re: Young U.S. Men Joining Russian Churches Promising "Absurd Levels of Manliness"

Fr Moses is awesome. Glad Orthodoxy is getting more exposure!

His church is down the road from Joel Webbon's, and apparently a good amount of people in Joel's congregation have been leaving his church and going to Fr Moses's. It was enough to make Joel do an anti-orthodox livestream a few months ago that was basically as sensational as this BBC article

Your manliness comes from your dad. The fact that so many men are lacking it speaks to the number of children being raised in homes without dad. For a lot of black kids, it's because a man abandoned his responsibility as a father, and for a lot of white kids, it's due to divorce.
For many young men looking for manhood, they think that going to the range, weightlifting and banging chicks without consequences make you a man. (Note: nothing wrong with the range or weightlifting - I do then myself.)
A real man accepts responsibility, corrects his mistakes, protects his family and weathers the storms of life and does not lie to himself or others.

quote:

---

Skinny jeans, crossing your legs, using an iron, shaping your eyebrows, and even eating soup are among the things he derides as too feminine.

---

Okay, the “priest” is a loon. The BBC is hyping an outlier to whip up a desired narrative.

Skinny jeans? Not my style, and certainly not “outdoor manly”, but I dont know what the young financial bucks are wearing these days.

Crossing your legs? At the ankle or at the knee? Maybe a tad unmanly for some, but an otherwise sufficiently manly dude can cross his legs if he desires. Who gives a shite.

Using an iron? I iron my own damned dressed shirts because my wife’s not good enough at ironing. What a slob if he doesn't iron at least some of his nice cotton shirts.

Shaping your eye brows? I dont really know what this is. Do non-gay men do this? I started letting my barber use the clippers like bush whackers on my eyebrows, ears and nose hair once I reached that elderly manly status.

Eating soup? What kind of idiot thinks eating soup is unmanly? GTFO

Christos Anesti!

quote:

---

even eating soup are among the things he derides as too feminine.

---

What about chowder?

I don't see what is effeminate about eating soup.

quote:

---

There’s nothing scriptural on infant baptism nor the pope being infallible or our mediator to our FATHER.
I am not judging I am however stating what is true biblical doctrine and what is COULD be false doctrine. You and I can agree on anything if it can be found in the New Testament. Man has cherry picked verses to fit their narrative. If I can’t find my answers in the Bible I must refer to the first century church. The apostles laid out nearly every scenario of how we must conduct ourselves as a church body and as an individual. Paul’s letters to the FIRST CHURCHES clearly state what the CHURCH OF CHRIST was founded on. Creeds, popes, bishops and worship of saints is not what Christ commanded us to do.

---

I'm not going to argue with you here, because no message board is a fitting forum to debate Theological issues that have been debated between Catholics/Orthodox and Protestants for the last 500 years. It's simply not possible for an on-line message board to serve that purpose.

So, I refer you and anybody else who wants to learn more about what Orthodox/Catholics believe about these issues to Catholic Answers, which explains our beliefs.

If there is an Orthodox website that is similar to Catholic Answers, that would be great. Fact is, though, that the Orthodox and Catholic views on the most fundamental doctrines of Theology are the same, especially regarding Apostolic Succession, Baptism and The Real Presence.

quote:

---

What elaboration, specifically regarding Orthodoxy?

---

The use of incense, bells, iconography/veneration of icons, and even the elaboration of the liturgy with litanies, hymns, and specific prayers not commanded by Scripture. Ornate vestments; chanting; the frequent use of the sign of the cross; the liturgical calendar; holy water, candles, oil, and relics used regularly in worship and blessing.

I could go on with differences, but the point is that the Didache provides an example of a very simplistic form of worship, while Catholicism and the Orthodox churches have elaborated on those greatly over hundreds of years.

quote:

---

Have you attended Divine Liturgy in an Eastern and/or Oriental Orthodox Church?

---

I have. I went to an Eastern Orthodox church in college. There are also many services streaming online. I skimmed through one before sending this reply.

quote:

---

The very purpose of the Divine Liturgy is to receive the body and blood of Christ and worship Him.

---

I don't doubt that. I'm not questioning the motive, necessarily, only the elaboration of the worship practices.

quote:

---

I assume you’re a Protestant…please explain how your particular denomination - or any Protestant denomination anywhere - practices with more “exactness” the mysteries of the Eucharist than the Orthodox.

---

In Protestantism--and in the Reformed tradition especially--we differentiate between elements of worship and circumstances of worship. Elements of worship include prayer, singing praise to God, giving of tithes and offerings, and especially the giving of the Word through preaching and the sacraments of baptism and the Eucharist (we call it Communion or the Lord's Supper). Circumstances would be the time of day that we worship, the place (in a dedicated building vs. a home), how long to preach, which books or passages of the Bible to preach from, or which psalms/songs to sing.

I would say that my denomination in particular (Presbyterian) emphasizes a simplistic worship service. The liturgy includes a call to worship and greeting, singing of psalms, reading of scripture, giving tithes and offerings, pastor-led prayer, recitation of the Lord's Prayer as a congregation, preaching of the Bible, and a benediction at the end. Very simple.

Regarding the Eucharist, we have elder-controlled communion; warnings and blessings of coming to the table; preaching the word of God as an accompaniment to it; prayer and setting the bread and wine apart for a sacramental use; distributing the elements and eating and drinking together as a congregation. We acknowledge the real spiritual presence of Christ in the meal (not merely a memorial) and partake once per month, though I'd prefer a weekly offering of the sacrament.

quote:

---

Furthermore, you stated “many Reformed and Presbyterian” churches observe the Eucharist “every” Lord’s Day. I am unaware of “many” but please provide an example of a juridiction/denomination that does do I can check into it.

---

The OPC, PCA, URC, RPCNA, and others in the NAPARC association of Reformed and Presbyterian churches have varying practices regarding how often the Eucharist is administered, however I've been a member of or visited many churches that observe the sacrament weekly, including some in my own denomination (weekly or monthly is the typical practice).

quote:

---

Does your church? If not…why not? This is a clear teaching of Christ and His Apostles and Church Fathers from the beginning. To depart is heresy.

---

As I stated, my church participates in it monthly rather than weekly.

I don't think you know what heresy is if you believe that not partaking of the Eucharist weekly is heretical. Not participating at all because you believe that Jesus never really had a body or died (like the Gnostics) would be heretical, but that's because of a wrong Christology.

quote:

---

Interesting how you begin your post identifying as a “Reformed Protestant”…can’t find that anywhere in the lexicon of Christianity until post-1519 AD and definitely not in the Holy Scriptures…let’s hold onto that point as you like to refer further on whether or not something is “scriptural”.

---

You--like many non-protestants--clearly don't understand what the doctrine of sola scriptura actually teaches. I don't want to take the time to explain it right now, but suffice it to say that referring to myself as a "Reformed Protestant" isn't a violation of that doctrine.

The monikers of "Reformed" and "Protestant" are intended to convey certain doctrinal convictions I hold to, especially in relation to Roman Catholics or other non-Reformed sects or denominations. As a "Reformed" Christian, in particular, I adhere to the Scriptures as the only infallible rule/authority for the faith and life of the Christian, and the ultimate authority above all other authorities (yes, I believe there are other authorities).

quote:

---

Please advise what the Holy Scriptures “determine what right worship is” since you just dismissed what Church Fathers have taught and practiced…maybe you can provide a list of Church Fathers that Reformed Protestants don’t believe taught “right worship” or even better, those who do.

---

I adhere to the biblical principle of the "regulative principle of worship" (RPW), which is a principle that describes the biblical teaching that whatever is not commanded by God in worship is forbidden. Many other Christians adhere to the normative principle of worship, which teaches that anything that God has not forbidden is allowed. The RPW can be most graphically seen in the example of Nadab and Abihu, being killed by God for worshipping God in a way He did not command (offering strange fire).

quote:

---

Interesting words sir. I guess you’re “picking and choosing which history you want to use” by saying “right worship” is only found in the Holy Scriptures and not also passed down by Church Fathers inspired by the Holy Spirit through Holy Traditions.

---

This is again why sola scriptura is so important.

Since you clearly believe that all oral traditions given by the Apostles are equally as authoritative to the Church today as the Bible, can you please point me to a source that lists every single oral teaching that the Apostles gave to the Church? I'd like to see a codified list of every single teaching they gave so I can know which teachings are equal in authority to the Bible, which was given and preserved for the Church.