OrthodoxChristianity.net
April 24, 2014, 01:10:17 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: The Rules page has been updated.  Please familiarize yourself with its contents!
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: De-Incarnated Christ of Orthodoxy?  (Read 11815 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #135 on: November 14, 2011, 11:00:44 AM »

It was not "divinity" nor was it "humanity" in some abstract sense that defeated the devil; instead, it was Christ, the second person of the Holy Trinity, who defeated death (and the devil) by dying and rising from the dead.

Natures do not act, only persons act, and it is a form of Nestorianism to say otherwise.
In a similar vein, the importance of the filioque: the Spirit does not proceed from the divine nature, but from the Person of the Father.
I agree.

Would you say that he proceeds in substance from the Person of the Father?
No, I would say that He proceeds hypostatically from the Father, which means that He receives His subsistence and essence from the person of the Father alone.

Is the essence of the Holy Spirit not the essence of the Father?
So the Spirit begets the Son?

And is not the essence of the Son not the essence of the Father?
So the Father is begotten?

And is not the essence of the Father not the essence of the Holy Spirit and the Son?
Are you arguing for modalism?

Are there THREE essences?
ONE in essence.

I am sorry but this response indicates that you are clueless when it comes to some pretty basic concepts used in the councils that define your faith.
Logged

ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 35,633



« Reply #136 on: November 14, 2011, 12:17:53 PM »

It was not "divinity" nor was it "humanity" in some abstract sense that defeated the devil; instead, it was Christ, the second person of the Holy Trinity, who defeated death (and the devil) by dying and rising from the dead.

Natures do not act, only persons act, and it is a form of Nestorianism to say otherwise.
In a similar vein, the importance of the filioque: the Spirit does not proceed from the divine nature, but from the Person of the Father.
I agree.

Would you say that he proceeds in substance from the Person of the Father?
No, I would say that He proceeds hypostatically from the Father, which means that He receives His subsistence and essence from the person of the Father alone.

Is the essence of the Holy Spirit not the essence of the Father?
So the Spirit begets the Son?

And is not the essence of the Son not the essence of the Father?
So the Father is begotten?

And is not the essence of the Father not the essence of the Holy Spirit and the Son?
Are you arguing for modalism?

Are there THREE essences?
ONE in essence.

I am sorry but this response indicates that you are clueless when it comes to some pretty basic concepts used in the councils that define your faith.
that you ask these questions that go nowhere exposes you as one without a clue but with an agenda.
Logged

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

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 11,965


Truth, Justice, and the American way!


« Reply #137 on: November 14, 2011, 04:24:47 PM »

It was not "divinity" nor was it "humanity" in some abstract sense that defeated the devil; instead, it was Christ, the second person of the Holy Trinity, who defeated death (and the devil) by dying and rising from the dead.

Natures do not act, only persons act, and it is a form of Nestorianism to say otherwise.
In a similar vein, the importance of the filioque: the Spirit does not proceed from the divine nature, but from the Person of the Father.
I agree.

Would you say that he proceeds in substance from the Person of the Father?
No, I would say that He proceeds hypostatically from the Father, which means that He receives His subsistence and essence from the person of the Father alone.

Is the essence of the Holy Spirit not the essence of the Father?
So the Spirit begets the Son?

And is not the essence of the Son not the essence of the Father?
So the Father is begotten?

And is not the essence of the Father not the essence of the Holy Spirit and the Son?
Are you arguing for modalism?

Are there THREE essences?
ONE in essence.

I am sorry but this response indicates that you are clueless when it comes to some pretty basic concepts used in the councils that define your faith.
that you ask these questions that go nowhere exposes you as one without a clue but with an agenda.
You are such a sweetie heart.  Roll Eyes
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #138 on: November 14, 2011, 08:51:25 PM »


that you ask these questions that go nowhere exposes you as one without a clue but with an agenda.

I would say that the one with the agenda is the one who suggested that the Trinity divides the divine essence into three.
Logged

JLatimer
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 1,202



« Reply #139 on: November 14, 2011, 09:23:11 PM »

Sorry I didn't get to this earlier.  I thought I owed Gabriel/Venuleius a response first.
Thanks for a great response, but let me play devil's advocate.

Nonsense?

Because that is what it is.  Odd coming from an Ultramontanist, given that they need-and demand we need-a "visible head," while we have no problem with Christ ruling the Church as the "invisible Head."

I think he might see invisibility as a sign of 'disincarnation'. ISTM he's working off an incarnate=visible idea.
Stepping back a moment, before the age of photography and mass media-indeed, maybe even back to before the invention of mass printing, how much more visible was the Vatican's "visible head" than Christ?  The present celebrity status of the sovereing of the Vatican, where perhaps even to the last hut in deepest, darkest Africa inhabited by a follower has a picture of his supreme pontiff-or at least knows what he looks like-does not reach back more than  two centuries, if that.  Such visibility did exist: the emperors, both pagan and Christian, had their image mass produced, and disfiguring one was capital offense (there is an amusing anecdote during the early Islamic conquests, where a Muslim inadvertedly shot a statue of the emperor on a border pillar, and the Muslims, to settle the matter, agreed to the Romans to carve a statue of the caliph-being Bedouin, the Muslims had no such things (not yet)-so that it could have a arrow shot in it to settle the score).  Caesar's image was on the coin of the realm for a reason: it is said that the switch to profile from full face (the medieval practice, the idea being similar to the canon of iconography of having the image in full engagement with the viewer by showing both eyes) came after the War of the Rose: profiles identiy the person better, and King Henry, after the civil war, wanted it clear who was the boss (later, King Louis XVI would rue that: he was recognized from the currency when he tried to escape France).  With the Gregorian Reform taking place during and after the Vatican's schism, the supreme pontiff pretty much settled down in Rome/Italy-when he was not in Avignon-so that nearly none of his followers would not recognize him if they looked him in the eye.  And then, who was the visible head here?

In contrast, one had a better than even chance of seeing the local bishop.  As Pope St. Leo observed "what was visible in our Savior has passed over into His Mysteries," St. Ignatius exhorted that "where the bishop is, let the people be, as where Christ is, there is the Catholic Church," and Christ Himself said "he who receives you receives Me."  As such, Christ the one highpriest resides in "the episcopate," which, as St. Cyprian observed, "is one, each one holding it for the whole."  This says it all:

(that's the real pope, btw).
Quote
Seems like another attempt to attack the Orthodox as somehow deficient in not having a "Vicar of Christ" "tanking the place of God on earth." Simple: He is ever present in the Orthodox Church,

He might say, as sacerdotium but not as regnum. His critique seems to be that the Orthodox Church acts a dispenser of sacraments, but does not image Christ's Kingship over creation. How do you address that? What is Christ's Kingship? How does it differ from earthly kingship? How is it similar? How does He exercise it? How does the Orthodox Church show it forth?
The Romans, taking their cue from Christ's own words "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's, and unto God what is God's" had their answer:

"In God We Trust" (for the non-Americans, that is the slogan on all US coins/money).  It seems that Gabriel/Venuleius has this in mind

for "Christ the King" (a rather odd point of attact on the Orthodox, given that the Vatican instituted it less than a century ago, by the same sovereign of the Vatican who signed the Lateran treaty with Mussolini).  You will note that he wears a tiara, with a secular crown at His feet. Perhaps remembering the good ol' days

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donation_of_Constantine
Christ Himself, however has ruled out theocracy, which is what Gabriel/Venuleius seems to be putting up as an ideal:"My Kingdom is not of this world."  It is for that reason that, although a monarchist, I cannot agree with those who argue that there must be a "God anointed sovereign."  St. Paul wrote to the Romans "honor the emperor" when he was Nero.  So too, I cannot agree with identifying political parties with the Church, nor forms of governance.

So, about Christ's kingship over creation, one needs only to go to the Great Blessing of water (unlike "Christ the King," a celebration of great antiquity) to find that:
Quote
Great are you, O Lord, and wonderful your works, and no word is adequate to sing the praise ofyour wonders. (Three times)
For by your own will you brought the universe from non-existence into being, you hold creationtogether by your might, and by your providence you direct the world. You composed creation from four elements; with four seasons you crowned the circle of the year. All the spiritual Powers tremble before you. The sun sings your praise, the moon glorifies you, the stars entreat you, thelight obeys you, the deeps tremble before you, the springs are your servants. You stretched out theheavens on the waters; you walled in the sea with sand; you poured out the air for breathing. Angelic Powers minister to you. The choirs of the Archangels worship you. The many-eyedCherubim and the six-winged Seraphim as they stand and fly around you hide their faces in fear ofyour unapproachable glory. For you, being God uncircumscribed, without beginning andinexpressible, came upon earth, taking the form of a servant, being found in the likeness of man. For you could not bear, O Master, in the compassion of your mercy to watch mankind beingtyrannised by the devil, but you came and saved us. We acknowledge your grace, we proclaim your mercy, we do not conceal your benevolence. You freed the generations of our race. Yousanctified a virgin womb by your birth. All creation sang your praise when you appeared. For youare our God, who appeared on earth and lived among men. You sanctified the streams of Jordan bysending down from heaven your All-holy Spirit and you crushed the heads of the dragons thatlurked there.

(And the Priest says this verse three times, blessing the water with his hand at each verse):Therefore, O King, lover of mankind, be present now too through the visitation of your Holy Spirit,and sanctify this water

There is more I can say on the subject of Christian kingship (e.g. the Legend of the Last Roman Emperor, who conquers the world and then goes to Jerusalem to lay his crown down on Calvary), which I'll have to leave now for later.

Quote
so He-and we-don't need a "Vicar."

And He is present physically-deincarnation would cause the whole very visible role of the Holy Icons to collapse in Orthodoxy.  Since I haven't seen that, I have no idea where they are getting this "deincarnation" in the Orthodox Church from.

He mentions the idea that Orthodox icons are too 'ascetical' or 'mystical'. Again the idea that incarnate=visible (in this case in the sense of 'realistic').

The problem is that the sanctity of the saint, invisible to invisible eyes, is no less real.  That is why a photo is not an icon: it doesn't capture that.

infrared photos are don't look like a photograph either

are they any less real or of this physical reality thereby?

Quote
Maybe he is upset that we do not share the Vatican's thirst for gore,

I think he might say what we see as a thirst for gore is a real, thoroughgoing commitment to the real, true, literal humanity of Christ.
The Christians of the first millenium, even in the West and Rome itself, were not slacking in commitment to the real, true, literal humanity of Christ, yet we see none of this obsession with body parts and "bleeding all over the place" as someone put it, until after Rome ran off the rails 1054 or thereabouts.  There is an emphasis on the Eucharist being a bloodless sacrifice. We should all hold that thought, as it entails no denial of Christ's humanity.  The gore seems a derivative of the mentality of the Tenebrae service, conducted as if we did not know how the story ends.

Quote
the fetish for displaying body parts or the obsession to put His mother on a par with Him.  Oh, well. That's their problem, not ours.

There is also not a too thinly disguised swipe at Orthodoxy as "Caesaropapism."  Of course, besides the transformation of the church into a Papal state-despite the clear words during that passion he refers to "My Kingdom is not of this world"

He seems to draw a distinction between "of this world", "in this world". He seems to think Orthodoxy, in stressing that Christ's Kingdom is not of this world, has pushed it altogether out of this world. For him, Christ's Kingdom is not of this world, but is in this world. I would tend to agree with that. But if not the Vatican, what does Christ's not-of-but-in-this-world Kingdom look like?
In our present world in the USA? Voting your conscience.  Symphonia is a Christian concept to the core.  The papal states is not, any more than the Holy Governing Synod is.

Quote
-the Vatican is always selective in its condemnation of "Caesaropapism."  It of course defends to the death the act of the Germanic kings in overturning the Tradition of Orthodox Rome, reiterated by Popes and inscribed on the doors of St. Peter's itself, in the insertion of the filioque in the mass at Rome, praises the Emperors of the Romans who dragged the bishops from the Orthodox patriarchates to submit to the Vatican in return for armies to defend their kingdom of this world, and celebrates the imposition of "union" by the Polish King (at the time trying to overturn the reformation in his native Sweden, and promising Polish lords Russian lands to make up for those lost to Sweden).  It isn't upset that we allegedly say "we have no king but Caesar," but that we refuse to recognize Caesar's successor as pontifex maximus as "Caesar" and "Supreme Pontiff."

I've been to many Orthodox Churches which had no Pantocrator in the dome.  I've never been to one which did not have an Icon of the Theotokos and Child (how He came) flanking the altar (how He comes now).

"It’s almost as if Christ’s Kingship can’t be understand when he was “just” leading the Apostles around Galilee or “just” enduring questioning, mockery, physical assault, etc. He had to be positioned in the Heavens, with a choir of angels and Saints, to be a King." Nearly every large Orthodox Cross I've seen has, above the Crucifixed Christ the inscription "King of Glory."

The N word I was thinking was Nestorian. It seems there is a similar concern for defending the integrity of humanity in the Incarnation, and a similar result: the Word of God assuming not humanity but a man (as you said, a visible Vicar of Christ, "taking the place of God on earth").
Yes, btw the elaborate rituals that surrounded the sovereign of the Vatican until lately, are largely taken from the court of Caesar (like the office of "supreme pontiff") and of New Rome.

I found this helpful. Thank you.
Logged

1 Samuel 25:22 (KJV)
So and more also do God unto the enemies of David, if I leave of all that pertain to him by the morning light any that pisseth against the wall.
William
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Netodox
Jurisdiction: OC.net
Posts: 4,172

Work hard, pray hard.


« Reply #140 on: December 25, 2011, 05:04:33 PM »

The blog post in question kind of touched a nerve with me because it brought to light some of the problems I've had with Byzantine liturgy.

I really prefer traditional Western rites. But there's no WRO parish anywhere near me. Sad
Logged

I wish you'd all just shut up. Then at least you would appear to be wise. - Job 13:5 ISV
podkarpatska
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 7,589


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #141 on: December 25, 2011, 05:40:08 PM »

Let's play nice, it's Christmas!
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 35,633



« Reply #142 on: December 25, 2011, 06:11:34 PM »

The blog post in question kind of touched a nerve with me because it brought to light some of the problems I've had with Byzantine liturgy.
Such as?
I really prefer traditional Western rites. But there's no WRO parish anywhere near me. Sad
Where are you at?
Logged

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

Faith: Netodox
Jurisdiction: OC.net
Posts: 4,172

Work hard, pray hard.


« Reply #143 on: December 26, 2011, 12:45:29 AM »

The blog post in question kind of touched a nerve with me because it brought to light some of the problems I've had with Byzantine liturgy.
Such as?

Well, sometimes I feel as though the hymnography tries to much to be a real long theological discourse. I know that liturgy is a huge source of theology, but still, it seems that there's not much room for concision.

Also, I love Gregorian chant. And Latin.


Quote
I really prefer traditional Western rites. But there's no WRO parish anywhere near me. Sad
Where are you at?

Louisville, KY.
Logged

I wish you'd all just shut up. Then at least you would appear to be wise. - Job 13:5 ISV
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 30,431


EXTERMINATE!


« Reply #144 on: December 26, 2011, 02:26:12 AM »

Let's play nice, it's Christmas!
The posts that have your defenses up are probably those that date back to mid November. This thread was resurrected just today after a hiatus of several weeks.
Logged
NicholasMyra
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,634


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #145 on: December 26, 2011, 02:26:32 AM »

The blog post in question kind of touched a nerve with me because it brought to light some of the problems I've had with Byzantine liturgy.
Such as?

Well, sometimes I feel as though the hymnography tries to much to be a real long theological discourse. I know that liturgy is a huge source of theology, but still, it seems that there's not much room for concision.

Also, I love Gregorian chant. And Latin.
The Tridentine high mass is concise?
Logged

"...you are the orphan, not the protagonist."

-St. Seraphim of Vyritsa, 'This was from me'
Shiny
Site Supporter
Banned
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Groucho Marxist
Jurisdiction: Dahntahn Stoop Haus
Posts: 13,267


Paint It Red


« Reply #146 on: December 26, 2011, 02:46:09 AM »

The blog post in question kind of touched a nerve with me because it brought to light some of the problems I've had with Byzantine liturgy.
Such as?

Well, sometimes I feel as though the hymnography tries to much to be a real long theological discourse. I know that liturgy is a huge source of theology, but still, it seems that there's not much room for concision.

Also, I love Gregorian chant. And Latin.

I hate to be a sexist, but there is something otherworldy holy when only men chant in Gregorian in monophonic.

Then again certain Byzantine chants have blown me away recently...
Logged

“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan
KShaft
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 238



« Reply #147 on: December 26, 2011, 03:32:30 AM »

The blog post in question kind of touched a nerve with me because it brought to light some of the problems I've had with Byzantine liturgy.
Such as?

Well, sometimes I feel as though the hymnography tries to much to be a real long theological discourse. I know that liturgy is a huge source of theology, but still, it seems that there's not much room for concision.

Also, I love Gregorian chant. And Latin.

I hate to be a sexist, but there is something otherworldy holy when only men chant in Gregorian in monophonic.

Then again certain Byzantine chants have blown me away recently...

I have to say I concur. I have 3 Fontgombault recordings as well as several other Solemses. and three of the Spanish monastery that had that platinum album (as well as a few others) and I have the Voices CD from Avignon (the one where Decca went to various female convents to decide the best one and is very critically acclaimed) and another formerly famous female one and the males are just heads and tails above the ladies.  I do have an Ambrosian Chant CD with all women and it is very good as well as one of the Gloria Del Cantores with either women or girls (maybe both but they do have at least girls and boys) and it is very good. 

However Ive always preferred women for modern music. Like Harriet Wheeler of The Sundays or Dolores O'Riordan of the Cranberries, Leigh Nash of Sixpense none the Richer, Alison Krauss, Natalie Merchant, or Fiona Apple, or Jasimine Rogers formerly of Boa (hardly anyone has heard of them).
Logged
podkarpatska
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 7,589


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #148 on: December 26, 2011, 09:51:10 AM »

Let's play nice, it's Christmas!
The posts that have your defenses up are probably those that date back to mid November. This thread was resurrected just today after a hiatus of several weeks.


Thanks! i didn't notice....
Logged
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,959


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #149 on: December 27, 2011, 05:09:51 PM »

The blog post in question kind of touched a nerve with me because it brought to light some of the problems I've had with Byzantine liturgy.
Such as?

Well, sometimes I feel as though the hymnography tries to much to be a real long theological discourse. I know that liturgy is a huge source of theology, but still, it seems that there's not much room for concision.

Also, I love Gregorian chant. And Latin.

I hate to be a sexist, but there is something otherworldy holy when only men chant in Gregorian in monophonic.

Then again certain Byzantine chants have blown me away recently...

Unless they're nuns in a nunnery, women should not be chanting in church. Smiley
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
Cavaradossi
法網恢恢,疏而不漏
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Chalcedonian Automaton Serial No. 5Aj4bx9
Jurisdiction: Chalcedonian Automaton Factory 5
Posts: 1,474



« Reply #150 on: December 27, 2011, 07:20:13 PM »

The blog post in question kind of touched a nerve with me because it brought to light some of the problems I've had with Byzantine liturgy.
Such as?

Well, sometimes I feel as though the hymnography tries to much to be a real long theological discourse. I know that liturgy is a huge source of theology, but still, it seems that there's not much room for concision.

Also, I love Gregorian chant. And Latin.

I hate to be a sexist, but there is something otherworldy holy when only men chant in Gregorian in monophonic.

Then again certain Byzantine chants have blown me away recently...

Unless they're nuns in a nunnery, women should not be chanting in church. Smiley
Thankfully, at my church, we prevent this horrible abuse by handing a piece of duct tape, with the words, "1 Corinthians 14:34," written on it, to each woman as she enters the building.
Logged

Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Posts: 16,167



« Reply #151 on: December 27, 2011, 07:39:16 PM »

The blog post in question kind of touched a nerve with me because it brought to light some of the problems I've had with Byzantine liturgy.
Such as?

Well, sometimes I feel as though the hymnography tries to much to be a real long theological discourse. I know that liturgy is a huge source of theology, but still, it seems that there's not much room for concision.

Also, I love Gregorian chant. And Latin.

I hate to be a sexist, but there is something otherworldy holy when only men chant in Gregorian in monophonic.

Then again certain Byzantine chants have blown me away recently...

Unless they're nuns in a nunnery, women should not be chanting in church. Smiley
Thankfully, at my church, we prevent this horrible abuse by handing a piece of duct tape, with the words, "1 Corinthians 14:34," written on it, to each woman as she enters the building.

True LOL!

Mario, you really are coming into your own.

*single tear*
Logged

Gradually fading away on a strict punishment schedule.
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 9,949


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #152 on: December 27, 2011, 07:39:38 PM »

The blog post in question kind of touched a nerve with me because it brought to light some of the problems I've had with Byzantine liturgy.
Such as?

Well, sometimes I feel as though the hymnography tries to much to be a real long theological discourse. I know that liturgy is a huge source of theology, but still, it seems that there's not much room for concision.

Also, I love Gregorian chant. And Latin.

I hate to be a sexist, but there is something otherworldy holy when only men chant in Gregorian in monophonic.

Then again certain Byzantine chants have blown me away recently...

Unless they're nuns in a nunnery, women should not be chanting in church. Smiley
Thankfully, at my church, we prevent this horrible abuse by handing a piece of duct tape, with the words, "1 Corinthians 14:34," written on it, to each woman as she enters the building.

ROTFL!!!

 laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
Hiwot
Christ is Risen!
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
Posts: 1,959


Job 19:25-27


« Reply #153 on: December 27, 2011, 09:13:56 PM »

The blog post in question kind of touched a nerve with me because it brought to light some of the problems I've had with Byzantine liturgy.
Such as?

Well, sometimes I feel as though the hymnography tries to much to be a real long theological discourse. I know that liturgy is a huge source of theology, but still, it seems that there's not much room for concision.

Also, I love Gregorian chant. And Latin.

I hate to be a sexist, but there is something otherworldy holy when only men chant in Gregorian in monophonic.

Then again certain Byzantine chants have blown me away recently...

Unless they're nuns in a nunnery, women should not be chanting in church. Smiley
Thankfully, at my church, we prevent this horrible abuse by handing a piece of duct tape, with the words, "1 Corinthians 14:34," written on it, to each woman as she enters the building.

Oh My ! LOL! laugh laugh
Logged

To God be the Glory in all things! Amen!

Only pray for me, that God would give me both inward and outward strength, that I may not only speak, but truly will; and that I may not merely be called a Christian, but really be found to be one. St.Ignatius of Antioch.Epistle to the Romans.
Riddikulus
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 4,788



« Reply #154 on: December 27, 2011, 09:30:50 PM »

The blog post in question kind of touched a nerve with me because it brought to light some of the problems I've had with Byzantine liturgy.
Such as?

Well, sometimes I feel as though the hymnography tries to much to be a real long theological discourse. I know that liturgy is a huge source of theology, but still, it seems that there's not much room for concision.

Also, I love Gregorian chant. And Latin.

I hate to be a sexist...

Come now, tell the truth, Achronos. Do you really hate it?  laugh Most sexists I have met delight in their sexism; male and female alike!  Wink
Logged

I believe in One God, maker of heaven and earth and of all things visible and invisible.

Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.
Theodosius Dobzhansky, Russian Orthodox Christian (1900-1975)
Riddikulus
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 4,788



« Reply #155 on: December 27, 2011, 09:31:21 PM »

The blog post in question kind of touched a nerve with me because it brought to light some of the problems I've had with Byzantine liturgy.
Such as?

Well, sometimes I feel as though the hymnography tries to much to be a real long theological discourse. I know that liturgy is a huge source of theology, but still, it seems that there's not much room for concision.

Also, I love Gregorian chant. And Latin.

I hate to be a sexist, but there is something otherworldy holy when only men chant in Gregorian in monophonic.

Then again certain Byzantine chants have blown me away recently...

Unless they're nuns in a nunnery, women should not be chanting in church. Smiley
Thankfully, at my church, we prevent this horrible abuse by handing a piece of duct tape, with the words, "1 Corinthians 14:34," written on it, to each woman as she enters the building.

 laugh
Logged

I believe in One God, maker of heaven and earth and of all things visible and invisible.

Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.
Theodosius Dobzhansky, Russian Orthodox Christian (1900-1975)
FormerReformer
Convertodox of the convertodox
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: I'll take (e) for "all of the above"
Posts: 2,393



WWW
« Reply #156 on: December 27, 2011, 10:08:48 PM »

The blog post in question kind of touched a nerve with me because it brought to light some of the problems I've had with Byzantine liturgy.
Such as?

Well, sometimes I feel as though the hymnography tries to much to be a real long theological discourse. I know that liturgy is a huge source of theology, but still, it seems that there's not much room for concision.

Also, I love Gregorian chant. And Latin.

I hate to be a sexist, but there is something otherworldy holy when only men chant in Gregorian in monophonic.

Then again certain Byzantine chants have blown me away recently...

I myself prefer Byzantine chant when its done by men with alternating chanter/ison, not so much when done by women, and dislike it when done by a choir, and am very aesthetically displeased when its accompanied by organ (I don't want to start an organ thread, I have nothing against them theologically, and they certainly have their place in secular music, I have just never heard an organ accompany a Greek choir that didn't make me desperately search SCOBA for the closest Russian/OCA/Antiochian/any other jurisdiction parish). Russian chant sounds better with a full choir.
« Last Edit: December 27, 2011, 10:09:46 PM by FormerReformer » Logged

"Funny," said Lancelot, "how the people who can't pray say that prayers are not answered, however much the people who can pray say they are."  TH White

Oh, no: I've succumbed to Hyperdoxy!
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #157 on: December 27, 2011, 10:48:21 PM »

Quote
The N word I was thinking was Nestorian. It seems there is a similar concern for defending the integrity of humanity in the Incarnation, and a similar result: the Word of God assuming not humanity but a man (as you said, a visible Vicar of Christ, "taking the place of God on earth").

Yup!
Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
Shiny
Site Supporter
Banned
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Groucho Marxist
Jurisdiction: Dahntahn Stoop Haus
Posts: 13,267


Paint It Red


« Reply #158 on: December 29, 2011, 10:17:33 AM »

The blog post in question kind of touched a nerve with me because it brought to light some of the problems I've had with Byzantine liturgy.
Such as?

Well, sometimes I feel as though the hymnography tries to much to be a real long theological discourse. I know that liturgy is a huge source of theology, but still, it seems that there's not much room for concision.

Also, I love Gregorian chant. And Latin.

I hate to be a sexist...

Come now, tell the truth, Achronos. Do you really hate it?  laugh Most sexists I have met delight in their sexism; male and female alike!  Wink
Well I have nothing against women singers/vocalists, some of them can send a shiver down or turn me on. There is just something about male chanting which is simultaneously mysterious and otherworldy. The dynamic women bring to chanting is the whole ethereal quality. 
Logged

“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan
Tags:
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 0.156 seconds with 51 queries.