A lot to sift through, but it seems it was the usual stuff. Everyone thinks we need some sort of evangelisitic movement, but no one is clear on precisely what form it will or should take. I tend to agree with dzheremi's assessment that all we need in North America is the Coptic Liturgy with more English, since there's no such thing as a "generic American" and we don't want to segregate and fracture the Church along strictly ethnic lines. I realize that others would contend that this is not so, and that a more "American" rite (whatever that means) would be more helpful. As I've always said, I'm open to that, so long as it entails a reverential, liturgical, and strictly Orthodox approach to worship. Pop music has no place in Orthodox worship of any sort. Stavro, as usual, was dead on point with his assessment of how quarters of the "mission" movement in North America has been perverted by some elements desirous of Protestantizing the Church. It's a shame his posts get kicked into the dungeon of the private fora. His perspective, if articulated in a harsh way sometimes, is a valid one and needs to be heard. And he's right that these churches don't attract more or less Westerners or Coptic youth.) It's a shame that these two subjects can't be uncoupled, and that when discussing mission we inevitably have to discuss certain parishes that have gone off the rails in asserting that The meeting cultural needs in North America means adopting Protestant style pop-"worship". It does not. It's to the point that some clergy and servants engaged in evangelism don't even want to use the term "mission" because they don't want to be associated in the minds of the people with the elements that Stavro usually names and I will not. (We need to take the term back and get to work.
Thanks for taking the time to find the threads, Mina.