A few posts ago I wrote about “Church Attendance.” I was responding to the claim that Cathodoxy (Eastern Orthodox + Roman Catholic) is growing due to its masculine appeal towards young men. In particular, we discussed how Orthodoxy has seen an influx in young men. Let’s examine a couple follow-up comments worth a mention.
Those leaving the AEP church for the EO church for the reasons mentioned above are shortsighted because they fail to address or be concerned about the differences in beliefs between the two churches. And the differences are huge.
Basically, they seem to believe that structure, i.e., Headship, marriage and family is what church should be about while teachings and beliefs are fluid. Those come with the territory, i.e., AEP or EO and are either of little importance or are irrelevant.
Thus, church becomes kind of a social club.
I believe this to be largely accurate. Church has become a social club chosen for its vibes. Here is a rather common example:
Become Orthodox
Based on this video, why should I? Look at pretty buildings?
Yes.
Cathodoxy folk like to post images comparing their grand cathedrals with plain, utilitarian Protestant buildings. I’ve seen many such cases. In keeping with the times, there is very little emphasis on particular teachings or beliefs. It’s about aesthetics.
Now, consider this example:
These are kids participating in VBS (Vacation Bible School) at the Roman Catholic Immaculate Heart of Mary Parish Indianapolis. VBS began in Protestant churches as a modernized, child-friendly, evangelical-oriented version of Sunday School and big tent revival meetings common in early American Protestantism. Many Roman Catholic churches have, since Vatican II, abandoned traditional modes of worship—replacing the Latin Mass for Mass in the vernacular—and have subsequently embraced this distinctly Protestant-American phenomenon.
Anecdotal evidence is keeping people from seeing the overall trends. To wit:
As a 67 year old man who came into EO late in life, I will state unequivocally that some of the narratives with some of the (clearly Protestant) commentators are a false narrative, particularly with the reasons young men and young families are drawn to EO. While this is anecdotal with my particular parish, I can also state unequivocally that it’s reflective in other parishes and jurisdictions in my area, as well as across the land
The non-anecdotal statistics of the EO churches show that while the modest 4% growth in the church (since 2020) is (apparently) being driven by an influx of young men, there is no corresponding net growth in the number of families “across the land.” New families are only being added at a replacement rate.
As with the trends in online dating, this male:female imbalance can only lead to a preponderance of incels in Eastern Orthodoxy.
If this commenter is correct about his parish and jurisdiction, then most of the growth must be happening in only a few highly restricted areas. After all, we know how much the EO churches are growing, so if Tubal Cain’s parish is growing at a much greater rate than the average EO parish, then there must be significant offsetting losses elsewhere. His anecdotes simply fail to account for the whole.
This implies that a majority of EO churches are failing and that a minority are holding it together. As with every other denomination where this has occurred, this is unsustainable.
This leads us to this recent post by Bruce Charlton, which I will quote liberally:
we are (most of us) nostalgic for the preceding era of human consciousness, in which groups were primary; and our individuality was expressed within the bounds set by the group. This nostalgia for immersion in a group ethos can be so powerful as to amount to a desperation, a craving.
Charlton is noting the same thing I have noted. The attractiveness of the church is largely aesthetic, what he calls “nostalgia” is what I call “trad vibes.”
Young men are seeking that which has an old school feel, regardless of the actual implementation. It doesn’t matter if it has a Protestant-style VBS or female saints and a female worship leader. The vibrant vibes that a majestic cathedral gives off are more important.
Few young men are theologians. But everyone has feelings.
But groupism entails that a group be set-up and sustained in face of society as it actually is – which is totalitarian. And – more importantly – sustained in the face of human consciousness as it actually is.
This means that (here-and-now) all groups are fatally compromised by the demands of their own survival – and dually compromised by the nature of people and the nature of society.
The nature of people is what makes groupism feebly motivating – feeble relative to the other influences of society in 2025; the nature of society is what makes groupism corrupting – since to survive the group will be linked to totalitarianism.
Therefore a group will both fail to provide the kind of immersive sustenance that our nostalgia desires; while at the same time the compromises/ corruptions of any viable and sustaining group will draw its members towards the ruling Globalist-Western ideology of modern, mainstream, totalitarian leftism.
The opposition to totalitarianism tends towards totalitarianism, just as the opposition to bureaucracy is almost invariably to call for more bureaucracy. It is human nature to try to fix what is broken by seeking more of the same.
Note: By “groups” I mean to include the whole range of organized and formal-or semi-formal grouping; such as churches and esoteric organizations (masonic, magical etc.), institutions, corporations and businesses, political groups such as nations and their subdivisions, locality-based groups, function-related groups (professions and the like), and so forth. But I do not include families, marriages, friendships – that are based on mutual and individual love – these are, I believe, of a qualitatively different nature from the kind of groups I am discussing here.
I see a fair number of young men going into two key areas: Eastern Orthodoxy and non-denominational evangelical Protestantism. But I don’t see either of these as the answer. Young men are desperate for a solution, but they won’t find it there.
There is something distinctly different about families, marriages, and friendships based on mutual and individual love. Young men seek these things, but they cannot find a replacement in formal or semi-formal groupings.
In the past, when young men sought to find answers in the church, they failed and created Red Pill 1.0, 2.0, etc. Unless the current trends change, I believe that this latest flood of young men to Eastern Orthodoxy will end in another New Wave Red Pill movement as disillusioned men find that the trad vibes do not satisfy the god-given desire to find a mate and form a family.
For the simultaneous futility and malignity of groupism to be appreciated depends on recognizing that Men and Society as of 2025, are qualitatively different from Men and Society of 1925 – and what was possible and good a century ago is no longer either possible or good.
Still, we are left with our nostalgia, and our cravings…
And this is why I think it has become so essential to go back to our deepest, our most fundamental and basic assumptions regarding the nature of God, creation, and Mankind – and our personal relationship to these great facts.
Men are not, apparently, flocking to Eastern Orthodoxy because they want a personal relationship with Christ. They want something that expresses a particular (masculine) ideology. They are looking for an aesthetic.
This will not, ultimately, bring satisfaction because it is the wrong focus. The answer to men’s problem—even of the vilification of masculinity—will not be found in any group. The journey each man must make is an individual one, and it will rock him to the core. But if you find this argument compelling…
God made Orthodoxy this beautiful so you would know it’s true the second you’re exposed to it.
I agree with the logic but catholicism is even more beautiful so
Maybe from like 500 years ago yall could compete.
…then you won’t even be capable of understanding what I’m saying.