OrthodoxChristianity.net
December 22, 2014, 10:31:19 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 3 4 All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: How many of the original holy sees remain  (Read 23682 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« on: May 05, 2004, 06:55:10 PM »

How many of the original holy sees remain?
Logged
ExOrienteLux
Waning: Spoilers
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 183



« Reply #1 on: May 05, 2004, 07:34:26 PM »

By 'original holy sees' you mean what exactly?  That's an honest question, by the way.  If I know what you mean, I can give you a (slightly) better answer.
Logged

Arise, O God! Judge the earth, for to Thee belong all the nations!
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #2 on: May 05, 2004, 07:42:29 PM »

By 'original holy sees' you mean what exactly?  That's an honest question, by the way.  If I know what you mean, I can give you a (slightly) better answer.

Like rome, constantinople, etc.. the original ones. which still exist to this day.
Logged
Mor Ephrem
NO TENURE FOR DEPONIO!!
Section Moderator
Stratopedarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 18,765


"And you shall call his name Jesus..."


WWW
« Reply #3 on: May 05, 2004, 07:42:55 PM »

They all exist today.
Logged

The Mor has spoken. Let his word endure unto the ages of ages.

Please, James, tell us more about women!
ExOrienteLux
Waning: Spoilers
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 183



« Reply #4 on: May 05, 2004, 07:52:35 PM »

Well, all five of the Patriachates (Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem) still exist today, and like Mor said, all of the sees that were founded by Apostles still exist (so far as I know - I'm not sure how many sees the Apostles founded when all was said and done).
Logged

Arise, O God! Judge the earth, for to Thee belong all the nations!
prodromos
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 1,463

Sydney, Australia


« Reply #5 on: May 06, 2004, 03:07:28 AM »

Christos Anesti!  Christ is Risen!

Of course Antioch has moved to Damascus and there are plenty of times I wonder if Constantinople shouldn't follow suit :-

John.
Logged
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #6 on: May 06, 2004, 06:35:26 AM »

Christos Anesti!  Christ is Risen!

Of course Antioch has moved to Damascus and there are plenty of times I wonder if Constantinople shouldn't follow suit :-

John.

then shouldn't it be called the holy see of damascus? if it know longer exist within the city/place where it was founded by the apstles,  then was is the point.

are there any christians left in antioch?

and should not the patriarch of costantnople be called the patriarch of "istanbul". Constantinople doesn't longer exist.
« Last Edit: May 06, 2004, 06:38:39 AM by romanbyzantium » Logged
Oblio
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 454

The Pointless One !


WWW
« Reply #7 on: May 06, 2004, 08:26:51 AM »

Quote
and should not the patriarch of costantnople be called the patriarch of "istanbul".

Istanbul is Constantinople transmorgified by the Muslims.
Logged
Fr. David
The Poster Formerly Known as "Pedro"
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA, Diocese of the South
Posts: 2,831



WWW
« Reply #8 on: May 06, 2004, 08:27:26 AM »

Probably should be, if we're going for literalness (is that a word?).  The names are kept, though, as a link to the apostolic past.
Logged

Priest in the Orthodox Church in America - ordained on March 18, 2012

Oh Taste and See (my defunct blog)

From Protestant to Orthodox (my conversion story)
theodore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 194


« Reply #9 on: May 06, 2004, 10:39:06 AM »

then shouldn't it be called the holy see of damascus? if it know longer exist within the city/place where it was founded by the apstles,  then was is the point.

And shouldn't the Holy See of Rome have changed it's name to the Holy See of Avignon, when for a period of time, the Popes of Rome were actually Frenchmen living in France?
Logged
Seraphim Reeves
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 450



WWW
« Reply #10 on: May 06, 2004, 10:54:59 AM »

RomanByzantium,

Quote
then shouldn't it be called the holy see of damascus? if it know longer exist within the city/place where it was founded by the apstles,  then was is the point.

In that case, several of your medieval Popes were not in fact "Bishop of Rome" at all, but Bishops of Avignon.

Quote
and should not the patriarch of costantnople be called the patriarch of "istanbul". Constantinople doesn't longer exist.

In unaware of any Orthodox who accept what the Turks did - I've never referred to it as Istanbul, even in conversations with non-Orthodox (much to their confusion until I explain.) Smiley

Seraphim
Logged

arimethea
Getting too old for this
Section Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Patriarchate of Antioch
Posts: 2,968


Does anyone really care what you think?


« Reply #11 on: May 06, 2004, 10:59:17 AM »

The see of the Patriarch of Antioch is still Antioch and will always be Antioch. There are several reasons for residing in Damascus; 1) Several earthquakes struck that region and much of Antioch was destroyd, 2) Antioch is now located in Turkey and for long periods Syria was more tolerant to Christians then Turkey/Ottoman, 3) Damascus became the dominant trade city of the region with the influx of Islamic control and the previous mention of the destruction of Antioch.

Even the Roman Catholic "Patriarch" of Antioch lives in Damascus because of many of these reasons. I am not sure how big the Christian population is in Antioch (Antakya) but I doubt it is very large because it is in Turkey and they did a very good job of killing off the Christian population in the last 400 years.

Logged

Joseph
ania
Life according to Abe Simpson:
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,097



« Reply #12 on: May 06, 2004, 11:28:54 AM »

Istanbul was Constantinople
Now it's Istanbul, not Constantinople
Been a long time gone, Constantinople
Now it's Turkish delight on a moonlit night

Every gal in Constantinople
Lives in Istanbul, not Constantinople
So if you've a date in Constantinople
She'll be waiting in Istanbul

Even old New York was once New Amsterdam
Why they changed it I can't say
People just liked it better that way

So take me back to Constantinople
No, you can't go back to Constantinople
Been a long time gone, Constantinople
Why did Constantinople get the works
That's nobody's business but the Turks

Istanbul (Istanbul)
Istanbul (Istanbul)

Even old New York was once New Amsterdam
Why they changed it I can't say
People just liked it better that way

Istanbul was Constantinople
Now it's Istanbul, not Constantinople
Been a long time gone, Constantinople
Why did Constantinople get the works
That's nobody's business but the Turks

So take me back to Constantinople
No, you can't go back to Constantinople
Been a long time gone, Constantinople
Why did Constantinople get the works
That's nobody's business but the Turks

Istanbul
Logged

Now where were we? Oh yeah - the important thing was I had an onion on my belt, which was the style at the time. They didn’t have white onions because of the war. The only thing you could get was those big yellow ones...
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #13 on: May 06, 2004, 11:39:46 AM »

The see of the Patriarch of Antioch is still Antioch and will always be Antioch. There are several reasons for residing in Damascus; 1) Several earthquakes struck that region and much of Antioch was destroyd, 2) Antioch is now located in Turkey and for long periods Syria was more tolerant to Christians then Turkey/Ottoman, 3) Damascus became the dominant trade city of the region with the influx of Islamic control and the previous mention of the destruction of Antioch.

Not to mention that the Turks were not about to allow TWP Orthodox Patriarchs to continue within the borders of "Turkey".

Quote
Even the Roman Catholic "Patriarch" of Antioch lives in Damascus because of many of these reasons. I am not sure how big the Christian population is in Antioch (Antakya) but I doubt it is very large because it is in Turkey and they did a very good job of killing off the Christian population in the last 400 years.


As noted above about Avignon - the Popes (of Rome) also resided for some  periods at Ravenna.

Demetri
Logged

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

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #14 on: May 06, 2004, 11:51:19 AM »

And shouldn't the Holy See of Rome have changed it's name to the Holy See of Avignon, when for a period of time, the Popes of Rome were actually Frenchmen living in France?

No.. it is very different. Rome still existed when the popes where exiled to france.  constantinople no longer exist.

why are we turning this thread into a ponting finger fiasco. I knew that this was going to be done.



Logged
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #15 on: May 06, 2004, 11:55:14 AM »

RomanByzantium,In that case, several of your medieval Popes were not in fact "Bishop of Rome" at all, but Bishops of Avignon.In unaware of any Orthodox who accept what the Turks did - I've never referred to it as Istanbul, even in conversations with non-Orthodox (much to their confusion until I explain.) Smiley

Seraphim


But rome still existed even when the popes where in exile to france. constantinople does not exist anymore.

Logged
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #16 on: May 06, 2004, 12:01:00 PM »

The see of the Patriarch of Antioch is still Antioch and will always be Antioch. There are several reasons for residing in Damascus; 1) Several earthquakes struck that region and much of Antioch was destroyd, 2) Antioch is now located in Turkey and for long periods Syria was more tolerant to Christians then Turkey/Ottoman, 3) Damascus became the dominant trade city of the region with the influx of Islamic control and the previous mention of the destruction of Antioch.

Even the Roman Catholic "Patriarch" of Antioch lives in Damascus because of many of these reasons. I am not sure how big the Christian population is in Antioch (Antakya) but I doubt it is very large because it is in Turkey and they did a very good job of killing off the Christian population in the last 400 years.



But antioch is different because it still exists to this day. constantinople does not exist at all.
Logged
Amadeus
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 268


I'm a llama!


« Reply #17 on: May 06, 2004, 12:21:03 PM »

Dear Friends:

Given the predisposition of RB to defend the Roman position, allow me to rephrase his question to:  "How many of the "apostolic" sees still remain in (or are back to) their original place of establishment/founding?

Let us further assume that we refer to those apostolic sees as the original 5 Patriarchates of Rome, Constantinople, Antioch, Alexandria, and Jerusalem.

Within these parameters, only the Patriarchate of Antioch seems to be displaced for the reasons already mentioned, with the Patriarchate of Constantinople in danger of being smoked out of Istanbul.

The Patriarchate of Jerusalem is, of course, presently under the strictures of the Israeli government and the Patriarchate of Alexandira is slowly being engulfed by Islam.

As a vibrant, alive, and freely "functioning" Patriarchal See, central to the governance of the territorial reaches of the Church/Churches under its provenance, arguably only the See of Rome is extant to this day, which leads me to reference made by RB on the current signification of the "Holy See."  

In modern parlance, the "Holy See" refers to none other than the Roman See. Alternately, it refers to the Vatican City State, de facto et de jure, as enshrined by international law and comity and recognized by ALL  members of the United Nations.  Thus, plenipotentiaries appointed by individual countries to the Vatican present their "letters of credence" to the Pope as ambassadors to the Holy See.

Feel free to disagree.

Amado
Logged
Brendan03
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 544



« Reply #18 on: May 06, 2004, 12:24:34 PM »

But antioch is different because it still exists to this day. constantinople does not exist at all.

What does that mean?  Both of them exist, even if the Turks renamed one of them to suit a Turkic corruption of the Greek (eis ton polli).

In any case, I for one (and I know I am going to get slagged for this) think that we should have a new first hierarch in Orthodoxy, Constantinople is not coming back, and the fact that we have the first hierarch located there is doing great harm to the Orthodox Church.   We're the first ones to argue that the canons at Chalcedon that raised the See of Constantinople had a pragmatic origin based on the status of that city as the imperial capital ... but of course, it is no longer the capital and it is no longer Orthodox, so the basis for that see being the First See, the primus-inter-pares, no longer obtains.

That begs the question of who should be that first hierarch, where he should be located and the like.  It seems likely that, because we do not have an earthly emperor to impose this on us, we will likely not agree as to who should be the first hierarch.  Moscow seems a likely choice, but noone else will agree.  Some have proposed the creation of a new Ecumenical Patriarchate somewhere ... maybe Athens or maybe even in New York.  Not likely either would fly with the other Orthodox Churches.  So likely we will remain frozen with the current system that, in a sense, ridicules our own ecclesiology.

Reminds me of something an Orthodox priest quipped to me once:  "If it looks organized, then you know that it can't be Orthodox".

Brendan
Logged

B
theodore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 194


« Reply #19 on: May 06, 2004, 02:54:47 PM »

But antioch is different because it still exists to this day. constantinople does not exist at all.
Sure it exists.  If the Italian government renamed Rome, would the Rome cease to exist?  By your logic, the Pope no longer resides in Rome, but a new nation created from a former part of the city of Rome called Vatican City, which is it's own government.  Your original question was answered, which is, all of the original patriarchal Sees still exist.  Your attempt to insinuate that a certain See doesn't exist because of name change of the City by the civil authorities is weak.  Give it a rest.
Logged
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #20 on: May 06, 2004, 03:03:55 PM »

Sure it exists.  If the Italian government renamed Rome, would the Rome cease to exist?  By your logic, the Pope no longer resides in Rome, but a new nation created from a former part of the city of Rome called Vatican City, which is it's own government.  Your original question was answered, which is, all of the original patriarchal Sees still exist.  Your attempt to insinuate that a certain See doesn't exist because of name change of the City by the civil authorities is weak.  Give it a rest.

Your last sentence makes so sense whatsoever.

Don't get bend out of shape. No one is insinuating anthing. Your sesibilities are getting in the way. I knoew that this was going to happen.

well, Rome still exists. but the pope is head of vatican city state to protect him from political influence and it is Bishop of Rome, Italy.

« Last Edit: May 06, 2004, 03:15:20 PM by romanbyzantium » Logged
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #21 on: May 06, 2004, 03:10:27 PM »

What does that mean?  Both of them exist, even if the Turks renamed one of them to suit a Turkic corruption of the Greek (eis ton polli).


Brendan

But it is called Istanbul in the country political state of Turkey.  The Christian city of Constantinople only exists in the pages of history and memory. Constantinople was destroyed and rebuilt and taken over by the Muslims. That is the reality.

We can't go one saying that the middle east is Christian when in fact it is no longer. a long time ago... it was but, we can't blind ourselves with delusions that those are Christian lands under Muslim control.

Logged
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,495


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #22 on: May 06, 2004, 03:40:26 PM »

Quote
We can't go one saying that the middle east is Christian when in fact it is no longer. a long time ago... it was but, we can't blind ourselves with delusions that those are Christian lands under Muslim control.

We really can't go on saying Europe is either.  Whereas the Muslims have taken control of the Middle East, secular humanism has taken hold in Europe.  France has pretty much outlawed any and all public religious expression.  One look at Italian television will toss any idea that it's a "Christian" nation into the proverbial fire.  There's quite a force within the EU to expunge any mention of Europe's Christian past from the European Constitution.

« Last Edit: May 06, 2004, 03:46:05 PM by Schultz » Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
Orthodoc
Supporter & Defender Of Orthodoxy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 2,526

Those who ignore history tend to repeat it.


« Reply #23 on: May 06, 2004, 06:27:53 PM »

[Constantinople was destroyed and rebuilt and taken over by the Muslims. That is the reality.]

Constantinople, although taken over by the Muslims,  was never destroyed and rebuilt.

Orthodoc
Logged

Oh Lord, Save thy people and bless thine inheritance.
Grant victory to the Orthodox Christians over their adversaries.
And by virtue of thy Cross preserve thy habitation.
Mor Ephrem
NO TENURE FOR DEPONIO!!
Section Moderator
Stratopedarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 18,765


"And you shall call his name Jesus..."


WWW
« Reply #24 on: May 06, 2004, 06:44:39 PM »

Dear RB,

Would you please expound on what, to you, determines whether a particular see has become non-existant?
Logged

The Mor has spoken. Let his word endure unto the ages of ages.

Please, James, tell us more about women!
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #25 on: May 06, 2004, 07:24:27 PM »

Dear RB,

Would you please expound on what, to you, determines whether a particular see has become non-existant?

ok... here goes... my attempt at explaining what I mean.

If the city or place seizes to exist.  How can you be bishop of rome without a rome, patriarch of antioch without antioch, etc...

To me it sounds funny to say or hear " The patriarch of constantinople", when where he lives is called Istanbul, Turkey. Constantinople is long gone and it will never return...unless by miracle of God.

They should be called Rome, Istanbul, Antioch, Alexandria, and Jerusalem.


The Dutch don't go around calling new york ...new amsterdam.

What happens when the christian community is no longer in these communities, can they still be called holy sees even with no christians living there?

Please, Please don't take what I am writing as an insult. I know how sesitive these topics can be. I am only want to generate some freindly polemics.
« Last Edit: May 06, 2004, 07:27:45 PM by romanbyzantium » Logged
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #26 on: May 06, 2004, 07:30:01 PM »

What does that mean?  Both of them exist, even if the Turks renamed one of them to suit a Turkic corruption of the Greek (eis ton polli).

In any case, I for one (and I know I am going to get slagged for this) think that we should have a new first hierarch in Orthodoxy, Constantinople is not coming back, and the fact that we have the first hierarch located there is doing great harm to the Orthodox Church.   We're the first ones to argue that the canons at Chalcedon that raised the See of Constantinople had a pragmatic origin based on the status of that city as the imperial capital ... but of course, it is no longer the capital and it is no longer Orthodox, so the basis for that see being the First See, the primus-inter-pares, no longer obtains.

That begs the question of who should be that first hierarch, where he should be located and the like.  It seems likely that, because we do not have an earthly emperor to impose this on us, we will likely not agree as to who should be the first hierarch.  Moscow seems a likely choice, but noone else will agree.  Some have proposed the creation of a new Ecumenical Patriarchate somewhere ... maybe Athens or maybe even in New York.  Not likely either would fly with the other Orthodox Churches.  So likely we will remain frozen with the current system that, in a sense, ridicules our own ecclesiology.

Reminds me of something an Orthodox priest quipped to me once:  "If it looks organized, then you know that it can't be Orthodox".

Brendan

How can you create a new ECP without an emperor? The next see in line should be regarded within orthodoxy as first among equals. I believe it is alexandria.
Logged
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #27 on: May 06, 2004, 07:31:51 PM »

[Constantinople was destroyed and rebuilt and taken over by the Muslims. That is the reality.]

Constantinople, although taken over by the Muslims,  was never destroyed and rebuilt.

Orthodoc


of course it was. what do you think happens in wars and subsequent Muslim additions and demolitions.
Logged
Mor Ephrem
NO TENURE FOR DEPONIO!!
Section Moderator
Stratopedarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 18,765


"And you shall call his name Jesus..."


WWW
« Reply #28 on: May 06, 2004, 07:37:43 PM »

ok... here goes... my attempt at explaining what I mean.

If the city or place seizes to exist.  How can you be bishop of rome without a rome, patriarch of antioch without antioch, etc...

To me it sounds funny to say or hear " The patriarch of constantinople", when where he lives is called Istanbul, Turkey. Constantinople is long gone and it will never return...unless by miracle of God.

But, RB, the point is that the city hasn't ceased to exist.  True, it has a different name in common parlance (although, as I believe was noted earlier in this thread, some/many/most Orthodox don't seem to have accepted the legitimacy of the name change beyond mere convention), but it is the same place.  If "Jane Doe", upon marriage, becomes "Jane Smith", she doesn't cease to exist; she merely has a different surname that addresses a different condition (married vs. single).  You do not have a problem with the Bishops of Rome being called Bishops of Rome even when they were displaced in Avignon because Rome still existed.  So does Constantinople.  

If your entire argument is based on the fact that one city has had its name changed (as it seems to me), it's a pretty lame argument.
Logged

The Mor has spoken. Let his word endure unto the ages of ages.

Please, James, tell us more about women!
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #29 on: May 06, 2004, 07:53:26 PM »

But, RB, the point is that the city hasn't ceased to exist.  True, it has a different name in common parlance (although, as I believe was noted earlier in this thread, some/many/most Orthodox don't seem to have accepted the legitimacy of the name change beyond mere convention), but it is the same place.  If "Jane Doe", upon marriage, becomes "Jane Smith", she doesn't cease to exist; she merely has a different surname that addresses a different condition (married vs. single).  You do not have a problem with the Bishops of Rome being called Bishops of Rome even when they were displaced in Avignon because Rome still existed.  So does Constantinople.  

If your entire argument is based on the fact that one city has had its name changed (as it seems to me), it's a pretty lame argument.  

Not only has the city changed in name but in everything.  culture, religion and national origin. it is not only a name change as you say. if it far more than that.

should I refer to new york as new amsterdam? and say that it is really a dutch city and not an american english one.

« Last Edit: May 06, 2004, 07:57:32 PM by romanbyzantium » Logged
arimethea
Getting too old for this
Section Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Patriarchate of Antioch
Posts: 2,968


Does anyone really care what you think?


« Reply #30 on: May 06, 2004, 07:56:47 PM »

I know many people who call Isreal Palistine and refuse to call that country anything other then Palistine or Occupied Palistine. The Turks had no desire to change the name of Constantinople, it is only through their misunderstanding and lack of understanding of the greek languague that they called it es ton poll. And to your logic Antioch is now called Antaky in turkish so therefore Antioch does not exist with your criteria but the RC church still has a  "Patriarch" of Antioch in the region. And the pope still refers to the Orthodox bishop in Instanbul as the Patriarch of Constantinople, so if you are a good Roman Catholic who follows the popes example you should therefor also refer to him as the Patriarch of Constantinople.
Logged

Joseph
Mor Ephrem
NO TENURE FOR DEPONIO!!
Section Moderator
Stratopedarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 18,765


"And you shall call his name Jesus..."


WWW
« Reply #31 on: May 06, 2004, 07:57:04 PM »

Quote
Not only has the city changed in name but in everything.  culture, religion and national origin. it is not only a name change as you say. if it far more than that.

But no one names a town with an eye toward circumscribing culture, religion, and national origin.  They just name a town.
« Last Edit: May 06, 2004, 07:58:23 PM by Mor Ephrem » Logged

The Mor has spoken. Let his word endure unto the ages of ages.

Please, James, tell us more about women!
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #32 on: May 06, 2004, 08:02:21 PM »

I know many people who call Isreal Palistine and refuse to call that country anything other then Palistine or Occupied Palistine. The Turks had no desire to change the name of Constantinople, it is only through their misunderstanding and lack of understanding of the greek languague that they called it es ton poll. And to your logic Antioch is now called Antaky in turkish so therefore Antioch does not exist with your criteria but the RC church still has a  "Patriarch" of Antioch in the region. And the pope still refers to the Orthodox bishop in Instanbul as the Patriarch of Constantinople, so if you are a good Roman Catholic who follows the popes example you should therefor also refer to him as the Patriarch of Constantinople.

sure cause they are in denial of the obvious.

It does not matter if there was a misunderstanding. the turks conquered the city and turned it into a muslim city. they changed its culture and religion for ever.

Just the way granada was a muslim city and much of southern spain but now it is a christian stroghold. muslim granada has nothing in common with christian granada. two very different places in two different time in history.
Logged
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #33 on: May 06, 2004, 08:04:38 PM »

But no one names a town with an eye toward circumscribing culture, religion, and national origin.  They just name a town.  

of course they do. that is what conquerors do. that is the beginning of it all until nothing is left of the old.
Logged
Mor Ephrem
NO TENURE FOR DEPONIO!!
Section Moderator
Stratopedarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 18,765


"And you shall call his name Jesus..."


WWW
« Reply #34 on: May 06, 2004, 08:16:17 PM »

I don't know how to answer that, so I won't.  I will instead ask a question.  Why does it matter to you if the Orthodox world, Roman Catholics, etc. refer to the Ecumenical Patriarch(ate) as the Patriarch(ate) of Constantinople?
Logged

The Mor has spoken. Let his word endure unto the ages of ages.

Please, James, tell us more about women!
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #35 on: May 06, 2004, 08:22:45 PM »

I don't know how to answer that, so I won't.  I will instead ask a question.  Why does it matter to you if the Orthodox world, Roman Catholics, etc. refer to the Ecumenical Patriarch(ate) as the Patriarch(ate) of Constantinople?

It doesn't matter to me. I just asked because it sounds funny referring to a place that no longer exists as if it still does.  If the pope and the orthodox world like to reminisce about those things, I am no one to argue with them.

Logged
Mor Ephrem
NO TENURE FOR DEPONIO!!
Section Moderator
Stratopedarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 18,765


"And you shall call his name Jesus..."


WWW
« Reply #36 on: May 06, 2004, 08:35:52 PM »

I would like to hear your take on how the culture and religion of the city of Rome today is the same as the culture and religion of the city of Rome when Saint Linus was Pope.
Logged

The Mor has spoken. Let his word endure unto the ages of ages.

Please, James, tell us more about women!
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #37 on: May 06, 2004, 08:45:14 PM »

I would like to hear your take on how the culture and religion of the city of Rome today is the same as the culture and religion of the city of Rome when Saint Linus was Pope.  

The difference is that rome was never taken over by muslim culture and religion and became a beacon of that civilization.

Rome had a christian population and in due time became  dominant culturally and politically. the reverse happened in constantinople. The conqueror change the name of the city and proceeded with its plan until they got to istanbul, wholly muslim in all matters.

Just the same way like New Amsterdam became New York. Dutch ways gave way for english ways.

Logged
Mor Ephrem
NO TENURE FOR DEPONIO!!
Section Moderator
Stratopedarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 18,765


"And you shall call his name Jesus..."


WWW
« Reply #38 on: May 06, 2004, 08:53:38 PM »

The difference is that rome was never taken over by muslim culture and religion and became a beacon of that civilization.

At first, your point was that the culture and religion of the city changed, and so it's no longer the same place it once was.  Well, the present culture of old Rome is very different from what it was in the early days of the Church, and the present religion (Roman Catholicism) is in many ways very different from what it used to be (Orthodoxy).  But now are you making an exception...Islam makes all the difference?  Change is change, RB.  

For your argument's sake, I hope Rome doesn't get taken over by Muslim culture and religion...the way things are going, you never know.  Tongue
Logged

The Mor has spoken. Let his word endure unto the ages of ages.

Please, James, tell us more about women!
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #39 on: May 06, 2004, 09:04:14 PM »

At first, your point was that the culture and religion of the city changed, and so it's no longer the same place it once was.  Well, the present culture of old Rome is very different from what it was in the early days of the Church, and the present religion (Roman Catholicism) is in many ways very different from what it used to be (Orthodoxy).  But now are you making an exception...Islam makes all the difference?  Change is change, RB.  

For your argument's sake, I hope Rome doesn't get taken over by Muslim culture and religion...the way things are going, you never know.  Tongue

First, orthodoxy was never the religion of Rome. orthodoxy was/is the religion of the east NOT the west.

I am not making no exception whatsoever. one city remained christian while the other became a muslim stronghold.

As for your last comment... I highly doubt it. europeans are very concience of what/whom they are.
Logged
Mor Ephrem
NO TENURE FOR DEPONIO!!
Section Moderator
Stratopedarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 18,765


"And you shall call his name Jesus..."


WWW
« Reply #40 on: May 06, 2004, 09:25:30 PM »

First, orthodoxy was never the religion of Rome. orthodoxy was/is the religion of the east NOT the west.

If, by Orthodoxy, you are thinking of "Byzantine rite", then maybe.  But Orthodoxy is more than a rite.  

Quote
I am not making no exception whatsoever. one city remained christian while the other became a muslim stronghold.

Or, perhaps, one city succumbed faster than the other, which is degenerating from its Orthodox roots to "cultural Christianity", secularism, Islam, or any combination thereof?  

Quote
As for your last comment... I highly doubt it. europeans are very concience of what/whom they are.

But that's what everyone says.
Logged

The Mor has spoken. Let his word endure unto the ages of ages.

Please, James, tell us more about women!
Orthodoc
Supporter & Defender Of Orthodoxy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 2,526

Those who ignore history tend to repeat it.


« Reply #41 on: May 06, 2004, 10:35:51 PM »

[First, orthodoxy was never the religion of Rome. orthodoxy was/is the religion of the east NOT the west. ]

That's true only if you base Orthodoxy completely on Ritual.  Which seems to be what all those Catholics in communion with Rome seem to do.  Especially those within the Unia who seem to use it as an excuse to make the false claim that they are 'Orthodox In Communion With Rome'

Orthodox Catholicity in reality, is based on a faith that is expressed in the unchanging  doctrines and dogma it believes and professes.  It has neither added to those doctrines (as Rome),  subtracted from those doctrines as Protestants, or changed those doctrines as both the RCC & Protestant churches have done.  Everything it still believes is that which was believed and formulated when the church was still basically one and  united.  It alone comes closest to St Vincents definition of what the Catholic Church is -


 "Hold fast that faith which has been believed everywhere, always, and by all."

So, yes at one time Rome was  Orthodox in its faith.  

Orthodoc




« Last Edit: May 06, 2004, 10:38:43 PM by Orthodoc » Logged

Oh Lord, Save thy people and bless thine inheritance.
Grant victory to the Orthodox Christians over their adversaries.
And by virtue of thy Cross preserve thy habitation.
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

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


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #42 on: May 06, 2004, 11:44:10 PM »

RB--

When did Constantinople cease being Roman?  331?  518?  1054?  1204?  1247? 1453?

Are the Romanians Romans?

anastasios
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

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

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #43 on: May 06, 2004, 11:52:48 PM »

[First, orthodoxy was never the religion of Rome. orthodoxy was/is the religion of the east NOT the west. ]

That's true only if you base Orthodoxy completely on Ritual.  Which seems to be what all those Catholics in communion with Rome seem to do.  Especially those within the Unia who seem to use it as an excuse to make the false claim that they are 'Orthodox In Communion With Rome'

Orthodox Catholicity in reality, is based on a faith that is expressed in the unchanging  doctrines and dogma it believes and professes.  It has neither added to those doctrines (as Rome),  subtracted from those doctrines as Protestants, or changed those doctrines as both the RCC & Protestant churches have done.  Everything it still believes is that which was believed and formulated when the church was still basically one and  united.  It alone comes closest to St Vincents definition of what the Catholic Church is -


 "Hold fast that faith which has been believed everywhere, always, and by all."

So, yes at one time Rome was  Orthodox in its faith.  

Orthodoc


yes orthodoc, you keep believeing that.  

then please explain why is it that you believe things that was not believed by the 2nd century christians.
Logged
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #44 on: May 07, 2004, 12:05:44 AM »

RB--

When did Constantinople cease being Roman?  331?  518?  1054?  1204?  1247? 1453?

Are the Romanians Romans?

anastasios

That is not issue at all.

the romanians do share in the roman legacy as a conquered people that were romanized.
« Last Edit: May 07, 2004, 12:17:54 AM by romanbyzantium » Logged
Fr. David
The Poster Formerly Known as "Pedro"
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA, Diocese of the South
Posts: 2,831



WWW
« Reply #45 on: May 07, 2004, 12:47:52 AM »

Why did Constantinople get the works
That's nobody's business but the Turks

Istanbul

Ah...They Might Be Giants.  Very cool, ania.  Think I'll find the mp3 now.
Logged

Priest in the Orthodox Church in America - ordained on March 18, 2012

Oh Taste and See (my defunct blog)

From Protestant to Orthodox (my conversion story)
prodromos
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 1,463

Sydney, Australia


« Reply #46 on: May 07, 2004, 03:19:08 AM »

then please explain why is it that you believe things that was not believed by the 2nd century christians.

Such as ...?
Logged
theodore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 194


« Reply #47 on: May 07, 2004, 06:24:20 AM »

That is not issue at all.

the romanians do share in the roman legacy as a conquered people that were romanized.
So, does that therefore make them Romans?
Logged
ania
Life according to Abe Simpson:
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,097



« Reply #48 on: May 07, 2004, 11:52:25 AM »

They Might Be Giants, one of my favorite bands of all time.
Logged

Now where were we? Oh yeah - the important thing was I had an onion on my belt, which was the style at the time. They didn’t have white onions because of the war. The only thing you could get was those big yellow ones...
Brendan03
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 544



« Reply #49 on: May 07, 2004, 12:16:45 PM »

They Might Be Giants, one of my favorite bands of all time.

Yep, they always manage to make me laugh.
Logged

B
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,495


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #50 on: May 07, 2004, 12:17:41 PM »

Quote
The difference is that rome was never taken over by muslim culture and religion and became a beacon of that civilization.

Kind of like how Rome was taken over-run by the pagan barbarian tribes at the end of the 5th centry?

I still say this dude is a troll.  No one is this thick or likes to argue this much over such trivialities.
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
Seraphim Reeves
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 450



WWW
« Reply #51 on: May 07, 2004, 12:23:28 PM »

RomanByzantium,

Quote
No.. it is very different. Rome still existed when the popes where exiled to france.  constantinople no longer exist.

How so.  Last time I checked, Constantinople still existed, Orthodox still called it Constantinople.  Oh but wait...things have changed, right?   It's not the same Constantinople it was say, 1000 years ago.  But alas, "Rome" is not the same "Rome" it was 1000 years ago either. Smiley

Quote
why are we turning this thread into a ponting finger fiasco. I knew that this was going to be done.

I can't stand passive aggressive people.

Seraphim
Logged

Seraphim Reeves
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 450



WWW
« Reply #52 on: May 07, 2004, 12:32:01 PM »

RomanByzantium,

Quote
Not only has the city changed in name but in everything.  culture, religion and national origin. it is not only a name change as you say. if it far more than that.

Rome used to be a pagan capital, where most of the hoi poloi spoke Greek, their "betters" spoke Latin, and where a culturally and ethnically semitic Bishop oversaw a growing flock composed of slaves, common folk, members of the Senate, and even members of the Emperor's house.

Does that sound much like the institution situated in the sovereign city state of the Vatican (carved out of a piece of Rome, which is currently the capital of yet another more modern country, Italy, which has gone through many changes in government) which only speaks a language very vaguely resembling Latin, in which almost the entire population is nominally Roman Catholic (though only a minory are regular Church goers)?

This reminds me of your absurd arguments against the East Roman Empire being in fact "Roman."  Simply put, you're being a label queen.

Seraphim
Logged

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

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #53 on: May 07, 2004, 12:37:56 PM »

First, orthodoxy was never the religion of Rome. orthodoxy was/is the religion of the east NOT the west.

I am not making no exception whatsoever. one city remained christian while the other became a muslim stronghold.

As for your last comment... I highly doubt it. europeans are very concience of what/whom they are.

well, lets look at some demographics.  To maintain a steady population, you need a birthrate of 2.1 children per family.  Italian families average 1.2 with less than one per family in Rome and the other large cities.  Therefore within 50 years Italy will have on average 3 times as many Retirees as workers.  They will need to import from somewhere.  Other European countries are facing similar problems.  Their solution has been to invite millions of Muslims into Europe who reproduce at a rate of about 6-7 children per family.  Sad to say, withiin 100 years you will not be able to tell the difference between the cultures of italy, spain and france on one hand and Syria, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia on the other.  Numbers don't lie man.

Joe Zollars
Logged

These posts no longer represent my beliefs and I in no way endorse their contents.
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,495


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #54 on: May 07, 2004, 12:40:48 PM »

Quote
Numbers don't lie man.

"There are three kinds of lies:  lies, damned lies, and statistics."
                                   - Benjamin Disraeli by way of Mark Twain


Wink
« Last Edit: May 07, 2004, 12:41:25 PM by Schultz » Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #55 on: May 07, 2004, 12:42:14 PM »

Quote
The difference is that rome was never taken over by muslim culture and religion and became a beacon of that civilization.

Kind of like how Rome was taken over-run by the pagan barbarian tribes at the end of the 5th centry?

I still say this dude is a troll.  No one is this thick or likes to argue this much over such trivialities.  

This is my hypothesis as well.

Joe Zollars
Logged

These posts no longer represent my beliefs and I in no way endorse their contents.
JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #56 on: May 07, 2004, 12:44:23 PM »

hehe!  I gotta remember that quote for next semester!

Joe Zollars
Logged

These posts no longer represent my beliefs and I in no way endorse their contents.
Orthodoc
Supporter & Defender Of Orthodoxy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 2,526

Those who ignore history tend to repeat it.


« Reply #57 on: May 07, 2004, 01:17:24 PM »

I still say this dude is a troll.  No one is this thick or likes to argue this much over such trivialities.  
 
 

This is my hypothesis as well.

Joe Zollars

=======

As it is mine!  This person is not interested in dialogue just getting in the last word.

Orthodoc
Logged

Oh Lord, Save thy people and bless thine inheritance.
Grant victory to the Orthodox Christians over their adversaries.
And by virtue of thy Cross preserve thy habitation.
ExOrienteLux
Waning: Spoilers
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 183



« Reply #58 on: May 07, 2004, 03:46:18 PM »

I still say this dude is a troll.  No one is this thick or likes to argue this much over such trivialities.  
 
 

This is my hypothesis as well.

Joe Zollars

=======

As it is mine!  This person is not interested in dialogue just getting in the last word.

Orthodoc

Wow, Orthodoc.  If that's what qualifies as a troll, then I know lots of 'em.  Here in the middle of Reformation-Land, we're always disagreeing over trivialities and I'm always wrong, since I'm a 'lapsed' Protestant.

I like to think of myself as a Protestant in the truest sense of the word, though: I've protested the excesses of Rome by returning to the Apostolic Church.  Grin

Josh  Grin Cheesy Grin
Logged

Arise, O God! Judge the earth, for to Thee belong all the nations!
JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #59 on: May 07, 2004, 04:41:02 PM »

lol! welcome to the club Josh!  I like to think of myself as being a Reformer--Reforming my life and theology to be in line and in the Orthodox Church.

But seriously, what we are talking about in regards to RB is simply that all he does is come here,  post something totally off the wall with no basis in fact, insult anyone who disagrees with him, hurl a few slanders around, and generally refuse to answer points made against his argument.  For instance in one of his posts on the first page of this thread, he said it should no longer be called "Patriarch of Antioch" because the patriarch resides in Damascas.  Then when someone pointed out that this argument was false because for a lenghty period of time the "pope" of Rome was in Avingnon and not in Rome.  Then instead of changing his position, he brings in Istanbull out of the woodwork to try and make some other point and hurl some more insults.  

Add this to his earlier trackrecord (i.e. bragging that he was recieving communion in Orthodox Churches he attended with his cousins by marriage and not telling the Priest he is not Orthodox, etc. ) leads many of us to believe he is a troll.

Joe Zollars
Logged

These posts no longer represent my beliefs and I in no way endorse their contents.
JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #60 on: May 07, 2004, 04:41:38 PM »

I normally don't like being so blunt, but thems the facts as this reporter sees em.

Joe Zollars
Logged

These posts no longer represent my beliefs and I in no way endorse their contents.
ExOrienteLux
Waning: Spoilers
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 183



« Reply #61 on: May 07, 2004, 05:19:38 PM »

I know what you're talking about, Joe.  I've realized that same thing myself.

Whaddaya say we go troll-hunting? Wink
Logged

Arise, O God! Judge the earth, for to Thee belong all the nations!
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #62 on: May 07, 2004, 05:42:33 PM »

lol! welcome to the club Josh!  I like to think of myself as being a Reformer--Reforming my life and theology to be in line and in the Orthodox Church.

But seriously, what we are talking about in regards to RB is simply that all he does is come here,  post something totally off the wall with no basis in fact, insult anyone who disagrees with him, hurl a few slanders around, and generally refuse to answer points made against his argument.  For instance in one of his posts on the first page of this thread, he said it should no longer be called "Patriarch of Antioch" because the patriarch resides in Damascas.  Then when someone pointed out that this argument was false because for a lenghty period of time the "pope" of Rome was in Avingnon and not in Rome.  Then instead of changing his position, he brings in Istanbull out of the woodwork to try and make some other point and hurl some more insults.  

Add this to his earlier trackrecord (i.e. bragging that he was recieving communion in Orthodox Churches he attended with his cousins by marriage and not telling the Priest he is not Orthodox, etc. ) leads many of us to believe he is a troll.

Joe Zollars

Point to constantinople on a map for me Joe?

I insult people!!!!!!!! who  are the ones calling people names?  you guys are acting like protestants and jews.

Logged
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #63 on: May 07, 2004, 05:44:42 PM »

Quote
The difference is that rome was never taken over by muslim culture and religion and became a beacon of that civilization.

Kind of like how Rome was taken over-run by the pagan barbarian tribes at the end of the 5th centry?

I still say this dude is a troll.  No one is this thick or likes to argue this much over such trivialities.  

sure shutlz... but one remain christian while the other was destroyed, renamed and to this day is a muslim stronghold.

why are you guys getting so defensive?HuhHuhHuh
Logged
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #64 on: May 07, 2004, 05:47:00 PM »

RomanByzantium,How so.  Last time I checked, Constantinople still existed, Orthodox still called it Constantinople.  Oh but wait...things have changed, right?   It's not the same Constantinople it was say, 1000 years ago.  But alas, "Rome" is not the same "Rome" it was 1000 years ago either. :)I can't stand passive aggressive people.

Seraphim


really constantinople still exist? point it to me on a map.

rome exists...........constantinople does not. that is the difference.  oh wait, New york is really new amsterdam. NOT!!!!
Logged
Mor Ephrem
NO TENURE FOR DEPONIO!!
Section Moderator
Stratopedarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 18,765


"And you shall call his name Jesus..."


WWW
« Reply #65 on: May 07, 2004, 05:47:28 PM »

RB,

I still contend that your entire argument, if it is based solely on names (as you seem to imply by your posts), is utterly laughable...stupid, to the layman.  If you seriously think, for example, that my mom became a different entity by changing her name on her new US passport (upon being naturalised) from what it was on her Green Card, then I give up, I really do.  

Happy feast day of Saint Alexis Toth, btw.    Wink
Logged

The Mor has spoken. Let his word endure unto the ages of ages.

Please, James, tell us more about women!
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #66 on: May 07, 2004, 05:50:40 PM »

RomanByzantium,Rome used to be a pagan capital, where most of the hoi poloi spoke Greek, their "betters" spoke Latin, and where a culturally and ethnically semitic Bishop oversaw a growing flock composed of slaves, common folk, members of the Senate, and even members of the Emperor's house.

Does that sound much like the institution situated in the sovereign city state of the Vatican (carved out of a piece of Rome, which is currently the capital of yet another more modern country, Italy, which has gone through many changes in government) which only speaks a language very vaguely resembling Latin, in which almost the entire population is nominally Roman Catholic (though only a minory are regular Church goers)?

This reminds me of your absurd arguments against the East Roman Empire being in fact "Roman."  Simply put, you're being a label queen.

Seraphim


That is right seraphin.... ROME was pagan and turned christian and it still remains. I wish that I could say the same for constantinople. If you wish to reminisce about constantinople.... who am I to argue.

easter empire was roman until it became hellinized. it is in the books.
« Last Edit: May 07, 2004, 05:52:11 PM by romanbyzantium » Logged
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #67 on: May 07, 2004, 05:54:53 PM »

This is my hypothesis as well.

Joe Zollars

sure.. anthing that rocks your boat is dismissed. reminds me of the jews. oh well that is another thread.
Logged
Mor Ephrem
NO TENURE FOR DEPONIO!!
Section Moderator
Stratopedarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 18,765


"And you shall call his name Jesus..."


WWW
« Reply #68 on: May 07, 2004, 05:55:40 PM »

Are you an anti-Semite or something?  Smiley
Logged

The Mor has spoken. Let his word endure unto the ages of ages.

Please, James, tell us more about women!
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #69 on: May 07, 2004, 05:56:34 PM »

RB,

I still contend that your entire argument, if it is based solely on names (as you seem to imply by your posts), is utterly laughable...stupid, to the layman.  If you seriously think, for example, that my mom became a different entity by changing her name on her new US passport (upon being naturalised) from what it was on her Green Card, then I give up, I really do.  

Happy feast day of Saint Alexis Toth, btw.    Wink

It is not only name. It is religion, people and culture. it is a muslim city in a muslim country.

Do you believe that NEW YORK is really New Amsterdam? please answer this question for me?
Logged
Mor Ephrem
NO TENURE FOR DEPONIO!!
Section Moderator
Stratopedarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 18,765


"And you shall call his name Jesus..."


WWW
« Reply #70 on: May 07, 2004, 06:01:14 PM »

It's the same territory, isn't it?  The name has changed, but it's still where it used to be.

And, since you're big on this whole culture thing, I'd appreciate it if you would go through the differences between English and Dutch cultures at the time when control of the area changed hands.  I honestly don't know much about this, and my (perhaps ignorant) guess would ordinarily be that, aside from language and denomination, it's basically the same culture.
Logged

The Mor has spoken. Let his word endure unto the ages of ages.

Please, James, tell us more about women!
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #71 on: May 07, 2004, 06:01:16 PM »

Are you an anti-Semite or something?  Smiley

to the protestants and jews............. I am .
Logged
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #72 on: May 07, 2004, 06:03:40 PM »

It's the same territory, isn't it?  The name has changed, but it's still where it used to be.

And, since you're big on this whole culture thing, I'd appreciate it if you would go through the differences between English and Dutch cultures at the time when control of the area changed hands.  I honestly don't know much about this, and my (perhaps ignorant) guess would ordinarily be that, aside from language and denomination, it's basically the same culture.  

It is not the same culture nor are they the same people. The dutch and english are very different people's.

do you believe greek and russian cultures and people are the same?
Logged
MsGuided
Pharmakolytria
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 478


St. Anastasia


« Reply #73 on: May 07, 2004, 06:05:27 PM »

Personally, I think you guys are taking this a little far, but I'm very willing to be corrected as I'm no scholar.

New Amsterdam, as far as I know, was not a major place of authority and reverence to the Church. Hence, its name change can be tolerated and accepted.  But when something happens to a centrally Orthodox city like Constantinople, it would make sense that the people would try their hardest to maintain its originality, even if it has changed.  The least they can do is call it by its original proper name, a name dear to them, instead of a somewhat "desacrated" name. (I'm bad at history, so I don't know precisely what happened, I'm just assuming its something bad that lead to Constantinople becoming Istanbul.)

But of course, this is just what I can reason out.

Kim
Logged

"Forgive me that great love leads me to talking nonsense." Barsanuphius
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #74 on: May 07, 2004, 06:09:33 PM »

Personally, I think you guys are taking this a little far, but I'm very willing to be corrected as I'm no scholar.

New Amsterdam, as far as I know, was not a major place of authority and reverence to the Church. Hence, its name change can be tolerated and accepted.  But when something happens to a centrally Orthodox city like Constantinople, it would make sense that the people would try their hardest to maintain its originality, even if it has changed.  The least they can do is call it by its original proper name, a name dear to them, instead of a somewhat "desacrated" name. (I'm bad at history, so I don't know precisely what happened, I'm just assuming its something bad that lead to Constantinople becoming Istanbul.)

But of course, this is just what I can reason out.

Kim

Yeah... the Muslim conquerors did what all conquerors do. They destroy, rename, introduce their religion and culture until very little of the old remains.  This is how constantinople became Instabul.

All the great empires( spanish, english, romans, etc)  have done it. The Romans did it to all the people that they conquered.
« Last Edit: May 07, 2004, 06:10:40 PM by romanbyzantium » Logged
Mor Ephrem
NO TENURE FOR DEPONIO!!
Section Moderator
Stratopedarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 18,765


"And you shall call his name Jesus..."


WWW
« Reply #75 on: May 07, 2004, 06:10:23 PM »

Greeks are from the Mediterranean, Russians are farther north, their languages are different, etc., etc.  To me, all these things caused them to develop differently, and so they are different cultures.  

The Dutch and the English, however, are inhabitants of lands in the same general vicinity, share a common religion (Protestantism, if I'm not mistaken), and their languages (again, if I'm not mistaken) may be related.  If this is true, then I would think they are more alike than different.  I readily grant that I might be wrong on this, but as I said, I don't know, and was hoping you'd tell me more than "yeah, they're different".
Logged

The Mor has spoken. Let his word endure unto the ages of ages.

Please, James, tell us more about women!
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #76 on: May 07, 2004, 06:15:52 PM »

Greeks are from the Mediterranean, Russians are farther north, their languages are different, etc., etc.  To me, all these things caused them to develop differently, and so they are different cultures.  

The Dutch and the English, however, are inhabitants of lands in the same general vicinity, share a common religion (Protestantism, if I'm not mistaken), and their languages (again, if I'm not mistaken) may be related.  If this is true, then I would think they are more alike than different.  I readily grant that I might be wrong on this, but as I said, I don't know, and was hoping you'd tell me more than "yeah, they're different".    

Don't ever tell an Englishman that his culture and religion and similar to the Dutch.

Spain, france, italy greece, middle east are all from the mediterranean and look at how different culturally they are.
« Last Edit: May 07, 2004, 06:17:24 PM by romanbyzantium » Logged
Orthodoc
Supporter & Defender Of Orthodoxy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 2,526

Those who ignore history tend to repeat it.


« Reply #77 on: May 07, 2004, 06:22:31 PM »

[I like to think of myself as a Protestant in the truest sense of the word, though: I've protested the excesses of Rome by returning to the Apostolic Church.  

Josh ]

All of which makes you "A CATHOLIC NOT IN COMMUNION WITH ROME" in more ways than one!  Smiley Wink Cheesy Grin

Orthodoc
Logged

Oh Lord, Save thy people and bless thine inheritance.
Grant victory to the Orthodox Christians over their adversaries.
And by virtue of thy Cross preserve thy habitation.
Mor Ephrem
NO TENURE FOR DEPONIO!!
Section Moderator
Stratopedarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 18,765


"And you shall call his name Jesus..."


WWW
« Reply #78 on: May 07, 2004, 06:27:23 PM »

I personally see more similarity than difference in the cultures of Spain, France, and Italy as one group, Greece and the Middle East as another group, and the English and Dutch and whoever else should be in there as yet a third group.  But I will cease pushing the culture point, since I'm not very well versed on the history and cultures of the peoples of Europe, and even if I was, I doubt you'd agree.  Smiley

Anyway, you are not really addressing the issue.  You start with the fact that the names are different, and when that is shown to be a useless basis on which to claim that the entities are different, you go into the whole culture thing.  For me, this is all about land.  Furthermore, it seems like you mistakenly believe that Orthodox completely do not accept "Istanbul" as a reality.  I think they do, but they refer to their EP as that of Constantinople.  Why that is a problem for you, a member of a Church which still appoints men to be auxiliary bishops of existing dioceses and gives them the titles of sees which have been defunct for hundreds of years, and canonically enjoins them to offer the Mass on occasion for the welfare of their "diocese", is beyond me.
Logged

The Mor has spoken. Let his word endure unto the ages of ages.

Please, James, tell us more about women!
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #79 on: May 07, 2004, 06:39:37 PM »

[I like to think of myself as a Protestant in the truest sense of the word, though: I've protested the excesses of Rome by returning to the Apostolic Church.  

Josh ]

All of which makes you "A CATHOLIC NOT IN COMMUNION WITH ROME" in more ways than one!  Smiley Wink Cheesy Grin

Orthodoc    

Orthodoc,

you are so resentful of Rome.
Logged
MsGuided
Pharmakolytria
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 478


St. Anastasia


« Reply #80 on: May 07, 2004, 06:40:58 PM »

Yeah... the Muslim conquerors did what all conquerors do. They destroy, rename, introduce their religion and culture until very little of the old remains.  This is how constantinople became Instabul.

All the great empires( spanish, english, romans, etc)  have done it. The Romans did it to all the people that they conquered.

RB,

Thanks for that lesson, since I wasn't sure what had happened.

But can you tell me, did the point I was making make any sense to you?  That's the meat of what I was addressing.

Kim
Logged

"Forgive me that great love leads me to talking nonsense." Barsanuphius
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #81 on: May 07, 2004, 06:52:35 PM »

I personally see more similarity than difference in the cultures of Spain, France, and Italy as one group, Greece and the Middle East as another group, and the English and Dutch and whoever else should be in there as yet a third group.  But I will cease pushing the culture point, since I'm not very well versed on the history and cultures of the peoples of Europe, and even if I was, I doubt you'd agree.  Smiley

Anyway, you are not really addressing the issue.  You start with the fact that the names are different, and when that is shown to be a useless basis on which to claim that the entities are different, you go into the whole culture thing.  For me, this is all about land.  Furthermore, it seems like you mistakenly believe that Orthodox completely do not accept "Istanbul" as a reality.  I think they do, but they refer to their EP as that of Constantinople.  Why that is a problem for you, a member of a Church which still appoints men to be auxiliary bishops of existing dioceses and gives them the titles of sees which have been defunct for hundreds of years, and canonically enjoins them to offer the Mass on occasion for the welfare of their "diocese", is beyond me.  

I am the only one addressing the issue here.  You guys haven't shown it to be useless.. of course you guys are going to say that.

As you can see the names are different for a purpose. conquerors do that and we all know what that purpose is. we are not discussing a name change within a christian context but of one of fundemantality different religion and culture.

Nor did I say that it was a name change alone, but a city that doesn't longer exists and then I gave you the facts that supporst this claim.

If the roman church does the same please provide me with an example. and if they do then they too are in denial.


Logged
Mor Ephrem
NO TENURE FOR DEPONIO!!
Section Moderator
Stratopedarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 18,765


"And you shall call his name Jesus..."


WWW
« Reply #82 on: May 07, 2004, 06:57:16 PM »

http://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/diocese/lt.html

I'd like you to tell me how many of these places actually exist (in the way you define existence) today, RB.  Thanks.
Logged

The Mor has spoken. Let his word endure unto the ages of ages.

Please, James, tell us more about women!
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #83 on: May 07, 2004, 07:00:08 PM »

RB,

Thanks for that lesson, since I wasn't sure what had happened.

But can you tell me, did the point I was making make any sense to you?  That's the meat of what I was addressing.

Kim

I understand what you are saying. But we need to look at reality in the face and accept it.

The palestianians must accept that Israel exists today as she did centuries ago. Calling Israel palestine will not change one iota of the reality of the situation.

When I went to mexico and south america 2 years ago..... I didn't refer to mexico as New Spain or Colombia as New Granada.
Logged
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #84 on: May 07, 2004, 07:02:46 PM »

http://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/diocese/lt.html

I'd like you to tell me how many of these places actually exist (in the way you define existence) today, RB.  Thanks.


choose a country for me?

show me one see that is defunct as you say?

lets concentrate on europe since the rest of the world was evangelized by the roman church and she created their traditional hierarchies. also, lets not forget that most of europe was roman catholic.

Look at this one from the hierarchy in turkey. Look at the name below.

Archeparchy of Istanbul (Armenian)

http://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/diocese/disar.html
« Last Edit: May 07, 2004, 07:10:32 PM by romanbyzantium » Logged
Mor Ephrem
NO TENURE FOR DEPONIO!!
Section Moderator
Stratopedarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 18,765


"And you shall call his name Jesus..."


WWW
« Reply #85 on: May 07, 2004, 07:20:48 PM »

I sent you the list of titular sees, RB...all of them are defunct, that's the point.  But, here's one:

http://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/diocese/d4c39.html

I note that the diocese you cited is a currently operating diocese, and not a titular see, which is what I am talking about, but your example is also good.  I notice that, while the diocese you cite is called, in English, the Archeparchy of Istanbul (Armenian), in Latin, it is called Constantinopolitanus Armenorum.  Surely the language which gave us Archidioecesis Neo-Eboracensis for the Archdiocese of New York is smart enough to give us a latinised form of Istanbul, isn't it?  Why stick to a name of the past, which has been supplanted by conquerors of another religion and culture?
Logged

The Mor has spoken. Let his word endure unto the ages of ages.

Please, James, tell us more about women!
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #86 on: May 07, 2004, 08:19:19 PM »

I sent you the list of titular sees, RB...all of them are defunct, that's the point.  But, here's one:

http://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/diocese/d4c39.html

I note that the diocese you cited is a currently operating diocese, and not a titular see, which is what I am talking about, but your example is also good.  I notice that, while the diocese you cite is called, in English, the Archeparchy of Istanbul (Armenian), in Latin, it is called Constantinopolitanus Armenorum.  Surely the language which gave us Archidioecesis Neo-Eboracensis for the Archdiocese of New York is smart enough to give us a latinised form of Istanbul, isn't it?  Why stick to a name of the past, which has been supplanted by conquerors of another religion and culture?  

lets see the definition of defunct:

1. not operating now: no longer operative, valid, or functional
2. dead: no longer alive or in existence
 
From where do you get the information that all those in latin america and western euorpe are defunct when these are heavily catholic areas?

Umm... You are aware that the catholic faith was in the americas long before the english came and even within those protestant colonies. we are still talking about christians here not another foreign religion.

and for your last comment they should change it. remember the reminiscing  i told you about.  

also, what is a titular bishop and how are they different? and how do you know if they are defunct? where does it say that?

also, i read somewhere that istanbul is turkish name for  byzantium and not constantinople.

But, I got this from the catholic encyclopedia.

Thus was granted the sacrilegious prayer of so many Greeks, blinded by unreasoning hate, that henceforth, not the tiara, but the turban should rule in the city of Constantine. Even the name of the city was changed. The Turks call it officially (in Arabic) Der-es-Saadet, Door of Happiness, or (chiefly on coins) Konstantinieh. Their usual name for it is Stamboul, or rather Istamboul, a corruption of the Greek expression eis ten polin (pronounced stimboli), perhaps under the influence of a form, Islamboul, which could pass for "the city of Islam". Most of the churches, like St. Sophia, were gradually converted into mosques. This was the fate of SS. Sergius and Bacchus -- a beautiful monument built by Justinian, commonly called "the little St. Sophia"; of the church of the monastery of Khora, whose splendid mosaics and pictures, mostly of the fourteenth century, are among the principal curiosities of the city; of the churches of the celebrated Pantocrator and Studium monasteries, etc. Other churches were demolished and replaced by various buildings; thus the church of the Holy Apostles gave way to the great mosque built by the conquering Sultan Mohammed II. The imperial tombs in this church were violated; some of their gigantic red porphyry sarcophagi were taken to the church of St. Irene. The latter is the only church taken from the Greeks that has not been changed into a mosque or demolished; it became, and is yet an arsenal, or rather a museum of ancient weapons.



« Last Edit: May 07, 2004, 08:57:37 PM by romanbyzantium » Logged
JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #87 on: May 07, 2004, 09:09:15 PM »

sure shutlz... but one remain christian while the other was destroyed, renamed and to this day is a muslim stronghold.

why are you guys getting so defensive?HuhHuhHuh

because you are insulting us and our homeland.

Joe Zollars

BTW, get a clue.  Istanbul is Constantinople as pronounced by Arabs.
Logged

These posts no longer represent my beliefs and I in no way endorse their contents.
JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #88 on: May 07, 2004, 09:13:11 PM »

That is right seraphin.... ROME was pagan and turned christian and it still remains. I wish that I could say the same for constantinople. If you wish to reminisce about constantinople.... who am I to argue.

easter empire was roman until it became hellinized. it is in the books.

Actually, somewhat specialize in this area of history.  That halph of hte empire always spoke greek, except for a few elite who only spoke Latin while with other elite or in Rome.  Ceaser himself spoke greek when at school in Athens.  Sorry, but history confirms that Greece was never non-Greek (or non-hellenic if you prefer such terms).  

BTW, just how many people in Rome today are Christian? right.  Once again your utterly illogical argument falls flat.

Joe Zollars
Logged

These posts no longer represent my beliefs and I in no way endorse their contents.
JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #89 on: May 07, 2004, 09:14:57 PM »

sure.. anthing that rocks your boat is dismissed. reminds me of the jews. oh well that is another thread.

Noone here is against inteligent well thought out conversation, even heated ones.  Draw your own conclusions as to what that makes your diatribes you delve into much to the detriment of the forum.

Joe Zollars
Logged

These posts no longer represent my beliefs and I in no way endorse their contents.
JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #90 on: May 07, 2004, 09:20:23 PM »

Personally, I think you guys are taking this a little far, but I'm very willing to be corrected as I'm no scholar.

New Amsterdam, as far as I know, was not a major place of authority and reverence to the Church. Hence, its name change can be tolerated and accepted.  But when something happens to a centrally Orthodox city like Constantinople, it would make sense that the people would try their hardest to maintain its originality, even if it has changed.  The least they can do is call it by its original proper name, a name dear to them, instead of a somewhat "desacrated" name. (I'm bad at history, so I don't know precisely what happened, I'm just assuming its something bad that lead to Constantinople becoming Istanbul.)

But of course, this is just what I can reason out.

Kim

yes it was something bad.  It started with the RC's who overran the Phanar in the fourth crusade and ransacked the treasures of the city.  To study Bzantine Art etc. one goes to the treasury in Venice not anyplace in Constantinople.  Of course we could get into how the RomanCAtholic crusaders and their attendant clergy paid prostitutes to dance upon the Orthodox Altars, but that is beside the point.  

Basically such desecration continued under the Turkish rule as well--and to a much greater degree to an extent.

Joe Zollars
Logged

These posts no longer represent my beliefs and I in no way endorse their contents.
JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #91 on: May 07, 2004, 09:22:14 PM »

Yeah... the Muslim conquerors did what all conquerors do. They destroy, rename, introduce their religion and culture until very little of the old remains.  This is how constantinople became Instabul.

All the great empires( spanish, english, romans, etc)  have done it. The Romans did it to all the people that they conquered.

Yes this is true, but what we are saying is that we do not have to recognize the legitimacy of it.  In Orthodoxy, such could only be done under a God-Given Authority.  

JOe Zollars
Logged

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

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #92 on: May 07, 2004, 09:24:48 PM »

because you are insulting us and our homeland.

Joe Zollars

BTW, get a clue.  Istanbul is Constantinople as pronounced by Arabs.

I am not insulting anyone. where have I insulted anyone?

that is not your homeland. Unless you are converting to the muslim religion and turkish?

I though you were american?  Is not america your homeland?

who says that istanbul  is constantinople pronounced by the arabs?
Logged
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #93 on: May 07, 2004, 09:32:48 PM »

Yes this is true, but what we are saying is that we do not have to recognize the legitimacy of it.  In Orthodoxy, such could only be done under a God-Given Authority.  

JOe Zollars

Joe... God ordains everything.  not one leaf falls from a tree without his permission. What happened to constantinople was ordained by God. I believe God ordains everything!!!!!!!!!!

Do you really think that people( turkish) care if you (orthodoxs) accept the legitimacy or not? They won. Turkey is a sovereign muslim nation recognized by all countries.  Just like the pope lost the papal states.


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

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #94 on: May 07, 2004, 09:32:53 PM »

I am not insulting anyone. where have I insulted anyone?

that is not your homeland. Unless you are converting to the muslim religion and turkish?

I though you were american?  Is not america your homeland?

who says that istanbul  is constantinople pronounced by the arabs?

In just about all of your 281 posts.  Thus leading dozens of us to believe you are indeed a troll.

No, and Constantinople is not a Turkish or Mohamadean city.  It is an Orthodox City that is currently enslaved by godless forces (just like it was during the fourth crusade).  I was speaking in a spiritual sense as that area of the world is the spiritual homeland of Orthodoxy, nto a physical one.

Actually Arkansas is my physical homeland.  See my explanation above.

In regards to your last point, it has been brought up numerous times in this thread and you have systematically ignored it each time.  The argument for you being either a troll or just plain wanting to stir up trouble dost continue.

Joe Zollars
Logged

These posts no longer represent my beliefs and I in no way endorse their contents.
JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #95 on: May 07, 2004, 09:38:44 PM »

Joe... God ordains everything.  not one leaf falls from a tree without his permission. What happened to constantinople was ordained by God. I believe God ordains everything!!!!!!!!!!

Do you really think that people( turkish) care if you (orthodoxs) accept the legitimacy or not? They won. Turkey is a sovereign muslim nation recognized by all countries.  Just like the pope lost the papal states.

By referring to it by its' conquered name, we recognize its legitimacy and right to exist.  Just like if you call Jerusalem the capital of Isreal, you recognize that it is an exclusivly jewish city, and the Palestinians and Christians have no rights to it.  

God permits everything, but he does not ordain everything.  This is a very important semantic difference.  God has allowed Constantinople to be conquered, not least of all because of the Apostasy of many of the greek aristocracy at the time from the ORthodox Faith .  The same happened in 1917 in Moscow.  

God would not wish godless and satanic forces to rule the world, but just like in the book of judges, He allows it until we repent.  

If we were to call it Istanbul, we would be saying that the government of Suleimon the Magnificent or that of the modern turkish state is just as legitimate as that of St. Constantine.  Just tell that to the millions of Armenians martyred by Turkey as Roman Catholic and protestant nations looked on and did nothing.  

Joe Zollars
Logged

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

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #96 on: May 07, 2004, 09:42:56 PM »

In just about all of your 281 posts.  Thus leading dozens of us to believe you are indeed a troll.

No, and Constantinople is not a Turkish or Mohamadean city.  It is an Orthodox City that is currently enslaved by godless forces (just like it was during the fourth crusade).  I was speaking in a spiritual sense as that area of the world is the spiritual homeland of Orthodoxy, nto a physical one.

Actually Arkansas is my physical homeland.  See my explanation above.

In regards to your last point, it has been brought up numerous times in this thread and you have systematically ignored it each time.  The argument for you being either a troll or just plain wanting to stir up trouble dost continue.

Joe Zollars

You could have fooled me that istanbul is not a muslim city. Istanbul is no more orthodox than mecca is catholic. was the godless comment in refernce to catholicism? It doesn't bother me Joe. I know where I stand. btw, do you remember that bit of history when the orthodox made an alliance with the muslim to attack the western christians soldiers ( crusaders) that where on their way to free jerusalem from the muslim. You know those same people that orthodox made an alliance with. chew on that for a moment and then revisit your comment.

I have answered every single post address to me. Calling your attention to an issue and asking questions is not being a troll.
Logged
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #97 on: May 07, 2004, 09:51:00 PM »

By referring to it by its' conquered name, we recognize its legitimacy and right to exist.  Just like if you call Jerusalem the capital of Isreal, you recognize that it is an exclusivly jewish city, and the Palestinians and Christians have no rights to it.  

God permits everything, but he does not ordain everything.  This is a very important semantic difference.  God has allowed Constantinople to be conquered, not least of all because of the Apostasy of many of the greek aristocracy at the time from the ORthodox Faith .  The same happened in 1917 in Moscow.  

God would not wish godless and satanic forces to rule the world, but just like in the book of judges, He allows it until we repent.  

If we were to call it Istanbul, we would be saying that the government of Suleimon the Magnificent or that of the modern turkish state is just as legitimate as that of St. Constantine.  Just tell that to the millions of Armenians martyred by Turkey as Roman Catholic and protestant nations looked on and did nothing.  

Joe Zollars

No matter what Israel does to the christians and the palestinians... jerusalem is the capital of israel like God ordained, even with her great sins on her. Remember we are the branch that was grafted in to israel. and god gave the land to Israel.

This still doesn't stop me from criticizing her. because I believe that she will one day will repent or her crimes againt christians.

How do you know that the catholics/protestants didn't do anything? what did the orthodox do?
Logged
JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #98 on: May 07, 2004, 09:54:38 PM »

yes, and can you blame them?  They douptless thought that the crusaders were comign to finish Constantinople off.  OH and BTW, the Mohamadeans treated  adn have treated Orthodox Christians better than the RC's did when they were in control of Constantinople.  Let's not forget the paying prostitutes to dance on the Altar of hte Hagia Sophia, the raping of the women, the torture and murder of Orthodox  Priests and/or their forced conversion to Romanism.  Little wonder what happened.

Not that I am defending such an action.  I am simply saying that it is understandable given the historical circumstances.

Joe Zollars
Logged

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

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #99 on: May 07, 2004, 10:01:42 PM »

yes, and can you blame them?  They douptless thought that the crusaders were comign to finish Constantinople off.  OH and BTW, the Mohamadeans treated  adn have treated Orthodox Christians better than the RC's did when they were in control of Constantinople.  Let's not forget the paying prostitutes to dance on the Altar of hte Hagia Sophia, the raping of the women, the torture and murder of Orthodox  Priests and/or their forced conversion to Romanism.  Little wonder what happened.

Not that I am defending such an action.  I am simply saying that it is understandable given the historical circumstances.

Joe Zollars

Are we forgetting the massacre of the latins by the orthodox years before the sack of constantinople occured. and that alliance that you had with the muslim was years before the sack of constantinople. explain that? explain and alliance with muslim infidels to me. the same people that sacked and conquered constantinople.

Joe do you really believe that I don't know your history. I choose not to live in the past.
« Last Edit: May 07, 2004, 10:02:58 PM by romanbyzantium » Logged
Bono Vox
The Orthodox Bagpiper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 1,620



« Reply #100 on: May 07, 2004, 10:17:59 PM »

Quote
well, lets look at some demographics.  To maintain a steady population, you need a birthrate of 2.1 children per family.  Italian families average 1.2 with less than one per family in Rome and the other large cities.  Therefore within 50 years Italy will have on average 3 times as many Retirees as workers.  They will need to import from somewhere.  Other European countries are facing similar problems.  Their solution has been to invite millions of Muslims into Europe who reproduce at a rate of about 6-7 children per family.  Sad to say, withiin 100 years you will not be able to tell the difference between the cultures of italy, spain and france on one hand and Syria, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia on the other.  Numbers don't lie man.

Joe Zollars

Joe, you make an excellent point and I completely agree with your theory.


I was wondering if any of you have read the article in the latest edition of "Again" magazine on the sack of constantinople? It is awful what the west had done.

If the pope was truly sorry about this past atrocities, then why doesn't he give back some of the relics that had been siezed from the Orthodox???  

Just some food for thought
Logged

Troparion - Tone 1:
O Sebastian, spurning the assemblies of the wicked,You gathered the wise martyrs Who with you cast down the enemy; And standing worthily before the throne of God, You gladden those who cry to you:Glory to him who has strengthened you! Glory to him who has granted you a crown!
Orthodoc
Supporter & Defender Of Orthodoxy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 2,526

Those who ignore history tend to repeat it.


« Reply #101 on: May 07, 2004, 10:18:03 PM »

Orthodoc,

you are so resentful of Rome.

Well, I can see where that went entirely over your head!

Orthodoc
Logged

Oh Lord, Save thy people and bless thine inheritance.
Grant victory to the Orthodox Christians over their adversaries.
And by virtue of thy Cross preserve thy habitation.
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #102 on: May 07, 2004, 10:22:01 PM »

Joe, you make an excellent point and I completely agree with your theory.


I was wondering if any of you have read the article in the latest edition of "Again" magazine on the sack of constantinople? It is awful what the west had done.

If the pope was truly sorry about this past atrocities, then why doesn't he give back some of the relics that had been siezed from the Orthodox???  

Just some food for thought

How we forget the orthodox atrocities against the western christians years before the sacking by the crusaders.
Logged
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #103 on: May 07, 2004, 10:23:16 PM »

Well, I can see where that went entirely over your head!

Orthodoc

It is called reading between the line. you resent the roman church and that is fine believe me. I don't have any ill-feelings towards orthodox at all.
« Last Edit: May 07, 2004, 10:25:56 PM by romanbyzantium » Logged
JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #104 on: May 07, 2004, 11:09:40 PM »

I have read many hundreds of Orthodoc's posts both her, and elsewhere.  Never did I get the feeling that he resents Rome.  Don't read your ideas into his statements.

Joe Zollars
Logged

These posts no longer represent my beliefs and I in no way endorse their contents.
Bono Vox
The Orthodox Bagpiper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 1,620



« Reply #105 on: May 07, 2004, 11:11:08 PM »

Quote
How we forget the orthodox atrocities against the western christians years before the sacking by the crusaders.

Nice way to avoid the question. Actions speak louder than words and if the pope is truly sorry, he should give back our relics!! Do you disagree, or do you support rome keeping stolen propery??
Logged

Troparion - Tone 1:
O Sebastian, spurning the assemblies of the wicked,You gathered the wise martyrs Who with you cast down the enemy; And standing worthily before the throne of God, You gladden those who cry to you:Glory to him who has strengthened you! Glory to him who has granted you a crown!
JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #106 on: May 07, 2004, 11:12:50 PM »

How we forget the orthodox atrocities against the western christians years before the sacking by the crusaders.

Well, shall we begin listing the atrocities commited by Catholcis and other western christians against ORthodox Christians?  Let us not forget that even in our own century, Austria, a Catholic nation, has oppressed and seeked to destroy the right-confessing people of Serbia.  How about Nato and Clinton bombing Orthodox Churches on Pascha? etc etc etc
Logged

These posts no longer represent my beliefs and I in no way endorse their contents.
JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #107 on: May 07, 2004, 11:13:35 PM »

Nice way to avoid the question. Actions speak louder than words and if the pope is truly sorry, he should give back our relics!! Do you disagree, or do you support rome keeping stolen propery??

very, very very good point OB!

Joe Zollars
Logged

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

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #108 on: May 07, 2004, 11:15:01 PM »

Nice way to avoid the question. Actions speak louder than words and if the pope is truly sorry, he should give back our relics!! Do you disagree, or do you support rome keeping stolen propery??

What do you call the apology that he made? where is the orthodox apology.

stolen property, hardly.  when will orthodox return the churches that it stole from the eastern catholics?
Logged
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #109 on: May 07, 2004, 11:15:50 PM »

very, very very good point OB!

Joe Zollars

what a surprised joe?

when will orthodox return the stolen property to the eastern catholics?
Logged
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #110 on: May 07, 2004, 11:19:21 PM »

Well, shall we begin listing the atrocities commited by Catholcis and other western christians against ORthodox Christians?  Let us not forget that even in our own century, Austria, a Catholic nation, has oppressed and seeked to destroy the right-confessing people of Serbia.  How about Nato and Clinton bombing Orthodox Churches on Pascha? etc etc etc

Nice way of avoiding to answer the question asked. please explain to us the massacres and atrocities and treachery of the orthodox on the western christians years before the sacking of constantinopole?

you mean nato the same organization that greece is a part of with a couple of other orthodox countries?
« Last Edit: May 07, 2004, 11:28:18 PM by romanbyzantium » Logged
JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #111 on: May 07, 2004, 11:19:47 PM »

the very churches those people worship in were originally stolen ORthodox properties.

Joe Zollars
Logged

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

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #112 on: May 07, 2004, 11:29:24 PM »

the very churches those people worship in were originally stolen ORthodox properties.

Joe Zollars

you keep believing that Joe. awe are talking about the churches that the orthodox church got the russian government to confiscate from the eatsern catholics and gave it to the orthodox. these are the stolen churches that need to be return to the eastern catholics.
« Last Edit: May 07, 2004, 11:31:34 PM by romanbyzantium » Logged
JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #113 on: May 07, 2004, 11:31:54 PM »

of course I will.  It is fact.  many of those churches are well over 500 years old and therefore--ORTHODOX!!!!

Anyways, I notice you have a habit of ending many discussions in such a manner as that last post.  The evidence of your trolldom continues to mount.

Joe Zollars
Logged

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

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #114 on: May 07, 2004, 11:34:16 PM »

Well, shall we begin listing the atrocities commited by Catholcis and other western christians against ORthodox Christians?  Let us not forget that even in our own century, Austria, a Catholic nation, has oppressed and seeked to destroy the right-confessing people of Serbia.  How about Nato and Clinton bombing Orthodox Churches on Pascha? etc etc etc

oh yeah and the wonderful war that the serbians started which killed how many millions?HuhHuh??

I know that you will say that they didn't started it but everyone involve know better.
Logged
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #115 on: May 07, 2004, 11:37:39 PM »

of course I will.  It is fact.  many of those churches are well over 500 years old and therefore--ORTHODOX!!!!

Anyways, I notice you have a habit of ending many discussions in such a manner as that last post.  The evidence of your trolldom continues to mount.

Joe Zollars

which post is that, joe?  There are so many.

I response to every post addressed to me, JOE.

sure Joe.. just showing your hypocrisy but if that amounts to trolling then what can I say?

Is that the cover story now about those stolen church properties?

look here joe

http://www.seattlecatholic.com/article_20020215_The_Romanian_Catholic_Fight_to_Reclaim_Stolen_Property.html

« Last Edit: May 07, 2004, 11:42:48 PM by romanbyzantium » Logged
JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #116 on: May 07, 2004, 11:41:36 PM »

its not teh cover story--its historical fact.  ERcatholics under rome did not exist until about 500 years ago (at least not in Slavic countries) and therefore churches older than that were originally Orthodox.  I know this may be difficult for you to understand, being based on logic unlike your argument which started this thread.

There is no hypocrsy in my posts, but since you bring it up, you mentioned in one of your posts on the first page of this thread that the Patriarchs of Antioch should change their title to Patriarch of Damascus since they reside there *in exile* from their normal see.  Then when someone pointed out that this too should apply to the pope of rome, you changed your story.  I smell a dead fish.

Jeo Zollars
Logged

These posts no longer represent my beliefs and I in no way endorse their contents.
JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #117 on: May 07, 2004, 11:44:19 PM »

oh yeah and the wonderful war that the serbians started which killed how many millions?HuhHuh??

I know that you will say that they didn't started it but everyone involve know better.

uh-huh.  Well you know your right.  What was serbia thinking fighting against an invading force and all?! tsk tsk.  BTW, no-one here aproves of Slobodon Malosovich, but there is a wrong way and a right way to take him out.  Guess which one the godless western christian apostates chose?

Joe Zollars
Logged

These posts no longer represent my beliefs and I in no way endorse their contents.
JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #118 on: May 07, 2004, 11:46:21 PM »

btw, here is a relevant Link:  Serbian Orthodox Bishop Shocked and Dissapointed

Note to admins/mods:  I do not mean this as forum pluggin as I no longer participate in that forum.  I was given the link by a friend in the course of our discussing this issue.

Joe Zollars
Logged

These posts no longer represent my beliefs and I in no way endorse their contents.
JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #119 on: May 07, 2004, 11:48:11 PM »

then shouldn't it be called the holy see of damascus? if it know longer exist within the city/place where it was founded by the apstles,  then was is the point.

are there any christians left in antioch?

and should not the patriarch of costantnople be called the patriarch of "istanbul". Constantinople doesn't longer exist.

This is the post I referenced three posts up just for thsoe who are trying to keep track of the conversation.

Joe Zollars
Logged

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

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #120 on: May 07, 2004, 11:51:19 PM »

its not teh cover story--its historical fact.  ERcatholics under rome did not exist until about 500 years ago (at least not in Slavic countries) and therefore churches older than that were originally Orthodox.  I know this may be difficult for you to understand, being based on logic unlike your argument which started this thread.

There is no hypocrsy in my posts, but since you bring it up, you mentioned in one of your posts on the first page of this thread that the Patriarchs of Antioch should change their title to Patriarch of Damascus since they reside there *in exile* from their normal see.  Then when someone pointed out that this too should apply to the pope of rome, you changed your story.  I smell a dead fish.

Jeo Zollars

It is called revisionist history.

really........ how many catholic countries are located in eastern europe, joe? that are slavic in origin.

« Last Edit: May 07, 2004, 11:51:38 PM by romanbyzantium » Logged
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #121 on: May 07, 2004, 11:54:16 PM »

btw, here is a relevant Link:  Serbian Orthodox Bishop Shocked and Dissapointed

Note to admins/mods:  I do not mean this as forum pluggin as I no longer participate in that forum.  I was given the link by a friend in the course of our discussing this issue.

Joe Zollars

sure and you forget to mention that the serbs have been persecuting the croatian who happen to be catholic. this just another example of telling half the story while at the same time hiding the rest of the story.
Logged
JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #122 on: May 07, 2004, 11:55:42 PM »

yeah sure.  Ukraine--Orthodox until Polish Jesuits converted the people at weapon point.  Its not called revisionist history my friend, its called facts.  

Yes there are some *Roman* rite countries over there, but the Unia is made up solely of ex-Orthodox and groups that were condemned by the Orthodox but accepted byRome.

Joe Zollars
Logged

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

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #123 on: May 07, 2004, 11:56:13 PM »

uh-huh.  Well you know your right.  What was serbia thinking fighting against an invading force and all?! tsk tsk.  BTW, no-one here aproves of Slobodon Malosovich, but there is a wrong way and a right way to take him out.  Guess which one the godless western christian apostates chose?

Joe Zollars

notice how you resort to name calling cause you can't deal with the facts.

also, notice that I have yet to call you any derogatory names. I alway take the high moral road.
Logged
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #124 on: May 07, 2004, 11:57:46 PM »

yeah sure.  Ukraine--Orthodox until Polish Jesuits converted the people at weapon point.  Its not called revisionist history my friend, its called facts.  

Yes there are some *Roman* rite countries over there, but the Unia is made up solely of ex-Orthodox and groups that were condemned by the Orthodox but accepted byRome.

Joe Zollars

really is that another cover story... at gun point?   wow those jesuits really do get around. they manage to convert all those slavic people to catholicism.

tell me where you protestant?
« Last Edit: May 08, 2004, 12:00:08 AM by romanbyzantium » Logged
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #125 on: May 07, 2004, 11:58:27 PM »

yeah sure.  Ukraine--Orthodox until Polish Jesuits converted the people at weapon point.  Its not called revisionist history my friend, its called facts.  

Yes there are some *Roman* rite countries over there, but the Unia is made up solely of ex-Orthodox and groups that were condemned by the Orthodox but accepted byRome.

Joe Zollars

some try perhaps the majority of eastern countries are catholic.
Logged
JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #126 on: May 08, 2004, 12:01:49 AM »

umm-no.  The Majority of EAStern Catholci Countries were historically ORthodox and are today falling prey to the secular humanism of hte west.  

and what on God's green earth does my religious background have to do with the color of moon pies in Chicago?  

Joe Zollars
Logged

These posts no longer represent my beliefs and I in no way endorse their contents.
JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #127 on: May 08, 2004, 12:04:45 AM »

really is that another cover story... at gun point?   wow those jesuits really do get around. they manage to convert all those slavic people to catholicism.

tell me where you protestant?

yeah all those people.  oh you mean the comparitivly microscopic EC groups?  the Latin Rite countries had been Latin rite from back when Rome was in the Church.  Rome Sent missionaries as did Constantinople in ajoint effort to the slavs.  

Joe Zollars
Logged

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

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #128 on: May 08, 2004, 12:08:52 AM »

umm-no.  The Majority of EAStern Catholci Countries were historically ORthodox and are today falling prey to the secular humanism of hte west.  

and what on God's green earth does my religious background have to do with the color of moon pies in Chicago?  

Joe Zollars

ummm yes.... those countries were NEVER othodox ..............they have always been catholic.  oh I forgot the jesuits got to them. lets keep that secret quiet.

how can a group of nations that were communist and athiest  fall prey to secular humanism?
« Last Edit: May 08, 2004, 12:24:10 AM by romanbyzantium » Logged
JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #129 on: May 08, 2004, 12:23:14 AM »

uhhuh.  Russia, Serbia, Hungary*, Slovakia*, Belarus, Ukraine, Romania, Bulgaria, Albania*, historic Transcarpathia, the Ukraine, and Poland*. All these countries are/were Orthodox historically.

Edit:  I forgot Georgia.

*While these countries are not entirely ORthodox, they have very ancient ORthodox sees dating from before the east-west schism.

JOe Zollars
« Last Edit: May 08, 2004, 12:24:21 AM by JoeZollars » Logged

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

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #130 on: May 08, 2004, 07:43:32 PM »

Joe,

So...have you always been orthodox?
Logged
Mor Ephrem
NO TENURE FOR DEPONIO!!
Section Moderator
Stratopedarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 18,765


"And you shall call his name Jesus..."


WWW
« Reply #131 on: May 09, 2004, 05:00:55 PM »

lets see the definition of defunct:

1. not operating now: no longer operative, valid, or functional
2. dead: no longer alive or in existence
 
From where do you get the information that all those in latin america and western euorpe are defunct when these are heavily catholic areas?

also, what is a titular bishop and how are they different? and how do you know if they are defunct? where does it say that?

A titular bishop is an auxiliary bishop who is given the title of a titular diocese.  A titular diocese is a diocese, once in existence, which for whatever reason is defunct.  You know the meaning of defunct.  

To my knowledge, I did not cite any other list than the list of titulars.  If there are titular sees in South America and Europe, it doesn't mean that the RCC in those areas is dead; it means that a diocese that was once there is no more, and probably replaced by another.  

The reason for giving bishops the title of a titular see is the idea that a bishop is ordained for a diocese.  Auxiliary bishops for existing sees do not have a real see of their own, so they are given a titular one.  However, this is the same type of "reminiscing" you criticise the Orthodox for.  

But I don't think this is "reminiscing"...that is a concept you have introduced, against the legitimate customs of both the Orthodox Church and the RC's.  I am more inclined to think that you are wrong on this point.
Logged

The Mor has spoken. Let his word endure unto the ages of ages.

Please, James, tell us more about women!
JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #132 on: May 09, 2004, 05:07:30 PM »

Joe,

So...have you always been orthodox?

As asked by me earlier, What on God's green earth does my personal religious background have to do with the color of moon pies in Chicago?

I prefer not to share my personal information with trolls.  

So the short answer is, none of your business.  Stop being rude.

Joe Zollars
Logged

These posts no longer represent my beliefs and I in no way endorse their contents.
JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #133 on: May 09, 2004, 05:08:05 PM »

and btw, when are going to answer the many points brought up in this thread?

Joe Zollars
Logged

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

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #134 on: May 09, 2004, 05:15:20 PM »

As asked by me earlier, What on God's green earth does my personal religious background have to do with the color of moon pies in Chicago?

I prefer not to share my personal information with trolls.  

So the short answer is, none of your business.  Stop being rude.

Joe Zollars

must we resort to childish name calling, Joe?


Yours truly,

The little euro troll.
« Last Edit: May 09, 2004, 05:23:18 PM by romanbyzantium » Logged
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #135 on: May 09, 2004, 05:16:10 PM »

and btw, when are going to answer the many points brought up in this thread?

Joe Zollars

Joe,

If you missed them.... I have responded to every single post directed at me. It might not be the answer that you want to here but, it is my answer.
Logged
JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #136 on: May 09, 2004, 05:22:53 PM »

must we resort to childish name calling, Joe?

hey... If you are ashamed that is your business but your silence is very telling.

Yours truly,

The little euro troll.

it is not name-calling but a logical deducement from your actions since joining here.  

I am not ashamed, but would just rather keep my personal information to myself.  These days you never know who reads/maliceously uses information posted on the net.  

Joe Zollars
Logged

These posts no longer represent my beliefs and I in no way endorse their contents.
JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #137 on: May 09, 2004, 05:25:34 PM »

Joe,

If you missed them.... I have responded to every single post directed at me. It might not be the answer that you want to here but, it is my answer.

How about my post quoting you as saying that Antioch should changes its name since it was no longer in residence at Antioch, but later your saying that Rome should not have changed its name to Avingnon?

How about my listing countries that are and always have been predominantly Orthodox contrary to your statement that they were once Catholic?

It seems that any time someone prooves you wrong, you simply ignore the post and go on posting your diatribe.  Everyone here has been proven wrong on something at somepoint, but at least we are adult enough to admit it.

Joe Zollars
Logged

These posts no longer represent my beliefs and I in no way endorse their contents.
Father Peter
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: British Orthodox Church within the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate
Posts: 2,658



WWW
« Reply #138 on: May 09, 2004, 05:29:51 PM »

Everyone here has been proven wrong on something at somepoint

Hey! I dispute that!!!!!! :-)

Peter Theodore
Logged

Lord have mercy upon me a sinner
http://www.orthodoxmedway.org

My blog - http://anorthodoxpriest.blogspot.co.uk

The poster formerly known as peterfarrington
theodore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 194


« Reply #139 on: May 09, 2004, 05:30:25 PM »

Joe,

So...have you always been orthodox?
RB,

So...have you always been so quarrelsome?

Your question to Joe is irrelevant to the topic at hand.  I'll answer for Joe: No.   Nobody has ALWAYS been Orthodox.  Even a baby born to Orthodox parents isn't Orthodox until he or she is Baptised/Chrismated.
Logged
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #140 on: May 09, 2004, 05:31:46 PM »

it is not name-calling but a logical deducement from your actions since joining here.  

I am not ashamed, but would just rather keep my personal information to myself.  These days you never know who reads/maliceously uses information posted on the net.  

Joe Zollars

No.. it is about not liking the questions that I have asked sincerely. People here have acted like I have committed the greatest sin on earth and have resorted to name calling to vilified me as someone that is agenda driven and has it against the orthodox church. Why?

I have been called papist, romanist, troll (my favorite), godless, apostate, heretic, etc..

Have I subjected any orthodox to derogatory names? No, I have not. I have no need for it. My concience won't allow me.

I don't get offended or get bent out shape because of questions that are asked about catholicism. I asnwer them to the best of my abilities and hope that somekind of seed gets planted and perhaps their attitude would change. who knws, God works in mysterious ways.

We know how is it like to get lots of questions... we get them all the time from protestants but I have never resorted to name calling and you know how they love to call us ( yes, the orthodox too) names.
Logged
JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #141 on: May 09, 2004, 05:36:58 PM »

Subdeacon Peter:  LOL!!!!  

Theodore:  thank you

RB:  YOu have done nothing to disprove those labels.  In factyou have continuously prooved them to be true.

No RB, you have not labeled people here.  Oh wait except for Ben who you called a no-nothing traditionalist.  Oh and let us not forget the very lenghty thread all about your bragging about recieving from an Orthodox Chalice under false pretenses.

Joe Zollars
Logged

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

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #142 on: May 09, 2004, 05:39:05 PM »

Subdeacon Peter:  LOL!!!!  

Theodore:  thank you

RB:  YOu have done nothing to disprove those labels.  In factyou have continuously prooved them to be true.

No RB, you have not labeled people here.  Oh wait except for Ben who you called a no-nothing traditionalist.  Oh and let us not forget the very lenghty thread all about your bragging about recieving from an Orthodox Chalice under false pretenses.

Joe Zollars


where have I called Ben a no-nothing traditionalist?
« Last Edit: May 09, 2004, 05:39:25 PM by romanbyzantium » Logged
JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #143 on: May 09, 2004, 05:43:55 PM »

in one of the threads in the Orthodox-Catholic discussion if memory serves me correctly.

Joe Zollars
Logged

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

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #144 on: May 09, 2004, 05:47:35 PM »

How about my post quoting you as saying that Antioch should changes its name since it was no longer in residence at Antioch, but later your saying that Rome should not have changed its name to Avingnon?

How about my listing countries that are and always have been predominantly Orthodox contrary to your statement that they were once Catholic?

It seems that any time someone prooves you wrong, you simply ignore the post and go on posting your diatribe.  Everyone here has been proven wrong on something at somepoint, but at least we are adult enough to admit it.

Joe Zollars

1. there is a difference between moving willingly and being exiled.
2. the papacy was called the avignone papacy even though he was exiled. then he return to rome. his proper place.
3. I never said that those countries were always catholic. I said that most countries in eastern europe are catholic. check the post
4. you were the one that said that those eastern catholic countries where once predominately orthodox.
5. then you said that it was the jesuit that converted them at gun point.


If you would like to produce a list of all eastern europe countries for me...lest see which are catholic ans which ones are orthodox.

Logged
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #145 on: May 09, 2004, 05:48:16 PM »

in one of the threads in the Orthodox-Catholic discussion if memory serves me correctly.

Joe Zollars

show it to me then.
Logged
JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #146 on: May 09, 2004, 05:54:38 PM »

1.  Who said Antioch has been entirely willinglymoved.  Remember Turkey is not exactly friendly to ORthdoxy.  In fact according to the AP itself, they are in Damascas in Exile.

2.  Most countries are not Catholic. They are either thouroughly secular, Mohamadean or Orthodox.   Can you name as many Catholic Countries in EE as the ORthodox ones I named (keep in my mind my list is by no means exaustive).

3.  Read your posts again.  I have no desire to see such tripe for myself.

Joe Zollars
Logged

These posts no longer represent my beliefs and I in no way endorse their contents.
Mor Ephrem
NO TENURE FOR DEPONIO!!
Section Moderator
Stratopedarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 18,765


"And you shall call his name Jesus..."


WWW
« Reply #147 on: May 09, 2004, 06:07:50 PM »

I have been called papist, romanist, troll (my favorite), godless, apostate, heretic, etc..

Dear RB,

I make a point of reading every post that gets posted on this website, and I don't recall you being called anything other than a troll and possibly a papist.  I would appreciate it if you would post at least one example of anyone addressing each of those words toward you (except troll, I've seen that enough).  I would like to see five examples, with links to the threads/posts in question--one each for papist, romanist, godless, apostate, and heretic.  

Thanks!
Logged

The Mor has spoken. Let his word endure unto the ages of ages.

Please, James, tell us more about women!
Ben
Unabashedly Pro-Life
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,260



« Reply #148 on: May 09, 2004, 06:09:39 PM »



2.  Most countries are not Catholic. They are either thouroughly secular, Mohamadean or Orthodox.   Can you name as many Catholic Countries in EE as the ORthodox ones I named (keep in my mind my list is by no means exaustive).


I am really wondering if we can really say there is such a thing as a Catholic or Orthodox country. The vast majority of nations that were once Catholic and Orthodox, are now very much secular nations. For example Spain, which was once a very Catholic country in every way, is just as secular as the USA. Or for example Russia, once a very Orthodox country, but look at Russia now, it is no less secular than the USA or the UK. I think the only religion that can actually claim entire countries, is Islam. There are indeed many Muslim nations, that are entirely Muslim in almost every way. However besides Islamic countries, I really do wonder if there is such a thing as an Orthodox or a Catholic country. Or even a protestant country. It seems that all of the once Christian nations are all now very much secular due to revolutions, democracy, and capitalism and/or communism.
Logged

"I prefer to be accused unjustly, for then I have nothing to reproach myself with, and joyfully offer this to the good Lord. Then I humble myself at the thought that I am indeed capable of doing the thing of which I have been accused. " - Saint
Ben
Unabashedly Pro-Life
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,260



« Reply #149 on: May 09, 2004, 06:17:24 PM »

Dear RB,

I make a point of reading every post that gets posted on this website, and I don't recall you being called anything other than a troll and possibly a papist.  I would appreciate it if you would post at least one example of anyone addressing each of those words toward you (except troll, I've seen that enough).  I would like to see five examples, with links to the threads/posts in question--one each for papist, romanist, godless, apostate, and heretic.  

Thanks!

I know Joe has called him, and all Catholics in general, Papists and Romanists, Joe never refers to Catholics as Catholics, because he believes the Orthodox Church to be the true Catholic Church. But other than troll, Papist, and Romanist, I haven't seen RB called anything else.
Logged

"I prefer to be accused unjustly, for then I have nothing to reproach myself with, and joyfully offer this to the good Lord. Then I humble myself at the thought that I am indeed capable of doing the thing of which I have been accused. " - Saint
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #150 on: May 09, 2004, 06:32:04 PM »

Dear RB,

I make a point of reading every post that gets posted on this website, and I don't recall you being called anything other than a troll and possibly a papist.  I would appreciate it if you would post at least one example of anyone addressing each of those words toward you (except troll, I've seen that enough).  I would like to see five examples, with links to the threads/posts in question--one each for papist, romanist, godless, apostate, and heretic.  

Thanks!

Sure.. the papist romanist was in another thread.

Notice here : uh-huh.  Well you know your right.  What was serbia thinking fighting against an invading force and all?! tsk tsk.  BTW, no-one here aproves of Slobodon Malosovich, but there is a wrong way and a right way to take him out.  Guess which one the godless western christian apostates chose?

and here

Let's not forget the paying prostitutes to dance on the Altar of hte Hagia Sophia, the raping of the women, the torture and murder of Orthodox  Priests and/or their forced conversion to Romanism.  Little wonder what happened.



« Last Edit: May 09, 2004, 06:48:58 PM by romanbyzantium » Logged
theodore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 194


« Reply #151 on: May 09, 2004, 07:04:07 PM »

1. there is a difference between moving willingly and being exiled.

And what would that difference be?  And which See moved willingly and which was exiled?   One could make a case that at least some of the Avignon Popes preferred to be in Avignon to Rome and didn't consider themselves to be in exile.  One could also make a case that the Syrian Church was exiled from it's former capital city to their new one due to political and seismological conditions.  But the point remains, the Apostolic succession is tied to the See, which does not HAVE to be located in it's original city, or original building, etc...  Whether the See moved willingly or not is irrelevant.

2. the papacy was called the avignone papacy even though he was exiled. then he return to rome. his proper place.

One of the Popes, Clement VI actually refused a solemn invitation to return to Rome, as he was devoted to France.  So to say that the Popes in Avignon felt exiled is just not true.

Logged
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #152 on: May 09, 2004, 07:37:00 PM »



Read about the babylonian captivity and how the powerful French King  Phillip  the 4th forced the pope to Avignon.

If I remember correctly, Clement VI was extremely partial to the french which angered the italians. They saw clement and the avignon popes as puppets of the French king. I believe that Clement VI was the worst of them all, a true puppet.... well as described by the italians.
« Last Edit: May 09, 2004, 08:00:28 PM by romanbyzantium » Logged
theodore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 194


« Reply #153 on: May 09, 2004, 08:04:15 PM »

Read about the babylonian captivity and how the powerful French King  Phillip  the 4th forced the pope to Avignon.

If I remember correctly, Clement VI was extremely partial to the french which angered the italians. They saw clement and the avignon popes as puppets of the French king. I believe that Clement VI was the worst of them all, a true puppet.... well as described by the italians.
And thus, not in exile, but where he preferred to be.
Logged
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #154 on: May 09, 2004, 08:09:31 PM »

And thus, not in exile, but where he preferred to be.

No!!!

even if he didn't want to return.. would you to a hostile place. The papacy( the office) was in exiled. until it returned later. perhaps you passed over the part about the powerful french kings that forced them to stay.
Logged
prodromos
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 1,463

Sydney, Australia


« Reply #155 on: May 10, 2004, 07:12:35 AM »

I wonder if anyone has noted the significance of the Constantinople Patriarchate's contact address.

Rum Patrikhanesi
34220 Fener - Hali+º
Istanbul, Turkey

John
Logged
theodore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 194


« Reply #156 on: May 10, 2004, 10:10:26 AM »

No!!!

even if he didn't want to return.. would you to a hostile place. The papacy( the office) was in exiled. until it returned later. perhaps you passed over the part about the powerful french kings that forced them to stay.
Looks like Clement VI didn't need any force.  Your English is not clear.  Are you insinuating that if Clement VI had gone to Rome that it would have been a hostile place for him?  If so, then why was he invited?
Logged
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #157 on: May 10, 2004, 12:40:07 PM »

I wonder if anyone has noted the significance of the Constantinople Patriarchate's contact address.

Rum Patrikhanesi
34220 Fener - Hali+º
Istanbul, Turkey

John

what is the significance that you see?
Logged
Brendan03
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 544



« Reply #158 on: May 10, 2004, 01:10:42 PM »

"Rum"  = "Roman"
Logged

B
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #159 on: May 10, 2004, 01:16:30 PM »

Troll bait. Come on, guys. Give RB a break. He'll need a new keyboard before long.
You know, his original question was assumed to be how many of the original 'pentarchy' are left. But there were a lot more 'holy sees' than these by the time the idea of the pentarchy was developed. I do wonder now: How many ARE left? How do you define "original"?

Demetri
Logged

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

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #160 on: May 10, 2004, 08:47:47 PM »

Troll bait. Come on, guys. Give RB a break. He'll need a new keyboard before long.
You know, his original question was assumed to be how many of the original 'pentarchy' are left. But there were a lot more 'holy sees' than these by the time the idea of the pentarchy was developed. I do wonder now: How many ARE left? How do you define "original"?

Demetri

The little euro troll got himself a new keyboard. I am ready to break it in. Smiley

So Demetri...........what do you think of the Greek Orthodox church of America NYC?
Logged
Ben
Unabashedly Pro-Life
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,260



« Reply #161 on: May 10, 2004, 10:59:06 PM »


Oh wait except for Ben who you called a no-nothing traditionalist.

In defense of RB, he never once called me a "no-nothing traditionalist". If I remember correctly in another thread he said "ah, so you are a traditonalist!", and many thought RB meant that in a negative way, but I don't think he did, after speaking with him over private message.

I am sure Joe meant well, but I just want to make sure the truth gets out.

Anywho...just wanted to clear that up  Smiley
Logged

"I prefer to be accused unjustly, for then I have nothing to reproach myself with, and joyfully offer this to the good Lord. Then I humble myself at the thought that I am indeed capable of doing the thing of which I have been accused. " - Saint
JoeZollars
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,278

Pray for me an unworthy sinner


WWW
« Reply #162 on: May 11, 2004, 12:37:52 AM »

hmm must have been my memory fogging up a bit.  Looking back you are right.  It seemed apparent from the context that he meant it in a derogatory manner.

Joe Zollars
Logged

These posts no longer represent my beliefs and I in no way endorse their contents.
Brigid of Kildare
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 280



« Reply #163 on: May 11, 2004, 05:34:10 AM »

I wonder if anyone has noted the significance of the Constantinople Patriarchate's contact address.

Rum Patrikhanesi
34220 Fener - Hali+º
Istanbul, Turkey

John

Sounds a bit rum to me all right, John. What would happen it you addressed a communication to Rum Patrikhanesi, 34220 Fener-Halic, Constantinople? Would it get there Tongue
Logged

Bríd Naomhtha, Mhuire na nGaeil, Guí Orainn
Brendan03
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 544



« Reply #164 on: May 11, 2004, 07:48:22 AM »

The significance is that "Rum" = "Roman" in Turkish.  The Turks refer to it, as they always have, as the "Roman Patriarchate", because when they conquered Constantinople, they considered that they had conquered the Romans, it being the capital at that time of the Roman Empire.

Brendan
Logged

B
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #165 on: May 11, 2004, 09:38:01 AM »


So Demetri...........what do you think of the Greek Orthodox church of America NYC?

Well, little troll, that's none of your business.

Demetri
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Seraphim Reeves
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 450



WWW
« Reply #166 on: May 11, 2004, 12:09:43 PM »

RomanByzantium,

Quote
That is right seraphin.... ROME was pagan and turned christian and it still remains. I wish that I could say the same for constantinople. If you wish to reminisce about constantinople.... who am I to argue.

Yes, nominally Rome is "Christian" - though it's odd that a city with so many churches can only keep them reasonably full because of tourists/pilgrims.

"Who are you to argue"... ha. Smiley

The point stands - neither Rome, nor Constantinople are the same cities they once were.  Indeed, strictly speaking, the Pope no longer resides in Rome at all, but in a sovereign state (Vatican City).

When it suits you, you harp about names; other times, you'll attempt to argue a little more intelligently and deal with substance.   I really don't know what you're doing here - it seems the only point of your participation is to annoy people.  And no, you're not "confounding the heretics" - you're simply a pest.

Seraphim
Logged

romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #167 on: May 11, 2004, 04:18:57 PM »

Well, little troll, that's none of your business.

Demetri

How many converts do you win with that attitude?
Logged
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #168 on: May 11, 2004, 04:24:35 PM »

How many converts do you win with that attitude?

You want personal info? PM me.
And you, my little troll, are not interested in Orthodoxy despite your so stating that you are.
{Oops, here I am violating my own "Don't Feed the Troll" rules Shocked }
Logged

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

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #169 on: May 11, 2004, 04:29:25 PM »

RomanByzantium,Yes, nominally Rome is "Christian" - though it's odd that a city with so many churches can only keep them reasonably full because of tourists/pilgrims.

"Who are you to argue"... ha. Smiley

The point stands - neither Rome, nor Constantinople are the same cities they once were.  Indeed, strictly speaking, the Pope no longer resides in Rome at all, but in a sovereign state (Vatican City).

When it suits you, you harp about names; other times, you'll attempt to argue a little more intelligently and deal with substance.   I really don't know what you're doing here - it seems the only point of your participation is to annoy people.  And no, you're not "confounding the heretics" - you're simply a pest.

Seraphim


How in the world do you get at nominally christian?

Did you know that the popes church is not Saint Peter's? The pope basilica is in Rome.

St. John Lateran is the cathedral of the pope, the Patriarch of the West. St. Peter's is assigned to the Patriarch of Constantinople, St. Paul's to the Patriarch of Alexandria, St. Mary Major to the Patriarch of Antioch. St. Lawrence-outside-the-Walls is also reckoned as a greater basilica because it is specially attributed to the Patriarch of Jerusalem.

To answer your second questions... I am not a pest but trying to engage in intelligent conversation but there are people here that do not want the boat to be rocked at all.
Logged
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #170 on: May 11, 2004, 04:32:08 PM »

You want personal info? PM me.
And you, my little troll, are not interested in Orthodoxy despite your so stating that you are.
{Oops, here I am violating my own "Don't Feed the Troll" rules Shocked }

Correct me if I am wrong. But is this not an orthodox board?

I have asked you a question on Greek orthodox church in america and you dismiss it as personal information.

Demetri grow up ok. You just don't like it that I have tough questions. just say so.
Logged
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #171 on: May 11, 2004, 04:40:20 PM »

It is really hard not to insult you, TROLL. Maybe the admins like you here, but I don't see you making any contribution -just digital pollution. It's still a personal question, not a hard one. And it is certainly not worthy of answering.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
sdcheung
it's as if..Saint Photios and Saint Mark Ephesus, has come back
Banned
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,325


...even though Romania Falls, another will Rise...


« Reply #172 on: May 11, 2004, 05:13:10 PM »

Ela Demetri..
His posts sound very Juvenile doesn't it? Wink
Logged


Keep Breed Mixing, and this Maine Coon Cat will be the last of it's kind. /\
No profanities in your sig line if you're going to post in the public forum.
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #173 on: May 11, 2004, 11:10:11 PM »

Ela Demetri..
His posts sound very Juvenile doesn't it? Wink

You mean like your name calling? what more juvenile than acting like middle school graders and all the nasty names.

Logged
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #174 on: May 11, 2004, 11:14:19 PM »

It is really hard not to insult you, TROLL. Maybe the admins like you here, but I don't see you making any contribution -just digital pollution. It's still a personal question, not a hard one. And it is certainly not worthy of answering.

But that is the point..............you are not insulting me. why in the world would I give you that power.

Name calling  directed at me just rolls of my back. perhaps it is because euorpeans are just arrogant and culturally superior.  Kiss

I am only kidding. Wink       Don't want anyone having a cow. Grin
Logged
Tags: Roman 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.382 seconds with 202 queries.