Liturgical Practices of New Skete

[LBK]

He is not but for the exception of the Monastic Communities of New Skete.  However, this should not be surprising as they started out as Byzantine Catholic Franciscans.

Fr. Deacon Lance

Fr Deacon Lance, they might have started out as Byzantine Catholic Franciscans, but they were received into the Orthodox Church, and therefore, are to abide by the doctrines and traditions of Orthodoxy. An analogy would be that of a protestant received into Orthodoxy, and maintaining a belief that the Eucharist is simply symbolic. It seems that their "old man" wasn't entirely cast off at their baptisms/chrismations. It is a false economia to allow meat-eating as a routine for monastics, or the painting of non-Orthodox figures (haloes or no haloes) within their church as a gesture of syncretism, and other obvious deviations from known, established Orthodox praxis, simply on the notion of "oh, they were Byzantine Catholics originally". A grave mistake was made to allow such practices, and I sincerely hope that the situation is rectified before long.

[Deacon Lance]

He is not but for the exception of the Monastic Communities of New Skete.  However, this should not be surprising as they started out as Byzantine Catholic Franciscans.

Fr. Deacon Lance

Fr Deacon Lance, they might have started out as Byzantine Catholic Franciscans, but they were received into the Orthodox Church, and therefore, are to abide by the doctrines and traditions of Orthodoxy. An analogy would be that of a protestant received into Orthodoxy, and maintaining a belief that the Eucharist is simply symbolic. It seems that their "old man" wasn't entirely cast off at their baptisms/chrismations. It is a false economia to allow meat-eating as a routine for monastics, or the painting of non-Orthodox figures (haloes or no haloes) within their church as a gesture of syncretism, and other obvious deviations from known, established Orthodox praxis, simply on the notion of "oh, they were Byzantine Catholics originally". A grave mistake was made to allow such practices, and I sincerely hope that the situation is rectified before long.

Well if push comes to shove and they have to leave Orthodoxy, I for one will welcome them back to the Byzantine Catholic Church, we could use their monastic witness.  Personally, I think they would be better off and more appreciated.

Fr. Deacon Lance

[username!]

He is not but for the exception of the Monastic Communities of New Skete.  However, this should not be surprising as they started out as Byzantine Catholic Franciscans.

Fr. Deacon Lance

Fr Deacon Lance, they might have started out as Byzantine Catholic Franciscans, but they were received into the Orthodox Church, and therefore, are to abide by the doctrines and traditions of Orthodoxy. An analogy would be that of a protestant received into Orthodoxy, and maintaining a belief that the Eucharist is simply symbolic. It seems that their "old man" wasn't entirely cast off at their baptisms/chrismations. It is a false economia to allow meat-eating as a routine for monastics, or the painting of non-Orthodox figures (haloes or no haloes) within their church as a gesture of syncretism, and other obvious deviations from known, established Orthodox praxis, simply on the notion of "oh, they were Byzantine Catholics originally". A grave mistake was made to allow such practices, and I sincerely hope that the situation is rectified before long.

Well if push comes to shove and they have to leave Orthodoxy, I for one will welcome them back to the Byzantine Catholic Church, we could use their monastic witness.  Personally, I think they would be better off and more appreciated.

Fr. Deacon Lance

What, do they love gender-neutral language like found in the Liturgy of the Ruthenian Byzantine Catholics?

[Deacon Lance]

He is not but for the exception of the Monastic Communities of New Skete.  However, this should not be surprising as they started out as Byzantine Catholic Franciscans.

Fr. Deacon Lance

Fr Deacon Lance, they might have started out as Byzantine Catholic Franciscans, but they were received into the Orthodox Church, and therefore, are to abide by the doctrines and traditions of Orthodoxy. An analogy would be that of a protestant received into Orthodoxy, and maintaining a belief that the Eucharist is simply symbolic. It seems that their "old man" wasn't entirely cast off at their baptisms/chrismations. It is a false economia to allow meat-eating as a routine for monastics, or the painting of non-Orthodox figures (haloes or no haloes) within their church as a gesture of syncretism, and other obvious deviations from known, established Orthodox praxis, simply on the notion of "oh, they were Byzantine Catholics originally". A grave mistake was made to allow such practices, and I sincerely hope that the situation is rectified before long.

Well if push comes to shove and they have to leave Orthodoxy, I for one will welcome them back to the Byzantine Catholic Church, we could use their monastic witness.  Personally, I think they would be better off and more appreciated.

Fr. Deacon Lance

What, do they love gender-neutral language like found in the Liturgy of the Ruthenian Byzantine Catholics?

Not that I am aware.  I've not found it in their liturgical books.

Fr. Deacon Lance

[Deacon Lance]

They are very liberal with how they do the Liturgy, and other aspects of how liturgical life at the monastary is run.

I would object to that characterization.  They pray Matins and Vespers everyday, adding Liturgy on Sundays and Feastdays.  They have their own approved specific liturgical usage and typicon codified in their published liturgical books.  Considering liberal in a religious context is usually code for subversive, unapproved, or illicit, I find that label unfair.

Fr. Deacon Lance

[HandmaidenofGod]

They are very liberal with how they do the Liturgy, and other aspects of how liturgical life at the monastary is run.

I would object to that characterization.  They pray Matins and Vespers everyday, adding Liturgy on Sundays and Feastdays.  They have their own approved specific liturgical usage and typicon codified in their published liturgical books.  Considering liberal in a religious context is usually code for subversive, unapproved, or illicit, I find that label unfair.

Fr. Deacon Lance

Fair enough. I guess I should have been more specific. As the nuns explained to me, they cut out portions of the Liturgy (such as the Litanies) because they said they pray those sections so many times during the course of the week.

That is what I was told.

The Liturgy I experienced there was very different from what I have experienced in UOC, OCA, Antiochian, or Greek parishes. I am not saying it's right or it's wrong, it was just different.

[LBK]

As the nuns explained to me, they cut out portions of the Liturgy (such as the Litanies) because they said they pray those sections so many times during the course of the week.

Poor dears. Wonder what else they cut corners on? 

[Deacon Lance]

They are very liberal with how they do the Liturgy, and other aspects of how liturgical life at the monastary is run.

I would object to that characterization.  They pray Matins and Vespers everyday, adding Liturgy on Sundays and Feastdays.  They have their own approved specific liturgical usage and typicon codified in their published liturgical books.  Considering liberal in a religious context is usually code for subversive, unapproved, or illicit, I find that label unfair.

Fr. Deacon Lance

Fair enough. I guess I should have been more specific. As the nuns explained to me, they cut out portions of the Liturgy (such as the Litanies) because they said they pray those sections so many times during the course of the week.

That is what I was told.

The Liturgy I experienced there was very different from what I have experienced in UOC, OCA, Antiochian, or Greek parishes. I am not saying it's right or it's wrong, it was just different.

I am shocked that the nuns would give that explanation for the reason the monks supressed/moved litanies.  It had nothing to do with how many times they pray a given piece.  The Little Litanies were reduced to "Let us pray to the Lord" since the Prayers of the Antiphons are chanted aloud.  They moved the  Great Litany to after the Gospel, its original position, and supressed the Litanies of Supplication as these were imports from Vespers/Matins.  At Vespers and Matins the Great Litany is moved and joined to the Litany of Supplication at the end of the service.  All these decisions were based on sound scholarship and the desire of the monks to renew the Byzantine Liturgy by moving it closer to earlier, simpler forms of that Liturgy.

Fr. Deacon Lance

[Deacon Lance]

As the nuns explained to me, they cut out portions of the Liturgy (such as the Litanies) because they said they pray those sections so many times during the course of the week.

Poor dears. Wonder what else they cut corners on? 

Why don't you pick up one of their liturgical books and see?  They have reformed their Liturgy and Office based on scholarship and the needs of their communities.  Given that they chant almost all of the prayers aloud that most take silently I would guess they spend the same amount of time at prayer as everbody else.  Its not about cutting corners but reforming the Byzantine Liturgy.

Fr. Deacon Lance

[LBK]

Its not about cutting corners but reforming the Byzantine Liturgy.

It is telling (and alarming) to compare the differences in praxis of New Skete in liturgical, iconographic and other practical terms (such as eating meat (as a routine, not in times of infirmity), or the nuns being bare-headed) to the centuries-old (many being more than a thousand-year-old) established Orthodox praxis (even accounting for regional variations, such as Slavic versus Greek), underpinned by patristic tradition. If only one of these areas Of New Skete's ways were an aberration, one could perhaps excuse it in some way. But there are too, too many deviations from accepted norms for an Orthodox Christian to be content with saying "Oh, it's OK, just a local variant".

Reforming the Byzantine Liturgy? C'mon, already! To paraphrase JFK: Ask not what God can do for you, but what you can do for God.

[Mickey]

Well if push comes to shove and they have to leave Orthodoxy, I for one will welcome them back to the Byzantine Catholic Church, we could use their monastic witness.  Personally, I think they would be better off and more appreciated.

That is a bit uncharitable. 

[PeterTheAleut]

Reforming the Byzantine Liturgy? C'mon, already! To paraphrase JFK: Ask not what God can do for you, but what you can do for God.

You speak of the Byzantinizing of the Orthodox Liturgy as though this were a good and much needed work.  I'm not so sure.

[Alveus Lacuna]

It's not about cutting corners but reforming the Byzantine Liturgy.

Can I getta shorter liturgy???  Holla!

[Anastasios]

As the nuns explained to me, they cut out portions of the Liturgy (such as the Litanies) because they said they pray those sections so many times during the course of the week.

Poor dears. Wonder what else they cut corners on? 

Why don't you pick up one of their liturgical books and see?  They have reformed their Liturgy and Office based on scholarship and the needs of their communities.  Given that they chant almost all of the prayers aloud that most take silently I would guess they spend the same amount of time at prayer as everbody else.  Its not about cutting corners but reforming the Byzantine Liturgy.

Fr. Deacon Lance

I've been to their liturgy and didn't like it at all. In the subsequent Q and A they kept trying to defend their practices by saying the received rite does not appeal to modern American converts.  I pointed out that many converts are attracted to the liturgy in its current form and that in fact these organic and normal parishes grown and produce missions whereas New Skete's practices have not spread organically--proof that their reform is not needed nor wanted by most people.

Their liturgical practices are not their only problem.  They also don't fast from dairy on Wed and Fri because "they work and need nourishment." I was flabbergasted--didn't the monks in Egypt work in 100 degree sun while fasting?

I could go on. But why bother? They do their thing; fine.  Just don't try to say that we are missing something by not taking up their "reforms." I don't know why it's so hard for some people to understand, but most of us are quite happy with what we have now.

[Deacon Lance]

Fr. Anastasios,

That is not a fair comparison as New Skete's usage is forbidden from being used in the parishes of the OCA.  I don't fault anyone who likes the traditional rubrics, but I have a problem with those who cast aspersions on New Skete when their usage has been approved by their Metropolitan.

Fr. Deacon Lance

[Deacon Lance]

Alveus,

Again I state the changes don't make the Liturgy shorter and aren't about making it shorter.  The Little Litanies are removed but the Prayers of the Antiphons are chanted aloud, along with most of the other formerly silent prayers.  The Antiphons are actually taken stationally; they start at their smaller church and process to the larger church.  An Old Testament reading is added.  The length of the Liturgy may actually be longer.

Fr. Deacon Lance

[Alveus Lacuna]

Still, I certainly am ignorant of most of the finer details in Byzantine liturgical history, but I simply do not like these "reconstructions."  This is why I don't like the idea of "Western Rite Orthodox" in their several liturgical variations, and also why I abhor "Messianic Judaism."  Why stop here though?  Should we follow the Old Ritualists' lead and reinstate the older and more traditional form of the Sign of the Cross as well?  I just do not know where reconstruction would start or stop.

[Schultz]

Fr. Anastasios,

That is not a fair comparison as New Skete's usage is forbidden from being used in the parishes of the OCA.  I don't fault anyone who likes the traditional rubrics, but I have a problem with those who cast aspersions on New Skete when their usage has been approved by their Metropolitan.

Fr. Deacon Lance

Are you sure about that, Fr. Deacon?  I know that St. Matthew's OCA, in Columbia, MD, uses New Skete usage for Great Vespers.  Of course, they could be doing it w/o official sanction, but they still use that particular ordo on Saturday evenings.

[Deacon Lance]

Schultz,

I stand corrected.  An OCA priest posting at byzcath gave me that info, but he is in the Diocese of Western PA.  Perhaps New Skete usage is permitted to parishes of the Diocese of NY-DC.

Fr. Deacon Lance

[HandmaidenofGod]

Alveus,

Again I state the changes don't make the Liturgy shorter and aren't about making it shorter.  The Little Litanies are removed but the Prayers of the Antiphons are chanted aloud, along with most of the other formerly silent prayers.  The Antiphons are actually taken stationally; they start at their smaller church and process to the larger church.  An Old Testament reading is added.  The length of the Liturgy may actually be longer.

Fr. Deacon Lance

I don't recall any such procession during my visit there.

I also don't understand why they have special permission to change the Liturgy, when every other monastic community in Orthodoxy uses the same Liturgy as the rest of us? I've been Orthodox my entire life and was completely lost during their Liturgy, and could not follow it at all. There's something wrong when the faithful can't follow the Liturgy, and it's being spoken in their native tongue. (After a while I just put down my prayer book with the DL in it, because I couldn't find where they were at.)

Just because they have permission from the Bishop to use an altered Liturgy doesn't mean we (meaning the participants on the discussion board) have to like it. (Let us not forget that in the Council of Florence that it was all but 1 Orthodox Bishop who conceaded to the Catholic demands. Thankfully, St. Mark of Ephesus did not go along with the crowd.)

As others have said, it doesn't just stop with changes to the Liturgy, and not fasting from dairy. While I can't speak for the monks, the only time the nuns would wear any type of clothing that indicated that they were a monastic is when they were in church. Then they put on the same type of black cassock a Reader wears (forgive me, I don't know the official name of the garment.) They never wear a habit, and outside of church, walk around in regular clothes. Even during church their heads are uncovered. The nuns explained to me that as long as they were dressed modestly, it didn't matter what they wore. A few of the nuns were professors at the local college. I don't know if it's permitted for the monastics to have jobs outside of the monastary, but I haven't heard of this in other Orthodox monastaries.

During mealtimes, talking and socializing is permitted. It's been my experience at other monastaries that during mealtimes the only person permitted to speak is the Reader reading from the Psalms. This was not done at New Skete.

While many of these practices wouldn't be surprising for Catholic nuns, I do find them surprising for Orthodox nuns.

I'm not sitting here saying they're uncanonical, but why are they permitted exceptions that no one else is permitted?

This I don't understand.

[Deacon Lance]

Handmaiden,

Perhaps they only process on Feasts?  The provision is in their Liturgicon.

They were the only ones to ask?  I am not sure why you couldn't follow the Liturgy.  The order is the same except for the suppression of some litanies.

I am not arguing people have to like their usage.  But many present their usage as some sneaky, will-nilly, abberation that the Metropolitan must not know about, as often happens in the Latin Catholic Church in the US.  This is not the case.  Their adjsutments were based on the best scholarship on the Byzantine Liturgy the Orthodox and Catholic Churches have.  Their usage was approved and anyone can order their books and examine them for themselves or attend their Liturgy.

As to their form of monasticism, they do not pretend to be, nor do they want to be Athonites.  And while they may not wear habits and may eat meat and dairy, I have not seen any of them accused of mental/emotional/physical abuse, sexual immorality, or stealing money, unlike some more traditional Orthodox monastics in the US.  So rather than see them as a novelty that needs to go, maybe they are a possibilty for monasticism in the US.  A vibrant parish has grown around them.

Fr. Deacon Lance

sorry Deacon Lance, meant to quote you and hit the wrong button -----username!

[username!]

Handmaiden,

Perhaps they only process on Feasts?  The provision is in their Liturgicon.

They were the only ones to ask?  I am not sure why you couldn't follow the Liturgy.  The order is the same except for the suppression of some litanies.

I am not arguing people have to like their usage.  But many present their usage as some sneaky, will-nilly, abberation that the Metropolitan must not know about, as often happens in the Latin Catholic Church in the US.  This is not the case.  Their adjsutments were based on the best scholarship on the Byzantine Liturgy the Orthodox and Catholic Churches have.  Their usage was approved and anyone can order their books and examine them for themselves or attend their Liturgy.

As to their form of monasticism, they do not pretend to be, nor do they want to be Athonites.  And while they may not wear habits and may eat meat and dairy, I have not seen any of them accused of mental/emotional/physical abuse, sexual immorality, or stealing money, unlike some more traditional Orthodox monastics in the US.  So rather than see them as a novelty that needs to go, maybe they are a possibilty for monasticism in the US.  A vibrant parish has grown around them.

Fr. Deacon Lance

sorry Deacon Lance, meant to quote you and hit the wrong button -----username!

What specifically are you referring to when you say "traditional Orthodox monastics in the US?" 
If memory serves me correct the New Skete tried to re-capture the Hagia Sophia Cathedral rite from the 11th or 12th century A.D.

[Deacon Lance]

Well I can't think of a more traditional monastery than Holy Transfiguration in Boston and we all know that story, the accusations of brainwashing against Elder Ephrem's Monasteries, the recent OCA problems had monastic bishops at the center, irregularities at St. Tikhon's remain unsolved, the numerous monasteries that have broke away from ROCOR like Blanco, TX, and Buena Vista, CO.  All these place have quite traditional Liturgy and monasticism but seem to have been lacking true monasticim.

Fr. Deacon Lance

[Bogoliubtsy]

I think some diversity in liturgical and monastic practice might be a necessary thing. I can't imagine all who feel called to the monastic life (broadly speaking) will all fit nicely within the same framework established on Athos, Egypt, or according to St. Sabbas. Is there not a place for more diverse forms of monastic life without it being a threat to the purity of Orthodoxy? I see some good in the Catholic charismas.

[Deacon Lance]

I don't think they were trying to re-create the Cathedral Rite of Holy Wisdom, if that is even possible.  They did study it and introduce elements of it into their usage.  Specifically: Psalm 85 with the refrain "Glory to you, O God, glory to you" as the proemial Psalm for Vespers in place of Psalm 103 during weekdays of the Great Fast; The use of Presanctified-style Psalm 140 at Vespers; Reduction of the monastic usage Six Psalms to the cathedral usage Three Pslams; The suppression of the Canon and use of Canticles with refrains and Irmosi at Matins.

Fr. Deacon Lance

[SolEX01]

Fwiw, New Skete hasn't updated their website to reflect their new Hierarch and they released a Winter '08/'09 Newsletter which mentions the election of Met. Jonah.

In November sisters Cecelia and Rebecca and brothers
Christopher, Marc, and Stavros attended the 15th All
American Council in Pittsburgh and participated
in the election of Metropolitan Jonah as the new
primate of the Orthodox Church in America

Source

With talk of "Healing" Vocations in their recent newsletter, I see New Skete as a hybrid version of Christian Science.

[Deacon Lance]

The theme for last years pilgrimage was "Healing: New Life in Christ".  I don't see how you equate that with Christian Science.  They aren't advocating not using doctors or medicine.

[BrotherAidan]

I think some diversity in liturgical and monastic practice might be a necessary thing. I can't imagine all who feel called to the monastic life (broadly speaking) will all fit nicely within the same framework established on Athos, Egypt, or according to St. Sabbas. Is there not a place for more diverse forms of monastic life without it being a threat to the purity of Orthodoxy? I see some good in the Catholic charismas.

I agree that variations in monastic discipline and mission could be a good thing. Is a life of relative isolation, silence, fasting and prayer the only way a person can pursue a monastic calling. Might a group of celibate Orthodox men or women with a healthy (albeit not exclusive) devotion to prayer also have a calling to minister to the poor, or work in foreign missions or operate a school?
 

[John of the North]

I think some diversity in liturgical and monastic practice might be a necessary thing. I can't imagine all who feel called to the monastic life (broadly speaking) will all fit nicely within the same framework established on Athos, Egypt, or according to St. Sabbas. Is there not a place for more diverse forms of monastic life without it being a threat to the purity of Orthodoxy? I see some good in the Catholic charismas.

New Skete pushes the line though...

[SolEX01]

The theme for last years pilgrimage was "Healing: New Life in Christ".  I don't see how you equate that with Christian Science.  They aren't advocating not using doctors or medicine.

Referring to New Skete as Hybrid Christian Scientists is better than calling them Hybrid Orthodox or Hybrid Catholics if such terms are applicable to them.  When waking up on Sunday mornings, I listen to a Christian Science radio program between 8:30 AM and 9:00 AM and every healed person has talked about finding new life following a healing by Christ the Scientist.

[PeterTheAleut]

The theme for last years pilgrimage was "Healing: New Life in Christ".  I don't see how you equate that with Christian Science.  They aren't advocating not using doctors or medicine.

Referring to New Skete as Hybrid Christian Scientists is better than calling them Hybrid Orthodox or Hybrid Catholics if such terms are applicable to them.

Yet you still need to show how the term "Hybrid Christian Scientists" applies to the monks and nuns of New Skete.  How are they engaging in practices found in Christian Science?  Give me specific examples.

When waking up on Sunday mornings, I listen to a Christian Science radio program between 8:30 AM and 9:00 AM and every healed person has talked about finding new life following a healing by Christ the Scientist.

That's nice.   How does this apply to the monks and nuns of New Skete?

BTW, aren't we all supposed to seek healing in Christ (even if this comes through modern medicine)?

[Irish Hermit]

I am shocked that the nuns would give that explanation for the reason the monks supressed/moved litanies.  It had nothing to do with how many times they pray a given piece.  The Little Litanies were reduced to "Let us pray to the Lord" since the Prayers of the Antiphons are chanted aloud.  They moved the  Great Litany to after the Gospel, its original position, and supressed the Litanies of Supplication as these were imports from Vespers/Matins.  At Vespers and Matins the Great Litany is moved and joined to the Litany of Supplication at the end of the service.  All these decisions were based on sound scholarship and the desire of the monks to renew the Byzantine Liturgy by moving it closer to earlier, simpler forms of that Liturgy.

At the time of ordination priests take an oath to serve Services as they are written in the Service books and not to effect changes (it is assumed that customary shortenings are allowed.)  Bishops take a similar oath at consecration.  So the question arises; were the New Skete liturgical changes given approval by the Holy Synod of the Orthodox Church in America?

[Deacon Lance]

Of course that beggs the question how many of New Skete's priests were ordaind in the OCA versus received by vesting in 1979 and if ordained in the OCA which Liturgicon were they presented at ordination.  My guess would be New Skete's.

Fr. Deacon Lance

[Irish Hermit]

Well if push comes to shove and they have to leave Orthodoxy, I for one will welcome them back to the Byzantine Catholic Church, we could use their monastic witness.  Personally, I think they would be better off and more appreciated.

I expect that some of the OCA bishops would agree with you.

Bishop Tikhon has written numerous messages on the Net about his horror with New Skete....

"I remember hearing from either Father Stavros Strikis or Father Basil Sommer how, when they were in Italy, they bumped into some guys that were obviously Americans with their Hawaiian flowered sport shirts and whose faces somehow looked familiar. These, it turned out, were Monks of New Skete, on their Annual Vacation!"

Btw, does anybody know how New Skete was able to go from Roman Catholic to Orthodox without forfeiting their church buildings and properties?

[Monk Vasyl]

Btw, does anybody know how New Skete was able to go from Roman Catholic to Orthodox without forfeiting their church buildings and properties?

The monks of New Skete were Byzantine Franciscans and Fr. Marc was ordained by Bishop Basil Losten.  I heard after they were received by the OCA, the Pope called the Byzantine Bishops to rome and wanted to know how this happened.  I remember talking to Fr. Laurence, of Eternal Memory, about their conversion.  Originally they approached Holy Tri nity, ROCOR, but when they were told some of their monks would go to Jordanville for training and some monks from Jordanville would come to New Skete to set them on the "right track", he approached the OCA.  I personally love New Skete.  Its been years since I have visited them.  I never had too much difficulty adjusting to their usage.  I remember a Russia monk telling me, "Never go to another monastery with the typicon of your monastery.

[SolEX01]

The theme for last years pilgrimage was "Healing: New Life in Christ".  I don't see how you equate that with Christian Science.  They aren't advocating not using doctors or medicine.

Referring to New Skete as Hybrid Christian Scientists is better than calling them Hybrid Orthodox or Hybrid Catholics if such terms are applicable to them.

Yet you still need to show how the term "Hybrid Christian Scientists" applies to the monks and nuns of New Skete.  How are they engaging in practices found in Christian Science?  Give me specific examples.

From the Christian Science FAQ:

Why do you call yourselves Christian?
Because Christian Science is based on the Bible, and Christian Scientists follow the teachings and ministry of Christ Jesus. In fact, the virgin birth, the crucifixion, the resurrection and ascension of Christ Jesus, and so on, are all central to Christian Science theology....

New Skete follows the teachings and ministry of Jesus Christ and also believe in virgin birth, crucifixion, resurrection and ascension as central tenets to their theology

There aren’t very many of you, are there? Isn’t Christian Science pretty much dying out?

It’s true that there has been a decrease in membership over the past several decades, a widely reported trend in many denominations. At the same time, there’s been an increase in dialogue about the power of prayer and a greater interest in spirituality, which is noteworthy—and promising.

See New Skete's 2008 Healing Conference.

When waking up on Sunday mornings, I listen to a Christian Science radio program between 8:30 AM and 9:00 AM and every healed person has talked about finding new life following a healing by Christ the Scientist.

That's nice.   How does this apply to the monks and nuns of New Skete?

A quote from CARM:

To the Christian Scientist, God (the Father-Mother) is a Principle known as the Divine Mind. It has no personhood and no personality. A catch phrase used in their literature is that God is "All in All." In other words, God is all that exists and what we perceive as matter is an interpretation of divine mind. Since God is love, it means that sin and sickness are only errors of interpreting the Divine Mind and have no true reality (S & H, 330:25-274; 470:9-14).

So, if New Skete wishes to have an icon of St. Francis of Assisi, Patriarch Athenagoras and other non-canonical figures, isn't that an interpretation of their Divine Mind?   

BTW, aren't we all supposed to seek healing in Christ (even if this comes through modern medicine)?

Christian Scientists believe that sin is nonexistent because that would be an error of the Divine Mind (Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures, 335:7-15).  New Skete feels that their depictions of uncanonical icons are completely acceptable based on the "All in All" concepts espoused by Christian Science.

Note S & H = Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures

[PeterTheAleut]

From the Christian Science FAQ:

Why do you call yourselves Christian?
Because Christian Science is based on the Bible, and Christian Scientists follow the teachings and ministry of Christ Jesus. In fact, the virgin birth, the crucifixion, the resurrection and ascension of Christ Jesus, and so on, are all central to Christian Science theology....

New Skete follows the teachings and ministry of Jesus Christ and also believe in virgin birth, crucifixion, resurrection and ascension as central tenets to their theology

The Orthodox also believe in the virgin birth, crucifixion, resurrection and ascension of Jesus Christ.  Does this make US Christian Scientists?

There aren’t very many of you, are there? Isn’t Christian Science pretty much dying out?

It’s true that there has been a decrease in membership over the past several decades, a widely reported trend in many denominations. At the same time, there’s been an increase in dialogue about the power of prayer and a greater interest in spirituality, which is noteworthy—and promising.

See New Skete's 2008 Healing Conference.

The Orthodox also believe in the healing power of Jesus Christ.  Does this make US Christian Scientists?

A quote from CARM:

To the Christian Scientist, God (the Father-Mother) is a Principle known as the Divine Mind. It has no personhood and no personality. A catch phrase used in their literature is that God is "All in All." In other words, God is all that exists and what we perceive as matter is an interpretation of divine mind. Since God is love, it means that sin and sickness are only errors of interpreting the Divine Mind and have no true reality (S & H, 330:25-274; 470:9-14).

So, if New Skete wishes to have an icon of St. Francis of Assisi, Patriarch Athenagoras and other non-canonical figures, isn't that an interpretation of their Divine Mind?   

Only if the monks and nuns of New Skete believe in the Christian Scientist concept of Divine Mind, which you have to establish.

Christian Scientists believe that sin is nonexistent because that would be an error of the Divine Mind (Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures, 335:7-15).  New Skete feels that their depictions of uncanonical icons are completely acceptable based on the "All in All" concepts espoused by Christian Science.

The Russian Orthodox Church believes in the virgin birth, crucifixion, resurrection and ascension of Jesus Christ.  The Russian Orthodox Church believes in the healing power of Jesus Christ.  Many Russian Orthodox Churches consider completely acceptable the display of "uncanonical" icons (i.e., God the Father icons and some other Western monstrosities).  The Russian Orthodox Church also believes in some concept of Divine Mind (i.e., the Mind of the Church).  I suppose, then, that according to your logic, all this must make the Russian Orthodox Church a branch of the Christian Science religion.

[Deacon Lance]

Btw, does anybody know how New Skete was able to go from Roman Catholic to Orthodox without forfeiting their church buildings and properties?

In 1966, when the monks founded New Skete, they had canonically left the Order of Friars Minor and were an autonomos monastery, meaning all property was owned by the monastic brotherhood directly.  Jurisdictionally, New Skete was under the jurisdiction of the Latin bishop of Albany because the Byzantine bishop of Passaic didn't want them.

So when they joined the OCA, the Latin  bishop had no claim to the property, nor do I think given the time (after Vatican II) there would there be any desire on the part of the Latin bishop to seek it.  The Monastery of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross (now called of the Protection of the Most Holy Theotokos) were in the same situation and transitioned to the OCA with full approval of the Byzantine bishop of Passaic, although that may have been an easy way to wash his hands of that mess.

I heard after they were received by the OCA, the Pope called the Byzantine Bishops to rome and wanted to know how this happened.

Since they weren't under their jurisdiction, I seriously doubt the above.

Fr. Deacon Lance

[SolEX01]

From the Christian Science FAQ:

Why do you call yourselves Christian?
Because Christian Science is based on the Bible, and Christian Scientists follow the teachings and ministry of Christ Jesus. In fact, the virgin birth, the crucifixion, the resurrection and ascension of Christ Jesus, and so on, are all central to Christian Science theology....

New Skete follows the teachings and ministry of Jesus Christ and also believe in virgin birth, crucifixion, resurrection and ascension as central tenets to their theology

The Orthodox also believe in the virgin birth, crucifixion, resurrection and ascension of Jesus Christ.  Does this make US Christian Scientists?

Christian Scientists reject Christ as the 2^nd Person in the Holy Trinity so Orthodox Christians are not Christian Scientists.

There aren’t very many of you, are there? Isn’t Christian Science pretty much dying out?

It’s true that there has been a decrease in membership over the past several decades, a widely reported trend in many denominations. At the same time, there’s been an increase in dialogue about the power of prayer and a greater interest in spirituality, which is noteworthy—and promising.

See New Skete's 2008 Healing Conference.

The Orthodox also believe in the healing power of Jesus Christ.  Does this make US Christian Scientists?

Because Christian Scientists do not believe in Sin for to them, the Divine Mind makes error impossible.  Orthodox Christians recognize sin; hence, Orthodox Christians are not Christian Scientists.

A quote from CARM:

To the Christian Scientist, God (the Father-Mother) is a Principle known as the Divine Mind. It has no personhood and no personality. A catch phrase used in their literature is that God is "All in All." In other words, God is all that exists and what we perceive as matter is an interpretation of divine mind. Since God is love, it means that sin and sickness are only errors of interpreting the Divine Mind and have no true reality (S & H, 330:25-274; 470:9-14).

So, if New Skete wishes to have an icon of St. Francis of Assisi, Patriarch Athenagoras and other non-canonical figures, isn't that an interpretation of their Divine Mind?   

Only if the monks and nuns of New Skete believe in the Christian Scientist concept of Divine Mind, which you have to establish.

[/quote]

New Skete has already written the book, The Divine Canine.  They've established the concept of Divine something (since God created Dogs and Dogs are perfect; hence, Dogs can't do any wrong).  I do not need to establish anything further.

Christian Scientists believe that sin is nonexistent because that would be an error of the Divine Mind (Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures, 335:7-15).  New Skete feels that their depictions of uncanonical icons are completely acceptable based on the "All in All" concepts espoused by Christian Science.

The Russian Orthodox Church believes in the virgin birth, crucifixion, resurrection and ascension of Jesus Christ.  The Russian Orthodox Church believes in the healing power of Jesus Christ.  Many Russian Orthodox Churches consider completely acceptable the display of "uncanonical" icons (i.e., God the Father icons and some other Western monstrosities).  The Russian Orthodox Church also believes in some concept of Divine Mind (i.e., the Mind of the Church).  I suppose, then, that according to your logic, all this must make the Russian Orthodox Church a branch of the Christian Science religion.

Why single out the Russian Orthodox Church?  I referred to New Skete as practicing a hybrid form of Christian Science because Christian Scientists do not recognize sin because to them, sin is impossible if one is in sync with the Divine Mind.  Every story of healing that I've heard on the Christian Science radio program refers to prayer to Christ (who's not the Son of God in their theology) for the Divine Mind necessary to promote healing.

[PeterTheAleut]

The Orthodox also believe in the virgin birth, crucifixion, resurrection and ascension of Jesus Christ.  Does this make US Christian Scientists?

Christian Scientists reject Christ as the 2^nd Person in the Holy Trinity so Orthodox Christians are not Christian Scientists.

Well, then, why didn't you say this earlier?   Can you prove now that the monastics of New Skete ALSO reject Christ as the Second Person of the Holy Trinity?  If not, you're simply comparing apples to teakettles.

The Orthodox also believe in the healing power of Jesus Christ.  Does this make US Christian Scientists?

Because Christian Scientists do not believe in Sin for to them, the Divine Mind makes error impossible.  Orthodox Christians recognize sin; hence, Orthodox Christians are not Christian Scientists.

But you didn't make this part of your original analogy.  You do realize that the failure to recognize error has nothing to do with recognizing one's power to heal?

New Skete has already written the book, The Divine Canine.  They've established the concept of Divine something (since God created Dogs and Dogs are perfect; hence, Dogs can't do any wrong).  I do not need to establish anything further.

One thing you have established very well is that you have zero grasp of basic logic.

Do you have any idea of what The Divine Canine even says, or are you just judging the book by its cover?
 

The Russian Orthodox Church believes in the virgin birth, crucifixion, resurrection and ascension of Jesus Christ.  The Russian Orthodox Church believes in the healing power of Jesus Christ.  Many Russian Orthodox Churches consider completely acceptable the display of "uncanonical" icons (i.e., God the Father icons and some other Western monstrosities).  The Russian Orthodox Church also believes in some concept of Divine Mind (i.e., the Mind of the Church).  I suppose, then, that according to your logic, all this must make the Russian Orthodox Church a branch of the Christian Science religion.

Why single out the Russian Orthodox Church?

To point out how brainless your reasoning on this thread has been.

I referred to New Skete as practicing a hybrid form of Christian Science because Christian Scientists do not recognize sin because to them, sin is impossible if one is in sync with the Divine Mind.

But you have proven nothing regarding the doctrines to which the monks and nuns of New Skete actually adhere.  All you've done is tell me what Christian Scientists believe and give me a litany of atrocious non sequiturs regarding the New Skete monastics.  I'd be willing to wager that you know ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about New Skete and are just making this baloney up.

Every story of healing that I've heard on the Christian Science radio program refers to prayer to Christ (who's not the Son of God in their theology) for the Divine Mind necessary to promote healing.

That's nice.   Now what does this have to do with the liturgical practices of the New Skete monasteries?

[SolEX01]

Well, then, why didn't you say this earlier?   Can you prove now that the monastics of New Skete ALSO reject Christ as the Second Person of the Holy Trinity?  If not, you're simply comparing apples to teakettles.

Referring to New Skete as a hybrid version of something (e.g. Christian Science) does not equate to rejecting Christ as the 2^nd person of the Holy Trinity.

But you didn't make this part of your original analogy.  You do realize that the failure to recognize error has nothing to do with recognizing one's power to heal?

Correct.  Christian Science also believes that evil is a man made concept:

One thing you have established very well is that you have zero grasp of basic logic.

I should have taken Philosophy 101 and failed for failure to grasp basic logic.   

Do you have any idea of what The Divine Canine even says, or are you just judging the book by its cover?

Does it matter?  Oh, I should read a dog training book where I have no interest in dogs.   

To point out how brainless your reasoning on this thread has been.

Well, I'm sad that you feel that way for does every thread on this board have to be academic in nature?   

But you have proven nothing regarding the doctrines to which the monks and nuns of New Skete actually adhere.  All you've done is tell me what Christian Scientists believe and give me a litany of atrocious non sequiturs regarding the New Skete monastics.  I'd be willing to wager that you know ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about New Skete and are just making this baloney up.

Christ taught that we judge by actions and not by words.  I'm not making any baloney up for what they have said and displayed on their website is plenty enough.  They are a hybrid jurisdiction - part Orthodox, part Catholic, part unknown.  Comparing them to Christian Scientists is a compliment.

That's nice.   Now what does this have to do with the liturgical practices of the New Skete monasteries?

I feel Christian Scientists have more credibility than the New Skete monastics.  If one reads the Christian Science treatise and compare it to Orthodox Christianity, one can reject Christian Science teachings in a split second.  Now, if one reads about New Skete and the other  monastic communities that I've spoken about at length, one can reject them as well.

Of course, I sometimes feel that it is better to remain silent than to say anything which would generate discord.  My intent is not to create discord except that others remain silent when it comes to discussing items that deviate from a single track thread.     Everything I've said is relevant to the thread even though I have failed to make my comments more worthy of academia.

[PeterTheAleut]

Do you have any idea of what The Divine Canine even says, or are you just judging the book by its cover?

Does it matter?  Oh, I should read a dog training book where I have no interest in dogs.   

You could at least read it before you make totally ignorant comments on what you think the title means.

Well, I'm sad that you feel that way for does every thread on this board have to be academic in nature?   

Is it too much to ask that, at the very least, they be coherent?

[SolEX01]

Well, I'm sad that you feel that way for does every thread on this board have to be academic in nature?   

Is it too much to ask that, at the very least, they be coherent?

While I admit that my writing tends to be technical (and keeping it simple is a challenging task on a forum where many are eloquent), maybe I try too hard to make my point especially if the point is controversial or even polemical.   

[BrotherAidan]

Btw, does anybody know how New Skete was able to go from Roman Catholic to Orthodox without forfeiting their church buildings and properties?

they moved to their current NY state site from western PA - they were quasi-independent until uniting with the OCA in 1979

[Deacon Lance]

Btw, does anybody know how New Skete was able to go from Roman Catholic to Orthodox without forfeiting their church buildings and properties?

they moved to their current NY state site from western PA - they built that NY monastery as Orthodox monks

Incorrect.  The monastic brotherhood was founded in 1966.  They spent a short time in PA before moving to Cambridge, NY in August of 1966.  Their smaller church, that of the Transfiguration, was consecrated in 1970.  They weren't recieved into the OCA until 1979.
 
http://www.newsketemonks.com/history.htm

Fr. Deacon Lance

[BrotherAidan]

Btw, does anybody know how New Skete was able to go from Roman Catholic to Orthodox without forfeiting their church buildings and properties?

they moved to their current NY state site from western PA - they built that NY monastery as Orthodox monks

Incorrect.  The monastic brotherhood was founded in 1966.  They spent a short time in PA before moving to Cambridge, NY in August of 1966.  Their smaller church, that of the Transfiguration, was consecrated in 1970.  They weren't recieved into the OCA until 1979.
 
http://www.newsketemonks.com/history.htm

Fr. Deacon Lance

you are quite correct, I wrote that from having remembered reading one of their spiritual books almost ten years ago; i went to their web site to check  and revised my post

[Tags:]

OrthodoxChristianity.net > Moderated Forums > Liturgy (Moderator: arimethea) > Topic: Liturgical Practices of New Skete