12776Re: [orthodox-synod] Re: MP nachala sud! Bozos in the woodwork!
- Oct 26, 2004In a message dated 10/26/2004 8:30:08 AM Eastern Standard Time,
Dear Vova,Your argument that tsars are acceptable for illiterate nations and
have no place in literate nations is not orthodox thinking. Your
view is humanistic, not faith oriented.
According to the orthodox thinking, we are on earth to work for our
salvation. Giving the power to the literate majority rather than to
an anointed tsar is assuming that literacy (intellectual knowledge)
is what saves, not faith and rectitude.
Good try, Vladimir, but not cigar. I'm sure I've read the Gospels just as
much as you have, but I've never seen any reference in them that indicates
trinitarian approval of an anointed Tsar. Besides, the track record has not
been that good. God-anointed monarchs (I won't even say Tsar here, because it's
a problem in all parts of the world) have a mixed track record at best, and
the more absolute their power, the more corrupt they tend to be. Give me an
exceptionb, even one!!!! From Constantine down to Nicholas II, they all
hedged their bets, and even Constantine covered all options by remaining a pagan
high priest until the end. We won't even talk about the Byzantine emperors,
but their is a poignant reason that the language refers to frequently
murderous and opprtunistic, backstabbing politics as Byzantine. Doesn't exactly
speak for the religious efficacy of the position; frankly, US presidents tend
to have a lot more altruism than any emperor of the Romans or the Russians
ever demonstrated, and that includes the worst of the lot.
No, Vladimir, faith and rectitude are much more important than literacy, but
you have proposed a non-sequitur. Sort of like: "I'd rather be poor and
happy and rich and miserable." How about literacy, and faith and rectitude? A
clod is too easily manipulated by that anointed ruler who is not altruistic...
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>