OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 22, 2014, 11:45:48 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 3 All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Is Western Rite Most Appropriate For Western Converts - Sensitive Subject  (Read 2447 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Studying_Orthodoxy
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 124


« on: November 22, 2013, 08:02:28 AM »

I would be very interested to know what people here think is the most appropriate rite for Westerners. Should they go to the Byzantine rite used by most of the Orthodox world or should they instead attend the Western liturgies of Western Rite Orthodoxy?

Is there anything wrong with a Westerner going for the Byzantine style?

Some have mentioned the example of how the Russians, Serbs, Albanians and others took Byzantine rite when they converted. Yet this has been attributed to the fact that all of these are eastern peoples and were geographically in the sphere of the Byzantine world. Would it be the same for Western people?
« Last Edit: November 22, 2013, 08:05:20 AM by Studying_Orthodoxy » Logged
Arachne
Trinary Unit || Resident Bossy Boots
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Archdiocese of the British Isles and Ireland
Posts: 4,490


Tending Brigid's flame


« Reply #1 on: November 22, 2013, 08:42:48 AM »

A lot depends on each convert's background, as well as the baggage they bring along. Were they raised Catholic, Protestant (umbrella term, but whatever), atheist/irreligious, or in some other religion altogether? Did the religious atmosphere at home jive with that around them? Do they want to retain any elements of their previous affiliation or do they want a clean break? And so on.

In short, I don't believe there is a single correct answer, and I would certainly oppose any attempt at imposing uniformity.
Logged

'When you live your path all the time, you end up with both more path and more time.'~Venecia Rauls

Blog ~ Bookshelf ~ Jukebox
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,019


"My god is greater."


« Reply #2 on: November 22, 2013, 08:52:54 AM »

The East/ West divide is exaggerated and is getting more irrelevant every day. Westerners going to Eastern liturgy is just fine. WR is such a tiny niche anyway that most Westerners don't even have an opportunity to visit a WR parish.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
IoanC
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,384



« Reply #3 on: November 22, 2013, 08:59:28 AM »

To be honest, I don't even know what a rite or style is in Orthodoxy. What I mean is that I believe Orthodoxy is concerned with the absolute form or truth, first and foremost, and things that have to do with appearance would come second; they are equally important, but they don't have the decisive role.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2013, 09:00:09 AM by IoanC » Logged

katherineofdixie
Archon
********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 3,356



« Reply #4 on: November 22, 2013, 11:15:02 AM »

The East/ West divide is exaggerated and is getting more irrelevant every day. Westerners going to Eastern liturgy is just fine. WR is such a tiny niche anyway that most Westerners don't even have an opportunity to visit a WR parish.

Exactly.

When I attended my first Divine Liturgy, I felt at home and was able to participate, even though large portions were in Greek. I recognized the shape or structure of the Liturgy from growing up in a liturgical church.
Logged

"If but ten of us lead a holy life, we shall kindle a fire which shall light up the entire city."

 St. John Chrysostom
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Jerkodox
Posts: 6,855



« Reply #5 on: November 22, 2013, 12:06:12 PM »

The East/ West divide is exaggerated and is getting more irrelevant every day. Westerners going to Eastern liturgy is just fine. WR is such a tiny niche anyway that most Westerners don't even have an opportunity to visit a WR parish.

I'd go a bit further. There is no "East" and "West". There are various kinds of Eastern and Western countries. I'm not an American so I don't knot whether the divide is getting irrelevant in America or not but it's still relevant around here.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2013, 12:07:36 PM by Alpo » Logged

Studying_Orthodoxy
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 124


« Reply #6 on: November 22, 2013, 02:42:03 PM »

If the cultural issue is not so big then what is the main argument of those who want Western Rite? Do they say that because the West had its own Orthodox tradition prior to the schism that it is worth reviving and therefore there is no need to import from the outside?

What is the main argument for Western rite?
Logged
Agabus
The user formerly known as Agabus.
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Pan-American Colloquial Convert Hybrid Orthodoxy.
Jurisdiction: We are all uncanonical now.
Posts: 2,361



« Reply #7 on: November 22, 2013, 03:11:24 PM »

This question operates on the assumption that a "rite" means anything to a convert.

The argument I think has some traction is that some groups are closer to Orthodoxy than others and shouldn't necessarily have to forfeit their patrimony that is in line with Orthodoxy when converting since the Church presumably transcends culture — hence you see the parishes from the Anglican continuum coming to Orthodoxy and adopting an Orthodox liturgy that is very familiar to them.

The exercise in resurrecting incomplete, long-disused liturgies from the seventh century has less traction or viability in my mind.
Logged

Blessed Nazarius practiced the ascetic life. His clothes were tattered. He wore his shoes without removing them for six years.

THE OPINIONS HERE MAY NOT REFLECT THE ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED ORTHODOX CHURCH
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 17,773


The Pope Emeritus reading OCNet


WWW
« Reply #8 on: November 22, 2013, 03:24:55 PM »

A lot depends on each convert's background, as well as the baggage they bring along. Were they raised Catholic, Protestant (umbrella term, but whatever), atheist/irreligious, or in some other religion altogether? Did the religious atmosphere at home jive with that around them? Do they want to retain any elements of their previous affiliation or do they want a clean break? And so on.

In short, I don't believe there is a single correct answer, and I would certainly oppose any attempt at imposing uniformity.

Basically, this.  Another practical consideration is the availability of churches of one or the other rite.  Not only would it not be wrong for a Westerner to embrace the Byzantine rite, but he may have no choice in the matter if that's all he has access to in the local church scene. 
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


Mor Ephrem > Justin Kissel
Antonious Nikolas
Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite, Anagnostis
Archon
********
Online Online

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox
Posts: 2,152


Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra


WWW
« Reply #9 on: November 22, 2013, 04:06:43 PM »

This question operates on the assumption that a "rite" means anything to a convert.

Good point.  And for the average American convert - coming in solo or with his or her immediate family - I don't think it does.  As long as they can get enough English in the Liturgy - whether that means the Byzantine or Coptic rite or whatever - they find their footing quickly enough and that (Eastern) liturgy soon becomes their own.  For every one American convert searching for a Western rite, I'd wager there are hundreds more who are simply searching for Orthodox worship in the English language.

The argument I think has some traction is that some groups are closer to Orthodoxy than others and shouldn't necessarily have to forfeit their patrimony that is in line with Orthodoxy when converting since the Church presumably transcends culture — hence you see the parishes from the Anglican continuum coming to Orthodoxy and adopting an Orthodox liturgy that is very familiar to them.

I agree.  The experience of groups (parishes or entire vagante churches) being received into Orthodoxy is radically different from that of individuals or families, and while I'm sure there are some folks who've sought out the Western Rite in the latter category, I think that it is much more prevalent in the former.

The exercise in resurrecting incomplete, long-disused liturgies from the seventh century has less traction or viability in my mind.

Sadly, I must agree.  Though I bemoan the grievous loss inflicted upon Oriental Orthodoxy when the Nubian Orthodox Church and liturgy were destroyed, when an acquaintance of mine - an intelligent but...eccentric (yeah, that's the word) academic who flirted with Coptic and Ethiopian Orthodoxy and eventually went vagante - said he was thinking about "reconstructing and resurrecting" that rite, I could only gawk at him as if he had two heads.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2013, 04:12:39 PM by Antonious Nikolas » Logged

"According to the Orthodox Faith, the teachings and traditions one upholds and believes in will necessarily influence and inform one's spiritual orientation and the way one worships..." - Harry Boosalis
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Jerkodox
Posts: 6,855



« Reply #10 on: November 22, 2013, 04:29:50 PM »

For every one American convert searching for a Western rite, I'd wager there are hundreds more who are simply searching for Orthodox worship in the English language.

And it'll stay that way as long as WRO is treated as an exception and concession for those who are unable to man up and become Orthodox.
Logged

WPM
Revolutionary Writer
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,549



« Reply #11 on: November 22, 2013, 04:48:30 PM »

IMO, the Orthodox Church needs to become more visible in Texas. While you have clusters of parishes in places like Pennsylvania and New Jersey there are hardly any here in Texas.
Logged
Agabus
The user formerly known as Agabus.
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Pan-American Colloquial Convert Hybrid Orthodoxy.
Jurisdiction: We are all uncanonical now.
Posts: 2,361



« Reply #12 on: November 22, 2013, 04:55:54 PM »

IMO, the Orthodox Church needs to become more visible in Texas. While you have clusters of parishes in places like Pennsylvania and New Jersey there are hardly any here in Texas.
Oddly enough, Texas has the most Antiochian WRO parishes of any region in the U.S.
Logged

Blessed Nazarius practiced the ascetic life. His clothes were tattered. He wore his shoes without removing them for six years.

THE OPINIONS HERE MAY NOT REFLECT THE ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED ORTHODOX CHURCH
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,019


"My god is greater."


« Reply #13 on: November 22, 2013, 04:56:46 PM »

IMO, the Orthodox Church needs to become more visible in Texas. While you have clusters of parishes in places like Pennsylvania and New Jersey there are hardly any here in Texas.

Step 1: Find more coal in Texas.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
WPM
Revolutionary Writer
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,549



« Reply #14 on: November 22, 2013, 05:18:00 PM »

IMO, the Orthodox Church needs to become more visible in Texas. While you have clusters of parishes in places like Pennsylvania and New Jersey there are hardly any here in Texas.
Oddly enough, Texas has the most Antiochian WRO parishes of any region in the U.S.

Well, maybe about 3 or 4 but ofc it takes transportation and gas.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2013, 05:18:34 PM by WPM » Logged
Regnare
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA catechumen
Posts: 325



« Reply #15 on: November 22, 2013, 05:32:29 PM »

Well, how many WRO parishes are churches that converted as a unit, and how many are missions? There would probably be more WRO churches if the Antiochians and Russians made a higher percentage of their missions Western Rite.
I don't know anything about the rate of parish-founding in those churches, though, so I'm talking out of my hat a bit.
Logged

"I give praise to your holy Nature, Lord, for you have made my nature a sanctuary for your hiddenness and a tabernacle for your holy mysteries, a place where you can dwell, and a holy temple for your Divinity." --Venerable St. Isaac of Nineveh
Alveus Lacuna
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,917



« Reply #16 on: November 22, 2013, 05:33:28 PM »

I'd go a bit further. There is no "East" and "West". There are various kinds of Eastern and Western countries. I'm not an American so I don't knot whether the divide is getting irrelevant in America or not but it's still relevant around here.

Yeah, but your country is officially Lutheran and Orthodox at the same time. So how big of a difference is it, really? Do Finnish Lutherans view Finnish Orthodoxy as something exotic or foreign; too "Eastern"?
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #17 on: November 22, 2013, 05:43:18 PM »

IMO, the Orthodox Church needs to become more visible in Texas. While you have clusters of parishes in places like Pennsylvania and New Jersey there are hardly any here in Texas.
Oddly enough, the Orthodox presence predates any Orthodox parish in Pennsylvania or New Jersey.  The Galveston parish is among the oldest on the continent outside of Alaska, and the (Orthodox?) descendants of Philip Ludwell III, the first Orthodox in the New World (even before Alaska) are buried there.
http://orthodoxhistory.org/2013/08/27/photos-from-nicholas-chapmans-ludwell-research-trip-in-texas/

The Orthodox George Fisher served in the Mexican administration in Galveston, and went on to help found the Cathedral in San Francisco in the 1860s.
Logged

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

Posts: 1,265

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #18 on: November 22, 2013, 05:50:21 PM »

Lots of great answers here. Within the Antiochian Archdiocese, only whole, stable parishes can become Western Rite, and they have to be vetted first for said stability. Not just anyone who wants to join can do so.

And the best answer, IMHO, which has been given already, is that the Western Rite is intended mostly for those parishes whose patrimony and native tradition are close enough to Orthodoxy that the move is relatively smooth and much can be retained. This is why Antioch's Western Rite is based upon the received tradition of the West rather than concocting something from the past, venerable as it may be. On the other hand, much in the received tradition was already ancient, so we aren't talking about a whole lot that had to be adjusted, so to speak.

Orthodoxy is Orthodoxy, regardless of cultural trappings, important as they can be. Rite really shouldn't matter. But there is some deep truth to the fact that some Christians are better suited to work our their salvation within a Western context of Orthodoxy, rather than an Eastern. Thank God our hierarchs and saints had the wisdom to recognize this.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #19 on: November 22, 2013, 05:55:41 PM »

The East/ West divide is exaggerated and is getting more irrelevant every day. Westerners going to Eastern liturgy is just fine.


Melkites

iconostasis
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #20 on: November 22, 2013, 05:59:29 PM »

The East/ West divide is exaggerated and is getting more irrelevant every day. Westerners going to Eastern liturgy is just fine. WR is such a tiny niche anyway that most Westerners don't even have an opportunity to visit a WR parish.

I'd go a bit further. There is no "East" and "West". There are various kinds of Eastern and Western countries. I'm not an American so I don't knot whether the divide is getting irrelevant in America or not but it's still relevant around here.
It was looking at a Gothic church in Finland where the cohesion of the Western tradition hit me.
Logged

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

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: I'll take (e) for "all of the above"
Posts: 2,438



WWW
« Reply #21 on: November 22, 2013, 06:00:11 PM »

IMO, the Orthodox Church needs to become more visible in Texas. While you have clusters of parishes in places like Pennsylvania and New Jersey there are hardly any here in Texas.

Step 1: Find more coal in Texas.

I guess oil just isn't as compatible with the Orthodox phronema  laugh

The East/ West divide is exaggerated and is getting more irrelevant every day. Westerners going to Eastern liturgy is just fine. WR is such a tiny niche anyway that most Westerners don't even have an opportunity to visit a WR parish.

Indeed. I've moved around a lot of different states quite a bit in the short time I've been Orthodox. The one time I've been close enough to a WR parish to actually attend, it would have been in another language anyway.

To address the OP, there is no over-arching "Western" to whom a robust Western Rite would appeal. Outside of the RCC, most Americans who bother going to church enough to have a church tradition are going to be Evangelicals, for whom any rite would be alien. It doesn't matter for an Evangelical if their prayer book has prayers from the BCP, Breviary, or one of the Byzantine/Russian collections- the very act of praying out of a prayer book is going to be a strange experience. It doesn't matter for an Evangelical if the chanting is done in Gregorian, Anglican plain-style, Byzantine, Georgian, Obikhod, etc- the very fact that there is no piano, no tunes past 1700 or so, and no "Worship/music leader/minister" taking over front-and-center from the clergy during pre-specified "this is singing time" is a new experience.

Even many converting to Orthodoxy from a more liturgical Protestant or even Roman Catholic tradition are doing so after the previous tradition having been a stepping stone out of Evangelicalism. When the liturgical tradition itself was a form of adjustment, and the language of the liturgy is not "in the blood" due to having been raised in that tradition, I think any culture shock from the mere liturgy of St John Chrysostom will not be all that great (attending a parish where English is not used, however, will definitely have an affect).

For these people, it makes more sense having a better translation of the Eastern Rite into English. And this is where I think the Anglican rite and it's Orthodox derivatives can help out. I think anyone attempting an English translation of the Eastern Rites should be required to first spend no less than five years using nothing but the Anglican prayers for morning and evening prayers (and for priests/bishops who wish to translate, using the Anglican Missal). More, during this time I think in addition to regular Scriptural and spiritual reading, these translators should be required to read only Shakespeare, Spencer, Milton, Tennyson, Eliot, and a host of other English/American poetry. After five years is spent immersed in this poetic tradition, and at least a little bit of the poetic mindset is absorbed, then and only then should translation be attempted. I think the same (that is, five years immersed in the local poetic tradition) should go for anyone attempting to translate the Byzantine Liturgy into the native tongue.

That said, I think a case could be made for having more Western rite parishes and more support for new Western Rite missions and such. Not for "Westerners" in general, but as an outreach for Westerners coming from more liturgical backgrounds, who might have become attached to the language of Cranmer or the Roman Rite. This is more of a "niche" here in America, and is shrinking into a "niche" in the European countries where atheism is becoming dominant, but a greater emphasis on Western Rite might make more sense in Europe than in the States.
Logged

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

Oh, no: I've succumbed to Hyperdoxy!
dzheremi
No longer posting here.
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,383


« Reply #22 on: November 22, 2013, 06:17:50 PM »

No. I converted from Roman Catholicism (Latin Rite), and didn't give a second thought to liturgical continuity or whatever you'd call it. It was only when I broadened my horizons beyond "You can either be Western or Byzantine" (which is essentially how many RCs see things) that Orthodoxy even began to make sense to me as a thing in the first place. If you were to try to get me to come to a "Western Rite" anything just because I'm not Coptic, I would pelt you into unconsciousness with cans of fava beans and feel nothing for you. Nothing.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2013, 06:18:26 PM by dzheremi » Logged

podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,576


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #23 on: November 22, 2013, 06:18:10 PM »

IMO, the Orthodox Church needs to become more visible in Texas. While you have clusters of parishes in places like Pennsylvania and New Jersey there are hardly any here in Texas.

Step 1: Find more coal in Texas.

Hey there....just across the border here in New York's southern tier, most of the Eastern Christian families are descendants of 'refugees' who had sense enough to have left the mines. My grandfather spent about a year working the mines in Nesquehoning, PA and said the heck with that and moved to Jersey!
Logged
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Jerkodox
Posts: 6,855



« Reply #24 on: November 22, 2013, 06:37:01 PM »

The East/ West divide is exaggerated and is getting more irrelevant every day. Westerners going to Eastern liturgy is just fine. WR is such a tiny niche anyway that most Westerners don't even have an opportunity to visit a WR parish.

I'd go a bit further. There is no "East" and "West". There are various kinds of Eastern and Western countries. I'm not an American so I don't knot whether the divide is getting irrelevant in America or not but it's still relevant around here.
It was looking at a Gothic church in Finland where the cohesion of the Western tradition hit me.

St. John's church in Helsinki?

« Last Edit: November 22, 2013, 06:37:56 PM by Alpo » Logged

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

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #25 on: November 22, 2013, 07:02:38 PM »

The East/ West divide is exaggerated and is getting more irrelevant every day. Westerners going to Eastern liturgy is just fine. WR is such a tiny niche anyway that most Westerners don't even have an opportunity to visit a WR parish.

I'd go a bit further. There is no "East" and "West". There are various kinds of Eastern and Western countries. I'm not an American so I don't knot whether the divide is getting irrelevant in America or not but it's still relevant around here.
It was looking at a Gothic church in Finland where the cohesion of the Western tradition hit me.

St. John's church in Helsinki?


No, Turku Cathedral

There was also a Gothic Crucifix in the National Museum, which reminded me of one I had just seen in Warsaw.
Logged

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

Faith: Jerkodox
Posts: 6,855



« Reply #26 on: November 22, 2013, 07:08:06 PM »

Finnish RC bishop was ordained in that cathedral. It was fairly beautiful service for a Novus Ordo.

yle.fi/elavaarkisto/artikkelit/isa_teemu_sippo_katolisen_kirkon_piispaksi_41662.html#media=41663
« Last Edit: November 22, 2013, 07:08:21 PM by Alpo » Logged

Regnare
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA catechumen
Posts: 325



« Reply #27 on: November 22, 2013, 07:26:13 PM »

My attitude to the WR is that even if, for most converts, it would be no less alien than the Eastern Rites, it would be a shame to let it slip away into history when it could be recovered by the Orthodox Church fairly easily.
Logged

"I give praise to your holy Nature, Lord, for you have made my nature a sanctuary for your hiddenness and a tabernacle for your holy mysteries, a place where you can dwell, and a holy temple for your Divinity." --Venerable St. Isaac of Nineveh
Antonious Nikolas
Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite, Anagnostis
Archon
********
Online Online

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox
Posts: 2,152


Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra


WWW
« Reply #28 on: November 22, 2013, 07:26:48 PM »

For every one American convert searching for a Western rite, I'd wager there are hundreds more who are simply searching for Orthodox worship in the English language.

And it'll stay that way as long as WRO is treated as an exception and concession for those who are unable to man up and become Orthodox.

I understand your frustration, and I certainly don't regard the Western Rite as a "concession for those who are unable to man up and become Orthodox" (one of the most wonderful and learned priests I know is WRO), but I think that in North America at least, what I've mentioned above has more to do with the fact that for most potential converts, rite - if it enters into the equation at all - is tertiary to (a) the Orthodox Faith and (b) the use of English as the primary liturgical language.  Many North Americans come from non-liturgical backgrounds (as FormerReformer has mentioned) and others aren't really conscious of themselves as being "Western" in any specific religious or cultural sense.  Still others, who do come from liturgical backgrounds, would feel offended and patronized if relegated to a specific rite because they were not of Eastern extraction (see dzheremi's unnecessarily violent, fava-bean flinging post!).  What percentage of the Orthodox churches in Finland would you say are Western Rite?  And what liturgy do they use?  Which Western tradition is it derived from?
« Last Edit: November 22, 2013, 07:28:08 PM by Antonious Nikolas » Logged

"According to the Orthodox Faith, the teachings and traditions one upholds and believes in will necessarily influence and inform one's spiritual orientation and the way one worships..." - Harry Boosalis
scamandrius
Crusher of Secrets; House Lannister
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: I'm Greek and proud of it, damn it!
Posts: 6,132



« Reply #29 on: November 22, 2013, 07:30:11 PM »

I would be very interested to know what people here think is the most appropriate rite for Westerners. Should they go to the Byzantine rite used by most of the Orthodox world or should they instead attend the Western liturgies of Western Rite Orthodoxy?

Is there anything wrong with a Westerner going for the Byzantine style?

Some have mentioned the example of how the Russians, Serbs, Albanians and others took Byzantine rite when they converted. Yet this has been attributed to the fact that all of these are eastern peoples and were geographically in the sphere of the Byzantine world. Would it be the same for Western people?

Most converts from a western christian confession go into the Eastern Rite anyway.  What's the point in shuffling them automatically into a WR parish?  Is it to say  to them "You're not Orthodox enough."  That's how many Eastern Rite laity and clergy view the western rite:  as something Orthodox-lite.  What's next?  If your family is of German origin, should you find the nearest parish which has the greatest amount of people of German descent?  Or if you're Italian?  All this needless talk is predicated on two things:  1)  WEstern converts are too stupid to worship in the eastern rite  2)  we need categories for everything (just like those Protestants we're trying not to be like)
Logged

I seek the truth by which no man was ever harmed--Marcus Aurelius

Those who do not read  history are doomed to get their facts from Hollywood--Anonymous

What earthly joy remains untouched by grief?--St. John Damascene
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Jerkodox
Posts: 6,855



« Reply #30 on: November 22, 2013, 07:31:12 PM »

We're Byzantines. No WRO around here. I'm probably one of the few Finns who are aware that WRO exists.
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,652


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #31 on: November 22, 2013, 07:36:56 PM »

I would be very interested to know what people here think is the most appropriate rite for Westerners. Should they go to the Byzantine rite used by most of the Orthodox world or should they instead attend the Western liturgies of Western Rite Orthodoxy?

Is there anything wrong with a Westerner going for the Byzantine style?

Some have mentioned the example of how the Russians, Serbs, Albanians and others took Byzantine rite when they converted. Yet this has been attributed to the fact that all of these are eastern peoples and were geographically in the sphere of the Byzantine world. Would it be the same for Western people?
Why would I have wanted to join the Western Rite over the Byzantine Rite when I converted, anyway? Growing up an Evangelical Protestant as I did, both rites were equally foreign to me.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #32 on: November 22, 2013, 07:39:40 PM »

I would be very interested to know what people here think is the most appropriate rite for Westerners. Should they go to the Byzantine rite used by most of the Orthodox world or should they instead attend the Western liturgies of Western Rite Orthodoxy?

Is there anything wrong with a Westerner going for the Byzantine style?

Some have mentioned the example of how the Russians, Serbs, Albanians and others took Byzantine rite when they converted. Yet this has been attributed to the fact that all of these are eastern peoples and were geographically in the sphere of the Byzantine world. Would it be the same for Western people?

Most converts from a western christian confession go into the Eastern Rite anyway.  What's the point in shuffling them automatically into a WR parish?  Is it to say  to them "You're not Orthodox enough."  That's how many Eastern Rite laity and clergy view the western rite:  as something Orthodox-lite.  What's next?  If your family is of German origin, should you find the nearest parish which has the greatest amount of people of German descent?  Or if you're Italian?  All this needless talk is predicated on two things:  1)  WEstern converts are too stupid to worship in the eastern rite  2)  we need categories for everything (just like those Protestants we're trying not to be like)
I worshiped as a Lutheran in the Middle East, so I know the situation in the opposite direction.

"go into the Eastern Rite anyway."  Few have any choice.

I know that Romanian Pentacostals and Baptists worship separately from their American brethren, because of cultural differences.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2013, 07:41:14 PM by ialmisry » Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antioch
Posts: 2,501



« Reply #33 on: November 22, 2013, 07:42:28 PM »

I would be very interested to know what people here think is the most appropriate rite for Westerners. Should they go to the Byzantine rite used by most of the Orthodox world or should they instead attend the Western liturgies of Western Rite Orthodoxy?

Is there anything wrong with a Westerner going for the Byzantine style?

Some have mentioned the example of how the Russians, Serbs, Albanians and others took Byzantine rite when they converted. Yet this has been attributed to the fact that all of these are eastern peoples and were geographically in the sphere of the Byzantine world. Would it be the same for Western people?
Why would I have wanted to join the Western Rite over the Byzantine Rite when I converted, anyway? Growing up an Evangelical Protestant as I did, both rites were equally foreign to me.
My response as well. And let me add that Western Rite may appear a little "too (Roman) Catholic" for Evangelicals and others who may have that bias.
Logged
James2
Mr.
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: skeptic
Posts: 750



« Reply #34 on: November 22, 2013, 07:43:23 PM »

Within the Antiochian Archdiocese, only whole, stable parishes can become Western Rite.

Not always.  Our parish (St. Gregory the Great in DC) was started from scratch (before I joined).  The pastor-to-be was a former Episcopal priest who had converted to Orthodoxy and gathered together a group of interested Orthodox laity and potential converts in the DC area in association with SS Peter and Paul parish in Bethesda.  They worshiped and met together for some time, and then he was ordained, the converts were chrismated, and the mission got started.  Later we moved out on our own and attained parish status.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #35 on: November 22, 2013, 07:45:27 PM »

I would be very interested to know what people here think is the most appropriate rite for Westerners. Should they go to the Byzantine rite used by most of the Orthodox world or should they instead attend the Western liturgies of Western Rite Orthodoxy?

Is there anything wrong with a Westerner going for the Byzantine style?

Some have mentioned the example of how the Russians, Serbs, Albanians and others took Byzantine rite when they converted. Yet this has been attributed to the fact that all of these are eastern peoples and were geographically in the sphere of the Byzantine world. Would it be the same for Western people?
Why would I have wanted to join the Western Rite over the Byzantine Rite when I converted, anyway? Growing up an Evangelical Protestant as I did, both rites were equally foreign to me.
My response as well. And let me add that Western Rite may appear a little "too (Roman) Catholic" for Evangelicals and others who may have that bias.
which of course confirms the raison d'etre of WRO.
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,576


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #36 on: November 22, 2013, 08:21:35 PM »

I would be very interested to know what people here think is the most appropriate rite for Westerners. Should they go to the Byzantine rite used by most of the Orthodox world or should they instead attend the Western liturgies of Western Rite Orthodoxy?

Is there anything wrong with a Westerner going for the Byzantine style?

Some have mentioned the example of how the Russians, Serbs, Albanians and others took Byzantine rite when they converted. Yet this has been attributed to the fact that all of these are eastern peoples and were geographically in the sphere of the Byzantine world. Would it be the same for Western people?

Most converts from a western christian confession go into the Eastern Rite anyway.  What's the point in shuffling them automatically into a WR parish?  Is it to say  to them "You're not Orthodox enough."  That's how many Eastern Rite laity and clergy view the western rite:  as something Orthodox-lite.  What's next?  If your family is of German origin, should you find the nearest parish which has the greatest amount of people of German descent?  Or if you're Italian?  All this needless talk is predicated on two things:  1)  WEstern converts are too stupid to worship in the eastern rite  2)  we need categories for everything (just like those Protestants we're trying not to be like)
I worshiped as a Lutheran in the Middle East, so I know the situation in the opposite direction.

"go into the Eastern Rite anyway."  Few have any choice.

I know that Romanian Pentacostals and Baptists worship separately from their American brethren, because of cultural differences.

Heck, up in these parts, the Russians and Ukrainians accomplished the impossible: they have a 'Russian Ukrainian Baptist Church' - (kind of like the 'dogs and cats living together' line from Ghostbusters....) I mention them, but I will not link their website.
Logged
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,190


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #37 on: November 22, 2013, 09:06:54 PM »

If the cultural issue is not so big then what is the main argument of those who want Western Rite? Do they say that because the West had its own Orthodox tradition prior to the schism that it is worth reviving and therefore there is no need to import from the outside?

What is the main argument for Western rite?

Those who have gone Western Rite say that they appreciate the Anglican or Roman Rite and do not feel at home in the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom.

However, at my first Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, I immediately felt at home as the Divine Liturgy was very sacred, absolutely beautiful, inspiring, and most importantly, so heavenly. As we stood in attentiveness and awe, we felt lifted up into Heaven itself, and indeed, during the Liturgy, if one has eyes to see, one is surrounded by all the angels, saints, and martyrs, as those witnesses surround us. My husband and I were in tears of joy.

On the contrary, at the Western Rite, where we are told to stand, sit, and kneel at different times, it felt too ritualized, and all these rubrics (when to stand, sit, or kneel) were a serious hindrance to our being attentive to the moment and to our worship of God as some older person clacked their teeth when we did not kneel fast enough.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2013, 09:09:08 PM by Maria » Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
GabrieltheCelt
Hillbilly Extraordinaire
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,988


Chasin' down a Hoodoo...


« Reply #38 on: November 22, 2013, 09:09:48 PM »

The East/ West divide is exaggerated and is getting more irrelevant every day. Westerners going to Eastern liturgy is just fine. WR is such a tiny niche anyway that most Westerners don't even have an opportunity to visit a WR parish.

 Or care about a WR parish.
Logged

"The Scots-Irish; Brewed in Scotland, bottled in Ireland, uncorked in America."  ~Scots-Irish saying
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,190


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #39 on: November 22, 2013, 09:23:38 PM »

The East/ West divide is exaggerated and is getting more irrelevant every day. Westerners going to Eastern liturgy is just fine. WR is such a tiny niche anyway that most Westerners don't even have an opportunity to visit a WR parish.

 Or care about a WR parish.

When I visited a Western Rite parish, the priest told us that the WR used to be viewed as a temporary phase of becoming Orthodox.  Once a catechumen was instructed and received into Orthodoxy, they were expected to "grow up" and gradually work their way into the Eastern Orthodox parishes, and it used to be that the Antiochians would accept WR parishes into the ER parishes.

Now, however, once a new group of converts have expressed an interest in starting a WR parish, they are expected to commit to the WR and stay there. When that happens, seasoned WR parishioners would move or would gradually find their way into an ER parish. What ultimately happens, is that there is a continual flow of people from the WR into the ER. However, with the establishment of the Oblates of St. Benedict, more people have found a home in WR Orthodoxy.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2013, 09:25:10 PM by Maria » Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #40 on: November 22, 2013, 09:33:51 PM »

The East/ West divide is exaggerated and is getting more irrelevant every day. Westerners going to Eastern liturgy is just fine. WR is such a tiny niche anyway that most Westerners don't even have an opportunity to visit a WR parish.

 Or care about a WR parish.

When I visited a Western Rite parish, the priest told us that the WR used to be viewed as a temporary phase of becoming Orthodox.  Once a catechumen was instructed and received into Orthodoxy, they were expected to "grow up" and gradually work their way into the Eastern Orthodox parishes, and it used to be that the Antiochians would accept WR parishes into the ER parishes.

Now, however, once a new group of converts have expressed an interest in starting a WR parish, they are expected to commit to the WR and stay there. When that happens, seasoned WR parishioners would move or would gradually find their way into an ER parish. What ultimately happens, is that there is a continual flow of people from the WR into the ER. However, with the establishment of the Oblates of St. Benedict, more people have found a home in WR Orthodoxy.
If flows in the opposite direction as well. I've know converts to ER and ended up WRO, and even cradle ER who became WRO.
Logged

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

Posts: 17,773


The Pope Emeritus reading OCNet


WWW
« Reply #41 on: November 22, 2013, 09:50:16 PM »

St. John's church in Helsinki?


No, Turku Cathedral

There was also a Gothic Crucifix in the National Museum, which reminded me of one I had just seen in Warsaw.

Beautiful churches, both of them!
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


Mor Ephrem > Justin Kissel
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,019


"My god is greater."


« Reply #42 on: November 22, 2013, 11:41:04 PM »

The East/ West divide is exaggerated and is getting more irrelevant every day. Westerners going to Eastern liturgy is just fine.


Melkites

iconostasis


They say a picture is worth a thousand words, but in this case, just five for you: "I have nothing to say."
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
Cognomen
Site Supporter
OC.net guru
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: Phyletism Rules, OK
Posts: 1,968


Ungrateful Biped


« Reply #43 on: November 23, 2013, 12:04:49 AM »

The general tone of the responses in this thread reminds me not to expect any large reception from other traditions in the near future.

I also think that the OP's question is a better one than some want to give it credit for.  Unless, of course, we wish to remain a largely ethnic or tiny niche church within Western Christianity. 

I think the question relates to a much broader view than the several journey, path, etc. stories mentioned in this thread. There are significant portions of the Anglican Communion and Roman Catholicism--just to name two, and two which are far far larger than Western Orthodoxy--that are being alienated from their respective churches.  The issue of which rite would be most appropriate for guiding and receiving these people into the Church shouldn't be dismissed so easily.

The notion that there is no "East v West" issue seems to be an incorrect and reactionary response to the question too. Yes, both are Orthodox, and yes the "Eastern mind" stuff  is pretty overplayed, exaggerated, or downright bogus.  That said, I've been to Byzantine and Western Rite parishes, and there can be a big difference between them.  Many of the practices that Sleeper describes are simply not done in Byzantine Rite parishes, and vice versa.  So sorry, when asking about "East v West" in the context of rites, there is a difference.  And these differences may affect the Church's appeal to certain populations.

Sure the individual's perspective matters, but I think the OP was thinking broader than the considerations of a smattering of oddball converts that wind up on this forum (I include myself in that number).

My personal, poorly researched and completely unqualified opinion--more of a gut feeling than anything--is that an Anglo-Catholic style Western Rite (if that can further develop and iron out some of its... issues) may be better for large-scale appeal in the broader "West," but that the Byzantine Rite is obviously the most widespread and developed.  It will thereby be the most dominant, prevalent, and able option, while also appealing to many interested in its practices or those disaffected with Western Christianity.  It's not crucial--a rite is a rite--but people (maybe not us) should be thinking about this question if we are to actually bring people to the faith.  I'm still not sure to what extent we're supposed to, but that's another topic.
Logged

North American Eastern Orthodox Parish Council Delegate for the Canonization of Saints Twin Towers and Pentagon, as well as the Propagation of the Doctrine of the Assumption of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 (NAEOPCDCSTTPPDAMAFM®).
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,265

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #44 on: November 23, 2013, 12:16:47 AM »

Schema-monk Fr. Gabriel Bunge's thoughts on conversion to Orthodoxy and the Western tradition are quite relevant and poignant.

Interviewer: "Of those who are wavering—do you think they could go in the direction of Orthodoxy, or might they instead give up everything?"

Fr. Gabriel: "The only way I see it happening is if they turn to their own Orthodoxy, because unless God works an unprecedented miracle that turns everyone to Byzantine Orthodoxy, there is a whole culture at work to prevent it. It is not just a matter of texts, or formulas. But they must turn back to their own Orthodoxy, their own traditions. For all these years, when I wrote my little books, my aim was this: as a monk, to help people have a spiritual life, to rediscover, reintegrate their own spiritual heritage, which is of course the same as ours; because we have the same roots."


Source: http://www.pravoslavie.ru/english/65138.htm
Logged
Studying_Orthodoxy
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 124


« Reply #45 on: November 23, 2013, 09:04:39 AM »



Melkites

iconostasis


Roman style is foreign to the Chinese.

By posting these images are you saying that eastern peoples are also worshiping at Western churches?
« Last Edit: November 23, 2013, 09:05:58 AM by Studying_Orthodoxy » Logged
Shlomlokh
主哀れめよ!
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Bulgarian
Posts: 1,267



« Reply #46 on: November 23, 2013, 09:35:09 AM »

I grew up in a "western background" (hate the "east/west" dichotomy) and had no problem at all integrating into my Bulgarian parish. Being subject to wacky post Vatican II liturgics made the Constantinopolitan tradition more than a breath of fresh air. I have nothing against WR Orthodoxy. The Spirit moves everyone where He wills.

In Christ,
Andrew
Logged

"I will pour out my prayer unto the Lord, and to Him will I proclaim my grief; for with evils my soul is filled, and my life unto hades hath drawn nigh, and like Jonah I will pray: From corruption raise me up, O God." -Ode VI, Irmos of the Supplicatory Canon to the Theotokos
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #47 on: November 23, 2013, 10:41:32 AM »

The East/ West divide is exaggerated and is getting more irrelevant every day. Westerners going to Eastern liturgy is just fine.
They say a picture is worth a thousand words, but in this case, just five for you: "I have nothing to say."
Much better than your original 21.
« Last Edit: November 23, 2013, 10:41:59 AM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #48 on: November 23, 2013, 10:58:38 AM »

Roman style is foreign to the Chinese.
Exactly.
By posting these images are you saying that eastern peoples are also worshiping at Western churches?

Yes, and it is obvious.  As opposed to, for instance:
« Last Edit: November 23, 2013, 11:01:02 AM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #49 on: November 23, 2013, 11:18:27 AM »

To follow up^:
Quote
Field Museum’s Chinese Scroll of Madonna and Child Shows Christianity’s Spread
A Chinese watercolor of the Madonna and Child has recently been restored, and is thought to be one of the earliest pieces of evidence for Christianity’s spread in China. From the Chicago Tribune:"Though the delicate watercolor of a Madonna and Child is among oldest visual evidences of Christianity in the Far East, the museum had prosaically dubbed it “catalog number 116027.” For decades, it sat in a dimly lit case, cracked and soiled. The details were hard to discern."...In the scroll's lower left corner are two Chinese characters representing the name of a famed artist, Tang Yin, who lived from about 1470 to 1523. Because that was before the Jesuit period, Laufer decided the signature was a forgery, subsequently added to protect the painting's owners during a period when Christianity was suppressed in China...First, scholars noticed a striking similarity between the scroll and a famous painting, "Salus Populi Romani," in a church in Rome. It seemed likely that missionaries had carried a copy of the earlier work to China, where it, in turn, was copied by the scroll's artist.

Arnold said that prototype arrived long before Laufer's date for the scroll. She explained that since his time, scholars have become more aware that the Jesuits weren't the first to missionize the East.

The scroll, she added, shows that cultural transformation: Guanyin has morphed into the Virgin, and Jesus has been transformed into a Chinese infant. Arnold thinks Laufer got it wrong: the signature on the scroll truly is that of a 15th-century artist. To her mind, it shows that China had incorporated Christian ideas by that period.
http://chinadigitaltimes.net/2008/01/field-museums-chinese-scroll-of-madonna-and-child-shows-christianitys-spread-ron-grossman/
http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2008/Jan/19/il/hawaii801190320.html
Logged

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

Posts: 17,773


The Pope Emeritus reading OCNet


WWW
« Reply #50 on: November 23, 2013, 11:51:19 AM »



That is awesome! 
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


Mor Ephrem > Justin Kissel
Studying_Orthodoxy
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 124


« Reply #51 on: November 23, 2013, 12:47:47 PM »

Yes, and it is obvious.  As opposed to, for instance:

So then you are saying that while Roman style looks foreign to the Chinese Byzantine fits them better and looks less distant?

By contrast you would certainly think that Roman style suits Westerners and that Byzantine style will not suit them?

I wonder why the Roman form looks unfitting for the Chinese whereas the Byzantine one does. Yet, at the same time there was nothing about the Eastern Slavs which would make it suit them either. They could easily have gone down the Catholic path. In fact Poland could have been Orthodox yet today it is Catholic.

It is is interesting. Do you believe that the world is inherently divided into eastern and western zones, so that some people will naturally incline one way, while others will incline in another direction? I thought it was all geographic.
« Last Edit: November 23, 2013, 12:54:22 PM by Studying_Orthodoxy » Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #52 on: November 23, 2013, 04:57:57 PM »

Yes, and it is obvious.  As opposed to, for instance
So then you are saying that while Roman style looks foreign to the Chinese Byzantine fits them better and looks less distant?
You mean the Constantinopolitan? (given the Vatican world view, I don't think the Byzantines ever reached China).  I wasn't saying that then, but I'll say it now, because it is true.


By contrast you would certainly think that Roman style suits Westerners and that Byzantine style will not suit them?
Who you calling Westerners?  The Constantinopolitan style suits the Russians, Romanians, Serbs, Bulgarians and Greeks, for instance, just fine.

I wonder why the Roman form looks unfitting for the Chinese whereas the Byzantine one does.
That's an interesting historical question.  It might be that Greece and Constantinople laid the foundations of their world civilization and continued it on, whereas Latin Rome worked/s to get from under the shadow of its civilizers.  Russia and Ukraine might have fallen prey to Westernization through a related cause.

Yet, at the same time there was nothing about the Eastern Slavs which would make it suit them either. They could easily have gone down the Catholic path. In fact Poland could have been Orthodox yet today it is Catholic.
Orthodox is Catholic.  And Poland has its own Orthodox Church


It is is interesting. Do you believe that the world is inherently divided into eastern and western zones, so that some people will naturally incline one way, while others will incline in another direction?

No, it just happens that way.

I thought it was all geographic.
No, it's cultural.
« Last Edit: November 23, 2013, 05:02:32 PM by ialmisry » Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Polish Autocephalous Orthodox Church
Posts: 80



« Reply #53 on: November 23, 2013, 05:14:28 PM »

Yet, at the same time there was nothing about the Eastern Slavs which would make it suit them either. They could easily have gone down the Catholic path. In fact Poland could have been Orthodox yet today it is Catholic.
Orthodox is Catholic.  And Poland has its own Orthodox Church
Almost completely populated by people of non-Polish descent.
Logged
Studying_Orthodoxy
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 124


« Reply #54 on: November 23, 2013, 06:25:00 PM »

Who you calling Westerners?  The Constantinopolitan style suits the Russians, Romanians, Serbs, Bulgarians and Greeks, for instance, just fine.

I never called those peoples Westerners. I was asking why if the Byzantine style is fine for the Chinese is it also not fine for the Germans, French, Spanish and English?

No, it's cultural.

In that case why is the West such a small section whereas the east is given the whole Asian continent with the various peoples there, many of which have nothing to do with each other. What separates the West from the east?

Also how is Roman or Latin culture more fitting for Germanics than Greek?
« Last Edit: November 23, 2013, 06:27:34 PM by Studying_Orthodoxy » Logged
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #55 on: November 23, 2013, 06:30:01 PM »

What separates the West from the east?

Elbe
or Bug
or Ural

I also know similar joke but I won't write it here since it's kinda racist.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #56 on: November 24, 2013, 12:17:38 AM »

Yet, at the same time there was nothing about the Eastern Slavs which would make it suit them either. They could easily have gone down the Catholic path. In fact Poland could have been Orthodox yet today it is Catholic.
Orthodox is Catholic.  And Poland has its own Orthodox Church
Almost completely populated by people of non-Polish descent.
Not according to the numbers of the last census.  Not to mention the interwar census.
Language                 Total            Roman Catholics Greek Catholics  Eastern Orthodox Evangelical(Luthern) Other Christian Jewish   Other
Polish                      21,993,000   20,333,000         487,000            497,000              219,000                   55,000            372,000 30,000
Ukrainian/Belarusian  6,278,000        107,000      2,845,000         3,239,000                  9,000                   73,000                1,000  4,000
Lithuanian                     83,000          83,000             -                      -                         -                            -                       -          -
Czech                           38,000            8,000             -                    22,000                 6,000                      1,000                 -          -
German                       741,000       118,000              -                                           599,000                     16,000               7,000    1,000
Yiddish                      2,732,000          -                     -                      -                        -                             -                2,731,000   1,000
Other                            50,000        20,000              4,000               4,000                 2,000                                              3,000  17,000
Total                      31,915,000  20,670,000       3,336,000         3,762,000              835,000                   145,000         3,114,000 53,000
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_Poland

Odd, given the bond between the original Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Rus' that no Orthodox or GC Lithuanians are recorded, but almost half a million Poles each are (the numbers were actually higher-the 1931 is admitted to have counted down minorities of all sorts.  Which, of course is why the Second Polish Republic ended up like the First Polish Republic-in oblivion).
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #57 on: November 24, 2013, 12:32:24 AM »

Who you calling Westerners?  The Constantinopolitan style suits the Russians, Romanians, Serbs, Bulgarians and Greeks, for instance, just fine.

I never called those peoples Westerners. I was asking why if the Byzantine style is fine for the Chinese is it also not fine for the Germans, French, Spanish and English?
Constantinopolitan? Same reason Chinoiserie isn't. (Byzantine exists only in the West and among the Westernized).

No, it's cultural.
In that case why is the West such a small section whereas the east is given the whole Asian continent with the various peoples there, many of which have nothing to do with each other. What separates the West from the east?

You're the one saying the Russians aren't Western.  They went so far East they reached the Far West.

Also how is Roman or Latin culture more fitting for Germanics than Greek?
The culture of East Rome was fine for the Goths in the Balkans and Crimea.  The West Germans integrated themselves into Latin Rome.
« Last Edit: November 24, 2013, 12:40:30 AM by ialmisry » Logged

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

Posts: 124


« Reply #58 on: November 24, 2013, 06:50:28 AM »

Constantinopolitan? Same reason Chinoiserie isn't. (Byzantine exists only in the West and among the Westernized).

Chinoiserie is not acceptable because it comes from China and that is thousands of miles away from Europe. It is truly distant and foreign. Constantinople is much closer.

You're the one saying the Russians aren't Western.  They went so far East they reached the Far West.

They did not belong to Latin civilisation so how can they be considered Western?

So do you believe the converts from Western backgrounds should go mostly to Western rite?
« Last Edit: November 24, 2013, 07:21:09 AM by Studying_Orthodoxy » Logged
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,019


"My god is greater."


« Reply #59 on: November 24, 2013, 08:46:12 AM »

Roman style is foreign to the Chinese.
Exactly.
By posting these images are you saying that eastern peoples are also worshiping at Western churches?

Yes, and it is obvious.  As opposed to, for instance:


They are both quite obvious to someone with long experience in Chinese culture.
The Chinese in the pictures you show look equally in-place/ out-of-place in Western and Eastern liturgies. The European West-East divide is irrelevant to Chinese culture.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
Luka
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Polish Autocephalous Orthodox Church
Posts: 80



« Reply #60 on: November 24, 2013, 09:12:18 AM »

Yet, at the same time there was nothing about the Eastern Slavs which would make it suit them either. They could easily have gone down the Catholic path. In fact Poland could have been Orthodox yet today it is Catholic.
Orthodox is Catholic.  And Poland has its own Orthodox Church
Almost completely populated by people of non-Polish descent.
Not according to the numbers of the last census.  Not to mention the interwar census.
Language                 Total            Roman Catholics Greek Catholics  Eastern Orthodox Evangelical(Luthern) Other Christian Jewish   Other
Polish                      21,993,000   20,333,000         487,000            497,000              219,000                   55,000            372,000 30,000
Ukrainian/Belarusian  6,278,000        107,000      2,845,000         3,239,000                  9,000                   73,000                1,000  4,000
Lithuanian                     83,000          83,000             -                      -                         -                            -                       -          -
Czech                           38,000            8,000             -                    22,000                 6,000                      1,000                 -          -
German                       741,000       118,000              -                                           599,000                     16,000               7,000    1,000
Yiddish                      2,732,000          -                     -                      -                        -                             -                2,731,000   1,000
Other                            50,000        20,000              4,000               4,000                 2,000                                              3,000  17,000
Total                      31,915,000  20,670,000       3,336,000         3,762,000              835,000                   145,000         3,114,000 53,000
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_Poland

Odd, given the bond between the original Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Rus' that no Orthodox or GC Lithuanians are recorded, but almost half a million Poles each are (the numbers were actually higher-the 1931 is admitted to have counted down minorities of all sorts.  Which, of course is why the Second Polish Republic ended up like the First Polish Republic-in oblivion).
Interesting, they must be then hiding somewhere. But wait, this table speaks only of the language, not of a nationality or an ethnicity. I guess this clarifies something.
Logged
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #61 on: November 24, 2013, 11:42:41 AM »

Interesting, they must be then hiding somewhere. But wait, this table speaks only of the language, not of a nationality or an ethnicity. I guess this clarifies something.

If isa's disagree with reality, worse for reality.
« Last Edit: November 24, 2013, 11:43:01 AM by Michał Kalina » Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
WPM
Revolutionary Writer
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,549



« Reply #62 on: November 24, 2013, 01:09:54 PM »

European Hinterland much?...
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #63 on: November 24, 2013, 03:55:10 PM »

Yet, at the same time there was nothing about the Eastern Slavs which would make it suit them either. They could easily have gone down the Catholic path. In fact Poland could have been Orthodox yet today it is Catholic.
Orthodox is Catholic.  And Poland has its own Orthodox Church
Almost completely populated by people of non-Polish descent.
Not according to the numbers of the last census.  Not to mention the interwar census.
Language                 Total            Roman Catholics Greek Catholics  Eastern Orthodox Evangelical(Luthern) Other Christian Jewish   Other
Polish                      21,993,000   20,333,000         487,000            497,000              219,000                   55,000            372,000 30,000
Ukrainian/Belarusian  6,278,000        107,000      2,845,000         3,239,000                  9,000                   73,000                1,000  4,000
Lithuanian                     83,000          83,000             -                      -                         -                            -                       -          -
Czech                           38,000            8,000             -                    22,000                 6,000                      1,000                 -          -
German                       741,000       118,000              -                                           599,000                     16,000               7,000    1,000
Yiddish                      2,732,000          -                     -                      -                        -                             -                2,731,000   1,000
Other                            50,000        20,000              4,000               4,000                 2,000                                              3,000  17,000
Total                      31,915,000  20,670,000       3,336,000         3,762,000              835,000                   145,000         3,114,000 53,000
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_Poland

Odd, given the bond between the original Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Rus' that no Orthodox or GC Lithuanians are recorded, but almost half a million Poles each are (the numbers were actually higher-the 1931 is admitted to have counted down minorities of all sorts.  Which, of course is why the Second Polish Republic ended up like the First Polish Republic-in oblivion).
Interesting, they must be then hiding somewhere. But wait, this table speaks only of the language, not of a nationality or an ethnicity. I guess this clarifies something.
"this table speaks only of the language, not of a nationality or an ethnicity"
LOL.  You deny any connection?

As for hiding, since the census was taken over 80 years ago, more than the life expectancy of the lands covered, and after a World War tramping back and forth through, I should think that most are hiding in a grave somewhere (I won't speculate where in the other world).

Somewhere I think posted the recent figures.  I'll look around.
Logged

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

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #64 on: November 24, 2013, 04:04:49 PM »

As for hiding, since the census was taken over 80 years ago, more than the life expectancy of the lands covered, and after a World War tramping back and forth through, I should think that most are hiding in a grave somewhere (I won't speculate where in the other world).

This census is a falsified piece of crap.

Quote
Somewhere I think posted the recent figures.  I'll look around.

Luka did not talk about nationality or language. He talked about descent.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #65 on: November 24, 2013, 04:14:07 PM »

Constantinopolitan? Same reason Chinoiserie isn't. (Byzantine exists only in the West and among the Westernized).

Chinoiserie is not acceptable because it comes from China and that is thousands of miles away from Europe.
Chinoiserie comes from Europe.  I don't know of any in China (though it might be, especially in Hong Kong, Peking and maybe Shanghai).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinoiserie#History

It is truly distant and foreign. Constantinople is much closer.
"Byzantine" doesn't come from Constantinople.  It comes from Franfort and Paris.

You're the one saying the Russians aren't Western.  They went so far East they reached the Far West.

They did not belong to Latin civilisation so how can they be considered Western?
I don't equate Latin with West.  For one thing, the Latin sources of Western civilization claim Greeks origins in the East.
So do you believe the converts from Western backgrounds should go mostly to Western rite?
I see no reason why they have to go to Eastern rite.
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Polish Autocephalous Orthodox Church
Posts: 80



« Reply #66 on: November 24, 2013, 04:43:19 PM »

Yet, at the same time there was nothing about the Eastern Slavs which would make it suit them either. They could easily have gone down the Catholic path. In fact Poland could have been Orthodox yet today it is Catholic.
Orthodox is Catholic.  And Poland has its own Orthodox Church
Almost completely populated by people of non-Polish descent.
Not according to the numbers of the last census.  Not to mention the interwar census.
Language                 Total            Roman Catholics Greek Catholics  Eastern Orthodox Evangelical(Luthern) Other Christian Jewish   Other
Polish                      21,993,000   20,333,000         487,000            497,000              219,000                   55,000            372,000 30,000
Ukrainian/Belarusian  6,278,000        107,000      2,845,000         3,239,000                  9,000                   73,000                1,000  4,000
Lithuanian                     83,000          83,000             -                      -                         -                            -                       -          -
Czech                           38,000            8,000             -                    22,000                 6,000                      1,000                 -          -
German                       741,000       118,000              -                                           599,000                     16,000               7,000    1,000
Yiddish                      2,732,000          -                     -                      -                        -                             -                2,731,000   1,000
Other                            50,000        20,000              4,000               4,000                 2,000                                              3,000  17,000
Total                      31,915,000  20,670,000       3,336,000         3,762,000              835,000                   145,000         3,114,000 53,000
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_Poland

Odd, given the bond between the original Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Rus' that no Orthodox or GC Lithuanians are recorded, but almost half a million Poles each are (the numbers were actually higher-the 1931 is admitted to have counted down minorities of all sorts.  Which, of course is why the Second Polish Republic ended up like the First Polish Republic-in oblivion).
Interesting, they must be then hiding somewhere. But wait, this table speaks only of the language, not of a nationality or an ethnicity. I guess this clarifies something.
"this table speaks only of the language, not of a nationality or an ethnicity"
LOL.  You deny any connection?

As for hiding, since the census was taken over 80 years ago, more than the life expectancy of the lands covered, and after a World War tramping back and forth through, I should think that most are hiding in a grave somewhere (I won't speculate where in the other world).

Somewhere I think posted the recent figures.  I'll look around.
Look, you don't need to give me figures that I am already acquainted with. Of course there is some connection between language and ethnicity/nationality/descent. But in Poland this connection means that people of foreign descent use Polish langauge since it's the only official language (let's forget Kashubian for now). That's all. Polish Orthodox Church is hardly Polish, the faithful speak Polish, yeah, but when someone speaks of his Polish Orthodox identity (and the person speaking is not a convert) it starts a controversy because it is assumed that as an Orthodox believer, he has non-Polish ancestors (whose heritage he therefore betrays). Period.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #67 on: November 24, 2013, 04:45:40 PM »

As for hiding, since the census was taken over 80 years ago, more than the life expectancy of the lands covered, and after a World War tramping back and forth through, I should think that most are hiding in a grave somewhere (I won't speculate where in the other world).

This census is a falsified piece of crap.
I think we agreed about that.

But since that is so, with its aim of projecting a monolithic Polish nation of the Vatican's Latin rite, every deviation is from that is an admission a reality it is hiding. "Roman Catholic" Ukrainians and "Greek Catholic" Ukrainians and Lutheran Ukrainians are OK.  But Orthodox Poles, no matter how small the number, present an existential problem to that monolithic vision-even the existence of Lutheran Poles can be swallowed before that.

Somewhere I think posted the recent figures.  I'll look around.
Luka did not talk about nationality or language. He talked about descent.
Yeah, I don't deal with fairy tales of descent being based on DNA in such matters (in the case of Poland, I suspect I can claim as much, but why should I get priority over you, someone a Polish citizen but not a Pole?).  The szlachta would be very hard pressed to show exclusive descent from Lech, and I'm not sure they ever made that claim.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #68 on: November 24, 2013, 04:50:09 PM »

Yet, at the same time there was nothing about the Eastern Slavs which would make it suit them either. They could easily have gone down the Catholic path. In fact Poland could have been Orthodox yet today it is Catholic.
Orthodox is Catholic.  And Poland has its own Orthodox Church
Almost completely populated by people of non-Polish descent.
Not according to the numbers of the last census.  Not to mention the interwar census.
Language                 Total            Roman Catholics Greek Catholics  Eastern Orthodox Evangelical(Luthern) Other Christian Jewish   Other
Polish                      21,993,000   20,333,000         487,000            497,000              219,000                   55,000            372,000 30,000
Ukrainian/Belarusian  6,278,000        107,000      2,845,000         3,239,000                  9,000                   73,000                1,000  4,000
Lithuanian                     83,000          83,000             -                      -                         -                            -                       -          -
Czech                           38,000            8,000             -                    22,000                 6,000                      1,000                 -          -
German                       741,000       118,000              -                                           599,000                     16,000               7,000    1,000
Yiddish                      2,732,000          -                     -                      -                        -                             -                2,731,000   1,000
Other                            50,000        20,000              4,000               4,000                 2,000                                              3,000  17,000
Total                      31,915,000  20,670,000       3,336,000         3,762,000              835,000                   145,000         3,114,000 53,000
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_Poland

Odd, given the bond between the original Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Rus' that no Orthodox or GC Lithuanians are recorded, but almost half a million Poles each are (the numbers were actually higher-the 1931 is admitted to have counted down minorities of all sorts.  Which, of course is why the Second Polish Republic ended up like the First Polish Republic-in oblivion).
Interesting, they must be then hiding somewhere. But wait, this table speaks only of the language, not of a nationality or an ethnicity. I guess this clarifies something.
"this table speaks only of the language, not of a nationality or an ethnicity"
LOL.  You deny any connection?

As for hiding, since the census was taken over 80 years ago, more than the life expectancy of the lands covered, and after a World War tramping back and forth through, I should think that most are hiding in a grave somewhere (I won't speculate where in the other world).

Somewhere I think posted the recent figures.  I'll look around.
Look, you don't need to give me figures that I am already acquainted with. Of course there is some connection between language and ethnicity/nationality/descent. But in Poland this connection means that people of foreign descent use Polish langauge since it's the only official language (let's forget Kashubian for now). That's all. Polish Orthodox Church is hardly Polish, the faithful speak Polish, yeah, but when someone speaks of his Polish Orthodox identity (and the person speaking is not a convert) it starts a controversy because it is assumed that as an Orthodox believer, he has non-Polish ancestors (whose heritage he therefore betrays). Period.
If having non-Polish ancestors disqualified one as a Pole, I dare say few if any Poles would be left.  Period.

And, btw, in that case, give the Ziemia Chełmska back to its rightful owners.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #69 on: November 24, 2013, 05:00:46 PM »

They are both quite obvious to someone with long experience in Chinese culture.
The Chinese in the pictures you show look equally in-place/ out-of-place in Western and Eastern liturgies. The European West-East divide is irrelevant to Chinese culture.
You claimed that West-East divide was irrelevant period.  Have you forgotten?
The East/ West divide is exaggerated and is getting more irrelevant every day. Westerners going to Eastern liturgy is just fine. WR is such a tiny niche anyway that most Westerners don't even have an opportunity to visit a WR parish.

Btw, I never claimed the in-place/out-of-place was essence over degree.
« Last Edit: November 24, 2013, 05:02:50 PM by ialmisry » Logged

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

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #70 on: November 24, 2013, 05:02:52 PM »

As for hiding, since the census was taken over 80 years ago, more than the life expectancy of the lands covered, and after a World War tramping back and forth through, I should think that most are hiding in a grave somewhere (I won't speculate where in the other world).

This census is a falsified piece of crap.
I think we agreed about that.

Then why do you keep quoting it?
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #71 on: November 24, 2013, 05:06:28 PM »

As for hiding, since the census was taken over 80 years ago, more than the life expectancy of the lands covered, and after a World War tramping back and forth through, I should think that most are hiding in a grave somewhere (I won't speculate where in the other world).

This census is a falsified piece of crap.
I think we agreed about that.
Then why do you keep quoting it?
because it testifies in spite of itself to the existence of the Orthodox Poles.
« Last Edit: November 24, 2013, 05:06:49 PM by ialmisry » Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Polish Autocephalous Orthodox Church
Posts: 80



« Reply #72 on: November 24, 2013, 05:07:22 PM »

If having non-Polish ancestors disqualified one as a Pole, I dare say few if any Poles would be left.  Period.
As in many nations. I agree completely. Still for some Orthodox people in Poland if someone has non-Polish descent he will stay Byelarussian, Ukrainian etc. for the ages of ages. It's not the problem with the Polish acceptance of the existence of the Polish Orthodox faithful, but with the emphasis on connection between the Orthodox faith and non-Polish descent among the Orthodox themselves. It's not that the Poles believe there exist only Poles that are Catholic (that's now rather outdated and an object of ridicule). It's that the Orthodox sometimes believe that the only Poles that exist are the Catholic Poles. If some Orthodox declares himself to be a Pole, it means he has some problem with his faith and surely he's on his way to Rome. Roll Eyes
Quote
And, btw, in that case, give the Ziemia Chełmska back to its rightful owners.
And Israel to Canaanites Tongue
« Last Edit: November 24, 2013, 05:08:47 PM by Luka » Logged
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #73 on: November 24, 2013, 05:27:57 PM »

If some Orthodox declares himself to be a Pole, it means he has some problem with his faith and surely he's on his way to Rome. Roll Eyes

It means he is ashamed of his roots. That's all.
« Last Edit: November 24, 2013, 05:28:16 PM by Michał Kalina » Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Christopher McAvoy
Never forget the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate & all persecuted christians!
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: orthodóxis, atque cathólice et apostólice fídei
Jurisdiction: Latin Catholic from the 12th c.
Posts: 443



WWW
« Reply #74 on: November 24, 2013, 05:34:58 PM »

For every one American convert searching for a Western rite, I'd wager there are hundreds more who are simply searching for Orthodox worship in the English language.

And it'll stay that way as long as WRO is treated as an exception and concession for those who are unable to man up and become Orthodox.

I agree with Alpo. I have become disillusioned with the Western rite concept within the Orthodox Church. Though I will never be against it outright or against those who are able to be within it and make the most of a tough situation. (tough as I see it.)
I do not think the importance of it it is taken seriously. As I always say, St. patrick's day can never be celebrated the same way in the byzantine rite, something is always missing. Yes, this is not necessary for our salvation, sure sure...

I will concede that if you're an agnostic, perhaps rite is less relevant, but not irrelevant.

We're going to have a rite no matter what, that I know. The byzantine rite reflects a particular cultural experience, the roman latin rite reflects another particular different cultural experience. The respect shown toward the rite reflects the respect shown to the culture it came from.

At the heart of it is this - to the extent that the roman rite is not taken seriously, I as an individual whose ancestors lived and were shaped into fine people through that rite (and spoke latin based language), do not feel respected. At the same time I would like to apologize for the westerners who showed likewise disinterest toward those whose tradition was alexandrian, byzantine, armenian rite, etc. Neither form of disinterest and or "prejudice" (I dont mean anything too intense by the word) is beneficial to society.

However, I also think that when there is a single Orthodox jurisdiction and primate for the entire United States of America - that will do much to alleviate some of the current issues, especially where practices between antioch and ROCOR are not aligned, and they do need to align. The Western rite needs to be more uniform within the Orthodox Church, the more it is united, the more gain and trust can be found within it. Sadly, when many of my friends or aquaitances refuse to take the western rite of the Orthodox Church very seriously it is hard for me to continue being the exception.

Frankly a united Orthodox Church in the USA is a necessity to gain trust of potential converts. I dont want that unity to come at the expense of more "liberalism" amongst prelates or unnecessary angst, but I am convinced that it is necessary for the continued growth of the Orthodox Church in North America, despite whatever challenges it presents.

Until there is a single jurisdiction for the Orthodox Church in North America - I do not feel that the Orthodox Church is competent to manage a Western rite vicariate very effectively. A minority within a minority of bishops who dont fully understand it..is asking for heartbreak.
« Last Edit: November 24, 2013, 05:57:15 PM by Christopher McAvoy » Logged

"and for all who are Orthodox, and who hold the Catholic and Apostolic Faith, remember, O Lord, thy servants" - yet the post-conciliar RC hierarchy is tolerant of everyone and everything... except Catholic Tradition, for modernists are as salt with no taste, to be “thrown out and trampled under foot
Christopher McAvoy
Never forget the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate & all persecuted christians!
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: orthodóxis, atque cathólice et apostólice fídei
Jurisdiction: Latin Catholic from the 12th c.
Posts: 443



WWW
« Reply #75 on: November 24, 2013, 05:52:41 PM »

I love the picture of the little baby kissing the image of the chinese Orthodox Martyrs.

I will always be an advocate more for the Eastern Churches in Eastern Asia, but yes it is true.

If I were not of western european cultural background or middle eastern etc, preference toward a particular rite would be less.

I am upfront that I do have a bias for the the roman rite, it's like a family member to me, I can't send it far away never to be seen against very easily.

Fr. Gabriel Bunge's comments posted by sleeper are very meaningful.

Yeah, no ones ever going to convince me that Rome is a hopeless mess, even though it is in a state of crisis.
I think many westerners including myself, if they can divorce themselves from "the True Church:" etc....are going to have to stick with Rome/SSPX etc...if they need to live in a happy roman liturgy land, the Orthodox Church is not a very feasible option in my opinion. If you can't handle the byzantine liturgy as the norm, being Orthodox is really hard - and vice versa toward the "eastern catholics" although there are still many many more of their churches in the USA than western rite Orthodox ones. Though I do sympathise with the fact that the average byzantine liturgy is far more healthy than the average "new mass" of vatican II. That is a simple truth.
« Last Edit: November 24, 2013, 06:03:24 PM by Christopher McAvoy » Logged

"and for all who are Orthodox, and who hold the Catholic and Apostolic Faith, remember, O Lord, thy servants" - yet the post-conciliar RC hierarchy is tolerant of everyone and everything... except Catholic Tradition, for modernists are as salt with no taste, to be “thrown out and trampled under foot
Yurysprudentsiya
Section Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA, although in my heart I will always remain a loving son of the UOC-USA
Posts: 2,061


God, the Great, the Only, Keep for Us Our Ukraine!


« Reply #76 on: November 24, 2013, 05:58:21 PM »

Yet, at the same time there was nothing about the Eastern Slavs which would make it suit them either. They could easily have gone down the Catholic path. In fact Poland could have been Orthodox yet today it is Catholic.
Orthodox is Catholic.  And Poland has its own Orthodox Church
Almost completely populated by people of non-Polish descent.
Not according to the numbers of the last census.  Not to mention the interwar census.
Language                 Total            Roman Catholics Greek Catholics  Eastern Orthodox Evangelical(Luthern) Other Christian Jewish   Other
Polish                      21,993,000   20,333,000         487,000            497,000              219,000                   55,000            372,000 30,000
Ukrainian/Belarusian  6,278,000        107,000      2,845,000         3,239,000                  9,000                   73,000                1,000  4,000
Lithuanian                     83,000          83,000             -                      -                         -                            -                       -          -
Czech                           38,000            8,000             -                    22,000                 6,000                      1,000                 -          -
German                       741,000       118,000              -                                           599,000                     16,000               7,000    1,000
Yiddish                      2,732,000          -                     -                      -                        -                             -                2,731,000   1,000
Other                            50,000        20,000              4,000               4,000                 2,000                                              3,000  17,000
Total                      31,915,000  20,670,000       3,336,000         3,762,000              835,000                   145,000         3,114,000 53,000
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_Poland

Odd, given the bond between the original Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Rus' that no Orthodox or GC Lithuanians are recorded, but almost half a million Poles each are (the numbers were actually higher-the 1931 is admitted to have counted down minorities of all sorts.  Which, of course is why the Second Polish Republic ended up like the First Polish Republic-in oblivion).
Interesting, they must be then hiding somewhere. But wait, this table speaks only of the language, not of a nationality or an ethnicity. I guess this clarifies something.
"this table speaks only of the language, not of a nationality or an ethnicity"
LOL.  You deny any connection?

As for hiding, since the census was taken over 80 years ago, more than the life expectancy of the lands covered, and after a World War tramping back and forth through, I should think that most are hiding in a grave somewhere (I won't speculate where in the other world).

Somewhere I think posted the recent figures.  I'll look around.
Look, you don't need to give me figures that I am already acquainted with. Of course there is some connection between language and ethnicity/nationality/descent. But in Poland this connection means that people of foreign descent use Polish langauge since it's the only official language (let's forget Kashubian for now). That's all. Polish Orthodox Church is hardly Polish, the faithful speak Polish, yeah, but when someone speaks of his Polish Orthodox identity (and the person speaking is not a convert) it starts a controversy because it is assumed that as an Orthodox believer, he has non-Polish ancestors (whose heritage he therefore betrays). Period.
If having non-Polish ancestors disqualified one as a Pole, I dare say few if any Poles would be left.  Period.

And, btw, in that case, give the Ziemia Chełmska back to its rightful owners.

This really isn't that hard.  Polonization, or the incorporation of people into an ethnic Polish nation, has been going on since the days of the Rzeczpospolita.  After Poland regained its independence in 1918, and particularly post-1926, this practice continued apace.  The easiest way to Polonize people is to get them to speak Polish and be Roman Catholic.  The 1931 census reflects an ambitious attempt to classify whole hosts of non-Poles, such as Belarusians, Ukrainians/Lemkos, etc., as Polish-speaking; a first step, if you will, to their Polonization.  The Second World War interrupted those plans but, of course, after the War, disruptions of a different sort emerged.

I suspect that the number of Orthodox Christians in Poland who are ethnically Polish (let's say, who have four grandparents with Polish-sounding last names and the majority of whose ancestors were originally Roman Catholic) is quite small.  The majority of Orthodox Christians in Poland likely have grandparents (or great-grandparents) who were Greek Catholics or Orthodox, and whose forebears spoke Belarusian or Ukrainian, or some dialect thereof.  These people may well speak the Polish language today, but their heritage isn't Polish.  (I'm sure that there are some Orthodox Christians in Poland who are of ethnic Polish extraction or who are the product of mixed marriages between Poles and Ukrainians/Belarusians.  But these are likely a small minority.)

Even from the 14th century in the lands of Rus' conquered by Kazimierz Wielki, separate overlapping dioceses were set up for the Latin-rite Poles and the Greek-rite Ruthenians.  Poles speak a West Slavic tongue and are culturally distinct from their East Slavic neighbors, although there is enormous overlap in many customs, words, etc.  So, while there is a Polish Autocephalous Orthodox Church, its membership has historically consisted almost entirely of the ethnic minorities who reside in the state of Poland.  The historical church of the Polish people, if such a thing can be said to exist, is the Latin-rite Roman Catholic Church.  It is a sad thing that the two are no longer in communion.  There is some evidence that intercommunion existed in the borderlands into the first part of the 15th century, at least.  Here, where east meets west, is a tremendous setting for understanding and the bridging of ancient theological and cultural divides which has been sadly neglected.
Logged
Christopher McAvoy
Never forget the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate & all persecuted christians!
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: orthodóxis, atque cathólice et apostólice fídei
Jurisdiction: Latin Catholic from the 12th c.
Posts: 443



WWW
« Reply #77 on: November 24, 2013, 06:06:09 PM »

Yes, Yury, border areas are fascinating bridges of ecumenism, rightly or wrongly.

I will forever be impressed that one may be received as Orthodox from Roman Catholic in Poland simply by renouncing Rome, without any chrismation. That's very hospitable and identical to the same practice that occurs if one goes from Orthodox to Roman Catholic, where one than renounces the other view of Orthodox being in error instead...
« Last Edit: November 24, 2013, 06:06:53 PM by Christopher McAvoy » Logged

"and for all who are Orthodox, and who hold the Catholic and Apostolic Faith, remember, O Lord, thy servants" - yet the post-conciliar RC hierarchy is tolerant of everyone and everything... except Catholic Tradition, for modernists are as salt with no taste, to be “thrown out and trampled under foot
Christopher McAvoy
Never forget the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate & all persecuted christians!
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: orthodóxis, atque cathólice et apostólice fídei
Jurisdiction: Latin Catholic from the 12th c.
Posts: 443



WWW
« Reply #78 on: November 24, 2013, 06:06:33 PM »

Yes, Yury, border areas are fascinating bridges of ecumenism, rightly or wrongly.

I will forever be impressed that one may be received as Orthodox from Roman Catholic in Poland simply by renouncing Rome, without any chrismation. That's very hospitable and identical to the same practice that occurs if one goes from Orthodox to Roman Catholic, where one than renounces the other view of Orthodox being in error instead...
Logged

"and for all who are Orthodox, and who hold the Catholic and Apostolic Faith, remember, O Lord, thy servants" - yet the post-conciliar RC hierarchy is tolerant of everyone and everything... except Catholic Tradition, for modernists are as salt with no taste, to be “thrown out and trampled under foot
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #79 on: November 24, 2013, 06:17:35 PM »

There is some evidence that intercommunion existed in the borderlands into the first part of the 15th century, at least. 

Not intercommunion. Rather jumping the fence multiple times depending on the  situation.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Yurysprudentsiya
Section Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA, although in my heart I will always remain a loving son of the UOC-USA
Posts: 2,061


God, the Great, the Only, Keep for Us Our Ukraine!


« Reply #80 on: November 24, 2013, 06:20:31 PM »

There is some evidence that intercommunion existed in the borderlands into the first part of the 15th century, at least. 

Not intercommunion. Rather jumping the fence multiple times depending on the  situation.

I know that there was a lot of flip-flopping.  It appears, however, from the New Catholic Encyclopedia, at least, that the Diocese of Przemysl may have been in communion with both Kyiv and Rome as late as the year 1416.  At any rate, I believe that the people in the villages probably had little to no conception of the split at that point.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #81 on: November 24, 2013, 06:36:27 PM »

There is some evidence that intercommunion existed in the borderlands into the first part of the 15th century, at least. 

Not intercommunion. Rather jumping the fence multiple times depending on the  situation.

I know that there was a lot of flip-flopping.  It appears, however, from the New Catholic Encyclopedia, at least, that the Diocese of Przemysl may have been in communion with both Kyiv and Rome as late as the year 1416.  At any rate, I believe that the people in the villages probably had little to no conception of the split at that point.
No, the Vatican ordered the Polish king to set up Latin bishops to replace the Orthodox bishops in Przemysl and elsewhere.  They, of course, were in communion with the Vatican.

At no time were the Orthodox in communion with Kiev at the same time in communion with the Vatican since at least the latter half of the 11th century, when the Metropolitan of Kiev, following Constantinople's lead, sent a letter to the Vatican denouncing its heresies.  Someone brought this letter up again just recently here.
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA, although in my heart I will always remain a loving son of the UOC-USA
Posts: 2,061


God, the Great, the Only, Keep for Us Our Ukraine!


« Reply #82 on: November 24, 2013, 06:40:25 PM »

There is some evidence that intercommunion existed in the borderlands into the first part of the 15th century, at least. 

Not intercommunion. Rather jumping the fence multiple times depending on the  situation.

I know that there was a lot of flip-flopping.  It appears, however, from the New Catholic Encyclopedia, at least, that the Diocese of Przemysl may have been in communion with both Kyiv and Rome as late as the year 1416.  At any rate, I believe that the people in the villages probably had little to no conception of the split at that point.
No, the Vatican ordered the Polish king to set up Latin bishops to replace the Orthodox bishops in Przemysl and elsewhere.  They, of course, were in communion with the Vatican.

At no time were the Orthodox in communion with Kiev at the same time in communion with the Vatican since at least the latter half of the 11th century, when the Metropolitan of Kiev, following Constantinople's lead, sent a letter to the Vatican denouncing its heresies.  Someone brought this letter up again just recently here.

I am aware that Latin-rite and Greek-rite hierarchies existed in Przemysl since 1375.  However, how do you explain the statement in the Catholic Encyclopedia that the Greek-rite hierarchy remained in communion with Rome until 1416 when it went over to the "schismatics?"  I recall that Prince Danylo of Halych had very good relations with the Roman Catholics, so it seems very plausible to me that the politics of the borders were not so neat.
Logged
Yurysprudentsiya
Section Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA, although in my heart I will always remain a loving son of the UOC-USA
Posts: 2,061


God, the Great, the Only, Keep for Us Our Ukraine!


« Reply #83 on: November 24, 2013, 06:44:00 PM »

There is some evidence that intercommunion existed in the borderlands into the first part of the 15th century, at least. 

Not intercommunion. Rather jumping the fence multiple times depending on the  situation.

I know that there was a lot of flip-flopping.  It appears, however, from the New Catholic Encyclopedia, at least, that the Diocese of Przemysl may have been in communion with both Kyiv and Rome as late as the year 1416.  At any rate, I believe that the people in the villages probably had little to no conception of the split at that point.
No, the Vatican ordered the Polish king to set up Latin bishops to replace the Orthodox bishops in Przemysl and elsewhere.  They, of course, were in communion with the Vatican.

At no time were the Orthodox in communion with Kiev at the same time in communion with the Vatican since at least the latter half of the 11th century, when the Metropolitan of Kiev, following Constantinople's lead, sent a letter to the Vatican denouncing its heresies.  Someone brought this letter up again just recently here.

I am aware that Latin-rite and Greek-rite hierarchies existed in Przemysl since 1375.  However, how do you explain the statement in the Catholic Encyclopedia that the Greek-rite hierarchy remained in communion with Rome until 1416 when it went over to the "schismatics?"  I recall that Prince Danylo of Halych had very good relations with the Roman Catholics, so it seems very plausible to me that the politics of the borders were not so neat.

Here is my source:
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12532b.htm

See the second paragraph.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #84 on: November 24, 2013, 06:47:17 PM »

If having non-Polish ancestors disqualified one as a Pole, I dare say few if any Poles would be left.  Period.
As in many nations. I agree completely. Still for some Orthodox people in Poland if someone has non-Polish descent he will stay Byelarussian, Ukrainian etc. for the ages of ages. It's not the problem with the Polish acceptance of the existence of the Polish Orthodox faithful, but with the emphasis on connection between the Orthodox faith and non-Polish descent among the Orthodox themselves. It's not that the Poles believe there exist only Poles that are Catholic (that's now rather outdated and an object of ridicule). It's that the Orthodox sometimes believe that the only Poles that exist are the Catholic Poles. If some Orthodox declares himself to be a Pole, it means he has some problem with his faith and surely he's on his way to Rome. Roll Eyes
Except for one, all the Polish Orthodox (only one being a convert) I've known in person identify themselves as Polish, and nothing else.  I've know Ukrainians in submission to the Vatican, but they identified themselves as Ukrainians-Polish was only an accident of birth and shifting boundaries.
I've known lots of the Vatican's Latin flock in and from Poland, who can't-in fact, insist on the impossibility-of separation of their church from their nationality.


And, btw, in that case, give the Ziemia Chełmska back to its rightful owners.
And Israel to Canaanites Tongue
you can see my many posts on that matter in the Politics section.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #85 on: November 24, 2013, 06:48:06 PM »

If some Orthodox declares himself to be a Pole, it means he has some problem with his faith and surely he's on his way to Rome. Roll Eyes

It means he is ashamed of his roots. That's all.
Or he is Polonized. Or just a Pole.
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA, although in my heart I will always remain a loving son of the UOC-USA
Posts: 2,061


God, the Great, the Only, Keep for Us Our Ukraine!


« Reply #86 on: November 24, 2013, 06:50:30 PM »

Except for one, all the Polish Orthodox (only one being a convert) I've known in person identify themselves as Polish, and nothing else.  I've know Ukrainians in submission to the Vatican, but they identified themselves as Ukrainians-Polish was only an accident of birth and shifting boundaries.
I've known lots of the Vatican's Latin flock in and from Poland, who can't-in fact, insist on the impossibility-of separation of their church from their nationality.

Successful Polonization, I fear.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #87 on: November 24, 2013, 07:10:51 PM »

There is some evidence that intercommunion existed in the borderlands into the first part of the 15th century, at least. 

Not intercommunion. Rather jumping the fence multiple times depending on the  situation.

I know that there was a lot of flip-flopping.  It appears, however, from the New Catholic Encyclopedia, at least, that the Diocese of Przemysl may have been in communion with both Kyiv and Rome as late as the year 1416.  At any rate, I believe that the people in the villages probably had little to no conception of the split at that point.
No, the Vatican ordered the Polish king to set up Latin bishops to replace the Orthodox bishops in Przemysl and elsewhere.  They, of course, were in communion with the Vatican.

At no time were the Orthodox in communion with Kiev at the same time in communion with the Vatican since at least the latter half of the 11th century, when the Metropolitan of Kiev, following Constantinople's lead, sent a letter to the Vatican denouncing its heresies.  Someone brought this letter up again just recently here.

I am aware that Latin-rite and Greek-rite hierarchies existed in Przemysl since 1375.  However, how do you explain the statement in the Catholic Encyclopedia that the Greek-rite hierarchy remained in communion with Rome until 1416 when it went over to the "schismatics?"
 
Propaganda for their faith.  In 1451 King Casimir recognized Met. St. Jonas' jurisdiction over all the Orthodox in the Commonwealth except the diocese of Halych and Peremyshl/Przemyshl, whose bishop a century and a half latter refused to sign the capitulation of Brest and help lead the opposition to it.

I recall that Prince Danylo of Halych had very good relations with the Roman Catholics, so it seems very plausible to me that the politics of the borders were not so neat.
yes, he toyed with the foul policies of the Palaelogi.  He also, however, sponsored the rise of the very Orthodox Met. St. Cyril as Metropolitan of Kiev and All Rus'.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #88 on: November 24, 2013, 07:11:46 PM »

Except for one, all the Polish Orthodox (only one being a convert) I've known in person identify themselves as Polish, and nothing else.  I've know Ukrainians in submission to the Vatican, but they identified themselves as Ukrainians-Polish was only an accident of birth and shifting boundaries.
I've known lots of the Vatican's Latin flock in and from Poland, who can't-in fact, insist on the impossibility-of separation of their church from their nationality.

Successful Polonization, I fear.
Do converts to Orthodoxy have to be de-Polonized?
Logged

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

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #89 on: November 24, 2013, 07:15:12 PM »

Except for one, all the Polish Orthodox (only one being a convert) I've known in person identify themselves as Polish, and nothing else.  I've know Ukrainians in submission to the Vatican, but they identified themselves as Ukrainians-Polish was only an accident of birth and shifting boundaries.
I've known lots of the Vatican's Latin flock in and from Poland, who can't-in fact, insist on the impossibility-of separation of their church from their nationality.

Successful Polonization, I fear.
Do converts to Orthodoxy have to be de-Polonized?

We are not talking about converts. We are talking about cradles.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,973


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #90 on: November 24, 2013, 07:28:44 PM »

Except for one, all the Polish Orthodox (only one being a convert) I've known in person identify themselves as Polish, and nothing else.  I've know Ukrainians in submission to the Vatican, but they identified themselves as Ukrainians-Polish was only an accident of birth and shifting boundaries.
I've known lots of the Vatican's Latin flock in and from Poland, who can't-in fact, insist on the impossibility-of separation of their church from their nationality.

Successful Polonization, I fear.
Do converts to Orthodoxy have to be de-Polonized?

In a certain wise, a Croatian Catholic who converts to Orthodoxy becomes a Serb since the only real division between Croats, Serbs, and Bosnians is religious. (In another wise, these are fighting words. But it's the Balkans. What aren't?)
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #91 on: November 24, 2013, 07:35:08 PM »

Except for one, all the Polish Orthodox (only one being a convert) I've known in person identify themselves as Polish, and nothing else.  I've know Ukrainians in submission to the Vatican, but they identified themselves as Ukrainians-Polish was only an accident of birth and shifting boundaries.
I've known lots of the Vatican's Latin flock in and from Poland, who can't-in fact, insist on the impossibility-of separation of their church from their nationality.

Successful Polonization, I fear.
Do converts to Orthodoxy have to be de-Polonized?

We are not talking about converts. We are talking about cradles.
We finished the topic of cradles.  We did not discuss the corollary of converts.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #92 on: November 24, 2013, 07:35:58 PM »

Except for one, all the Polish Orthodox (only one being a convert) I've known in person identify themselves as Polish, and nothing else.  I've know Ukrainians in submission to the Vatican, but they identified themselves as Ukrainians-Polish was only an accident of birth and shifting boundaries.
I've known lots of the Vatican's Latin flock in and from Poland, who can't-in fact, insist on the impossibility-of separation of their church from their nationality.

Successful Polonization, I fear.
Do converts to Orthodoxy have to be de-Polonized?

In a certain wise, a Croatian Catholic who converts to Orthodoxy becomes a Serb since the only real division between Croats, Serbs, and Bosnians is religious. (In another wise, these are fighting words. But it's the Balkans. What aren't?)
I was told expressly by a Croatian who embraced Orthodoxy that he was NOT a Serb.
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA, although in my heart I will always remain a loving son of the UOC-USA
Posts: 2,061


God, the Great, the Only, Keep for Us Our Ukraine!


« Reply #93 on: November 24, 2013, 07:37:13 PM »

Propaganda for their faith.  In 1451 King Casimir recognized Met. St. Jonas' jurisdiction over all the Orthodox in the Commonwealth except the diocese of Halych and Peremyshl/Przemyshl, whose bishop a century and a half latter refused to sign the capitulation of Brest and help lead the opposition to it.

I want to know more.  I am unwilling just to dismiss a specific assertion of a date out of hand as "propaganda."  What happened in 1416, the date when the Catholics allege that the eparchy of Przemysl went over to the "schismatic" Orthodox?  

I know that Przemysl did not entirely accept the Union of Brest until 1692.  My ancestors resided within its territory.  It had parallel hierarchies from 1610, however, and the Orthodox bishop had his residence in Przemysl, with a coadjutor at Sanok.  The Greek Catholic bishop had his seat in Sambor. 

EDIT:  Fixed the locations of the bishoprics, as near as I can tell.
« Last Edit: November 24, 2013, 07:41:18 PM by Yurysprudentsiya » Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #94 on: November 24, 2013, 07:39:45 PM »

There is some evidence that intercommunion existed in the borderlands into the first part of the 15th century, at least.  

Not intercommunion. Rather jumping the fence multiple times depending on the  situation.

I know that there was a lot of flip-flopping.  It appears, however, from the New Catholic Encyclopedia, at least, that the Diocese of Przemysl may have been in communion with both Kyiv and Rome as late as the year 1416.  At any rate, I believe that the people in the villages probably had little to no conception of the split at that point.
No, the Vatican ordered the Polish king to set up Latin bishops to replace the Orthodox bishops in Przemysl and elsewhere.  They, of course, were in communion with the Vatican.

At no time were the Orthodox in communion with Kiev at the same time in communion with the Vatican since at least the latter half of the 11th century, when the Metropolitan of Kiev, following Constantinople's lead, sent a letter to the Vatican denouncing its heresies.  Someone brought this letter up again just recently here.

I am aware that Latin-rite and Greek-rite hierarchies existed in Przemysl since 1375.  However, how do you explain the statement in the Catholic Encyclopedia that the Greek-rite hierarchy remained in communion with Rome until 1416 when it went over to the "schismatics?"  I recall that Prince Danylo of Halych had very good relations with the Roman Catholics, so it seems very plausible to me that the politics of the borders were not so neat.

Here is my source:
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12532b.htm

See the second paragraph.
Look on page 214 here:
http://books.google.com/books?id=iB8vTQZSSSkC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=unseat&f=false
"Catholic-Orthodox Relations in the Diocese of Przemyśl in the Fourteenth-Eighteenth Centuries," Jacek Krochmal

Propaganda for their faith.  In 1451 King Casimir recognized Met. St. Jonas' jurisdiction over all the Orthodox in the Commonwealth except the diocese of Halych and Peremyshl/Przemyshl, whose bishop a century and a half latter refused to sign the capitulation of Brest and help lead the opposition to it.

I want to know more.  I am unwilling just to dismiss a specific assertion of a date out of hand as "propaganda."  What happened in 1416, the date when the Catholics allege that the eparchy of Przemysl went over to the "schismatic" Orthodox?  

I know that Przemysl did not entirely accept the Union of Brest until 1692.  My ancestors resided within its territory.  It had parallel hierarchies from 1610, however, and the Orthodox bishop had his residence in Sanok, not Przemysl.  The Greek Catholic bishop had his seat in Przemysl.
The Vatican has a problem because it has to accept the fake Metropolitan of Kiev, Gregory Tsamblak, as a legit Metropolitan, to have his participation at its council of Constance to mean anything.
« Last Edit: November 24, 2013, 07:43:42 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #95 on: November 24, 2013, 08:45:02 PM »

Btw, somewhere we have a thread (or two) on the existence of a Western Orthodox Rite movement within the interwar Orthodox Church of Poland-which, of course, the Polish Second Republic had no love for.
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,019


"My god is greater."


« Reply #96 on: November 24, 2013, 08:52:53 PM »

They are both quite obvious to someone with long experience in Chinese culture.
The Chinese in the pictures you show look equally in-place/ out-of-place in Western and Eastern liturgies. The European West-East divide is irrelevant to Chinese culture.
You claimed that West-East divide was irrelevant period.  Have you forgotten?
The East/ West divide is exaggerated and is getting more irrelevant every day. Westerners going to Eastern liturgy is just fine. WR is such a tiny niche anyway that most Westerners don't even have an opportunity to visit a WR parish.

Btw, I never claimed the in-place/out-of-place was essence over degree.

Yes, it is getting irrelevant pretty much everywhere. But feel free to continue posting photographic non-sequiturs.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #97 on: November 24, 2013, 09:13:39 PM »

They are both quite obvious to someone with long experience in Chinese culture.
The Chinese in the pictures you show look equally in-place/ out-of-place in Western and Eastern liturgies. The European West-East divide is irrelevant to Chinese culture.
You claimed that West-East divide was irrelevant period.  Have you forgotten?
The East/ West divide is exaggerated and is getting more irrelevant every day. Westerners going to Eastern liturgy is just fine. WR is such a tiny niche anyway that most Westerners don't even have an opportunity to visit a WR parish.

Btw, I never claimed the in-place/out-of-place was essence over degree.

Yes, it is getting irrelevant pretty much everywhere. But feel free to continue posting photographic non-sequiturs.
"Resistance is futile," eh?

"Fact" masquerading as your face.
Your face is an interruption of pointless injection
Your face is a social dogma rabbit hole.
Have you considered the possibility that your face is an ad hominem?
Do you do this with your face painted yellow and a kimono on?
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA, although in my heart I will always remain a loving son of the UOC-USA
Posts: 2,061


God, the Great, the Only, Keep for Us Our Ukraine!


« Reply #98 on: November 24, 2013, 09:14:02 PM »

There is some evidence that intercommunion existed in the borderlands into the first part of the 15th century, at least.  

Not intercommunion. Rather jumping the fence multiple times depending on the  situation.

I know that there was a lot of flip-flopping.  It appears, however, from the New Catholic Encyclopedia, at least, that the Diocese of Przemysl may have been in communion with both Kyiv and Rome as late as the year 1416.  At any rate, I believe that the people in the villages probably had little to no conception of the split at that point.
No, the Vatican ordered the Polish king to set up Latin bishops to replace the Orthodox bishops in Przemysl and elsewhere.  They, of course, were in communion with the Vatican.

At no time were the Orthodox in communion with Kiev at the same time in communion with the Vatican since at least the latter half of the 11th century, when the Metropolitan of Kiev, following Constantinople's lead, sent a letter to the Vatican denouncing its heresies.  Someone brought this letter up again just recently here.

I am aware that Latin-rite and Greek-rite hierarchies existed in Przemysl since 1375.  However, how do you explain the statement in the Catholic Encyclopedia that the Greek-rite hierarchy remained in communion with Rome until 1416 when it went over to the "schismatics?"  I recall that Prince Danylo of Halych had very good relations with the Roman Catholics, so it seems very plausible to me that the politics of the borders were not so neat.

Here is my source:
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12532b.htm

See the second paragraph.
Look on page 214 here:
http://books.google.com/books?id=iB8vTQZSSSkC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=unseat&f=false
"Catholic-Orthodox Relations in the Diocese of Przemyśl in the Fourteenth-Eighteenth Centuries," Jacek Krochmal

Propaganda for their faith.  In 1451 King Casimir recognized Met. St. Jonas' jurisdiction over all the Orthodox in the Commonwealth except the diocese of Halych and Peremyshl/Przemyshl, whose bishop a century and a half latter refused to sign the capitulation of Brest and help lead the opposition to it.

I want to know more.  I am unwilling just to dismiss a specific assertion of a date out of hand as "propaganda."  What happened in 1416, the date when the Catholics allege that the eparchy of Przemysl went over to the "schismatic" Orthodox?  

I know that Przemysl did not entirely accept the Union of Brest until 1692.  My ancestors resided within its territory.  It had parallel hierarchies from 1610, however, and the Orthodox bishop had his residence in Sanok, not Przemysl.  The Greek Catholic bishop had his seat in Przemysl.
The Vatican has a problem because it has to accept the fake Metropolitan of Kiev, Gregory Tsamblak, as a legit Metropolitan, to have his participation at its council of Constance to mean anything.

Very good reference re the book.  Unfortunately Google Books only has a preview.   I will have to order the original.
Logged
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,019


"My god is greater."


« Reply #99 on: November 25, 2013, 08:20:36 AM »

NVM, with apologies to Isa
« Last Edit: November 25, 2013, 08:38:33 AM by Iconodule » Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #100 on: November 25, 2013, 12:28:22 PM »

Propaganda for their faith.  In 1451 King Casimir recognized Met. St. Jonas' jurisdiction over all the Orthodox in the Commonwealth except the diocese of Halych and Peremyshl/Przemyshl, whose bishop a century and a half latter refused to sign the capitulation of Brest and help lead the opposition to it.

I want to know more.  I am unwilling just to dismiss a specific assertion of a date out of hand as "propaganda."  What happened in 1416, the date when the Catholics allege that the eparchy of Przemysl went over to the "schismatic" Orthodox?  

I know that Przemysl did not entirely accept the Union of Brest until 1692.  My ancestors resided within its territory.  It had parallel hierarchies from 1610, however, and the Orthodox bishop had his residence in Sanok, not Przemysl.  The Greek Catholic bishop had his seat in Przemysl.
The Vatican has a problem because it has to accept the fake Metropolitan of Kiev, Gregory Tsamblak, as a legit Metropolitan, to have his participation at its council of Constance to mean anything.
btw, the usurping Met. Gregory was deposed formally by the Patriarch of Constantinople in 1416
https://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&hl=en&q=%22Gregory+was+excommunicated+by+Photius+and+deposed+by+patriarch+Joseph+II+in+1416%22
Logged

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

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #101 on: November 25, 2013, 12:37:13 PM »

Propaganda for their faith.  In 1451 King Casimir recognized Met. St. Jonas' jurisdiction over all the Orthodox in the Commonwealth except the diocese of Halych and Peremyshl/Przemyshl, whose bishop a century and a half latter refused to sign the capitulation of Brest and help lead the opposition to it.

I want to know more.  I am unwilling just to dismiss a specific assertion of a date out of hand as "propaganda."  What happened in 1416, the date when the Catholics allege that the eparchy of Przemysl went over to the "schismatic" Orthodox? 

I know that Przemysl did not entirely accept the Union of Brest until 1692.  My ancestors resided within its territory.  It had parallel hierarchies from 1610, however, and the Orthodox bishop had his residence in Sanok, not Przemysl.  The Greek Catholic bishop had his seat in Przemysl.
The Vatican has a problem because it has to accept the fake Metropolitan of Kiev, Gregory Tsamblak, as a legit Metropolitan, to have his participation at its council of Constance to mean anything.
btw, the usurping Met. Gregory was deposed formally by the Patriarch of Constantinople in 1416
https://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&hl=en&q=%22Gregory+was+excommunicated+by+Photius+and+deposed+by+patriarch+Joseph+II+in+1416%22

I can't blame metr. Gregory.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #102 on: November 25, 2013, 01:21:36 PM »

Propaganda for their faith.  In 1451 King Casimir recognized Met. St. Jonas' jurisdiction over all the Orthodox in the Commonwealth except the diocese of Halych and Peremyshl/Przemyshl, whose bishop a century and a half latter refused to sign the capitulation of Brest and help lead the opposition to it.

I want to know more.  I am unwilling just to dismiss a specific assertion of a date out of hand as "propaganda."  What happened in 1416, the date when the Catholics allege that the eparchy of Przemysl went over to the "schismatic" Orthodox? 

I know that Przemysl did not entirely accept the Union of Brest until 1692.  My ancestors resided within its territory.  It had parallel hierarchies from 1610, however, and the Orthodox bishop had his residence in Sanok, not Przemysl.  The Greek Catholic bishop had his seat in Przemysl.
The Vatican has a problem because it has to accept the fake Metropolitan of Kiev, Gregory Tsamblak, as a legit Metropolitan, to have his participation at its council of Constance to mean anything.
btw, the usurping Met. Gregory was deposed formally by the Patriarch of Constantinople in 1416
https://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&hl=en&q=%22Gregory+was+excommunicated+by+Photius+and+deposed+by+patriarch+Joseph+II+in+1416%22

I can't blame metr. Gregory.
blame him for what?
Logged

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

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #103 on: November 25, 2013, 01:39:11 PM »

Propaganda for their faith.  In 1451 King Casimir recognized Met. St. Jonas' jurisdiction over all the Orthodox in the Commonwealth except the diocese of Halych and Peremyshl/Przemyshl, whose bishop a century and a half latter refused to sign the capitulation of Brest and help lead the opposition to it.

I want to know more.  I am unwilling just to dismiss a specific assertion of a date out of hand as "propaganda."  What happened in 1416, the date when the Catholics allege that the eparchy of Przemysl went over to the "schismatic" Orthodox?  

I know that Przemysl did not entirely accept the Union of Brest until 1692.  My ancestors resided within its territory.  It had parallel hierarchies from 1610, however, and the Orthodox bishop had his residence in Sanok, not Przemysl.  The Greek Catholic bishop had his seat in Przemysl.
The Vatican has a problem because it has to accept the fake Metropolitan of Kiev, Gregory Tsamblak, as a legit Metropolitan, to have his participation at its council of Constance to mean anything.
btw, the usurping Met. Gregory was deposed formally by the Patriarch of Constantinople in 1416
https://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&hl=en&q=%22Gregory+was+excommunicated+by+Photius+and+deposed+by+patriarch+Joseph+II+in+1416%22

I can't blame metr. Gregory.
blame him for what?

For not subsuming to Moscow. And it later turned out  he had been right since former Kiev Metropolitanate had been divided into separate Moscow and GDL parts.
« Last Edit: November 25, 2013, 01:40:32 PM by Michał Kalina » Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #104 on: November 25, 2013, 04:18:11 PM »

Propaganda for their faith.  In 1451 King Casimir recognized Met. St. Jonas' jurisdiction over all the Orthodox in the Commonwealth except the diocese of Halych and Peremyshl/Przemyshl, whose bishop a century and a half latter refused to sign the capitulation of Brest and help lead the opposition to it.

I want to know more.  I am unwilling just to dismiss a specific assertion of a date out of hand as "propaganda."  What happened in 1416, the date when the Catholics allege that the eparchy of Przemysl went over to the "schismatic" Orthodox?  

I know that Przemysl did not entirely accept the Union of Brest until 1692.  My ancestors resided within its territory.  It had parallel hierarchies from 1610, however, and the Orthodox bishop had his residence in Sanok, not Przemysl.  The Greek Catholic bishop had his seat in Przemysl.
The Vatican has a problem because it has to accept the fake Metropolitan of Kiev, Gregory Tsamblak, as a legit Metropolitan, to have his participation at its council of Constance to mean anything.
btw, the usurping Met. Gregory was deposed formally by the Patriarch of Constantinople in 1416
https://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&hl=en&q=%22Gregory+was+excommunicated+by+Photius+and+deposed+by+patriarch+Joseph+II+in+1416%22

I can't blame metr. Gregory.
blame him for what?

For not subsuming to Moscow. And it later turned out  he had been right since former Kiev Metropolitanate had been divided into separate Moscow and GDL parts.
by the Orthodox Apostate Vytautas, whose daughter was the Grand Princess/Duchess of Moscow.  Not canonically valid.  Met. Photios of Kiev and All Rus' did his episcopal visitations in GDL in 1412, 1420-1, 1423, 1427 and 1430:
http://books.google.com/books?id=1ndUgrTtvbkC&pg=PA266&dq=Gregory+Tsamblak&hl=en&sa=X&ei=mbGTUr37LoLZoAT11IDoDA&ved=0CDkQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=Gregory%20Tsamblak&f=false

And the temporary and provisional "division" of the Kiev Metropolitanate-which still existed-had been done away with decades before 1416.
« Last Edit: November 25, 2013, 04:19:14 PM by ialmisry » Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,576


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #105 on: November 25, 2013, 04:52:41 PM »

^ I have a problem with applying modern understandings of national identity with political, religious and social issues which divided people who happened to live in the same areas a millennium or half a millennium ago. Even in modern times (post 1875 or so) immigrants coming to America from the same parts of Europe may have identified themselves in half a dozen different terms. While I recognize that said issues and historical figuresare important in shaping any particular modern national identity, more often than not it is more in the way of legend and myth, rather than reality. The mythology often hinders understanding in the present days (And I am not just referring to those who came from the Hapsburg or Russian empires or their borderlands. Nor am I referring specifically to the east west  schism or the Unia. Just a general observation.)
Logged
frjohnmorris
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 1,177


« Reply #106 on: December 06, 2013, 08:44:09 PM »

I would be very interested to know what people here think is the most appropriate rite for Westerners. Should they go to the Byzantine rite used by most of the Orthodox world or should they instead attend the Western liturgies of Western Rite Orthodoxy?

Is there anything wrong with a Westerner going for the Byzantine style?

Some have mentioned the example of how the Russians, Serbs, Albanians and others took Byzantine rite when they converted. Yet this has been attributed to the fact that all of these are eastern peoples and were geographically in the sphere of the Byzantine world. Would it be the same for Western people?

I have no doubt that there are far more converts from Protestantism and Roman Catholicism in Byzantine Rite parishes than Western Rite parishes. Most of the clergy of the Antiochian Archdiocese are converts and most serve the Byzantine Rite.
Although I support and accept the validity of the Western Rite, I am always offended when someone argues that the Byzantine Rite is too foreign for American converts. All of the parishes of the Evangelical Orthodox Church that came out of Evangelical Protestantism became canonical Orthodox through the Antiochian Archdiocese serve the Byzantine Rite.

Fr. John W. Morris
Logged
Tags:
Pages: 1 2 3 All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.422 seconds with 134 queries.