A piece of context that may help people understand the orthobros is that they stem from the internet blood sport debate field. That arena is vicious and requires the interlocutors to have thick skin as well as quick wit. Those who could deliver philosophical or logical counters to their opponent in the most entertaining way typically amassed the bigger following. Now pair that with the truth of Orthodoxy and the audience started to see the chasm between it and the secular belief systems plaguing the west. It was a recipe that captured the hearts and minds of honest men seeking truth in the most generic way and introduced to them the royal path. Their character and delivery is the nature of the niche they emerged from and because of that I feel they are misunderstood a lot of the time.
While the Orthrobro is a bit odd I don't begrudge them. Certainly this may have been the sort who Jesus called the "Sons of Thunder" among the apostles.
"Jesus attempted to find accommodations for the night in one place but was met with opposition from the villagers, simply because His destination was Jerusalem—a result of Jew-Samaritan prejudice. “When the disciples James and John saw this, they asked, ‘Lord, do you want us to call fire down from heaven to destroy them?’” (Luke 9:54). Jesus rebuked the brothers, and they all went to another village."
The line, "Do you want us to ask God to blow them up" sounds totally up the OrthoBro alley.
I agree with most of what you are saying. I came to Orthodoxy via the Lord of Spirits podcast, and I have mostly avoided content or videos from the Orthobro crowd. However, I see it this way, if it brings in young man to the Church, which apparently it does quite a bit, it is our responsibility as a community to integrate them in an appropriate manner. Our priest has on occasion lovingly called out the Orthobros in our parish and from what I see they get discipled to learn about Orthodoxy in the proper context. But it opens the door and those who were looking for just another way to stick it to the libs and women leave rather sooner than later. Surprisingly or not, most stay and are the new catechumens that show up at parish work day and Vespers, and are really engaged.
A nicely balanced piece which is refreshing! It's usual for opinions to be quite strongly defensive or antagonistic towards this phenomenon.
My perspective has shifted since first exploring Orthodoxy online in 2020 and as others have mentioned, the gentler yet rigorous intellectual energy of the Lord of Spirits podcast became and remains one of my top listens.
But I will say that despite finding the debates distasteful, Jay Dyer was the person who first really made me take Orthodoxy seriously. I devoured his content in my early enquirer stage and despite cooling on his style, I'll always be grateful to him.
I will be baptised, God willing, on Lazarus Saturday and the Orthobro contingent, including Primus inter pares JD played a huge part in bringing me home.
Excellent thoughts. I feel fortunate I did not come to the faith through Orthobro apologetics. I know some who have, but ,after really learning the life and love of the faith, have abandoned orthobroism.
At Pentecost, the Apostles received the Holy Spirit and spoke in all tongues so that everyone could hear them. In this day and age, debate is simply the form of communication that many people prefer to listen to.
Orthodoxy has long championed the necessity of humility. When the first thing noted about some of these figures is pride, it can be concluded quite easily that they are not, in fact, Orthodox.
Well said. It’s certainly a thing. And I guess it’s the kind of thing that happens in these kind of times. I dunno. I try to avoid them at all costs because I don’t want to get drawn into their mess. I was actually accused of ‘piety signaling’. 😆 none of us are Orthodox ‘enough’ for these Bros and everything is seen as an ecumenical threat. 🤷♂️
Thank you for a refreshing view on this subject. At first glance, I thought this would be another “LARPER” article (there are so many out there criticizing the OB movement, that it’s really starting to get old). I agree w Dave^. And the ecumenical councils certainly involved debate, so to think that something is inherently “unorthodox” about using debate and rhetoric couldn’t be further from the truth. Many of the early church fathers were previously Byzantine lawyers! For many evangelicals out there, they would not have ever come to orthodoxy had it not been for these boisterous online presences. There is an aspect of ‘trolling’ to the presence, which is a bit scandalous in itself. But part of that is what works, surprisingly. People are tired of complacency and watered down “agree to disagree” theology. Maybe many evangelical converts convert in a sort of reactionary manner. But this gives them the chance to see the depth of the faith also, on their own. It’s a brilliant gift.
There is something fundamentally “not Orthodox” about the whole debate mentality. One is not argued into Orthodoxy, or convinced through syllogisms. I try to picture a St Paisios or a St John Maximovich or Fr Seraphim Rose “debating” in this manner: it’s unimaginable. Which isn’t to say there is not place for debate or apologetics in Orthodoxy, but it cannot be a way of life for people.
A piece of context that may help people understand the orthobros is that they stem from the internet blood sport debate field. That arena is vicious and requires the interlocutors to have thick skin as well as quick wit. Those who could deliver philosophical or logical counters to their opponent in the most entertaining way typically amassed the bigger following. Now pair that with the truth of Orthodoxy and the audience started to see the chasm between it and the secular belief systems plaguing the west. It was a recipe that captured the hearts and minds of honest men seeking truth in the most generic way and introduced to them the royal path. Their character and delivery is the nature of the niche they emerged from and because of that I feel they are misunderstood a lot of the time.
While the Orthrobro is a bit odd I don't begrudge them. Certainly this may have been the sort who Jesus called the "Sons of Thunder" among the apostles.
"Jesus attempted to find accommodations for the night in one place but was met with opposition from the villagers, simply because His destination was Jerusalem—a result of Jew-Samaritan prejudice. “When the disciples James and John saw this, they asked, ‘Lord, do you want us to call fire down from heaven to destroy them?’” (Luke 9:54). Jesus rebuked the brothers, and they all went to another village."
The line, "Do you want us to ask God to blow them up" sounds totally up the OrthoBro alley.
I agree with most of what you are saying. I came to Orthodoxy via the Lord of Spirits podcast, and I have mostly avoided content or videos from the Orthobro crowd. However, I see it this way, if it brings in young man to the Church, which apparently it does quite a bit, it is our responsibility as a community to integrate them in an appropriate manner. Our priest has on occasion lovingly called out the Orthobros in our parish and from what I see they get discipled to learn about Orthodoxy in the proper context. But it opens the door and those who were looking for just another way to stick it to the libs and women leave rather sooner than later. Surprisingly or not, most stay and are the new catechumens that show up at parish work day and Vespers, and are really engaged.
Lord of Spirits is what led our family to Orthodoxy, too. Nice to see a fellow traveler on the same path.
A nicely balanced piece which is refreshing! It's usual for opinions to be quite strongly defensive or antagonistic towards this phenomenon.
My perspective has shifted since first exploring Orthodoxy online in 2020 and as others have mentioned, the gentler yet rigorous intellectual energy of the Lord of Spirits podcast became and remains one of my top listens.
But I will say that despite finding the debates distasteful, Jay Dyer was the person who first really made me take Orthodoxy seriously. I devoured his content in my early enquirer stage and despite cooling on his style, I'll always be grateful to him.
I will be baptised, God willing, on Lazarus Saturday and the Orthobro contingent, including Primus inter pares JD played a huge part in bringing me home.
All Glory to God! ☦️
Excellent thoughts. I feel fortunate I did not come to the faith through Orthobro apologetics. I know some who have, but ,after really learning the life and love of the faith, have abandoned orthobroism.
A sane response.
At Pentecost, the Apostles received the Holy Spirit and spoke in all tongues so that everyone could hear them. In this day and age, debate is simply the form of communication that many people prefer to listen to.
Mysterious ways!
Orthodoxy has long championed the necessity of humility. When the first thing noted about some of these figures is pride, it can be concluded quite easily that they are not, in fact, Orthodox.
Well said. It’s certainly a thing. And I guess it’s the kind of thing that happens in these kind of times. I dunno. I try to avoid them at all costs because I don’t want to get drawn into their mess. I was actually accused of ‘piety signaling’. 😆 none of us are Orthodox ‘enough’ for these Bros and everything is seen as an ecumenical threat. 🤷♂️
God bless
Thank you for a refreshing view on this subject. At first glance, I thought this would be another “LARPER” article (there are so many out there criticizing the OB movement, that it’s really starting to get old). I agree w Dave^. And the ecumenical councils certainly involved debate, so to think that something is inherently “unorthodox” about using debate and rhetoric couldn’t be further from the truth. Many of the early church fathers were previously Byzantine lawyers! For many evangelicals out there, they would not have ever come to orthodoxy had it not been for these boisterous online presences. There is an aspect of ‘trolling’ to the presence, which is a bit scandalous in itself. But part of that is what works, surprisingly. People are tired of complacency and watered down “agree to disagree” theology. Maybe many evangelical converts convert in a sort of reactionary manner. But this gives them the chance to see the depth of the faith also, on their own. It’s a brilliant gift.
There is something fundamentally “not Orthodox” about the whole debate mentality. One is not argued into Orthodoxy, or convinced through syllogisms. I try to picture a St Paisios or a St John Maximovich or Fr Seraphim Rose “debating” in this manner: it’s unimaginable. Which isn’t to say there is not place for debate or apologetics in Orthodoxy, but it cannot be a way of life for people.
Wonderful. I appreciate you coming back to the "royal path" in dealing with this situation. Such wisdom and sense in that disposition.