OrthodoxChristianity.net
July 25, 2014, 03:11:23 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 2146 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,964


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
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: 37,124



« 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
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: 37,124



« 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
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the USA
Posts: 1,255


« 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
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: 37,124



« 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
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: 37,124



« 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: 6,861


"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

Quote from: Byron
Just ignore iconotools delusions. He is the biggest multiculturalist globalist there is due to his unfortunate background.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
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: 37,124



« 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
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the USA
Posts: 1,255


« 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: 6,861


"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

Quote from: Byron
Just ignore iconotools delusions. He is the biggest multiculturalist globalist there is due to his unfortunate background.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
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: 37,124



« 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
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: 37,124



« 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
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: 37,124



« 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
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,018


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


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: 1,173


« 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 0.114 seconds with 44 queries.