Koinonia - Latest Comments

Re: Archpastoral Exhortation Regarding the Russian Invasion of Ukraine

Robert D Hosken — Thu, 26 May 2022 16:13:29 -0000

I will post the intro to this article on my 10 social media feeds.

Re: Archpastoral Exhortation Regarding the Russian Invasion of Ukraine

Gregory Jensen — Mon, 23 May 2022 13:12:36 -0000

You're welcome!
While I appreciate the delicate position the Antiochian Archdiocese and the Patriarch of Antioch are in, I think not all of your clergy are opposed to the invasion. Early on at least, I responded to AA clergy on social media who seemed more than willing to repeat Russian talking points which in seeking to shift responsibility to NATO had the effect--at best--of minimizing Russia's responsibility for invading a sovereign nation. I also got backhanded criticism from an Antiochian clergyman for publicly criticizing Patriarch Kirill in a sermon for his support of the invasion.
So while your priest and bishop might oppose the invasion, this is not the unanimous position of the clergy in the AA.

Re: Archpastoral Exhortation Regarding the Russian Invasion of Ukraine

Robert D Hosken — Mon, 23 May 2022 11:45:55 -0000

Thank you for posting this, Fr. Gregory! It puts us, who are members of the Antiochian jurisdiction now, in a difficult situation because our priest and our bishop are opposed to this war, but the Antiochian Patriarch is under the protection of the Russians in Syria, so he doesn't speak out against the war.

Re: Did NATO Expansion Provoke Putin?

AskSeekandKnock Matt77 — Thu, 10 Mar 2022 21:35:23 -0000

I listen to Professor Kotkin every chance I get. I find him to be one of the most convincing people on this issue. He is a heavyweight on Russian History & Politics. He does a good job of drawing our attention to the corrupt processes inside Russian that have continued since 1991. If you have a chance, Fr. Gregory, listen to Professor John Mearsheimer at the University of Chicago - he takes the contrarian view to Kotkin. I do not agree with him entirely, but I believe many things he points out have merit. He gave a short presentation and Q & A session just a few days ago. https://www.youtube.com/wat...

- Adam

Re: Remarks on the War in Ukraine

Gregory Jensen — Tue, 08 Mar 2022 12:27:35 -0000

Hi Jerry,

Christ is among us!

Thank you for your comment! I agree with most everything you have said. As a priest and a Christian, however, I cannot say or support your statement that God must condemn anyone (including those who have committed war crimes) to Hell. This is simply not the Gospel.

Should someone stand before Christ at the last judgment then, yes, they will find themselves in hell but by this is a different matter.

Finally, to suggest that the attackers deserve "a slow painful death" and be treated without "compassion or mercy" is not something that Christians can support.

Giving into my anger can make me just as bad as those who are attacking Ukraine. By all means "let justice rain down and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream" (Amos 5:24). But not vengeance. Vengeance is what is motivating Putin. I owe it to myself and Ukraine to be better than this.

Re: Remarks on the War in Ukraine

Jerry Sheehan — Mon, 07 Mar 2022 19:48:23 -0000

Mr. Putin and each and every one who has supported and encouraged him to wage war on the innocent Ukrainian population, have the blood of innocents on their hands. These murderers will be made pay for the criminal carnage and wilful destruction of property in Ukraine by the International Court of Justice & the International Criminal Court. They will also face their maker. God will have no choice but to condemn each and every one of them to HELL. Each of these sinners should receive a slow and painful death - the least they deserve. We do not want to hear their lies. They do not know how to speak the truth. When they face judgement, they should be shown no compassion or mercy.

Re: Why Would Putin Would Risk War?

Gregory Jensen — Fri, 04 Feb 2022 17:15:52 -0000

Howdy!
Thanks for the comment and congratulations on being received into the Church! Did any of your family come along as well?
It is indeed worrying that Putin seems to have so many fans on both the Left & Right. More worrying still however are his Orthodox fans. God preserve us all!
In Christ,
+FrG

Re: Why Would Putin Would Risk War?

AskSeekandKnock Matt77 — Fri, 04 Feb 2022 15:16:03 -0000

Father, Bless.

What Applebaum wrote seems to make sense. I just finished one of her books late last year: "The Twilight of Democracy: The Seductive Lure of Authoritarianism." Though she talked a lot about the wave of authoritarian politics happening in places like Great Britain, Poland, Bulgaria, and the US, she gave Vladimir Putin an honorable mention.

What I find somewhat fascinating is that there seems to be a growing number of people in the USA who are admirers of President Putin. People on the political right think that he is spot on with many of his social policies and some on the left praise him for giving whistleblowers like Edward Snowden political asylum.

Further, when you watch Russian media and see how he handles/answers questions, he seems to project an image of calm, rationality, and thoughtfulness. This seems to attract a lot of people too. This reminds me of the "authoritarian impulse" in many people that Applebaum writes about in her book.

Hope all is well is WI.

(BTW, I was received into the Orthodox Church on Feast of the Nativity).

Kissing Your Right Hand,

Adam Sheehan in Illinois

Re: The Religion that is ‘Woke Racism’

Eric Ruthford — Sat, 30 Oct 2021 00:33:26 -0000

Marshall McLuhan, Aristotle, Immanuel Kant, DiAngelo and Kendi all in two paragraphs? I've got whiplash from that speedy tour.

One thing I appreciated about Kendi was his explanation of the difference between segregationist and assimilationist racism. Whites don't think as much about assimilationist policies, but Blacks really feel them.

Re: EEOC Updates Guidance On Religious Objections To COVID Vaccine

Ronda Janell Wintheiser — Wed, 27 Oct 2021 17:29:19 -0000

I don't remember whenever I asked the point of whatever else it was. But whenever I ask that question, I do so because I don't want to assume anything.

My sense of this post was exactly what you have just said, however. You are attacking Orthodox Christians who claim a religious exemption.

I think it's interesting that you don't find the connection between aborted children and the development of these shots a moral one.

Re: EEOC Updates Guidance On Religious Objections To COVID Vaccine

Gregory Jensen — Wed, 27 Oct 2021 10:32:51 -0000

My initial training is in moral theology and I have an interest in the relationship between the Christian moral tradition and public policy. The EEOC guidelines I quote here are interesting to me because while as an Orthodox Christian I don't see any theological justification for saying the covid-19 vaccine in immoral, the guidelines offer the possibility for a religious exemption not based on obedience to tradition but personal conscience. In other words, while there is no theological reason to refuse the vaccine, the EEOC (and Holy Tradition) do agree that conscience does provide such an exemption.

Now let me ask you a question. This is the second time you have asked the point of something I posted. What is your interest in asking?

In Christ,

FrG

Re: EEOC Updates Guidance On Religious Objections To COVID Vaccine

Ronda Janell Wintheiser — Wed, 27 Oct 2021 10:08:01 -0000

What is the point of this piece? What is the reason you all posted it?

Re: Covid-19 vaccination is not the hill to die on

Gregory Jensen — Sat, 09 Oct 2021 10:53:15 -0000

I thought Feser made a good argument. The fact that he is Catholic is incidental to the validity of this position.

Re: Covid-19 vaccination is not the hill to die on

Ronda Janell Wintheiser — Fri, 08 Oct 2021 22:48:36 -0000

Hello?

What does what Catholics do have to do with it?

Re: It’s OK to Reject Critical Race Theory – Yellow Stripes & Dead Armadillos

Gregory Jensen — Mon, 22 Mar 2021 18:13:52 -0000

The thing I've told the students in my college group at UW-Madison yes, the US has done bad, even criminal things. Slavery of Africans and their descendants and our treatment of the Native People are top of this list.
What is noteworthy, however, is not that we did bad, wicked, evil things but that we stopped doing them.

Re: It’s OK to Reject Critical Race Theory – Yellow Stripes & Dead Armadillos

AskSeekandKnock Matt77 — Mon, 22 Mar 2021 16:07:24 -0000

Agreed. Famous author James Baldwin had some of the most seering criticisms of the United States of any figure in the 20th century, but those criticisms were rooted in his belief that the US was capable of doing so much better. He once wrote, " I love my country, and because I love my country, I reserve the right to criticize it." Shortly before he passed away (in the late 1980s) he said, "The United States of America has a history that is criminal, but it is no more or no less criminal than any other nation in history." All the Best - Adam

Re: Virtues Hard & Soft

Night of the World — Thu, 19 Nov 2020 13:03:24 -0000

“The neighbor is something very radical in Juedeo-Christian tradition. The neighbor is not ’the other who is like us’ the neighbor is some kind of a traumatic presence—it’s the other person (if you want) in the abyss of its infinity. And there is always something monstrous about it, but the name of that monstrosity is freedom.”
- Slavoj Zizek

Re: Art Should Portray the Truth

Night of the World — Thu, 19 Nov 2020 12:40:14 -0000

So that “nobility” is not corrupted taxonomically speaking? As in, it exists as a natural position within culture which is subject to bad actors—that content here be the object of derision not form. Absolute power revealing Absolutely, like the story of Marcus Aurelius:

“In his case, power didn’t corrupt, absolute power did not corrupt absolutely. Instead absolute power allowed us to see what the man underneath the body is really like—it allowed us to find out what Marcus Aurelius’ soul is like. Imagine a man for whom all the restraints of law and custom and political order are taken away—he could have whatever he wants. If a man under those circumstances behaves well, you know something about the soul underneath because no external constraint is making him do what he is doing. And Marcus Aurelius is the one example of an absolute ruler who behaves himself in such a way as not to disgrace himself.”
- Michael Sugrue (Princeton), The Great Courses, From Athens to Jerusalem, The Stoic Ideal.

Re: Technocratic vs. moral

Gregory Jensen — Wed, 19 Aug 2020 17:55:48 -0000

Hi Adam,

Sorry for the delay in getting back to you. These days everything seems to take two or three times longer.

While I've not read either book, I'm familiar with their arguments. I raised similar concerns when I taught moral theology. Technology is never morally neutral. It always shapes our responses. This isn't necessarily morally bad but it is something we need to bear in mind.

The reason for this is because our character is shaped by our actions. In limiting the kinds of actions we can undertake, technology can misshape our character. If for no other reason then it causes us to overlook some actions in favor of others. It can even make us unaware that other ways of acting are even possible.

Divorced from the life of virtue, technology is always a moral danger less in and of itself and more in what it causes is to overlook.

Thanks for the comment!

In Christ,

+FrG

Re: Technocratic vs. moral

AskSeekandKnock Matt77 — Sat, 15 Aug 2020 16:29:07 -0000

Hello Father, This post reminds of two different haunting books that I read while in college. 1) The Technological Society by Jacques Ellul (1954) and 2) Technolopy: The Surrendering of Culture to Technology by Neil Postman (1992). Both warn about moving from the use of technology as a tool to the surrendering of our will to it.
- Adam

Re: Atheist In All But Name

Deon — Sun, 02 Feb 2020 19:33:13 -0000

Thank you!

Re: Atheist In All But Name

Gregory Jensen — Sun, 02 Feb 2020 18:39:01 -0000

You can email at pastor@madisonorthodox.com

Re: Atheist In All But Name

Deon — Sun, 02 Feb 2020 18:15:46 -0000

Father, I would like to send you a note but your contact form isn't working. How can I get in touch with you regarding a question I have on the fathers?

Re: Just A Grain of Incense

Gregory Jensen — Mon, 16 Dec 2019 08:42:36 -0000

Dear Peter,

The point of French's article (and my reason for commenting on it) is not primarily to criticize President Trump. While there is much to dislike about the President's style, the substance of his accomplishments are often very good. The latter is especially the case in his choices for the federal judiciary.

On economic matters, I think the President's approach to foreign trade makes him closer to a left of center Democrat than a proponent of free trade.

As for foreign affairs--especially the war against terrorism--he is squarely in the mold of President Obama. Trump seems to be much more aggressive however in winding down the American military's overseas involvement.

I think we can--and should--support at least some of Trump's policies. His judicial appointment will likely protect religious liberty and return contentious issues like abortion back to the States.

To return to French's argument, especially among Evangelical Christians, there is a tendency to not simply support some of Trump's policies but excuse his character flaws. Doing so seriously damages their argument that character matters. Evangelicals seem willing to forgive the President's history of not only engaging in sexual immorality but bragging about engaging in fornication and adultery.

Also much in evidence is his use of vulgar language and willingness to bully. His self-aggrandizing is also on display.

The question French raises--and the question I think needs asking--does character matter or not? Are Christians willing to overlook the President decades long history of public immorality to score political victories?

Recently Eric Metaxas and Franklin Graham said that Trump's critics were under demonic control. It is this kind of over the top defense of the President by Evangelical Christians to which French is responding.

Finally, what if the shoe was on the other foot? Would Evangelical Christians remain silent on character if the POTUS was a liberal Democrat? If sexual immorality doesn't matter in Trump's case, how about for Peter Buttigieg? If Trump's bragging about his history of promiscuity can be overlooked, how about Buttigieg's same-sex marriage?

If for Evangelical Christians character disqualifies a Democrat why doesn't it disqualify a Republican?

Re: Just A Grain of Incense

peter — Fri, 13 Dec 2019 19:03:48 -0000

OK, I will put my ignorance on display. These types of criticisms of President Trump and calls for his criticism cause me to ask, What are we talking about?

Are we saying that someone with a reputation (or brand) like Donald Trump is unfit to be President of the United States? That he should be removed? Or are we saying that there needs to be more, louder, amplified public criticism of his "immorality"? Specifically, what immorality?

I agree that plenty of displays of low moral character have come from our President in the years before his campaign and inauguration. At the same time, efforts to overthrow his government through impeachment have yielded no credible evidence of actual crimes, despite 3+ years of attempting to find such evidence during the course of his campaign and presidency.

So, what are we talking about? What is the behavior that is deficient in the lives of Christians as they relate to our President? What is the path of repentance that you are suggesting we walk?

Thank you