OrthodoxChristianity.net
November 25, 2014, 08:43:38 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Schmemann on The Western Rite  (Read 36572 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
The young fogey
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,798


I'm an alpaca, actually


WWW
« Reply #90 on: May 29, 2003, 10:57:53 PM »

Quote
A group that has order from ROCOR is not the the same thing as any old dude setting up shop in his garage.

'Getting orders from' somebody, then going outside the communion of the Church to do your own thing is vagante theology, not EO. Garage-church Mar Harry claims a 'line of succession' from the Russian Orthodox too. So what?
Logged

JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #91 on: May 29, 2003, 11:03:34 PM »

The Greek Old Calandrists aren't creating a new religion, that is what the New Calandrists are doing.  

These people have real congregations, Orthodox Belief, and Orthodox Praxis, so Serge how do these people fit your frequently mentioned defintion of a vagante?

Joe Zollars
Logged

These posts no longer represent my beliefs and I in no way endorse their contents.
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #92 on: May 29, 2003, 11:40:40 PM »

Quote
'Getting orders from' somebody, then going outside the communion of the Church to do your own thing is vagante theology, not EO. Garage-church Mar Harry claims a 'line of succession' from the Russian Orthodox too. So what?

You still can't distingiush between a garge church and a church with many congregations with real membership, can you?  The Milan Synod still is Orthodox in praxis and belief.  A true vagante group won't be for long.  Their faith will start to change, praxis will soften up etc.
Logged
Mexican
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria
Posts: 489


« Reply #93 on: May 30, 2003, 04:22:32 AM »

Dear friends.

I am not opposed to the Milanese Synod or question the integrity of their priests, but I believe that their possitions are inconsistent. How can a Traditionalist Orthodox jurisdiction have tides with Patriarch Filaret? Do you know that they are now making deals with the Syriac Non-Chalcedonian Patriarchate of Antioch?  Huh

How can one rejevt Ecumenism and at the same time have archeological western liturgies as a part of the Church?

Regarding the canonical AOC-WR, people ignore that the Tridentine Missal which is used is in fact the mass of John XXIII of 1962, with modified rubrics and Calendar, prayers at the foot of the altar reduced, "universal prayer", etc. (the "road" to the new mass) It is even celebrated in English. This is hardly a pre-schism liturgy, not to mention the prayer book of the English heresiarch Cranmer.
Logged
prodromos
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 1,463

Sydney, Australia


« Reply #94 on: May 30, 2003, 05:40:55 AM »

Christos Anesti!  Christ is Risen!

...and he has done far more for Christian witness in the world, teaching against contraception, abortion and homosexuality and taking the secular world's derision for it, than a bunch of old Greek cranks yanking each other's beards anathematizing each other, denying each other's orders have grace and obsessing over a f***ing man-made calendar. (Billy Graham, wrong as he may be, probably is more appealing than these jokers.)
Serge, in the past you have made disparaging remarks about Athonite monasticism and now you mock the priests and bishops of Greece. I ask that you refrain from making such offensive remarks regarding those who shoulder the extremely difficult task and responsibility of being shepherds of God's flock.
Also, those priests and bishops are not the Pope and as such do not have the media attention nor the world audience that he commands. They have their own local communities to minister to. Have you even the slightest clue as to what these "jokers" are managing to do within their own parishes?

John.
Logged
Nigula Qian Zishi
Administrator Emeritus, Retired Deacon, Inactive Poster, Active Orthodox Christian, Father, and Husband
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America
Posts: 1,836


我美丽的妻子和我。

nstanosheck
WWW
« Reply #95 on: May 30, 2003, 07:58:57 AM »

How can one rejevt Ecumenism and at the same time have archeological western liturgies as a part of the Church?

Easily, as long as they are pre-Schism. As I said before, I have no problem with pre-schism, I just do not agree with tweaking newer, post-schism ones. I believe the Milan Synod Wester Rite usages is pre-schism.
Logged

在基督         My Original Blog
尼古拉         My Facebook Profile
前执事         My Twitter Page
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,487


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #96 on: May 30, 2003, 07:59:28 AM »

Snoopy,

It is my understanding they BROKE communion with the KP when Filaret became Patriarch.

And how can you be pro-Milan Synod and anti-Filaret? They are all in the same boat in my eyes (irregular status, uncanonical, what not, I still call them Orthodox but say they are schismatic).

All,

What is funny is Serge is actually professing in the strictest sense the Orthodox belief that outside the Church is nothing we can measure, and he is being attacked...you would think that traditionalists would be like "Yeah, go Serge!"  Perhaps some are annoyed because he calls Latins apostolic but calls the Milan Synod vagante?  I think he has made his distinction clear: Latins aren't *O*rthodox but they are "apostolic" which you could claim about the Milan Synod, too.  I think personally that Serge should't call the MS vagante since they don't fit the definition of a vagante (a bishop with no diocese who goes around making new, congregationless bishops), but he is right in a way that their status doesn't really matter if they aren't in communion.  Yet Nektarios and others do bring up the question: if it smells like a duck, looks like a duck, and acts like a duck, what is it?  MS is clearly on a level way above Met. Bill of the True Wiccan Orthodox Non-Chalcedonian Church of Texas in Exile in Nebraska.

anastasios
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,436



« Reply #97 on: May 30, 2003, 08:25:48 AM »

The Milan Synod that St Hilarion's Monastery (odox.net) now belongs to are not in the Eastern Orthodox communion - they are Greek Old Calendarists who used to be in communion with ROCOR (?) but aren't now.

The squabble over the Milan Synod seems to me to bring a lot of the issues here together.

First of all, it seems to me that their projection of Orthodoxy onto the Western Rite is strictly woo-woo and loudly unhistorical. They show a bunch of furnishings, vestments, and objects of different periods and places and try to talk an organic whole out of them, saying that it's not that different from current Eastern practice. Well, it's obvious to everyone that a very late medieval French rood screen doesn't go into a very early Mediterranean church. The one thing that can be said about Western rites in general is that there is a considerable indifference to architecture contained in a rite that can be celebrated in buildings as different as St. Mark's Venice, Kings College Cambridge, and tiny Saxon cell churches in North England. All the various arguments about this medieval vestment and that medieval object and some other medieval architectural feature blatantly ignore the ease with which sucessive reforms keep sweeping them away. Rood screens are either gothic survivals or gothic revivals, and other periods don't have them; the shape of the chasuble changes back and forth. Nobody in the West thinks that the number of chains on a thurible matters, or that an alb has to have any particular decoration (indeed, the modern pattern is to combine the alb and the cassock into a single vestment).

Fishing expeditions into the pre-Norman English church are equally as dubious. It's easy enough to show an English/Celtic "school" of spirituality, but that school crosses over the magic line of 1054/1066 without effort. Dame Julian is about as characteristically English as anyone gets, and she dates from around 1400. Saxon and Celtic England are attractive because they are comparatively obscure, so that all sort of claims, from the dubious to the outlandish, can be made without fear of definite refutation.

If this is not strictly vagante, it is exactly the sort of thing that vagante groups do.  Indeed, it strikes me that this talk of who's in communion with whom sounds like a variant of "branch theory" ecclesiology-- "live circuit" or "pipeline" ecclesiology, as it were.
Logged
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #98 on: May 30, 2003, 11:33:01 AM »

Christos Anesti,

John thanks for saying what needed to be said.  The Greeks, especially the Athonites played a very positive role in my conversion and in my spirituality today.  I don't like to see them get insulted.

Quote
What is funny is Serge is actually professing in the strictest sense the Orthodox belief that outside the Church is nothing we can measure, and he is being attacked...

My contention is with saying communion is the sole factor that makes one Orthodox.  I don't personally go for the out of communion groups, but they are still Orthodox in practice and belief.  OTOH Serge has made obvious his love for the Heretical Churches of the West which is baffeling since the GOCs are much closer to World Orthodoxy.  As an aside is Serge calling a vagante anyone who is a spiritual son of Milan Synod...


Quote
MS is clearly on a level way above Met. Bill of the True Wiccan Orthodox Non-Chalcedonian Church of Texas in Exile in Nebraska.

Thank you this is the main point I am trying to make.  The arbitrary lable vagante isn't proper for some groups that may fit the loose definition...Old Calendarists, SSPX etc.  


NOTE:  The edit was ONLY to fix a gramatical error

« Last Edit: May 30, 2003, 11:34:08 AM by Nektarios » Logged
Nigula Qian Zishi
Administrator Emeritus, Retired Deacon, Inactive Poster, Active Orthodox Christian, Father, and Husband
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America
Posts: 1,836


我美丽的妻子和我。

nstanosheck
WWW
« Reply #99 on: May 30, 2003, 11:49:20 AM »

Interesting note by Fr. John Shaw, Rector, Holy Trinity Russian Orthodox Church, Milwaukee, WI from http://www.odox.net/Liturgy-Discussion1a.htm

The Eucharistic Canon of St. Peter is of course better known in its other setting, and it forms the basis of the Western Rite in the Orthodox Church. In that case the surrounding structure is Western, but the Canon is the same. Since there were Latin parishes in what is now Albania that remained under the jurisdiction of the Greek Metropolitan of Dyrrachion until the 12th century, or after the Greek Liturgy of St. Peter is attested by the manuscripts, and since communities in the United States have been using this Eucharistic Anaphora continuously from about 1961—we now see that this ancient Roman Canon has never been “out of use” in the Orthodox Church. Although there were intervening centuries when it was not celebrated (by the Orthodox Church) in Latin, it was none the less celebrated in Greek and Slavonic.
Logged

在基督         My Original Blog
尼古拉         My Facebook Profile
前执事         My Twitter Page
Boswell
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 74

Bi, poly, trans and ex-Orthodox


« Reply #100 on: May 30, 2003, 12:24:35 PM »

The St. Peter canon is liturgical archaelology at its worst.
Why not use the pre-existing Roman canon? Just stick to the mainstream-no pre-schism regional oddball liturgies.
I once read the online newsletter of St. Mark's in Denver(antiochian WR) and it was Anglo-Saxon this,Celtic that- not surprising given that they were former Episcopalians, who probably implicitly had an idea that the Norman Conquest meant the endof the true faith.
sorryfor the grammar, my keyboard doesn't work thatwell.

Boswell

Logged
Nigula Qian Zishi
Administrator Emeritus, Retired Deacon, Inactive Poster, Active Orthodox Christian, Father, and Husband
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America
Posts: 1,836


我美丽的妻子和我。

nstanosheck
WWW
« Reply #101 on: May 30, 2003, 12:31:55 PM »

Pre-Tridentine there were many local Rites in the Western Church with regional canons. The Latin Church when they called their council of Trent, it was to brinng all the Liturgies into line with the one (Ordo of St. Gregory I believe) used in Rome with a few tweaks and changes.

The Western Rite should use Liturgies used pre-schism and not make frankenstein Liturgies from ones being used bythe heterodox today.
Logged

在基督         My Original Blog
尼古拉         My Facebook Profile
前执事         My Twitter Page
Mexican
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria
Posts: 489


« Reply #102 on: May 30, 2003, 12:56:29 PM »

It is my understanding that the Tridentine Rite was nothing but the attempt to unify the local variants of the Latin Rite in a single liturgy. The variants were never so different to be "different rites", and the Tridentine Rite of Pope Pius V was like a "koine", it was codified by him and never invented by him or anyone. The narratives of the reformation in Europe clearly show that the Latin rite was already the way it was known after Trent.

The pre or post schism character of the other WR's such as the Galican or Mozarabic rites is also of very little importance and it is not a "guarantee" of its Orthodox Christian faith. The "filioque" started among Spanish Christians who were probably of the Mozarabic or Visigotic rite. The Sarum and Galican liturgies also evoluted after the schism and suffered modifications.

And it's not that easy, it's not just restoring the western rites in the papers and the liturgical texts, it is more complex. What vestments did they use? Were they Roman or Byzantine? Hybrid perhaps? What about the rubrics? The chant? Was it Hreek-like or Gregorian-like? Were they Low-Mass type or High one? Does the modern architecture applies for the celebration of restored western rites? Did they have a screen or not? ..... This is the work of archeologists and anthropologists more than that of religious men.

The development of these liturgies is not a proof of their "hetherodoxy" either. The modifications on the Rite of Pope Pius V by the AOC adding a Byzantine Epiclesis are a lack of respect toward a rite which encouraged so many vocations and saints in the West. Moreover, the pre-schism western liturgy never had a Byzantine Epiclesis.
« Last Edit: May 30, 2003, 01:08:08 PM by Snoopy » Logged
Ebor
Vanyar
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,432



« Reply #103 on: May 30, 2003, 02:17:21 PM »

Surely limiting the laity to receiving the Eucharist in one kind (a practice condemned by Pope St. Leo I) and turning the priest's perspective from altar to congregation are greater and more significant changes.
I am working on a bit of a theory that the giving only the Bread to the laity seems to coincide with what is called "The Little Ice Age".  Grapes used to grow in southern England and Northern Europe but then the temperature cooled and this ended.  If there is only a small amount of wine and this must be imported, as many records and Medieval cookbooks refer to wine coming from Spain or other southern climes, but wheat still grows, thus there is bread, then could there be a corrolation? If there isn't any, it can't be  given after all.  More research....

Why theorize when Rome already has a reason the switched to one form anyway?

Because there is often a *practical* reason why something happens or is done that is added to with a Reason of Great Meaning.  I will give an example: An EO priest told me that the waving of the "aer" (veiling over the bread and wine) is held by some to symbolize the waving of angels wings... but it started with waving to keep flies off.  
Ebor
Logged

"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

The Katana of Reasoned Discussion

For some a world view is more like a neighborhood watch.
Ebor
Vanyar
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,432



« Reply #104 on: May 30, 2003, 02:20:19 PM »

Thanks, Brigid.

Ebor is giving the practical reason behind the change, -¥-+-¦-+-+-¦-¦, and I think her idea is brilliant. Never knew the climate was so different 1,000+ years ago such that grapes grew in southern England.


Thank you for your kind words.   Smiley I am providing a couple of links to Linus re the Little Ice age and wine in England.

Ebor
Logged

"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

The Katana of Reasoned Discussion

For some a world view is more like a neighborhood watch.
Oblio
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 454

The Pointless One !


WWW
« Reply #105 on: May 30, 2003, 02:28:02 PM »

Quote
An EO priest told me that the waving of the "aer" (veiling over the bread and wine) is held by some to symbolize the waving of angels wings... but it started with waving to keep flies off.  

I thought that was the purpose of the fans ?
Logged
Ebor
Vanyar
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,432



« Reply #106 on: May 30, 2003, 02:30:35 PM »

Quote
I am working on a bit of a theory that the giving only the Bread to the laity seems to coincide with what is called "The Little Ice Age".  Grapes used to grow in southern England and Northern Europe but then the temperature cooled and this ended.  If there is only a small amount of wine and this must be imported, as many records and Medieval cookbooks refer to wine coming from Spain or other southern climes, but wheat still grows, thus there is bread, then could there be a corrolation? If there isn't any, it can't be  given after all.  More research....

A couple of points for your research, Ebor. First, for your theory to make sense you would have to show that communion in one kind began in the North, where grapes are scarce. I don't think that was the case.

Second, as an historian who has a special interest in the Germanic barbarians, I can say with some degree of assurance that wine began to be imported into the North at a pretty early date. If grapes were grown in southern England it was long before that area was known as "Angle-land," perhaps even before the Celts got there. I could be wrong, but I don't think any grapes were grown in England under the Anglo-Saxons. Remember, they arrived in Britain as pagans and were converted under Pope St. Gregory the Great and the latter St. Augustine.

The Germanic tribes, including the Anglo-Saxons, obtained wine in trade and as booty; the only native wine they knew was mead (honey wine), a product for which Britain was famous indeed. Roman colonists introduced viniculture to the middle Rhein and Mosel regions and among the Scandinavian (from Borgundarholm/Bornholm) Burgundians.


Here are a couple of links regarding the growing of wine grapes in England, apparently as far north as Leeds at one point, from Roman times to the 1300's or so:

http://members.aol.com/bellavue/ancient.html  bottom of the page

http://www2.sunysuffolk.edu/mandias/lia/little_ice_age.html  about a quarter of the way down the page "Impact on Wine Production"

http://www.winejoe.com/archives/July99/littleiceage.htm  wine column on Champagne that refers near the beginning to more northerly vineyards.

Ebor
Logged

"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

The Katana of Reasoned Discussion

For some a world view is more like a neighborhood watch.
Nigula Qian Zishi
Administrator Emeritus, Retired Deacon, Inactive Poster, Active Orthodox Christian, Father, and Husband
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America
Posts: 1,836


我美丽的妻子和我。

nstanosheck
WWW
« Reply #107 on: May 30, 2003, 02:32:01 PM »

I thought that was the purpose of the fans?

That is what I thought too.
Logged

在基督         My Original Blog
尼古拉         My Facebook Profile
前执事         My Twitter Page
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,436



« Reply #108 on: May 30, 2003, 03:04:43 PM »

It is my understanding that the Tridentine Rite was nothing but the attempt to unify the local variants of the Latin Rite in a single liturgy. The variants were never so different to be "different rites", and the Tridentine Rite of Pope Pius V was like a "koine", it was codified by him and never invented by him or anyone. The narratives of the reformation in Europe clearly show that the Latin rite was already the way it was known after Trent.

Trent did much more than this. The Sarum rite, for instance, had picked up a tremendous accretion of stuff-- liturgical colors, tropes, sequences, etc.-- and all this was pruned away quite heavily. Gallican rites are even more elaborated.

Quote
And it's not that easy, it's not just restoring the western rites in the papers and the liturgical texts, it is more complex. What vestments did they use? Were they Roman or Byzantine? Hybrid perhaps? What about the rubrics? The chant? Was it Hreek-like or Gregorian-like? Were they Low-Mass type or High one? Does the modern architecture applies for the celebration of restored western rites? Did they have a screen or not? ..... This is the work of archeologists and anthropologists more than that of religious men.

Well, in one respect this is seriously wrong-headed. Western rites simply aren't so tied to specifics of architecture, vestments, or utensils. The rite of a votive low mass and of a high pontifical mass is the same, though everything else about them is quite different.

But at the same time, there is a point to this. Attempts at a pre-schism Eucharist are still plagued by the historicity issue. We are all post-schism. Searching the past for an undefiled liturgy is to a greater or lesser extent an exercise in fantasy anyway, but in any case such a liturgy is brought forward into a world which has not only had gothic, but gothic revival. Such a liturgy does not perhaps mean for a modern person what it meant 1000 or 1200 years ago.

That beings me back to the is of the composite rite. Various mentions have been made of the lack of an epyclesis in older Western rites. Modern anglican rites do tend to have an epyclesis; moreover, it tends to be very close to an Eastern form.

That leads me to consider a hypothetical situation. Let's suppose that the Anglican communion breaks up, and that at least one group of bishops sticks with a modern rite and indeed brings it closer to ancient Eastern forms. Eventually they enter into talks with Orthodox bodies with the intention of rejoining the Orthodox communion as a separate episcopate with its own, Western rite. In the course of this they go over their rite, line by line, and corrects their rite according to whatever objections are offered. Would the result be acceptable as an Orthodox rite?

I think that there would be a substantial negative response. There would be plenty of people saying that, since it is at heart an Anglican rite, it would be ipso facto unacceptable. I don't think the historicity arguments obtain at all here, because what one is seeing is simply the continuing development of the rite. Any specific theological disputes presumably would be resolved in the course of the negotiations. So what's left?
Logged
Ebor
Vanyar
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,432



« Reply #109 on: May 30, 2003, 03:41:51 PM »


Keble,

England WAS under the Jurisdiction of the Pope of Rome, but the aforementioned Patriarch was once an Orthodox Heirarch, before he left the Blessed Communion of the Holy Orthodox Church and took most of Western Europe with it.  Why do you think St. Harold, the last Orthodox king of England, refused to pay the Peters Pence?  And thus the Pope blessed William to invade England and execute those who refused to pay the Peter's Pence.

Joe Zollars

Joe, I ask this with *no* offense intended.  Where did you find this information about Harold Godwinson and William of Normandy?   Or that he is "St. Harold"?  

Many rulers didn't pay Peter's Pence at one time or another.  Harold wasn't the first in line to succeed Edward the Confessor; that was Edgar, a boy, who was the only male heir and a great-grandson of Ethelread the Unready.  William also had a claim, distant though it was, through marriage.  Harold had at one point, under less then free circumstances, had sworn to uphold William's claim.  Thus, when he was crowned right after Edward's death, he was deemed an "oath-breaker" a very serious charge.  

All of the parties concerned were Christian and most of the other folk involved as well, including many of the Danes/Norse/Vikings.  Olaf the Stout, king of Norway, became St. Olaf.  Iceland voted to become Christian at the "Althing" in 1000.  This was not a struggle of religion but for power and land and wealth.  The history of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles is mostly about conquest and who gets the most power.

Ebor
« Last Edit: May 30, 2003, 03:49:20 PM by Ebor » Logged

"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

The Katana of Reasoned Discussion

For some a world view is more like a neighborhood watch.
Ebor
Vanyar
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,432



« Reply #110 on: May 30, 2003, 03:45:05 PM »

Quote
An EO priest told me that the waving of the "aer" (veiling over the bread and wine) is held by some to symbolize the waving of angels wings... but it started with waving to keep flies off.  

I thought that was the purpose of the fans ?

On that I have not words.  But that is what the priest told me.

Ebor
Logged

"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

The Katana of Reasoned Discussion

For some a world view is more like a neighborhood watch.
Ebor
Vanyar
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,432



« Reply #111 on: May 30, 2003, 04:12:09 PM »

[quote author=Ebor

Yes, indeed.  From my reading, many who espouse "Celtic Christianity" go to it with a idea of "This was the warm, egalitarian mutual woman affirming, nature loving Christianity before those Awful Romans took over".  A sort of allergic reaction to things Latin maybe.  But since little is known, they "reconstruct" i.e. make it up.  Then you get the things like "St. Brigid was  *really* a goddess who was taken over by the evil misogynist RC's" new age stuff.  (gag and also *bang head on keyboard*).

All this makes me wonder if the proponents have actually read Patrick's "Confession" or for that matter "The Tain" for a classic Irish work.  Not warm and fuzzy, but an epic.

Quote

Ebor,
You speak as one after my own heart. When I read the lives of Celtic saints like Kevin of Glendalough, Colum Cille etc. I was struck by the parallels with the spirituality of the Desert Fathers. There is asceticism and struggle with the passions in the lives of these saints, not the cosy comfortable banalities of these modern 'Celts'.

I doubt very much whether too many of these beautiful New Age Celtic people have ever heard of The Tain let alone read it.  One epic I am currently enjoying, however,  is your own story and I look forward to the next instalment!

Brigid


Thank you for your kind words.  I'm hardly on the same level as Finn McCumhail or Beowulf.  Smiley

Re-writing history to suit a modern sensibility is lying about the past.  Using this to say that one has 'recovered' ancient spirituality is doubly false, imo and spiritually dangerous to boot.

Ebor
Logged

"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

The Katana of Reasoned Discussion

For some a world view is more like a neighborhood watch.
JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #112 on: May 30, 2003, 04:21:08 PM »

I believe he is refered to as St. Harold (the Last Orthodox King of England) on the Calander published by St. John of Kronstadt or the calander published by St. Hilarions.  I could be mistaken though.  I know I read it somewhere.  I shall have to do some digging to find it for you.

Joe Zollars
Logged

These posts no longer represent my beliefs and I in no way endorse their contents.
The young fogey
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,798


I'm an alpaca, actually


WWW
« Reply #113 on: May 30, 2003, 07:39:14 PM »

Thanks, anastasios - in the scope of this board, that's what I meant. The Milan Synod may keep the same beliefs and practices as EOxy, socially they may be a real church (real congregations) and according to Catholic ecclesiology they're apostolic.

But they don't operate on Catholic terms ('we're a real Orthodox church because the Catholic Church says we're valid - read our list proving our lines of succession' - Mar Harry ecclesiology), do they?

On their own terms they're a contradiction, claiming to be Orthodox but not in the EO communion.

Unless they think they and only they are the Orthodox Church, period. Greek Old Calendarists who think that way are like Russian Old Believers, including the priestless who build churches with iconostases against the wall, who think only they are the Church - they are internally logical and so get my respect, even though I think they're wrong.

But on EOxy's own terms, they're not EO.

The MS may have real churches and Mar Harry may not. But both seem to be using 'what's my line?' sacramentology and ecclesiology - 'getting orders from' some Orthodox source and then breaking away to do their own thing. Not EO, folks.

Are EO converts online so insecure they can't take a little constructive criticism that is orthodox and even Orthodox?

The same people who dismiss Catholics' belief in an infallible papal office go nuts if one points out the gurus they've adopted for themselves aren't perfect.

That's certainly not the ethos of places like St Vladimir's Seminary in the OCA, which some here may attack as 'modernist', but having been there and worshipped there, and knowing that their late, great Fr Alexander Schmemann once called the attempted ordination of women 'the death of all dialogue', I know that's horsefeathers.

Better a church with a congregation of three humble Eastern European immigrants who eat meat on Fridays and confess it than a stadium full of neurotic, insecure, self-righteous converts.

Yes, I should stop reading my psalter, the Word of God, in numerical order twice every day like those 'heretical' Western churches and obsess over a calendar instead. What a shining witness to the world of what's really important.

(Again, What I believe is on my blog, dated May 16, for all to read.)

Personally, I think the Julian calendar is a neat accoutrement of Russian religious culture but not a matter of faith. Since the Church of Russia uses this calendar and is an integral part of 'world Orthodoxy', I guess that means I'm right.

Archimandrite Serge (Keleher) says only a tiny percentage of people in Greece show up for church weekly. (Yes, he's been there.) Like all Mediterranean countries, it seems Greeks are both secularized and have a longstanding love/hate relationship with the church and an anticlerical streak. (Familiarity breeding contempt?)

I'm sure the schisms and counterschisms of the Old Calendarists don't recommend the Church as a way of life to the average Greek.

Great points about ahistoricity and mixing and matching rites as vagante games. Totally true.

From what I remember, St Hilarion's Sarum Mass isn't really preschism, but a medieval Roman Mass translated into English, slightly byzantinized and done in a church with a whimsical mix of Byzantine and Roman trappings. In short, yet another unhistorical trip into fantasy. It's orthodox, to be sure, but historically, it ain't real.

The Sarum Use was a branch of the Roman Rite, not a separate rite. The Council of Trent didn't kill it in England - the 'Reformation' did. But it's true that to restore some order and to ensure orthodoxy, the council and Pope got rid of any missal not in continuous use for 200 years. (The 'R' stopped continuous use of the Sarum.)

I believe the Liturgy of St Peter is real, even though it's on a Milan Synod site, since a real Orthodox priest, Fr John Shaw (ROCOR), vouches for it - I have a link to it on my site's Faith page. Apparently this hybrid, a Byzantine Liturgy with the Canon of the Roman Mass in it, was an authentic Russian variation some Old Believers kept.

The notion of Harold as 'last Orthodox king of England' (impossible since England never was under the Byzantine emperor!) comes from the book quoted by -¥-+-¦-+-+-¦-¦, Orthodox England, by a ROCOR priest in England who is English and a convert (he never was Catholic or Anglican). I forget his name but a link to his site (same title as his book) is on my Orthodoxy page.
Logged

JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #114 on: May 30, 2003, 07:51:20 PM »

Umm, Serge, I just went through a whole bunch of the Milan Synod sites and never once saw mention to Apostolic Succession (other than to say that the Orthodox Faith believes in Apostolic Succession) and certainly not the tables of Apostolic Succession that you would see on a Vagante Website (like any of the ones you would see at ind-movement.org).  

And England, although it may not have been called Orthodox, was part of the Holy Orthodox church up until the time of the Schism.

Joe Zollars
Logged

These posts no longer represent my beliefs and I in no way endorse their contents.
The young fogey
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,798


I'm an alpaca, actually


WWW
« Reply #115 on: May 30, 2003, 08:07:23 PM »

Quote
Umm, Serge, I just went through a whole bunch of the Milan Synod sites and never once saw mention to Apostolic Succession (other than to say that the Orthodox Faith believes in Apostolic Succession) and certainly not the tables of Apostolic Succession that you would see on a Vagante Website (like any of the ones you would see at ind-movement.org).

Beside the point. 1) No Church in the EO communion is in communion with them. 2) I think it was Nektarios who said, 'They take their [holy] orders from ROCOR'. They're not in communion with ROCOR or any Orthodox church, but they take their orders from one. To which EOxy says, 'So what?' Garage-church Mar Harry thinks like that - he can claim a 'line of succession' from real Russian Orthodox bishops through some cleric who left the EO fold at some point. It means bubkes in Orthodox sacramentology and ecclesiology, without the reality of the Orthodox Church.

Quote
And England, although it may not have been called Orthodox, was part of the Holy Orthodox church up until the time of the Schism.

I understand where people who use the word Orthodox like that are coming from, but maintain it's unhistorical, just the snide flip side of 'Roman is Catholic, period'. Before the estrangement, the Western part of the Church was called Catholic; the part under the Byzantine emperor was called Orthodox.

Both sides did and do use both words, but even back then those were the monikers that stuck.
Logged

Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #116 on: May 30, 2003, 08:08:12 PM »

Quote
The MS may have real churches and Mar Harry may not. But both seem to be using 'what's my line?' sacramentology and ecclesiology - 'getting orders from' some Orthodox source and then breaking away to do their own thing. Not EO, folks.

I am the one who said the milan synod recieved their orders from the ROCOR.  But if you actually read the website you condemn you'd notiec there is no section explaining their orders.  It is an external link that has links to bios of each bishop that says who ordained each bishop.  If I am not mistaken the OCA says the date and who ordained each of their bishops on their webpage, are they vagante now?

Quote
Are EO converts online so insecure they can't take a little constructive criticism that is orthodox and even Orthodox?

Back upon your judgement seat again, mighty Serge?

That is just the thing...us who ARE Orthodox don't see a distinction between Orthodoxy and orthodoxy.  

Quote
The same people who dismiss Catholics' belief in an infallible papal office go nuts if one points out the gurus they've adopted for themselves aren't perfect.

Again, Orthodox people do not refer to the saints, fathers, mothers, or their own spiritual fathers as gurus.  Perhaps I could recomend some reading for you on Athonite Monasticism since you seem to be unclear on this topic?

Quote
That's certainly not the ethos of places like St Vladimir's Seminary in the OCA, which some here may attack as 'modernist', but having been there and worshipped there, and knowing that their late, great Fr Alexander Schmemann once called the attempted ordination of women 'the death of all dialogue', I know that's horsefeathers.

Is Fr. Schmenann your Guru?  

Quote
Better a church with a congregation of three humble Eastern European immigrants who eat meat on Fridays and confess it than a stadium full of neurotic, insecure, self-righteous converts

nice words that pack a big punch, yet mean nothing.  You've made it abundantly clear that you hate converts in general (even though you are one with an obsession with "anglo-catholicism"), but you especially hate anyone with any interest in Orthodoxy Spirituality (not just superficial eastern culture) or the monastic style of life.  Why?  

Quote
Yes, I should stop reading my psalter, the Word of God, in numerical order twice every day like those 'heretical' Western churches and obsess over a calendar instead. What a shining witness to the world of what's really important.

The ironic thing is you'll berate Joe for not being Eastern enough yet you still use your old Western devotions!  Pick one or the other...you can't have it both way.  I guess except in the Serge religion.  

Logged
The young fogey
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,798


I'm an alpaca, actually


WWW
« Reply #117 on: May 30, 2003, 08:24:11 PM »

Quote
I am the one who said the milan synod recieved their orders from the ROCOR.  But if you actually read the website you condemn you'd notiec there is no section explaining their orders.  It is an external link that has links to bios of each bishop that says who ordained each bishop.  If I am not mistaken the OCA says the date and who ordained each of their bishops on their webpage, are they vagante now?

The MS site doesn't tell you they aren't recognized by any real Orthodox church. But they're not. You and I know the OCA is so recognized, either as a separate church or as the American metropolia of the Moscow Patriarchate.

Maybe you can answer this: do the MS think only they are the Orthodox Church? Then at least their position would make sense.

Quote
Back upon your judgement seat again, mighty Serge?

The more I read forums like this the more I realize I don't like those converts to EOxy with attitudes like yours. To your delight I may just drop my participation here.

Quote
even though you are one with an obsession with "anglo-catholicism"

They were part of my formation and I would be lying and ungrateful not to acknowledge that, but it's clear from my site that being one is not an option, theologically speaking. Next...

Quote
The ironic thing is you'll berate Joe for not being Eastern enough yet you still use your old Western devotions!  Pick one or the other...you can't have it both way.  I guess except in the Serge religion.

Joe is obviously a spite-convert wannabe who doesn't appreciate Eastern Orthodoxy - he even admitted he didn't like the Byzantine Rite liturgy!

Read my blog, Nektarios: May 16, What I believe. You make it sound like I have a prayer life that's nearly all Western. If you have read my writings, you know what you wrote is a calumny. What would the holy Athonite monks think of that?
« Last Edit: May 30, 2003, 08:27:31 PM by Serge » Logged

Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,487


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #118 on: May 30, 2003, 08:55:29 PM »


That is just the thing...us who ARE Orthodox don't see a distinction between Orthodoxy and orthodoxy.  



OK I am trying to see where both of you are coming from BUT Nektarios, come on, think about what you just said with common sense.  Of course there is a distinction between the two.  Almost everyone makes this distinction, Protestants, Orthodox, Catholics, secular scholars, etc.  Big-O Orthodox believe is the belief of the Orthodox Church.  Small o-orthodox beliefs are beliefs that are considered the traditional Christian teaching.  It's very logical and true: Protestants and Catholics share the orthodox view of the Trinity and the Incarnation, deity of Christ, etc.  So they are orthodox.  But they are not Orthodox as a proper noun.

anastasios
« Last Edit: May 30, 2003, 08:58:00 PM by anastasios » Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #119 on: May 30, 2003, 09:02:12 PM »

Anastasios,

From what I can tell Serge has a definition all his own of orthodox versus Orthodox.  Like the same way he throws around the lable apostostalic to any group that has fancy vestments and is fairly traditional.  Leaving the secular definition aside and only looking at the religous definition a groups that has any orthodoxy whatsoever is only because of what it shares with The Orthodox Church.
Logged
carpo-rusyn
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 383



« Reply #120 on: May 30, 2003, 09:08:45 PM »

Christos Voskrese,

I know I'm new here but could we all lighten up.  It seems like this particular thread has gotten more than a little venomous.
We're all still celebrating Pascha.  What happened to forgiving all for the sake of the Resurrection?

Carpo-Rusyn
Logged
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,487


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #121 on: May 30, 2003, 09:11:45 PM »

Anastasios,

From what I can tell Serge has a definition all his own of orthodox versus Orthodox.  Like the same way he throws around the lable apostostalic to any group that has fancy vestments and is fairly traditional.  Leaving the secular definition aside and only looking at the religous definition a groups that has any orthodoxy whatsoever is only because of what it shares with The Orthodox Church.  

Well of course you're right that orthodoxy is dependent on the source (The Orthodox Church), but I don't think Serge denies that.

From what Serge has wrote, he uses apostolic as a way to reference all traditional churches that have "apostolic succession" but avoid mixing them all up into one CHURCH.  Isn't that Orthodox, he is not saying Catholics are the same as Orthodox, but he is saying that they share an apostolic foundation, which comes in handy when opposing them to Protestantism (which Serge and I see as the true "other"*)
To say Serge throws the word around to any group with fancy vestments is wrong since he doesn't call Anglicans apostolic.

Serge hasn't said anything heretical yet I sense a real anger on your part towards his posts.  Sure I disagree with Serge sometimes but that doesn't mean I think one or the other of us is headed for apostasy.  Can't we allow for some diversity in the Orthodox Church (an honest question, not rhetorical).

In Christ,

anastasios
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #122 on: May 30, 2003, 09:15:25 PM »

Quote
The MS site doesn't tell you they aren't recognized by any real Orthodox church. But they're not. You and I know the OCA is so recognized, either as a separate church or as the American metropolia of the Moscow Patriarchate.


Actually there was nothing secretive on their site when I looked at it.  I thought was interesting was the lack of polemical "we are the last Orthodox jurisdiction in the world" stuff.  

Quote
Maybe you can answer this: do the MS think only they are the Orthodox Church? Then at least their position would make sense.

You'd be better off writting to them and finding it out without a middleman.  

Quote
The more I read forums like this the more I realize I don't like those converts to EOxy with attitudes like yours. To your delight I may just drop my participation here.

Too bad we all can't be like Serge the Great *falling down making repeated prostrations*

Quote
They were part of my formation and I would be lying and ungrateful not to acknowledge that, but it's clear from my site that being one is not an option, theologically speaking. Next...

But you fall under your anathema (for lack of a better word) for not being "Easter" enough.  Oh wait I forgot Great Serge only condemns and is above his own perfect judgements.

Quote
Joe is obviously a spite-convert wannabe who doesn't appreciate Eastern Orthodoxy - he even admitted he didn't like the Byzantine Rite liturgy!

You have right to judge that in him.  Don't you think the priest who is guiding his conversion will deal that?  (oh wait I forgot spiritual fathers are just guru cult leaders).  My undersanding of what Joes has said is that at first the Byzantine liturgy was hard to get used to ( which is more than understandable) and that he appreciates his roots (i.e. traditional Roman Catholicism).  Now you invoke your right to be gratefull to the anglo-catholics, but deny Joe's same right?



Logged
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #123 on: May 30, 2003, 09:20:01 PM »

Quote
Can't we allow for some diversity in the Orthodox Church (an honest question, not rhetorical).

That is what I am all for.  But it seems a different tune is sung by many people seeking diversity and tolerance when Old Calendarist Orthodox Jurisdictions (like the MS) are mentioned.  I actaully allow for a great deal of diversity by thinking the Antiochians to the ROAC to all in the end be under the same umbrella of the Orthodox Church.
Logged
The young fogey
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,798


I'm an alpaca, actually


WWW
« Reply #124 on: May 30, 2003, 10:23:29 PM »

Let me try to de-personalize this thread and break it down to the essentials as they have been of late.

Nektarios doesn't like me. Fine. But that's not relevant to the point here. N, if you are pissed off at me personally or over some point in my beliefs or practices, the places for you to vent are on my blog's shout-outs, my guestbook or via e-mail - not by derailing a thread on a message board.

ISTM the thread drifted, as threads do, from the issue of Western rites being used in Eastern Orthodoxy to the Milan Synod, because St Hilarion's Monastery, now in the MS, specializes in a kind of Western Mass. On another thread Joe Zollars said he didn't know about the background of this group so here (perhaps mistakenly here - should have answered on that thread) I tried to be helpful and fill in the background of St H's and MS, pointing out in all honesty that AFAIK the MS are not in communion with any Orthodox Church and therefore, on EOxy's own terms as I believe them to be, are not EO.

This apparently offended Nektarios, who has a great affinity for Greek Old Calendarist groups. While I understand that, he could not prove to me that the MS are in fact in the Orthodox communion.

Things degenerated from there. I criticized the Greek Old Calendarists and Joe Zollars (sorry for getting personal) and Nektarios retaliated by turning the thread into a sort of Hellenic Inquisition about my own beliefs, even though they are not germane to the topic.

OK, let's agree to disagree.

I see EO ecclesiology and sacramentology as one of communion, of being in the body known as the Orthodox Church.

Nektarios has a different view, basically seeing any Byzantine Rite group not under the Pope and holding EO theology and traditional praxis as big-O Orthodox, thus including 'world Orthodoxy' and groups like the MS, ROAC, etc.

Fine. We don't agree.

As for the alleged conversion process of Joe Zollars, ordinarily it would be none of my business but he has made it public on this forum, loudly and repeatedly.

I won't repeat myself. Just search the forum for my say.

Quote
Like the same way he throws around the label apostolic to any group that has fancy vestments and is fairly traditional.

That's almost true, but beyond the scope of this discussion. If you object to my beliefs, add to the blog's shout-outs under May 16.

It's also the grounds by which I accept the Oriental Orthodox, basically the house's position on this forum.

It's ironic but I have a very similar criticism of your criteria for who is Eastern Orthodox. I see it as communion plus your criteria. We know where we stand, so enough on that.

Quote
From what Serge has wrote, he uses apostolic as a way to reference all traditional churches that have "apostolic succession" but avoid mixing them all up into one CHURCH.  Isn't that Orthodox, he is not saying Catholics are the same as Orthodox, but he is saying that they share an apostolic foundation, which comes in handy when opposing them to Protestantism (which Serge and I see as the true "other"*)

To say Serge throws the word around to any group with fancy vestments is wrong since he doesn't call Anglicans apostolic.

Right. Thanks, anastasios. I never have claimed a group is Eastern Orthodox when it is not - the real issue of this latest turn in the thread.

(Anglo-Catholics have the same apostolic beliefs as me but, sorry, Keble and Ebor, with all due respect I don't believe they are part of an apostolic church. Keble and Ebor of course do - duly and respectfully noted.)

Quote
Serge hasn't said anything heretical yet I sense a real anger on your part towards his posts

Right. Nothing I've written in this conversation has been inimical or foreign to Eastern Orthodoxy, and I personally have no emotional investment in the status of the Milan Synod. It's all just an interesting theoretical argument to me. Nektarios got personal, and I got personal back. Not the place, dude. Take it private - go to my sites and/or e-mail. Not here.

I covered a lot of the ground of this topic in a page, Who is Orthodox?

Finis.
« Last Edit: May 30, 2003, 10:45:23 PM by Serge » Logged

JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #125 on: May 30, 2003, 10:43:52 PM »

Serge, was it any of your business when you sent me the numerous harassing PM's and emails?  

Joe Zollars
Logged

These posts no longer represent my beliefs and I in no way endorse their contents.
The young fogey
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,798


I'm an alpaca, actually


WWW
« Reply #126 on: May 30, 2003, 10:48:46 PM »

Quote
Serge, was it any of your business when you sent me the numerous harassing PM's and emails?

Joe, if I'm not mistaken both the former and current churches you identify with teach that detraction and calumny are sins.

I did write you privately, rightly thinking that a public forum wasn't appropriate. If I disclosed any of your answers here, it was a mistake, not deliberate. Forgive me.

Be it known I never have 'harassed' Mr Zollars.

If you don't want to communicate with me via PM or e-mail, that's fine.
Logged

Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #127 on: May 30, 2003, 10:58:31 PM »

Serge,
here is what I don't like:

1) Arbitrarily calling groups vagante.  I think we can both agree there is a world of difference bewtween the MS and Mar Harry (or whatever his name is).  

2) Having more in common with RCs than Old Calendarists.  

3) Disdain shown for Orthodox Monasticism and her Tradition.

4) Constantly attacking a person for not being Byzantine enough, yet still holding many anglo-catholic leanings.

Of these only the last is personal...but I wasn't the one who brought it up in this thread.

But I do like being known as the "Hellenic Inquisition" and have added it to my signiture!

Edited for gramatical errors only
« Last Edit: May 30, 2003, 10:59:47 PM by Nektarios » Logged
JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #128 on: May 30, 2003, 10:58:46 PM »

Serge,

Those who actually know anything about me, which you most obviously do not, know that I would sooner don the uniform of the d*myankees and salute the vile Abraham Lincoln, Ulysses S. Grant, etc. than spread rumors.  

I am sorry for the continued derailing of this thread.  I am leaving this forum now and will not return.

Joe Zollars
Logged

These posts no longer represent my beliefs and I in no way endorse their contents.
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,487


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #129 on: May 30, 2003, 11:44:36 PM »

Ok friends, it's time to close this one.  If any of you wish to keep talking about Western Rites, please do so, but in a new thread.  We all know how Serge, Nektarios, and JoeZ feel about one another so from now on, let's try not to bring personal info in. I'm not assigning any blame and I tried several times to bring this thread back on track BUT it was to no avail.

All in all a very interesting subject that did get lots of good coverage.

anastasios
ADMIN
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 18,350


"Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee..."


WWW
« Reply #130 on: May 30, 2003, 11:45:29 PM »

Dear Nektarios,

1) Arbitrarily calling groups vagante.  I think we can both agree there is a world of difference bewtween the MS and Mar Harry (or whatever his name is).

I don't think that Serge is "arbitrarily" calling groups vagantes.  In all his posts, he seems (at least to me) to have clarified that he's coming from a strict Eastern Orthodox ecclesiological point of view.  You may disagree with his conclusion, but I don't think you can disagree with how he came to that conclusion, since it is Orthodox, unless you want to discount the value and need of being in communion with the Church.  Certainly there is a difference between "Mar Harry" (why, oh why, must they always borrow Syrian titles?) and the Milan Synod, but I personally would say this is a matter of which group is more respectable, trustworthy, etc.  However, ecclesiologically, the status of "Mar Harry" and the Milan Synod seems to be the same according to Eastern Orthodox standards.  If Serge has missed something, however, and communion with the Orthodox Church is secondary to other considerations, I think it would be good to know what those other considerations are and what the basis is for them ranking higher than communion.  

2) Having more in common with RCs than Old Calendarists.

It depends on what you mean by this.  From his writings, I don't think Serge is doctrinally un-Orthodox.  Perhaps his spiritual life has some Western elements in it.  So what?  I don't think anyone has demonstrated what is wrong with those Western things he practices.  Besides, there are other Eastern Orthodox people/groups who might also fit this bill (for instance, I've rarely heard a good word about the Greek Orthodox in this country from those Orthodox friends of mine of the "Russian" tradition that I've personally spoken with, be they OCA or ROCOR, precisely because some of the things they do are "Roman Catholic" or "Western" or whatever; yet, what they complain about are things I don't think affect the integrity of the Orthodox faith...should we now go after the Greeks, then?)

3) Disdain shown for Orthodox Monasticism and her Tradition.

Where did Serge address monasticism?

I will not address the fourth point because enough has been said about it in this thread and in others in recent months.  I'd rather see such personal discussions disappear.
Logged

The Mor has spoken. Let his word endure unto the ages of ages.
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,487


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #131 on: May 30, 2003, 11:48:03 PM »

Ah the joys of a MySQL database versus a PostgresSQL.... with MySQL two people can edit a post at the same time, which is why Mor got a post in after I closed this.

LOL

bye!
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.
Robert
"Amazing"
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,442



« Reply #132 on: May 31, 2003, 04:02:30 AM »

Actually, MySQL will NOT let two users edit a table field at the same time.

MySQL isn't an ACID compliant database, and it doesn't even support transactions, which is why it could be said that MySQL isn't a real DBMS. MySQL has row level locking, which means that when I edit a particular field in the table, that whole row in the table is locked and cannot be edited by anyone else while I am manipulating it.
 
PostgreSQL has transaction support which allows multiple people to edit the same fields in the same table without a hitch. Transactions allow the changes to queue up in the table, and them commences the changes without causing conflicts.

Bobby

Code:
Select
   to_number(decode(SID, 65535, NULL, SID)) sid,
   operation_type                           OPERATION,
   trunc(WORK_AREA_SIZE/1024)               WSIZE,
   trunc(EXPECTED_SIZE/1024)                ESIZE,
   trunc(ACTUAL_MEM_USED/1024)              MEM,
   trunc(MAX_MEM_USED/1024)                 "MAX MEM",
   number_passes                            PASS
from
   v$sql_workarea_active
order by 1,2;

Logged
Tags: Fr. Alexander Schmemann Western Rite 
Pages: « 1 2 3  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.154 seconds with 71 queries.