How does an Atheist get started in his conversion to the Eastern Orthodox Church?

After that you should probably get baptized.

Why would someone make a thread asking for conversion help if they already didn't have a semblance of belief?

There aren't any Orthodox Churches anywhere near me.

Is this board always this retarded?

Whoa, you think?

Put on your trip Constantine

Belief in what? If you believe in Eastern Orthodoxy you're already Orthodox. Hell, you're more Orthodox than 90% of the self-described Orthodox who only see a pope for funerals.

If you don't already believe in God I doubt much is going to sway you into doing so.

>a board dedicated to advice on why they can't get girlfriends or why they're depressed

I don't think that's how it works, user.

>There aren't any Orthodox Churches anywhere near me.
Then email one and ask them to put a mission in your area.

If you want to practice devotions at home in the meantime, consider getting some icons.

can orthodox priests get married?

No, but they can be married prior to becoming priests, and generally are. Priests can't get married after ordination because they don't want them using their position as a status symbol to get an attractive wife or something.

I'm not asking to be convinced, I'm asking for information on conversion to the Church.

Many thanks friend. I know for a fact my location would never build a mission here, but I will email a few priests.

what's the point in joining a religion you can't even participate in? why bother converting? just follow their practices/rituals, say their prayers, etc. i'm not trying to shit on your idea, really, but why go through the trouble of conversion via correspondence? all you gain is your name on a registry

Speaking of funerals, did you know we hold like half a dozen funerals (technically "memorial services") for each dead person and you're expected to feed and pay the popes for doing the liturgy each time?

>I don't think that's how it works, user.
No, trust me.

most of them are married but they can marry while being a priest, only before getting ordained

>what's the point in joining a religion you can't even participate in?

I really don't think anyone should have to explain why faith isn't limited by your geolocation.

You can't really believe in something you have little idea about.

>it's an user wants to larp thread
If you just had faith, why would you want to convert to orthodox? Especially if they're a literal non-presence where you live
Did you just think "ay shiet these niggas look cool, I'mmuna be Orthodox :D"

Why do you make such stupid thread you stupid cunt
ASK GOOGLE YOU FUCK WIT
QUIT RUINING THIS BOARD WITH YOUT SHITTY THREADS

>You can't really believe in something you have little idea about.
That's why I'm asking what you mean when you say you're an atheist who wants to convert to Eastern Orthodoxy.

What's the most egalitarian sect of Christianity?

You're not talking about faith though, you're talking about joining a community that by your own account doesn't even exist where you live

heresy

i can practice any faith without having to contact a religious institution and getting their recognition as a convert. i guess i should have asked OP why he wants to be a recognized affiliate of an organization he can't physically participate in

Unitarian Universalists probably. At least that's the oft-repeated meme.
I think there are even more "liberal" sects but they're practically new age stuff.

Why so judgemental?

You don't have to bump this thread at all. It looks like you're shitting up an already shitted up board.
Would have a better time with this thread on /pol/.

What I mean by that is how does someone with no experience in this church except for some basic knowledge continue down this path?

I'm not even atheist, I don't know what I am. Agnostic would be the most appropriate title but even then it's iffy.

I can physically participate in my province, just not in my particular city I'm not going to be living in for too much longer.

Start by basing all your personal beliefs on emotion, self-pity, and a general dislike of humanity. Then move onto ignoring scripture of the religion you're converting to, and acquire a passion of all things Byzantine and medieval (so deep seeded you'd be willing to lie in the period's defense in order to increase your church's prestige). Maybe add in dishonest statements like "everyone believed in God before the 18th century", or "child rape in the church only started in the 1970's. This is a modernity caused problem if anything". Then finish by blaming all problems of today on either the reformation, the enlightenment, capitalism, communism, or some combination of them.

Congrats, you're now an Orthodox/Catholic Christian. Make sure to continue discrediting all criticisms from outsiders as being based on "improper perception", while simultaneously crediting your church as the "greatest/clearest educator in the world".

Again, I'd like to believe the act of wanting to join a community isn't negated by the fact there aren't any places of worship in my immediate vicinity at this moment.

Yeah, fuck this place.

Thanks to anyone who actually wanted to help.

That's technically incorrect. Some niche religions don't take lay members and require you to be initiated as clergy. Others have geographical or ethnic limitations or other requirements that effectively preclude you from practicing the religion wherever you like.

Granted, none of this applies to catholic religions like mainstream Christianity.

When you're done crying about it, I'll see you tomorrow

>Many thanks friend. I know for a fact my location would never build a mission here, but I will email a few priests.
The people in your location don't necessarily have to build one for the Church to create one; in fact, many missions start with literally no one but the clerics, Then they evangelize and build a base. That's mainly how the Church spreads.

i'm not sure of the obligations of membership, but as long as you can attend church and hold up your end then go for it. i would recommend just attending a service and talking to a priest afterward about your interest. he may have reading materials to get you started or the church may host classes for potential converts

Heresy is teaching something as dogma that isn't dogma, subtracting from dogma, or distorting dogma. Dogma is what Christ himself taught, and clerical celibacy was not taught by Christ, it's just a canon or discipline. Even the RCC acknowledges this.

unless they have hidden rites and secret sacred texts then i can learn and practice on my own. granted i may be doing so without permission, but with available materials there is nothing to prevent me from doing so.

>crying

There's absolutely no point coming into a thread with a pretty clear purpose and question if you're not going to attribute anything but your own hatred for the religion.

Seems like you're just a very bitter person to be honest lad.

This isn't a Veeky Forums thread, this belongs in /adv/ bitch. Get your personal problems sorted out somewhere else, dibshit.

Practicing Orthodoxy means things like Holy Confession and Holy Communion

What if the hidden rites are group rituals and secret sacred texts basically say "no, you can't practice this religion on your own, that's heretical and missing the point"?

Like, imagine some sect that says regularly holding mass is a requirement to practice their branch of Christianity. To conduct mass you need a cleric instructed through a proper apostolic line of succession, you need a special type of bread and wine and some holy water blessed by a bishop or above, and the secret scriptures of course. Maybe it also specifies you need a sanctified icon and crucifix and the proper vestments and assistants to fill other roles and the sect is really anal about all this and you're going to hell if you try to make a mockery of the proper ritual.
Well, several faiths are like that.

Please bump the thread some more, why don't you?

obligations of participation in certain rites and practices are dependent upon a person's ability to participate. if I live in a remote area and cannot join a religion and practice it in the preferred way then so be it, but that won't stop me from learning and practicing it to the best of my ability. i won't fool myself and say that i'm really a member of that faith, but it also doesn't mean that i won't attempt to be a part of it

UU stopped being anything remotely resembling Christian long ago. They have no religious beliefs. They're more a social gathering for people of any conviction (except anything conservative/confessional) who might want to sing some shitty songs and talk about spirituality with other people.

>obligations of participation in certain rites and practices are dependent upon a person's ability to participate.
That REALLY depends on the religion. Some are like "come drop by whenever convenient", others are like "it's okay if you INTENDED to participate" and others are like "NO YOU HAVE TO PHYSICALLY TAKE PART BECAUSE YOU NEED THE MAGIC THING FOR SPIRITUAL REASONS"

>i won't fool myself and say that i'm really a member of that faith, but it also doesn't mean that i won't attempt to be a part of it
Fair enough, though you could say you've essentially created an eclectic branch of the faith for yourself.

I think it's more important to follow the faith Christ founded, than to follow "branches" of it.

>follow the faith Christ founded
Good luck with that, heretic.

What's heretical about Orthodoxy?

Which Orthodoxy are we talking about?

The only one, the Orthodox Church.

Oriental Orthodox (Assyrian) here.

To convert you simply need to accept Christ as your salvation, go to your nearest Church and get a baptism.

If you want to get into the religion I recommend studying early Christianity and the figures surrounding it.

I'd recommend you start with St. Isaac the Syrian and St. John of Damascus. Isaac in particular has writings that are central to an Orthodox worldview.

Well, the Orthodox Church of Greece (Holy Synod in Resistance) was not in communion with the Eastern Orthodox mainstream for one. They since merged into the Genuine Orthodox Church of Greece who are more ambivalent but they generally still refuse communion to apostates.

The Russian Orthodox Church is also famous for the number of resistant Churches, notably the Old Believers, the Russian Orthodox Church in America and the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia (the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad separated from the later when it established full communion with the main Church again)

The most significant of the meme churches are the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Kiev Patriarchate, larger than the "official" one with nearly a third of Ukrainians being adherents, and the Montenegrin Orthodox Church with nearly 30% of Montenegrin Christians being adherents despite these two Churches being in communion with most ofther Orthodox Churches.

Needless to say, not being in full communion implies suspicion of grave doctrinal error and heresy.

>despite these two Churches being in communion
*NOT being in communion, of course

Oh and just in case people think I'm splitting hairs:

"Canonicity (i.e., a local Church's total conformity to the Holy Canons in its constitution and administrative functioning) is a rare commodity in nearly all of the Patriarchates and the autocephalous Churches today. The synodal system has been seriously weakened by diverse incursions from within and without, and there appears everywhere a move towards despotism among the major Hierarchs or local Synods. Were we to but begin with an examination of canonical impediments to the Priesthood and so on, I do not believe that we would occasion to find absolute canonicity anywhere. I can only say that the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad constitutes an exception to the foregoing, on account of its strict devotion to the Holy Canons and its freedom from the bonds of every worldly power. In response to the allegations which many have made against this Church's ostensibly uncanonical status as a self-governing Church body, these observations can be made:

Patriarch Tikhon, foreseeing a bleak future for the Russian Church, issued a decree to the Bishops outside Soviet Russia, granting them the right to organize self-governing synodal bodies. Despite this, the exiled Russian Hierarchs, having lived in an atmosphere of utmost loyalty to the law and obedience under the Tsar, insisted, during their first few years of exile, on maintaining contact with their base (Patriarch Tikhon and his successors) and to seek from there approval for their more momentous decisions at least—though this was difficult under their circumstances at the time (persecutions, banishments, etc.). "

Breaking Communion over something non-dogmatic (a calendar) means you're not in the Church.

Old Believers were insane fanatics who burned their whole families in houses to achieve a "baptism by fire" since they thought that was the only way to cleanse sin after the Church lose her grace.

The Church outside of Russia broke Communion with the Patriarch when he pledged Church loyalty to the USSR (most bishops in fact, broke Communion with him, but they restored Communion with the election of a new Patriarch). They just took longer to reestablish Communion with the Patriarch, but they are in full communion now.

The purely political churches you mentioned at the end are not valid in any way.

"This communion was abruptly cut off by the capitulation of the locum tenens and later Patriarch Tikhon (Stragorodsky)* in his infamous declaration—something totally unacceptable to the Bishops in exile—, assuring the full submission of the Church to the atheist regime and ordering the faithful to show full obedience to and pray for the Soviet authorities. In my opinion, this rupture in communion was justified by the Canons, which provide for the cessation of all commemoration of the first Hierarch of a local Church in the event that he preaches heretical teachings; for Marxism is not only a political system, but entails a secular worldview, indeed a heresy.

The present Bishops of the ROCA, because of their isolation from the other Orthodox Churches, hearken back with genuine spiritual reverence to these events, directives, contacts, etc., which demonstrate the lawful and canonical establishment of their ecclesiastical body.

The most compelling argument in support of the canonicity of the ROCA, one insufficiently emphasized with regard to this issue, is that at the outset the Ecumenical Patriarch and all of the other local Churches maintained good relations with the Synod in Exile, which contained within her bosom, it is worthy of note, the "elite" of the Russian Hierarchs and theologians. Men of the stature of Metropolitan Anthony (Khrapovitsky) of Kiev, who made a lasting impression with his memorable homilies at the Athens Cathedral and who cannot be likened to the low level of our own [Greek New Calendarist] Hierarchs, evoked respect and de facto recognition from everyone."

*lost her grace

>most bishops in fact, broke Communion with him
I mean those in Russia. Stalin tolerated it at the time because otherwise he'd have to bring back the Living Church, and people wouldn't go for that.

"The position of the Ecumenical Patriarchate with regard to the ROCA radically changed after the First Pan-Orthodox Conference in 1923, when the First Hierarch of the Russian Church Abroad at the time, Metropolitan Anastassy,** distinguished himself as a leading personality by his resistance to the innovations of the acknowledged Mason Meletios Metaxakis. Things were somewhat more improved under the successors of Metaxakis, until the end of World War II and a full break in relations, when Soviet external political forces began, by various means, to urge all of the Orthodox Churches to cease communion with the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad and to recognize only the Patriarch of Moscow, who was fully under the control of Soviet political forces and whom these forces used to serve their own ends. The Patriarch of Moscow took the isolation of the ROCA as an opportunity to establish relations with the other Patriarchates and autocephalous Churches: "Either they or we." Thus for political reasons and out of self-interest, but also for ideological reasons, as we have seen, the Phanar cut off all official relations with the Synod in Exile and, in imitation thereof, so did most of the other local Churches, except for the Churches of Jerusalem and Serbia, which have maintained semi-formal relations with the ROCA to this day.

The isolation of the ROCA from the other local Churches—albeit, not a complete isolation (the Blessed Justin [Popovich] and his disciples and the present Patriarch of Serbia have been well disposed toward the ROCA)—can in no way be taken as evidence of doubt about the canonicity of this local Church, since many similar examples can be found in Church history."

t: Abbot of the Monastery of Philotheou on Mt. Athos, Archimandrite Ephraim

The Church Outside Russia does raise the question: can Orthodoxy exist "outside" the Ecumenical Patriarchate?
Apparently yes.

The Ecumenical Patriarch is just a bishop with ceremonial respect, he's not an Orthodox Pope.

It's disingenuous to ignore the focal status of the Ecumenical Patriarch. He's called Ecumenical for a reason. The Orthodox Church essentially consists of all the Churches and bishops in full communion with Constantinople (every Orthodox bishop being under Constantinople's jurisdiction by default, unless they're under the jurisdiction of another Patriarchiate) and obviously excluding heretics and resistant churches.
Yet the ROCA was not in full communion, and it was Orthodox. It is now in communion again (well, except for a few recalcitrants.)
You can mock the Old Believers and the Kiev Patriarchate, but the ROCA was a genuine Orthodox Church during its isolation just like it is now, as recognized by some of those who stayed with Constantinople. As noted by the Elder Ephraim, it was not the first time this happened either.
Thus Orthodoxy does exist outside of "the only one Church" if it is understood to be the one in communion with Constantinople. If you have another practical definition of the Church, feel free to offer it.

He's called "Ecumenical" because that was that meant what was covered by the Empire in Byzantine Times. It's like "Imperial Patriarch" Constantinople was called the "Ecumenical City" because it was capital of the Ecumene, which, again, back then meant the territory covered by the Empire.

The Ecumenical See has fallen into heresy many times. Nestorius, for instance, was the Ecumenical Patriarch. The EP also sided with the Iconoclasts. That See wasn't around during Christ's ministry, are you saying they were Christians then? It's purely canonical, and in fact another See can readily be made the EP, since the EP is purely a canonical honor, not dogmatic. In fact, we don't even need an EP, if we wanted to, we could abolish that.

It's not like the Pope.

The Orthodox Church are all those who hold the Orthodox faith with Apostolic succession. That rules out, for instance, Old Calenderists, because they do not hold the faith, they are heretics. Heresy includes adding to dogma. Dogma is and only can ever be what Christ personally taught.

By converting to Christianity

Cyril Lucaris is another departure from Orthodoxy, yet he is honored as a saint.

In a similar position to one you might have been in OP. Can you tell me your story on how you became an atheist and how you managed to find faith again and in Orthodoxy rather than any other christian denomination or any other religion full stop?

He is not considered a saint by any means. Well-meaning, but absolutely not a saint.

Remove the part of your brain that can reason

You shouldn't.

Note: this helps for EVERY religion.

Is there any religion that actually values reason and intellect? Plenty of them have very advanced theologies and apologetics for the clergy to struggle with, and yet the fools who blindly trust in God have the easiest time getting into Heaven. The sum of Christian philosophy is Kierkegaard's conclusion that you have to take a "leap of faith". Sometimes you wonder if the priests wish they got a lobotomy since thinking about all this difficult stuff just gets in the way of happiness and salvation, and those who can selectively turn their brain off become the greatest theologians. I'm talking about Christianity a lot but I haven't seen other religions do better.

Nice pic why don't you read it

I think 99% percent of atheists are just too lazy to believe in anything because it takes effort.

I have a lot of respect for the 1% that take the time to actually read and try to refute the different religious apologists.

ITT fedora lords

>too lazy to believe

Expand on this
I don't believe simply because I don't believe. There's nothing else to it. I can understand why people do believe, and I don't really like other atheists. I simply don't have faith, and I don't understand how that reflects negatively on my actual character.

Dont assume dumb shit please.

>99% percent of atheists are just too lazy to believe in anything because it takes effort.
Yeah that's why they just assume the Earth is flat and God created Adam and Eve and everything else and diseases are caused by evil spirits.

And OP has the biggest fedora of them all.

Maybe your too lazy to read about science, logic, and citical thinking

>Doos vult!!!11!!!

Most families who are serious about religion are fucked. Weirdo dads obsessed with their daughters pussy and moms that hate their daughters because they see them as competition. Kids are encouraged to get married as soon as possible, getting married itself is the goal, finding someone to marry is just a means to fufill that goal. Dudes are horny and want the first pussy they can get their hands on no matter who it is, and girls wanna get fucked too and have spent their whole lives obsessing about how everyone can throw a party and pay attention to them and live planning out the details of their wedding.

Yeah this sounds cool when you're from a secular family and aren't around these people IRL, but hardcore Church families are fucking creepy.

Internet New Atheists are to Atheism what Independent Fundamentalist Baptists are to Christianity

>your

Semi-related, but do Coptics accept converts? I've heard that if you're not Egyptian there's no real point in converting because you will never fit in with the congregation.

They do. It's just more rare. It highly depends on the parish and the clergy serving there, obviously.

bumping for an answer of this

Which isn't Protestant

i always keep looking at this post and laughing

kek, this

what happened to that Christposter anyway?

that's pretty cool. Didn't know you guys accepted converts. Where do you live? I know that Assyrians are just a few, so it must be rare meeting one of you

>How does an Atheist get started in his conversion to the Eastern Orthodox Church?

>unhelpful cum rag?
>self-righteous faggot
>Is this board always this retarded?
>Yeah, fuck this place

If this is all OP and if you are still here, I would recommend you start with a change in attitude toward your fellow man.
You are offensive and rude.

Have a blessed day

yeah where is consty?

>Is this board always this retarded?

Did you really have to ask?

On her period

I think everyone knows corruption of most of all the religions in the world.

People, who don't have any beliefs, will have more highly possibility for salvation than believers, who have one of religions, have if they do recover their morality and social justice.
brahmanedu.org/english/materials/summary/30_20160623_brexit_revealed_by_maitreya_buddha_and_messiah.html

The following webpage include history Hebrew kingdom, First distortion of Tanakh, Second distortion of Tanakh, Lot and Sodom and Gmorrah, Wrath of Messiah for the Hebrew, Israelites as a people of Abram’s eldest son and Moses,
brahmanedu.org/english/books/true1/books_true1_15_1.html

Real Identities of Twelve Apostles as Jesus' Original Disciples
brahmanedu.org/english/materials/summary/39_1_3_2.html