A Western Rite ROCOR Disagrees with My Writing and Defends Putin

Aristibule C Adams

21 décembre, 07:19

"The laws of every society reflect its culture and morals. Ours bear the imprint of liberalism and its hyper-individualist focus. In such a setting, even the most spirited efforts to preserve traditions must fall by the wayside of an ugly, vacuous culture of narcissistic indulgence. Libertarians say that it’s the responsibility of parents, not the state, to protect children from accessing porn, but in a declining and ugly culture, parents can only shelter their children from the world for so long, and even that is no formula for a healthy or happy life.

Libertarians may privately sympathize with the conservative desire for cultural renewal, but in practice their fear of public power makes such a renewal impossible. If conservatives are not willing to embrace political solutions to public problems, then the Left will gladly fill the void. Would conservatives rather live in a culture that reflects their understanding of the good, or as aliens within an enemy regime that regards them with hostility and suspicion?"

American Greatness : If the Right Doesn’t Stand Against Porn, What Will It Stand For?
Matthew Boose - December 19th, 2019
https://amgreatness.com/2019/12/19/if-the-right-doesnt-stand-against-porn-what-will-it-stand-for/

Hans-Georg Lundahl

I can live with a government banning porn, if it also bans abortions.

Putin might want to "ban porn" in order to get a cyberwall and then use that cyberwall in order to block other things as well, which shouldn't be blocked. He's had nearly 20 years and hasn't banned abortions.

The one law that banned promoting information on abortion also banned promoting homoeopathic or herbal cures ...

G. K.

This is a good point; how far do we trust the ones in charge, and if we trust the one we have now, what about the next one? Any information banned must be very narrowly and carefully defined. For example, people have been prosecuted in the US for "child porn" that involved no photos of children at all, or clothed photos that were intended for a high school yearbook that one over-zealous prosecutor wanting to insure reelection decided were 'too risque.' There is far too much danger in giving government free reign over information. I grew up during the Cold War, which was the age of lies on both sides, and, unlike now with the internet, virtually no citizen in either the US or USSR could get any information beyond what the government and media chose to tell them, and it was always the same well before that, through war after war.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

In Russia a historian was charged with "pedophilia" after refusing to correct the idea Cheka or UGP whatever killed some guys to Finns doing it during Continuation War.

Aristibule C Adams

It banned witchcraft and occultism.*

Again, he's not a dictator. He has to get the votes in parliament. A lot of damage was done in the Soviet and the Clintons suzerainty years. He's got the Church in his side in the Pro-Life side. Their outlook on ending that looks better. Us, not so much.

*[Later on it seems he confuses what the law is I am talking about, I am talking about one involving medical practises, he is talking of one involving religious ones./HGL]

Hans-Georg Lundahl

That law?

He didn't ban abortion and herbal medicine is not witchcraft.

"Their outlook on ending that looks better."

Indeed? After 20 years of saying one can't end abortion?

He has to gets votes in parliament? So did Mussolini ... under whom abortion was a criminal offense.

Seriously, he accepts heading a party which does not vote for banning abortion, says something about him, and it is not good.

Have you read what Mark Shea says about US Americans who still think Trump will end abortion?

Aristibule C Adams

Putin has no power to ban anything. Parliament makes the laws. And yes, that law was directed towards witches.

No, I don't read Mark Shea. No one should read him.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Whether the law was in intention directed to witches or not, the actual terms are such that herbal medicine even without witchcraft is targetted, if we are even speaking of the same law.

The one I speak of bans giving publically available information on abortion facilities and on herbal medicine.

Those terms may have some "sentimental" connexion with banning witchcraft, but banning Tea Tree Oil as treatment for scabies is not targetting witchcraft but a very licit medical practise, though other pharmacopy than modern treatments, and banning information on abortion but not abortion itself is not targetting the witches enough.

As for "no one should read Mark Shea" I disagree, he has some very valid points to make in defending Catholic Mariology, it's a pity he's modernist on a few issues, including in believing Old Age and some kind of Theistic Evolution.

So far he has been right and pro-lifers of the movement nearly only wrong about Trump being pro-life. Exception, the Alabama law which according to terms bans all abortions after week 5 or 6, which is much better than Russia did so far (perhaps other state laws have concurred).

The Russian law I speak of by banning information on abortion also bans (I suppose) pro-life tracts (except those discretely enough distributed by Orthos), and makes getting an abortion a privilege depending on the right connexions or the badwill of the doctor. At the same time, the banning of information on herbal medicine boosts modern synthetic phramacopy, which on top of that has in Russia had some scandals of very bad products.

And the uses of pharmacopy which constitute witchcraft (maleficium), like abortion, contraception, pushing an excitement of sexual type, inhibiting an excitement of sexual type, and making someone more pliable to orders from others (psychiatric pharmacopy) have not the least been targetted by the terms of that law, as long as the pharmacopy is modern and scientific.

Where do the Church Fathers say a witch is not a witch if the witch uses a certain type of lab?

Aristibule C Adams

The Pro-Life position of the Russian Orthodox Church is quite open, not 'discrete'.

I suppose you can imbibe at the fount of CIA propaganda - but it's diabolical (divisive) in origin.

Not sure who you're preaching to against Trump here. The only men I've voted for for President of the USA are Pat Buchanan and Ron Paul, and Bo Gritz (once). Gritz was a mistake - the other two are pro-Life.

I think of lot of your muddle and confusion would be solved if you could reconcile with the Orthodox clergy that you've thrown a fit at. Following the Devil's politics isn't going to get you far. Mark Shea you could do better without. You could do better without the whole self-promoting self-anointed Internet Apologist Blogger scene.

[My point was Mark Shea's point is better applied on Putin than on Trump. But his voting pro-life, fine./HGL]

Hans-Georg Lundahl

"The Pro-Life position of the Russian Orthodox Church is quite open, not 'discrete'."

• 1) Can they very openly distribute a pro-life tract outside the Church?
• 2) Can someone else, independently of them?

"if you could reconcile with the Orthodox clergy that you've thrown a fit at."

Are you drunk?

• 1) I haven't thrown a fit at anyone, I have expressed just indignation.
• 2) I am Roman Catholic.

"You could do better without the whole self-promoting self-anointed Internet Apologist Blogger scene."

NEITHER blogger NOR apologist is an anointed order of the sacrament of orders. St Justin was an apologist and he was a layman.

If the Orthodox do not agree with laymen taking initiatives to defend the faith, so much worse for them.

Plus this:

"I suppose you can imbibe at the fount of CIA propaganda - but it's diabolical (divisive) in origin."

• 1) Divisive and diabolical are not the same.
• 2) Nothing I said comes from the CIA.

Aristibule C Adams

Let's see - you *were* Orthodox or claim so - and have a litany of complaints to express about what you were directed to do by Orthodox clergy. You follow Pope Michael of Kansas, the Conclavist. But you do read Mark Shea.

It's all over the place - and none of it matters here. This is the wall of a Russian Orthodox priest of the Western rite. No KGB stuff. No CIA stuff. No Mossad stuff. No MI6 stuff.

You're not going to be repeating the lies here about the Russian church persecuting anyone, or being pro-abortion. So, Russia is still a modern republic working its way out of a messed up past. Bearing False Witness is still a violation of the Ten Commandments - doing so about clergy is even worse, or trying to lie to a priest's face.

Yes, a lot that you say are things that the CIA has first promoted in its instruments abroad to cause division among Orthodox, among Christians in general, and to politically contain Christians within the US (especially Orthodox.) You're shilling their story line on Russia word for word.

W. H.

Hans-Georg Lundahl Shea confuses intrinsic evils with non intrinsic evils and the Church's dogma with statements from the USCCB. He's wrong and it's dangerous to teach what he's teaching.

Aristibule C Adams

Diabolos literally means 'divides in twain'. That's what the diaboloical does: divides man from God and man alike.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Divisive means sth else.

My Pope has not banned reading Mark Shea. Nor recommen[d]ed all he writes (obviously not the pro-evolution stuff).

Diabolos means accuser. You are accusing me of repeating lies, so, you are playing a diabolos in the Greek sense. You are also accusing me of getting them from intelligence services. Again. However, diabolos also has a second meaning, namely calumniator and as both your accusations were calumnious, you are again playing diabolos in the Greek sense.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

W. H. I agree Mark Shea is confused on some things.

[I should have added that as a layman, he is not "teaching" and as a writer, not bishop, he can be read by people not agreeing with all of him. For instance, I think Aristobule may have quoted CSL somewhere, without agreeing with his evolutionism.]

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Aristibule C Adams one more:

"Let's see - you *were* Orthodox or claim so"

I was Neohimerite with Palaeohimerite leanings, hoping that way to hold one hand to both guys like you and one to guys like SSPX - it failed.

Aristibule C Adams "on Russia's laws against occult groups and dangerous cults"

You seem not to be getting what law I am talking of. [Indeed.]

It didn't mention occult groups as far as I can remember. [Or probably at all, since he's talking of one law and I of another.]

As for dangerous cults, Putin can use his old KGB criteria on what it applies to. [Note, now I am commenting on the law Aristobule mentioned.]

"I don't care what your Pope has said to you - he has no authority here."

Noting your schismatic intention publically expressed.

Aristibule C Adams

Well, you can stop right there then. I really don't care. You were asked Orthodox priests there, and they gave you spiritual direction - and you are in disobedience to those instructions. I'm not hearing it. You can go do your obedience, but pushing your vagante craziness here gets tiresome.

Putin doesn't use an old KGB criteria. If we're not forgetting - Putin fought the KGB in the early 1990s. He was of the Pro-Western party through then up to his election. His own party isn't all that different than the American Democrats before their present lunacy. His party's conservative turn is *so far* from KGB / Soviet / Bolshevism as for any claim to any present action of Russia, Putin, or the Church there to being 'KGB' is beyond ridiculous. Go do that craziness somewhere else.

Son - you're the schismatic. There is no pope elected by his mom and a couple of other people at the kitchen table.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

I am not your son, as you are schismatic you do not exercise authority over me.

There is a minimum quota of voters for a valid election within a conclave, there is no minimum of voters overall.

Kitchen table or not is an adiaphoron. In Rome there were house churches, which is where the majority of cardinals' hats come from, up to Constantine.

By the way, your little half-idol Putin has considered house churches as "dangerous sects".

Women involved - they are involved in shouting "axios" to your bishops too.

None of your arguments hold, neither does your rebellion against the pope, neither does your so called authority.

If the man you consider as Patriarch of all Russia is a Christian, why hasn't he excommunicated politicians who refuse to vote for banning abortion?

A few years ago, he called that "Christian sharia".

And the priority for that was with Constantine and Theodosius. Constantine did not wait for banning non-Christian religions (except Judaism with less publicity) before banning abortion. But first Constantine banned abortion, and second Theodosius banned Pagan temples. Even he did not ban pagan "house churches".

Aristibule C Adams

No replies for you!

Then the following is not for that Schismatic priest. It's for all of my actual readers.

He claimed Putin is not using old KGB criteria. Proof? He fought KGB.

Well, not all the time. In 1989, he blocked a crowd (with an authority which could have been saintly or demonic, I don't know, but back then he could have been still in a state of grace) of Germans who wanted to storm KGB offices in Berlin and find out who KGB had collaborated with.

Well, how about false flag? When KGB is under attack, would he have openly defended them? Or could he better defend them by pretending to fight them?

But whether or not his discarding of KGB loyalties was sincere, which maybe it was, it does not mean he need to have changed all the ways of thinking he learned from them back then.

Describing either an Evangelical Sect or criticism against himself as coming from CIA is precisely the kind of thing KGB was doing back then. Invoking consensus and opposing being "divisive" (in the colloquial sense, which as said is different from the one defended by Aristobule) is an old KGB criterium. Describing Evangelicals as dangerous sects is also the old KGB stuff. Or, if not KGB, then Russian psychiatry, politicised, and not opposed by the KGB - but arguably shared by lots of KGB-ers as well.

I was not new born in 1989 or 1990./HGL

One more : he is reconstructing what happened between me and priests, whether Orthodox between 2006 and early 2009 or SSPX from 2009 to when I ceased attending St. Nicolas. I was not given any explicit pastoral instruction to cease writing. I have obeyed the instructions I got explicitly.

If either of them should pretend to now give me an instruction not to write, I would count neither as an authority.

Pope Michael has also not given any instruction to cease writing, though he may have been put under pressure to do so. If he were to give such an instruction, I would at first charitably suppose it comes from pressure put on him. His observations on what is book market mores right now are not facts of moral theology and need not be obeyed if he were trying to push it as an order./HGL

Epilogue:

That schismatic unfriended and blocked (or at least blocked) me over my asking on his wall if he agreed with Soviet agression against Poland being defended by Putin because Poles were Antisemites.

I actually asked him if he believed mail dot com was misciting him on this news link:

mail dot com : Putin rebuffs Western criticism of 1939 Stalin-Hitler pact
https://www.mail.com/int/news/europe/9621270-putin-rebuffs-western-criticism-1939-stalin-hitler.html

PS to above:

mail dot com : Polish PM accuses Putin of lying about outbreak of WWII
https://www.mail.com/int/news/europe/9627916-polish-pm-accuses-putin-lying-outbreak-wwii.html

Epilogue 2:

Since Aristobule mentioned another law than the one I was speaking of (and it is possible I had the news from him), and that other law involved a ban on occultism, I checked:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Lodge_of_Russia

It seems, unlike under Franco, freemasonry is still perfectly legal in Russia. So, small witches can be caught if practising witchcraft in a small coven of 13, but big warlocks can remain scot free, if practising witchcraft in lodges under this grandlodge./HGL

Epilogue 3:

In 2018, the highest number of abortions per 1000 live births was Bulgaria, 380. Of those over 300, I think Sweden was the lowest or one of the lowest. Russia was one of the higher ones, as there was no European country with more than 400.

statista : Number of abortion procedures performed in European countries in 2018*
https://www.statista.com/statistics/866423/abortion-rate-europe/

The page opened up correctly once, then when I tried to reaccess, it needs a paid subscription./HGL

PS, there may even be a way of getting it for free .../HGL