As an inquirer not really

Well I mean like there are no Orthodox parishes near me

So it seems as if I must be a Papist

My Korean Priest sent me some data for lent and Hesychasm, St Gregory palams

*St Gregory palamas

really Nice!

Any Eastern Rite Catholic churches nearby? They'd have Eastern Liturgy

I mean papism isn't a substitute

that's like being baptist or lutheran because there aren't any papist churches to attend or something

Looks like I've been bamboozled

If you believe Orthodoxy is the path, find a way
I have a friend that drove hours and slept in the church basement on weekends to be able to be a catechumen

He apostatized to papism for years before he was baptized
and this past year returned to Orthodoxy

Some of my friend and parishioners in Russian parish converted from Roman Catholic

In case of a guy in my parish, He raised in Confucian family, accepted Roman Catholic in late-teen, converted to the Orthodox 2 years ago.

I don't know really, it is my inclination though.

I've been reading a lot of Perennialist works like Rene Guenon.

So the natural choice for me would be Orthodoxy or Sufism.

>islame

ok man

don't be arian

We should have a literature division of the Legion

Like how the National Alliance has National Vanguard and Resistance Records

Guys

Yea?

Was there ever a heresy claiming that Christ was born of intimate relationships? I mean aside from the babilonian talmud?

Is there any refutations to it in the fathers or the councils?

The Talmud claims Mary was raped by a Roman

The book of Mormon claims that Mary was impregnated by Elohim willingly

For a while there was a heresy going around in Italy

Which stated that Christ wasn't born of a virgin

It was refuted by Alexander Borgia

Allright, but then it's a late heresy.

Where in the talumud can i find the "raping of mary"

I'm trying to refute somedude who made sacrilege on the Most Holy Theotokos saying that because she had free will to neglect Christ's birth, abortion is correct theologically, i already refuted his structure argument but he remains in the position that mary could not have been born of the supernatural conception.

What a ridiculous argument.

Oh i got that wrong he remains in the position that CHRIST could not have been born of supernatural conception lmao.

Why?

First he just made it adhoc but then he based himself on a stupid scientificist paradigma.

"Hurr durrr christ cannot be divine born cuz that ain't scientific"

He then made an argument like this.