OrthodoxChristianity.net
April 20, 2014, 11:40:05 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: The Rules page has been updated.  Please familiarize yourself with its contents!
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 3 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: St. Maximilian Kolbe and the "quasi"-incarnation  (Read 3953 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« on: February 29, 2012, 03:02:48 PM »

Was wanting opinion from resident RC's regarding this belief and St. Maximilian's understanding of it. Would this teaching be considered a "pious opinion"?

http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=6547&CFID=122830042&CFTOKEN=96909764

"In other writings the Polish friar attempts to describe Mary's deep, intimate union with the Third Person of the Trinity from her conception, by calling Mary the "quasi-incarnation" of the Holy Spirit.13 He is careful to stress that this union "is not of the same order as the hypostatic union linking the human and divine natures in Christ";14 for he repeated often that the Holy Spirit does not dwell in Mary in the same way in which the Eternal Word is present in the sacred humanity of Jesus.15 The notion of the Holy Spirit becoming "in some manner" (quasi) incarnate in Mary may at first seem to be an extreme idea. However, it is somewhat analogous to the statement by St. Louis de Montfort, that "God the Son wishes to form himself, and in a manner of speaking, become incarnate every day in his members through his dear Mother."16 Along the same lines, St. Paul says: "It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me" (Gal. 2:20).

With the term "quasi-incarnation" Kolbe means that Mary is so much like (quasi) the Holy Spirit, in that she reflects the Third Person of the Trinity especially in two qualities or attributes: receptivity and fruitfulness. The Holy Spirit is the Fruit of the Father and the Son. He was "eternally conceived," if you will, as the Fruit of the all-pure love which has forever flowed between the Father and the Son. He receives the mutual love of the Father and the Son and eternally fructifies it within the inner life of the Trinity.17 Mary's sinlessness from conception is the fruit of God's love. At Mary's conception the Holy Spirit conformed her to himself. The Blessed Virgin, by reason of the singular grace of her Immaculate Conception, is totally receptive to the love of God. At the Annunciation she receives God's love and in cooperation with the Holy Spirit makes that love fruitful — infinitely so — in conceiving the Incarnate Word.18"
Logged
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #1 on: February 29, 2012, 03:04:50 PM »

Also would like opinions from EO on this...do you see any parallels between this teaching and that of Sergei Bulgakov?
Logged
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 9,945


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


« Reply #2 on: February 29, 2012, 03:33:29 PM »

St. Maximilian Kolbe is one of my most favorite saints (amongst many favorite saints!) for a variety of reasons.  However, with all due respect, why would the Orthodox care about whether his teaching, as explained in the link you provided, is a pious opinion or anything else for that matter?  He is, after all, a post-schism Western Catholic Saint.  Personally, I find nothing wrong with the description of his teaching as far as I understand it, but then, I *am* Catholic  Grin.

What teaching(s) of Bulgakov are you seeking parallels to here?  And, again, why would it matter to an Orthodox Christian?
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
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Posts: 16,167



« Reply #3 on: February 29, 2012, 04:04:01 PM »

Also would like opinions from EO on this...do you see any parallels between this teaching and that of Sergei Bulgakov?

It is vile.

Can't say about the Bulgakov part.
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: 9,945


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


« Reply #4 on: February 29, 2012, 04:10:17 PM »

Also would like opinions from EO on this...do you see any parallels between this teaching and that of Sergei Bulgakov?

It is vile.

 Roll Eyes
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
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #5 on: February 29, 2012, 06:35:07 PM »

wiki on Sophianism:

Sophianism (from Greek Σοφια "wisdom") is a heresy which has been condemned by the Russian Orthodox Church. Sophianism has roots in Wisdom theology, nineteenth and twentieth century Russian theology, preeminently Sergius Bulgakov through the influence of Vladimir Solovyov. Russian Orthodox priest Georges Florovsky and Orthodox theologian Vladimir Lossky opposed the interjection of the deity Sophia. Lossky stated that it was a misguided uniting together of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary into a single deity or hypostasis of God.  

Is there any streams of wisdom theology in RC circles that connect Mary and the person of Wisdom?
« Last Edit: February 29, 2012, 06:35:27 PM by Ortho_cat » Logged
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #6 on: February 29, 2012, 06:37:04 PM »

Also from wiki (Sergei Bulgakov):

In the words [of Fr. Sergius Bulgakov], when the Holy Spirit came to dwell in the Virgin Mary, she acquired "a dyadic life, human and divine; that is, She was completely deified, because in Her hypostatic being was manifest the living, creative revelation of the Holy Spirit" (Archpriest Sergei Bulgakov, The Unburnt Bush, 1927, p. 154). "She is a perfect manifestation of the Third Hypostasis" (Ibid., p. 175), "a creature, but also no longer a creature" (P. 19 1)...
« Last Edit: February 29, 2012, 06:39:31 PM by Ortho_cat » Logged
William
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Netodox
Jurisdiction: OC.net
Posts: 4,149


« Reply #7 on: February 29, 2012, 06:38:02 PM »

However, with all due respect, why would the Orthodox care about whether his teaching, as explained in the link you provided, is a pious opinion or anything else for that matter? 

Because otherwise he seemed like an incredibly saintly person. I'd like to know whether it'd be proper to privately venerate him or if his weird theology would prevent that.
Logged

A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion. - Proverbs 18:2

Delight thyself also in the Lord; and he shall give thee the desires of thine heart. - Psalm 36
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #8 on: February 29, 2012, 06:40:22 PM »

However, with all due respect, why would the Orthodox care about whether his teaching, as explained in the link you provided, is a pious opinion or anything else for that matter? 

Because otherwise he seemed like an incredibly saintly person. I'd like to know whether it'd be proper to privately venerate him or if his weird theology would prevent that.

Venerate St Maximilian Kolbe? I think most EO would say it's not ok...
Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 5,670



« Reply #9 on: February 29, 2012, 09:56:13 PM »

Was wanting opinion from resident RC's regarding this belief and St. Maximilian's understanding of it. Would this teaching be considered a "pious opinion"?

This was taught in my Mariology course in college (this was in the late 90s). I don't think the specific term "pious opinion" was brought up, but that seems to be a fair assessment.

Is there any streams of wisdom theology in RC circles that connect Mary and the person of Wisdom?

That was also in the Mariology course, but I forget the specifics.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 5,670



« Reply #10 on: February 29, 2012, 09:57:25 PM »

Also from wiki (Sergei Bulgakov):

In the words [of Fr. Sergius Bulgakov], when the Holy Spirit came to dwell in the Virgin Mary, she acquired "a dyadic life, human and divine; that is, She was completely deified, because in Her hypostatic being was manifest the living, creative revelation of the Holy Spirit" (Archpriest Sergei Bulgakov, The Unburnt Bush, 1927, p. 154). "She is a perfect manifestation of the Third Hypostasis" (Ibid., p. 175), "a creature, but also no longer a creature" (P. 19 1)...

That seems to be a bit off-topic, since the thread is about St. Maximillan Kolbe's teachings.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
William
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Netodox
Jurisdiction: OC.net
Posts: 4,149


« Reply #11 on: February 29, 2012, 09:57:32 PM »

However, with all due respect, why would the Orthodox care about whether his teaching, as explained in the link you provided, is a pious opinion or anything else for that matter? 

Because otherwise he seemed like an incredibly saintly person. I'd like to know whether it'd be proper to privately venerate him or if his weird theology would prevent that.

Venerate St Maximilian Kolbe? I think most EO would say it's not ok...

Why? Is allowing yourself to be slowly starved in palce of another person not saintly?  Huh
Logged

A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion. - Proverbs 18:2

Delight thyself also in the Lord; and he shall give thee the desires of thine heart. - Psalm 36
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #12 on: February 29, 2012, 11:46:46 PM »

Also from wiki (Sergei Bulgakov):

In the words [of Fr. Sergius Bulgakov], when the Holy Spirit came to dwell in the Virgin Mary, she acquired "a dyadic life, human and divine; that is, She was completely deified, because in Her hypostatic being was manifest the living, creative revelation of the Holy Spirit" (Archpriest Sergei Bulgakov, The Unburnt Bush, 1927, p. 154). "She is a perfect manifestation of the Third Hypostasis" (Ibid., p. 175), "a creature, but also no longer a creature" (P. 19 1)...

That seems to be a bit off-topic, since the thread is about St. Maximillan Kolbe's teachings.

well, my second post was specifically to EO posters to see if they thought there was any similarity between the two teachings. Someone asked me about specifics regarding what he taught, so I provided them.
Logged
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #13 on: February 29, 2012, 11:48:08 PM »

However, with all due respect, why would the Orthodox care about whether his teaching, as explained in the link you provided, is a pious opinion or anything else for that matter? 

Because otherwise he seemed like an incredibly saintly person. I'd like to know whether it'd be proper to privately venerate him or if his weird theology would prevent that.

Venerate St Maximilian Kolbe? I think most EO would say it's not ok...

Why? Is allowing yourself to be slowly starved in palce of another person not saintly?  Huh

Well, in order to venerate him, you would probably need either an icon or a relic of him...do you have either? Or are you referring to praying to him for intercession? Like I said, he's a post schism RC saint, so most EO would not acknowledge him as a saint that EO would venerate...not on our calendar, or anything like that...
Logged
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #14 on: February 29, 2012, 11:48:52 PM »

Was wanting opinion from resident RC's regarding this belief and St. Maximilian's understanding of it. Would this teaching be considered a "pious opinion"?

This was taught in my Mariology course in college (this was in the late 90s). I don't think the specific term "pious opinion" was brought up, but that seems to be a fair assessment.

Is there any streams of wisdom theology in RC circles that connect Mary and the person of Wisdom?

That was also in the Mariology course, but I forget the specifics.

I would be interested in finding out more about this.
Logged
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 11,959


Truth, Justice, and the American way!


« Reply #15 on: March 01, 2012, 12:21:05 AM »

I see what St. Kolbe is trying to say. If one actually reads through the passage, it is not heterodox per se, but the term "quasi-incarnation" can be problemactic because it could lend itself to heterdox interpretations. I think St. Kolbe should have just dropped the term altogether, and instead, discussed the intimate relationship between the Holy Spirit and the Theotokos, on its own terms.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
JamesRottnek
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Anglican
Jurisdiction: Episcopal Diocese of Arizona
Posts: 4,885


I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine


« Reply #16 on: March 01, 2012, 01:49:06 AM »

However, with all due respect, why would the Orthodox care about whether his teaching, as explained in the link you provided, is a pious opinion or anything else for that matter? 

Because otherwise he seemed like an incredibly saintly person. I'd like to know whether it'd be proper to privately venerate him or if his weird theology would prevent that.

Venerate St Maximilian Kolbe? I think most EO would say it's not ok...

Why? Is allowing yourself to be slowly starved in palce of another person not saintly?  Huh

Well, many Fathers - I believe this is also the general consensus, at least in the earlier centuries of the Church - held to the view that to become a martyr if you aren't part of the Church, is to commit suicide.  So, perhaps, it isn't.

Anyways, the belief mentioned in the OP is, at the very least, extremely disconcerting. 
Logged

I know a secret about a former Supreme Court Justice.  Can you guess what it is?

The greatest tragedy in the world is when a cigarette ends.

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011
Michał Kalina
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,465


WWW
« Reply #17 on: March 01, 2012, 06:06:20 AM »

However, with all due respect, why would the Orthodox care about whether his teaching, as explained in the link you provided, is a pious opinion or anything else for that matter?

Because otherwise he seemed like an incredibly saintly person. I'd like to know whether it'd be proper to privately venerate him or if his weird theology would prevent that.

Why would you venerate a man who started an organisation which main goal is "to proselytize sinners, heretics and schismatics" (what means us).

If you are looking for a Saint that was martyred in Auschwitz, check him.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
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: 1,473



« Reply #18 on: March 01, 2012, 08:36:18 AM »

I honestly think there are a few points where the words of Kolbe, as presented in the article, are incompatible with Orthodox teaching. 

Quote
And who is the Holy Spirit? The flowering of the love of the Father and the Son. If the fruit of created love is a created conception, then the fruit of divine Love, that prototype of all created love, is necessarily a divine "conception." The Holy Spirit is, therefore, the "uncreated, eternal conception," the prototype of all the conceptions that multiply life throughout the whole universe.

This is obviously unacceptable because the Cappadocian fathers chose the term proceeds precisely to prevent this kind of thinking. The mode of origin is left vague because the Spirit's relation to the Father is not as clearly defined in scripture like the relationship between the Father and Son. The Spirit is not a conception.

Quote
[T]he Holy Spirit manifests his share in the word of Redemption through the Immaculate Virgin who, although she is a person entirely distinct from him, is so intimately associated with him that our minds cannot understand it. So, while their union is not of the same order as the hypostatic union linking the human and divine natures in Christ, it remains true to say that Mary's action is the very action of the Holy Spirit.

This is problematic because the last sentence in Orthodox thought is not unique to Mary. By virtue of having a personal relationship with the three persons of the Trinity, the divine energies of God are personalized (enhypostasized) in the saints by grace, which is a sending from one divine person (the Holy Spirit) to a receiving human person.  The statement itself is not unacceptable, but it is only acceptable with the reservation that the described relationship of union in action belongs properly to the entire communion of saints.

Quote
When we reflect on these two truths: that all graces come from the Father by the Son and the Holy Spirit; and that our Holy Mother Mary is, so to speak, one with the Holy Spirit, we are driven to the conclusion that this Most Holy Mother is indeed the intermediary by whom all graces come to us.

This is simply not conceivable in Orthodoxy. The Theotokos is the mediator of grace in relation to her bringing Christ into the world. To say that she serves as the intermediary by whom all graces flow undermines the teaching that grace comes by virtue of a personal relationship (communion) with the Holy Trinity.
« Last Edit: March 01, 2012, 09:08:20 AM by Cavaradossi » Logged

Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 5,670



« Reply #19 on: March 01, 2012, 09:46:15 AM »

Well, many Fathers - I believe this is also the general consensus, at least in the earlier centuries of the Church - held to the view that to become a martyr if you aren't part of the Church, is to commit suicide. 

That seems very strange.

If, say, a Buddhist was martyred for being a Buddhist, that obviously wouldn't be equivalent to Christian martyrdom; but to call it suicide? That doesn't make sense.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 9,945


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


« Reply #20 on: March 01, 2012, 12:09:09 PM »

However, with all due respect, why would the Orthodox care about whether his teaching, as explained in the link you provided, is a pious opinion or anything else for that matter? 

Because otherwise he seemed like an incredibly saintly person. I'd like to know whether it'd be proper to privately venerate him or if his weird theology would prevent that.

Venerate St Maximilian Kolbe? I think most EO would say it's not ok...

Why? Is allowing yourself to be slowly starved in palce of another person not saintly?  Huh

Well, in order to venerate him, you would probably need either an icon or a relic of him...do you have either? Or are you referring to praying to him for intercession? Like I said, he's a post schism RC saint, so most EO would not acknowledge him as a saint that EO would venerate...not on our calendar, or anything like that...

Since when does one *need* an icon or relics to venerate a saint?  Are we, whether Orthodox or Catholic, not free to venerate privately and ask for the prayers and intercessions of any saint, irregardless of whether we possess an icon or relics?  After all, it is God Who makes the saints, not man or the Church.  The Church acknowledges, through the canonization process, that which God has already done.  Well....at least that's my understanding, anway  Wink.  I could be wrong  Embarrassed.


As far as St. Maximilian Kolbe goes, my understanding (again, possibly faulty) is that as a Christian (and he was certainly that, even if he was one of those darned Catholics) he was canonized far more out of recognition of what he did in Auschwitz than for his Mariology.  Does the fact that he wasn't "Orthodox" disqualify him for sainthood?   

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
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 9,945


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


« Reply #21 on: March 01, 2012, 12:21:35 PM »

Well, many Fathers - I believe this is also the general consensus, at least in the earlier centuries of the Church - held to the view that to become a martyr if you aren't part of the Church, is to commit suicide. 

That seems very strange.

If, say, a Buddhist was martyred for being a Buddhist, that obviously wouldn't be equivalent to Christian martyrdom; but to call it suicide? That doesn't make sense.

Strange, indeed!

John 15:12-13--"This is my commandment, that you love one another, as I have loved you.  Greater love than this no man hath, that a man lay down his life for his friends."

How could St. Kolbe giving his life, under these circumstances, be even remotely considered to be suicide??  To think thus is, if I might say so, highly disrespectful, to say the least.
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
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 9,945


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


« Reply #22 on: March 01, 2012, 01:42:20 PM »

However, with all due respect, why would the Orthodox care about whether his teaching, as explained in the link you provided, is a pious opinion or anything else for that matter?

Because otherwise he seemed like an incredibly saintly person. I'd like to know whether it'd be proper to privately venerate him or if his weird theology would prevent that.

If you are looking for a Saint that was martyred in Auschwitz, check him.

Thanks for posting that link.  I had never before heard of him, and now I have and am richer for it!

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
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #23 on: March 01, 2012, 02:16:05 PM »

However, with all due respect, why would the Orthodox care about whether his teaching, as explained in the link you provided, is a pious opinion or anything else for that matter? 

Because otherwise he seemed like an incredibly saintly person. I'd like to know whether it'd be proper to privately venerate him or if his weird theology would prevent that.

Venerate St Maximilian Kolbe? I think most EO would say it's not ok...

Why? Is allowing yourself to be slowly starved in palce of another person not saintly?  Huh

Well, in order to venerate him, you would probably need either an icon or a relic of him...do you have either? Or are you referring to praying to him for intercession? Like I said, he's a post schism RC saint, so most EO would not acknowledge him as a saint that EO would venerate...not on our calendar, or anything like that...

Since when does one *need* an icon or relics to venerate a saint?  Are we, whether Orthodox or Catholic, not free to venerate privately and ask for the prayers and intercessions of any saint, irregardless of whether we possess an icon or relics?  After all, it is God Who makes the saints, not man or the Church.  The Church acknowledges, through the canonization process, that which God has already done.  Well....at least that's my understanding, anway  Wink.  I could be wrong  Embarrassed.


As far as St. Maximilian Kolbe goes, my understanding (again, possibly faulty) is that as a Christian (and he was certainly that, even if he was one of those darned Catholics) he was canonized far more out of recognition of what he did in Auschwitz than for his Mariology.  Does the fact that he wasn't "Orthodox" disqualify him for sainthood?   



how many post schism EO's does the RC declare as saints?
Logged
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 9,945


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


« Reply #24 on: March 01, 2012, 02:52:30 PM »

However, with all due respect, why would the Orthodox care about whether his teaching, as explained in the link you provided, is a pious opinion or anything else for that matter?

Because otherwise he seemed like an incredibly saintly person. I'd like to know whether it'd be proper to privately venerate him or if his weird theology would prevent that.

Venerate St Maximilian Kolbe? I think most EO would say it's not ok...

Why? Is allowing yourself to be slowly starved in palce of another person not saintly?  Huh

Well, in order to venerate him, you would probably need either an icon or a relic of him...do you have either? Or are you referring to praying to him for intercession? Like I said, he's a post schism RC saint, so most EO would not acknowledge him as a saint that EO would venerate...not on our calendar, or anything like that...

Since when does one *need* an icon or relics to venerate a saint?  Are we, whether Orthodox or Catholic, not free to venerate privately and ask for the prayers and intercessions of any saint, irregardless of whether we possess an icon or relics?  After all, it is God Who makes the saints, not man or the Church.  The Church acknowledges, through the canonization process, that which God has already done.  Well....at least that's my understanding, anway  Wink.  I could be wrong  Embarrassed.


As far as St. Maximilian Kolbe goes, my understanding (again, possibly faulty) is that as a Christian (and he was certainly that, even if he was one of those darned Catholics) he was canonized far more out of recognition of what he did in Auschwitz than for his Mariology.  Does the fact that he wasn't "Orthodox" disqualify him for sainthood?  



how many post schism EO's does the RC declare as saints?


I've no idea, really.

How many saints are there, Catholic and/or Orthodox, that have never been "officially" recognized as such, i.e. canonized?
« Last Edit: March 01, 2012, 02:54:07 PM by J Michael » 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
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #25 on: March 01, 2012, 05:10:59 PM »

However, with all due respect, why would the Orthodox care about whether his teaching, as explained in the link you provided, is a pious opinion or anything else for that matter?

Because otherwise he seemed like an incredibly saintly person. I'd like to know whether it'd be proper to privately venerate him or if his weird theology would prevent that.

Venerate St Maximilian Kolbe? I think most EO would say it's not ok...

Why? Is allowing yourself to be slowly starved in palce of another person not saintly?  Huh

Well, in order to venerate him, you would probably need either an icon or a relic of him...do you have either? Or are you referring to praying to him for intercession? Like I said, he's a post schism RC saint, so most EO would not acknowledge him as a saint that EO would venerate...not on our calendar, or anything like that...

Since when does one *need* an icon or relics to venerate a saint?  Are we, whether Orthodox or Catholic, not free to venerate privately and ask for the prayers and intercessions of any saint, irregardless of whether we possess an icon or relics?  After all, it is God Who makes the saints, not man or the Church.  The Church acknowledges, through the canonization process, that which God has already done.  Well....at least that's my understanding, anway  Wink.  I could be wrong  Embarrassed.


As far as St. Maximilian Kolbe goes, my understanding (again, possibly faulty) is that as a Christian (and he was certainly that, even if he was one of those darned Catholics) he was canonized far more out of recognition of what he did in Auschwitz than for his Mariology.  Does the fact that he wasn't "Orthodox" disqualify him for sainthood?  



how many post schism EO's does the RC declare as saints?


I've no idea, really.

How many saints are there, Catholic and/or Orthodox, that have never been "officially" recognized as such, i.e. canonized?

not sure, millions?
Logged
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 9,945


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


« Reply #26 on: March 01, 2012, 05:14:52 PM »

However, with all due respect, why would the Orthodox care about whether his teaching, as explained in the link you provided, is a pious opinion or anything else for that matter? 

Because otherwise he seemed like an incredibly saintly person. I'd like to know whether it'd be proper to privately venerate him or if his weird theology would prevent that.

Venerate St Maximilian Kolbe? I think most EO would say it's not ok...

Why? Is allowing yourself to be slowly starved in palce of another person not saintly?  Huh

Well, in order to venerate him, you would probably need either an icon or a relic of him...do you have either? Or are you referring to praying to him for intercession? Like I said, he's a post schism RC saint, so most EO would not acknowledge him as a saint that EO would venerate...not on our calendar, or anything like that...

Since when does one *need* an icon or relics to venerate a saint?  Are we, whether Orthodox or Catholic, not free to venerate privately and ask for the prayers and intercessions of any saint, irregardless of whether we possess an icon or relics?  After all, it is God Who makes the saints, not man or the Church.  The Church acknowledges, through the canonization process, that which God has already done.  Well....at least that's my understanding, anway  Wink.  I could be wrong  Embarrassed.


As far as St. Maximilian Kolbe goes, my understanding (again, possibly faulty) is that as a Christian (and he was certainly that, even if he was one of those darned Catholics) he was canonized far more out of recognition of what he did in Auschwitz than for his Mariology.  Does the fact that he wasn't "Orthodox" disqualify him for sainthood?   



how many post schism EO's does the RC declare as saints?

Why do you ask?
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
William
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Netodox
Jurisdiction: OC.net
Posts: 4,149


« Reply #27 on: March 01, 2012, 06:00:10 PM »

However, with all due respect, why would the Orthodox care about whether his teaching, as explained in the link you provided, is a pious opinion or anything else for that matter? 

Because otherwise he seemed like an incredibly saintly person. I'd like to know whether it'd be proper to privately venerate him or if his weird theology would prevent that.

Venerate St Maximilian Kolbe? I think most EO would say it's not ok...

Why? Is allowing yourself to be slowly starved in palce of another person not saintly?  Huh

Well, many Fathers - I believe this is also the general consensus, at least in the earlier centuries of the Church - held to the view that to become a martyr if you aren't part of the Church, is to commit suicide.  So, perhaps, it isn't.

Wow. Maybe you're holy enough to judge someone who was willing to die for another during the Holocaust and say his act was worthless, but I know I'm not.
Logged

A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion. - Proverbs 18:2

Delight thyself also in the Lord; and he shall give thee the desires of thine heart. - Psalm 36
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Posts: 16,167



« Reply #28 on: March 01, 2012, 06:02:57 PM »

However, with all due respect, why would the Orthodox care about whether his teaching, as explained in the link you provided, is a pious opinion or anything else for that matter? 

Because otherwise he seemed like an incredibly saintly person. I'd like to know whether it'd be proper to privately venerate him or if his weird theology would prevent that.

Venerate St Maximilian Kolbe? I think most EO would say it's not ok...

Why? Is allowing yourself to be slowly starved in palce of another person not saintly?  Huh

Well, many Fathers - I believe this is also the general consensus, at least in the earlier centuries of the Church - held to the view that to become a martyr if you aren't part of the Church, is to commit suicide.  So, perhaps, it isn't.

Wow. Maybe you're holy enough to judge someone who was willing to die for another during the Holocaust and say his act was worthless, but I know I'm not.

And that is exactly what James is doing.
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: 9,945


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


« Reply #29 on: March 01, 2012, 06:05:20 PM »

However, with all due respect, why would the Orthodox care about whether his teaching, as explained in the link you provided, is a pious opinion or anything else for that matter?

Because otherwise he seemed like an incredibly saintly person. I'd like to know whether it'd be proper to privately venerate him or if his weird theology would prevent that.

Venerate St Maximilian Kolbe? I think most EO would say it's not ok...

Why? Is allowing yourself to be slowly starved in palce of another person not saintly?  Huh

Well, many Fathers - I believe this is also the general consensus, at least in the earlier centuries of the Church - held to the view that to become a martyr if you aren't part of the Church, is to commit suicide.  So, perhaps, it isn't.

Please supply some references that confirm your contention.  And then, please show us how ST. Maximilian Kolbe was not "part of the Church".  And then, please explain to us how his voluntarily dying in order to save the life of another (who, in fact, did survive the war) was "suicide".  And then, please explain how his actions were contrary to John 15:12-13.  Thanks!
« Last Edit: March 01, 2012, 06:11:19 PM by J Michael » 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
witega
Is it enough now, to tell you you matter?
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Diocese of the South
Posts: 1,614


« Reply #30 on: March 01, 2012, 06:10:03 PM »

I honestly think there are a few points where the words of Kolbe, as presented in the article, are incompatible with Orthodox teaching. 

Quote
And who is the Holy Spirit? The flowering of the love of the Father and the Son. If the fruit of created love is a created conception, then the fruit of divine Love, that prototype of all created love, is necessarily a divine "conception." The Holy Spirit is, therefore, the "uncreated, eternal conception," the prototype of all the conceptions that multiply life throughout the whole universe.

This is obviously unacceptable because the Cappadocian fathers chose the term proceeds precisely to prevent this kind of thinking. The mode of origin is left vague because the Spirit's relation to the Father is not as clearly defined in scripture like the relationship between the Father and Son. The Spirit is not a conception.

One point of clarification (or maybe just emphasis)--the term proceeds was actually 'chosen' by Christ. The Cappadocian Fathers choice was to stick to what had been revealed rather than engaging in unfounded speculation about the unknowable.
Logged

Ariel Starling - New album

For it were better to suffer everything, rather than divide the Church of God. Even martyrdom for the sake of preventing division would not be less glorious than for refusing to worship idols. - St. Dionysius the Great
Michał Kalina
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,465


WWW
« Reply #31 on: March 01, 2012, 06:34:09 PM »

And then, please show us how ST. Maximilian Kolbe was not "part of the Church".

That's the easy one.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 11,959


Truth, Justice, and the American way!


« Reply #32 on: March 01, 2012, 06:47:51 PM »

However, with all due respect, why would the Orthodox care about whether his teaching, as explained in the link you provided, is a pious opinion or anything else for that matter? 

Because otherwise he seemed like an incredibly saintly person. I'd like to know whether it'd be proper to privately venerate him or if his weird theology would prevent that.

Venerate St Maximilian Kolbe? I think most EO would say it's not ok...

Why? Is allowing yourself to be slowly starved in palce of another person not saintly?  Huh

Well, in order to venerate him, you would probably need either an icon or a relic of him...do you have either? Or are you referring to praying to him for intercession? Like I said, he's a post schism RC saint, so most EO would not acknowledge him as a saint that EO would venerate...not on our calendar, or anything like that...

Since when does one *need* an icon or relics to venerate a saint?  Are we, whether Orthodox or Catholic, not free to venerate privately and ask for the prayers and intercessions of any saint, irregardless of whether we possess an icon or relics?  After all, it is God Who makes the saints, not man or the Church.  The Church acknowledges, through the canonization process, that which God has already done.  Well....at least that's my understanding, anway  Wink.  I could be wrong  Embarrassed.


As far as St. Maximilian Kolbe goes, my understanding (again, possibly faulty) is that as a Christian (and he was certainly that, even if he was one of those darned Catholics) he was canonized far more out of recognition of what he did in Auschwitz than for his Mariology.  Does the fact that he wasn't "Orthodox" disqualify him for sainthood?   



how many post schism EO's does the RC declare as saints?
Well, I know that Byzantine Catholic Churches commemorate St. Gregory Palamas and St. Seraphim of Serov, to name two.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
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: 1,473



« Reply #33 on: March 01, 2012, 07:06:04 PM »

I honestly think there are a few points where the words of Kolbe, as presented in the article, are incompatible with Orthodox teaching. 

Quote
And who is the Holy Spirit? The flowering of the love of the Father and the Son. If the fruit of created love is a created conception, then the fruit of divine Love, that prototype of all created love, is necessarily a divine "conception." The Holy Spirit is, therefore, the "uncreated, eternal conception," the prototype of all the conceptions that multiply life throughout the whole universe.

This is obviously unacceptable because the Cappadocian fathers chose the term proceeds precisely to prevent this kind of thinking. The mode of origin is left vague because the Spirit's relation to the Father is not as clearly defined in scripture like the relationship between the Father and Son. The Spirit is not a conception.

One point of clarification (or maybe just emphasis)--the term proceeds was actually 'chosen' by Christ. The Cappadocian Fathers choice was to stick to what had been revealed rather than engaging in unfounded speculation about the unknowable.

Sort of, but the idea I was trying to get across was that the Cappadocian Fathers were the first, if I am remembering correctly, to use proceeds as an analogue of sorts to begotten as signifying having origin from the Father (that is that the Cappadocian Fathers in stressing the divinity of the Spirit were the first to assign a term to describe the Spirit's eternal manner of origin from the Father). We have them to thank for the phrase from the Creed of Constantinople which states that the Spirit 'proceeds from the Father', which was not present in the Creed of Nicaea.

Divorced from this particular theological context, ἐκπορευόμενον seems to be a rather vague term. It is also used, for example, to describe the river of the water of life flowing from the throne of the Father and the Lamb in Revelations 22:1.
« Last Edit: March 01, 2012, 07:13:41 PM by Cavaradossi » Logged

Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 5,670



« Reply #34 on: March 02, 2012, 09:14:25 AM »

One point of clarification (or maybe just emphasis)--the term proceeds was actually 'chosen' by Christ.

No. The word proceed (procedere) was chosen by St. Jerome.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 9,945


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


« Reply #35 on: March 02, 2012, 11:11:44 AM »

And then, please show us how ST. Maximilian Kolbe was not "part of the Church".

That's the easy one.

Oh boy....here we go....yet again  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
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
Michał Kalina
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,465


WWW
« Reply #36 on: March 02, 2012, 11:14:33 AM »

And then, please show us how ST. Maximilian Kolbe was not "part of the Church".

That's the easy one.

Oh boy....here we go....yet again  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes


It's you who made that stupid request ;P
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 9,945


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


« Reply #37 on: March 02, 2012, 11:22:24 AM »

And then, please show us how ST. Maximilian Kolbe was not "part of the Church".

That's the easy one.

Oh boy....here we go....yet again  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes


It's you who made that stupid request ;P

If you noticed, the request was part of a string of connected requests.  Care to address the others as well, since you already started?

In anticipation of your (hopefully intelligent) answer, St. Maximilian Kolbe was most definitely a part of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.  That is the Catholic Church, Roman and Eastern sui juris churches all in communion with the Pope.  We are in what is called, by us,  an imperfect communion with the Orthodox Churches.  If you or others wish to totally dissociate yourselves from us, and deny that we, along with our saints, including St. Kolbe, are indeed "part of the Church", that is your right.  God gave you free will.  It is also your inestimable loss.  It is our loss, too, unfortunately.

Hopefully that will be all that has to be said about that.
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
Michał Kalina
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,465


WWW
« Reply #38 on: March 02, 2012, 11:38:30 AM »

In anticipation of your (hopefully intelligent) answer, St. Maximilian Kolbe was most definitely a part of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.  That is the Catholic Church, Roman and Eastern sui juris churches all in communion with the Pope.  We are in what is called, by us,  an imperfect communion with the Orthodox Churches.  If you or others wish to totally dissociate yourselves from us, and deny that we, along with our saints, including St. Kolbe, are indeed "part of the Church", that is your right.  God gave you free will.  It is also your inestimable loss.  It is our loss, too, unfortunately.

And what have you accomplished with writing that? What meaningful does it bring into the discussion?
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
witega
Is it enough now, to tell you you matter?
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Diocese of the South
Posts: 1,614


« Reply #39 on: March 02, 2012, 11:43:31 AM »

And then, please show us how ST. Maximilian Kolbe was not "part of the Church".

That's the easy one.

Oh boy....here we go....yet again  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes


It's you who made that stupid request ;P


In anticipation of your (hopefully intelligent) answer, St. Maximilian Kolbe was most definitely a part of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.  That is the Catholic Church, Roman and Eastern sui juris churches all in communion with the Pope.

You know that Orthodox do not believe the second sentence. And that, accordingly, you've demonstrated Michael's point, that it's easy to show that Kolbe was "not part of the Church" according to Orthodox teaching. You just did it yourself.


Quote
Hopefully that will be all that has to be said about that.

This is the Orthodox-Catholic discussion subforum of an Orthodox forum. Quite obviously, every time you dispute Orthodox ecclesiology here you are going to get responses. I have no idea why you think it's useful to act surprised every time you take a thread off-track by doing so. If I was on an RC forum, I'd expect exactly the same level of responses every time I said, "the Papacy is in schism."
Logged

Ariel Starling - New album

For it were better to suffer everything, rather than divide the Church of God. Even martyrdom for the sake of preventing division would not be less glorious than for refusing to worship idols. - St. Dionysius the Great
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 9,945


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


« Reply #40 on: March 02, 2012, 11:44:22 AM »

In anticipation of your (hopefully intelligent) answer, St. Maximilian Kolbe was most definitely a part of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.  That is the Catholic Church, Roman and Eastern sui juris churches all in communion with the Pope.  We are in what is called, by us,  an imperfect communion with the Orthodox Churches.  If you or others wish to totally dissociate yourselves from us, and deny that we, along with our saints, including St. Kolbe, are indeed "part of the Church", that is your right.  God gave you free will.  It is also your inestimable loss.  It is our loss, too, unfortunately.

And what have you accomplished with writing that? What meaningful does it bring into the discussion?

Just trying to establish, against all odds on this board, that St. Maximilian Kolbe was "part of the Church" and to lament the fact that some (many? all?) Orthodox Christians like yourself seem to consider that we are not part of the same Church, although in different ways.
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
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 5,670



« Reply #41 on: March 02, 2012, 11:50:25 AM »

Quite obviously, every time you dispute Orthodox ecclesiology here you are going to get responses.

I guess that explains my feelings of deja vu.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Michał Kalina
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,465


WWW
« Reply #42 on: March 02, 2012, 11:53:21 AM »

In anticipation of your (hopefully intelligent) answer, St. Maximilian Kolbe was most definitely a part of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.  That is the Catholic Church, Roman and Eastern sui juris churches all in communion with the Pope.  We are in what is called, by us,  an imperfect communion with the Orthodox Churches.  If you or others wish to totally dissociate yourselves from us, and deny that we, along with our saints, including St. Kolbe, are indeed "part of the Church", that is your right.  God gave you free will.  It is also your inestimable loss.  It is our loss, too, unfortunately.

And what have you accomplished with writing that? What meaningful does it bring into the discussion?

Just trying to establish, against all odds on this board, that St. Maximilian Kolbe was "part of the Church" and to lament the fact that some (many? all?) Orthodox Christians like yourself seem to consider that we are not part of the same Church, although in different ways.

Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 9,945


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


« Reply #43 on: March 02, 2012, 12:00:20 PM »

And then, please show us how ST. Maximilian Kolbe was not "part of the Church".

That's the easy one.

Oh boy....here we go....yet again  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes


It's you who made that stupid request ;P


In anticipation of your (hopefully intelligent) answer, St. Maximilian Kolbe was most definitely a part of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.  That is the Catholic Church, Roman and Eastern sui juris churches all in communion with the Pope.

You know that Orthodox do not believe the second sentence. And that, accordingly, you've demonstrated Michael's point, that it's easy to show that Kolbe was "not part of the Church" according to Orthodox teaching. You just did it yourself.


Quote
Hopefully that will be all that has to be said about that.

This is the Orthodox-Catholic discussion subforum of an Orthodox forum. Quite obviously, every time you dispute Orthodox ecclesiology here you are going to get responses. I have no idea why you think it's useful to act surprised every time you take a thread off-track by doing so. If I was on an RC forum, I'd expect exactly the same level of responses every time I said, "the Papacy is in schism."

Everyone here, myself included, is well aware that Saint Kolbe was not an Orthodox Christian.  It wasn't me, originally, who opened the door to this discussion.  I was hoping it wouldn't happen and we wouldn't have to get back on this merry-go-round again.  As a Catholic who is being graciously allowed to participate here, on the Orthodox-Catholic discussion subforum, I'm well aware that this is, indeed, an Orthodox board.  When Catholic ecclesiology is challenged, do you expect me or other Catholics to sit idly by and not take up that challenge, to the best of our abilities--mine being pretty limited, admittedly?

I think it was Wyatt who commented on another thread about this subforum being nothing more than a place to troll Catholics.  That entered my mind when this thread first started and prompted the reply that I initially wrote.  Seems he may have been right. 

It also seems that I'm a sucker for falling into the "trap", if you will, by even bothering to reply here.  Guess I'll have to reassess whether I even want to participate any longer.  It is Lent, after all, and I'm doing my best (which isn't very good sometimes) to resist the temptation to sin, so maybe I should include in my fasting regimen fasting (again) from this board.  Pardon me for thinking out loud, and please forgive me if I've offended you or others here.  I am, after all, a great sinner.
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
Michał Kalina
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,465


WWW
« Reply #44 on: March 02, 2012, 12:05:52 PM »

When Catholic ecclesiology is challenged, do you expect me or other Catholics to sit idly by and not take up that challenge, to the best of our abilities--mine being pretty limited, admittedly?

When your ecclesiology is not related to the ongoing discussion in any way?

Pretty so.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Tags: Poland Polish 
Pages: 1 2 3 »  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 0.207 seconds with 73 queries.