OrthodoxChristianity.net
September 18, 2014, 03:41:22 AM *
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 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 »   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Old vs. New Calendar?  (Read 205806 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Arystarcus
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 836


« Reply #135 on: November 22, 2004, 12:58:40 AM »

Quote
I think deep down I prefer the Old Calendar.  I don't follow it because my church is on the New Calendar.  If at some point the OCA decided to become Old Calendar, I wouldn't care. It's sort of a non-issue for me.

I feel the exact same way.

In Christ,
Aaron
Logged
prodromos
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 1,463

Sydney, Australia


« Reply #136 on: November 22, 2004, 03:33:23 AM »

I would be very pleased if our church changed back to the Old Calendar. It would actually make life a bit more difficult initially but it is something I would be happy to put up with.

John
Logged
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #137 on: November 22, 2004, 10:31:03 AM »

I would be very pleased if our church changed back to the Old Calendar. It would actually make life a bit more difficult initially but it is something I would be happy to put up with.

John

I with you all the way here, John. I do not think the transition back would be as difficult as many think. And I have stressed this to my GOAA priest (to his surprise) and our ACROD priest and to Metropolitan Nicholas directly (asking him not to force ACROD's Old Calendar parishes to change.) Not that my opinion matters, but ya' never know...

Demetri
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #138 on: November 23, 2004, 03:19:00 AM »

Besides the jurisdictions already mentioned in the United States the MP parishes here and the JP use the Church Calendar (i.e the Julian Calendar).  And of course there is ROCOR.  

The Calendar isn't going to save anyone, and perhaps for some people being "Old Calendarists" just feeds into the super-correctness problem that Father Seraphim of Platina very harshly condemned.  The old calendar movement has had its far share of problems with many groups bordering on schism and others in outright schism (at least IMO).  But someone taking an honest look at the implementation of the new calendar in Greece or Romania would be appalled at it.  FWIW I follow the Old Calendar for fasting and feasting and attend both ROCOR and GOA churches.
Logged
cizinec
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 941


There ain't no way but the hard way.


« Reply #139 on: November 23, 2004, 02:00:56 PM »

To finish Bojan's thought and answer Jennifer's question, the Serbian Orthodox Church in the USA is a member of SCOBA.  

So there are old and new calendar jurisdictions.  Having come from Byzantine Catholicism and trying to use a newer calendar, I prefer the older.  Not because I like old things, but because when living the church year it became obvious to me that the life of the Church was developed around this calendar (or one closer to it than the Gregorian or almost Gregorian or not quite Gregorian calendars) and that the dates of things seem to fall into place.

That's my impression.  Others have other impressions and prefer the newer calendar.  There are obvious difficulties with celebrating Christmas later than the rest of your co-workers, family members, etc.

I personally think the controversy is downright silly.  ISTM that those who like the newer calendar prefer it for purposes of convenience, which I understand.  If it's a real stumbling block for your brothers and sisters, however, I think it needs a lot of thought.  

Cheers!
Logged

"Brother, your best friend ain't your Momma, it's the Field Artillery."
Sabbas
Drink from your own wells
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 503

St. Glicherie True Orthodox Church of Romania


« Reply #140 on: December 07, 2004, 10:26:54 PM »

I'm sorry I'm bringing this back up but I need help. Does anyone know when the Antiochian Patriarchate went New Calendar? I haven't been able to find out though I am lazy and busy at college.
I couldn't find any info when I looked at the terrible events of the early 1920's when this New Calendar was forced on many for the sake of a few Ecumenists in the Church and Greek govt.
I am a catechumen in the Antiochian Archdiocese at www.straphaelorthodoxchurch.org but have been unable to find out.

As to some peoples objections to the 'Old' Calendarists consider this.
The majority of New Calendar Orthodox churches in America have adopted pews! happily St.Raphaels does not. May I ask how you are supposed to prostrate in church with pews? or even bow properly? Most New Calendar churches in America are paving over what they call small t traditions for the sake of capital T Tradition, sounds like I'm back in 3rd grade Sunday School it's so watered down.

Strelets, whom I have no problem with as I don't know him well enough, wrote regarding www.orthodoxinfo.com
Quote
There are many edifying articles on this site and I enjoy reading them over and over again, but one must remember it is from an Old Calendarist position, and some of the articles dealing with ecumenicism and the calendar not only contain some misstatements (i.e. that the 1st EC adopted the Julian Calendar), but are of a highly polemical and uncharitable nature towards 99% of the Orthodox faithful.

Ninety-nine percent! The majority of Orthodox world-wide do not follow the modernistic Orthodoxy that is becoming more common throughout America. The mission I go to has some of this modernism with regards to the congregation saying Amen during the Epiclesis, which gives no consideration to the fact that the deacon has said this for hundreds of years, though I admit this is a throw back to St.Justin Martyrs account of the Liturgy. Other than this I don't experience it much when at St.Raphaels, however I've been to other New Calendar churches in America, many ethnic, and they have totally caved in to modernism!

Orthodox need to be Orthodox again! I am thankful I go to a New Calendar mission that is very much in tune with both small t tradition and capital T Tradition, yet I feel for the plight of many who want to be Orthodox but go to the church only to find that most of the congregation talks throughout the Divine Liturgy and don't take their faith seriously. The Traditionalists are passing it down undefiled. If the New Calendar jurisdictions get much worse I think we may see another great falling away as disasterous as the West falling away into heresy.

Having said that I want you to remember I am just being honest and probably will stay in the New Calendar Antiochian Archdiocese as long as possible because I think things can get better and that many Orthodox will wake up to the INCREDIBLE DEPTH that there is in Orthodoxy.

Asking your Prayers
« Last Edit: December 07, 2004, 10:30:39 PM by Sabbas » Logged

www.hungersite.com  Ãƒâ€šÃ‚  www.freedonation.com you can donate up to 20 times at freedonation.  http://www.pomog.org/ has online 1851 Sir Lancelot C.L. Brenton English translation of Septuagint.http://www.cnrs.ubc.ca/greekbible/ Original Koine Septuagint and New Testament.
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,444


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #141 on: December 07, 2004, 10:44:04 PM »

The Antiochian Patriarchate went New Calendar in 1941.

Anastasios
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodo
TonyS
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 705


« Reply #142 on: December 07, 2004, 10:46:25 PM »

I believe the typikon says if St George falls on Holy Week or Pascha, it is just to be moved to Bright Monday.

Anastasios

Exactly.  The problem with this typ of polemic literature is that is sometimes lacks integrity in its attempt to combat what it sees as lacking integrity.  Or perhaps it is lack of education, in either event it is not good.

The Slavonic Sabbaite Typikon forsees the possiblity of the feast of St. George falling as early, IIRC, as Holy and Great Friday.  It has rules for how the feast is to be relocated to a later date.  With the new calendar, the feast of St. George just falls earlier, so why can't the same principle already elucidated in The Typikon be applied?

It is because of these inaccuracies that I find some of this literature suspect.  

It is unnecessary to resort to this type of accusation to slander the new calendar.  There are plenty of points to argue, why keep dragging St. George into this?

TonyS
Logged

Tómame como al tequila, de un golpe y sin pensarlo. - Ricardo Arjona

I'd be a fool to surrender when I know I can be a contender
and if everbody's a sinner then everybody can be a winner
...
I'll see you when yo
Sabbas
Drink from your own wells
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 503

St. Glicherie True Orthodox Church of Romania


« Reply #143 on: December 07, 2004, 11:11:59 PM »

Thank you for your quick reply anastasios
Do you know any info why? or a source with more info?
Logged

www.hungersite.com  Ãƒâ€šÃ‚  www.freedonation.com you can donate up to 20 times at freedonation.  http://www.pomog.org/ has online 1851 Sir Lancelot C.L. Brenton English translation of Septuagint.http://www.cnrs.ubc.ca/greekbible/ Original Koine Septuagint and New Testament.
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,444


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #144 on: December 07, 2004, 11:46:43 PM »

Tony,

I don't think you can slander a calendar Smiley (smiley)

Anastasios
« Last Edit: December 08, 2004, 12:41:41 AM by anastasios » Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodo
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,444


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #145 on: December 07, 2004, 11:49:04 PM »

"The problem with this typ of polemic literature is that is sometimes lacks integrity in its attempt to combat what it sees as lacking integrity.  Or perhaps it is lack of education, in either event it is not good."

I would like to see the citation from the typikon that you cite, just so I can see what it says for myself.  At any rate, literature against the New Calendar is generally accurate.  If there is an error, I think it needs to be pointed out, but I don't think we need to assume malice.

Anastasios
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodo
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,444


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #146 on: December 07, 2004, 11:50:18 PM »

Also, the thought came to mind that one could read New Calendar propoganda, such as the outrageous book by Fr John Morris "Orthodox Fundamentalism" which is filled with half-truths, and find errors there.  I think honesty on all sides is key.  But really, the St George issue is not the major argument for the Old Calendar.

Anastasios
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodo
TonyS
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 705


« Reply #147 on: December 08, 2004, 12:49:02 AM »

Anastasios,

Honesty at all times must reign supreme.  That is why when I see things like the mention of the feast of St. George it bugs me.  And for those on the other side of this argument, if they employ falsehoods, that is just as bad.

You may check this with The Typikon in the library or I can show you my own.  The entry is for April 23.  After the initial entry which provides the incipits of the texts, etc, there follows an entry called "Oukaz o velikom muchenikom Georgii."  I will provide the citation in full resolving all abbreviations.  "Nachinaetsia ot dne velikago piatka, i voskhodit do chetvertka piataia nedeli po pastse. I ashche sluchitsia velikomuchenika Georgia v velikii piatok, ili v velikuiu subbotu, ili na samuiu paskhu, poiutsia stikhiry sviatago, i kanon, i prochaia sluzhba, v ponedel'nik svetlyia nedeli, s sluzhboiu dnevnoiu."

Emphasis mine for clarity.

Any questions?
« Last Edit: December 08, 2004, 12:49:56 AM by TonyS » Logged

Tómame como al tequila, de un golpe y sin pensarlo. - Ricardo Arjona

I'd be a fool to surrender when I know I can be a contender
and if everbody's a sinner then everybody can be a winner
...
I'll see you when yo
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,444


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #148 on: December 08, 2004, 12:59:57 AM »

Thanks Tony (smiley face)!
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodo
TonyS
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 705


« Reply #149 on: December 08, 2004, 01:15:43 AM »

This is one of the interesting factoids brought up by Old C's, because it's really a glaring problem for the Julian Calendar.  Under the JC, Pascha can fall as late as April 24th or 25th.  So what happens when St. George's feast, on April 23rd, arrives on those years?  The OC parish either ignores it or most likely moves it forward after Pascha.  No canon law or tradition sets a standard for how to handle this, yet the Old Calendarist gives himself a pass to change the festal cycle when these anomalies arise, but declares the New Calendarist as engaging in unlawful behavior.  It's a double standard.

Strelets,

As Anastasios replied and as I quoted from The Typikon, there are rules for this.  

TonyS
Logged

Tómame como al tequila, de un golpe y sin pensarlo. - Ricardo Arjona

I'd be a fool to surrender when I know I can be a contender
and if everbody's a sinner then everybody can be a winner
...
I'll see you when yo
TonyS
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 705


« Reply #150 on: December 08, 2004, 01:20:05 AM »

But really, the St George issue is not the major argument for the Old Calendar.

Anastasios

Agreed.  Yet, it is number 2 in the list you quoted, presumed by me to be the second most important element.  Further the list you quote says "there are several other examples" like this one of St. George, I would like to see them, I tend to think they are ofthe same nature.  

This issue of the feast of St. George keeps getting mentioned when the calendar is discussed, perhaps everyone is quoting the same erroneous author.

It's a shame isn't it?
Logged

Tómame como al tequila, de un golpe y sin pensarlo. - Ricardo Arjona

I'd be a fool to surrender when I know I can be a contender
and if everbody's a sinner then everybody can be a winner
...
I'll see you when yo
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,444


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #151 on: December 08, 2004, 01:44:01 AM »

Agreed.  Yet, it is number 2 in the list you quoted, presumed by me to be the second most important element.  Further the list you quote says "there are several other examples" like this one of St. George, I would like to see them, I tend to think they are ofthe same nature.  

This issue of the feast of St. George keeps getting mentioned when the calendar is discussed, perhaps everyone is quoting the same erroneous author.

It's a shame isn't it?

Tony,

I don't think out my internet postings and ramblings that well  LOL.  So please don't assume that because it was #2 on a list that it was #2 in importance.

I think everyone is quoting Hieromonk Cassian in his book on the Old Calendar.

It is a shame that erroneous info is getting mentioned. So I will go back and edit my original post.

Anastasios
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodo
The young fogey
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,684


I'm an alpaca, actually


WWW
« Reply #152 on: December 08, 2004, 09:28:19 AM »

Quote
The entry is for April 23.  After the initial entry which provides the incipits of the texts, etc, there follows an entry called "Oukaz o velikom muchenikom Georgii."


-ú-¦-¦-+ -+ -¦-¦-+-+-¦-+-+ -+-â-ç-¦-+-+-¦-+-+ -ô-¦-+-Ç-¦-+-¦: 'Order regarding the great martyr George'.

(Modern Russian spelling as that's the only typing option.)

Quote
"Nachinaetsia ot dne velikago piatka, i voskhodit do chetvertka piataia nedeli po pastse. I ashche sluchitsia velikomuchenika Georgia v velikii piatok, ili v velikuiu subbotu, ili na samuiu paskhu, poiutsia stikhiry sviatago, i kanon, i prochaia sluzhba, v ponedel'nik svetlyia nedeli, s sluzhboiu dnevnoiu."

-¥-¦-ç-+-+-¦-¦-é-ü-Å -+-é -¦-+-¦ -¦-¦-+-+-¦-¦-¦-+ -+-Å-é-¦-¦, -+ -¦-+-ü-à -+-¦-+-é -¦-+ -ç-¦-é-¦-¦-Ç-¦-¦ -+-Å-é-¦-Å -+-¦-¦-¦-+-+ -+-+ -+-¦-ü-å-¦. -ÿ -¦-ë-¦ -ü-+-â-ç-+-é-ü-Å -¦-¦-+-+-¦-+-+-â-ç-¦-+-+-¦-¦ -ô-¦-+-Ç-+-Å -¦ -¦-¦-+-+-¦-+-¦ -+-Å-é-+-¦, -+-+-+ -¦ -¦-¦-+-+-¦-â-Ä -ü-â-¦-¦-+-é-â, -+-+-+ -+-¦ -ü-¦-+-â-Ä -+-¦-ü-à -â, -+-+-Ä-é-ü-Å -ü-é-+-à -+-Ç-ï -ü-¦-Å-é-¦-¦-+, -+ -¦-¦-+-+-+, -+ -+-Ç-+-ç-¦-Å -ü-+-â-¦-¦-¦, -¦ -+-+-+-¦-¦-¦-+-î-+-+-¦ -ü-¦-¦-é-+-ï-Å -+-¦-¦-¦-+-+, -ü -ü-+-â-¦-¦-+-Ä -¦-+-¦-¦-+-+-Ä.

-ƒ-¦-Ç-¦-¦-+-¦: 'It starts from the day of Good Friday and continues until the Thursday of the fifth week after Easter. And if the ? of the great martyr George falls on Good Friday, or on Holy Saturday, or on Easter itself, the verses of the saint, the canon and the ? service are sung on Monday of Bright Week with the service of the day.'

(Translated by me on the fly with no dictionary or computer-translator help. Russian translation sites don't always work with Slavonic anyway.)
« Last Edit: December 08, 2004, 09:33:07 AM by Serge » Logged

cizinec
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 941


There ain't no way but the hard way.


« Reply #153 on: December 08, 2004, 10:01:58 AM »

All of this timing talk about St. George has got me dizzy.  

I would really like to hear someone who is a new calendar apologist address my primary concern.  That is:

ISTM that those who like the newer calendar prefer it for purposes of convenience, which I understand.  If it's a real stumbling block for your brothers and sisters, however, I think it needs a lot of thought.  

Is the New Calendar worth all the noise?  So you think the old-calendarists are extreme in their defense of the old calendar.  So you think their arguments are not to your intellectual standards.  Is the New Calendar really worth the schisms?  Is it really worth it to offend your brothers and sisters in Christ?  Would you be as offended at doing it the way it has always been done as these folks are at changing it for . . . well, why did it get changed?  For spiritual reasons?  
Logged

"Brother, your best friend ain't your Momma, it's the Field Artillery."
TonyS
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 705


« Reply #154 on: December 08, 2004, 10:03:53 AM »



-ú-¦-¦-+ -+ -¦-¦-+-+-¦-+-+ -+-â-ç-¦-+-+-¦-+-+ -ô-¦-+-Ç-¦-+-¦: 'Order regarding the great martyr George'.

(Modern Russian spelling as that's the only typing option.)-¥-¦-ç-+-+-¦-¦-é-ü-Å -+-é -¦-+-¦ -¦-¦-+-+-¦-¦-¦-+ -+-Å-é-¦-¦, -+ -¦-+-ü-à -+-¦-+-é -¦-+ -ç-¦-é-¦-¦-Ç-¦-¦ -+-Å-é-¦-Å -+-¦-¦-¦-+-+ -+-+ -+-¦-ü-å-¦. -ÿ -¦-ë-¦ -ü-+-â-ç-+-é-ü-Å -¦-¦-+-+-¦-+-+-â-ç-¦-+-+-¦-¦ -ô-¦-+-Ç-+-Å -¦ -¦-¦-+-+-¦-+-¦ -+-Å-é-+-¦, -+-+-+ -¦ -¦-¦-+-+-¦-â-Ä -ü-â-¦-¦-+-é-â, -+-+-+ -+-¦ -ü-¦-+-â-Ä -+-¦-ü-à -â, -+-+-Ä-é-ü-Å -ü-é-+-à -+-Ç-ï -ü-¦-Å-é-¦-¦-+, -+ -¦-¦-+-+-+, -+ -+-Ç-+-ç-¦-Å -ü-+-â-¦-¦-¦, -¦ -+-+-+-¦-¦-¦-+-î-+-+-¦ -ü-¦-¦-é-+-ï-Å -+-¦-¦-¦-+-+, -ü -ü-+-â-¦-¦-+-Ä -¦-+-¦-¦-+-+-Ä.

-ƒ-¦-Ç-¦-¦-+-¦: 'It starts from the day of Good Friday and continues until the Thursday of the fifth week after Easter. And if the ? of the great martyr George falls on Good Friday, or on Holy Saturday, or on Easter itself, the verses of the saint, the canon and the ? service are sung on Monday of Bright Week with the service of the day.'

(Translated by me on the fly with no dictionary or computer-translator help. Russian translation sites don't always work with Slavonic anyway.)

Serge,

That's good.

An ukaz is not the same as a chin or posledovanie. It is not "order" but "decree" or "edict."   'It starts from the day of Great Friday and continues until the Thursday of the fifth week after Easter. And if the great martyr George occurs on Great Friday, or on Holy Saturday, or on Easter itself, the verses of the saint, the canon and the further service are sung on Monday of Bright Week with the service of the day.'

TonyS
Logged

Tómame como al tequila, de un golpe y sin pensarlo. - Ricardo Arjona

I'd be a fool to surrender when I know I can be a contender
and if everbody's a sinner then everybody can be a winner
...
I'll see you when yo
The young fogey
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,684


I'm an alpaca, actually


WWW
« Reply #155 on: December 08, 2004, 10:08:16 AM »

Thanks, Tony. I knew that order has more than one meaning in English and that -â-¦-¦-+ has the meaning of order as a command, not order like ordo (-+-+-ü-+-¦-¦-+-¦-¦-+-+-¦) or rank (-ç-+-+).
Logged

TonyS
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 705


« Reply #156 on: December 08, 2004, 10:13:59 AM »

Tony,

I don't think out my internet postings and ramblings that well  LOL.  So please don't assume that because it was #2 on a list that it was #2 in importance.

I think everyone is quoting Hieromonk Cassian in his book on the Old Calendar.

Anastasios

Anastasios,

It looked to me like you were quoting some source, oh well, my bad.

As for the Hieromonk Cassian book, I discussed this previously with a poster on another board.  IIRC the good father mentions in a footnote that indeed the feast of St. George can fall from Good Friday to Pascha by the Julian calendar.  Technically that is not during Lent.  So, technically he is not wrong, but the statement is confusing.

Without doing all the calculations, I would guess that, on the revised Julian, St. George can fall earlier than contemplated in The Typikon.  Yet why can't the same principle be applied?

I dislike it when people use The Typikon as a weapon.  

It is like using the canons.  Not everything is contemplated in the canons so we use the principle that we find and apply it to other situations.  

T
« Last Edit: December 08, 2004, 10:21:08 AM by TonyS » Logged

Tómame como al tequila, de un golpe y sin pensarlo. - Ricardo Arjona

I'd be a fool to surrender when I know I can be a contender
and if everbody's a sinner then everybody can be a winner
...
I'll see you when yo
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,411



« Reply #157 on: December 08, 2004, 10:16:39 AM »

6) A miracle, which can't be used by itself for proof but which is interesting: when Jerusalem switched to the New Calendar in 1969, the Paschal fire did not come at Pascha in 1970.  Hence, it switched back.

As far as I can tell, this didn't happen. The only account we've ever been able to find is a flagrantly legendary account from A Scientific Examination of the Orthodox Church Calendar whose plausibility we've discussed before. I'l repeat what I said on the last pass: it is preposterous that one has to appeal to a traveller's tale for an event that was surely seen by hundreds of more accessible witnesses.
Logged
TonyS
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 705


« Reply #158 on: December 08, 2004, 10:38:18 AM »

Thanks, Tony. I knew that order has more than one meaning in English and that -â-¦-¦-+ has the meaning of order as a command, not order like ordo (-+-+-ü-+-¦-¦-+-¦-¦-+-+-¦) or rank (-ç-+-+).

Ah.  But both chin and posledovanie are used in the service books when the service is actually given.  Ukaz is purely disciplinary or instructional.  Command would be povelenie, so an ukaz does not translate as command either.   But, an ukaz certainly directs, so perhaps order as in command is better.  

edited to correct spelling/typo
« Last Edit: December 08, 2004, 02:22:43 PM by TonyS » Logged

Tómame como al tequila, de un golpe y sin pensarlo. - Ricardo Arjona

I'd be a fool to surrender when I know I can be a contender
and if everbody's a sinner then everybody can be a winner
...
I'll see you when yo
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,411



« Reply #159 on: December 08, 2004, 10:40:36 AM »

As far as the transference of feasts is concerned, the Annuciation is already a problem either in the Gregorian or Julian calendars, because it can fall in Holy Week or even on Easter proper.  There are always rules for dealing with this sort of thing. (Ironically, I think that using the Julian/Dionysian Paschalion with the Gregorian fixed calendar means that the Annuciation never falls in holy week.)
Logged
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,444


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #160 on: December 08, 2004, 10:55:51 AM »

As far as I can tell, this didn't happen. The only account we've ever been able to find is a flagrantly legendary account from A Scientific Examination of the Orthodox Church Calendar whose plausibility we've discussed before. I'l repeat what I said on the last pass: it is preposterous that one has to appeal to a traveller's tale for an event that was surely seen by hundreds of more accessible witnesses.


You assume that there would be an account readily available in English. Do you read Greek or Arabic?  There could be something cited in those languages.

Anastasios
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodo
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,444


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #161 on: December 08, 2004, 10:57:10 AM »

As far as the transference of feasts is concerned, the Annuciation is already a problem either in the Gregorian or Julian calendars, because it can fall in Holy Week or even on Easter proper.  There are always rules for dealing with this sort of thing. (Ironically, I think that using the Julian/Dionysian Paschalion with the Gregorian fixed calendar means that the Annuciation never falls in holy week.)


Why is that a problem?  Our feast of Kyriopascha is wonderfully arranged.

Anastasios
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodo
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,444


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #162 on: December 08, 2004, 11:00:58 AM »

"I dislike it when people use The Typikon as a weapon.  

It is like using the canons.  Not everything is contemplated in the canons so we use the principle that we find and apply it to other situations."

I don't think it is being used as a weapon. It is being brought out in an intelligent discussion about whether it's better from an Orthodox liturgical standpoint to use the Julian Calendar.  If some facts are off, we can point them out like you have done and move on to the next area of discussion.

The typikon does not stike me as the same as the canons, which as you said have to be interpreted.  The typikon seems to me to be comprehensive in its scope and attempting to provide a prescriptive instruction whereas the canons seem to me to be proscriptive and not comprehensive.

In Christ,

Anastasios
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodo
TonyS
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 705


« Reply #163 on: December 08, 2004, 11:27:02 AM »


The typikon does not stike me as the same as the canons, which as you said have to be interpreted.  The typikon seems to me to be comprehensive in its scope and attempting to provide a prescriptive instruction whereas the canons seem to me to be proscriptive and not comprehensive.

Agreed.  The canons have a different structure as they build on one another and oftentimes quote one another or an earlier canon.  Nevertheless, it seems that the axiom that our Lord used regarding the Sabbath is useful here.  These things are meant to help us not hinder us.  If something is not contemplated within the Tradition the custom has been to look within the Tradition for a similar situation, so that the same principle is applied, even if the particulars are slightly different.  Otherwise we cannot accept any change of anything.  

So, while The Typikon is more comprehensive and prescriptive (and descriptive), it is also more modern.  No one speaks of ekonomia regarding The Typikon (maybe they do but I don't recall it) like they do the canons.  The canons were received by councils, I don't recall that The Typikon has been.  

The Typikon has developed over the years and there are in fact at leat two in use in the Orthodox world.  I have no doubt both resolve the issue of the feast in question when it collides with Holy Week or Pascha.  

TonyS
« Last Edit: December 08, 2004, 11:28:46 AM by TonyS » Logged

Tómame como al tequila, de un golpe y sin pensarlo. - Ricardo Arjona

I'd be a fool to surrender when I know I can be a contender
and if everbody's a sinner then everybody can be a winner
...
I'll see you when yo
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,411



« Reply #164 on: December 08, 2004, 12:18:50 PM »

Why is that a problem?  Our feast of Kyriopascha is wonderfully arranged.

It's a problem because I am certain that, in those years when the two feasts fall on the same date, you don't celebrate them at the same time. I'm sure there is a rule. You're talking as if these matters are difficult to adjust when, in fact, the principles behind the current rules are already sufficient to deal with whatever "problems" arise in correcting the fixed calendar and the Paschalion.
Logged
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,411



« Reply #165 on: December 08, 2004, 12:29:05 PM »

You assume that there would be an account readily available in English. Do you read Greek or Arabic?  There could be something cited in those languages.

You're grasping at straws. We're talking about perhaps the most important liturgical observance in all of Orthodoxy, witnessed by hundreds of people who speak every language of Europe, in an era where photography is omnipresent and communications are easy. If something so shocking had actually happened, there should be hundreds of accounts-- first person accounts. Instead, the only account we have is third- or even fourth-hand, and no name is given to the original witness. If there were a first-hand Greek or Arabic account, it would have been translated into English thirty years ago, because it would have been important.

All the evidences are of a pious tale, formed in the traditional obscure way common to legends-- urban or not. It should be disbelieved.
Logged
Strelets
Стрелец
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 444


« Reply #166 on: December 08, 2004, 01:01:07 PM »

Greetings Sabbas,

I will try to clarify and answer some of the points you raised about my earlier posts, though in my net experience this is one of those subjects that generates more argumentation than enlightenment and that's why Augustine and I bowed out earlier rather than continue in an uncharitable discussion.  Most of us really don't get worked up over our calendars.

As to some peoples objections to the 'Old' Calendarists consider this.
The majority of New Calendar Orthodox churches in America have adopted pews! happily St.Raphaels does not. May I ask how you are supposed to prostrate in church with pews? or even bow properly?

I don't know about "majority"...  Perhaps the majority of Greek and Antiochian parishes, but not the OCA, the jurisdiction to which I belong.  Many Serbian parishes have pews and chairs,  yet it's an Old Calendar jurisdiction.

Ninety-nine percent! The majority of Orthodox world-wide do not follow the modernistic Orthodoxy that is becoming more common throughout America.

Mr. Barnes and other OC's would disagree with that assertion.  The orthodoxinfo site goes after the whole gamut of "modernist" innovations, as they've defined.  The biggest bogey man is ecumenicism, epitomized by the majority of Orthodox jurisdictions partaking in the World Council of Churches.

These American jurisdictions share communion with 99%+ of Orthodox Christians worldwide, while many of the OC jurisdictions not only don't share communion with 99% of Orthodox Christianity, but they often don't commune with each other, either.

The Traditionalists are passing it down undefiled.

Wellllllllll... let's look at a couple of points.  One, in the early Church, or I should say before the 20th century, when disputes and outright heresy erupted within a jurisdiction, the "good" guys, so to speak, fought it out within the jurisdiction until the heretical bishop was removed or  a council was called to settle the matter and retain the unity and integrity of the hierarchical office of the Church.  But what happens today?  One individual decides his bishop is a heretic, and he forms a new jurisdiction out of communion with his former Orthodox brothers and sisters.  This is an innovation.

Then take a look at the baptism issue.  The Russian Church (pre-Revolution, too!) followed a policy of accepting Lutherans and Catholics through chrismation.  One of our cherished Russian saints of the 20th century, St. Elizabeth the New Martyr, was a Lutheran brought into the Church by this method.  ROCOR followed this practice until the early 1970's, when they changed policy and began baptising Protestant and Catholic converts, and in many cases even Orthodox from "world" Orthodox jurisdictions.  This policy was a break from tradition, and difficult to explain when a Lutheran's beliefs were no more false in 1975 than they were in 1905.
Logged

"The creed is very simple, and here is what it is: to believe that there is nothing more beautiful, more courageous, and more perfect than Christ; and there not only isn't, but I tell myself with a jealous love, there cannot be." ~ Fyodor Dostoevsky
Strelets
Стрелец
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 444


« Reply #167 on: December 08, 2004, 01:11:14 PM »

At any rate, literature against the New Calendar is generally accurate.  If there is an error, I think it needs to be pointed out, but I don't think we need to assume malice.

That's a rather broad category - "literature against the New Calendar."  The aforementioned orthodoxinfo site, among others, states the First EC adopted the Julian Calendar.  That's no more accurate than saying the First EC adopted the sundial or whatever hardware (i.e. clocks and calendars) the Romans were using to run their time programs.  Anyone can read the canons of the First EC and learn for themselves this statement isn't true.

I believe what Tony is saying is that the OC assertion that the NC's are doing something dastardly by moving the St. George fast forward is a double-standard on the OC's part, when they in fact are doing the same thing.  Their ultimate premise seems to be that moving a feast around because of anomalies in a calendar is unlawful, by bishop or synod, period.  This might not be elucidated in such words, and might be outright denied, but that's the general thrust of the arguments.

Quote
This is one of the interesting factoids brought up by Old C's, because it's really a glaring problem for the Julian Calendar.  Under the JC, Pascha can fall as late as April 24th or 25th.  So what happens when St. George's feast, on April 23rd, arrives on those years?  The OC parish either ignores it or most likely moves it forward after Pascha.  No canon law or tradition sets a standard for how to handle this, yet the Old Calendarist gives himself a pass to change the festal cycle when these anomalies arise, but declares the New Calendarist as engaging in unlawful behavior.  It's a double standard.

Strelets,

As Anastasios replied and as I quoted from The Typikon, there are rules for this.  

TonyS

I certainly wrote my point badly and incompletely.  Let me clarify.  When I wrote "no canon law or tradition", I wasn't including the typikon because I've been led to believe there are differences between the Slavonic one and others used in Greek and Jerusalem monasteries.  I don't have these documents in front of me, only that's been what I've gathered from following previous discussions.  It's hard to refer to something as an Orthodox tradition, where universality is an important component, if a practice isn't universal.  Also, what's further led me to believe other typikons don't instruct on this transfer of St. George to after Pascha is because some OC's have said that one should celebrate a Pre-sanctified Liturgy on the feast day even though it may fall before Pascha, rather than unlawfully move it afterwards.  This tells me that not only are some following a different typikon, but also that the wording (that references the Lord's Resurrection) of the St. George Troparia is either changed or ignored when holding that Pre-sanctified Liturgy.

If anyone has access to the Greek and Arabic typikons, and can translate, I'd be interested in what's there.
Logged

"The creed is very simple, and here is what it is: to believe that there is nothing more beautiful, more courageous, and more perfect than Christ; and there not only isn't, but I tell myself with a jealous love, there cannot be." ~ Fyodor Dostoevsky
Strelets
Стрелец
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 444


« Reply #168 on: December 08, 2004, 01:31:19 PM »

All of this timing talk about St. George has got me dizzy.  

I would really like to hear someone who is a new calendar apologist address my primary concern.  That is:

ISTM that those who like the newer calendar prefer it for purposes of convenience, which I understand.  If it's a real stumbling block for your brothers and sisters, however, I think it needs a lot of thought.

The answer is that those of us in NC jurisdictions don't regard adopting a new calendar that abides by the Paschal formula as established by the First EC as heretical or unlawful.

Therefore, we follow our bishop's direction on the matter.  If my bishop says tomorrow we are using the Julian Calendar, then so be it, I'll follow it.  It doesn't bother me to use faulty hardware for telling me when to turn a page on my calendar.

Is the New Calendar worth all the noise?  So you think the old-calendarists are extreme in their defense of the old calendar.  So you think their arguments are not to your intellectual standards.  Is the New Calendar really worth the schisms?  Is it really worth it to offend your brothers and sisters in Christ?  Would you be as offended at doing it the way it has always been done as these folks are at changing it for . . . well, why did it get changed?  For spiritual reasons?  

It was changed primarily in the vain hope it would bring western Christians into the Orthodox Church.  But then let's ask this question... why did the Orthodox Church adopt December 25th as the day of the Nativity?  Prior to the fourth century, the Eastern Patriarchates celebrated the Nativity on the same day as the Theophany, until Saint John Chrysostom separated it to its own day - a day that coincided with a major Roman pagan holiday - in an ecumenical act of goodwill towards western Christians who'd adopted that date in their own ecumenical gesture to the pagans.  Following OC logic, we would have to say that Chrysostom was practicing false ecumenicism, and the EP had "abandoned" Orthodoxy.

Look at it another way.  The Russian Church made drastic changes to the liturgical books, architecture, and rituals in the 1500's.  This spawned the Old Believers.  Now I would ask an OC (whom I presume isn't an Old Believer), why do you cleave to these Nikonian "innovations", knowing that it offended your brothers and sisters in Christ who left to form their own jurisdiction?  In my view, the more appropriate question is whether being offended is grounds for starting new jurisdictions, and what precedent was set for this drastic action in early Church, especially when the "real" heresies that raged in the early centuries apparently didn't warrant the creation of ever-multiplying jurisdictions.
Logged

"The creed is very simple, and here is what it is: to believe that there is nothing more beautiful, more courageous, and more perfect than Christ; and there not only isn't, but I tell myself with a jealous love, there cannot be." ~ Fyodor Dostoevsky
TonyS
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 705


« Reply #169 on: December 08, 2004, 02:21:00 PM »

It's a problem because I am certain that, in those years when the two feasts fall on the same date, you don't celebrate them at the same time. I'm sure there is a rule. You're talking as if these matters are difficult to adjust when, in fact, the principles behind the current rules are already sufficient to deal with whatever "problems" arise in correcting the fixed calendar and the Paschalion.


Keble,

No, both are celebrated, hence there exists Kyriopascha in the unmixed calendars.  If you want I can provide the supporting evidence from The Typikon, or you can look at:
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&q=kyriopascha

You will notice that some of the sites are opposing the revised Julian, or the mixed calendar.  That calendar does not provide for Kyriopascha.  The Gregorian for the fixed feasts and Pascha AFAIK does.

If you want the cite from the Slavonic Sabbaite Typikon I can provide that later as I work 2-3, have Vespers then Supper then work again 630-930, then Compline.  I have a cold I need to rest.

Tony
Logged

Tómame como al tequila, de un golpe y sin pensarlo. - Ricardo Arjona

I'd be a fool to surrender when I know I can be a contender
and if everbody's a sinner then everybody can be a winner
...
I'll see you when yo
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,444


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #170 on: December 08, 2004, 02:43:19 PM »

It's a problem because I am certain that, in those years when the two feasts fall on the same date, you don't celebrate them at the same time. I'm sure there is a rule. You're talking as if these matters are difficult to adjust when, in fact, the principles behind the current rules are already sufficient to deal with whatever "problems" arise in correcting the fixed calendar and the Paschalion.


Yes, they are celebrated at the same time. That's why the feast is called Kyriopascha.

Anastasios
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodo
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,444


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #171 on: December 08, 2004, 02:50:54 PM »

Quote
Then take a look at the baptism issue.  The Russian Church (pre-Revolution, too!) followed a policy of accepting Lutherans and Catholics through chrismation.  One of our cherished Russian saints of the 20th century, St. Elizabeth the New Martyr, was a Lutheran brought into the Church by this method.  ROCOR followed this practice until the early 1970's, when they changed policy and began baptising Protestant and Catholic converts, and in many cases even Orthodox from "world" Orthodox jurisdictions.  This policy was a break from tradition, and difficult to explain when a Lutheran's beliefs were no more false in 1975 than they were in 1905.

You are oversimplifying a very complex issue.  Method of reception and the question of whether there is grace in the sacraments of non-Orthodox are not necessarily the same issue.  The Russian Orthodox Church Abroad specifically implemented baptism of converts because at that time people were beginning to assume that because the convert was being received by chrismation, his Lutheran or Catholic baptism counted in and of itself. This is incorrect (except in certain circles where this belief is being forwarded).  The Russian Church, using the principle of economy (which is accepted by most Orthodox, except for the above-mentioned circle of people who want to recognize non-Orthodox baptism in and of itself, against the witness of the fathers, in order to have union with the heterodox), decided to forgo with economy in most circumstances and practice baptism so that those coming to Orthodoxy would be clear that they are entering the Church, not going from one point of the Church to another.

Would you like me to take the time to give an annotated bibliography of both sides? I will do it if you want it, but I don't want to do it if you are not going to check out what I write (I am busy but I like making the time if it is going to be useful).  I have articles that argue both ways, and I came to my own more conservative opinions after examining both sides.

In Christ

Anastasios
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodo
Twenty Nine
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of America
Posts: 187



« Reply #172 on: December 08, 2004, 03:52:44 PM »

Quote
Would you like me to take the time to give an annotated bibliography of both sides?

I am interested!

Gregory
Logged

Finally, brethren, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is gracious, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things. - Philippians 4:8
Strelets
Стрелец
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 444


« Reply #173 on: December 08, 2004, 06:05:17 PM »

Hi, Dustin.

Yes, I agree with what you wrote about the nuances of receiving heterodox Christians.  My point was, going from a practice followed for hundreds of years - granting oeconomia for RCC and Lutheran baptisms because they followed the Trinitarian formula and subscribed to the same Trinitarian belief - and then changing policy abruptly (several months after the OCA was granted autocephaly) is going to raise questions.  The Church grants oeconomia in allowing a second and third marriage... so why not just stop that practice?  It seems obvious to me that mulitple marriages and divorce are more of a problem in the Church these days than Trinitarian, heterodox baptisms.  The answer, I believe, is because adopting a policy of requiring rebaptism is a political statement to make it appear a group is truly Orthodox, and the other guys are not because they don't do it.  It's one more thing to establish a separate, distinct identity.  There's no evidence that someone who is received into the OC by chrismation only in 1975 believes any more than someone in 1900 that his previous baptism was an Orthodox baptism.  I've not even seen a source try to demonstrate such.  Even if we accept that premise hypothetically, this is where the catechumenate process comes in, where the priest gets to know the mindset of the convert and the nature of his previous beliefs.  So what happens if the convert openly states he realizes his previous baptism wasn't whole?  Do you suddenly stop granting oeconomia, when you've been doing it in this situation for hundreds of years?  No one is saying you can't suddenly stop this leniency, but it looks highly unusual.  It looks almost like a lack of faith in the Church's ordained right to make the heterodox baptism whole through chrismation.

But what's more troubling about the re-baptism business is that they are doing it to Orthodox from the mainstream denominations.  What's the rationale for this, except to say your Orthodox baptism wasn't Orthodox and your priest/bishop/jurisdiction isn't Orthodox?  Even more than that, it's saying they are heretics.  By no means is this an across the board practice in ROCOR, but it's not uncommon (and in the Genuine Greek groups, and the various other True Russian offshoots, I believe it's the common practice).  I have an Orthodox friend whose entire family was required to be re-baptised when they left the Antiochians and joined a ROCOR parish.  It's not just my opinion that this sort of thing is the act of a fanatic; I've read ROCOR priests and monastics criticize their own for re-baptising Orthodox who were received into their former jurisdiction through chrismation.  Father Averky from Jordanville wrote as much over in Monachos.net during these baptism discussions.  I can link it if you want.

Thanks for the bibliography offer, but I've read the material on both sides and discussed this with priests, bishops and upper level hierarchy.  My preference has been to fall on the side of the consistent practice of the Church over the course of its existence.  Smiley
Logged

"The creed is very simple, and here is what it is: to believe that there is nothing more beautiful, more courageous, and more perfect than Christ; and there not only isn't, but I tell myself with a jealous love, there cannot be." ~ Fyodor Dostoevsky
cizinec
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 941


There ain't no way but the hard way.


« Reply #174 on: December 14, 2004, 10:12:02 AM »

Quote
The answer is that those of us in NC jurisdictions don't regard adopting a new calendar that abides by the Paschal formula as established by the First EC as heretical or unlawful.

While some here may raise that issue, I certainly did not. I do not dare to declare those who use the NC as heretical. My question was simply asking whether or not the switch to the NC was worth the trouble it has caused.

Quote
Therefore, we follow our bishop's direction on the matter. If my bishop says tomorrow we are using the Julian Calendar, then so be it, I'll follow it. It doesn't bother me to use faulty hardware for telling me when to turn a page on my calendar.

Fair enough, although I am still curious about your personal opinion re:
Quote
ISTM that those who like the newer calendar prefer it for purposes of convenience, which I understand. If it's a real stumbling block for your brothers and sisters, however, I think it needs a lot of thought.

My question:
Quote
Is the New Calendar worth all the noise? So you think the old-calendarists are extreme in their defense of the old calendar. So you think their arguments are not to your intellectual standards. Is the New Calendar really worth the schisms? Is it really worth it to offend your brothers and sisters in Christ? Would you be as offended at doing it the way it has always been done as these folks are at changing it for . . . well, why did it get changed? For spiritual reasons?

Your answer and my comments/questions:

Quote
It was changed primarily in the vain hope it would bring western Christians into the Orthodox Church.
If the hope was in vain, why retain the NC if it is causing your brothers to stumble? That seems counterproductive to me.

Quote
But then let's ask this question... why did the Orthodox Church adopt December 25th as the day of the Nativity? Prior to the fourth century . . . . Following OC logic, we would have to say that Chrysostom was practicing false ecumenicism, and the EP had "abandoned" Orthodoxy.

If in my question I insinuated that NC jurisdictions were using the NC as "false ecumenism", I apologize. Today, the adoption of December 25th as the Nativity Feast has not caused so much scandal in the Church. My question/concern does not involve "false ecumenism" but the opposite, the unneeded offense of our own Orthodox family.

Quote
Look at it another way. The Russian Church made drastic changes to the liturgical books, architecture, and rituals in the 1500's. This spawned the Old Believers. Now I would ask an OC (whom I presume isn't an Old Believer), why do you cleave to these Nikonian "innovations", knowing that it offended your brothers and sisters in Christ who left to form their own jurisdiction?

Whether one does or does not adhere to the Nikonian changes does not alter the fact that many have criticized the way in which these changes were made. The legitimacy of the Old Believer claims is a different topic.

There is, however, a substantial difference in these two controversies. The Nikonian changes were made for theological concerns, right or wrong. In the argument of the NC apologists, I do not hear this type of argument. I simply hear that it is more convenient. If there are theological problems with using the OC, then I think we should look at those.

That is not to say that I am questioning the authority of a bishop. I am simply stating that we are all sinners and make errors. The Nikonian controversy created an unfortunate schism with which we must cope. I wonder why you would point out an unfortunate and, in some people's views, avoidable schism to justify another.

Quote
In my view, the more appropriate question is whether being offended is grounds for starting new jurisdictions, and what precedent was set for this drastic action in early Church, especially when the "real" heresies that raged in the early centuries apparently didn't warrant the creation of ever-multiplying jurisdictions.

My concern is the protection of our brothers and sisters in Christ and the unity of the Faith. Your concern seems to be whether the weak are weak (Huh??) and whether that should bother us. When St. Paul dealt with the eating of meats offered to idols, he emphasized that it was wrong to cause your brother to fall. By what you have told me you get very little to nothing by using the NC. I have not heard that it is theologically improper to follow the OC. I haven't heard anything in support of the NC besides failed gestures to those outside the faith and convenience factors for the NC adherents. However, the spiritually weak (in some people's views) are falling aside (again, in some people's views) because of a practice from which the adherents receive no spiritual benefit (at least none that I have seen and I haven't seen one put forward in this forum).

I am admittedly suspect of the NC and the reasons for its use. Is it simply for convenience? Isn't the spiritual welfare of our Orthodox family more important than this convenience?
Logged

"Brother, your best friend ain't your Momma, it's the Field Artillery."
Strelets
Стрелец
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 444


« Reply #175 on: December 14, 2004, 01:46:44 PM »

Good morning, Cizinec.

While some here may raise that issue, I certainly did not. I do not dare to declare those who use the NC as heretical. My question was simply asking whether or not the switch to the NC was worth the trouble it has caused.

Presuming your position is that following the NC isn't heretical and unlawful, then IMO the trouble is rooted in one's willingness to disobey his bishop and synod. Considering the trouble is found by less than 1% who choose to do their own thing, regardless of how big the presence may seem on the internet, I'm not losing sleep.

If in my question I insinuated that NC jurisdictions were using the NC as "false ecumenism", I apologize. Today, the adoption of December 25th as the Nativity Feast has not caused so much scandal in the Church. My question/concern does not involve "false ecumenism" but the opposite, the unneeded offense of our own Orthodox family.

Are you sure it didn't create some scuffles in moving the Nativity Feast from the Theophany to Dec. 25th? I'm inclined to think memories fade over time, as is the case with the Old Believer scandal in which many "traditionalist" Orthodox in the Russian side of the house aren't too familiar with that history.

There is, however, a substantial difference in these two controversies. The Nikonian changes were made for theological concerns, right or wrong. In the argument of the NC apologists, I do not hear this type of argument. I simply hear that it is more convenient. If there are theological problems with using the OC, then I think we should look at those.

The Nikonian changes were not rooted in theology. They involved the form and structure of worship, the architectural layout of the sanctuary, the positioning of the priest and choir during services, switching from two finger to three finger blessings (thereby breaking the previous traditional symbols involved in the two finger formation), changes in style and content of iconography, and major changes to the language and content of the liturgical books. This question is highly relevant because if one feels it's OK to continue abiding by these changes (i.e. "offending" the Old Believers), then I don't see why one now makes an issue over "offense", whatever that means, to other Orthodox over the calendar - especially when 99% are not offended.

The purpose given for the Nikonian reforms was the errors that had crept into the outward forms of worship and service books, even though one would have to presume many of these errors were there in the beginning and the fact that inaccuracies are always present to some degree is accepted by any sober mind. Likewise, there are astronomical errors in the JC which many NC view as needing corrected with a more accurate calendar. The Old C's will say these errors are OK and don't warrant altering what's become enshrined by God in tradition, but this is the same line of argumentation as used by the Old Believers.

That is not to say that I am questioning the authority of a bishop. I am simply stating that we are all sinners and make errors. The Nikonian controversy created an unfortunate schism with which we must cope. I wonder why you would point out an unfortunate and, in some people's views, avoidable schism to justify another.

That's just the point. We're not justifying schism, we're criticising those behaving schismatically by jumping ship, breaking communion with their Orthodox family, and starting new jurisdictions. I'm sorry, but this looks like one is blaming the legislator for the criminal breaking the law. The bishop and the synod have the right to decide on this matter, among others. One can get offended and do his own thing, but Orthodoxy demands a high degree of humility, and what I'm seeing is a high degree of Protestant sectarianism introduced into the Orthodox Faith. I don't see a precedent for this during the truly heretical controversies in the early Church. I don't know why 99% of the Orthodox faithful (in both JC - Serbian and Moscow Patriarchates - and RJC jurisdictions) have no problem with following their bishops on these matters and find no reason for offense (which is the traditional, humble practice of Orthodoxy), but then we're to believe a few are truer Orthodox for getting angry, offended, and becoming disobedient.

My concern is the protection of our brothers and sisters in Christ and the unity of the Faith. Your concern seems to be whether the weak are weak (??) and whether that should bother us. When St. Paul dealt with the eating of meats offered to idols, he emphasized that it was wrong to cause your brother to fall. By what you have told me you get very little to nothing by using the NC. I have not heard that it is theologically improper to follow the OC. I haven't heard anything in support of the NC besides failed gestures to those outside the faith and convenience factors for the NC adherents. However, the spiritually weak (in some people's views) are falling aside (again, in some people's views) because of a practice from which the adherents receive no spiritual benefit (at least none that I have seen and I haven't seen one put forward in this forum).

I don't quite see a parallel in this teaching of Paul's in regards to the calendar issue. In fact, Paul's words would on the surface seem much more broad. I think to construe these passages to mean we shouldn't do anything for fear it will offend someone from converting to Christ (since, after all, he was talking about pagan gentiles being disturbed) is taking it too far. This is the mess that's occurring in mainstream Protestantism today.

I'm not really certain what you're trying to argue. Are you saying that creating a separate jurisdiction out of communion with "world" Orthodoxy is an example of falling aside, a sign of spiritual weakness? Is it the Church's fault to teach adultery is a sin when it offends a few members, and these few in turn join a sect where they can indulge in their own idea of morality? I simply don't see that the Church "makes" others become disobedient. I don't believe this reasoning is in accord with Orthodox thought. The Church says the bishops have certain prerogatives in the liturgical and spiritual order in their districts, and willfully disobeying your bishop is a sin. If you feel your bishop is doing something "illegal", then come out and say as much and present your case. But if the synod says you're wrong... you're wrong. By bolting the jurisdiction and creating your own, you're teaching the souls who follow you that it's OK to leave home when you don't like the policies of your bishop. And that's exactly what happens, where today these groups keep breaking off into ever more splinter organizations when someone gets "offended."

I am admittedly suspect of the NC and the reasons for its use. Is it simply for convenience? Isn't the spiritual welfare of our Orthodox family more important than this convenience?

I'm no more suspect of the NC than I am of breaking the liturgical order of celebrating the Nativity on December 25th rather than on the Theophany. I'm no more suspicious of the RJC than I am of the three finger blessing, which evidently ticks off a bunch of Old Believers. But I am certainly suspect of those who believe it's legitimate to break communion with their Orthodox brothers and sisters on an item that they admit isn't heretical.
Logged

"The creed is very simple, and here is what it is: to believe that there is nothing more beautiful, more courageous, and more perfect than Christ; and there not only isn't, but I tell myself with a jealous love, there cannot be." ~ Fyodor Dostoevsky
Donna Rose
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 937


« Reply #176 on: December 14, 2004, 02:01:53 PM »

Quote
Quote:
Would you like me to take the time to give an annotated bibliography of both sides?

I am interested!

Gregory

I actually am as well...particularly in writings arguing FOR economy, and what that exactly means in the case of chrismation beyond the layman's definition: "Orthodox chrismation fills in for what was lacking in a heterodox baptism." I am very interested in seeing this definition unpacked and explained from the p.o.v. of the Church, as well as any other writings that clarify exactly what the Church (i.e. the OCA, etc.) believes on this topic.
Logged

hmmmm...
Strelets
Стрелец
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 444


« Reply #177 on: December 14, 2004, 04:46:24 PM »

A thorough writing on reception of heterodox Christians is available on Holy Trinity Cathedral's (OCA) website, called On the Question of the Order of Reception of Persons into the Orthodox Church, Coming to Her from Other Christian Churches by Archimandrite Ambrosius (Pogodin).

http://www.holy-trinity.org/ecclesiology/pogodin-reception/reception-ch0.html
Logged

"The creed is very simple, and here is what it is: to believe that there is nothing more beautiful, more courageous, and more perfect than Christ; and there not only isn't, but I tell myself with a jealous love, there cannot be." ~ Fyodor Dostoevsky
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,444


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #178 on: December 14, 2004, 04:50:58 PM »

Quote
Thanks for the bibliography offer, but I've read the material on both sides and discussed this with priests, bishops and upper level hierarchy.  My preference has been to fall on the side of the consistent practice of the Church over the course of its existence

Sorry I haven't gotten back to this; exams and all.  What you wrote above troubles me because there WAS no consistent practice over the centuries of the Church's existence.

Anastasios
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodo
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,444


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #179 on: December 14, 2004, 04:51:36 PM »

A thorough writing on reception of heterodox Christians is available on Holy Trinity Cathedral's (OCA) website, called On the Question of the Order of Reception of Persons into the Orthodox Church, Coming to Her from Other Christian Churches by Archimandrite Ambrosius (Pogodin).

http://www.holy-trinity.org/ecclesiology/pogodin-reception/reception-ch0.html

That is one of the sources I am preparing on my bibliography for those interested.  It is good but does not address the Greek practice well enough.

Anastasios
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodo
Tags: old calendar New Calendar calendar computus paschalion ecclesiastical moon nomikon faska cheval mort 
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 »   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 0.177 seconds with 72 queries.