On Orthodox Bridge’s Recent Switch

Since this blog is less polemical as my other ones, I try not to attack other traditions.  And this post isn’t an “attack.”  It is a critical observation, though.  A very critical one.

As readers know from past experience, I was very harsh with the old website Orthodox Bridge.  They deserved it.  They deserved it because they advertised their site as a “bridge” for Reformed and Orthodox to meet and understand each other’s tradition.

What actually happened was that Reformed were supposed to comment on how ignorant they were of EO and start getting a conversion story ready.  When I started pointing out that the High Reformed Theology never believed what they said it believed, they got mad

But still, the site had a wide readership but not a wide interaction.  If you go back and read the old posts (or better, don’t; just look at the number of comments) you will find a common theme.  Where I am allowed to comment, the comments will range from 50-300 (and most of them aren’t even by me, since I was usually outnumbered 10:1.   By the end of those conversations I would be “banned” or blocked.

And then the next 5 posts would have about 8 comments total.  I was the only reason that site was remotely interesting.

Now Ancient Faith is hosting that site.  I’m not sure if that is a good or bad move.  Mind you, at the end of the day I don’t really care. The good news for the site is that Ancient Faith is a top-notch media outlet and it will get more viewers.  And admittedly, the new look is aesthetically pleasing.

The problem is that the site is aimed to bridge the gap for Reformed readers.  How many Reformed readers go to Ancient Faith?  Well, a few certainly do.  But how many Reformed readers who are sympathetic to both Geneva and where Orthodox come from and wouldn’t mind clearing up some straw men?   Very few.

But they were never welcome in the first place.




Author: Ephraim's Arrow

Interests include patristics, the role of the soul in the human person, analytic theology, charismatic gifts

10 thoughts on “On Orthodox Bridge’s Recent Switch”

      1. Archetypal theology means the knowledge that God has of himself. Ectypal theology is the finite capacity humans have to receive that knowledge. It’s similar to, but not identical with Plato’s two worlds.


  1. Such as TULIP = The Totality of Reformed theology

    Sola Scripture = scripture as the *only* source of theology. That is wrong. Scripture is the final authority, not the only one. I gave up trying to get them to understand that.


    1. It seems that some hyper-zealous Orthodox almost go as far to strip the Bible of any authority, that it exists merely in the storehouse of the Church. Without all the technical jargon, the essence of ‘sola scriptura’ was trying to recover a sense of canon.

      Sometimes I wonder if Anglo-Catholicism, Rome, and Orthodoxy inadvertently hide clusters of neo-liberal Protestants. Ones who trumpet ecclesial authority, and decry “right reason” (to sound Anglican), yet are rather choosy with how they do their knock-out polemics. I use to love Hauerwas until the magic wore off. Now I see him as a kind of neo-Con Ritschl redivivus.

      Anyway, a lot of them seem quite comfortable with biblical criticism, feeling protected within the parameters of lackluster bishops or unenforced conciliar decisions.


      1. Yeah, that describes just how I feel about Hauerwas. Some of the Protestants who convert are still fundies, and good for them. Others react against everything they perceive as evangelical, and so yuo will see them embracing evolution, gay marriage, and the like


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s