What hinder Orthodox Church to preach gosepl to all nations?

[choy]

Where are you going to go to not be in an "ethnic" environment, Choy? Where in the world do people not have an ethnic/cultural background?

Sorry I did not put more context into that.  But I must say I'm surprised this would come from you, given our extended discussion on the matter you would already know where I am coming from.

Let me clarify, what I mean by my statement is that ethnic ghettoes within Churches is a problem.  If you are in North America and the parish is of a foreign ethnicity, it is a problem for everyone.  Those who belong to that ethnic group, it is hard for them to get other people in their parish.  If you are not, then it is hard for you to go that parish and feel like a part of it.

There are places here in Canada which are commercial areas but heavily ethnic.  Same thing, people who frequent those places are also people of that ethnic group.  Currently it is not a problem for them because normally it is Asian (ie. Chinese) Malls and there are lots of Asians in the big cities here.  But same as Churches, once the demographic changes, either there is less of that ethnic group or that fresh immigrants who has a strong affinity to the motherland dwindle, and the succeeding generations are more local, then the patronage would go down.  And then what?  If businesses shut down, it may not be a big deal.  Hopefully the owner had a good run and overall made money.  But churches, no matter how you look at it, it is a disaster for a church to close down.

[dzheremi]

Not to mention all of South America where Orthodoxy is almost non existant.

Does it ever get tiring being wrong all the time?

I have Mormans, Jehovahs Witness, Roman Catholic, Evangelicals of every flavor. uh...Jewish, Seventh-day Adventist, etc., from all ethnicity in easy 10-15 minutes.  One Orthodox Church at least 3 hours away and it is with the specific immigrants. The Catholic and Universal church? Does that sound like the Catholic and Universal church to you?

Yes, it does, because it preserves the apostolic faith that is CATHOLIC (lit. "according to the whole").

Maybe it is not all those Japanese, Europeans and South Americans who have some sort of spiritual problem. Maybe, just maybe it is you who have some sort of problem. Maybe like nationalism and ethnocentrism. Something that might be considered.

And maybe you're a troll with an unhealthy fixation on the terribly ethnic Orthodox Church, at the expense of your spiritual life. As I've pointed out before on this board, Pentecost must've been terribly ethnic as well, with each person (you might say, each person from every nation) hearing the Word being preached in their own language and everything. I guess the Holy Spirit is ethnocentric, too.

Troll.

[Green_Umbrella]

Not to mention all of South America where Orthodoxy is almost non existant.

Does it ever get tiring being wrong all the time?

I have Mormans, Jehovahs Witness, Roman Catholic, Evangelicals of every flavor. uh...Jewish, Seventh-day Adventist, etc., from all ethnicity in easy 10-15 minutes.  One Orthodox Church at least 3 hours away and it is with the specific immigrants. The Catholic and Universal church? Does that sound like the Catholic and Universal church to you?

Yes, it does, because it preserves the apostolic faith that is CATHOLIC (lit. "according to the whole").

Maybe it is not all those Japanese, Europeans and South Americans who have some sort of spiritual problem. Maybe, just maybe it is you who have some sort of problem. Maybe like nationalism and ethnocentrism. Something that might be considered.

And maybe you're a troll with an unhealthy fixation on the terribly ethnic Orthodox Church, at the expense of your spiritual life. As I've pointed out before on this board, Pentecost must've been terribly ethnic as well, with each person (you might say, each person from every nation) hearing the Word being preached in their own language and everything. I guess the Holy Spirit is ethnocentric, too.

Troll.

Does it ever get tiring being wrong all the time?

I am from South America. I live in South America. I travel in South America. I can tell you Orthodoxy is virtually unheard-of in South America. A couple of videos on youtube does not change this. Besides one of those videos you linked had all of ¨2¨ views.   

Troll.

Calling someone a name is the least graceful way of admitting you have lost an argument.

[Green_Umbrella]

I have no idea. But I do know I can take a look through religious forums and the blogosphers and find comments after comments sounding like this...

I love the Orthodox Church dearly in many ways, but endless fighting, the ethnocentric bigotry and the nonstop power struggles, plus the people's managing to drive away a very holy priest, has me fed up.
 

This is from a person’s particular view point of something that happened and how they saw things.  It is not indicative of how the overall Orthodox Church operates and clearly, not everyone will be happy with how things turn out, regardless of which church they belong.  I know of very little fighting and power struggles within Orthodoxy.  Without the entire and full context, this is little more than an underhanded attempt to discredit the Church.

I do not now belong to the Eastern Orthodox Church because I am not culturally Eastern, and I am unwilling and unable to live my life as a pretend Russian, or a pretend Greek.

I am not culturally Eastern, but I am Orthodox.  I do not pretend to be Greek because I go to a Greek Orthodox Church.  I do appreciate the historical value it brings and enjoy learning new things as I would at a Russian Church.  To say this reveals a person is not willing to put in what is needed to get out what they want from that specific Church.  Again, a personal view point, nothing more.

Once, when I inquired of an Eastern Orthodox friend of mine why he did not go to just any Orthodox church, he replied matter-of-factly that “We go where the Russians go” (for he is Russian). [/b]

So there must be some problem at least.

Personal preference.  I fail to see where the problem is in all of this.

Now, if you want to talk about Latin mass when no one speaks Latin, we can, but I don't see a problem with that either.

Everything is a point of view. You are giving your point of view. These people are giving their points of view. What is striking is the number of people expressing very similiar points of view in regards to the ethnocentrism in orthodoxy. Even Choy is saying this exist here on this very thread.

[NicholasMyra]

What hinder Orthodox Church to teach and preach the gosepl to all nations?

"And then if anyone says to you, ‘Behold, here is the Christ’; or, ‘Behold, He is there’; do not believe him; for false Christs and false prophets will arise, and will show signs and wonders, in order to lead astray, if possible, the elect. 'But take heed; behold, I have told you everything in advance."

[Kerdy]

I have no idea. But I do know I can take a look through religious forums and the blogosphers and find comments after comments sounding like this...

I love the Orthodox Church dearly in many ways, but endless fighting, the ethnocentric bigotry and the nonstop power struggles, plus the people's managing to drive away a very holy priest, has me fed up.
 

This is from a person’s particular view point of something that happened and how they saw things.  It is not indicative of how the overall Orthodox Church operates and clearly, not everyone will be happy with how things turn out, regardless of which church they belong.  I know of very little fighting and power struggles within Orthodoxy.  Without the entire and full context, this is little more than an underhanded attempt to discredit the Church.

I do not now belong to the Eastern Orthodox Church because I am not culturally Eastern, and I am unwilling and unable to live my life as a pretend Russian, or a pretend Greek.

I am not culturally Eastern, but I am Orthodox.  I do not pretend to be Greek because I go to a Greek Orthodox Church.  I do appreciate the historical value it brings and enjoy learning new things as I would at a Russian Church.  To say this reveals a person is not willing to put in what is needed to get out what they want from that specific Church.  Again, a personal view point, nothing more.

Once, when I inquired of an Eastern Orthodox friend of mine why he did not go to just any Orthodox church, he replied matter-of-factly that “We go where the Russians go” (for he is Russian). [/b]

So there must be some problem at least.

Personal preference.  I fail to see where the problem is in all of this.

Now, if you want to talk about Latin mass when no one speaks Latin, we can, but I don't see a problem with that either.

Everything is a point of view. You are giving your point of view. These people are giving their points of view. What is striking is the number of people expressing very similiar points of view in regards to the ethnocentrism in orthodoxy. Even Choy is saying this exist here on this very thread.

I suppose the only solution is we all become Roman Catholic.

[Green_Umbrella]

I have no idea. But I do know I can take a look through religious forums and the blogosphers and find comments after comments sounding like this...

I love the Orthodox Church dearly in many ways, but endless fighting, the ethnocentric bigotry and the nonstop power struggles, plus the people's managing to drive away a very holy priest, has me fed up.
 

This is from a person’s particular view point of something that happened and how they saw things.  It is not indicative of how the overall Orthodox Church operates and clearly, not everyone will be happy with how things turn out, regardless of which church they belong.  I know of very little fighting and power struggles within Orthodoxy.  Without the entire and full context, this is little more than an underhanded attempt to discredit the Church.

I do not now belong to the Eastern Orthodox Church because I am not culturally Eastern, and I am unwilling and unable to live my life as a pretend Russian, or a pretend Greek.

I am not culturally Eastern, but I am Orthodox.  I do not pretend to be Greek because I go to a Greek Orthodox Church.  I do appreciate the historical value it brings and enjoy learning new things as I would at a Russian Church.  To say this reveals a person is not willing to put in what is needed to get out what they want from that specific Church.  Again, a personal view point, nothing more.

Once, when I inquired of an Eastern Orthodox friend of mine why he did not go to just any Orthodox church, he replied matter-of-factly that “We go where the Russians go” (for he is Russian). [/b]

So there must be some problem at least.

Personal preference.  I fail to see where the problem is in all of this.

Now, if you want to talk about Latin mass when no one speaks Latin, we can, but I don't see a problem with that either.

Everything is a point of view. You are giving your point of view. These people are giving their points of view. What is striking is the number of people expressing very similiar points of view in regards to the ethnocentrism in orthodoxy. Even Choy is saying this exist here on this very thread.

I suppose the only solution is we all become Roman Catholic.

I would not go that far. 

Instead of saying ¨The Russian Orthodox Church.¨, They might try...¨The Orthodox Church in Russia.¨, ¨The Orthodox Church in France¨ and so on.

[dzheremi]

But I must say I'm surprised this would come from you, given our extended discussion on the matter you would already know where I am coming from.

Well, I certainly understand (and even share) your frustration -- to a point.

Let me clarify, what I mean by my statement is that ethnic ghettoes within Churches is a problem. If you are in North America and the parish is of a foreign ethnicity, it is a problem for everyone.

This may be one of the ways in which the USA and Canada differ, but it doesn't really make sense to talk about "foreign ethnicity" in a country composed almost entirely of immigrants.

Those who belong to that ethnic group, it is hard for them to get other people in their parish.  If you are not, then it is hard for you to go that parish and feel like a part of it.

Who is "you" in this situation -- me or you? Because this is something that people at my parish ask me on a fairly regular basis: "Are you really okay with everybody speaking Arabic around you, when you can't speak very much?" I always answer that I wouldn't expect Egyptians to speak anything else among themselves, and if I want to know something that isn't directed at me, I can always ask what everyone is talking about. Sure, I miss being able to speak English with fluent speakers (we lost that when the nice young Ethiopian woman who used to attend moved to California back in December), but that's secondary to the liturgy, which is the reason we're all together in the first place, and is almost entirely in English. I do feel like a part of the parish because nobody expects me to be Egyptian (in fact, last time one of the more strident people in the congregation got on my case for not dressing as he himself would, another man who actually barely speaks English stepped in to tell me "don't listen to him -- you do whatever you want; it's your church, too"). That would just be ridiculous. I will admit that it is more difficult to be the only non-Arabphone, but you know, if the Church is really not about ethnicity, then it's not about my ethnicity, either. I do not make the people at my church pray in English or Spanish, just because those are in my own background. But of course we celebrate the liturgy mostly in English because we do recognize that this is the majority and de facto national language of this country, so it makes sense to do it in this language.

There are places here in Canada which are commercial areas but heavily ethnic.  Same thing, people who frequent those places are also people of that ethnic group.  Currently it is not a problem for them because normally it is Asian (ie. Chinese) Malls and there are lots of Asians in the big cities here.  But same as Churches, once the demographic changes, either there is less of that ethnic group or that fresh immigrants who has a strong affinity to the motherland dwindle, and the succeeding generations are more local, then the patronage would go down.  And then what?  If businesses shut down, it may not be a big deal.  Hopefully the owner had a good run and overall made money.  But churches, no matter how you look at it, it is a disaster for a church to close down.

I agree. The Church will not survive if it is identified exclusively with one ethnic group. But at least for the OO (and I would assume with good reason also for the EO), that has never been the case. Romans, Egyptians, Syrians, Armenians, etc. have enriched (and even founded) the monasteries of the Egyptian desert, as well as in Turkey (Deir-ul-Zafaran), and on to today in America (ex., St. Mary & St. Moses Abbey in Texas attracts not only Egyptians to its ranks, but also Latinos like Fr. Daniel).

[dzheremi]

I am from South America. I live in South America. I travel in South America. I can tell you Orthodoxy is virtually unheard-of in South America. A couple of videos on youtube does not change this. Besides one of those videos you linked had all of ¨2¨ views.  

You had written that it is virtually non-existent. Clearly, if there are churches in Mexico, Colombia, Ecuador, Guatemala, Bolivia, Chile, Argentina, Peru, Brazil, etc., it is not "virtually non-existent". It is in fact present in the majority of countries in Latinoamerica. At the church in which I was baptized, a presentation was given by three young people who had been to the Church in Bolivia (see here) and reported that somewhere north of 400 native Bolivians attend in La Paz every week, and there is also a very beloved and supported orphanage outside of the city at which many people from the church volunteer, and they report that many more in the countryside who have been neglected by local priests have come to Orthodoxy.

There is a vast difference, of course, between "the average person on the street doesn't know the church", and "the church does not exist in my country/continent". The average person in the United States wouldn't know about the Orthodox Church, either, but there are around 2,000 parishes and perhaps 2-3 million Orthodox in this country (and this number only counts Eastern Orthodox, not Oriental Orthodox; there are roughly 1 million Copts in the United States, plus how many Armenians, Syriacs, Tewahedo, etc). So this is not a very good way to measure such things. If there are churches, and they are being used, then the church exists in a given place.

Calling someone a name is the least graceful way of admitting you have lost an argument.

When you post things that demonstrably false and take your own uninformed view to be the truth simply because you believe in it even though you have no practical experience with the topic at hand (since Orthodoxy doesn't exist where you live, remember?), it is textbook trolling. If you don't like it, stop doing it.

[Cyrillic]

I wish the EO or OO would evangelise my city. There are around 120.000 inhabitants in my town so it should merit at least one parish 

[Kerdy]

I have no idea. But I do know I can take a look through religious forums and the blogosphers and find comments after comments sounding like this...

I love the Orthodox Church dearly in many ways, but endless fighting, the ethnocentric bigotry and the nonstop power struggles, plus the people's managing to drive away a very holy priest, has me fed up.
 

This is from a person’s particular view point of something that happened and how they saw things.  It is not indicative of how the overall Orthodox Church operates and clearly, not everyone will be happy with how things turn out, regardless of which church they belong.  I know of very little fighting and power struggles within Orthodoxy.  Without the entire and full context, this is little more than an underhanded attempt to discredit the Church.

I do not now belong to the Eastern Orthodox Church because I am not culturally Eastern, and I am unwilling and unable to live my life as a pretend Russian, or a pretend Greek.

I am not culturally Eastern, but I am Orthodox.  I do not pretend to be Greek because I go to a Greek Orthodox Church.  I do appreciate the historical value it brings and enjoy learning new things as I would at a Russian Church.  To say this reveals a person is not willing to put in what is needed to get out what they want from that specific Church.  Again, a personal view point, nothing more.

Once, when I inquired of an Eastern Orthodox friend of mine why he did not go to just any Orthodox church, he replied matter-of-factly that “We go where the Russians go” (for he is Russian). [/b]

So there must be some problem at least.

Personal preference.  I fail to see where the problem is in all of this.

Now, if you want to talk about Latin mass when no one speaks Latin, we can, but I don't see a problem with that either.

Everything is a point of view. You are giving your point of view. These people are giving their points of view. What is striking is the number of people expressing very similiar points of view in regards to the ethnocentrism in orthodoxy. Even Choy is saying this exist here on this very thread.

I suppose the only solution is we all become Roman Catholic.

I would not go that far.  

Instead of saying ¨The Russian Orthodox Church.¨, They might try...¨The Orthodox Church in Russia.¨, ¨The Orthodox Church in France¨ and so on.

Or, we can understand this is the same thing, only worded differently.  Orthodox being the key word, not the nation.  

Also, understand this distinction only exists in the United States, I believe, because we are so culturally diverse.

[Kerdy]

I can understand a person disagreeing with the teachings of the Orthodox Church, disagreeing with certain viewpoints on history, etc., but to say the Orthodox Church is wrong because of ethnical influence is silliness in the best of circumstances. 

[Green_Umbrella]

I am from South America. I live in South America. I travel in South America. I can tell you Orthodoxy is virtually unheard-of in South America. A couple of videos on youtube does not change this. Besides one of those videos you linked had all of ¨2¨ views.  

You had written that it is virtually non-existent. Clearly, if there are churches in Mexico, Colombia, Ecuador, Guatemala, Bolivia, Chile, Argentina, Peru, Brazil, etc., it is not "virtually non-existent". It is in fact present in the majority of countries in Latinoamerica. At the church in which I was baptized, a presentation was given by three young people who had been to the Church in Bolivia (see here) and reported that somewhere north of 400 native Bolivians attend in La Paz every week, and there is also a very beloved and supported orphanage outside of the city at which many people from the church volunteer, and they report that many more in the countryside who have been neglected by local priests have come to Orthodoxy.

There is a vast difference, of course, between "the average person on the street doesn't know the church", and "the church does not exist in my country/continent". The average person in the United States wouldn't know about the Orthodox Church, either, but there are around 2,000 parishes and perhaps 2-3 million Orthodox in this country (and this number only counts Eastern Orthodox, not Oriental Orthodox; there are roughly 1 million Copts in the United States, plus how many Armenians, Syriacs, Tewahedo, etc). So this is not a very good way to measure such things. If there are churches, and they are being used, then the church exists in a given place.

Calling someone a name is the least graceful way of admitting you have lost an argument.

When you post things that demonstrably false and take your own uninformed view to be the truth simply because you believe in it even though you have no practical experience with the topic at hand (since Orthodoxy doesn't exist where you live, remember?), it is textbook trolling. If you don't like it, stop doing it.

There are 11 million people in Bolivia. How many are Orthodox?

virtually

non

existent

That 400 you are talking about is probably about the total in the entire country.


Brazil has a population of almost 200 million people. The Orthodox population in Brazil is what...30,000? That is not even a single percentage point of the population. Not even close to being a single percentage point. Not even half of a percent. Not even a quarter of a percent.   

virtually

non

existent

And they that do exist are 99.999% Greek, Russian, etc. immigrants. We could go down the list of Latin American countries but it is about the same everywhere. So yes. It is very fair and very accurate to say Orthodoxy in Latin America is virtually non existent. I did not say ¨non existent.¨ I said ¨virtually non existent.¨ as in, practically, almost, nearly, in effect, in essence, as good as, to all intents and purposes and so on.

When you post things that demonstrably false and take your own uninformed view to be the truth simply..

You are arguing from a very emotionaly charged position and it is effecting your judgement. I am just giving you the facts. 

[Green_Umbrella]

I can understand a person disagreeing with the teachings of the Orthodox Church, disagreeing with certain viewpoints on history, etc., but to say the Orthodox Church is wrong because of ethnical influence is silliness in the best of circumstances. 

I have not said Orthodoxy is wrong. I would not say Orthodoxy is wrong. I think Orthodoxy is practically right. I am just answering the posters question.. ¨What hinders Orthodox Church to preach gosepl to all nations?¨

What do you think hinders the Orthodox Church to preach gosepl to all nations?

[Ansgar]

I am from South America. I live in South America. I travel in South America. I can tell you Orthodoxy is virtually unheard-of in South America. A couple of videos on youtube does not change this. Besides one of those videos you linked had all of ¨2¨ views.  

You had written that it is virtually non-existent. Clearly, if there are churches in Mexico, Colombia, Ecuador, Guatemala, Bolivia, Chile, Argentina, Peru, Brazil, etc., it is not "virtually non-existent". It is in fact present in the majority of countries in Latinoamerica. At the church in which I was baptized, a presentation was given by three young people who had been to the Church in Bolivia (see here) and reported that somewhere north of 400 native Bolivians attend in La Paz every week, and there is also a very beloved and supported orphanage outside of the city at which many people from the church volunteer, and they report that many more in the countryside who have been neglected by local priests have come to Orthodoxy.

There is a vast difference, of course, between "the average person on the street doesn't know the church", and "the church does not exist in my country/continent". The average person in the United States wouldn't know about the Orthodox Church, either, but there are around 2,000 parishes and perhaps 2-3 million Orthodox in this country (and this number only counts Eastern Orthodox, not Oriental Orthodox; there are roughly 1 million Copts in the United States, plus how many Armenians, Syriacs, Tewahedo, etc). So this is not a very good way to measure such things. If there are churches, and they are being used, then the church exists in a given place.

Calling someone a name is the least graceful way of admitting you have lost an argument.

When you post things that demonstrably false and take your own uninformed view to be the truth simply because you believe in it even though you have no practical experience with the topic at hand (since Orthodoxy doesn't exist where you live, remember?), it is textbook trolling. If you don't like it, stop doing it.

There are 11 million people in Bolivia. How many are Orthodox?

virtually

non

existent

That 400 you are talking about is probably about the total in the entire country.


Brazil has a population of almost 200 million people. The Orthodox population in Brazil is what...30,000? That is not even a single percentage point of the population. Not even close to being a single percentage point. Not even half of a percent. Not even a quarter of a percent.   

virtually

non

existent

And they that do exist are 99.999% Greek, Russian, etc. immigrants. We could go down the list of Latin American countries but it is about the same everywhere. So yes. It is very fair and very accurate to say Orthodoxy in Latin America is virtually non existent. I did not say ¨non existent.¨ I said ¨virtually non existent.¨ as in, practically, almost, nearly, in effect, in essence, as good as, to all intents and purposes and so on.

When you post things that demonstrably false and take your own uninformed view to be the truth simply..

You are arguing from a very emotionaly charged position and it is effecting your judgement. I am just giving you the facts. 

I think you need to read this.
http://journeytoorthodoxy.com/2012/08/27/the-most-orthodox-country-in-the-western-hemisphere/

Also, you seems to completely ignore the succes, the Church has experienced in other parts of the World. Both in Africa and Asia, the Prthpdpx Church has been bale to incorporate local customs and traditions into the life of the Church.

You criticise the Church for being almost non-present. In Denmark, there are 40.405 roman catholics, that's 0,72 % of the entire population. Of those 40.405 people, 78 % are above 18 years old and many of them are immigrants. 

[Green_Umbrella]

I am from South America. I live in South America. I travel in South America. I can tell you Orthodoxy is virtually unheard-of in South America. A couple of videos on youtube does not change this. Besides one of those videos you linked had all of ¨2¨ views.  

You had written that it is virtually non-existent. Clearly, if there are churches in Mexico, Colombia, Ecuador, Guatemala, Bolivia, Chile, Argentina, Peru, Brazil, etc., it is not "virtually non-existent". It is in fact present in the majority of countries in Latinoamerica. At the church in which I was baptized, a presentation was given by three young people who had been to the Church in Bolivia (see here) and reported that somewhere north of 400 native Bolivians attend in La Paz every week, and there is also a very beloved and supported orphanage outside of the city at which many people from the church volunteer, and they report that many more in the countryside who have been neglected by local priests have come to Orthodoxy.

There is a vast difference, of course, between "the average person on the street doesn't know the church", and "the church does not exist in my country/continent". The average person in the United States wouldn't know about the Orthodox Church, either, but there are around 2,000 parishes and perhaps 2-3 million Orthodox in this country (and this number only counts Eastern Orthodox, not Oriental Orthodox; there are roughly 1 million Copts in the United States, plus how many Armenians, Syriacs, Tewahedo, etc). So this is not a very good way to measure such things. If there are churches, and they are being used, then the church exists in a given place.

Calling someone a name is the least graceful way of admitting you have lost an argument.

When you post things that demonstrably false and take your own uninformed view to be the truth simply because you believe in it even though you have no practical experience with the topic at hand (since Orthodoxy doesn't exist where you live, remember?), it is textbook trolling. If you don't like it, stop doing it.

There are 11 million people in Bolivia. How many are Orthodox?

virtually

non

existent

That 400 you are talking about is probably about the total in the entire country.


Brazil has a population of almost 200 million people. The Orthodox population in Brazil is what...30,000? That is not even a single percentage point of the population. Not even close to being a single percentage point. Not even half of a percent. Not even a quarter of a percent.   

virtually

non

existent

And they that do exist are 99.999% Greek, Russian, etc. immigrants. We could go down the list of Latin American countries but it is about the same everywhere. So yes. It is very fair and very accurate to say Orthodoxy in Latin America is virtually non existent. I did not say ¨non existent.¨ I said ¨virtually non existent.¨ as in, practically, almost, nearly, in effect, in essence, as good as, to all intents and purposes and so on.

When you post things that demonstrably false and take your own uninformed view to be the truth simply..

You are arguing from a very emotionaly charged position and it is effecting your judgement. I am just giving you the facts. 

I think you need to read this.
http://journeytoorthodoxy.com/2012/08/27/the-most-orthodox-country-in-the-western-hemisphere/

Also, you seems to completely ignore the succes, the Church has experienced in other parts of the World. Both in Africa and Asia, the Prthpdpx Church has been bale to incorporate local customs and traditions into the life of the Church.

You criticise the Church for being almost non-present. In Denmark, there are 40.405 roman catholics, that's 0,72 % of the entire population. Of those 40.405 people, 78 % are above 18 years old and many of them are immigrants. 

You really believe 200,000 Guatemalans have joined the Orthodox church in the last several years? 

I know a ¨villero¨ who wants to watch your car friend.

[Ansgar]

I am from South America. I live in South America. I travel in South America. I can tell you Orthodoxy is virtually unheard-of in South America. A couple of videos on youtube does not change this. Besides one of those videos you linked had all of ¨2¨ views.  

You had written that it is virtually non-existent. Clearly, if there are churches in Mexico, Colombia, Ecuador, Guatemala, Bolivia, Chile, Argentina, Peru, Brazil, etc., it is not "virtually non-existent". It is in fact present in the majority of countries in Latinoamerica. At the church in which I was baptized, a presentation was given by three young people who had been to the Church in Bolivia (see here) and reported that somewhere north of 400 native Bolivians attend in La Paz every week, and there is also a very beloved and supported orphanage outside of the city at which many people from the church volunteer, and they report that many more in the countryside who have been neglected by local priests have come to Orthodoxy.

There is a vast difference, of course, between "the average person on the street doesn't know the church", and "the church does not exist in my country/continent". The average person in the United States wouldn't know about the Orthodox Church, either, but there are around 2,000 parishes and perhaps 2-3 million Orthodox in this country (and this number only counts Eastern Orthodox, not Oriental Orthodox; there are roughly 1 million Copts in the United States, plus how many Armenians, Syriacs, Tewahedo, etc). So this is not a very good way to measure such things. If there are churches, and they are being used, then the church exists in a given place.

Calling someone a name is the least graceful way of admitting you have lost an argument.

When you post things that demonstrably false and take your own uninformed view to be the truth simply because you believe in it even though you have no practical experience with the topic at hand (since Orthodoxy doesn't exist where you live, remember?), it is textbook trolling. If you don't like it, stop doing it.

There are 11 million people in Bolivia. How many are Orthodox?

virtually

non

existent

That 400 you are talking about is probably about the total in the entire country.


Brazil has a population of almost 200 million people. The Orthodox population in Brazil is what...30,000? That is not even a single percentage point of the population. Not even close to being a single percentage point. Not even half of a percent. Not even a quarter of a percent.  

virtually

non

existent

And they that do exist are 99.999% Greek, Russian, etc. immigrants. We could go down the list of Latin American countries but it is about the same everywhere. So yes. It is very fair and very accurate to say Orthodoxy in Latin America is virtually non existent. I did not say ¨non existent.¨ I said ¨virtually non existent.¨ as in, practically, almost, nearly, in effect, in essence, as good as, to all intents and purposes and so on.

When you post things that demonstrably false and take your own uninformed view to be the truth simply..

You are arguing from a very emotionaly charged position and it is effecting your judgement. I am just giving you the facts.  

I think you need to read this.
http://journeytoorthodoxy.com/2012/08/27/the-most-orthodox-country-in-the-western-hemisphere/

Also, you seems to completely ignore the succes, the Church has experienced in other parts of the World. Both in Africa and Asia, the Prthpdpx Church has been bale to incorporate local customs and traditions into the life of the Church.

You criticise the Church for being almost non-present. In Denmark, there are 40.405 roman catholics, that's 0,72 % of the entire population. Of those 40.405 people, 78 % are above 18 years old and many of them are immigrants.  

You really believe 200,000 Guatemalans have joined the Orthodox church in the last several years?  

I know a ¨villero¨ who wants to watch your car friend.

On what basis do you doubt it?

I won't say that 200.000 is the correct number but it is clear that a very large number of people (mainly natives) have converted or seek to be accepted into the Orthodox Church. If you are able to find the precise nuber of converts, I hope that you will share it with us.

It has been discussed here:
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,28288.45.html

[Kerdy]

I can understand a person disagreeing with the teachings of the Orthodox Church, disagreeing with certain viewpoints on history, etc., but to say the Orthodox Church is wrong because of ethnical influence is silliness in the best of circumstances. 

I have not said Orthodoxy is wrong. I would not say Orthodoxy is wrong. I think Orthodoxy is practically right. I am just answering the posters question.. ¨What hinders Orthodox Church to preach gosepl to all nations?¨

What do you think hinders the Orthodox Church to preach gosepl to all nations?

Nothing.  I feel confident it has.  Whether or not people choose it or not is an entirely different question.

[Green_Umbrella]

I am from South America. I live in South America. I travel in South America. I can tell you Orthodoxy is virtually unheard-of in South America. A couple of videos on youtube does not change this. Besides one of those videos you linked had all of ¨2¨ views.  

You had written that it is virtually non-existent. Clearly, if there are churches in Mexico, Colombia, Ecuador, Guatemala, Bolivia, Chile, Argentina, Peru, Brazil, etc., it is not "virtually non-existent". It is in fact present in the majority of countries in Latinoamerica. At the church in which I was baptized, a presentation was given by three young people who had been to the Church in Bolivia (see here) and reported that somewhere north of 400 native Bolivians attend in La Paz every week, and there is also a very beloved and supported orphanage outside of the city at which many people from the church volunteer, and they report that many more in the countryside who have been neglected by local priests have come to Orthodoxy.

There is a vast difference, of course, between "the average person on the street doesn't know the church", and "the church does not exist in my country/continent". The average person in the United States wouldn't know about the Orthodox Church, either, but there are around 2,000 parishes and perhaps 2-3 million Orthodox in this country (and this number only counts Eastern Orthodox, not Oriental Orthodox; there are roughly 1 million Copts in the United States, plus how many Armenians, Syriacs, Tewahedo, etc). So this is not a very good way to measure such things. If there are churches, and they are being used, then the church exists in a given place.

Calling someone a name is the least graceful way of admitting you have lost an argument.

When you post things that demonstrably false and take your own uninformed view to be the truth simply because you believe in it even though you have no practical experience with the topic at hand (since Orthodoxy doesn't exist where you live, remember?), it is textbook trolling. If you don't like it, stop doing it.

There are 11 million people in Bolivia. How many are Orthodox?

virtually

non

existent

That 400 you are talking about is probably about the total in the entire country.


Brazil has a population of almost 200 million people. The Orthodox population in Brazil is what...30,000? That is not even a single percentage point of the population. Not even close to being a single percentage point. Not even half of a percent. Not even a quarter of a percent.  

virtually

non

existent

And they that do exist are 99.999% Greek, Russian, etc. immigrants. We could go down the list of Latin American countries but it is about the same everywhere. So yes. It is very fair and very accurate to say Orthodoxy in Latin America is virtually non existent. I did not say ¨non existent.¨ I said ¨virtually non existent.¨ as in, practically, almost, nearly, in effect, in essence, as good as, to all intents and purposes and so on.

When you post things that demonstrably false and take your own uninformed view to be the truth simply..

You are arguing from a very emotionaly charged position and it is effecting your judgement. I am just giving you the facts.  

I think you need to read this.
http://journeytoorthodoxy.com/2012/08/27/the-most-orthodox-country-in-the-western-hemisphere/

Also, you seems to completely ignore the succes, the Church has experienced in other parts of the World. Both in Africa and Asia, the Prthpdpx Church has been bale to incorporate local customs and traditions into the life of the Church.

You criticise the Church for being almost non-present. In Denmark, there are 40.405 roman catholics, that's 0,72 % of the entire population. Of those 40.405 people, 78 % are above 18 years old and many of them are immigrants.  

You really believe 200,000 Guatemalans have joined the Orthodox church in the last several years?  

I know a ¨villero¨ who wants to watch your car friend.

On what basis do you doubt it?

I won't say that 200.000 is the correct number but it is clear that a very large number of people (mainly natives) have converted or seek to be accepted into the Orthodox Church. If you are able to find the precise nuber of converts, I hope that you will share it with us.

It has been discussed here:
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,28288.45.html

I have read 100,000, 200,000, all the way up to 600,000. I saw a protestant group claiming 400,000! I am not sure if these are part of the same indigenous people or a different group. You might have some competition. But anyways, there are economic and social realities you need to look at here.

What percentage of these ¨converts¨ have even a basic education? What percentage of these ¨converts¨ can even read? I think you need to look at some things like this. What some take for granted can not always be taken for granted. Look here...

¨Former criminals protect Orthodox monastery in Guatemala

The Grand Orthodox Church of the Holy Trinity in Guatemala is protected by a high fence and controlled by the security service armed with pump rifles and automatic pistols. Local residents say that security service consists of former criminals. Once, Guatemala criminal groups had asked a fee from Sister Ines "for protection" of her monastery, but eventually they volunteered to protect the church and its surrounding territory.¨

This is a different reality than I think you may understand.

Look, I have no doubt the Orthodox church is doing a good thing. I have no doubt the place they are working in is dangerous. The people involved in this are to be commended. I think this is a good thing and I wish them success. This is what Christians are supposed to do. I do think some people maybe were a little too excited announcing 100,000- 600,000 ¨converts¨

I wish them well though.

[Ansgar]

I have read 100,000, 200,000, all the way up to 600,000.

It is true that there has been some uncertainty concerning the exact number, however, there are eyewitness account about many thousands of converts.
http://www.svots.edu/headlines/seminarian-jesse-brandow-gives-first-hand-account-explosion-orthodox-christianity-guatemal
http://www.theonewaytolive.com/
http://thewordfromguatemala.blogspot.dk/

What percentage of these ¨converts¨ have even a basic education? What percentage of these ¨converts¨ can even read? I think you need to look at some things like this. What some take for granted can not always be taken for granted. Look here...

What does that has to do with anything?

Look, I have no doubt the Orthodox church is doing a good thing. I have no doubt the place they are working in is dangerous. The people involved in this are to be commended. I think this is a good thing and I wish them success.

Thank you.
The only thing I am trying to do is to disprove your claim that the Church has failed in spreading Orthodoxy.

[Opus118]

That is a whitewash.  

From wiki...¨In the United States, most Eastern Orthodox parishes are, for the most part, ethnocentric, that is, focused on serving an ethnic community that has immigrated from overseas (eg. the Greeks, Russians, Romanians, Finns, Serbians, Antiochians etc.) Many Orthodox Christians must travel long distances to find a local Church that is familiar to their ethnic background.¨

Nation and ethnicity first. God second. That is the reality without the gloss. That is why the Orthodox church has such a hard time getting established in new areas that do not share their ethnicity or language.  

This statement seemed so untrue that I decided to look up its source. Of course you did not make it easy because you did not provide the source at wikipedia for this statement. It sounded like it was from some kind of study and it was nothing of the sort. If you bothered to look at the citation for this statement (footnote 5) you would discover it was from the Russian Orthodox Church in America (ROCIA) which exists at two locations, Roswell New Mexico and a mission in Hayward California. I know Hayward fairly well and I never heard of this mission.  They are an old calendarist church (according to them), I do not know who they are in communion with (Irish Melkite may know about this), and their motto is "Freedom From Phyletism". They also make sure that they have an overwhelming internet presence.

I think it is safe to assume that they did not commission some statistical study on the topic your are citing.

I have no idea. But I do know I can take a look through religious forums and the blogosphers and find comments after comments sounding like this...

I love the Orthodox Church dearly in many ways, but endless fighting, the ethnocentric bigotry and the nonstop power struggles, plus the people's managing to drive away a very holy priest, has me fed up.

I do not now belong to the Eastern Orthodox Church because I am not culturally Eastern, and I am unwilling and unable to live my life as a pretend Russian, or a pretend Greek.

Once, when I inquired of an Eastern Orthodox friend of mine why he did not go to just any Orthodox church, he replied matter-of-factly that “We go where the Russians go” (for he is Russian).

So there must be some problem at least.

I was pointing out that you are an incautious poster. There are some problems here and there from what I have read but I have never seen it myself. Like ROCIA, we will just have to see if you can continue to thrive on misconceptions and misdirections.

Otherwise, Kerdy's answer to your post was fine with me. I went to bed after posting.

[dzheremi]

That 400 you are talking about is probably about the total in the entire country.

No. That's in La Paz, as I wrote. And that's from people who have actually been there and served in that church, not from Wikipedia or whatever. This is what I mean when I wrote that you dismiss the truth in favor of your own viewpoint which is wrong and ill-informed. Have you spoken to people of the Orthodox Church in Bolivia, or even people who have been there? I doubt it, or you wouldn't be posting such things.

And they that do exist are 99.999% Greek, Russian, etc. immigrants. We could go down the list of Latin American countries but it is about the same everywhere.

How many Egyptians do you see here, besides the priest? How much Arabic are they using vs. how much Spanish?

You are arguing from a very emotionaly charged position and it is effecting your judgement. I am just giving you the facts. 

Hardly. Rather, you're dismissing the facts when they don't fit your preconceived view.

[Asteriktos]

There are 11 million people in Bolivia. How many are Orthodox?

...Brazil has a population of almost 200 million people.

...
..
.

See my post(s) above.

[choy]

I wish the EO or OO would evangelise my city. There are around 120.000 inhabitants in my town so it should merit at least one parish 

That is your calling.

[Shanghaiski]

Where are you going to go to not be in an "ethnic" environment, Choy? Where in the world do people not have an ethnic/cultural background?

A lot of white Americans have little to no connection with any single ethnicity, being blends of several different ones. That's probably the reason for the bias against ethnicity. It's cultural.

[Azul]

the churches are ethnic because they represent the soul of these ethnicities.

every ethnicity has their distinctions.

one should not feel alienated in any (other) Orthodox Church if he is one with the Church and shares the same soul, even in diversity.. when Orthodox meet they are one.. the Church has culturalized the culture of this ethnicities (that is why they are mostly pretty much the same) and this ethnicities have adopted the culture of the Church in their culture and to their culture..

[dzheremi]

Where are you going to go to not be in an "ethnic" environment, Choy? Where in the world do people not have an ethnic/cultural background?

A lot of white Americans have little to no connection with any single ethnicity, being blends of several different ones. That's probably the reason for the bias against ethnicity. It's cultural.

True enough, but that itself is a cultural distinctive, which does not hold across the country. Where I live, "whites" are officially a minority at 42.2% of the population, while Hispanics including "white" make up 46.7%. So what is the ethnicity that the Church should reflect here? We do things in English because it's the majority language of the country, but if we were to suddenly have an influx of Navajo or other native people, we'd have to find some way to do that (thank God the local university teaches Navajo; I hope we'll need it someday). Either situation would alienate some people.

Just because "American" does not conjure up any immediate ethnic association doesn't mean that the worship wouldn't be done in a certain way that is unique to the people of that particular church. The problem is figuring out just what that means in a particular place, because that varies so much. At any rate, you can't have a church that is made for people who have no culture, because such people don't exist. Saying "I'm n-th generation" is not the same as saying "I do not have a particular way of understanding the world that has been shaped by the society I live in", which is really what culture is in the first place.

[choy]

Well, I certainly understand (and even share) your frustration -- to a point.

This may be one of the ways in which the USA and Canada differ, but it doesn't really make sense to talk about "foreign ethnicity" in a country composed almost entirely of immigrants.

I think it may be less of a problem in the US than in Canada.  The US is a melting pot whereas in Canada you are encouraged to retain your ethnic identity.  So people tend to Americanize faster and see each other as Americans.  In Canada people tend to retain their ethnic identity and tend to form ghettoes.  Some people here are still on virtual ethnic islands 2 or 3 generations after.  The thing is, if you're to strong on one culture, you alienate everyone else.

Who is "you" in this situation -- me or you? Because this is something that people at my parish ask me on a fairly regular basis: "Are you really okay with everybody speaking Arabic around you, when you can't speak very much?" I always answer that I wouldn't expect Egyptians to speak anything else among themselves, and if I want to know something that isn't directed at me, I can always ask what everyone is talking about. Sure, I miss being able to speak English with fluent speakers (we lost that when the nice young Ethiopian woman who used to attend moved to California back in December), but that's secondary to the liturgy, which is the reason we're all together in the first place, and is almost entirely in English. I do feel like a part of the parish because nobody expects me to be Egyptian (in fact, last time one of the more strident people in the congregation got on my case for not dressing as he himself would, another man who actually barely speaks English stepped in to tell me "don't listen to him -- you do whatever you want; it's your church, too"). That would just be ridiculous. I will admit that it is more difficult to be the only non-Arabphone, but you know, if the Church is really not about ethnicity, then it's not about my ethnicity, either. I do not make the people at my church pray in English or Spanish, just because those are in my own background. But of course we celebrate the liturgy mostly in English because we do recognize that this is the majority and de facto national language of this country, so it makes sense to do it in this language.

See, in my parish no one asks me that.  They expect me and my family to suck it up if I want to attend their parish.  They don't care if bilingual Liturgies are 70% or more Ukrainian.  I'm surprised some non-Ukrainians still come back after Summer.  Then everything else outside of Liturgy is about Ukrainian culture.  Even people try to speak to me in Ukrainian.  I'm not caucasian so I don't know where they get this idea that I speak Ukrainian.  Or maybe that is the expectation, that I have to be culturally Ukrainian to be part of their Church.  And this issue is not unique to us, I hear the same complaints about the ethnic Orthodox parishes in our area.

I agree. The Church will not survive if it is identified exclusively with one ethnic group. But at least for the OO (and I would assume with good reason also for the EO), that has never been the case. Romans, Egyptians, Syrians, Armenians, etc. have enriched (and even founded) the monasteries of the Egyptian desert, as well as in Turkey (Deir-ul-Zafaran), and on to today in America (ex., St. Mary & St. Moses Abbey in Texas attracts not only Egyptians to its ranks, but also Latinos like Fr. Daniel).

Monasteries are another thing.  The place is spiritual and thus it is easy to overcome the ethnic boundaries.  As I told people, I think I would have felt better if our parish is as much spiritual as it is ethnic.  But perrogy making gets better attendance than Divine Liturgy.  Parents bring their kids to Catechism only because there is a Ukrainian Language class before Catechism.  And their kids participate in cultural concerts where they get to put on traditional ethnic costumes.  Funny I was reminded by the priest this weekend my greatest frustration on this set-up.  He asked me what we did for First Communion Preparation last year (we still have remnants of Latinization, our kids older than 3 did not receive Communion at baptism and thus will be prepared for First Communion as before.  But the babies now receive Communion so hopefully in about 4-5 years we would not have to worry about First Communion for our kids catechism).  I told him we didn't really prepare because our classes were cancelled many times because the kids had to practice their singing and dancing for this concert they are participating in.  Its from the works of this Ukrainian poet, completely secular.  Think a Ukrainian Shakespeare.

If you are in a parish like this, it is really hard to be there.

[choy]

the churches are ethnic because they represent the soul of these ethnicities.

every ethnicity has their distinctions.

one should not feel alienated in any (other) Orthodox Church if he is one with the Church and shares the same soul, even in diversity.. when Orthodox meet they are one.. the Church has culturalized the culture of this ethnicities (that is why they are mostly pretty much the same) and this ethnicities have adopted the culture of the Church in their culture and to their culture..

The problem with ethnic parishes is that they tend to be Cultural Centers that just happen to have Liturgy every Sunday.

[dzheremi]

I think it may be less of a problem in the US than in Canada.  The US is a melting pot whereas in Canada you are encouraged to retain your ethnic identity.  So people tend to Americanize faster and see each other as Americans.  In Canada people tend to retain their ethnic identity and tend to form ghettoes.  Some people here are still on virtual ethnic islands 2 or 3 generations after.  The thing is, if you're to strong on one culture, you alienate everyone else.

I thought this might be the case. I have a Canadian friend who is Syriac Orthodox, and when her parents immigrated there from Iraq in the 1980s, they settled among other Middle Easterners (primarily Arabs) because they share more culture with them than with other Canadians, so it made the transition a bit easier. But her mother already spoke French before immigrating, and she herself was raised speaking French and English, not Arabic or Neo-Aramaic, so she has not had trouble integrating as much as some others might.

See, in my parish no one asks me that.  They expect me and my family to suck it up if I want to attend their parish.  They don't care if bilingual Liturgies are 70% or more Ukrainian.

 

This sounds like something you need to bring up to people in charge at your particular parish, then. I do not think that Orthodoxy needs to be or should be this way.

I'm surprised some non-Ukrainians still come back after Summer.  Then everything else outside of Liturgy is about Ukrainian culture.  Even people try to speak to me in Ukrainian.  I'm not caucasian so I don't know where they get this idea that I speak Ukrainian.

 

I am not Egyptian, but still sometimes people try to speak to me in Arabic. I took it as a sign that I was becoming more integrated into the parish, as they'd really only do that if they'd forgotten that I'm not one of them. So it was not alienating for me, but I could see how it could be if they insisted on speaking to me in Arabic despite knowing that I can't speak it very well.

Or maybe that is the expectation, that I have to be culturally Ukrainian to be part of their Church.  And this issue is not unique to us, I hear the same complaints about the ethnic Orthodox parishes in our area.

Well then their expectation is wrong. I mean, let's not confuse actual Orthodoxy for everyone's expectation of what Orthodoxy is. That's the whole problem with certain posts in this thread. Granted, reality is often much more disappointing than the ideal, but that doesn't mean that we stop working towards it. If the Ukrainian Church is only for Ukrainians, or the Egyptian Church for Egyptians, or the Romanian Church only for Romanians, etc., then the people who want it to be that way will get their wish, but probably also find it quite disappointing, as there is not actually an inexhaustible supply of people of X ethnicity to shore up the Church. So time and natural language attrition patterns are on the side of de-ethnicizing what now might seem like very insular churches. (And the ethnic ghettos that you mention are a transitory phenomenon, even if they don't seem like it; examples are made of Hispanics in the USA who "won't learn English", but I know from tutoring the children of these immigrants that, so long as they are in school, they will eventually learn it, however imperfectly.)

Monasteries are another thing.  The place is spiritual and thus it is easy to overcome the ethnic boundaries.

 

I'm not so sure that this is clearly the case. Witness, for instance, the fights between the Copts and the Ethiopians in the Holy Land (Lord have mercy!) over Deir el-Sultan. Rather, my point was that our history is multi-ethnic and multi-cultural, and that is shown clearly in the monasteries, and our churches and their practices are heavily influenced/shaped by that monastic spirituality. So whether it's receiving individuals at the monastery in Texas, or larger groups of people in missionary churches far away from traditional Orthodox territories, the impulse is essentially the same -- to integrate Orthodox Christianity among every people, regardless of language, culture, homeland, etc.

As I told people, I think I would have felt better if our parish is as much spiritual as it is ethnic.  But perrogy making gets better attendance than Divine Liturgy.  Parents bring their kids to Catechism only because there is a Ukrainian Language class before Catechism.  And their kids participate in cultural concerts where they get to put on traditional ethnic costumes.  Funny I was reminded by the priest this weekend my greatest frustration on this set-up.  He asked me what we did for First Communion Preparation last year (we still have remnants of Latinization, our kids older than 3 did not receive Communion at baptism and thus will be prepared for First Communion as before.  But the babies now receive Communion so hopefully in about 4-5 years we would not have to worry about First Communion for our kids catechism).  I told him we didn't really prepare because our classes were cancelled many times because the kids had to practice their singing and dancing for this concert they are participating in.  Its from the works of this Ukrainian poet, completely secular.  Think a Ukrainian Shakespeare.

This seems like an issue with your particular parish, which may also reflect similar issues in other parishes, but is not essential to the character of Orthodoxy in any way.

If you are in a parish like this, it is really hard to be there.

Oh, indeed! Even just reading about it, it sounds really tough. My sympathies are with you. Perhaps it is time to find a more welcoming community.

[Green_Umbrella]

I have read 100,000, 200,000, all the way up to 600,000.

It is true that there has been some uncertainty concerning the exact number, however, there are eyewitness account about many thousands of converts.
http://www.svots.edu/headlines/seminarian-jesse-brandow-gives-first-hand-account-explosion-orthodox-christianity-guatemal
http://www.theonewaytolive.com/
http://thewordfromguatemala.blogspot.dk/

What percentage of these ¨converts¨ have even a basic education? What percentage of these ¨converts¨ can even read? I think you need to look at some things like this. What some take for granted can not always be taken for granted. Look here...

What does that has to do with anything?

Look, I have no doubt the Orthodox church is doing a good thing. I have no doubt the place they are working in is dangerous. The people involved in this are to be commended. I think this is a good thing and I wish them success.

Thank you.
The only thing I am trying to do is to disprove your claim that the Church has failed in spreading Orthodoxy.

The Church has failed in spreading Orthodoxy at least in Latin America.  Unless you consider less than a single percentage points in every Latin American country a success.

And as far as your 100,000, 200,000, 600,000, 800,000 or whatever number you pull out of the sky for Mayans you are claiming have converted to Orthodoxy. I do not think so. At all. I think some people are confusing poor, uneducated and destitute indigenous people looking for a bag of rice as religious converts.

All religious denominations have been going into these communities for decades claiming thousands of converts that never amounted to anything more than a hope for help from poverty. Then they would quietly slip away after the big story.

Join reality. 82% child malnutrition. 20% literacy. Wages are on average 2$ a day. Little if any health care. Little if any public services. Are you getting a picture here? They could care less about felioque , econemical councils, if the priest faces the church or not and what language you have liturgy. If you do not believe me get on a plane to Guatemala and go up in the mountains and find out.

Of course you will probably be robbed of everything you have before you even get there if you do not go in a protected group of foreigners.         

[LizaSymonenko]

Please consider this map. Thank you.

Nonsense.

This map shows Ukraine as not having a dominant religion.  Really?

The majority of Ukrainians are Orthodox.  Granted they are divided among various Churches - MP, KP, UAOC, etc....however, you cannot deny that they are Orthodox.

[Αριστοκλής]

Apparently some here confuse converting and proselytizing. They are not synonyms. 

[LizaSymonenko]

Nowaways, Orthodox Church is still limited and focus on Eastern Europe. There are really seldom Orthodox Christian in other areas in the world.

I live in Hong Kong.Orthodox Church is very weak in Hong Kong and Asia. Jesus taught us that we need to teach and preach to the nations.But Orthodox Church seems quite difficult to finish this mission from Christ.What hinder Orthodox Church to teach and preach the gosepl to all nations?

We....We, Orthodox Christians, are the hindrance.

The "Church" relies on her faithful to do the "work"....but, do we? 

No.  We are too self-centered to bother.

Every day we have multiple opportunities to be missionaries to hundreds of people we come in to contact each day....at work, at the store, at the schools, etc.

We need to "live" our Faith, and be examples to others....and when that golden moment hits,....that someone expresses and interest....then we need to be prepared to preac our Faith, to explain what we believe and why.

Plus, we need to get over our desire and need to "fit in".  This desire mutes us, and our missionary work.  When difficult questions arise in a conversation, etc...we need to not shrink back because we don't want to be ridiculed, labeled, ostracized, etc....we need to stand up for the tenants of our Faith.

When there's a charitable event in our communities - perhaps a city wide bake sale, are our churches represented? 

If the call goes out for people to volunteer at the local soup kitchen, do we go?  Or do we think that we'd rather not dirty our hands....besides there's a good game on TV tonight.

How many opportunities have we already missed this morning, in spreading the good Word?

[choy]

I thought this might be the case. I have a Canadian friend who is Syriac Orthodox, and when her parents immigrated there from Iraq in the 1980s, they settled among other Middle Easterners (primarily Arabs) because they share more culture with them than with other Canadians, so it made the transition a bit easier. But her mother already spoke French before immigrating, and she herself was raised speaking French and English, not Arabic or Neo-Aramaic, so she has not had trouble integrating as much as some others might.

People still tend to group with people of the same race/ethnicity.  I've been here 5 years and most of my friends are Filipinos.  I've made friends who are not Filipinos but we don't "hang out" as much because they also go with people of their race/ethnicity.

This sounds like something you need to bring up to people in charge at your particular parish, then. I do not think that Orthodoxy needs to be or should be this way.

I've heard it is the same in some of the Orthodox parishes in my area.  And this came from other Orthodox.

I am not Egyptian, but still sometimes people try to speak to me in Arabic. I took it as a sign that I was becoming more integrated into the parish, as they'd really only do that if they'd forgotten that I'm not one of them. So it was not alienating for me, but I could see how it could be if they insisted on speaking to me in Arabic despite knowing that I can't speak it very well.

Perhaps, but I'm far from being "white", or maybe they just forget.  I mean, these are little things.  Maybe I notice them too much right now because of where I am.

Well then their expectation is wrong. I mean, let's not confuse actual Orthodoxy for everyone's expectation of what Orthodoxy is. That's the whole problem with certain posts in this thread. Granted, reality is often much more disappointing than the ideal, but that doesn't mean that we stop working towards it. If the Ukrainian Church is only for Ukrainians, or the Egyptian Church for Egyptians, or the Romanian Church only for Romanians, etc., then the people who want it to be that way will get their wish, but probably also find it quite disappointing, as there is not actually an inexhaustible supply of people of X ethnicity to shore up the Church. So time and natural language attrition patterns are on the side of de-ethnicizing what now might seem like very insular churches. (And the ethnic ghettos that you mention are a transitory phenomenon, even if they don't seem like it; examples are made of Hispanics in the USA who "won't learn English", but I know from tutoring the children of these immigrants that, so long as they are in school, they will eventually learn it, however imperfectly.)

Of course it is not an expectation of what Orthodoxy is.  But that is the problem why Orthodoxy is slow to spread to other people.  Even in the Philippines, Orthodox only really started 10 years ago because the parish started moving away from being too Greek and became more welcoming to the locals.  And then finally they started having local clergy which made it a bigger draw.  I believe Orthodoxy there will grow, they are in the right direction.

I'm not so sure that this is clearly the case. Witness, for instance, the fights between the Copts and the Ethiopians in the Holy Land (Lord have mercy!) over Deir el-Sultan. Rather, my point was that our history is multi-ethnic and multi-cultural, and that is shown clearly in the monasteries, and our churches and their practices are heavily influenced/shaped by that monastic spirituality. So whether it's receiving individuals at the monastery in Texas, or larger groups of people in missionary churches far away from traditional Orthodox territories, the impulse is essentially the same -- to integrate Orthodox Christianity among every people, regardless of language, culture, homeland, etc.

That is right.  Like I said, monasteries are places of spirituality.  Ethnicity really isn't important there.  But in parishes, it is the lay people who make up the identity of the parish, that is why it normally ends up ethnic.

This seems like an issue with your particular parish, which may also reflect similar issues in other parishes, but is not essential to the character of Orthodoxy in any way.

It is the tendency of Orthodox parishes in North America.  Mainly because the parishes here are established by immigrants.  Its not any different with ethnic Roman Catholic parishes.  Although with RC parishes, you can easily find another one (provided you are in a big city) that isn't ethnic.  Not the same with Orthodoxy.  In the other city I lived here, there was a nearby Greek Orthodox parish.  Then 10-15 minutes away there is a Serbian Orthodox parish.  About 20 mins in the other direction is a Russian parish.

Oh, indeed! Even just reading about it, it sounds really tough. My sympathies are with you. Perhaps it is time to find a more welcoming community.

Already did.  Just figuring out how to make the jump

[dzheremi]

Perhaps, but I'm far from being "white", or maybe they just forget.  I mean, these are little things.  Maybe I notice them too much right now because of where I am.

Perhaps.

Of course it is not an expectation of what Orthodoxy is.  But that is the problem why Orthodoxy is slow to spread to other people.  Even in the Philippines, Orthodox only really started 10 years ago because the parish started moving away from being too Greek and became more welcoming to the locals.  And then finally they started having local clergy which made it a bigger draw.  I believe Orthodoxy there will grow, they are in the right direction.

It can take, as I'm sure you know, quite some time to get your life settled after coming to a new country. A great many immigrants, particularly if they are escaping threatening or traumatic situations in their homeland, will see the church as an oasis of familiarity and comfort in a foreign land and cling to it as a result. This does not absolve anyone, of course, from reaching out to others who are not of the expected cultural background, but it does explain why they can be rather slow to do so. For instance, here in Albuquerque at our little Coptic church we have only within the past 3 or 4 months been successfully negotiating to get a building in which we can hold services (we've tried several times in the past, but never gotten very far due to a lack of funds). The community has been having liturgy for 16 years now, but always in a private home, which understandably limits our evangelistic opportunities (it doesn't look like a church, so people don't know to go there, and we don't have a website/information cards/etc). There are only about 40 of us in total, and I'm the only fluent English-speaker. I'm also really new to the faith, so my responsibilities are limited, in consideration of that fact. We would all love to do large-scale evangelism (Lord knows there are enough other kinds of churches here, so people are very hungry for God), but all of these things require time to be dealt with. Again, it's not an excuse, it's a challenge. I'm always looking for an opportunity to invite people to come to our liturgies, but have not had much success since I am also a transplant to this area, so I don't really know many people outside of church in the first place.

That is right.  Like I said, monasteries are places of spirituality.  Ethnicity really isn't important there.  But in parishes, it is the lay people who make up the identity of the parish, that is why it normally ends up ethnic.

Indeed. Ukrainians don't magically become non-Ukrainian (nor Egyptians non-Egyptian, Romanians non-Romanian, etc.) every time a non-Ukrainian walks through the door. It is a natural function of the makeup of the parish.

It is the tendency of Orthodox parishes in North America.  Mainly because the parishes here are established by immigrants.

 

Well, yeah...they can't very well be started by non-immigrants who haven't heard of Orthodoxy! That's the whole issue...

Although with RC parishes, you can easily find another one (provided you are in a big city) that isn't ethnic.

 

I don't believe that's actually so. In my RC days, when I went to an Anglo parish, I was very aware that I was in an Anglo parish (or an Anglo mass v. Hispanic mass, etc). I think this is all a matter of perspective, but having been to Anglo, Hispanic, and Ukranian (well, Ruthenian) parishes in my time in the RCC, I felt that they all had their own cultures, even if they didn't always perfectly correspond to different ethnicities (e.g., there were Africans at the Anglo-Latin parish I went to in Oregon, for instance). It seems that there is still an assumption in your reply that it is possible to have a non-ethnic parish. I do not think that is true. I think it is better to say that it is possible to have a parish that matches the demographics of the wider community, which may be rather diluted in the sense of being nth generation something white (they've forgotten by now) and W.A.S.P.y (yes, also among Catholics), or may be Hispanic, or may be Haitian, or may be just about anything. But that doesn't make one "not ethnic", and the rest "ethnic". Baloney sandwich and Ovaltine white people are not the standard by which all other Catholicisms or Orthodoxies will be judged. The majority of the Catholic Church is decidedly brown/black and funny talkin'. Y a la chingada con lo demas. (Not so sure about the EO cos I'm not one, but I think that also holds for the OO, as its largest particular church is in East Africa.)

Not the same with Orthodoxy.  In the other city I lived here, there was a nearby Greek Orthodox parish. Then 10-15 minutes away there is a Serbian Orthodox parish.  About 20 mins in the other direction is a Russian parish.

And you could've gone to any of them. Really, I don't mean to downplay your struggle, because I'm an extreme minority in my own church too, it's just...well, I'm not going to wait around for a church that looks and talks like me. If it took 16 years to just get a church building, how many more will it be before we're all speaking English over the Agape meal? It is better to work with whatever there is, and let time take its course in nativizing the church (the young children, aged 3 to 11, of the parishioners, do not speak much or any Arabic). If people need to realize that you're having trouble with their expectation that you "suck it up" to be a part of their parish, then maybe you need to talk to those people to explain why that's a taller order than they probably realize. Remember, they haven't had to conform to expectations of what the Ukrainian Church is or should be. For them, it's natural that the ethnicity and the church go together, because they always have throughout their history. For everything else, the faith (the important thing) is Orthodox. That is why we put up with being cultural outsiders. I'd rather learn new Arabic over the Agape meal than learn new (wrong) doctrine in the liturgy.

Already did.  Just figuring out how to make the jump

May God bless you and be with you in your journey.

[choy]

Well, yeah...they can't very well be started by non-immigrants who haven't heard of Orthodoxy! That's the whole issue...

Sorry, what I meant was to contrast the difference between lay immigrants and missionaries.  Missionaires look to establish the faith in the locale, they bring the faith, not their culture.  That is why Sts. Cyril and Methodius studied the Slavic languages and came up with Slavonic.  They didn't make the Slavs into Greeks, they made the faith Slavic.  Immigrants aren't really looking to be missionaries, they just want to be able to worship the same way they did back home.  The parish is not for the locals, it is for themselves.  I think also that is what is lacking in many ethnic parishes, the missionary spirit.  You'll hear more about their cultural festivals than their faith.

Of course the other way to convert people of a foreign land is by Inquisition, as the Spanish model have shown, heheheh    but hey, it worked for the Philippines and South America.  We are Christians and hispanic.

I don't believe that's actually so. In my RC days, when I went to an Anglo parish, I was very aware that I was in an Anglo parish (or an Anglo mass v. Hispanic mass, etc). I think this is all a matter of perspective, but having been to Anglo, Hispanic, and Ukranian (well, Ruthenian) parishes in my time in the RCC, I felt that they all had their own cultures, even if they didn't always perfectly correspond to different ethnicities (e.g., there were Africans at the Anglo-Latin parish I went to in Oregon, for instance). It seems that there is still an assumption in your reply that it is possible to have a non-ethnic parish. I do not think that is true. I think it is better to say that it is possible to have a parish that matches the demographics of the wider community, which may be rather diluted in the sense of being nth generation something white (they've forgotten by now) and W.A.S.P.y (yes, also among Catholics), or may be Hispanic, or may be Haitian, or may be just about anything. But that doesn't make one "not ethnic", and the rest "ethnic". Baloney sandwich and Ovaltine white people are not the standard by which all other Catholicisms or Orthodoxies will be judged. The majority of the Catholic Church is decidedly brown/black and funny talkin'. Y a la chingada con lo demas. (Not so sure about the EO cos I'm not one, but I think that also holds for the OO, as its largest particular church is in East Africa.)

Well, North American Roman Catholicism is bland.  You want to see incultured Roman Catholicism, go to Mexico or South America or the Philippines.  But yes, there are cultural groups in Roman Catholicism.  But it is not as tough as Orthodoxy.  I guess in a way you can slip in and out of an RC parish without notice.  Can't do that in Orthodoxy.  Also the sheer numbers of Roman Catholics, it is easy to find people of other backgrounds in any parish.

And you could've gone to any of them. Really, I don't mean to downplay your struggle, because I'm an extreme minority in my own church too, it's just...well, I'm not going to wait around for a church that looks and talks like me. If it took 16 years to just get a church building, how many more will it be before we're all speaking English over the Agape meal? It is better to work with whatever there is, and let time take its course in nativizing the church (the young children, aged 3 to 11, of the parishioners, do not speak much or any Arabic). If people need to realize that you're having trouble with their expectation that you "suck it up" to be a part of their parish, then maybe you need to talk to those people to explain why that's a taller order than they probably realize. Remember, they haven't had to conform to expectations of what the Ukrainian Church is or should be. For them, it's natural that the ethnicity and the church go together, because they always have throughout their history. For everything else, the faith (the important thing) is Orthodox. That is why we put up with being cultural outsiders. I'd rather learn new Arabic over the Agape meal than learn new (wrong) doctrine in the liturgy.

May God bless you and be with you in your journey.

I've heard complaints about them even from other Orthodox.  I do pray for their success and hopefully they don't have to shut down.  But I've heard of the same sad stories as I experienced in some of our UGCC parishes.  That is, an aging population and thinly attended church.  One told me of a story of a Ukrainian Orthodox parish which the person told me he thinks the youngest in attendace was like 80.  And there are only a few people there.  Yet they don't want to stop having Liturgy in Slavonic/Ukrainian.  And it is tough for people to get in such churches without that massively high first hurdle.

[dzheremi]

Sorry, what I meant was to contrast the difference between lay immigrants and missionaries.  Missionaires look to establish the faith in the locale, they bring the faith, not their culture.  That is why Sts. Cyril and Methodius studied the Slavic languages and came up with Slavonic.  They didn't make the Slavs into Greeks, they made the faith Slavic.  Immigrants aren't really looking to be missionaries, they just want to be able to worship the same way they did back home.

Some appear to be looking to do both, but in a way that is responsive to their current circumstance.

Well, North American Roman Catholicism is bland.

 

Nope. Anglo parishes are bland. That's as cultural as anything else, hence my examples of going to Anglo, Hispanic, and Ruthenian masses. They're all three quite different. One is not "not ethnic" and the other two "ethnic".

You want to see incultured Roman Catholicism, go to Mexico or South America or the Philippines.

 

Already been (Mexico), that's why I think as I do. Catholicism in Mexico is a lot closer to my experience of Orthodoxy in America than my experience of Anglo-Catholicism (read: not Anglicanism) in America was, in terms of its pastoral, community-based character.

But yes, there are cultural groups in Roman Catholicism.  But it is not as tough as Orthodoxy.

 

I'm not sure that this is the case. It's easy for you to say that as a Filipino when most of your people are Catholic, but if you came from a culture where most people aren't, what do you think your reaction would be? You ever try taking a hardcore baptist to a high mass?  (And really that's not even fair since they're both forms of Western Christianity; it would be more appropriate to compare, say...I don't know...taking a Calivinist to a Tewahedo Qedase or something...I'd pay to see that.)

I guess in a way you can slip in and out of an RC parish without notice.  Can't do that in Orthodoxy.

And praise the Lord for that!

I've heard complaints about them even from other Orthodox.  I do pray for their success and hopefully they don't have to shut down.  But I've heard of the same sad stories as I experienced in some of our UGCC parishes.  That is, an aging population and thinly attended church.  One told me of a story of a Ukrainian Orthodox parish which the person told me he thinks the youngest in attendace was like 80.  And there are only a few people there.  Yet they don't want to stop having Liturgy in Slavonic/Ukrainian.  And it is tough for people to get in such churches without that massively high first hurdle.

Amen. That's a tragedy, but as I already agreed to earlier, that's what happens when you focus on one particular group exclusively, as though there is an inexhaustible supply of new Ukrainians or whatever so that they don't actually have to do evangelism. Sad.

[choy]

Nope. Anglo parishes are bland. That's as cultural as anything else, hence my examples of going to Anglo, Hispanic, and Ruthenian masses. They're all three quite different. One is not "not ethnic" and the other two "ethnic".

I guess the problem really is that American (or even Canadian) culture isn't as defined as the cultures of other places which has been there for hundreds, if not thousands of years.  I guess that is the result of forcing something by rejecting the past (rejection of being British) unlike in the past that culture is developed, or by forced assimilation through conquests of more powerful nations.

Already been (Mexico), that's why I think as I do. Catholicism in Mexico is a lot closer to my experience of Orthodoxy in America than my experience of Anglo-Catholicism (read: not Anglicanism) in America was, in terms of its pastoral, community-based character.

Yes, although I was never really close to a priest before and I was the type who'd go to a different parish every week.  I guess not I realize the value on having a good relationship with your pastor.  But the problem also is the current RC practice of moving priests around in a diocese every 5 years or so.

I'm not sure that this is the case. It's easy for you to say that as a Filipino when most of your people are Catholic, but if you came from a culture where most people aren't, what do you think your reaction would be? You ever try taking a hardcore baptist to a high mass?  (And really that's not even fair since they're both forms of Western Christianity; it would be more appropriate to compare, say...I don't know...taking a Calivinist to a Tewahedo Qedase or something...I'd pay to see that.)

I mean, I can easily go into a parish that is predominantly Chinese (did that once since my place of work is in the part of town where most of the Chinese immigrants settle) and don't feel too out of place.

And praise the Lord for that!

Amen. That's a tragedy, but as I already agreed to earlier, that's what happens when you focus on one particular group exclusively, as though there is an inexhaustible supply of new Ukrainians or whatever so that they don't actually have to do evangelism. Sad.

Same problem with our parish.  But you have to solve that problem then.  I will find out this week, I am attending a meeting with the bishop about the "vision" for the future.  I have come to realize that the change they need to do is within themselves.  They have to make themselves more open to others and they have to make their parishes more of a spiritual place rather than being a cultural center.  If they have more cultural festivals than Bible studies or Adult catechism classes, then there is something wrong.  I don't have the answer, but hopefully I can contribute something to this weekend's discussion.  And then leave for Orthodoxy 

[Michał Kalina]

I guess the problem really is that American (or even Canadian) culture isn't as defined as the cultures of other places which has been there for hundreds, if not thousands of years.  I guess that is the result of forcing something by rejecting the past (rejection of being British) unlike in the past that culture is developed, or by forced assimilation through conquests of more powerful nations.

I guess you are trying too make it special and you fail to prove that. Same for the people who say "American" is not an ethnicity.

[Asteriktos]

Well, I tried.

[dzheremi]

Nope. Anglo parishes are bland. That's as cultural as anything else, hence my examples of going to Anglo, Hispanic, and Ruthenian masses. They're all three quite different. One is not "not ethnic" and the other two "ethnic".

I guess the problem really is that American (or even Canadian) culture isn't as defined as the cultures of other places which has been there for hundreds, if not thousands of years.  I guess that is the result of forcing something by rejecting the past (rejection of being British) unlike in the past that culture is developed, or by forced assimilation through conquests of more powerful nations.

Again, I don't know where you get your idea of what culture is, but it's not a matter of it being more or less 'defined' than some other place (I'm not sure what that means, or how to measure it even if I knew). Canada is different than the USA, which is different than Mexico, which is different than Suriname, etc. These are all different places. It's not about being or not being like the other guy. It's about being whatever it is you are. No matter what language we use at the liturgy, I'll never be Egyptian. No matter where I go, there I am. Being an American in that place.

I mean, I can easily go into a parish that is predominantly Chinese (did that once since my place of work is in the part of town where most of the Chinese immigrants settle) and don't feel too out of place.

Okay.

If they have more cultural festivals than Bible studies or Adult catechism classes, then there is something wrong.  I don't have the answer, but hopefully I can contribute something to this weekend's discussion.  And then leave for Orthodoxy  

Good luck.

[Ansgar]

The Church has failed in spreading Orthodoxy at least in Latin America.  Unless you consider less than a single percentage points in every Latin American country a success.

According to this logic, the catholic church is a failure too.

And as far as your 100,000, 200,000, 600,000, 800,000 or whatever number you pull out of the sky for Mayans you are claiming have converted to Orthodoxy. I do not think so. At all. I think some people are confusing poor, uneducated and destitute indigenous people looking for a bag of rice as religious converts.

You ask for evidence concerning the growth of orthodoy and when I show you accountsfrom people who have actually witnessed a large number of people being accepted into the Church you dismiss it. Do you think that the people, the apostles converted were all rich and educated.

[Green_Umbrella]

The Church has failed in spreading Orthodoxy at least in Latin America.  Unless you consider less than a single percentage points in every Latin American country a success.

According to this logic, the catholic church is a failure too.

And as far as your 100,000, 200,000, 600,000, 800,000 or whatever number you pull out of the sky for Mayans you are claiming have converted to Orthodoxy. I do not think so. At all. I think some people are confusing poor, uneducated and destitute indigenous people looking for a bag of rice as religious converts.

You ask for evidence concerning the growth of orthodoy and when I show you accountsfrom people who have actually witnessed a large number of people being accepted into the Church you dismiss it. Do you think that the people, the apostles converted were all rich and educated.

According to this logic, the catholic church is a failure too.

I do not understand.

You ask for evidence concerning the growth of orthodoy and when I show you accountsfrom people who have actually witnessed a large number of people being accepted into the Church you dismiss it.

I can show you accounts from people who claim they were abducted by aliens. They flew in their space ships and visited their planet. That does not make it true. The latest I saw was 7 Orthodox priest working in Guatamala. If your numbers are to be believed that is 1 priest for a every 100,000 converts more or less. Do you believe this? I do not.

As I told you before, if you want to find out take a plane to Guatamala and look for yourself. I think you will be very dissapointed.   And before you go, just so you know what you are getting into...more people are beaten and stabbed to death in Guatemala every year than die in war zones.

When do you leave?

[Hinterlander]

How much of the answer to this question can be related to world history and simple geographic conditions?  The eastern church(es) have had a much different history/geography than the western ones (consider colonization/industrialization/conflict/communism/globalization).  I don't believe these historical/geographical factors are entirely deterministic of the prevalence of any particular Christian tradition, obviously the beliefs/practices etc also have a role to play.

I didn't want to say more yet but I thought this brief comment might nudge the dialogue along.

[Tags:]

OrthodoxChristianity.net > Moderated Forums > Orthodox-Other Christian Discussion > Topic: What hinder Orthodox Church to preach gosepl to all nations?