OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 30, 2014, 01:44:18 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Is Contemporary Orthodoxy True To The Original Faith?  (Read 4819 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
вєликаго
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Drevlepravoslavie (Old Orthodox) STRANNIKI
Jurisdiction: Lipovan
Posts: 230



« Reply #135 on: June 17, 2012, 06:01:52 PM »

Are you even Slavic at all? Really the only people I've ever seen have a problem with a language like this is that they painfully want to be exotic and esoteric somehow, for example, someone that hates English and wants to speak in Japanese or Old High Neo-Classical Mountain Urdu would most likely be a WASP.

His nick suggests that he does not know Church Slavonic or any other Slavic language.

This is near total non-sense and has next to nothing to do with me.

It shows that you're most likely a non-Slavic convert to the Old Rite, which makes your defense of Old Church Slavonic even more laughable.

What does my person have to do with the historical enquires/ discussion we are engaging in?
You're defending the language of a culture that was never yours.

What defense of Slavonic are you speaking of?
You call Slavonic one of only three languages that "have a blessing" for liturgical use.

What is so "laughable" about this so called defense?
You're defending the language of a culture that was never yours.

What does my knowledge of Slavonic have to do with anything?
If you don't know Slavonic, then you're defending the liturgical use of a language you can't even understand.

I know plenty of Slavs that do not know Slavonic -- what would you think about them?
That they should be allowed to worship in a language they understand.

What does my ancestry have to do with this?
Be what you are. Don't try to return to some nostalgic, mythical past that never existed except in your own mind.

What ancestry am I being accused of being? What knowledge of me do you presume to know or think you are being confirmed in by this post?
I don't know. I just think your defense of Slavonic rather weird, since even your choice of a username shows that you don't know the language.

By the way: Not all Russians are Slavs! (at least not the way I understand it).
I'm not saying they are. I'm just pointing out how you're defending the liturgical use of the language of a culture that was never yours.

Your wrong, wrong, wrong. Your entirely wrong. How have I defended Slavonic? When did I say ONLY Hebrew, Greek, and SLavonic was blessed? I gave some examples of those languages for purposes other then how you present it. I posted what I knew was fact, or else what I thought was fact about those languages and I asked for constructive input.


once again, VERY WRONG!!

And I still fail to see what any of this personal information (about me) has to do with anything.


  
« Last Edit: June 17, 2012, 06:07:01 PM by вєликаго » Logged

St. Meletius the Confessor – Submit not yourselves to monastics, nor to presbyters, who teach lawless things and evilly propound them. And why do I say only monastics or presbyters? Follow not even after bishops who guilefully exhort you to do and say and believe things that are not profitable. What
вєликаго
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Drevlepravoslavie (Old Orthodox) STRANNIKI
Jurisdiction: Lipovan
Posts: 230



« Reply #136 on: June 17, 2012, 07:35:39 PM »

I have seen a website by an American man who converted to the Orthodox faith. In it he says that the true Orthodoxy is lost since the reformations in 1666 in the Russian Empire which led to the split between the contemporary Orthodox and the Old Believers. This man is an Old Believer and says that today's Orthodoxy has deviated from the true path. In his opinion English is also not a language in which scripture or other holy things can be transmitted through as it is created by witches and is not an original but created language. Furthermore he also says that the use of electricity and imitation of non-Orthodox peoples is also part of this devation. Therefore I would like to ask if what he says is true? Is the Orthodoxy we see today the original Orthodox faith or is it corrupted?

I suggest checking this link out:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkKMun8flF4&feature=relmfu and this is good as well:

http://orthodoxword.wordpress.com/2011/06/30/fr-george-calciu-on-ecumenism-video/

And encourage you to beware of the Ecumenists  and those Orthodox who have altogether joned Rome already. I feel that you should beware Metropolitan Kallistos ware as I  believe he seeks Union with Rome.

Titles added - MK.
« Last Edit: June 17, 2012, 08:25:55 PM by Michał Kalina » Logged

St. Meletius the Confessor – Submit not yourselves to monastics, nor to presbyters, who teach lawless things and evilly propound them. And why do I say only monastics or presbyters? Follow not even after bishops who guilefully exhort you to do and say and believe things that are not profitable. What
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,721


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #137 on: June 17, 2012, 09:16:38 PM »

Are you even Slavic at all? Really the only people I've ever seen have a problem with a language like this is that they painfully want to be exotic and esoteric somehow, for example, someone that hates English and wants to speak in Japanese or Old High Neo-Classical Mountain Urdu would most likely be a WASP.

His nick suggests that he does not know Church Slavonic or any other Slavic language.

This is near total non-sense and has next to nothing to do with me.

It shows that you're most likely a non-Slavic convert to the Old Rite, which makes your defense of Old Church Slavonic even more laughable.

What does my person have to do with the historical enquires/ discussion we are engaging in?
You're defending the language of a culture that was never yours.

What defense of Slavonic are you speaking of?
You call Slavonic one of only three languages that "have a blessing" for liturgical use.

What is so "laughable" about this so called defense?
You're defending the language of a culture that was never yours.

What does my knowledge of Slavonic have to do with anything?
If you don't know Slavonic, then you're defending the liturgical use of a language you can't even understand.

I know plenty of Slavs that do not know Slavonic -- what would you think about them?
That they should be allowed to worship in a language they understand.

What does my ancestry have to do with this?
Be what you are. Don't try to return to some nostalgic, mythical past that never existed except in your own mind.

What ancestry am I being accused of being? What knowledge of me do you presume to know or think you are being confirmed in by this post?
I don't know. I just think your defense of Slavonic rather weird, since even your choice of a username shows that you don't know the language.

By the way: Not all Russians are Slavs! (at least not the way I understand it).
I'm not saying they are. I'm just pointing out how you're defending the liturgical use of the language of a culture that was never yours.

Your wrong, wrong, wrong. Your entirely wrong. How have I defended Slavonic? When did I say ONLY Hebrew, Greek, and SLavonic was blessed? I gave some examples of those languages for purposes other then how you present it. I posted what I knew was fact, or else what I thought was fact about those languages and I asked for constructive input.


once again, VERY WRONG!!
Actually, I'm very RIGHT on this. You HAVE condemned the liturgical use of English because it is not blessed (according to you), and you HAVE defended the liturgical use of Slavonic because it is blessed (again, according to you).

Who says that all languages are equal? Find me something from the saints, if you would please? What saint says English is equal to Greek? I would say Greek is very set apart on account that the Lord spoke it. I would say Hebrew is very set apart on account that Moses used it. I would say Slavonic is very set apart on account that it was used by those who are equal of the Apostles.

How one feels about something is not proof. Does Christ tell us to judge the True Faith by how we feel about it?
Logged
вєликаго
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Drevlepravoslavie (Old Orthodox) STRANNIKI
Jurisdiction: Lipovan
Posts: 230



« Reply #138 on: June 17, 2012, 09:37:07 PM »

Are you even Slavic at all? Really the only people I've ever seen have a problem with a language like this is that they painfully want to be exotic and esoteric somehow, for example, someone that hates English and wants to speak in Japanese or Old High Neo-Classical Mountain Urdu would most likely be a WASP.

His nick suggests that he does not know Church Slavonic or any other Slavic language.

This is near total non-sense and has next to nothing to do with me.

It shows that you're most likely a non-Slavic convert to the Old Rite, which makes your defense of Old Church Slavonic even more laughable.

What does my person have to do with the historical enquires/ discussion we are engaging in?
You're defending the language of a culture that was never yours.

What defense of Slavonic are you speaking of?
You call Slavonic one of only three languages that "have a blessing" for liturgical use.

What is so "laughable" about this so called defense?
You're defending the language of a culture that was never yours.

What does my knowledge of Slavonic have to do with anything?
If you don't know Slavonic, then you're defending the liturgical use of a language you can't even understand.

I know plenty of Slavs that do not know Slavonic -- what would you think about them?
That they should be allowed to worship in a language they understand.

What does my ancestry have to do with this?
Be what you are. Don't try to return to some nostalgic, mythical past that never existed except in your own mind.

What ancestry am I being accused of being? What knowledge of me do you presume to know or think you are being confirmed in by this post?
I don't know. I just think your defense of Slavonic rather weird, since even your choice of a username shows that you don't know the language.

By the way: Not all Russians are Slavs! (at least not the way I understand it).
I'm not saying they are. I'm just pointing out how you're defending the liturgical use of the language of a culture that was never yours.

Your wrong, wrong, wrong. Your entirely wrong. How have I defended Slavonic? When did I say ONLY Hebrew, Greek, and SLavonic was blessed? I gave some examples of those languages for purposes other then how you present it. I posted what I knew was fact, or else what I thought was fact about those languages and I asked for constructive input.


once again, VERY WRONG!!
Actually, I'm very RIGHT on this. You HAVE condemned the liturgical use of English because it is not blessed (according to you), and you HAVE defended the liturgical use of Slavonic because it is blessed (again, according to you).

Who says that all languages are equal? Find me something from the saints, if you would please? What saint says English is equal to Greek? I would say Greek is very set apart on account that the Lord spoke it. I would say Hebrew is very set apart on account that Moses used it. I would say Slavonic is very set apart on account that it was used by those who are equal of the Apostles.

How one feels about something is not proof. Does Christ tell us to judge the True Faith by how we feel about it?

I brought English into question, said there is ground to find it suspect; I gave facts, or things I think are facts, that lead me to think why there is ground to suspect English; and I said my personal thinking was English was pretty poor;  but I do not recall using the words "I know English is condemned" or "I think its condemned", but, rather I said there is ground to think it could be condemned and then I began to list what I know, or think I know, about English, Greek, Hebrew, and Slavonic.

I made it very clear that I had no firm stand concerning English -- so from the first post I admitted uncertainty. I mentioned the only thing I was certain about was, based on what I know (or think I know), is that there was plenty of ground to suspect English.

I spoke in favor of Slavonic based on it receiving a blessing. I brought up something I know about Slavonic and contrasted to English. Are you saying you do not know the story of how Saints Cyril and Methodius received a blessing to use Slavonic?

Not sure how this is "defending" Slavonic. I did not know Slavonic was under attack by anyone here?
« Last Edit: June 17, 2012, 09:50:43 PM by вєликаго » Logged

St. Meletius the Confessor – Submit not yourselves to monastics, nor to presbyters, who teach lawless things and evilly propound them. And why do I say only monastics or presbyters? Follow not even after bishops who guilefully exhort you to do and say and believe things that are not profitable. What
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
*****
Online Online

Posts: 14,170


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #139 on: June 17, 2012, 09:53:35 PM »

Question for anyone: what would it take to make a language acceptable or approved for use in the liturgy? Would the parish have to get a letter from the bishop? Does there have to be a meeting of the synod? Would missionaries be allowed to compromise if they went to a remote area and neither the priest nor the attendees spoke the same language with fluency - half the service in one language and half in another?

 Huh

Seems to be a harder decision than it looks.
« Last Edit: June 17, 2012, 09:54:16 PM by biro » Logged

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

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

spcasuncoast.org
akimori makoto
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Non-heretical Christian
Jurisdiction: Fully-sik-hektic archdiocese of Australia, bro
Posts: 3,126

No-one bound by fleshly pleasures is worthy ...


« Reply #140 on: June 17, 2012, 09:55:40 PM »

Question for anyone: what would it take to make a language acceptable or approved for use in the liturgy? Would the parish have to get a letter from the bishop? Does there have to be a meeting of the synod? Would missionaries be allowed to compromise if they went to a remote area and neither the priest nor the attendees spoke the same language with fluency - half the service in one language and half in another?

 Huh

Seems to be a harder decision than it looks.

Ecumenical council?
Logged

The Episcopallian road is easy and wide, for many go through it to find destruction. lol sorry channeling Isa.
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
*****
Online Online

Posts: 14,170


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #141 on: June 17, 2012, 09:59:33 PM »

Aha. That could be it.  Smiley
Logged

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

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

spcasuncoast.org
вєликаго
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Drevlepravoslavie (Old Orthodox) STRANNIKI
Jurisdiction: Lipovan
Posts: 230



« Reply #142 on: June 17, 2012, 09:59:39 PM »

Question for anyone: what would it take to make a language acceptable or approved for use in the liturgy? Would the parish have to get a letter from the bishop? Does there have to be a meeting of the synod? Would missionaries be allowed to compromise if they went to a remote area and neither the priest nor the attendees spoke the same language with fluency - half the service in one language and half in another?

 Huh

Seems to be a harder decision than it looks.

I should have formed my question more like you did (just now), when I first posted in this thread. Based on what I've read, I think that you need a blessing from a Bishop.
Logged

St. Meletius the Confessor – Submit not yourselves to monastics, nor to presbyters, who teach lawless things and evilly propound them. And why do I say only monastics or presbyters? Follow not even after bishops who guilefully exhort you to do and say and believe things that are not profitable. What
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
*****
Online Online

Posts: 14,170


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #143 on: June 17, 2012, 10:00:43 PM »

Question for anyone: what would it take to make a language acceptable or approved for use in the liturgy? Would the parish have to get a letter from the bishop? Does there have to be a meeting of the synod? Would missionaries be allowed to compromise if they went to a remote area and neither the priest nor the attendees spoke the same language with fluency - half the service in one language and half in another?

 Huh

Seems to be a harder decision than it looks.

I should have formed my question more like you did (just now), when I first posted in this thread. Based on what I've read, I think that you need a blessing from a Bishop.

Interesting, thanks.
Logged

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

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

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

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,721


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #144 on: June 17, 2012, 10:22:42 PM »

Are you even Slavic at all? Really the only people I've ever seen have a problem with a language like this is that they painfully want to be exotic and esoteric somehow, for example, someone that hates English and wants to speak in Japanese or Old High Neo-Classical Mountain Urdu would most likely be a WASP.

His nick suggests that he does not know Church Slavonic or any other Slavic language.

This is near total non-sense and has next to nothing to do with me.

It shows that you're most likely a non-Slavic convert to the Old Rite, which makes your defense of Old Church Slavonic even more laughable.

What does my person have to do with the historical enquires/ discussion we are engaging in?
You're defending the language of a culture that was never yours.

What defense of Slavonic are you speaking of?
You call Slavonic one of only three languages that "have a blessing" for liturgical use.

What is so "laughable" about this so called defense?
You're defending the language of a culture that was never yours.

What does my knowledge of Slavonic have to do with anything?
If you don't know Slavonic, then you're defending the liturgical use of a language you can't even understand.

I know plenty of Slavs that do not know Slavonic -- what would you think about them?
That they should be allowed to worship in a language they understand.

What does my ancestry have to do with this?
Be what you are. Don't try to return to some nostalgic, mythical past that never existed except in your own mind.

What ancestry am I being accused of being? What knowledge of me do you presume to know or think you are being confirmed in by this post?
I don't know. I just think your defense of Slavonic rather weird, since even your choice of a username shows that you don't know the language.

By the way: Not all Russians are Slavs! (at least not the way I understand it).
I'm not saying they are. I'm just pointing out how you're defending the liturgical use of the language of a culture that was never yours.

Your wrong, wrong, wrong. Your entirely wrong. How have I defended Slavonic? When did I say ONLY Hebrew, Greek, and SLavonic was blessed? I gave some examples of those languages for purposes other then how you present it. I posted what I knew was fact, or else what I thought was fact about those languages and I asked for constructive input.


once again, VERY WRONG!!
Actually, I'm very RIGHT on this. You HAVE condemned the liturgical use of English because it is not blessed (according to you), and you HAVE defended the liturgical use of Slavonic because it is blessed (again, according to you).

Who says that all languages are equal? Find me something from the saints, if you would please? What saint says English is equal to Greek? I would say Greek is very set apart on account that the Lord spoke it. I would say Hebrew is very set apart on account that Moses used it. I would say Slavonic is very set apart on account that it was used by those who are equal of the Apostles.

How one feels about something is not proof. Does Christ tell us to judge the True Faith by how we feel about it?

I brought English into question, said there is ground to find it suspect; I gave facts, or things I think are facts, that lead me to think why there is ground to suspect English; and I said my personal thinking was English was pretty poor;  but I do not recall using the words "I know English is condemned" or "I think its condemned", but, rather I said there is ground to think it could be condemned and then I began to list what I know, or think I know, about English, Greek, Hebrew, and Slavonic.

I made it very clear that I had no firm stand concerning English -- so from the first post I admitted uncertainty. I mentioned the only thing I was certain about was, based on what I know (or think I know), is that there was plenty of ground to suspect English.

I spoke in favor of Slavonic based on it receiving a blessing. I brought up something I know about Slavonic and contrasted to English. Are you saying you do not know the story of how Saints Cyril and Methodius received a blessing to use Slavonic?
No, I already know. Are you saying you do not know the story of how Pope Adrian II granted Ss. Cyril and Methodius his blessing to use Slavonic in their liturgies? Why did he do this?

Not sure how this is "defending" Slavonic. I did not know Slavonic was under attack by anyone here?
Does something need to be under attack for you to feel the need to defend it?
Logged
вєликаго
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Drevlepravoslavie (Old Orthodox) STRANNIKI
Jurisdiction: Lipovan
Posts: 230



« Reply #145 on: June 17, 2012, 10:33:01 PM »

Are you even Slavic at all? Really the only people I've ever seen have a problem with a language like this is that they painfully want to be exotic and esoteric somehow, for example, someone that hates English and wants to speak in Japanese or Old High Neo-Classical Mountain Urdu would most likely be a WASP.

His nick suggests that he does not know Church Slavonic or any other Slavic language.

This is near total non-sense and has next to nothing to do with me.

It shows that you're most likely a non-Slavic convert to the Old Rite, which makes your defense of Old Church Slavonic even more laughable.

What does my person have to do with the historical enquires/ discussion we are engaging in?
You're defending the language of a culture that was never yours.

What defense of Slavonic are you speaking of?
You call Slavonic one of only three languages that "have a blessing" for liturgical use.

What is so "laughable" about this so called defense?
You're defending the language of a culture that was never yours.

What does my knowledge of Slavonic have to do with anything?
If you don't know Slavonic, then you're defending the liturgical use of a language you can't even understand.

I know plenty of Slavs that do not know Slavonic -- what would you think about them?
That they should be allowed to worship in a language they understand.

What does my ancestry have to do with this?
Be what you are. Don't try to return to some nostalgic, mythical past that never existed except in your own mind.

What ancestry am I being accused of being? What knowledge of me do you presume to know or think you are being confirmed in by this post?
I don't know. I just think your defense of Slavonic rather weird, since even your choice of a username shows that you don't know the language.

By the way: Not all Russians are Slavs! (at least not the way I understand it).
I'm not saying they are. I'm just pointing out how you're defending the liturgical use of the language of a culture that was never yours.

Your wrong, wrong, wrong. Your entirely wrong. How have I defended Slavonic? When did I say ONLY Hebrew, Greek, and SLavonic was blessed? I gave some examples of those languages for purposes other then how you present it. I posted what I knew was fact, or else what I thought was fact about those languages and I asked for constructive input.


once again, VERY WRONG!!
Actually, I'm very RIGHT on this. You HAVE condemned the liturgical use of English because it is not blessed (according to you), and you HAVE defended the liturgical use of Slavonic because it is blessed (again, according to you).

Who says that all languages are equal? Find me something from the saints, if you would please? What saint says English is equal to Greek? I would say Greek is very set apart on account that the Lord spoke it. I would say Hebrew is very set apart on account that Moses used it. I would say Slavonic is very set apart on account that it was used by those who are equal of the Apostles.

How one feels about something is not proof. Does Christ tell us to judge the True Faith by how we feel about it?

I brought English into question, said there is ground to find it suspect; I gave facts, or things I think are facts, that lead me to think why there is ground to suspect English; and I said my personal thinking was English was pretty poor;  but I do not recall using the words "I know English is condemned" or "I think its condemned", but, rather I said there is ground to think it could be condemned and then I began to list what I know, or think I know, about English, Greek, Hebrew, and Slavonic.

I made it very clear that I had no firm stand concerning English -- so from the first post I admitted uncertainty. I mentioned the only thing I was certain about was, based on what I know (or think I know), is that there was plenty of ground to suspect English.

I spoke in favor of Slavonic based on it receiving a blessing. I brought up something I know about Slavonic and contrasted to English. Are you saying you do not know the story of how Saints Cyril and Methodius received a blessing to use Slavonic?
No, I already know. Are you saying you do not know the story of how Pope Adrian II granted Ss. Cyril and Methodius his blessing to use Slavonic in their liturgies? Why did he do this?

Not sure how this is "defending" Slavonic. I did not know Slavonic was under attack by anyone here?
Does something need to be under attack for you to feel the need to defend it?

Based on the blessing they received I feel no need to defend Slavonic. So I honestly do not understand how you might get the idea I was "defending" Slavonic.

The Story of Saints Cyril and Methodius has always been a favorite of mine, I (think I) know why he blessed them.
« Last Edit: June 17, 2012, 10:41:33 PM by вєликаго » Logged

St. Meletius the Confessor – Submit not yourselves to monastics, nor to presbyters, who teach lawless things and evilly propound them. And why do I say only monastics or presbyters? Follow not even after bishops who guilefully exhort you to do and say and believe things that are not profitable. What
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,721


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #146 on: June 17, 2012, 10:49:28 PM »

Based on the blessing they received I feel no need to defend Slavonic. So I honestly do not understand how you might get the idea I was "defending" Slavonic.

The Story of Saints Cyril and Methodius has always been a favorite of mine, I (think I) know why he blessed them.
So the Slavs could hear the Gospel and worship Christ in their own language? Why do Ss. Cyril and Methodius need an episcopal blessing to make sure that happens?
« Last Edit: June 17, 2012, 10:50:03 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
вєликаго
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Drevlepravoslavie (Old Orthodox) STRANNIKI
Jurisdiction: Lipovan
Posts: 230



« Reply #147 on: June 17, 2012, 10:57:12 PM »

Based on the blessing they received I feel no need to defend Slavonic. So I honestly do not understand how you might get the idea I was "defending" Slavonic.

The Story of Saints Cyril and Methodius has always been a favorite of mine, I (think I) know why he blessed them.
So the Slavs could hear the Gospel and worship Christ in their own language? Why do Ss. Cyril and Methodius need an episcopal blessing to make sure that happens?

Are you saying that any parish is allowed to use whatever language they want without the blessing of a Bishop?

« Last Edit: June 17, 2012, 11:07:14 PM by вєликаго » Logged

St. Meletius the Confessor – Submit not yourselves to monastics, nor to presbyters, who teach lawless things and evilly propound them. And why do I say only monastics or presbyters? Follow not even after bishops who guilefully exhort you to do and say and believe things that are not profitable. What
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,721


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #148 on: June 17, 2012, 11:06:06 PM »

Based on the blessing they received I feel no need to defend Slavonic. So I honestly do not understand how you might get the idea I was "defending" Slavonic.

The Story of Saints Cyril and Methodius has always been a favorite of mine, I (think I) know why he blessed them.
So the Slavs could hear the Gospel and worship Christ in their own language? Why do Ss. Cyril and Methodius need an episcopal blessing to make sure that happens?

Are you saying that any parish is allowed to use whatever language they want without the blessing of a Bishop?
OK, let me explore this avenue with you, since you place such a great emphasis on priests receiving the blessing of their bishop to celebrate the liturgy in the language of the people: What bishop in North America has NOT granted his hierarchical blessing to the use of English in the liturgy?

We also have Patriarch St. Tikhon of Moscow who, while he was archbishop in the US, granted his blessing to the compilation of the Hapgood Prayer Book, a translation of the prayers of the Church into English. So now you have a bishop and a saint, a Russian saint at that, granting his blessing to the liturgical use of English.
« Last Edit: June 17, 2012, 11:19:57 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
вєликаго
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Drevlepravoslavie (Old Orthodox) STRANNIKI
Jurisdiction: Lipovan
Posts: 230



« Reply #149 on: June 17, 2012, 11:12:26 PM »

Based on the blessing they received I feel no need to defend Slavonic. So I honestly do not understand how you might get the idea I was "defending" Slavonic.

The Story of Saints Cyril and Methodius has always been a favorite of mine, I (think I) know why he blessed them.
So the Slavs could hear the Gospel and worship Christ in their own language? Why do Ss. Cyril and Methodius need an episcopal blessing to make sure that happens?

Are you saying that any parish is allowed to use whatever language they want without the blessing of a Bishop?
OK, let me explore this avenue with you, since you place such a great emphasis on priests receiving the blessing of their bishop to celebrate the liturgy in the language of the people: What bishop in North America has NOT granted his hierarchical blessing to the use of English in the liturgy?

My mention of a Saint was just a for instance. I also mentioned "Some other kind" of Church Authority; I left it vague ( not just a Bishop) because obviously an Apostle could give a blessing.

I will give you this. You have motivated me to ask my priest about this. I will let you know how that goes, if your interested.
Logged

St. Meletius the Confessor – Submit not yourselves to monastics, nor to presbyters, who teach lawless things and evilly propound them. And why do I say only monastics or presbyters? Follow not even after bishops who guilefully exhort you to do and say and believe things that are not profitable. What
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,611



« Reply #150 on: June 18, 2012, 12:21:49 AM »

"Is Contemporary Orthodoxy True To The Original Faith?"  YES.

The best post on this thread, IMO.  I wholeheartedly concur
Logged
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #151 on: June 18, 2012, 04:40:54 AM »

His nick suggests that he does not know Church Slavonic or any other Slavic language.

This is near total non-sense and has next to nothing to do with me.


Really? What Slavic languages do you speak?
« Last Edit: June 18, 2012, 04:46:16 AM by Michał Kalina » Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Ebor
Vanyar
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,428



« Reply #152 on: June 18, 2012, 09:13:00 AM »

вєликаго, have you looked at any of the links that I have provided that show that Old English was used as a language of prayer and worship as well the translation of Scriptures? 

Old English/Anglo-Saxon then developed into Middle English (the language used by Chaucer for example) and then into Modern English. 
Logged

"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

The Katana of Reasoned Discussion

For some a world view is more like a neighborhood watch.
вєликаго
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Drevlepravoslavie (Old Orthodox) STRANNIKI
Jurisdiction: Lipovan
Posts: 230



« Reply #153 on: June 18, 2012, 09:18:23 AM »

вєликаго, have you looked at any of the links that I have provided that show that Old English was used as a language of prayer and worship as well the translation of Scriptures?  

Old English/Anglo-Saxon then developed into Middle English (the language used by Chaucer for example) and then into Modern English.  

I am in fact looking more into it. But I'm a bit perplexed. I'll post some questions soon. Thanks for taking the time / intrest to help me better understand this.

I have looked at some of the links.
« Last Edit: June 18, 2012, 09:19:17 AM by вєликаго » Logged

St. Meletius the Confessor – Submit not yourselves to monastics, nor to presbyters, who teach lawless things and evilly propound them. And why do I say only monastics or presbyters? Follow not even after bishops who guilefully exhort you to do and say and believe things that are not profitable. What
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 0.152 seconds with 46 queries.