of this decision, for a simple reason. I am convinced that the institutional structure of our Archdiocese here requires it at this time. One of the greatest assets that we have been blessed with in this Archdiocese is our strong unity. We cannot take any chance that disunity would occur in the Antiochian Archdiocese. I believe that this decision supports maximum unity and guards against any fracture in the future. I approved the decision of the Holy Synod based on my background and personal experience. I came to this country in 1956 from a divided nation. I found in North America a divided Antiochian family: first between "Russy" and "Antaki", and second between New York and Toledo. I worked very hard to unite this family at the cost of blood and tears. I will guard this unity with my life and I will leave to our future generations a strong and unified Antiochian family in North America. If we do not learn from the mistakes of history, we will be condemned to repeat the same mistakes. In my judgement, the models of other Orthodox jurisdictions simply do not work, and the examples are numerous. Most importantly, I do not see the action of the Holy Synod of Antioch as making that much practical change in the way we operate. Most of the auxiliary bishops will remain where they are. The auxiliary bishops will administer the dioceses on behalf of the Metropolitan. It is now clear that in the few instances in which the Metropolitan disagrees with the action of a bishop, that the Metropolitan has the authority to reverse that decision. While we have vacancies in some of the dioceses, it is important that the Metropolitan have the flexibility of moving a bishop to a place where the best interests of the Archdiocese can be served.
The second question deals with the exact status of our bishops. The decision makes it very clear that our bishops within this Archdiocese will now be considered Auxiliary Bishops. But we need to focus on the practical application of that change, and not just a title. in due time we will begin the work of editing the "Manual of Hierarchical Duties and Responsibilities" so that these changes will be clear. The Archpastoral Directive of March 3, 2009 made it clear that the Metropolitan is to be commemorated in all divine services. The auxiliary bishop will be commemorated only in the case that he is present at the divine service.
The third question deals with the impact of this decision on the provisions of our Self-Rule as well as certain articles of our Pittsburgh Constitution.
Our Self-Rule status remains in effect with regard to the relationship of this Archdiocese to the Holy Synod of Antioch. The decision of the Holy Synod is a narrow administrative decision, addressing only the standing of bishops across the See of Antioch. As we know from church history, administrative structures come and go as the needs of the church change over time. As you are all aware, there are still some differences that exist between the Archdiocese Constitution that was approved in Pittsburgh, and the constitution that was proposed by the Holy Synod of Antioch as an alternative. These differences will be addressed with the Patriarch, myself, and the Holy Synod in due time.
I pray that you will all have a blessed Journey to the Empty Tomb.
Yours in Christ,

Metropolitan Philip: Where Have All The Bishops Gone...And Why?

Biography of the Right Reverend Bishop ALEXANDER
Diocese of Ottawa, Eastern Canada and Upstate New York
Ottawa Chancery
10820 Rue Laverdure
Montreal, QC H3L 2L9 CANADA


Right Reverend Bishop MARK
Diocese of Toledo and the Midwest
Toledo Chancery
2656 Pemberton Dr.
Toledo, OH 43606-2903
Montreal, QC H3L 2L9 CANADA


Right Reverend Bishop THOMAS
Diocese of Charleston, Oakland and the Mid-Atlantic
Charleston WV Chancery
4407 Kanawha Ave., S.E.
Charleston, WV 25304


Right Reverend Bishop BASIL
Diocese of Wichita and Mid-America
Wichita Chancery
1559 N. Woodlawn
Wichita, KS 67208-2429


Right Reverend Bishop ANTOUN
Diocese of Miami and the Southeast
358 Mountain Road
P.O. Box 5238
Englewood, NJ 07631-5238


Right Reverend Bishop JOSEPH
Diocese of Los Angeles and the West
Los Angeles Chancery
454 S. Lorraine Blvd.
Los Angeles, CA 90020-4730


For Information on the status of your Bishop contact them directly or contact the Metropolitan at the Contact info below:

Phone Number

Phone - (201) 871-1355

Fax Number

Fax - (201) 871-7954

Postal Address

For prompt delivery, please address all correspondence to His Eminence or the Archdiocese office as follows:
Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese
PO Box 5238
Englewood, NJ 07631-5238
Please note: It is important that all official correspondence with the Archdiocese must be conducted in writing by postal mail.
Unfortunately there is no direct e-mail for the Metropolitan's office and my past attempts at communication by letter have gone unanswered. Some would fault BLOGs of this type as an inappropriate place to discuss such matters, but until parishioners of the Antiochian Diocese know that their one remaining Bishop has an ear for their concerns, it will have to do.

Douglas Cramer, the Editor of the Antiochian.org website, does have an email address. One might inquire to him as to why no explanation on the matter has been posted on OUR website.
editor@Antiochian.org

All Antiochian Bishops Demoted To Auxiliary Status

The confusion over the recent unexpected and unexplained cryptic decision by the Holy Synod of the Antiochian Orthodox Church continues. According to the letter released by the Archbishop's office March 3, 2009, priests are inquiring as to what the decision means. I was curious that in the Sunday Liturgy at our own church, our former Bishiop Antoun was commemorated as has been the practice even though he was no longer our Bishop. According to the following letter, only Metropolitan Philip's name will be mentioned from this point on unless an Auxiliary Bishop is physically present.

Metropolitan PHILIP writes:

To all clergy of the Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America:

We greet you in the spirit of this Great Lent.

Some of our clergy have inquired about hierarchical commemorations in the divine services. In order to avoid any confusion or misunderstanding, we would like to direct your attention to the following:

On February 24^th, 2009 the Holy Synod of Antioch amended Chapter VI of the by-laws of the Patriarchate, which now reads:

Article 76

The Metropolitan is the point of reference of all bishops in his Archdiocese and they are under his authority.

Article 77

All bishops within the Antiochian See are auxiliary bishops and are directly under their spiritual authority.

Article 78

The Metropolitan defines the responsibilities of the bishops and the place where they should serve. The bishop does not do anything contrary to the will of the Metropolitan.

Therefore, in accordance with the decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch, the following is the proper order for the commemoration of hierarchs in the divine services:

• The clergy should commemorate the Metropolitan in all divine services.
• The clergy should commemorate the auxiliary bishop when he is present at the divine service.

It is expected that all clergy will strictly adhere to this directive. May the journey to the Empty Tomb bring you all the joy of the Glorious Resurrection.

Your father in Christ,

It seems it would be prudent for the Metropolitan to inform those under his care as to the reason and purpose of the change and what the people of North America may expect from his point on. Anything other seems cryptic.

The Qur'an Challenge

The End Of "Self Rule"?

On Tuesday February 24, 2009, the Holy Synod of the Antiochian Orthodox Church made a major decision concerning the Bishops and Dioceses in North America. The Decision? There will be no more Bishops and Dioceses in North America. In a meeting called to discuss this single issue, the Synod delegated all authority and pastorate to the office of Metropolitan, in effect reverting all existing Diocesan Bishops to the role of Auxiliary Bishops and eliminating their oversight of each Diocese.

This is a major departure from the 2002 Synod ruling that created the existence of the Self Ruled elements of the North American Antiochian jurisdiction allowing Bishops and the Metropolitan to oversee the flock. Now, there is only one sole ruling Bishop in North America, the Metropolitan himself, and he answers directly to the Patriarch in all matters. The questions remain: Why this change and does this in all practicality eliminate the status of Self Rule from North American Antiochian Church? Does this also eliminate the Local Synod and the method of governance? No reason or explanation has been given for the restructuring and no advanced notice.

The 2002 Self Rule decision states:

1. Self Rule and Jurisdiction The Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America is and shall remain self-ruled within its present jurisdiction (The United States of America and Canada) and shall constitute one unified ecclesiastical Antiochian entity.

2. Governance
The Archdiocese is governed by the Holy Scripture, the Sacred Tradition, the Holy Canons, the Constitution of the Church of Antioch and this Synodical resolution and by its Constitution and Bylaws.

3. Recognition of Auxiliary Bishops as Diocesan Bishops and Local Synod
Upon adoption of this resolution, the Auxiliary Bishops of the Archdiocese shall become Diocesan Bishops and bear their given titles. The Diocesan Bishops will constitute under the Metropolitan the Local Synod of the Archdiocese which will be its governing authority. The Local Synod shall determine the number of dioceses and their boundaries.

According to OrthoxWiki, an Auxiliary Bishop is a bishop with no territorial authority and is technically uncanonical due to the fact that they are given a title within the jurisdiction of another Bishop. The being true, the future of the six former Bishops are in question.

The new Synod Ruling states,

THE DECISION REGARDING THE AMENDING OF ARTICLES CONCERNING BISHOPS ACCORDING TO THE BY-LAWS OF THE PATRIARCH

Chapter VI, The Bishop

Article 75 The Patriarch is the reference point of all Bishops in Damascus, Patriarchal Monasteries and Vicariates; and they are under his authority.

Article 76 The Metropolitan is the point of reference of all bishops in his Archdiocese and they are under his authority.

Article 77 All Bishops within the Antiochian See are auxiliary Bishops and are directly under their spiritual authority.

Article 78 The Metropolitan defines the responsibilities of the Bishop and the place where they should serve. The Bishop does not do anything contrary to the will of the Metropolitan.

Article 79 The aforementioned article 75,76,77,78 are applied in all Antiochian Archdiocese and whatever contradicts these articles is null and void.

The notification of the change will come in the form of a letter from Metropolitan Philip which will be required to be read in all parishes on Sunday February 26, 2009.

Metropolitan PHILIP writes:

Esteemed Members of the Board of Trustees of the Archdiocese,
Beloved Clergy and Parish Councils and all Faithful of our God-Protected Archdiocese,

Greetings and blessings to all of you in the spirit of this Holy and Great Lent.

Enclosed, please find two copies of the Holy Synod decision regarding all bishops within the Holy See of Antioch. This decision was adopted by the Holy Synod of Antioch which was convened at the Patriarchate in Damascus, February 24^th, 2009. The Patriarch and the Holy Synod are the highest authority in our Antiochian Church. You will find enclosed the Arabic text and the English translation which is mine. Since this was a special Synod meeting with only one item on the agenda concerning the bishops, the proposed text of this decision was sent to the members of the Holy Synod, who were not present, for their approval.

We take this opportunity to wish you the blessings and spiritual rewards of this Great Lent which was described by St. John Chrysostom as the "springtime of souls."

Your Father in Christ,

We can only hope that the Antiochian leadership will be forthcoming about the reasons that such a major restructuring has been so abruptly implemented. The heart and soul of the Orthodox faith is that we are all accountable to one another as seen by the fact that all, even Laymen, are considered Priests. With a stroke of a pen our Bishops are gone and with a stroke of a pen the future of the Self-Ruled Antiochian Christian Archdioesese of North America is in question. This change is too major to simply expect parishioners to accept without question.

Directions To The East-For My Baptist Friends

West is the opposite direction from East, but if you keep going and keep your eyes open you'll eventually hit East again. Starting East, as we all have, find Martin Luther Highway. Get off on the Zwingli exit. That will take you to Ana-baptist Blvd. Drive through the Sola Scriptura community and take a left at Calvinist lane (where the pretty TULIPS are), you don't stay on it too long before coming to John Smythe Circle.There is a Lifeway Bookstore on the corner. Circle around the Baptismal fountain in the middle until you get tired or you run out of crackers and grape juice, then do a Google Earth search to see where you are in comparison to from where you've come. You get a much better perspective when you pull way back and see the whole picture rather than the journey in microcosm. When you find the East, start heading back. It will be a totally different route. I have included some directions:
http://audio.ancientfaith.com/eastwest/iew_2009-01-07.mp3

Pray For Australia

Pray for our Orthodox family and for the many citizens of Australia who have been affected by the most devastating brush fires in the country's history. Over 108 lives lost and hundreds of homes and towns devastated.

CyVan Syndrome

Regarding the dialogue on the current state of affairs in Gaza; I respect the sincere comments I have received regarding my strong request for a balanced response on the issue from Metropolitan Philip. I understand that the subject is so volatile that it is difficult to wade through the emotions. If one leans even partially to one side he is lumped in totality to that side and afforded all of its prejudices. This is hardly fair but there seems to be no black and white on this subject. I have endeavored to be balanced and at the same time speak clearly and firmly in language that is not easily mistaken. But people have the tendency to be Cyclops Readers, that is, they only read with one eye. The equivalent is Van Gogh Listeners who only hear with one ear. This condition prevents a person from considering the total of what has been said. They are selective in what they see or hear and react only to the part they have internalized. They suffer from CyVan Syndrome. Unfortunately, this condition does not allow for an adequate or factual response. For instance, I have commended the Archdiocese and the Metropolitan for their pastorate and good works toward converts and their heart for the suffering in the Arab lands but that gets lost in the controversy and my strong comment on “bias”.

I do not mind dialoging with those having CyVan Syndrome for perhaps I can glean from what they have seen with their one eye or heard with their one ear. For instance, a JTO reader just sent me a book called “Blood Brothers, The Unforgettable Story of a Palestinian Christian Working For Peace In Israel”. I am reading it with great interest and am gleaning. There is a false presumption on the reader’s part, however, that I am not knowledgeable of Zionism, its history, its aggression and the plight of Christian Arabs in the Middle East region. This is Cyclops and Van Gogh. I am aware of the existence of the alleged Talmudic Judaism conspiracies and of the tenants of the Zionist movement and am researching for an article on the subject. I have also taken a respectful hit from a Dispensationalist-leaning Orthodox brother who falsely presumed I was anti-Semetic when I pointed out the existence of 911 conspiracies. Further, I have posted one article which defends the Archdiocese from accusations of Anti-Semitism and acknowledged the existence of Jews Against Zionism organizations. I am also Orthodox in my view that the Church is Israel and not the nation and to assume, as some have asserted, that I must be a “Zionist Christian”, is further evidence of the CyVan Syndrome. That accusation is easily refuted by reading other posts on this blog, where I refute Evangelical Dispensationalism. It may be the CyVan effect that causes some to miss these facts and respond with inaccurate and extreme verbiage such as:

 

Heretical 

1.One who holds to a heresy; one who believes some doctrine contrary to the established faith or prevailing religion.  

2.One who having made a profession of Christian belief, deliberately and pertinaciously refuses to believe one or more of the articles of faith "determined by the authority of the universal church. 

(No doctrines have been discussed here much less the straying from foundational truth. I believe some use this serious word too flippantly.)

 Hatred

Strong aversion; intense dislike; hate; an affection of the mind awakened by something regarded as evil.

Syn: Odium; ill will; enmity; hate; animosity; malevolence; rancor; malignity; detestation; loathing; abhorrence; repugnance; antipathy.

(Re-reading the post with two eyes will allow anyone to see that there is no hatred in any of the JTO posts. Strong verbal exhortation to right conduct is not hatred of the recipient of the words.)

Spite

1. To be angry at; to hate. [Obs.]

2. To treat maliciously; to try to injure or thwart.

(There is a difference between anger and righteous indignation. Righteous indignation does not have as its motive to maliciously try to injure or thwart. Jesus’ use of the whip in the Temple is example of this. Those at the end of the whip were still none too happy with Him, I am sure.)

Self-Professed Christian

There is no dictionary definition for this hyphenated word, but it is self-explanatory. To make commentary in the way of indicting a person’s salvation is un-Orthodox and, if I might add, a fearful thing to do.

Terrorist

To use this word in any way, shape or form in relation to any JTO post is to lose credibility in the dialogue.  One objector to the "balance" post even equated me to Cain, asserting that, as a Convert, I am hating my older brother. I can only presume that this included the assumption that Converts are second class Christians whose offerings are not as readily received by God. To apply the illustration correctly, however, wouldn't it be the older brother who kills the younger? Regardless, this scriptural analogy is not applicable here. Christianity is not a club or an organization whereby membership status is granted by seniority or by certified proof of genealogy. Are Arabic Orthodox the real Christians, the rest of us just tag-alongs? According to the parable of Christ, we are all converts and all have the same reward no matter how long we have worked in the vineyard. "The last shall be first and the first shall be last"( Matt. 20). In any case, I do not hate anyone and I have not murdered anyone, especially not my brother. I sometimes take issue with some of my Orthodox Brothers and submit refutation comments on their blogs, which they graciously post. I will also occasionally write an article provoked by something I have seen or heard from those with whom I have had precious discourse, but I have never used any of the words or phrases such as the above in any of my posts and have been fearfully aware that I am speaking of things concerning the activities of the leadership of our church under whose pastorate I dwell.

Setting aside the argument on who is right or wrong in the Gaza situation, and yes, it can be set aside, unless your name is "Cy" or "Van", here is the argument in brief:

Given that Israel has stolen the land and terrorized a people, can someone at least say,

"Brother Arabs, go ahead and attack the evil empire, get your land back, drive the invaders into the sea, but stop using your own women and children as shields, firing rockets from your own neighborhoods assuring retaliation, and stop firing rockets indiscriminately, hitting non-military targets which kills Israeli women and children, Jews, Arabs and Gentiles"?

My desire and heart of compassion is for all peoples, even our Christian brothers in Israel. In my deploring of all atrocities, I have focused on the absence of rebuke from our Church toward the inhuman practices of the Palestinian militants. It is only Cy and Van who could muddy the waters of my clearly worded posts. Surely, as Christians, we can't succumb to "the means justify the end" attitude that Palestinians can do no wrong because the Israelis do no good. I would like to think that in private conference our Bishops are addressing this part of the complex issue, but I believe it would be of great benefit for the world and for Orthodox believers to see that this is an equal opportunity Church where sin and deplorable actions are equally disdained. It is this that is at the heart of my exhortation to the Metropolitan to not be biased. We have a Church and brothers in Palestine, Israel and America alike, and the Church must speak to the concerns of all. The Metropolitan is the voice of the Church in North America. It is some of those North American Orthodox priests and deacons who reportedly verbally and vehemently protested at the last Clergy Symposium, as an Orthodox Academic presented his opinion that Islam is friendly to Christians and Christians fair well under their domination while Israel is oppressive to Christians and Christians fair poorly under Jewish domination. According to several attenders of the Symposium, nearly 250 clergy stood to their feet and shouted "no!", in what one observer called, "a near insurrection." It is this same imbalanced, biased, ethnic demagoguery that is at issue in the Palestinian/Israeli debate and the vast majority of Antiochian Orthodox Christians of North America have little tolerance for such, even from His Eminence.

I will continue to commend the Orthodox Faith, especially the Antiochian Arch-Diocese, to others as the Faith of our Fathers and the place where we all should be quick to confess our sins and faithful to magnify the Holy Trinity. God be merciful to me a sinner, but I will also continue to pray for and dialogue with our Bishops, who guard our souls, that they will remain outside of the political fray and promote only the Faith as found in the Scriptures and Holy Tradition.

UPDATE: See http://journeytoorthodoxy.blogspot.com/2009/06/why-we-leftwhere-we-went.html 
for an update on why I can no longer commend the Antiochian Diocese.