The original radical traditionalists

Today is the feast day of St Nikodemus the Hagiorite so i decided to take the chance to throw some light on the, relatively unknown, Kollyvades movement, which St Nikodemus played a great role at.

The Kollyvades were monks who in the 18th century decided to fight back against alien influences on Orthodox Christianity from the west, and also European atheism (rampant on intellectual circles at the time) and Islam.

Let the Kollyvades and other related movements (like the movement of Papoulakos, another relatively unknown movement for tradition and the correct faith) serve as a reminder to all of us that the responsibillity of keeping our traditions and the correct teachings of Christ lies in our hands, never let anyone tell you otherwise ;)

Attached: Nikodemos of the Holy Mountain.jpg (550x961, 112.92K)

Other urls found in this thread:

God bless you lad. It is sad that there is barely any real Orthodoxy in the west. The New Calender and other such heresies have done a lot of damage, but the Church will prevail. Lord have mercy.


Attached: meme orthodox starter pack.png (1000x1000, 957.77K)

lol you have no idea what orthodoxy is. not even trying to be prideful or meme. I will pray for you lad

9.5 The branch theory—“denominationalist”

Another aspect of the western Christianity that the saint strongly rejected was the so-called Branch Theory (or as Peter Bouteneff calls it: “denominationalist”), which is very common in the Protestant world. The basic idea is that all Christian churches are different branches on the one Christian tree; they are part of the same body. St. Justin sees it not as branches of the tree of truth, but as fallen off and withered branches; “a branch withers if it falls off the vine” (John 15:6). The vine is for St. Justin the Church, the body of Christ, the God-man and the ultimate truth. By falling off from the truth, from Christ and his Church, a branch withers and dies. Therefore, he sees the western Christian movements as fallen away and withering, as heretical. This is important to understand; St. Justin sees the Roman Catholic Church and what he calls its offspring, the Protestant movement, as heretics. He often uses St. Mark of Ephesus to demonstrate it, who himself alone, according to common Orthodox opinion, saved Orthodoxy from a union with Rome (see: council of Florence 1439): “One who departs even by a little from the Genuine Faith is deemed a heretic and is subjected to the laws against heretics… Latins [Roman Catholic Church] are therefore heretics and we have cut them off as heretics” (Quote by St. Mark of Ephesus used in St. Justin’s note23). Being a heretic for St. Justin meant being separated from God and from the Truth. The branch theory was, according to St. Justin, a western innovation from the 16th century, and therefore he saw no organic connection to the early Church and to the teachings of the fathers and/or the Ecumenical councils. “As soon as man separates from him (the God-man)—he dries out, withers and dies. This is exactly what happened to papist, Protestants and all other heresies and schisms.”24 St. Justin’s understanding of “The branch theory” or “denominationalist” is very much in line with traditional Orthodox and Roman Catholic understanding. The difference is how St. Justin explains it and where he sees its roots.

St. Justin and Orthodox ecumenism—how it should be

It is very clear for us how St. Justin felt about Western Christianity, what he saw as the biggest problems and heresies. He has written countless more works about the falling away of the Western church and its heresies. However, here has been brought to light the core in his thought about this, his criticisms. Let’s now focus on St. Justin`s thoughts about how ecumenism should take place from an Orthodox perspective; because despite his sometimes very harsh writings about ecumenism and its participants, he was not totally against an ecumenical dialog. Bishop Atanasije Jevtic, one of St. Justin`s spiritual sons and the one that was closest to St. Justin, calls people that suggest St. Justin was against every kinds of ecumenism as “unwise zealots” and that they are blaspheming St. Justin by thinking that.25 Some critics of ecumenism claim that people’s efforts to find positive views towards the ecumenical movement in St. Justin’s thoughts are forced and out of place. It is, however, important to point out that people like bishop Atanasije are regarded as rather cautious or even negative towards ecumenism themselves, and many describe him (Bishop Atanasije) as ultra-nationalistic and conservative in a way which would exclude ecumenism almost completely. This is an indication that he would have no personal interest in portraying and defending St. Justin`s thoughts in any inaccurate way.
St. Justin calls ecumenism “The substance of the Church”26. This ecumenism is not the ecumenism understood and practiced today, especially in the Protestant world. For St. Justin, ecumenism is the way the apostles worked miracles by the Holy Spirit and in the name of Jesus. Ecumenism can only be practiced with and by the holy mysteries (that is, the sacraments) of the Church, with Holy virtue that “christify us and trinitize, divinize and sanctify us”27. This would again imply truth, being in truth, in the Church, as the main criteria for ecumenism. I think the way one might understand this is that all should go back to the roots of the Christian church; hence the apostles being mentioned, and from there work forwards, rejecting all innovations not accepted by the Seven Ecumenical Councils, the things that are not truth and that has caused division among Christians. Everything must be done through Christ and with Christ in ecumenism. The saint lists a few key fundamentals of ecumenism. I have divided them here into small categories as I saw fit.

Ecumenism is “Where two or three are gathered together” (Matt 18:20).

Ecumenism should be build/have its foundation “On the Holy Spirit”28. Like the apostles and the ecumenical councils, ecumenism must allow the Holy Spirit to act just as it does within the Church. The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Truth.

Ecumenism can’t be about us humans; it can’t be anthropologic. As the apostle Paul preaches: For we do not preach about ourselves, but about Christ Jesus as Lord (2 Cor. 4:5). About the God-man and “Not about Paul nor Apollos nor Cephas—neither Luther nor Calvin”29. Instead we should preach the Gospel, which is not according to man. Humanistic Christianity is pseudo-Christianity. Every humanism is a heresy.

The only way ecumenism can work again, the only way out so to speak is through repentance “that leads to a full knowledge of the truth” (2tim 2:25). This repentance must come by humbling oneself before the God-man, before His Church, before the Theotokos and all the saints. St. Justin never, not even once, talks about repentance in an earthly way; he never seeks for forgiveness here on earth from heretics towards the Orthodox. Instead he always puts the God-man in the center of all; and because heresy is such a grave sin, forgiveness and repentance can only be asked from God and given by God – through his only begotten son the God-man Christ and his Church.

18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

I'm Orthodox (since birth) altarservant

and yet you think the papist calendar is ok? Lord have mercy

Nice LARP. People like you are the ones that end up becoming papists later.

I will pray for you lad.

The holy Tradition is the Gospel of the Lord Christ, and the Lord Christ Himself, Whom the Holy Spirit instills in each and every believing soul, in the entire Church. Whatever is Christ's, by the power of the Holy Spirit becomes ours, human; but only within the body of the Church. The Holy Spirit—the soul of the Church, incorporates each believer, as a tiny cell, into the body of the Church and makes him a "co-heir" of the God-man (Eph. 3:6). In reality the Holy Spirit makes every believer into a God-man by grace. For what is life in the Church? Nothing other than the transfiguration of each believer into a God-man by grace through his personal, evangelical virtues; it is his growth in Christ, the putting on of Christ by growing in the Church and being a member of the Church. A Christian's life is a ceaseless, Christ-centered theophany: the Holy Spirit, through the holy mysteries and the holy virtues, transmits Christ the Savior to each believer, renders him a living tradition, a living life: "Christ who is our life" (Col. 3:4). Everything Christ's thereby becomes ours, ours for all eternity: His truth, His righteousness, His love, His life, and His entire divine Hypostasis.

Holy Tradition? It is the Lord Jesus Christ, the God-man Himself, with all the riches of his divine Hypostasis and, through Him and for His sake, those of the Holy Trinity. That is most fully given and articulated in the Holy Eucharist, wherein, for our sake and for our salvation, the Savior's entire theanthropic economy of salvation is performed and repeated. Therein wholly resides the God-man with all His wondrous and miraculous gifts; He is there, and in the Church's life of prayer and liturgy. Through all this, the Savior's philanthropic proclamation ceaselessly resounds: "And, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world" (Mt. 28 20): He is with the apostles and, through the apostles, with all the faithful, world without end. This is the whole of the holy Tradition of the Orthodox Church of the apostles: life in Christ = life in the Holy Trinity; growth in Christ = growth in the Trinity (cf. Mt. 28: 19-20).

Based off of what?

I made a compromise of my OC and the new version

Degrees of ecclesiology isn't the same as branch theory, and denying degrees of ecclesiology puts you against endless canons, it doesn't make you based or edgy

But have you been trademark true baptized by my secret spiritual father in the Panagia's Garden? That's Mount Athos for you """"""Orthodox""" out there


Attached: NewVersionOfOC.png (1000x1000, 959.61K)

Finally, Blessed Philotheos notes that as a Church calendar the New Calendar has been condemned and anathematized by three Regional Synods (in 1583, 1587, and 1593). This pamphlet has the merit of putting the Calendar problem in proper perspective, dealing with its essential aspects in a brief, clear, incisive manner. New Calendarists think that the question is about thirteen days, about astronomical correctness, and view the Old Calendarists as simply stubborn, ignorant persons who are averse to scientific improvements. Father Philotheos makes no mention of "astronomical correctness" vs. "astronomical incorrectness," because this is not really the point at issue. What is at issue is whether Orthodox Christians should remain faithful to Tradition, or are free to innovate as they please, with a view to some political or other secular expediency, without regard to the Church’s canonical way of doing things and without regard to foreseeable evil consequences ("fruits") of their innovations for the Church.

It should be added that the New Calendar was introduced into the Orthodox Church not for the sake of astronomical correctness, but as the first step in achieving a forced, false union of the Orthodox Church with non-Orthodox New Calendarist Christian bodies, for the sake of certain secular advantages which such a union was expected to have. This was to be the beginning of the Orthodox Church’s participation in the "Ecumenical Movement"—a movement which has further divided the Orthodox Church into mutually hostile parties: the Ecumenists and the anti-Ecumenists. All the Greek Old Calendarists are anti-Ecumenists, while some of the New Calendarists are Ecumenists and others are anti-Ecumenists. Thus, the evil fruits of the introduction of the New Calendar, which the Blessed Elder clearly foresaw, keep growing in number.

i'd rather trust what saints have to say about things

also the meme sucks:
"ancient" faith is for larpers, jay doesn't know anything about theology, putin is kgb, toll houses are real, there's a reason rose is not a saint, also turks will be destoryed according to saint kosmos. not sure why st. mark is on here

Stop being an ethnophylite

That's the point.

tollhouses are real isn't a point
also the Jay part was an edit, but I'm not convinced he doesn't know theology, just that he spouts it in an edgy way

So is going by the New Calendar sinful?
What if there's no Orthodox church near me that follows the Old Calendar?

Literally go to any church with a cannonical bishop, it's that easy

The church closest to me only one within driving distance is under the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese.
They're canonical, right?

Probably legit
If you're in America this can help:
Really just find out who their bishop is and you can usually tell if they're legit, "bishops" usually can be sorted out through a google search

it is what it is lad. God understands your struggle.

Can someone do an ELI5 on the new calendar thing?

Just for you to know
western influences in 18th century = enlightenment

Did you know St.Nikodemus Hagiorite translated the spiritual excercises of the Jesuits.
He actually liked those books you call "prelest". Really makes you think.