Divorce, Sanctity of Marriage

Monomakhos, a web-log I don't particularly like, quite frankly, posted a piece about OCALaity's resolutions that they are submitting at the All-American Council this fall. The author's intro text says, "All are well aware of the continued assault on traditional marriage due to fornication, adultery, divorce, and same-sex unions." Emphasis added. I do like that he included divorce in this list.

The resolutions, however, do not contain the word "divorce" at all and only allude to it. It is of course true that, in certain circumstances, the Church allows divorce and remarriage. However, I would certainly argue that divorce is a far greater threat to "traditional marriage" than "same-sex unions" - though certainly far less than fornication and adultery - and therefore deserves at least an explicit mention in any resolution about the "sanctity of marriage". If George Michalopoulos can find room in the intro text on his web-log for the word, I'm sure the actual resolutions can as well. Divorce is the only thing on George's list, after all, that will end a "traditional marriage". I realize it's tricky to mention appropriately, but if you're going to tackle tough subjects, you have to actually tackle them. Otherwise, it's just political posturing.

EDIT: Of course, the big issue is not so much divorce but remarriage after divorce. If somebody divorces and remains celibate perpetually, there's not much to object to. However, neither Michalopoulos nor the resolutions refer to remarriage after divorce and only Michalopoulos mentions divorce.

What I'm Reading Right Now

I'm reading A Change of Heart, a book about the Framingham study, a groundbreaking longitudinal study which unraveled many of the mysteries surrounding the causes of cardiovascular disease. They're the people who coined the term "risk factor". It's amazing how far science has advanced in the last few decades. I got it for a penny off of Amazon, but it seems that the used price is now slightly more. I don't know that I would recommend seeking it out unless you are interested in the subject matter, but it is very good if you are. Of course, how can all these scientist jokers compare to an exercise cult? They will obviously be dwarfed.

Before that, I read The Fatal Shore, which is about the founding of Australia up to the end of the transportation system. This book is not only a wonderful history, but it well-written and enthralling. I highly recommend it even if you are not terribly interested in the subject matter. As a bonus, you can still get it off of Amazon.com for a penny (plus shipping). I first heard about this book while reading the Aubrey/Maturin series. O'Brian mentioned it as a valuable resource when writing about their trip to Australia and highly recommended it. It was a good recommendation. Interestingly, the author is an art critic, not a historian. There is some overlap in the training for the disciplines, to be sure, but it is not what I would expect.

Besides that, some chess books. Before all that, the Flashman novels, which you'll either love or hate. The last few get a bit redundant, but are interesting for their historical details, just like the boat books.

I haven't been reading much theology lately besides the lives of the saints and the OCA tabloids.

Good grief, OCA Truth is still silly. Ironic quotes.

Remember the last time a leave of absence was announced, how well that went? Making it public did how much good?

Of course, one could argue that the histrionics of the OCA Truth web site played a large part in "how well that went", given that they were publishing, on average, 2 articles per day.

I think OCA Truth here has succeeded in making another tempest in a molehill. I think they would do well to reconsider what the reply they published said, viz, "What is WRONG with you people that you’re filled with this much hate, pride and animosity?! If I were you, I’d go find something more important to do with your life than needling and ripping apart the Church you belong to." And, finally, I must, of course, comment on the irony of OCA Truth criticizing any web site for being indiscreet. The only thing they were ever discreet about was their own identities.

EDIT: Though it does make me mildly curious who has their hand up the puppet's back that OCA Truth cares so much about Fr Zacchaeus, or at least who would care enough to write them an (anonymous) e-mail for publication about it. Or perhaps everybody involved only cares about justice, transparency, discretion, etc, which is so readily evidenced by the rest of the contents of the OCA Truth web-log. OCA Truth publishes infrequently these days, so it's somewhat intriguing that they pop out and post two articles about some minor figure they've never met who should fade into obscurity (unless some scandal breaks later, but of course it won't if OCA Truth's righteous indignation is well-founded).

At least he isn't crazy.

On some other message board somewhere, in the land of crazy people talking about Orthodoxy (why are they all crazy on the internet?), some guy started a thread complaining about how his priest wasn't hard enough on him in confession. Namely, he uses pornography and such and wanted practical advice about kicking the habit. The priest, however, according to his impressions, was basically saying, "Yeah, whatevs, stop doing it, it's bad. Okay, let's talk about the other stuff." At the time, I said, in my infinite wisdom, that it's a specific problem and the priest might not have the specific resources to help him deal with it. Big deal, go to SA or something, get professional help, whatever. He's not being a bad priest.

Recently, though, somebody brought up how utterly weird this stuff can get. In retrospect, I think the guy should be grateful his priest isn't some weird fellow who wants to get involved with this sort of stuff (perhaps helpfully, perhaps not). This stuff can get downright crazy. However, some people, it seems, want the crazy. Not sure what can be done for them. Perhaps they can all get on a boat and sail to an island that they can have for themselves.

I forgot the most important "pro" of the Greeks!

Pro: the English was "You/Your" instead of faux-archaic English.

Review of recent non-OCA parishes

I have barely been in $HOME_PARISH for the last month because of travels and other nonsense, so I will post a brief review of the non-OCA parishes I visited.

Mostly Russian ROCOR Church in Texas
Pros: pretty much all Slavonic, had an exhibit of 17th-19th century Russian icons that weekend, had a panikhida for soldiers because of Victory Day, sermon mentioned the names of myrrh-bearing women, very Russian.
Cons: slow style of serving. I probably would've been out at 1pm if I hadn't ducked out.

Mostly Convert ROCOR Church in Virginia
Pros: cute little country church.
Neutral things: did the service of preparation for communion before liturgy.
Cons: I thought the service was starting at 9:30 or something like that instead of 10.

Greek Church in Nebraska
Pros: quite Greek, priest had a decent voice, still not Pentecost so no kneeling on Sunday.
Cons: an organ and pews.

I guess I can review my own parish, too, for the month.

gzt's OCA Parish (a couple weeks ago)
Pros: had a hierarchical liturgy, it's a good bishop, service still moves quickly and starts early.
Cons: regular choir director on vacation, gzt is incompetent at hierarchical liturgies despite having a comprehensive manual, gzt no longer outranks the children.

I hope, dear readers, this will help you discern the phronema with your nous.