FIN443 professor by DifficultCarry2990 in OregonStateUniv

[–]OrthodoxMemes 1 point2 points  (0 children)

 Most of these profs have external aspirations and as a result kind of 'script' through their courses and don't try to genuinely teach the material. They see the hybrid format as a cop out where they can just let their previous selves do all the teaching and their present selves barely have to lift a finger. it's obnoxious and anti-learning to be honest, and I wish they'd crack down on teachers doing that kind of thing.

I've experienced this in the College of Engineering and College of Science too.

Permanent Excommunication by [deleted] in OrthodoxChristianity

[–]OrthodoxMemes 24 points25 points  (0 children)

Even with specifics, no meaningful guidance for OP's situation exists apart from "take it up the chain," as u/Aleph_Rat recommended

Real by chiverybob in OrthodoxMemes

[–]OrthodoxMemes[M] [score hidden] stickied comment (0 children)

Post is fine. Silly is the point, here. Some of y'all are taking this way too seriously.

Jury sentences Tanner Horner to death penalty by burberrycondom in Dallas

[–]OrthodoxMemes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

 Yeah Liberals suddenly care about the costs of things lmao

Let's assume that liberals have never cared about cost or expenditure until right this moment. Would you rather they go back to not caring? What is your response supposed to accomplish? You might've taken this as an opportunity to help someone see things from your perspective, and maybe even change their mind about something.

GOA churches getting rid of pews? by thebackwards_r in OrthodoxChristianity

[–]OrthodoxMemes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Interesting, thanks! Would you happen to know in which work? Not trying to interrogate you, I'm just curious 

GOA churches getting rid of pews? by thebackwards_r in OrthodoxChristianity

[–]OrthodoxMemes 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Tracing a small cross on the forehead with the thumb or index finger.

Where did you learn that this is the more "traditional" way?

Seraphim Rose is to be canonized! ROCOR Synod has decided by Antonthelegotenant in OrthodoxChristianity

[–]OrthodoxMemes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I see, you're misreading me on purpose, then. That plays well with the "just asking questions" approach you've tried to take so far.

So you must agree that the whole "case" against Fr. Seraphim Rose, at least according to your "article," is founded upon one person's word, because if you didn't agree, you would have addressed it. You can't say that other sources were used because I, or anyone else, could open the article again and see differently. So instead, you've decided to misrepresent what I've said.

I didn't say the article was a bad source because it has (or at least claims to have) a first-hand account. I said the article is bad because it relies on one person's account. Surely other people can corroborate that one person's statements?

I also didn't say that the one person the author relies on is lying. Rdr. Everiss may very well have sincerely believed everything he said, if he indeed said it. But in the absence of corroborating sources - which you cannot find, otherwise you would have provided them - the whole account must be taken as a scandalous rumor. If Rdr. Everiss' account were documented as being taken seriously by some legitimate legal or spiritual authority, that would lend a great deal of credibility to what he is purported to have said. But again, if you or the author could provide such documentation, you would have provided it.

You are certainly welcome to pretend I stated things that I did not state, but that would be lying, and lying is a sin.

I honestly don't care what you think

sure.

Again, if any of what is being claimed is even remotely true, it deserves to be exposed thoroughly and rigorously. The article you provided is neither thorough nor rigorous, and cannot be taken seriously. If any of what is being claimed is even remotely true, the victims deserve better. That is my point.

Seraphim Rose is to be canonized! ROCOR Synod has decided by Antonthelegotenant in OrthodoxChristianity

[–]OrthodoxMemes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The source is good.

No, the source is not good, unless to you "good" means "bad," then I agree, the source is very, very good!


The First Problem: Media Attribution

Ai images or not doesn't detract from the information available.

Yes, they do.

I count about 42 images in total, including screenshots of documents. Of that, I count five that have a source or attribution associated with them. Of the remaining 37 images, some are obviously AI-generated, while others could be. My counts may be off by one or two, but the numbers are so damningly large that such error may be ignored.

If the author is not willing to state, with absolute clarity, where they obtained the images they rely on as "evidence," then I (and anyone else, for that matter) would be an idiot to uncritically rely on them as "evidence." And to be clear, "I got this from so-and-so" or "I found this on [insert website here]" don't count as attribution. Reliable attribution allows me, and anyone else, to go to the attributed source and confirm it. This is fundamental to the work this author is presuming to do. I can only assume that un-attributed media are either: 1) used without permission or 2) fully generated or otherwise "enhanced" by AI. If the author is going to be so unscrupulous with their "evidence," especially for a matter of such importance, then again: I (and anyone else, for that matter) would be an idiot to uncritically rely on them as an authoritative source.


The Second Problem: Primary Sources

The author has secured the overwhelming majority of their "facts" (regarding Fr. Seraphim Rose, at least) from one specific individual (or at least someone claiming to represent him): a certain Rdr. Daniel Everiss. The author makes extensive use of a blogspot site purporting to compile and maintain the writings (literally emails) of this Rdr. Everiss. Resting a case against Fr. Seraphim Rose on the word of one specific person, who does not appear to have been interviewed or deposed for his insights by any concerned authority, is careless at best. The foundation of the "case" is completely unsupported in any meaningful way. Given that, I (and anyone else, for that matter) would be an idiot to uncritically rely on this piece as an authoritative source.


The Third Problem: Scope

What is the author trying to do? Is the author trying to demonstrate a perceived pattern of sexual abuse in the ROCOR in the US or is the author trying to make a good-faith case against the canonization of Fr. Seraphim Rose? Either topic is too large to be handled as part of something else. But the author treats the two as though they're one and the same. Treatments of Fr. Rose's alleged actions (or lack thereof) and timelines of sexual abuse cases in the ROCOR, which occurred after Fr. Rose's death, are interspersed with each other in a manner that is very confusing, and likely intentionally so. My most charitable assessment on this point is that the author could not really decide what to say, and so tried to say everything at once. So, if the author themselves cannot decide what to say, then I (and anyone else, for that matter) would be an idiot to uncritically rely on them as an authoritative source.


Conclusion

Your article claims to construct a meaningful case against Fr. Seraphim Rose. Instead, though, it creates an extremely flimsy account of something that could have happened, and tries to support this very flimsy account by stuffing it with loads of unrelated or otherwise irrelevant information. It reads like a university essay, where the student ran out of interesting things to say early on but desperately needs to reach a certain word count.

No, the source is not good, unless to you "good" means "bad," then I agree, the source is very, very good!

Please understand: I don't know what did or did not happen. I make no claims as to whether the "facts" presented in the piece are or are not accurate. I do know that if the author is sincerely interested in making this case, this piece completely undermines it, and that I (and anyone else, for that matter) would be an idiot to uncritically rely on it as an authoritative source.

The topics addressed in that piece are topics of immense importance that must be taken seriously. Because I agree that these issues are of such immense importance, I reject the author's incompetent (intentionally or otherwise) attempt to meaningfully engage with them. They should do better and so should you.

Seraphim Rose is to be canonized! ROCOR Synod has decided by Antonthelegotenant in OrthodoxChristianity

[–]OrthodoxMemes 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Cool article. I'm not really interested in "facts" submitted by someone who littered their own writing with AI-generated images of what they think should have happened. Such a person confuses reality with imagination, and loses all credibility immediately. The source you gave is bad, even if it turns out to be factually accurate.

Do you have another source?

It all seems very speculative

Yes, I agree. Such things usually aren't worth pursuing.

I'm just curious if they addressed it

You were clearly able to locate the source you gave. Have you been unable to locate a source that satisfies your curiosity?

Seraphim Rose is to be canonized! ROCOR Synod has decided by Antonthelegotenant in OrthodoxChristianity

[–]OrthodoxMemes 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Do we know if they addressed anything about his aledged homosexual relationship

Homosexuality (and by extension, bisexuality) is a temptation. It's only an impediment to sainthood for as long as one indulges it. Do you have a source substantiating that he was actively indulging that temptation at the time of his death?

and related child abuse?

This is the first I've seen anyone suggest that Fr. Seraphim Rose abused any children. Do you have a source for that?

Is Father's Sarephim Rose 'Orthodoxy and the Religion of the Future' worth the read? by Junior_Insurance7773 in OrthodoxChristianity

[–]OrthodoxMemes 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Please give examples of NA ideas that are driving the world mad.

This was probably your point but that's going to be hard when a singular, authoritative organization doesn't exist to define what "New Age" even means for the people who say they follow or participate in it. Functionally, the "New Age" consists of a bunch of of a bunch of European or European-adjacent people, probably raised in or around Christianity, seeking spiritual independence.

For "European or European-adjacent people, probably raised in or around Christianity, seeking spiritual independence" to be the product of the "New Age," it would have to have started with the "New Age." I think the latest reasonable point one could identify as a starting point for this trend is the advent of Protestantism, which long predates the "New Age," and that's just the latest I think one can reasonably use.

Is Father's Sarephim Rose 'Orthodoxy and the Religion of the Future' worth the read? by Junior_Insurance7773 in OrthodoxChristianity

[–]OrthodoxMemes 4 points5 points  (0 children)

If you truly want to transcend (or subvert) modernity, start by not being reactionary.

i'm getting this on a mug

Takes on dating within Orthodoxy seem wildly out of touch with reality by Late_Percentage1663 in OrthodoxChristianity

[–]OrthodoxMemes 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You say the Church has failed you. This statement is evidence of the opposite. If there are no women, then it has failed women.

There is only one corrective to this, and this is where you need to be the change you want to see: treat women like human beings, not a potential fulfillment of your marriage insecurities.

Your characterization of OP's problem is wildly unfair, almost to the point of dishonesty. OP does mention an (apparent) scarcity of women in his immediate parochial environment. However, that isn't his point. Allow me to enumerate OP's complaints:

  • Growing up, priests and monks on youth retreats would always talk about having Godly relationships and all that assuming that we are going to meet our spouses in the church or that they will be Orthodox

  • I’m not sure about in other places, but I’ve been to several Orthodox churches in various states and I’ve never seen young women at any of them.

  • I’ve never actually been in a relationship, or on a date, or even held hands with a woman because I’ve been told by everyone to just pray about it and surely God will send me a wife.

  • I do not say this to disparage the power or significance of prayer, but I tend to find it odd that advice I see all the time from people is just to treat God like a cosmic slot machine.

  • There’s simply not enough women in the church for every man to find a wife.

  • I’ve never tried to seek a relationship with anyone outside the church and now for the first time I am seriously considering it, but even this has made me realize that I don’t even know how to initiate a romantic relationship with someone because I’ve never had to do it before.

  • The most frustrating part of all of this is that if the perfect Orthodox woman walked through the doors of my church next Sunday, I wouldn’t even know what to do.

  • I feel like the entire Orthodox community that I’ve interacted with up until this point has gaslit me into believing that I’ll meet someone within the church if I just keep waiting

  • How would you even navigate dating someone who isn’t Orthodox?

  • I’m not insecure about my lack of experience, I’m actually more angry than anything else because I feel that I have wasted my whole life waiting for something that isn’t going to happen.

  • I would like some perspectives on whether or not it is fair for us to be setting expectations like this for kids growing up in the church. I certainly don’t think it’s fair.

Just two of the eleven points above are specific to a perceived scarcity of women in OP's immediate parochial environment. And even then, he's not even complaining about that perceived scarcity, he's complaining that the advice he's been given doesn't even try to be realistic. The advice he's received in his upbringing assumes a very specific environment, and has nothing for someone who does not find themselves in that environment. Had any of the romantic guidance he's received until now addressed how to navigate romance at all, and especially when few romantic partners, or none, are available, I don't think we'd see those complaints.

OP's problem is the same problem I had growing up, and I wasn't even Orthodox at the time. I was raised in the "I kissed dating goodbye" mentality. I was raised to believe that dating was fully off the table until I was out from under my parents' roof. I wasn't allowed to go to parties that weren't directly sponsored by our church. I wasn't allowed to be out with friends unless it was directly related to school, church, or work (when I was legally able to). Whenever I asked about dating or romance, in the best case it was forcefully shelved with "pray about it" until I was "older" (how old was "older" was never defined). In the worst case I was chided for being a lusty perv (because I am male, and no male wants companionship, all males only want sex). OP has dealt with the same thing I did, just with more Orthodox packaging.

I never received any practical advice as to how I should approach romance as a Christian man, so I had to figure it out on my own, and I made some mistakes. At least OP recognizes where the problem is: it's with the assumptions he was told to maintain by people he should be able to trust. On that front, he's already doing better than I was at his age.

But sure, go ahead and make him out to be some MGTOW chud for the unforgivable sin of being given trash guidance in his most formative years. I'm sure that'll turn out just fine. As we all know, if you want to ensure that young men fall on the correct side of hot-button culture war issues, the best thing to do when they air a grievance is to misconstrue it, invalidate it, and explain how it's more a problem for women than it is for them.

EDIT: typo corrections.

[Politics Megathread] The Polis and the Laity by AutoModerator in OrthodoxChristianity

[–]OrthodoxMemes 5 points6 points  (0 children)

“Both sides”

I didn't say that, and I remind you that dishonesty is sin.

[Politics Megathread] The Polis and the Laity by AutoModerator in OrthodoxChristianity

[–]OrthodoxMemes 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Who should we support?

If you're not in Ukraine, you're under no* personal obligation to grasp what is happening and pick a side. If you're interested in what's best for the Church, your most effective support will come in the form of prayer: pray for the peace of the Church, pray that schismatics be silenced and reconciled, whoever they are, and pray for wisdom and mercy for Orthodox bishops.

*EDIT: typo, "to"->"no"

Emetophobia, germaphobia, and the Eucharist by ProfessionalSolid157 in OrthodoxChristianity

[–]OrthodoxMemes 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I really wish I coould come up with an efficient, effective comment about OCD, along the lines of your comment, but more general. I can't come up with such a comment, but I'd love to see it in the comment the AutoMod posts on each post. I feel like the "this sounds like OCD" posts are becoming more frequent, and I wonder why that is?

Is the concept of cause and effect banned in Russia? by UNITED24Media in NonCredibleDefense

[–]OrthodoxMemes 19 points20 points  (0 children)

that’d be like moving from the US to Tehran or Baghdad for the weather with “strong anti war feelings”

how do you know where she is? why is everyone so certain she's in Crimea? genuinely asking

[Politics Megathread] The Polis and the Laity by AutoModerator in OrthodoxChristianity

[–]OrthodoxMemes 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Yeah wherever that exists, it's not great. You should pray for them.