OrthodoxChristianity.net
April 16, 2014, 03:21:53 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: The Rules page has been updated.  Please familiarize yourself with its contents!
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags CHAT 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 »   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Old vs. New Calendar?  (Read 190974 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
Punch
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica Metropolitanate
Posts: 4,450



« Reply #1485 on: May 12, 2011, 02:11:35 AM »

Christos Voskrese!
I'm not sure what either of you are talking about. I was responding to Hermogenes saying "some contributors seem to imply that the Julian calendar is part of Christ's teaching; that right after He told us to "Love one another as I have loved you" He told us that His Father prefers the Julian calendar." There are plenty of things that are central to the church that Christ didn't address directly.

You can think the calendar was changed to be more scientifically correct and that there were no other motives besides that; I just don't. For all the talk of it uniting Christians I fail to see that unity.

yah, so some Orthodox celebrate the feasts with heterodox Christians, but now the Orthodox don't all celebrate together! what an absurdity!

has there been any good fruit from the New Calendar?
Any good fruit from hanging onto the Old Calendar?

St. John Maximovic, St. Justin Popovic, St. Nicholii Velimirovic, St. Evgeny Rodinov, and these are just the ones that I can think of off the top of my head.  I don't know of any New Calendar Saints.
Logged

God did not create man equal.  Samuel Colt made man equal.  Blessed be the Peacemaker.
SubdeaconDavid
"...the spread of the light of Orthodoxy among the peoples of all the lands where our Church exists continues as an inseparable part of our mission": Metropolitan Hilarion, First Hierarch of ROCOR
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Russian Orthodox Church Abroad (ROCOR)
Posts: 504


Помилуй мя Боже, по велицей милости Твоей


WWW
« Reply #1486 on: May 12, 2011, 02:12:30 AM »

I'm not sure what either of you are talking about. I was responding to Hermogenes saying "some contributors seem to imply that the Julian calendar is part of Christ's teaching; that right after He told us to "Love one another as I have loved you" He told us that His Father prefers the Julian calendar." There are plenty of things that are central to the church that Christ didn't address directly.

You can think the calendar was changed to be more scientifically correct and that there were no other motives besides that; I just don't. For all the talk of it uniting Christians I fail to see that unity.
No other motives.  One only has to look at Ecumenical Patriarch Meletios IV (Metaxakis) to see motives for change.
Quote
t may be said that from the moment that he was elected there begins a completely new chapter in the history of the Orthodox Church. As a fiery warrior for the political ideas of Panhellenism, an energetic modernist and Church reformer, Meletios initiated a series of reforms and influenced the acceptance of numerous resolutions which had extremely tragic consequences. In 1922 the Synod of his Patriarchate issued an encyclical which recognized the validity of Anglican orders (11) and, from 10 May to 8 June, at Meletios’ initiative a ‘Pan-Orthodox Congress’ took place in Istanbul.

Despite the resolutions of the Councils of 1583 (12), 1587 and 1593, the Congress took the decision to change the calendar of the Orthodox Church. It is remarkable that at this Conference, which goes under various names – ‘Pan-Orthodox Congress’, ‘Orthodox Assembly’ (13) and so on – representatives of only three Local Churches were present: from Greece, Romania and Serbia. At the same time representatives from others, and moreover from the closest – the Patriarchates of Antioch, Jerusalem and Alexandria - decided not to take part. As Oecumenical Patriarch, Meletios chaired the sessions of the meeting, at which the Anglican Bishop Charles Gore was present. At Meletios’ invitation, Gore sat on his right and took part in the work of the Congress (14)[11] Encyclical on Anglican Orders, from the Oecumenical Patriarch to the Presidents of the Particular Eastern Orthodox Churches, 1922, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~ucgbmxd/ patriarc.htm

[12] The Local Council of 1583 in Constantinople was summoned in response to the proposal of Pope Gregory XIII to the Orthodox to accept the new calendar. Patriarch Jeremiah of Constantinople, Patriarch Sylvester of Alexandria, Patriarch Sophronios of Jerusalem and other fathers took part in the Council. The Council clearly said: If any do not follow the customs of the Church, founded in the Oecumenical Councils, including holy Pascha (Easter) and the calendar, which they command us to follow, but wish to follow the newly devised Paschalia and the calendar of the atheist astronomers of the Pope and contradict (the customs of the Church), wanting to reject and sully the dogmas and customs of the Church, which we have inherited from our fathers, may ANATHEMA be on them and may they be excommunicated from the Church and communion with the faithful.

[13] Sibev T., The Question of the Church Calendar, Synodal Publishing, Sofia, 1968, pp. 33-34 (In Bulgarian).

[14] The very name 'Congress' witnesses to the fact that this meeting does not fit in with Orthodox Tradition.
http://www.orthodoxengland.org.uk/meletios.htm


Moreover the whole modernist agenda of Patriarch (later Metropolitan) Meletios IV was outlined at that Council - remarriage for clergy, marriage after ordination, shortening and 'relaxing' the fasts, translating feasts to Sundays etc.

There is no doubt there was and perhaps is a modernist agenda amongst some - not all New calendarists, just as there is extremism in a minority of Old Calendar advocates.  Trying to say that the calendar changes were for scientific reasons is a nonsense.  Just look at the political and cultural milieu in which the reforms came.  

You have an ecumenist Freemason on the Patriarchal throne with an agenda of reform - no doubt well-meaning.  His championing of this - railroading of this through a 'Congress' has nothing to do with a decision that we better get au fait with modern science.  It was - and is about the realpolitik of rapproachment with the world and Western Latin Christendom.
Logged

Visit my blog@  http://orthodoxtasmania.blogspot.com

To the Russians abroad it has been granted to shine in the whole world  the light of Orthodoxy, so that other peoples, seeing their good deeds, might glorify our Father in Heaven, and thus obtain salvation
S John of Shanghai & San Francisco
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 35,604



« Reply #1487 on: May 12, 2011, 02:15:26 AM »

Christos Voskrese!
NONE of this calendar stuff is absolute. We simply agree on a way to do things. I have always belonged to the same Orthodox jurisdiction, and I celebrate the feasts when my church tells me to celebrate them. If they decided to change that, unless the change they made was completely outlandish, impossible, and/or contrary to Scripture, I would most likely adhere to their decision--out of holy obedience, if for no other reason. Surely the meaning of a feast is more important than how the date was calculated? This is where I lose patience with fundamentalists of all stripes, when they obsess about the package to the extent of almost completely ignoring the contents.

AMEN, my thoughts exactly. This entire discussion merits a big yawn...nothing new, nothing persuasive from the schismatics.
   All of Orthodoxy was 'Old' Calendar until modernists made their changes.
Calling canonical Orthodox schismatic is offensive,[/quote]
Did he?  We have had a few posters on this thread who openly declare they are not canonical Orthodox (though "world Orthodox" is the term many of the Churches use)
and not related to any arguments about the merits of the Calendar.
Fits like a book end with the fact that much here isn't related to any argument about the (alleged) demerits of the New Calendar.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 30,399


EXTERMINATE!


« Reply #1488 on: May 12, 2011, 02:40:19 AM »

I'm not sure what either of you are talking about. I was responding to Hermogenes saying "some contributors seem to imply that the Julian calendar is part of Christ's teaching; that right after He told us to "Love one another as I have loved you" He told us that His Father prefers the Julian calendar." There are plenty of things that are central to the church that Christ didn't address directly.

You can think the calendar was changed to be more scientifically correct and that there were no other motives besides that; I just don't. For all the talk of it uniting Christians I fail to see that unity.
No other motives.  One only has to look at Ecumenical Patriarch Meletios IV (Metaxakis) to see motives for change.
You really think Patriarch Meletios had that much control over whether other local jurisdictions adopted the New Calendar? It's all too easy to demonize the New Calendar by attributing it solely to Patriarch Meletios, but I for one don't buy the rhetoric.
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 30,399


EXTERMINATE!


« Reply #1489 on: May 12, 2011, 02:41:24 AM »

Christos Voskrese!
I'm not sure what either of you are talking about. I was responding to Hermogenes saying "some contributors seem to imply that the Julian calendar is part of Christ's teaching; that right after He told us to "Love one another as I have loved you" He told us that His Father prefers the Julian calendar." There are plenty of things that are central to the church that Christ didn't address directly.

You can think the calendar was changed to be more scientifically correct and that there were no other motives besides that; I just don't. For all the talk of it uniting Christians I fail to see that unity.

yah, so some Orthodox celebrate the feasts with heterodox Christians, but now the Orthodox don't all celebrate together! what an absurdity!

has there been any good fruit from the New Calendar?
Any good fruit from hanging onto the Old Calendar?

St. John Maximovic, St. Justin Popovic, St. Nicholii Velimirovic, St. Evgeny Rodinov, and these are just the ones that I can think of off the top of my head.  I don't know of any New Calendar Saints.
What does that prove? That you don't know any saints outside your limited realm of experience?
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 35,604



« Reply #1490 on: May 12, 2011, 03:00:53 AM »

Christos Voskrese!
I'm not sure what either of you are talking about. I was responding to Hermogenes saying "some contributors seem to imply that the Julian calendar is part of Christ's teaching; that right after He told us to "Love one another as I have loved you" He told us that His Father prefers the Julian calendar." There are plenty of things that are central to the church that Christ didn't address directly.

You can think the calendar was changed to be more scientifically correct and that there were no other motives besides that; I just don't. For all the talk of it uniting Christians I fail to see that unity.

yah, so some Orthodox celebrate the feasts with heterodox Christians, but now the Orthodox don't all celebrate together! what an absurdity!

has there been any good fruit from the New Calendar?
Any good fruit from hanging onto the Old Calendar?

St. John Maximovic, St. Justin Popovic, St. Nicholii Velimirovic, St. Evgeny Rodinov, and these are just the ones that I can think of off the top of my head.  I don't know of any New Calendar Saints.
St. Nektarios of Aegina  reposed  and Chrysostomos of Smyrna was martyred just before the calendar was revised, but were glorified by a New Calendar Church.  How do you count them?
You can go to MI and see a living one, Fr. Roman Braga. Or wait for Elder Cleopa's inevitable glorification, along with that of Lynette Hoppe in Albania.  In the meantime, St. Arsenios the Cappadocian reposed on the New Calendar.

Not that it matters much, as for all the claims of a connection between the Old Calndar and St. John Maximovich etc., I'be never seen any proof demonstrated, especially in the face of the great number of sinners we know on the Old Calendar, the calendar of Czar Peter I, Rasputin and a great number of others.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 35,604



« Reply #1491 on: May 12, 2011, 03:23:53 AM »

Christ is risen!
yah, so some Orthodox celebrate the feasts with heterodox Christians, but now the Orthodox don't all celebrate together! what an absurdity!

has there been any good fruit from the New Calendar?

I have not seen any.  Perhaps if I had seen any good fruit, I would not be as opposed to the new calendar.  As to this "Revised Julian Calendar" rot, it is more lies by the devil to confuse the people.  That is why I don't use the terms "Julian" and "Gregorian".  There is the Church Calendar, and there is the innovation of the Greeks known as the New Calendar.  Calling the New Calendar the "Revised Julian" comes from the same marketing dishonesty as calling a product "new and improved" when all you did was make the box smaller and charge more for it.
Quite right.  "Revised Julian" is a disingenuous attempt to make the New Calendar palatable to Orthodox Christians who follow the Church Calendar.  Lets remember.  One day you were all following the 'Julian' Church Calendar
Let's remember that it was a civil calendar. That's how the October Revolution happened in November.
and through the stroke of a pen or two, your New Calendarist hierarchs wiped 13 days of saints from commemoration

and the universe came to a screetching halt.  Sounds pretty Mayan.
and made the devil and the heterodox rejoice.
The heterodox barely noticed if they noticed at all.  I try not to talkk to the devil too much, so I shan't ask him if he really told you that he rejoiced.  I should think that he would be more pleased that the Old Calendarists were rendering to the original Caesar what was God's (2nd Day of Creation).
« Last Edit: May 12, 2011, 03:24:52 AM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 35,604



« Reply #1492 on: May 12, 2011, 03:29:06 AM »

Christ is risen!
I'm not sure what either of you are talking about. I was responding to Hermogenes saying "some contributors seem to imply that the Julian calendar is part of Christ's teaching; that right after He told us to "Love one another as I have loved you" He told us that His Father prefers the Julian calendar." There are plenty of things that are central to the church that Christ didn't address directly.

You can think the calendar was changed to be more scientifically correct and that there were no other motives besides that; I just don't. For all the talk of it uniting Christians I fail to see that unity.
No other motives.  One only has to look at Ecumenical Patriarch Meletios IV (Metaxakis) to see motives for change.
Quote
t may be said that from the moment that he was elected there begins a completely new chapter in the history of the Orthodox Church. As a fiery warrior for the political ideas of Panhellenism, an energetic modernist and Church reformer, Meletios initiated a series of reforms and influenced the acceptance of numerous resolutions which had extremely tragic consequences. In 1922 the Synod of his Patriarchate issued an encyclical which recognized the validity of Anglican orders (11) and, from 10 May to 8 June, at Meletios’ initiative a ‘Pan-Orthodox Congress’ took place in Istanbul.

Despite the resolutions of the Councils of 1583 (12), 1587 and 1593, the Congress took the decision to change the calendar of the Orthodox Church. It is remarkable that at this Conference, which goes under various names – ‘Pan-Orthodox Congress’, ‘Orthodox Assembly’ (13) and so on – representatives of only three Local Churches were present: from Greece, Romania and Serbia. At the same time representatives from others, and moreover from the closest – the Patriarchates of Antioch, Jerusalem and Alexandria - decided not to take part. As Oecumenical Patriarch, Meletios chaired the sessions of the meeting, at which the Anglican Bishop Charles Gore was present. At Meletios’ invitation, Gore sat on his right and took part in the work of the Congress (14)[11] Encyclical on Anglican Orders, from the Oecumenical Patriarch to the Presidents of the Particular Eastern Orthodox Churches, 1922, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~ucgbmxd/ patriarc.htm

[12] The Local Council of 1583 in Constantinople was summoned in response to the proposal of Pope Gregory XIII to the Orthodox to accept the new calendar. Patriarch Jeremiah of Constantinople, Patriarch Sylvester of Alexandria, Patriarch Sophronios of Jerusalem and other fathers took part in the Council. The Council clearly said: If any do not follow the customs of the Church, founded in the Oecumenical Councils, including holy Pascha (Easter) and the calendar, which they command us to follow, but wish to follow the newly devised Paschalia and the calendar of the atheist astronomers of the Pope and contradict (the customs of the Church), wanting to reject and sully the dogmas and customs of the Church, which we have inherited from our fathers, may ANATHEMA be on them and may they be excommunicated from the Church and communion with the faithful.

[13] Sibev T., The Question of the Church Calendar, Synodal Publishing, Sofia, 1968, pp. 33-34 (In Bulgarian).

[14] The very name 'Congress' witnesses to the fact that this meeting does not fit in with Orthodox Tradition.
http://www.orthodoxengland.org.uk/meletios.htm


Moreover the whole modernist agenda of Patriarch (later Metropolitan) Meletios IV was outlined at that Council - remarriage for clergy, marriage after ordination, shortening and 'relaxing' the fasts, translating feasts to Sundays etc.

There is no doubt there was and perhaps is a modernist agenda amongst some - not all New calendarists, just as there is extremism in a minority of Old Calendar advocates.  Trying to say that the calendar changes were for scientific reasons is a nonsense.  Just look at the political and cultural milieu in which the reforms came.  
The collapse of anachronism in the flames of WWI
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
jckstraw72
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,174



« Reply #1493 on: May 12, 2011, 08:44:41 AM »

which one of my posts did not make sense? i'd be glad to explain them to you.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2011, 08:49:14 AM by jckstraw72 » Logged
jah777
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 1,599


« Reply #1494 on: May 12, 2011, 09:00:56 AM »

Christ is risen!
The date of pascha is on the solar calendar: the paschal full moon has to come after the equinox. We should keep the equinox, i.e. when day and night are equal.

You mean using the first sunday after the first (real) full moon after the (real) equinox like the council calls for?  Huh

yes, imagine doing exactly what the Fathers say. Quite a novel concept.


Quote
From St. Nikodemos of the Holy Mountain, The Pedalion (Rudder), p.9, footnote

“For let [the Latins] know that the Ecumenical Synods held after the First Synod, and the rest of the Fathers, wise as they were, could see, of course, that the equinox had deviated a great deal [from where it was previously]; nevertheless, they did not wish to change its position from March 21, where the First Synod found it, because they preferred agreement and union of the Church to accuracy in the matter of the equinox, which causes no confusion in fixing the date of our Pascha, nor any harm to piety.”

« Last Edit: May 12, 2011, 09:01:11 AM by jah777 » Logged
SubdeaconDavid
"...the spread of the light of Orthodoxy among the peoples of all the lands where our Church exists continues as an inseparable part of our mission": Metropolitan Hilarion, First Hierarch of ROCOR
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Russian Orthodox Church Abroad (ROCOR)
Posts: 504


Помилуй мя Боже, по велицей милости Твоей


WWW
« Reply #1495 on: May 12, 2011, 09:39:47 AM »

Christ is risen!
I'm not sure what either of you are talking about. I was responding to Hermogenes saying "some contributors seem to imply that the Julian calendar is part of Christ's teaching; that right after He told us to "Love one another as I have loved you" He told us that His Father prefers the Julian calendar." There are plenty of things that are central to the church that Christ didn't address directly.

You can think the calendar was changed to be more scientifically correct and that there were no other motives besides that; I just don't. For all the talk of it uniting Christians I fail to see that unity.
No other motives.  One only has to look at Ecumenical Patriarch Meletios IV (Metaxakis) to see motives for change.
Quote
t may be said that from the moment that he was elected there begins a completely new chapter in the history of the Orthodox Church. As a fiery warrior for the political ideas of Panhellenism, an energetic modernist and Church reformer, Meletios initiated a series of reforms and influenced the acceptance of numerous resolutions which had extremely tragic consequences. In 1922 the Synod of his Patriarchate issued an encyclical which recognized the validity of Anglican orders (11) and, from 10 May to 8 June, at Meletios’ initiative a ‘Pan-Orthodox Congress’ took place in Istanbul.

Despite the resolutions of the Councils of 1583 (12), 1587 and 1593, the Congress took the decision to change the calendar of the Orthodox Church. It is remarkable that at this Conference, which goes under various names – ‘Pan-Orthodox Congress’, ‘Orthodox Assembly’ (13) and so on – representatives of only three Local Churches were present: from Greece, Romania and Serbia. At the same time representatives from others, and moreover from the closest – the Patriarchates of Antioch, Jerusalem and Alexandria - decided not to take part. As Oecumenical Patriarch, Meletios chaired the sessions of the meeting, at which the Anglican Bishop Charles Gore was present. At Meletios’ invitation, Gore sat on his right and took part in the work of the Congress (14)[11] Encyclical on Anglican Orders, from the Oecumenical Patriarch to the Presidents of the Particular Eastern Orthodox Churches, 1922, http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~ucgbmxd/ patriarc.htm

[12] The Local Council of 1583 in Constantinople was summoned in response to the proposal of Pope Gregory XIII to the Orthodox to accept the new calendar. Patriarch Jeremiah of Constantinople, Patriarch Sylvester of Alexandria, Patriarch Sophronios of Jerusalem and other fathers took part in the Council. The Council clearly said: If any do not follow the customs of the Church, founded in the Oecumenical Councils, including holy Pascha (Easter) and the calendar, which they command us to follow, but wish to follow the newly devised Paschalia and the calendar of the atheist astronomers of the Pope and contradict (the customs of the Church), wanting to reject and sully the dogmas and customs of the Church, which we have inherited from our fathers, may ANATHEMA be on them and may they be excommunicated from the Church and communion with the faithful.

[13] Sibev T., The Question of the Church Calendar, Synodal Publishing, Sofia, 1968, pp. 33-34 (In Bulgarian).

[14] The very name 'Congress' witnesses to the fact that this meeting does not fit in with Orthodox Tradition.
http://www.orthodoxengland.org.uk/meletios.htm


Moreover the whole modernist agenda of Patriarch (later Metropolitan) Meletios IV was outlined at that Council - remarriage for clergy, marriage after ordination, shortening and 'relaxing' the fasts, translating feasts to Sundays etc.

There is no doubt there was and perhaps is a modernist agenda amongst some - not all New calendarists, just as there is extremism in a minority of Old Calendar advocates.  Trying to say that the calendar changes were for scientific reasons is a nonsense.  Just look at the political and cultural milieu in which the reforms came.  
The collapse of anachronism in the flames of WWI
I don't follow your comment at all.  Are you linking the adoption of the New Calendar to some kind of "out with the old and in with the new" spirit caused by the collapse of the monarchies of Germany, Austria-Hungary and the fall of Orthodox monarchy in Russia?  The collapse of the Ottoman Empire? What was anachronistic that was obliterated by the flames of the Great War?  The Russian Orthodox Church, martyred under the godless communists? Please explain.
Logged

Visit my blog@  http://orthodoxtasmania.blogspot.com

To the Russians abroad it has been granted to shine in the whole world  the light of Orthodoxy, so that other peoples, seeing their good deeds, might glorify our Father in Heaven, and thus obtain salvation
S John of Shanghai & San Francisco
jckstraw72
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,174



« Reply #1496 on: May 12, 2011, 09:40:15 AM »

Christos Voskrese!
I'm not sure what either of you are talking about. I was responding to Hermogenes saying "some contributors seem to imply that the Julian calendar is part of Christ's teaching; that right after He told us to "Love one another as I have loved you" He told us that His Father prefers the Julian calendar." There are plenty of things that are central to the church that Christ didn't address directly.

You can think the calendar was changed to be more scientifically correct and that there were no other motives besides that; I just don't. For all the talk of it uniting Christians I fail to see that unity.

yah, so some Orthodox celebrate the feasts with heterodox Christians, but now the Orthodox don't all celebrate together! what an absurdity!

has there been any good fruit from the New Calendar?
Any good fruit from hanging onto the Old Calendar?

St. John Maximovic, St. Justin Popovic, St. Nicholii Velimirovic, St. Evgeny Rodinov, and these are just the ones that I can think of off the top of my head.  I don't know of any New Calendar Saints.

well come on now, thats silly. i think someone already mentioned Elder Cleopa, and there are living ones like Fr. Roman and Elder Ephraim. Also, St. George of Drama reposed in Greece in 1959, so he was on the New Calendar for 30 yrs or so.
Logged
SubdeaconDavid
"...the spread of the light of Orthodoxy among the peoples of all the lands where our Church exists continues as an inseparable part of our mission": Metropolitan Hilarion, First Hierarch of ROCOR
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Russian Orthodox Church Abroad (ROCOR)
Posts: 504


Помилуй мя Боже, по велицей милости Твоей


WWW
« Reply #1497 on: May 12, 2011, 09:51:49 AM »

You really think Patriarch Meletios had that much control over whether other local jurisdictions adopted the New Calendar? It's all too easy to demonize the New Calendar by attributing it solely to Patriarch Meletios, but I for one don't buy the rhetoric.
[/quote]
Patriarch Meltios IV (Metaxakis) was pretty influential and a significant figure in the modernist drive to adopt the New Calendar and certainly an incredibly colorful character.  Chainsmoker of Turkish cigarettes, beaten up in his own Patriarchal Palace, anathema to the Greek King, sat Church of England Archbishop Cosmo Lang at his right hand in the 1923 "Congress".... a man who recognised Anglican priestly orders and by extension the branch theory of a divided Church which Anglicans subscribe to.  Now there is a lot more in the politics and culture of this than a desire to get au fait with the alleged merits of the Gregorian calendar and western science. There is also more to Meltios IV (Metxakis)'s understanding of the theology of the Church that is very disturbing to any orthodox Orthodox Christian. I am not saying New Calendarists today support in the main such an ecclesiology. There is far more evidence than rhetoric when it comes to the ecclesial and political views of the late Meletios IV (Metaxakis). Nothing in his tempestuous ecclesiastical ladder-climb predicates that he made a decision to embrace the new Calendar for scientific reasons.
Quote
Orthodox Christians have much more pressing concerns than astronomy, the chief of these being the mastering of the science of spiritual life, viz., the struggle with sin and passions, both those found internally within a man and those found externally in his surrounding environment. This science of sciences directly involves one in the future, eternal life, and is infinitely more important than the present, temporal life, despite the fact that it is unfortunately neglected and forgotten today. The Holy Fathers discharged us from the onerous task of composing a liturgical calendar and accompanying services, so that by utilizing what they have passed on to us, by way of Holy Tradition, we might be able to pursue the universally essential fight for salvation unencumbered by technical distractions. With the eternal salvation of the human soul as the focal point, the imaginary problem of "meticulosity" posed by the Gregorian calendar reformers not only pales, but literally vanishes, as a consideration, in the same way that in mathematics every finite number in relation to infinity is equal to zero. Therefore, even if the "concern" of the Gregorian Paschalists were well grounded, if it displaces our most important concern and objective—salvation—, it becomes groundless and senseless. What need is there to "reinvent" that which has already been established once and for all times?
http://orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/calsci_ch4.aspx



« Last Edit: May 12, 2011, 10:02:06 AM by SubdeaconDavid » Logged

Visit my blog@  http://orthodoxtasmania.blogspot.com

To the Russians abroad it has been granted to shine in the whole world  the light of Orthodoxy, so that other peoples, seeing their good deeds, might glorify our Father in Heaven, and thus obtain salvation
S John of Shanghai & San Francisco
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 30,399


EXTERMINATE!


« Reply #1498 on: May 12, 2011, 10:01:42 AM »

You really think Patriarch Meletios had that much control over whether other local jurisdictions adopted the New Calendar? It's all too easy to demonize the New Calendar by attributing it solely to Patriarch Meletios, but I for one don't buy the rhetoric.
Patriarch Meltios IV (Metaxakis) was pretty influential and a significant figure in the modernist drive to adopt the New Calendar and certainly an incredibly colorful character.  Chainsmoker of Turkish cigarettes, beaten up in his own Patriarchal Palace, anathema to the Greek King, sat Church of England Archbishop Cosmo Lang at his right hand in the 1923 "Congress".... a man who recognised Anglican priestly orders and by extension the branch theory of a divided Church which Anglicans subscribe to.  Now there is a lot more in the politics and culture of this than a desire to get au fait with the alleged merits of the Gregorian calendar and western science. There is also more to Meltios IV (Metxakis)'s understanding of the theology of the Church that is very disturbing to any orthodox Orthodox Christian. I am not saying New Calendarists today support in the main such a view at all. There is far more evidence than rhetoric when it comes to the ecclesial and political views of the late Meletios IV (Metaxakis).
But nothing you say in the above even comes close to proving the authority you imply he had over other local churches.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2011, 10:02:12 AM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
SubdeaconDavid
"...the spread of the light of Orthodoxy among the peoples of all the lands where our Church exists continues as an inseparable part of our mission": Metropolitan Hilarion, First Hierarch of ROCOR
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Russian Orthodox Church Abroad (ROCOR)
Posts: 504


Помилуй мя Боже, по велицей милости Твоей


WWW
« Reply #1499 on: May 12, 2011, 10:17:57 AM »

You really think Patriarch Meletios had that much control over whether other local jurisdictions adopted the New Calendar? It's all too easy to demonize the New Calendar by attributing it solely to Patriarch Meletios, but I for one don't buy the rhetoric.
Patriarch Meltios IV (Metaxakis) was pretty influential and a significant figure in the modernist drive to adopt the New Calendar and certainly an incredibly colorful character.  Chainsmoker of Turkish cigarettes, beaten up in his own Patriarchal Palace, anathema to the Greek King, sat Church of England Archbishop Cosmo Lang at his right hand in the 1923 "Congress".... a man who recognised Anglican priestly orders and by extension the branch theory of a divided Church which Anglicans subscribe to.  Now there is a lot more in the politics and culture of this than a desire to get au fait with the alleged merits of the Gregorian calendar and western science. There is also more to Meltios IV (Metxakis)'s understanding of the theology of the Church that is very disturbing to any orthodox Orthodox Christian. I am not saying New Calendarists today support in the main such a view at all. There is far more evidence than rhetoric when it comes to the ecclesial and political views of the late Meletios IV (Metaxakis).
But nothing you say in the above even comes close to proving the authority you imply he had over other local churches.
Ecumenical Patriarch Meletios (Metaxakis) was clearly eager for the authority of the Ecumenical Throne, and to say that he had no influence is absurd. He was part of the Church of Greece.  He fostered pan-Orthodox influence via ecumenism. You say "authority".  I say "influence".  For some there was no doubt authority in the Ecumenical Patriarch's views.  Yet even after his deposition as Patriarch, as a Metropolitan, he maintained his influence internationally via ecumenism.  It was something he had cultivated in Greece.

Quote
Under the indirect influence of powerful progressive and revolutionary ideas, which had their origins in and were advocated by those initiated into Masonry [which strives to unite everyone, but denies the exclusive truth of Orthodoxy], religious free-thinking was introduced into Orthodoxy. This free-thinking was especially characteristic of the so-called Russian religious renaissance during the first decades of this century. Religious free-thinking prepared the way for renovationism in Russia — the first manifestations of modernism to form itself into an "Orthodox Church" ( in fact a new, Eastern rite Protestantism) in our century. Renovationism was a religious movement typified in post-revolutionary Russia, in its most extreme and crude forms, and in the Greek Orthodox world of the 1920's, with corresponding similarities. Illustrations of renovationist tendencies are the Council of the "Living Church" in Russia (opened April 16/29, 1923), and the "Pan-Orthodox Congress" in Constantinople (May 10–June 8, 1923), which took place at nearly the same time. In spite of the fact that the Constantinople Congress made a resolution in defense of Patriarch Tikhon and thus, in a way, separated itself from the Living Church, the decisions of both forums were nonetheless very similar: they both changed the Church Calendar, allowed second marriages for clergy and published other similar declarations, discussing reforms in the spirit of religious liberalism, unthinkable only a few years previously.

http://orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/photii_1.aspx

Elder Gabriel of Mt. Athos, onetime Abbott of Dionysiou urges the Greek Church:

Quote
There is only one solution to the Calendar problem, and that is the restoration of the Traditional (Old) Calendar. This is to be effected by the common decision of the Holy Synod of the Church of Greece and the Greek Government. It can easily be done, provided there are humility and good will. Just as the Church of Greece unilaterally introduced the New Calendar, in the same manner she can at once return to the Old Calendar.

We hope that our Government will decide to bring peace to the Church, and that the Holy Synod, like an affectionate Mother, caring even for the least of her children, will approve of the restoration of the Traditional Calendar for the sake of unity. This will result in all the Greeks, with one mouth and one heart, glorifying at the same time the All-holy name of our blessed God.

To err is human, but to abide in error is inexcusable and sinful. The restoration of the Old Calendar will bring peace to the conscience of all. It will bring unity and peace to our Church, and will strengthen faith, which is so much needed by todays spiritually shaken world. There will be great joy in Heaven and on Earth for the gladsome event of the return of the Greeks to their sacred Traditions. We whole-heartedly pray for this.
http://orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/eldergabriel_calendar.aspx

Please make every effort to conform to forum rules. Serb1389.
« Last Edit: May 13, 2011, 12:06:56 AM by serb1389 » Logged

Visit my blog@  http://orthodoxtasmania.blogspot.com

To the Russians abroad it has been granted to shine in the whole world  the light of Orthodoxy, so that other peoples, seeing their good deeds, might glorify our Father in Heaven, and thus obtain salvation
S John of Shanghai & San Francisco
podkarpatska
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 7,544


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #1500 on: May 12, 2011, 10:29:11 AM »

You really think Patriarch Meletios had that much control over whether other local jurisdictions adopted the New Calendar? It's all too easy to demonize the New Calendar by attributing it solely to Patriarch Meletios, but I for one don't buy the rhetoric.
Patriarch Meltios IV (Metaxakis) was pretty influential and a significant figure in the modernist drive to adopt the New Calendar and certainly an incredibly colorful character.  Chainsmoker of Turkish cigarettes, beaten up in his own Patriarchal Palace, anathema to the Greek King, sat Church of England Archbishop Cosmo Lang at his right hand in the 1923 "Congress".... a man who recognised Anglican priestly orders and by extension the branch theory of a divided Church which Anglicans subscribe to.  Now there is a lot more in the politics and culture of this than a desire to get au fait with the alleged merits of the Gregorian calendar and western science. There is also more to Meltios IV (Metxakis)'s understanding of the theology of the Church that is very disturbing to any orthodox Orthodox Christian. I am not saying New Calendarists today support in the main such a view at all. There is far more evidence than rhetoric when it comes to the ecclesial and political views of the late Meletios IV (Metaxakis).
But nothing you say in the above even comes close to proving the authority you imply he had over other local churches.

Indeed, I fail to see where any of the allegations about what he did or didn't do in the 1920's or what his 'grand plan' (if any) may have been, have any currency regarding the behavior of Church leaders today. (I know, this statement of mine will cause some to trot out the same tired canards and falsehoods about most current 'world Orthodox' Bishops from the current Ecumenical Patriarch, to Metropolitan Hilarion to Metropolitan Jonah and so on and on and on down....) For goodness sake, +Patriarch Meletios has been dead for decades yet he remains the 'boogeyman' for every individual and group which professes its disillusionment with canonical Orthodoxy.

So, to those who sincerely believe all of that, and constantly restate it over and over again (just Google "Meletios IV" for a simple biography of the man and you will find page and page of rhetoric before you encounter a non-biased bio.), please  - recognize and accept the reality that most of us in the "world Orthodox"  with sadness in our hearts view many of you and many of your churches as being in schism from the Orthodox Church.( fwi: I don't mean ROCOR.) I fully understand that many of you likewise regard the rest of us as at least being schismatic and to some, even heretics, so let the chips fall where they may. I am not losing any sleep over your opinions. (I obviously do not include Old Calendarists who form the majority of the faithful within the canonical Church as such; I simply don't agree with your arguments in support of the Old Calendar. I just think that there are better arguments to support the old ways than trotting out the corpse of +Patriarch Meletios.)

Again, for the record, my parish is Old Calendar but I view it as a matter of discipline - not faith as was argued forcefully by Melodist earlier.

Finally, I sincerely doubt that restoration of the Old Calendar would in any way end divisions within our Orthodox world as there would still remain differences in terms of the role of monastic and ascetic influence on everyday Christians, extremism in praxis, what language to use and so on. The disaffected will always find something to focus upon.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2011, 10:31:46 AM by podkarpatska » Logged
Hermogenes
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 493



« Reply #1501 on: May 12, 2011, 10:36:48 AM »

Christ is risen!
yah, so some Orthodox celebrate the feasts with heterodox Christians, but now the Orthodox don't all celebrate together! what an absurdity!

has there been any good fruit from the New Calendar?

I have not seen any.  Perhaps if I had seen any good fruit, I would not be as opposed to the new calendar.  As to this "Revised Julian Calendar" rot, it is more lies by the devil to confuse the people.  That is why I don't use the terms "Julian" and "Gregorian".  There is the Church Calendar, and there is the innovation of the Greeks known as the New Calendar.  Calling the New Calendar the "Revised Julian" comes from the same marketing dishonesty as calling a product "new and improved" when all you did was make the box smaller and charge more for it.
Quite right.  "Revised Julian" is a disingenuous attempt to make the New Calendar palatable to Orthodox Christians who follow the Church Calendar.  Lets remember.  One day you were all following the 'Julian' Church Calendar
Let's remember that it was a civil calendar. That's how the October Revolution happened in November.
and through the stroke of a pen or two, your New Calendarist hierarchs wiped 13 days of saints from commemoration

and the universe came to a screetching halt.  Sounds pretty Mayan.
and made the devil and the heterodox rejoice.
The heterodox barely noticed if they noticed at all.  I try not to talkk to the devil too much, so I shan't ask him if he really told you that he rejoiced.  I should think that he would be more pleased that the Old Calendarists were rendering to the original Caesar what was God's (2nd Day of Creation).

I should think he'd be really pleased to have sown so much discord over dates. Is today May 12, or is it 13 days from now? I'd imagine him giggling quite contentedly at having got people so worked up over such an issue. I don't really mind if people want to use Julius Caesar's calendar. I wouldn't mind if my own parish wanted to use it. The year would still haver the same number of days, the same feasts, etc.

Logged
podkarpatska
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 7,544


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #1502 on: May 12, 2011, 10:37:45 AM »

Christ is risen!
yah, so some Orthodox celebrate the feasts with heterodox Christians, but now the Orthodox don't all celebrate together! what an absurdity!

has there been any good fruit from the New Calendar?

I have not seen any.  Perhaps if I had seen any good fruit, I would not be as opposed to the new calendar.  As to this "Revised Julian Calendar" rot, it is more lies by the devil to confuse the people.  That is why I don't use the terms "Julian" and "Gregorian".  There is the Church Calendar, and there is the innovation of the Greeks known as the New Calendar.  Calling the New Calendar the "Revised Julian" comes from the same marketing dishonesty as calling a product "new and improved" when all you did was make the box smaller and charge more for it.
Quite right.  "Revised Julian" is a disingenuous attempt to make the New Calendar palatable to Orthodox Christians who follow the Church Calendar.  Lets remember.  One day you were all following the 'Julian' Church Calendar
Let's remember that it was a civil calendar. That's how the October Revolution happened in November.
and through the stroke of a pen or two, your New Calendarist hierarchs wiped 13 days of saints from commemoration

and the universe came to a screetching halt.  Sounds pretty Mayan.
and made the devil and the heterodox rejoice.
The heterodox barely noticed if they noticed at all.  I try not to talkk to the devil too much, so I shan't ask him if he really told you that he rejoiced.  I should think that he would be more pleased that the Old Calendarists were rendering to the original Caesar what was God's (2nd Day of Creation).

I should think he'd be really pleased to have sown so much discord over dates. Is today May 12, or is it 13 days from now? I'd imagine him giggling quite contentedly at having got people so worked up over such an issue. I don't really mind if people want to use Julius Caesar's calendar. I wouldn't mind if my own parish wanted to use it. The year would still haver the same number of days, the same feasts, etc.



From my point of view, vice versa.

Logged
Punch
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica Metropolitanate
Posts: 4,450



« Reply #1503 on: May 12, 2011, 10:58:47 AM »

Christos Voskrese!
I'm not sure what either of you are talking about. I was responding to Hermogenes saying "some contributors seem to imply that the Julian calendar is part of Christ's teaching; that right after He told us to "Love one another as I have loved you" He told us that His Father prefers the Julian calendar." There are plenty of things that are central to the church that Christ didn't address directly.

You can think the calendar was changed to be more scientifically correct and that there were no other motives besides that; I just don't. For all the talk of it uniting Christians I fail to see that unity.

yah, so some Orthodox celebrate the feasts with heterodox Christians, but now the Orthodox don't all celebrate together! what an absurdity!

has there been any good fruit from the New Calendar?
Any good fruit from hanging onto the Old Calendar?

St. John Maximovic, St. Justin Popovic, St. Nicholii Velimirovic, St. Evgeny Rodinov, and these are just the ones that I can think of off the top of my head.  I don't know of any New Calendar Saints.
What does that prove? That you don't know any saints outside your limited realm of experience?

Well, gee - I don't know.  What does the original question try to prove?  Of course, you really don't know and don't want to.  This is just another of your long series of "stir the pot" posts with no or little value.  And just so you know, not that you are capable of being educated, I may know of far more saints than you may imagine.  My rather extensive library contains multiple volumes of lives of Saints, including ones from this century.  The lives of the Saints (or the continuation of the Acts of the Apostles, as I like to call them) are among my more favored readings.  I actually even had the privileged of working with one of the translators on editing one volume.  I have also had the wonderful opportunity to see some of them during a major surgery that I had years back.  I have always believed in them and loved them, and they were there when I needed them.  It is not my fault that the OCA and Antioch have not produced that many recently, or else have not chosen to get the word out about them.  It is my love for the Saints that is the reason that I despise the New Calendar to this degree.  Rather than worship these great men and women, in whom God is Glorified, in unity, your schismatic minority has chosen to break that unity so you can be closer to the World.  What does THAT prove, other than you would rather worship with masons, heretics and the Pope than the Saints of the Orthodox Church.  Perhaps you could enlighten us with something spiritual for once and tell us of YOUR vast experience with the Saints.  Perhaps then I could be educated and supplement my limited realm of experience.
Logged

God did not create man equal.  Samuel Colt made man equal.  Blessed be the Peacemaker.
podkarpatska
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 7,544


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #1504 on: May 12, 2011, 11:16:07 AM »

Christos Voskrese!
I'm not sure what either of you are talking about. I was responding to Hermogenes saying "some contributors seem to imply that the Julian calendar is part of Christ's teaching; that right after He told us to "Love one another as I have loved you" He told us that His Father prefers the Julian calendar." There are plenty of things that are central to the church that Christ didn't address directly.

You can think the calendar was changed to be more scientifically correct and that there were no other motives besides that; I just don't. For all the talk of it uniting Christians I fail to see that unity.

yah, so some Orthodox celebrate the feasts with heterodox Christians, but now the Orthodox don't all celebrate together! what an absurdity!

has there been any good fruit from the New Calendar?
Any good fruit from hanging onto the Old Calendar?

St. John Maximovic, St. Justin Popovic, St. Nicholii Velimirovic, St. Evgeny Rodinov, and these are just the ones that I can think of off the top of my head.  I don't know of any New Calendar Saints.
What does that prove? That you don't know any saints outside your limited realm of experience?

Well, gee - I don't know.  What does the original question try to prove?  Of course, you really don't know and don't want to.  This is just another of your long series of "stir the pot" posts with no or little value.  And just so you know, not that you are capable of being educated, I may know of far more saints than you may imagine.  My rather extensive library contains multiple volumes of lives of Saints, including ones from this century.  The lives of the Saints (or the continuation of the Acts of the Apostles, as I like to call them) are among my more favored readings.  I actually even had the privileged of working with one of the translators on editing one volume.  I have also had the wonderful opportunity to see some of them during a major surgery that I had years back.  I have always believed in them and loved them, and they were there when I needed them.  It is not my fault that the OCA and Antioch have not produced that many recently, or else have not chosen to get the word out about them.  It is my love for the Saints that is the reason that I despise the New Calendar to this degree.  Rather than worship these great men and women, in whom God is Glorified, in unity, your schismatic minority has chosen to break that unity so you can be closer to the World.  What does THAT prove, other than you would rather worship with masons, heretics and the Pope than the Saints of the Orthodox Church.  Perhaps you could enlighten us with something spiritual for once and tell us of YOUR vast experience with the Saints.  Perhaps then I could be educated and supplement my limited realm of experience.

An honest question..Since you state your affiliation as "Serbian Orthodox Jurisdiction: New Gracanica Metropolitanate"  and often speak of your affection for ROCOR, how can you, as an individual, assert that others within the conciliar and canonical sphere of both of these esteemed jurisdictions are 'schismatics?' 

I am comfortable in asserting that those who profess allegiance to jurisdictions apart from the metaphorical 'omophorion' of canonical Orthodoxy are, in fact, in schism from my point of view, but I would not, as a member of the Church, presume to call others who are within that 'omophorion' by such a term in the absence of a hierarchical determination that found that to be the case.

If I honestly believed that my hierarchs had departed from Orthodoxy by not making such a determination, I would be bound by my conscience to leave such a body and find communion with another for the sake of my eternal salvation.

Am I missing something?
Logged
stashko
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: ИСТОЧНИ ПРАВОСЛАВНИ СРБИН
Jurisdiction: Non Ecumenist Free Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 4,998


Wonderworking Sitka Icon


« Reply #1505 on: May 12, 2011, 11:24:24 AM »

About This Patriarch it's Confusing... Huh

This Alone Makes Me yearn For the Non Canonical  Orthodox Churches....

This Patriarch Seems to Me ,to be a Sower Of Discord, Why wasn't he Condemed ,Plus being a  Freemason, Shouldn't that Alone of Had him Condemed and kicked out .....
« Last Edit: May 12, 2011, 11:26:51 AM by stashko » Logged

ГОСПОДЕ ГОСПОДЕ ,ПОГЛЕДАЈ СА НЕБА ,ДОЂИ И ПОСЕТИ ТВОЈ ВИНОГРАД ТВОЈА ДЕСНИЦА ПОСАДИЛА АМИН АМИН.
podkarpatska
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 7,544


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #1506 on: May 12, 2011, 11:39:31 AM »

About This Patriarch it's Confusing... Huh

This Alone Makes Me yearn For the Non Canonical  Orthodox Churches....

This Patriarch Seems to Me ,to be a Sower Of Discord, Why wasn't he Condemed ,Plus being a  Freemason, Shouldn't that Alone of Had him Condemed and kicked out .....


Confusion is the word. Orthodoxwiki has a good amount of information as a starting point...http://orthodoxwiki.org/Meletios_IV_(Metaxakis)_of_Constantinople#endnote_1

It seems to me that he was more of a political figure than a religious one, caught up between Hellene monarchists and republicans following the first world war. I also find it odd that he ended up as Patriarch of Alexandria after leaving Constantinople.

We also have to keep in mind that the 1920's represented a very scary and dark period in Orthodox world history, given the devastation of the war, the Russian Revolution, the collapse of the Ottomans and the expulsions of the Greeks from Turkey. It is easy to assume and judge motivations of people long dead from the comfort of our modern living rooms so I really have not formed any valid opinion about him.

I would be interested in learning more about him from an academic point of view, rather than a polemical one. Anyone have any source material? Thanks.
Logged
CBGardner
Site Supporter
High Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 618


Ask w/ tears, seek w/ obedience, knock w/ patience


« Reply #1507 on: May 12, 2011, 11:39:53 AM »

Christ is risen!
I'm not sure what either of you are talking about. I was responding to Hermogenes saying "some contributors seem to imply that the Julian calendar is part of Christ's teaching; that right after He told us to "Love one another as I have loved you" He told us that His Father prefers the Julian calendar." There are plenty of things that are central to the church that Christ didn't address directly.
But He did address the calendar issue "The Son of Man is the Lord of the Sabbath."

You can think

that is what the record says.
the calendar was changed to be more scientifically correct and that there were no other motives besides that; I just don't. For all the talk of it uniting Christians I fail to see that unity.
That was as true of three centuries after Nicea I.

So because Christ 'worked' on the Sabbath, it means He is for the new calendar? (I assume you're citing Matthew 12)

Quote
New Calendarists think that the question is about thirteen days, about astronomical correctness, and view the Old Calendarists as simply stubborn, ignorant persons who are averse to scientific improvements. Father Philotheos makes no mention of "astronomical correctness" vs. "astronomical incorrectness," because this is not really the point at issue. What is at issue is whether Orthodox Christians should remain faithful to Tradition, or are free to innovate as they please, with a view to some political or other secular expediency, without regard to the Church’s canonical way of doing things and without regard to foreseeable evil consequences ("fruits") of their innovations for the Church.

It should be added that the New Calendar was introduced into the Orthodox Church not for the sake of astronomical correctness, but as the first step in achieving a forced, false union of the Orthodox Church with non-Orthodox New Calendarist Christian bodies, for the sake of certain secular advantages which such a union was expected to have. This was to be the beginning of the Orthodox Church’s participation in the "Ecumenical Movement"—a movement which has further divided the Orthodox Church into mutually hostile parties: the Ecumenists and the anti-Ecumenists. Thus, the evil fruits of the introduction of the New Calendar, which the Blessed Elder clearly foresaw, keep growing in number.

For the source and more about the "fruits" of the new calendar: http://orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/zervakos_calendar.aspx

St. Augustine, says: "Let there be no innovations, because innovations defile antiquity. For the Bridegroom and His Bride, the Church, are without blemish."
« Last Edit: May 12, 2011, 11:42:20 AM by CBGardner » Logged

Authentic zeal is not directed towards anything but union in Christ, or against anything but our own fallenness.

"Beardliness is next to Godliness."- Asteriktos
podkarpatska
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 7,544


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #1508 on: May 12, 2011, 12:06:35 PM »

Christ is risen!
I'm not sure what either of you are talking about. I was responding to Hermogenes saying "some contributors seem to imply that the Julian calendar is part of Christ's teaching; that right after He told us to "Love one another as I have loved you" He told us that His Father prefers the Julian calendar." There are plenty of things that are central to the church that Christ didn't address directly.
But He did address the calendar issue "The Son of Man is the Lord of the Sabbath."

You can think

that is what the record says.
the calendar was changed to be more scientifically correct and that there were no other motives besides that; I just don't. For all the talk of it uniting Christians I fail to see that unity.
That was as true of three centuries after Nicea I.

So because Christ 'worked' on the Sabbath, it means He is for the new calendar? (I assume you're citing Matthew 12)

Quote
New Calendarists think that the question is about thirteen days, about astronomical correctness, and view the Old Calendarists as simply stubborn, ignorant persons who are averse to scientific improvements. Father Philotheos makes no mention of "astronomical correctness" vs. "astronomical incorrectness," because this is not really the point at issue. What is at issue is whether Orthodox Christians should remain faithful to Tradition, or are free to innovate as they please, with a view to some political or other secular expediency, without regard to the Church’s canonical way of doing things and without regard to foreseeable evil consequences ("fruits") of their innovations for the Church.

It should be added that the New Calendar was introduced into the Orthodox Church not for the sake of astronomical correctness, but as the first step in achieving a forced, false union of the Orthodox Church with non-Orthodox New Calendarist Christian bodies, for the sake of certain secular advantages which such a union was expected to have. This was to be the beginning of the Orthodox Church’s participation in the "Ecumenical Movement"—a movement which has further divided the Orthodox Church into mutually hostile parties: the Ecumenists and the anti-Ecumenists. Thus, the evil fruits of the introduction of the New Calendar, which the Blessed Elder clearly foresaw, keep growing in number.

For the source and more about the "fruits" of the new calendar: http://orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/zervakos_calendar.aspx

St. Augustine, says: "Let there be no innovations, because innovations defile antiquity. For the Bridegroom and His Bride, the Church, are without blemish."

So, shall we get together to start restoring the unity of the Roman Empire? After all, the Empire was divided during Augustine's lifetime - an innovation to be sure.
Logged
Hermogenes
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 493



« Reply #1509 on: May 12, 2011, 12:10:50 PM »

 
Quote
So, shall we get together to start restoring the unity of the Roman Empire? After all, the Empire was divided during Augustine's lifetime - an innovation to be sure.
Thinking of the number of things that have changed in the church since Augustine's time is mind boggling!

Of course, it's equally mind boggling to consider all that's stayed the same!
« Last Edit: May 12, 2011, 12:11:56 PM by Hermogenes » Logged
CBGardner
Site Supporter
High Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 618


Ask w/ tears, seek w/ obedience, knock w/ patience


« Reply #1510 on: May 12, 2011, 12:21:10 PM »

Christ is risen!
I'm not sure what either of you are talking about. I was responding to Hermogenes saying "some contributors seem to imply that the Julian calendar is part of Christ's teaching; that right after He told us to "Love one another as I have loved you" He told us that His Father prefers the Julian calendar." There are plenty of things that are central to the church that Christ didn't address directly.
But He did address the calendar issue "The Son of Man is the Lord of the Sabbath."

You can think

that is what the record says.
the calendar was changed to be more scientifically correct and that there were no other motives besides that; I just don't. For all the talk of it uniting Christians I fail to see that unity.
That was as true of three centuries after Nicea I.

So because Christ 'worked' on the Sabbath, it means He is for the new calendar? (I assume you're citing Matthew 12)

Quote
New Calendarists think that the question is about thirteen days, about astronomical correctness, and view the Old Calendarists as simply stubborn, ignorant persons who are averse to scientific improvements. Father Philotheos makes no mention of "astronomical correctness" vs. "astronomical incorrectness," because this is not really the point at issue. What is at issue is whether Orthodox Christians should remain faithful to Tradition, or are free to innovate as they please, with a view to some political or other secular expediency, without regard to the Church’s canonical way of doing things and without regard to foreseeable evil consequences ("fruits") of their innovations for the Church.

It should be added that the New Calendar was introduced into the Orthodox Church not for the sake of astronomical correctness, but as the first step in achieving a forced, false union of the Orthodox Church with non-Orthodox New Calendarist Christian bodies, for the sake of certain secular advantages which such a union was expected to have. This was to be the beginning of the Orthodox Church’s participation in the "Ecumenical Movement"—a movement which has further divided the Orthodox Church into mutually hostile parties: the Ecumenists and the anti-Ecumenists. Thus, the evil fruits of the introduction of the New Calendar, which the Blessed Elder clearly foresaw, keep growing in number.

For the source and more about the "fruits" of the new calendar: http://orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/zervakos_calendar.aspx

St. Augustine, says: "Let there be no innovations, because innovations defile antiquity. For the Bridegroom and His Bride, the Church, are without blemish."

So, shall we get together to start restoring the unity of the Roman Empire? After all, the Empire was divided during Augustine's lifetime - an innovation to be sure.

Of course not. I think this shows, though, the Father's clear disposition against innovation. That in order to innovate there must be an incredibly good and spiritual reason for it, otherwise it defiles antiquity. So I'm still curious what the good and spiritual reasons for the change were. It can't be unity considering the one step forward is over shadowed by the 4 or 5 steps back.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2011, 12:22:27 PM by CBGardner » Logged

Authentic zeal is not directed towards anything but union in Christ, or against anything but our own fallenness.

"Beardliness is next to Godliness."- Asteriktos
Hermogenes
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 493



« Reply #1511 on: May 12, 2011, 12:33:04 PM »

Quote

Of course not. I think this shows, though, the Father's clear disposition against innovation. That in order to innovate there must be an incredibly good and spiritual reason for it, otherwise it defiles antiquity.

Ahhh, the good ol' days, when clergy rode around on donkeys and the church owned slaves...

Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 30,399


EXTERMINATE!


« Reply #1512 on: May 12, 2011, 12:35:28 PM »

Christos Voskrese!
I'm not sure what either of you are talking about. I was responding to Hermogenes saying "some contributors seem to imply that the Julian calendar is part of Christ's teaching; that right after He told us to "Love one another as I have loved you" He told us that His Father prefers the Julian calendar." There are plenty of things that are central to the church that Christ didn't address directly.

You can think the calendar was changed to be more scientifically correct and that there were no other motives besides that; I just don't. For all the talk of it uniting Christians I fail to see that unity.

yah, so some Orthodox celebrate the feasts with heterodox Christians, but now the Orthodox don't all celebrate together! what an absurdity!

has there been any good fruit from the New Calendar?
Any good fruit from hanging onto the Old Calendar?

St. John Maximovic, St. Justin Popovic, St. Nicholii Velimirovic, St. Evgeny Rodinov, and these are just the ones that I can think of off the top of my head.  I don't know of any New Calendar Saints.
What does that prove? That you don't know any saints outside your limited realm of experience?

Well, gee - I don't know.  What does the original question try to prove?  Of course, you really don't know and don't want to.  This is just another of your long series of "stir the pot" posts with no or little value.  And just so you know, not that you are capable of being educated, I may know of far more saints than you may imagine.  My rather extensive library contains multiple volumes of lives of Saints, including ones from this century.  The lives of the Saints (or the continuation of the Acts of the Apostles, as I like to call them) are among my more favored readings.  I actually even had the privileged of working with one of the translators on editing one volume.  I have also had the wonderful opportunity to see some of them during a major surgery that I had years back.  I have always believed in them and loved them, and they were there when I needed them.  It is not my fault that the OCA and Antioch have not produced that many recently, or else have not chosen to get the word out about them.  It is my love for the Saints that is the reason that I despise the New Calendar to this degree.  Rather than worship these great men and women, in whom God is Glorified, in unity, your schismatic minority has chosen to break that unity so you can be closer to the World.  What does THAT prove, other than you would rather worship with masons, heretics and the Pope than the Saints of the Orthodox Church.  Perhaps you could enlighten us with something spiritual for once and tell us of YOUR vast experience with the Saints.  Perhaps then I could be educated and supplement my limited realm of experience.
Honestly, Punch, I've not seen you offer anything of substance in your last few posts on this thread. All you've done is demonize the New Calendar by trotting out your usual "it's the work of the devil/antichrist" canard and impugn my motives and the motives of others like me who follow the New Calendar. Sadly, I've come to expect such displays of emotive non-logic from you.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2011, 03:15:20 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
CBGardner
Site Supporter
High Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 618


Ask w/ tears, seek w/ obedience, knock w/ patience


« Reply #1513 on: May 12, 2011, 01:00:52 PM »

Quote

Of course not. I think this shows, though, the Father's clear disposition against innovation. That in order to innovate there must be an incredibly good and spiritual reason for it, otherwise it defiles antiquity.

Ahhh, the good ol' days, when clergy rode around on donkeys and the church owned slaves...



So you don't think getting to a larger number of parishioners more quickly and freeing slaves is spiritually beneficial and thus are positive innovations??
Logged

Authentic zeal is not directed towards anything but union in Christ, or against anything but our own fallenness.

"Beardliness is next to Godliness."- Asteriktos
Hermogenes
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 493



« Reply #1514 on: May 12, 2011, 01:08:42 PM »

Quote

Of course not. I think this shows, though, the Father's clear disposition against innovation. That in order to innovate there must be an incredibly good and spiritual reason for it, otherwise it defiles antiquity.

Ahhh, the good ol' days, when clergy rode around on donkeys and the church owned slaves...



So you don't think getting to a larger number of parishioners more quickly and freeing slaves is spiritually beneficial and thus are positive innovations??

I was speaking ironically...It was a joke.
Logged
CBGardner
Site Supporter
High Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 618


Ask w/ tears, seek w/ obedience, knock w/ patience


« Reply #1515 on: May 12, 2011, 01:11:26 PM »

Quote

Of course not. I think this shows, though, the Father's clear disposition against innovation. That in order to innovate there must be an incredibly good and spiritual reason for it, otherwise it defiles antiquity.

Ahhh, the good ol' days, when clergy rode around on donkeys and the church owned slaves...



So you don't think getting to a larger number of parishioners more quickly and freeing slaves is spiritually beneficial and thus are positive innovations??

I was speaking ironically...It was a joke.

For sure  Smiley just seeing if you were indeed trying to deflect the point.
Logged

Authentic zeal is not directed towards anything but union in Christ, or against anything but our own fallenness.

"Beardliness is next to Godliness."- Asteriktos
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 35,604



« Reply #1516 on: May 12, 2011, 02:44:22 PM »

Christ is risen!
You really think Patriarch Meletios had that much control over whether other local jurisdictions adopted the New Calendar? It's all too easy to demonize the New Calendar by attributing it solely to Patriarch Meletios, but I for one don't buy the rhetoric.
Patriarch Meltios IV (Metaxakis) was pretty influential and a significant figure in the modernist drive to adopt the New Calendar and certainly an incredibly colorful character.  Chainsmoker of Turkish cigarettes, beaten up in his own Patriarchal Palace, anathema to the Greek King, sat Church of England Archbishop Cosmo Lang at his right hand in the 1923 "Congress".... a man who recognised Anglican priestly orders and by extension the branch theory of a divided Church which Anglicans subscribe to.  Now there is a lot more in the politics and culture of this than a desire to get au fait with the alleged merits of the Gregorian calendar and western science. There is also more to Meltios IV (Metxakis)'s understanding of the theology of the Church that is very disturbing to any orthodox Orthodox Christian. I am not saying New Calendarists today support in the main such a view at all. There is far more evidence than rhetoric when it comes to the ecclesial and political views of the late Meletios IV (Metaxakis).
But nothing you say in the above even comes close to proving the authority you imply he had over other local churches.
Ecumenical Patriarch Meletios (Metaxakis) was clearly eager for the authority of the Ecumenical Throne, and to say that he had no influence is absurd. He was part of the Church of Greece.
He was deposed, defocked, and sentenced to confinement by the Church of Greece, by the the first All Greece Councill.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 35,604



« Reply #1517 on: May 12, 2011, 02:48:03 PM »

Christ is risen!
The date of pascha is on the solar calendar: the paschal full moon has to come after the equinox. We should keep the equinox, i.e. when day and night are equal.

You mean using the first sunday after the first (real) full moon after the (real) equinox like the council calls for?  Huh

yes, imagine doing exactly what the Fathers say. Quite a novel concept.


Quote
From St. Nikodemos of the Holy Mountain, The Pedalion (Rudder), p.9, footnote

“For let [the Latins] know that the Ecumenical Synods held after the First Synod, and the rest of the Fathers, wise as they were, could see, of course, that the equinox had deviated a great deal [from where it was previously]; nevertheless, they did not wish to change its position from March 21, where the First Synod found it, because they preferred agreement and union of the Church to accuracy in the matter of the equinox, which causes no confusion in fixing the date of our Pascha, nor any harm to piety.”


St. Nikodemus doesn't know his history, as this account directly contradicts Pope St. Cyril, who states that Alexandria was chosen solely for the job of calculating Pascha because of the accuracy of its astronomers.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,439



« Reply #1518 on: May 12, 2011, 02:49:10 PM »

About This Patriarch it's Confusing... ???This Alone Makes Me yearn For the Non Canonical  Orthodox Churches....This Patriarch Seems to Me ,to be a Sower Of Discord, Why wasn't he Condemed ,Plus being a  Freemason, Shouldn't that Alone of Had him Condemed and kicked out .....

We also have to keep in mind that the 1920's represented a very scary and dark period in Orthodox world history, given the devastation of the war, the Russian Revolution, the collapse of the Ottomans and the expulsions of the Greeks from Turkey. It is easy to assume and judge motivations of people long dead from the comfort of our modern living rooms ...  

Excellent point!   We are backseat driving with regard to evaluating the decisions of the 10's and the 20's.    
Logged
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church
Posts: 11,908


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #1519 on: May 12, 2011, 02:54:50 PM »

Quote from: podkarpatska
So, shall we get together to start restoring the unity of the Roman Empire?

Yay!  Grin

Logged

Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,439



« Reply #1520 on: May 12, 2011, 02:55:08 PM »

And Alexandria, of course, was not on the Julian Calendar either at the time of Nicea I nor for centuries following.  

Christ is risen!
The date of pascha is on the solar calendar: the paschal full moon has to come after the equinox. We should keep the equinox, i.e. when day and night are equal.
You mean using the first sunday after the first (real) full moon after the (real) equinox like the council calls for?  Huh
yes, imagine doing exactly what the Fathers say. Quite a novel concept.


Quote
From St. Nikodemos of the Holy Mountain, The Pedalion (Rudder), p.9, footnote

“For let [the Latins] know that the Ecumenical Synods held after the First Synod, and the rest of the Fathers, wise as they were, could see, of course, that the equinox had deviated a great deal [from where it was previously]; nevertheless, they did not wish to change its position from March 21, where the First Synod found it, because they preferred agreement and union of the Church to accuracy in the matter of the equinox, which causes no confusion in fixing the date of our Pascha, nor any harm to piety.”


St. Nikodemus doesn't know his history, as this account directly contradicts Pope St. Cyril, who states that Alexandria was chosen solely for the job of calculating Pascha because of the accuracy of its astronomers.
Logged
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,439



« Reply #1521 on: May 12, 2011, 03:03:29 PM »

You are not missing anything.  Punch is thinking with his emotions.  For any of us, this is a dangerous thing.  

Christos Voskrese!
I'm not sure what either of you are talking about. I was responding to Hermogenes saying "some contributors seem to imply that the Julian calendar is part of Christ's teaching; that right after He told us to "Love one another as I have loved you" He told us that His Father prefers the Julian calendar." There are plenty of things that are central to the church that Christ didn't address directly.

You can think the calendar was changed to be more scientifically correct and that there were no other motives besides that; I just don't. For all the talk of it uniting Christians I fail to see that unity.

yah, so some Orthodox celebrate the feasts with heterodox Christians, but now the Orthodox don't all celebrate together! what an absurdity!

has there been any good fruit from the New Calendar?
Any good fruit from hanging onto the Old Calendar?

St. John Maximovic, St. Justin Popovic, St. Nicholii Velimirovic, St. Evgeny Rodinov, and these are just the ones that I can think of off the top of my head.  I don't know of any New Calendar Saints.
What does that prove? That you don't know any saints outside your limited realm of experience?

Well, gee - I don't know.  What does the original question try to prove?  Of course, you really don't know and don't want to.  This is just another of your long series of "stir the pot" posts with no or little value.  And just so you know, not that you are capable of being educated, I may know of far more saints than you may imagine.  My rather extensive library contains multiple volumes of lives of Saints, including ones from this century.  The lives of the Saints (or the continuation of the Acts of the Apostles, as I like to call them) are among my more favored readings.  I actually even had the privileged of working with one of the translators on editing one volume.  I have also had the wonderful opportunity to see some of them during a major surgery that I had years back.  I have always believed in them and loved them, and they were there when I needed them.  It is not my fault that the OCA and Antioch have not produced that many recently, or else have not chosen to get the word out about them.  It is my love for the Saints that is the reason that I despise the New Calendar to this degree. Rather than worship these great men and women, in whom God is Glorified, in unity, your schismatic minority has chosen to break that unity so you can be closer to the World.  What does THAT prove, other than you would rather worship with masons, heretics and the Pope than the Saints of the Orthodox Church.  Perhaps you could enlighten us with something spiritual for once and tell us of YOUR vast experience with the Saints.  Perhaps then I could be educated and supplement my limited realm of experience.

An honest question..Since you state your affiliation as "Serbian Orthodox Jurisdiction: New Gracanica Metropolitanate"  and often speak of your affection for ROCOR, how can you, as an individual, assert that others within the conciliar and canonical sphere of both of these esteemed jurisdictions are 'schismatics?'  

I am comfortable in asserting that those who profess allegiance to jurisdictions apart from the metaphorical 'omophorion' of canonical Orthodoxy are, in fact, in schism from my point of view, but I would not, as a member of the Church, presume to call others who are within that 'omophorion' by such a term in the absence of a hierarchical determination that found that to be the case.

If I honestly believed that my hierarchs had departed from Orthodoxy by not making such a determination, I would be bound by my conscience to leave such a body and find communion with another for the sake of my eternal salvation.

Am I missing something?
« Last Edit: May 12, 2011, 03:04:08 PM by FatherHLL » Logged
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,439



« Reply #1522 on: May 12, 2011, 03:04:53 PM »

Selective education?

Christos Voskrese!
I'm not sure what either of you are talking about. I was responding to Hermogenes saying "some contributors seem to imply that the Julian calendar is part of Christ's teaching; that right after He told us to "Love one another as I have loved you" He told us that His Father prefers the Julian calendar." There are plenty of things that are central to the church that Christ didn't address directly.

You can think the calendar was changed to be more scientifically correct and that there were no other motives besides that; I just don't. For all the talk of it uniting Christians I fail to see that unity.

yah, so some Orthodox celebrate the feasts with heterodox Christians, but now the Orthodox don't all celebrate together! what an absurdity!

has there been any good fruit from the New Calendar?
Any good fruit from hanging onto the Old Calendar?

St. John Maximovic, St. Justin Popovic, St. Nicholii Velimirovic, St. Evgeny Rodinov, and these are just the ones that I can think of off the top of my head.  I don't know of any New Calendar Saints.
Logged
jah777
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 1,599


« Reply #1523 on: May 12, 2011, 04:17:39 PM »

Christ is risen!
The date of pascha is on the solar calendar: the paschal full moon has to come after the equinox. We should keep the equinox, i.e. when day and night are equal.

You mean using the first sunday after the first (real) full moon after the (real) equinox like the council calls for?  Huh

yes, imagine doing exactly what the Fathers say. Quite a novel concept.


Quote
From St. Nikodemos of the Holy Mountain, The Pedalion (Rudder), p.9, footnote

“For let [the Latins] know that the Ecumenical Synods held after the First Synod, and the rest of the Fathers, wise as they were, could see, of course, that the equinox had deviated a great deal [from where it was previously]; nevertheless, they did not wish to change its position from March 21, where the First Synod found it, because they preferred agreement and union of the Church to accuracy in the matter of the equinox, which causes no confusion in fixing the date of our Pascha, nor any harm to piety.”


St. Nikodemus doesn't know his history, as this account directly contradicts Pope St. Cyril, who states that Alexandria was chosen solely for the job of calculating Pascha because of the accuracy of its astronomers.

Please read more carefully before you claim to have a better understanding than St. Nikodemos.  He did not contradict St. Cyril, nor did he claim that Alexandria’s method for calculating Pascha was considered inaccurate at Nicea and yet accepted anyway.  What St. Nikodemos said was that the Fathers and Councils after Nicea knew that the equinox was deviating from March 21st, and yet they intentionally chose to retain the old method because of its importance in maintaining unity throughout the Church in the celebration of the Feasts.  The Alexandrian method was chosen initially for its superior astronomical accuracy, but the purpose of instituting one method of calculation for the whole Church was to maintain unity in worship, particularly in the celebration of Pascha.  The entire cycle of services was based on the Julian and great liturgical disorder arises by shifting the Julian by 13 days.  The problem with the calendar change is not that it “makes the Orthodox too much like the Roman Catholics”, but rather that the change was made by individual local churches, without the consensus and agreement of the rest of the Church, and despite the fact that certain local churches (like Jerusalem) already said they would never adopt this innovation.  This unilateral activity is schismatic in character, though the rest of the Church did not cut off from itself those who adopted this innovation, so the innovators remained part of the Church.  Understandably, some became scandalized by the innovation and departed into Old Calendarist schisms.  Those who departed into schisms were not canonically justified in doing so, but the innovators are to blame for causing “the little ones” (in faith) to stumble by introducing the scandalous innovation.  Those who introduced the innovation will have to answer to God for the harm and confusion that has resulted, and for them it may have been better if a mill stone had been put around their necks and they were cast into the sea.  What some do not realize is that souls have been lost by this careless innovation, and it is unbecoming of a Christian to either justify this senseless innovation or to show indifference to the loss of souls which has resulted. 
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 35,604



« Reply #1524 on: May 12, 2011, 05:44:57 PM »

Christ is risen!
The date of pascha is on the solar calendar: the paschal full moon has to come after the equinox. We should keep the equinox, i.e. when day and night are equal.

You mean using the first sunday after the first (real) full moon after the (real) equinox like the council calls for?  Huh

yes, imagine doing exactly what the Fathers say. Quite a novel concept.


Quote
From St. Nikodemos of the Holy Mountain, The Pedalion (Rudder), p.9, footnote

“For let [the Latins] know that the Ecumenical Synods held after the First Synod, and the rest of the Fathers, wise as they were, could see, of course, that the equinox had deviated a great deal [from where it was previously]; nevertheless, they did not wish to change its position from March 21, where the First Synod found it, because they preferred agreement and union of the Church to accuracy in the matter of the equinox, which causes no confusion in fixing the date of our Pascha, nor any harm to piety.”


St. Nikodemus doesn't know his history, as this account directly contradicts Pope St. Cyril, who states that Alexandria was chosen solely for the job of calculating Pascha because of the accuracy of its astronomers.

Please read more carefully before you claim to have a better understanding than St. Nikodemos.  He did not contradict St. Cyril, nor did he claim that Alexandria’s method for calculating Pascha was considered inaccurate at Nicea and yet accepted anyway.


Pope St. Cyril said that it was considered accurate at Nicea, and adopted for that reason.  Please read more carefully.

What St. Nikodemos said was that the Fathers and Councils after Nicea knew that the equinox was deviating from March 21st, and yet they intentionally chose to retain the old method because of its importance in maintaining unity throughout the Church in the celebration of the Feasts.

There was no unity to preserve until around the time of Nicea II.

The Alexandrian method was chosen initially for its superior astronomical accuracy, but the purpose of instituting one method of calculation for the whole Church was to maintain unity in worship, particularly in the celebration of Pascha.
Nothing like founding unity on a strong and firm (i.e. accurate) foundation.

The entire cycle of services was based on the Julian and great liturgical disorder arises by shifting the Julian by 13 days.

No, for one thing, Alexandria didn't use the Julian calendar at the time of Nicea I.  And no, great disorder, liturgical and otherwise, arises by letting the equinox process, as the pagan Egyptian calendar showed.

The problem with the calendar change is not that it “makes the Orthodox too much like the Roman Catholics”, but rather that the change was made by individual local churches, without the consensus and agreement of the rest of the Church, and despite the fact that certain local churches (like Jerusalem) already said they would never adopt this innovation.
At Nicea I, none of the Patriarchates used the same calendar, nor did they immediately thereafter. Not until Justinians imposition of the indiction.



And most Old Calendarists place great store in the "Sigillion" of Constantinople over the calendar, although it was signed by only a few individual local churches.  You don't?

This unilateral activity is schismatic in character, though the rest of the Church did not cut off from itself those who adopted this innovation, so the innovators remained part of the Church.  Understandably, some became scandalized by the innovation and departed into Old Calendarist schisms.  Those who departed into schisms were not canonically justified in doing so, but the innovators are to blame for causing “the little ones” (in faith) to stumble by introducing the scandalous innovation.  Those who introduced the innovation will have to answer to God for the harm and confusion that has resulted, and for them it may have been better if a mill stone had been put around their necks and they were cast into the sea.  What some do not realize is that souls have been lost by this careless innovation, and it is unbecoming of a Christian to either justify this senseless innovation or to show indifference to the loss of souls which has resulted. 

Hence why we have to spread the word on the calendar reform.

Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 30,399


EXTERMINATE!


« Reply #1525 on: May 12, 2011, 06:10:26 PM »

Christ is risen!
The date of pascha is on the solar calendar: the paschal full moon has to come after the equinox. We should keep the equinox, i.e. when day and night are equal.

You mean using the first sunday after the first (real) full moon after the (real) equinox like the council calls for?  Huh

yes, imagine doing exactly what the Fathers say. Quite a novel concept.


Quote
From St. Nikodemos of the Holy Mountain, The Pedalion (Rudder), p.9, footnote

“For let [the Latins] know that the Ecumenical Synods held after the First Synod, and the rest of the Fathers, wise as they were, could see, of course, that the equinox had deviated a great deal [from where it was previously]; nevertheless, they did not wish to change its position from March 21, where the First Synod found it, because they preferred agreement and union of the Church to accuracy in the matter of the equinox, which causes no confusion in fixing the date of our Pascha, nor any harm to piety.”


St. Nikodemus doesn't know his history, as this account directly contradicts Pope St. Cyril, who states that Alexandria was chosen solely for the job of calculating Pascha because of the accuracy of its astronomers.

Please read more carefully before you claim to have a better understanding than St. Nikodemos.  He did not contradict St. Cyril, nor did he claim that Alexandria’s method for calculating Pascha was considered inaccurate at Nicea and yet accepted anyway.  What St. Nikodemos said was that the Fathers and Councils after Nicea knew that the equinox was deviating from March 21st, and yet they intentionally chose to retain the old method because of its importance in maintaining unity throughout the Church in the celebration of the Feasts.  The Alexandrian method was chosen initially for its superior astronomical accuracy, but the purpose of instituting one method of calculation for the whole Church was to maintain unity in worship, particularly in the celebration of Pascha.  The entire cycle of services was based on the Julian and great liturgical disorder arises by shifting the Julian by 13 days.  The problem with the calendar change is not that it “makes the Orthodox too much like the Roman Catholics”, but rather that the change was made by individual local churches, without the consensus and agreement of the rest of the Church, and despite the fact that certain local churches (like Jerusalem) already said they would never adopt this innovation.  This unilateral activity is schismatic in character, though the rest of the Church did not cut off from itself those who adopted this innovation, so the innovators remained part of the Church.  Understandably, some became scandalized by the innovation and departed into Old Calendarist schisms.  Those who departed into schisms were not canonically justified in doing so, but the innovators are to blame for causing “the little ones” (in faith) to stumble by introducing the scandalous innovation.  Those who introduced the innovation will have to answer to God for the harm and confusion that has resulted, and for them it may have been better if a mill stone had been put around their necks and they were cast into the sea.  What some do not realize is that souls have been lost by this careless innovation, and it is unbecoming of a Christian to either justify this senseless innovation or to show indifference to the loss of souls which has resulted. 

Rule No. 1 when confronting misconduct is to take responsibility for your own actions and not pass the blame off to someone else. Did those hierarchs who implemented the New Calendar in their jurisdictions scandalize some of the more traditionalist-minded in our churches and make them want to break off into schism? Absolutely, and for this they will need to give an account before God for their insensitivity. But those who did break off into their schisms chose to break off into schism; nobody forced them to do so. They therefore have no one to blame but themselves for their decision, a decision for which they themselves will ultimately be called to account.

Many souls will be lost for their decision to schism, and it is unbecoming of a Christian to either justify this Church-rending action or show indifference to their own sin and the loss of souls that has resulted.
Logged
podkarpatska
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 7,544


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #1526 on: May 12, 2011, 08:46:14 PM »

Christ is risen!
The date of pascha is on the solar calendar: the paschal full moon has to come after the equinox. We should keep the equinox, i.e. when day and night are equal.

You mean using the first sunday after the first (real) full moon after the (real) equinox like the council calls for?  Huh

yes, imagine doing exactly what the Fathers say. Quite a novel concept.


Quote
From St. Nikodemos of the Holy Mountain, The Pedalion (Rudder), p.9, footnote

“For let [the Latins] know that the Ecumenical Synods held after the First Synod, and the rest of the Fathers, wise as they were, could see, of course, that the equinox had deviated a great deal [from where it was previously]; nevertheless, they did not wish to change its position from March 21, where the First Synod found it, because they preferred agreement and union of the Church to accuracy in the matter of the equinox, which causes no confusion in fixing the date of our Pascha, nor any harm to piety.”


St. Nikodemus doesn't know his history, as this account directly contradicts Pope St. Cyril, who states that Alexandria was chosen solely for the job of calculating Pascha because of the accuracy of its astronomers.

Please read more carefully before you claim to have a better understanding than St. Nikodemos.  He did not contradict St. Cyril, nor did he claim that Alexandria’s method for calculating Pascha was considered inaccurate at Nicea and yet accepted anyway.  What St. Nikodemos said was that the Fathers and Councils after Nicea knew that the equinox was deviating from March 21st, and yet they intentionally chose to retain the old method because of its importance in maintaining unity throughout the Church in the celebration of the Feasts.  The Alexandrian method was chosen initially for its superior astronomical accuracy, but the purpose of instituting one method of calculation for the whole Church was to maintain unity in worship, particularly in the celebration of Pascha.  The entire cycle of services was based on the Julian and great liturgical disorder arises by shifting the Julian by 13 days.  The problem with the calendar change is not that it “makes the Orthodox too much like the Roman Catholics”, but rather that the change was made by individual local churches, without the consensus and agreement of the rest of the Church, and despite the fact that certain local churches (like Jerusalem) already said they would never adopt this innovation.  This unilateral activity is schismatic in character, though the rest of the Church did not cut off from itself those who adopted this innovation, so the innovators remained part of the Church.  Understandably, some became scandalized by the innovation and departed into Old Calendarist schisms.  Those who departed into schisms were not canonically justified in doing so, but the innovators are to blame for causing “the little ones” (in faith) to stumble by introducing the scandalous innovation.  Those who introduced the innovation will have to answer to God for the harm and confusion that has resulted, and for them it may have been better if a mill stone had been put around their necks and they were cast into the sea.  What some do not realize is that souls have been lost by this careless innovation, and it is unbecoming of a Christian to either justify this senseless innovation or to show indifference to the loss of souls which has resulted. 

Rule No. 1 when confronting misconduct is to take responsibility for your own actions and not pass the blame off to someone else. Did those hierarchs who implemented the New Calendar in their jurisdictions scandalize some of the more traditionalist-minded in our churches and make them want to break off into schism? Absolutely, and for this they will need to give an account before God for their insensitivity. But those who did break off into their schisms chose to break off into schism; nobody forced them to do so. They therefore have no one to blame but themselves for their decision, a decision for which they themselves will ultimately be called to account.

Many souls will be lost for their decision to schism, and it is unbecoming of a Christian to either justify this Church-rending action or show indifference to their own sin and the loss of souls that has resulted.

Peter is absolutely correct about the effects of schism. Now I know that some will say, so what if some 'weak in faith' souls are lost as a consequence. That is easy for one to say and it borders upon the attitude of the Pharisee in scripture.

I will share a story my father liked to tell, having lived through a bitter schism in the Church and parish which his parents struggled to build when they came to America early in the 20th century and later, having been honored to serve as pastor and pastor emeritus of St. Michael'sOrthodox Church (ACROD) in Binghamton, NY for over 45 years.

In the 1920's, St. Michael's was one of the largest Ruthenian Greek Catholic congregations in the country. There were over 3,000 families registered on its metrical books with an average of over 100 baptisms per year from the 1914 through 1938 era.

As a result of the ham handed imposition of celibacy by Rome through the dreaded dictak of 'cum date fuerit', St. Michael's was rendered asunder in a bitter fight between those who put their faith in their pastor and bishop praying that the Holy Father would come to his senses if only he knew what THEY were doing in his name. (same sort of misplaced belief Russian peasants placed in the Tsar prior 1905) and those who knew that the only way to preserve the fullness of their ancestral faith was to leave Rome and return to Orthodoxy. Almost ten years of bitter, family splitting litigation followed.

When the dust settled during the war, the metrical books of the parish, now Orthodox, tell the tale and show the price of schism. Of the nearly 3000 families that existed prior to the fight, fewer than 1200 remained. About 800 left to build a Byzantine Catholic parish down the street. Of the rest, some joined the Slovak Catholic Church on the other block and most lost their faith and were scattered to the winds. The vitriol, anger and harsh words that were exchanged by all involved were too much for many to bear. They lost faith.

Wherever there has been schism, records will reflect similar shifts. There is a price to be paid.

Now, I am not suggesting that there is never a time or a place to take a stand, even if that stand leads to schism. Of course not, but taking such a stand, or creating the atmosphere which causes some to take that stand are not actions to be lightly undertaken. All involved will have to account to God in the end. We can only pray that we chose wisely.
Logged
Jonathan Gress
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOC/HOTCA
Posts: 2,632


« Reply #1527 on: May 13, 2011, 09:51:54 AM »

From "The Calendar Question" by Fr Basil Sakkas (available at http://hotca.org/orthodoxy/orthodox-awareness/203-the-calendar-question):

Quote
The Holy Apostle commands us saying, “Hold fast the traditions which ye have received, whether by word of mouth or through an epistle of ours.” (2 Thes. 11:15). It is therefore with genuine joy that we recommend to you this present study written by a Greek brother, Fr. Basil Sakkas, who is a priest under our Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia serving in Geneva, Switzerland. It is the voice of a true Orthodox Christian of the Greek Church, which Church has been afflicted for the last fifty years with divisions, and contention, and persecution on account of the innovation of the New Calendar which was brought about in 1924 by modernists in a hasty and most uncanonical manner.

Fr. Basil sets forth in a clear fashion the reasons why many of our Greek Orthodox brethren refused to follow after the uncanonical change of the calendar in their Church in 1924 and, being aided by the fathers of the Holy Mountain Athos, courageously and justly withstood this innovation which was the beginning of an inundation of innovations perpetuated by the modernists until the sorry state in which we are found today of the heresy of Ecumenism.

All serious and concerned Orthodox Christians should pay attention to this work of Fr. Basil, especially today when there is talk by the modernists of changing the Orthodox Paschalia. The translation and printing of this study is especially precious since the texts of the three condemnations of the Gregorian Calendar enacted by Pan-Orthodox councils in the 16th Century and the Pan-Orthodox condemnation of modernism last century presided over by Patriarch Anthemus appear for the first time in English.

These condemnations were never lifted by any later council—they still stand and are binding for all Orthodox Christians. The innovation of the New Calendar brought about schism in all the local churches that adopted it. Thus, Greece, Cyprus, Rumania, and now Bulgaria have tasted the fruits of disobedience. It is only to be regretted that the Orthodox peoples of the above-mentioned Churches were not able to all rise up together and as a great wave overcome and put down this tide of innovations, as the Russian people put down the modernism of the “Living Church” in this century. Our own Russian Church in the person of the then Archbishop Anastassy of blessed memory, later Metropolitan and the First Hierarch of our Synod, strongly and resolutely protested the innovation of the New Calendar and the other modernisms of Patriarch Meletius Metaxakis of sorry memory at the gathering in Constantinople in 1923, which is wrongly referred to as Pan-Orthodox since the Patriarchates of Alexandria and Jerusalem and the Church of Cyprus did not attend. Most hierarchs of the Church of Constantinople also refused to attend, thus protesting the uncanonicity of the forced political appointment of Meletius as Ecumenical Patriarch. The Primate of our Church at that time, Metropolitan Anthony, also protested against that reform in his correspondence with the Eastern Patriarchs and received answers supporting his stand.

“Glory and honor,” therefore, in the words of the Holy Apostle, to all who hold fast the traditions and keep the Faith as we have received it without additions or subtractions even though they be slandered and persecuted.

†Metropolitan Philaret
The 14th of April, 1972
Feast of St. Martin the Confessor, pope of Rome,
and the bishop confessors with him in the West.

From "A Life of Metropolitan Philaret" by Vladimir Moss (available at http://www.orthodoxchristianbooks.com/articles/211/a-life-metropolitan-philaret-new-york/):

Quote
On September 20, 1975, Metropolitan Philaret wrote to Metropolitan

Epiphanius of Kition, the leader of the Old Calendarist Church of Cyprus:

“From the beginning our Russian Church has known that the calendar

innovation was unacceptable, and has not dared to move this boundary set by

patristic tradition, for the Ecclesiastical Calendar is a support of the life of the

Church and as such is fortified by decrees of Holy Tradition.

However, it is obvious to all that the calendar innovation caused a schism

in the Greek Church in 1924, and the responsibility for the schism weighs

exclusively on the innovators.
This is the conclusion that will be reached by

anyone studying the Patriarchal Tomoi (as that of 1583) and taking into

account the wretched and self-evident fact of the schism and the frightful

punishments, persecutions and blasphemies which those who have cleaved to

the patristic piety of Holy Tradition have undergone.

“Thinking in this way, our Holy Synod has decreed that we ‘flee’

concelebrations with the new calendarist modernists. We do not concelebrate

with them, nor do we give permission or a blessing to our clergy for such a

concelebration. In order to assure you of the truth of what we say, we inform

you that whenever a community in the diaspora is received into our Church,

they are required to follow the patristic Calendar of the Orthodox Church…”
Logged
Punch
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica Metropolitanate
Posts: 4,450



« Reply #1528 on: May 13, 2011, 10:01:08 AM »

Selective education?

To some extent.  My early readings of the modern Greek writers did not leave me with much, at least as compared to the Slavic writers.  So, after a time, I stopped reading them.  There are so many Saints, and so few hours in the day.  Plus, it is possible that there is a subconscious distrust of anyone in the NC Churches.  When my wife wanted to continue to attend a Lutheran Bible Study, our ROCOR priest did not forbid her, but rather asked her what she was hoping to accomplish.  He said that if the Lutherans understood the Bible, they would be Orthodox.  I could well be guilty of harboring a similar underlying feeling about NC "Saints".  To me, the calendar issue is so clear (particularly the way that I was converted to it by a vision of the Theotokos after praying fervently on the matter), that I tend to discount as authoritative anyone who abides by that calendar.  I do not ignore them completely, just as I do not completely ignore the writings of the Coptic writers, or even Hindu and Taoist writers.  I just don't take a lot of time to bother with them since there is so much in the OC library of works that I have left to read that I don't have time to take to read from those who have already outwardly exhibited a gross misunderstanding of what they did to the Body of Christ.  Truth be told, for good or bad but in any case it is my honest opinion, I regard the writings of Sadhu Sundar Sing higher than I regard most of the NC writers.
Logged

God did not create man equal.  Samuel Colt made man equal.  Blessed be the Peacemaker.
jah777
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 1,599


« Reply #1529 on: May 13, 2011, 10:24:17 AM »

Quote
On September 20, 1975, Metropolitan Philaret wrote to Metropolitan

Epiphanius of Kition, the leader of the Old Calendarist Church of Cyprus:

“From the beginning our Russian Church has known that the calendar

innovation was unacceptable, and has not dared to move this boundary set by

patristic tradition, for the Ecclesiastical Calendar is a support of the life of the

Church and as such is fortified by decrees of Holy Tradition.

However, it is obvious to all that the calendar innovation caused a schism

in the Greek Church in 1924, and the responsibility for the schism weighs

exclusively on the innovators.
This is the conclusion that will be reached by

anyone studying the Patriarchal Tomoi (as that of 1583) and taking into

account the wretched and self-evident fact of the schism and the frightful

punishments, persecutions and blasphemies which those who have cleaved to

the patristic piety of Holy Tradition have undergone.

 


I agree that the innovators are responsible for the schism that resulted in 1924.  The three hierarchs that left the State Church of Greece in 1935, however, are responsible for uncanonically declaring the State Church of Greece to be in schism from the rest of the Church and without sacramental grace on account of the adoption of the New Calendar.  Of the three bishops that made this declaration, they all came to regret this decision, but this declaration has nevertheless been adopted again by today’s Old Calendarists despite the fact that it was this single declaration that caused all of the subsequent splintering among the Old Calendarists and prevented any reconciliation with the State Church of Greece or the other Patriarchates.  The resistance of the Old Calendar faithful and clergy from 1924 to 1935 was understandable, and perhaps even laudatory, but this cannot be said of the cacadox ecclesiology introduced by the three renegade hierarchs in 1935.  The holy Met Philaret, though he obviously thought well of the Greek Old Calendarists at first, did not hold to the false ecclesiology of these groups, and it was on account of this false ecclesiology that ROCOR and Met Philaret did not and could not remain in communion with these groups. 

« Last Edit: May 13, 2011, 10:24:41 AM by jah777 » Logged
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 »   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 0.26 seconds with 73 queries.