OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 01, 2014, 07:12:31 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: The ROCOR WRV does still exist, yes?  (Read 3406 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #45 on: May 12, 2014, 03:41:12 PM »

overlapping jurisdictions are overwhelmingly considered uncanonical

Alright, I'll grant you that point. As a matter of fact, it happens that I've noticed many of my fellow Catholics (I spend a lot of time on CAF) being a wee bit too comfortable with overlapping jurisdictions -- particularly those of my fellow Catholics who are quite gung-ho about the importance of being in communion with (under?) the Pope.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Chrismated
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Russian Orthodox
Posts: 68


« Reply #46 on: June 04, 2014, 10:11:05 AM »

Regnare,
The WR Vicariate, which was under Bishop Jerome, and Father Anthony Bondi (Now Bishop Bondi, of his own, new Church) was discontinued, and the "Beacon Group" was alledgedly placed in a position of being "homeless", so everyone thought. The information is available on the ROCOR website, if one wishes to read it for themselves. The Western Rite Parishes are now under direct authority of the Metropolitan, and belong to no Diocese.
 Bishop Jerome was stripped of his duties, and "retired", and greatly limited in his abilities to "minister". Anthony Bondi, eventually (within a year) left ROCOR, and formed his own new "Vicariate" and now is Bishop Anthony.
Recently (within the last month) those who survived the events of May and June of 2013, and after much charges and countercharges, and what I would call, downright backbiting by some, have reconciled, and were in the process of going through "Ordination" into ROCOR (not re-ordained as Priests), since the ordinations that took place under Bishop Jerome, were not done individually, but en-mass. This, apparently was a big misunderstanding, with godly men on both sides of the controversy saying that the other gave permission for the mass ordinations, and the other saying he didn't. I would have to say, that since i wasn't there, that there was a gross missunderstanding or misspeaking, or missinterpreting of the discussion between Bishop Jerome and the Metropolitan Hilarion, and leave it at that.
A Priest from Omaha, NE, who had been "leading the charge" to incorporate many WR parishes and Priests into ROCOR, contacted various other Churches, including the Antiochian, and the APA (Anglican Province of America). He ended up convincing many of the dejected group to accompany him in forming a WRV within the APA. APA, at a meeting of Bishops, unanimously agreed to allow this formation of a Western Rite Vicariate within their organization, which would be self governing, and answer to a Laison Priest, appointed by the Arch Bichop of the APA.
Things didn't work out for many and various reasons, and the Omaha Priest, decided not to proceed with the agreement with APA. In the meantime, somehow, all the mudslinging and bantor that went on was forgotten, and now the Beacon Group, and ROCOR are reconciled. I don't know how many for sure are going through the transition, or how many gave up on it, or perhaps went with APA as Anglicans, or perhaps some other group. What is past is past, and no-one will ever know the whole truth of the matter. What is secret for now, eventually comes to light though.
I would say, Pray for all concerned, and God bless ROCOR for allowing more WR Parishes to be under the Blessings and protection of the Orthodox Church. My personal hope, is that the former Anglicans will truly become Orthodox.
Logged
Aboonah
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: MP/ROCOR
Posts: 6



WWW
« Reply #47 on: June 04, 2014, 08:59:31 PM »

 
<Recently (within the last month) those who survived the events of May and June of 2013, and after much charges and countercharges,>
<and what I would call, downright backbiting by some, have reconciled, and were in the process of going through "Ordination" into ROCOR>
<(not re-ordained as Priests),>

There is no such thing as "Ordination into ROCOR." The ordinations were *regularized* because they were not canonical. Even the "western-
rite" used was defective. Such "regularization" is relatively common in the Church when there is a question about a previous ordination.

<since the ordinations that took place under Bishop Jerome, were not done individually, but en-mass. This, apparently was a big misunder-
<standing, with godly men on both sides of the controversy saying that the other gave permission for the mass ordinations, and the other
<saying he didn't.

There was no misunderstanding, the mass-ordination had been forbidden when it became know that it was being planned and another to fol-
low later in the fall.

See my original post on March 24, I believe it was, for a few details.

<What is secret for now, eventually comes to light though.

I'm not sure what that comment means. Nothing is being kept secret by the Church, though some information regarding individuals is not being publicized, for
what ought to be obvious reasons.

<My personal hope, is that the former Anglicans will truly become Orthodox.

No need to single out "former Anglicans" because there were "former" other denominational people included. That is certainly the hope every time *anyone*
is joined to the Church. We who receive them will ultimately be judged according to the diligence with which they are prepared and nurtured.

Fr. Anthony
Logged

V. Rev. Protopriest Anthony Nelson
Saint Benedict Russian Orthodox Church
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma USA
Chrismated
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Russian Orthodox
Posts: 68


« Reply #48 on: June 05, 2014, 08:10:13 AM »

Dear V. Rev. Nelson,
I have always understood the word "majority" (as little as 50.000001 %) to be inclusive of others that were not of the same category as the "majority.
I have  spent a great deal of time, traveling, and paying particular attention to the subject of Orthodoxy in Anglicanism. I have read countless websites, postings, letters by various Clergy, including those made by members of ROCOR , including Clergy, and have never heard the term "mass regularizations" used in connection with the events of May of 2013. However, the term "mass ordinations" has been used over and over and over. It will take some time, but I will attempt to recapture the exact quotes from some of them.
I understand and agree with your point made, however, the rest of the fact remains, semantics considered, that "mass ordinations" is what the events of last May are known as by the vast majority.
I have the greatest respect for you and what you are doing, and have no doubt, that you are one who will be elevated to Bishop eventually, God willing. I do believe that the Metropolitan and the ROCOR Bishops were in the right on this matter, and that what is being done now, is the best for all concerned. It is easy to let emotion and loyalties cloud matters, and hopefully all of the hard feelings, and still existing (backbiting comments) on certain websites will be deleted, and the hurtful will become lost to memory and the good will prevail.
God bless.
Logged
Chrismated
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Russian Orthodox
Posts: 68


« Reply #49 on: June 05, 2014, 01:25:53 PM »

Dear Fr. Anthony Nelson,

Please read the post by Aboona, under the heading of "ROCOR WRV does still exist, yes? Reply # 27, on 3-24-2014, at o8:29:11 PM. Thank you.
Logged
Aboonah
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: MP/ROCOR
Posts: 6



WWW
« Reply #50 on: June 05, 2014, 08:47:43 PM »

"Chrismated" wrote:

<(I) have never heard the term "mass regularizations" used in connection with the events of May of 2013.

Neither have I. I did not use that term - I wrote regarding "mass ordinations" and the regularization of those ordinations.
It did not occur to me that my comments would be construed to mean that "mass ordinations" would be resolved by "mass
regularizations." The document that came out of the Synod meeting of last July was quite clear that those ordinands who
were involved in the mass ordination - and were found acceptable/worthy - would have their ordinations regularized. It
would seem somewhat contradictory for the Church to declare mass ordinations not canonical and then to resolve that
problem by some sort of "mass regularizations."

<the rest of the fact remains, semantics considered, that "mass ordinations" is what the events of last May are known as
<by the vast majority.

Yes. I don't believe I wrote anything that would question or contradict that.

<I have the greatest respect for you and what you are doing,

Thank you for the kind words.

Fr. Anthony
Logged

V. Rev. Protopriest Anthony Nelson
Saint Benedict Russian Orthodox Church
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma USA
Aboonah
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: MP/ROCOR
Posts: 6



WWW
« Reply #51 on: June 05, 2014, 08:54:24 PM »


"Chrismated" wrote:

<Please read the post by Aboona, under the heading of "ROCOR WRV does still exist, yes? Reply # 27,
<on 3-24-2014, at o8:29:11 PM. Thank you.

That was my post - I wrote it.

Fr. Anthony (Aboonah)
Logged

V. Rev. Protopriest Anthony Nelson
Saint Benedict Russian Orthodox Church
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma USA
Justin Kolodziej
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: I agree with the Church
Jurisdiction: Huh
Posts: 291


St. Leo III, Defender of Orthodoxy


« Reply #52 on: June 06, 2014, 01:39:21 PM »

But the question remains, if the lack-of-a-Russian-Catholic-patriarchate is "due to the Russian-Vatican agreement with the soviets," then what is the lack-of-a-WRO-patriarchate due to?

I'm not sure anyone would want a "WRO-patriarchate" since we don't have rite-based churches and overlapping jurisdictions are overwhelmingly considered uncanonical (establishing a specific "patriarchate" for the WRO would enshrine such a state).

+1

"One city, one bishop."

No phyletism, rite based or otherwise.

The Catholic Church's overlapping Sui juris episcopate a demonstrate that their model of unity in diversity is canonically incorrect.

Each city should have one bishop who oversees all parishes in that region, of whatever rite or ethnic background.   Period.
When we tried that, you guys got St. Alexis Toth because the one bishop refused to let him and his parishoners be their own rite.  Undecided
Logged

Where even the last two or three are gathered in His name, He is there in their midst.
Yurysprudentsiya
Section Moderator
OC.net guru
*****
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA, although in my heart I will always remain a loving son of the UOC-USA
Posts: 1,846


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


« Reply #53 on: June 06, 2014, 01:45:04 PM »

But the question remains, if the lack-of-a-Russian-Catholic-patriarchate is "due to the Russian-Vatican agreement with the soviets," then what is the lack-of-a-WRO-patriarchate due to?

I'm not sure anyone would want a "WRO-patriarchate" since we don't have rite-based churches and overlapping jurisdictions are overwhelmingly considered uncanonical (establishing a specific "patriarchate" for the WRO would enshrine such a state).

+1

"One city, one bishop."

No phyletism, rite based or otherwise.

The Catholic Church's overlapping Sui juris episcopate a demonstrate that their model of unity in diversity is canonically incorrect.

Each city should have one bishop who oversees all parishes in that region, of whatever rite or ethnic background.   Period.
When we tried that, you guys got St. Alexis Toth because the one bishop refused to let him and his parishoners be their own rite.  Undecided

Bishop Ireland was in grievous error.  A bishop should ideally oversee all faithful of all rites within his diocese.   
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 #54 on: June 06, 2014, 01:58:38 PM »

In my opinion, neither the Latin nor Byzantine rite bishops are able to consistently be trusted with overseeing two rites and respecting two or more distinctly different canon laws. Instead both view them as mutually contradictory, thereby assuring perpetual divisions based on culture and nation.

From time to time particular bishops who are either byzantine or latin who do respect the other rite and its canon laws, but when the majority of other bishops work against them their good will becomes ineffective to achieve anything long lasting.

The east and west will not live together and respect each other.

« Last Edit: June 06, 2014, 02:01:15 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
Nephi
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Non-Chalcedonian Chalcedonian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch
Posts: 4,474



« Reply #55 on: June 06, 2014, 02:16:07 PM »

+1

"One city, one bishop."

No phyletism, rite based or otherwise.

The Catholic Church's overlapping Sui juris episcopate a demonstrate that their model of unity in diversity is canonically incorrect.

Each city should have one bishop who oversees all parishes in that region, of whatever rite or ethnic background.   Period.
When we tried that, you guys got St. Alexis Toth because the one bishop refused to let him and his parishoners be their own rite.  Undecided

Bishop Ireland was in grievous error.  A bishop should ideally oversee all faithful of all rites within his diocese.   

I'm not sure how well that would work in the RCC, given the historical and present reality that too many Latin bishops (even if not all or the majority) would be unfair, to put it mildly, to their non-Latin flock. IMO it seems the current system they have is out of necessity to prevent Latin dominance over Eastern Catholics in overlapping areas.
Logged
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 17,410


The Pope Emeritus reading OCNet


WWW
« Reply #56 on: June 06, 2014, 02:24:26 PM »

A bishop should ideally oversee all faithful of all rites within his diocese.   

As a canonical ideal to strive for, yes.  Then again, did the canons envision multi-ritual dioceses?  There has always been local and even regional variation within a rite, but that is dealt with easily enough within the rite.  Did the canons ever anticipate a situation like "Archdiocese of New York" where, in a fully reunited Church, every major rite is represented by sizable communities?  I'm sure, "in those days", people traveled back and forth, but did they set up shop for their own rite or acclimate themselves to the rite of the local Church?  If the latter, which is what I'm presuming, are we ready to assign a "canonical rite" to "canonical territories"? 
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 is a jerk." - kelly
Yurysprudentsiya
Section Moderator
OC.net guru
*****
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA, although in my heart I will always remain a loving son of the UOC-USA
Posts: 1,846


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


« Reply #57 on: June 06, 2014, 02:33:55 PM »

A bishop should ideally oversee all faithful of all rites within his diocese.   

As a canonical ideal to strive for, yes.  Then again, did the canons envision multi-ritual dioceses?  There has always been local and even regional variation within a rite, but that is dealt with easily enough within the rite.  Did the canons ever anticipate a situation like "Archdiocese of New York" where, in a fully reunited Church, every major rite is represented by sizable communities?  I'm sure, "in those days", people traveled back and forth, but did they set up shop for their own rite or acclimate themselves to the rite of the local Church?  If the latter, which is what I'm presuming, are we ready to assign a "canonical rite" to "canonical territories"? 

Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think the sizable Latin communities in Constantinople before 1182 had their own local Hierarch. 
Logged
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 17,410


The Pope Emeritus reading OCNet


WWW
« Reply #58 on: June 06, 2014, 02:41:38 PM »

Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think the sizable Latin communities in Constantinople before 1182 had their own local Hierarch. 

What did their pastoral care look like?  Was the EP bi-ritual?  Was there a "vicar"?  Was it enough that the EP had jurisdiction but did not really visit the communities and preside in their services? 

Honestly, I don't know, which is why I'm asking.  It would be interesting to see what precedents for multi-ritual pastoral care have been in place in the past.   
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 is a jerk." - kelly
Yurysprudentsiya
Section Moderator
OC.net guru
*****
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA, although in my heart I will always remain a loving son of the UOC-USA
Posts: 1,846


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


« Reply #59 on: June 06, 2014, 02:42:44 PM »

+1

"One city, one bishop."

No phyletism, rite based or otherwise.

The Catholic Church's overlapping Sui juris episcopate a demonstrate that their model of unity in diversity is canonically incorrect.

Each city should have one bishop who oversees all parishes in that region, of whatever rite or ethnic background.   Period.
When we tried that, you guys got St. Alexis Toth because the one bishop refused to let him and his parishoners be their own rite.  Undecided

Bishop Ireland was in grievous error.  A bishop should ideally oversee all faithful of all rites within his diocese.   

I'm not sure how well that would work in the RCC, given the historical and present reality that too many Latin bishops (even if not all or the majority) would be unfair, to put it mildly, to their non-Latin flock. IMO it seems the current system they have is out of necessity to prevent Latin dominance over Eastern Catholics in overlapping areas.

It is really a function of how those communities came about.  The documents from Brest guaranteed the Orthodox bishops equal dignity to the Latin ones.  The impetus for this setup came from the Orthodox side because they wanted to preserve their rite, they wanted seats in the Sejm, etc.  In fact, at least for a while the children of an RC and GC were automatically GC as a concession to the GC desire to preserve their ethnos by entering the union rather than succumbing to Latinization entirely.  As the RC acknowledged, this framework for union is not a model to be followed.  It got some union at the expense of fracturing Orthodox communities and set up an administrative model that elevated preservation of an ethnic consciousness as a raison d'être for the rites existence.  Podkarpatska can chime in here but if I recall from the time of the 1646 Union of Uzhhorod until the establishment of the 1771 Eparchy of Mukachevo, at least during much of that time, the Byzantine Catholics were under the RC bishop.  While that is right, the way the union was achieved was flawed and it is this that required the eastern churches to be set up as they were, because the second lung of this two lung church was admittedly an artificially built one.   It was not achieved organically.   The Union of Florence, for all its problems, was probably the last such attempt to achieve organic union.  
Logged
Yurysprudentsiya
Section Moderator
OC.net guru
*****
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA, although in my heart I will always remain a loving son of the UOC-USA
Posts: 1,846


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


« Reply #60 on: June 06, 2014, 02:45:40 PM »

Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think the sizable Latin communities in Constantinople before 1182 had their own local Hierarch. 

What did their pastoral care look like?  Was the EP bi-ritual?  Was there a "vicar"?  Was it enough that the EP had jurisdiction but did not really visit the communities and preside in their services? 

Honestly, I don't know, which is why I'm asking.  It would be interesting to see what precedents for multi-ritual pastoral care have been in place in the past.   

I don't know either.  But I'd like to.   This will help us understand even how North American Orthodox unity could happen. 

Hopefully someone can help us out.  There were also Greeks in Italy - did they have their own bishops?
Logged
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,477


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #61 on: June 06, 2014, 11:27:15 PM »

Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think the sizable Latin communities in Constantinople before 1182 had their own local Hierarch. 

What did their pastoral care look like?  Was the EP bi-ritual?  Was there a "vicar"?  Was it enough that the EP had jurisdiction but did not really visit the communities and preside in their services? 

Honestly, I don't know, which is why I'm asking.  It would be interesting to see what precedents for multi-ritual pastoral care have been in place in the past.   

I don't know either.  But I'd like to.   This will help us understand even how North American Orthodox unity could happen. 

Hopefully someone can help us out.  There were also Greeks in Italy - did they have their own bishops?

Funny thing, as I was reading the thread, the same question occurred to me regarding EO unity in North America. Heck we're supposed to be the same "rite" and we're all worried about it.....let alone Latins and Byzantines....
Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #62 on: June 07, 2014, 10:56:39 AM »

In my opinion, neither the Latin nor Byzantine rite bishops are able to consistently be trusted with overseeing two rites and respecting two or more distinctly different canon laws. Instead both view them as mutually contradictory, thereby assuring perpetual divisions based on culture and nation.

From time to time particular bishops who are either byzantine or latin who do respect the other rite and its canon laws, but when the majority of other bishops work against them their good will becomes ineffective to achieve anything long lasting.

The east and west will not live together and respect each other.

Interesting post. I'm curious to see what Orthodox posters (WRO or otherwise) will say in response.
« Last Edit: June 07, 2014, 10:57:40 AM by Peter J » Logged

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

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #63 on: June 07, 2014, 12:13:36 PM »

Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think the sizable Latin communities in Constantinople before 1182 had their own local Hierarch. 

What did their pastoral care look like?  Was the EP bi-ritual?  Was there a "vicar"?  Was it enough that the EP had jurisdiction but did not really visit the communities and preside in their services? 

Honestly, I don't know, which is why I'm asking.  It would be interesting to see what precedents for multi-ritual pastoral care have been in place in the past.   

I don't know either.  But I'd like to.   This will help us understand even how North American Orthodox unity could happen. 

That's a good question. If there's never been a thread about it, then I think we should have one.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,427


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #64 on: June 07, 2014, 01:42:23 PM »

Quote
In my opinion, neither the Latin nor Byzantine rite bishops are able to consistently be trusted with overseeing two rites and respecting two or more distinctly different canon laws
If you are speaking of Rome, then I would agree. If you're talking about Orthodoxy, we have the same canon, same laws, and same bishops. We don't have the problem you see with the "Eastern Catholic" folks.

Quote
The east and west will not live together and respect each other
THIS is the issue that bothers me. I was arguing with someone on facebook about the WRO (her jurisdiction doesnt have any at all in the first place) and she was completely ignorant of a very basic understanding on the "WHY's" of the Western Rite. In the end, she called us every name in the book and claimed we werent Orthodox. The issue alot of folks have is this insistence of one having the be eastern to be Orthodox. Some of these folks the commemorate St. John Maximovich, which I find to be pretty ironic.

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 17,410


The Pope Emeritus reading OCNet


WWW
« Reply #65 on: June 07, 2014, 02:33:42 PM »

Some of these folks the commemorate St. John Maximovich, which I find to be pretty ironic.

Do you mean this St John Maximovitch?







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 is a jerk." - kelly
hecma925
Non-clairvoyant
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA - Diocese of the South
Posts: 6,000


Pray for me, a sinner.


WWW
« Reply #66 on: June 07, 2014, 03:53:51 PM »

Is there another St. John Maximovitch I'm unaware of?  Cheesy
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 #67 on: June 09, 2014, 12:17:04 PM »

Quote
If you are speaking of Rome, then I would agree. If you're talking about Orthodoxy, we have the same canon, same laws, and same bishops. We don't have the problem you see with the "Eastern Catholic" folks.

Ah, but that is the very problem, the western rite has a western canon law and the byzantine rite has a byzantine canon law, they are two distinctly different laws, EVEN IN THE EIGHTH CENTURY.

Therefore what you are saying is absolute nonsense.  TO HAVE THE EXACT SAME CANON LAW IS THE ESSENCE OF THE PROBLEM. Having the same bishop for two rites is theoretically possible, thats not the most important issue to me.

I'm in full agreement that there should be MORE HARMONY and LESS DIFFERENCES in the canon laws between byzantines and latins, but I am NOT in agreement that they be identical 100%. Now the present day western rite orthodoxy does allow some differences for certain, but it is inconsistent in what pre-schism customs it accepts and what it does not. For most westerners who know their latin rite history this is not reassuring.

The majority of westerners are uncomfortable taking part in a western rite orthodoxy that denies some legitimate orthodox pre-schism customs (such as multiple ordination at one time) and accepts others (such as anti-doron, which was a latin custom). That is one of the reasons, from a philosophical/cultural point of view why the western rite orthodoxy continues to struggle to attract converts, it lacks the respect for the entire tradition, it only gives bits and pieces.
« Last Edit: June 09, 2014, 12:36:20 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
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,427


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #68 on: June 10, 2014, 12:28:25 PM »

Quote
Ah, but that is the very problem, the western rite has a western canon law and the byzantine rite has a byzantine canon law, they are two distinctly different laws, EVEN IN THE EIGHTH CENTURY
The western rite of Orthodoxy (the one of which I celebrate every Sunday) does NOT have a different canon from the rest of the Orthodox Church. Anyone who says otherwise is a liar or extremely ill-informed.

If you are speaking of a WESTERN canon that Rome has taken for its own after it left the Church, then I will totally agree.

Quote
TO HAVE THE EXACT SAME CANON LAW IS THE ESSENCE OF THE PROBLEM
For Eastern Catholics, yes. For us, it makes us Orthodox. We have the same everything that matters.

Quote
Now the present day western rite orthodoxy does allow some differences for certain, but it is inconsistent in what pre-schism customs it accepts and what it does not
Eastern Rite folks have the same problem. Just start a discussion about the different lengths of the liturgy for that can of worms.....

Quote
The majority of westerners are uncomfortable taking part in a western rite orthodoxy
Source? I didnt know the majority of westerners even know about Orthodoxy, let alone the Western Rite....news to me.....

Quote
from a philosophical/cultural point of view why the western rite orthodoxy continues to struggle to attract converts
Source? Western Rite parishes are opening all the time, and are doing fine. In our parish, we have tripled the size of our parish in the last 5 years and all but one person is still faithful. We've chrismated more in the last 3 years than some parishes chrismate in 30 (outside of infants). The western rite is doing what alot of parishes refuse to do. Go forth and proclaim the gospel and stop being an ethnic museum.

Quote
it lacks the respect for the entire tradition, it only gives bits and pieces
Again, source? What "respect" are we neglecting? Give me details.

Have you actually been to a WR liturgy? You give generalized complaints, many of which have been debunked by OTHER ER priests (Fr. Patrick Reardon comes to mind) without giving examples.

PP
« Last Edit: June 10, 2014, 12:28:55 PM by primuspilus » Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
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 #69 on: June 11, 2014, 12:44:38 PM »

PrimusPalus,

For canons I spoke of ones Rome had before 1054 not after, they were never identical. My source is that nearly all educated traditional catholics and anglicans refuse to take western rite orthodoxy seriously. I've spoken to them and asked them to consider it for years, these are the people who know the orthodox church better than anyone else whos not orthodox.

Ask Dr. William J. Tighe at Muhlenberg College for specific answers if you like. I am not a professional apologist and I think that you may very well not care for the answers I give irregardless of what they are.
« Last Edit: June 11, 2014, 12:48:55 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
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #70 on: June 11, 2014, 10:13:29 PM »

PrimusPalus,

For canons I spoke of ones Rome had before 1054 not after, they were never identical. My source is that nearly all educated traditional catholics and anglicans refuse to take western rite orthodoxy seriously.

In recent times, I've been tempted to create a proposal saying that WRO cannot be taken seriously unless it has mandatory priestly celibacy (just for fun, though, since I actually don't have a very high opinion of mandatory priestly celibacy).
« Last Edit: June 11, 2014, 10:15:07 PM by Peter J » Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
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 #71 on: June 11, 2014, 10:33:35 PM »

I actually pray that the day comes when WRO "IS" taken seriously. Not because I believe in schisms, but because for those who are not going to be Roman Catholics, it is the only reasonable option that exists. I am sorry that my criticisms are sometimes misunderstood or appear nitpicky.

I do not think highly of mandatory priestly celibacy either, nor am I a poster boy for forcible reintroduction of the married priesthood. I remain officially neutral in that matter. (I see no difference whatsoever between either married or unmarried clergy in how well they function in the liturgy and fulfill their basic taskes) but Peter J's point is a valid example of exactly what I am talking about.

If you want REAL western rite orthodoxy you give exactly what the west had nothing more, nothing less.

Omit the filioque - FINE, but all the other aspects that no one talks about.. those are the ones that persuaded me it was not what God intends for the long term for the full flowering of the latin tradition.

Everytime I see a new WRO priest ordained wearing a phelonion instead of a chasuble, I know I made the right decision. It is but another indian reservation. For that matter, I do not view the byzantine rite catholics as appearing logical either. (Melkites are OK, but too many are ecumenists). I don't much care for either one at this point.  You want to be eastern be Orthodox, you want to be Latin be Catholic. Everything inbetween is some kind of weird compromise. The absolutely horridly ugly "spaceship" style cathedral that the Ukrainian Catholics built in Kiev for their patriarchate is a perfect example of this weirdness. I want no part of it, am burned out.

Apparently the Eastern Catholics and Western Rite Orthodox is really good and helpful for a number of people - so more power to them.
They have helped me - and they are great to visit - but I would not want to live there.
« Last Edit: June 11, 2014, 10:45:30 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
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #72 on: June 11, 2014, 10:44:50 PM »

I actually pray that the day comes when WRO "IS" taken seriously. Not because I believe in schisms,

Although I try to have the utmost respect for other Christians, it doesn't seem to me very much of a schism when someone leaves Anglicanism, given how divided the Anglicans are among themselves. (I feel differently, naturally, if it's a case of someone leaving Catholicism.)
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
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 #73 on: June 11, 2014, 10:47:27 PM »

I actually pray that the day comes when WRO "IS" taken seriously. Not because I believe in schisms,

Although I try to have the utmost respect for other Christians, it doesn't seem to me very much of a schism when someone leaves Anglicanism, given how divided the Anglicans are among themselves. (I feel differently, naturally, if it's a case of someone leaving Catholicism.)

Yeah, right, but at least the WRO have valid grace filled sacraments. Anglicanism is protestants pretending. Helpful perhaps, but lacking the number of verified miracles.
« Last Edit: June 11, 2014, 10:48:20 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
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #74 on: June 11, 2014, 11:17:18 PM »

I actually pray that the day comes when WRO "IS" taken seriously. Not because I believe in schisms,

Although I try to have the utmost respect for other Christians, it doesn't seem to me very much of a schism when someone leaves Anglicanism, given how divided the Anglicans are among themselves. (I feel differently, naturally, if it's a case of someone leaving Catholicism.)

Yeah, right, but at least the WRO have valid grace filled sacraments. Anglicanism is protestants pretending. Helpful perhaps, but lacking the number of verified miracles.

Alright. This seems a slightly odd response (if only because of the word "but") but anyhow I guess you agree that it "doesn't seem ... very much of a schism when someone leaves Anglicanism". Smiley
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,427


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #75 on: June 12, 2014, 07:53:42 AM »

Quote
For canons I spoke of ones Rome had before 1054 not after, they were never identical
Ah. My apologies. I thought you were speaking of the Western Rite.

Quote
My source is that nearly all educated traditional catholics and anglicans refuse to take western rite orthodoxy seriously.
Really? Your source is incorrect. My priest was a bishop in the Anglican Church and he left with a host of priests, all of which are very well educated (hint, there is a member of this very message board who is one of them, who will remain anonymous unless he wishes to comment).

Quote
William J. Tighe
Ah, is this the same Dr. Tighe who admitted that he criticized the Western Rite before actually putting eyes on the liturgy, and never attending a service? Yeah, no thanks.

Quote
In recent times, I've been tempted to create a proposal saying that WRO cannot be taken seriously unless it has mandatory priestly celibacy (just for fun, though, since I actually don't have a very high opinion of mandatory priestly celibacy)
I dont think that the Pope would approve of that, judging by his comments of late concerning the topic.

Quote
You want to be eastern be Orthodox, you want to be Latin be Catholic
This is why the WRO are misunderstood, because of ignorant statements like this.

Quote
Apparently the Eastern Catholics and Western Rite Orthodox is really good and helpful for a number of people - so more power to them
You can't correlate the two. They are entirely different animals.

PP
« Last Edit: June 12, 2014, 07:54:14 AM by primuspilus » Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #76 on: June 12, 2014, 11:29:50 AM »

Quote
You want to be eastern be Orthodox, you want to be Latin be Catholic
This is why the WRO are misunderstood, because of ignorant statements like this.

Perhaps we're seeing here why e.g. there are no WRO in Greece.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
LBK
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,877


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #77 on: June 12, 2014, 07:53:34 PM »

Quote
You want to be eastern be Orthodox, you want to be Latin be Catholic
This is why the WRO are misunderstood, because of ignorant statements like this.

Perhaps we're seeing here why e.g. there are no WRO in Greece.

Last time I checked, neither Antioch nor ROCOR have a jurisdictional presence on Greece.
Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #78 on: June 12, 2014, 08:29:54 PM »

Quote
You want to be eastern be Orthodox, you want to be Latin be Catholic
This is why the WRO are misunderstood, because of ignorant statements like this.

Perhaps we're seeing here why e.g. there are no WRO in Greece.

Last time I checked, neither Antioch nor ROCOR have a jurisdictional presence on Greece.

I'm not sure if this was meant as a serious response or not, but you're right, neither Antioch nor ROCOR have a jurisdictional presence on Greece.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
ICXCNIKA
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 661



« Reply #79 on: June 12, 2014, 09:31:56 PM »

Am I the only one that thinks that the WR would do better if it was independent of Eastern Rite Churches?

Here is what I mean. Take 10 Eastern monks train them on the Western Rite and then ordain them bishops of a autonomous western rite church with instructions of allowing organic growth as long as them conform to EO theology.
Logged
Nephi
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Non-Chalcedonian Chalcedonian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch
Posts: 4,474



« Reply #80 on: June 12, 2014, 09:46:08 PM »

Am I the only one that thinks that the WR would do better if it was independent of Eastern Rite Churches?

Here is what I mean. Take 10 Eastern monks train them on the Western Rite and then ordain them bishops of a autonomous western rite church with instructions of allowing organic growth as long as them conform to EO theology.

Would you carve out a geographic location for them too or just give the stamp of approval for overlapping jurisdictions?
Logged
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,257

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #81 on: June 12, 2014, 10:27:15 PM »

Mr. McAvoy's complaints always seem to be centered on the fact that WRO parishes are pretty much only interested in being Orthodox and Western, and not some grand scheme to restore a mythically glorious Latin past. He knows he made the "right decision" because of seeing photos of something a priest was wearing? Good grief.

I'm glad my humble parish doesn't exist to fulfill the odd fantasties of historical/liturgical fetishists as if the entire Western world would come running if we just put on costumes and pretended it was 500-1100 AD.

Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #82 on: June 12, 2014, 10:33:51 PM »

Am I the only one that thinks that the WR would do better if it was independent of Eastern Rite Churches?

Here is what I mean. Take 10 Eastern monks train them on the Western Rite and then ordain them bishops of a autonomous western rite church with instructions of allowing organic growth as long as them conform to EO theology.

Would you carve out a geographic location for them too or just give the stamp of approval for overlapping jurisdictions?

I won't try to answer that, per se, as I'm not Orthodox. But speaking as a Catholic -- and especially as an Eastern Catholic -- I find it a little strange that you guys have several jurisdictions in the USA, but not a single one that is WR.
Logged

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

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #83 on: June 12, 2014, 10:36:30 PM »

Mr. McAvoy's complaints always seem to be centered on the fact that WRO parishes are pretty much only interested in being Orthodox and Western, and not some grand scheme to restore a mythically glorious Latin past.

Dude, he can hear what you're saying.


(Kidding ... sort of.)
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,257

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #84 on: June 12, 2014, 10:38:21 PM »

Mr. McAvoy's complaints always seem to be centered on the fact that WRO parishes are pretty much only interested in being Orthodox and Western, and not some grand scheme to restore a mythically glorious Latin past.

Dude, he can hear what you're saying.


(Kidding ... sort of.)

 Cheesy I've gone round and round with him on here before, and only posted in this manner because he is often less than prompt in replying to threads (or will resurrect some months later).
Logged
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 17,410


The Pope Emeritus reading OCNet


WWW
« Reply #85 on: June 12, 2014, 10:41:38 PM »

Quote
You want to be eastern be Orthodox, you want to be Latin be Catholic
This is why the WRO are misunderstood, because of ignorant statements like this.

Perhaps we're seeing here why e.g. there are no WRO in Greece.

Last time I checked, neither Antioch nor ROCOR have a jurisdictional presence on Greece.

I'm not sure if this was meant as a serious response or not, but you're right, neither Antioch nor ROCOR have a jurisdictional presence on Greece.

I won't speak for LBK, but I'm not sure if your questions/comments are serious to begin with. 
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 is a jerk." - kelly
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #86 on: June 12, 2014, 10:53:29 PM »

Quote
You want to be eastern be Orthodox, you want to be Latin be Catholic
This is why the WRO are misunderstood, because of ignorant statements like this.

Perhaps we're seeing here why e.g. there are no WRO in Greece.

Last time I checked, neither Antioch nor ROCOR have a jurisdictional presence on Greece.

I'm not sure if this was meant as a serious response or not, but you're right, neither Antioch nor ROCOR have a jurisdictional presence on Greece.

I won't speak for LBK, but I'm not sure if your questions/comments are serious to begin with. 

Well, that's really a very broad-based attack, so I'm not really sure what to say in defense of myself or my participation on this forum. But regardless, it truly amazes me that the lack of Western-Rite Orthodox in Greece would be explained (if that is in fact what LBK meant) in terms of the Antiochians and ROCOR not being present there.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 17,410


The Pope Emeritus reading OCNet


WWW
« Reply #87 on: June 12, 2014, 11:01:11 PM »

Quote
You want to be eastern be Orthodox, you want to be Latin be Catholic
This is why the WRO are misunderstood, because of ignorant statements like this.

Perhaps we're seeing here why e.g. there are no WRO in Greece.

Last time I checked, neither Antioch nor ROCOR have a jurisdictional presence on Greece.

I'm not sure if this was meant as a serious response or not, but you're right, neither Antioch nor ROCOR have a jurisdictional presence on Greece.

I won't speak for LBK, but I'm not sure if your questions/comments are serious to begin with. 

Well, that's really a very broad-based attack, so I'm not really sure what to say in defense of myself or my participation on this forum. But regardless, it truly amazes me that the lack of Western-Rite Orthodox in Greece would be explained (if that is in fact what LBK meant) in terms of the Antiochians and ROCOR not being present there.

Why would you expect Western Rite Orthodox in a country which is predominantly Eastern Orthodox?  It's like criticising the Vatican for not having a Syro-Malankara parish within its geographic bounds. 
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 is a jerk." - kelly
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,128



« Reply #88 on: June 12, 2014, 11:13:46 PM »

Quote
You want to be eastern be Orthodox, you want to be Latin be Catholic
This is why the WRO are misunderstood, because of ignorant statements like this.

Perhaps we're seeing here why e.g. there are no WRO in Greece.

Last time I checked, neither Antioch nor ROCOR have a jurisdictional presence on Greece.

I'm not sure if this was meant as a serious response or not, but you're right, neither Antioch nor ROCOR have a jurisdictional presence on Greece.

I won't speak for LBK, but I'm not sure if your questions/comments are serious to begin with.  

Well, that's really a very broad-based attack, so I'm not really sure what to say in defense of myself or my participation on this forum. But regardless, it truly amazes me that the lack of Western-Rite Orthodox in Greece would be explained (if that is in fact what LBK meant) in terms of the Antiochians and ROCOR not being present there.

Why would you expect Western Rite Orthodox in a country which is predominantly Eastern Orthodox?  It's like criticising the Vatican for not having a Syro-Malankara parish within its geographic bounds.  

Um, sure, it's like criticising the Vatican for not having a Syro-Malankara parish within its geographic bounds.
[/sarcasm]

Sorry couldn't resist. But unless I'm greatly misinformed, the number of Malankara Christians in Italy is, if not non-existent, certainly much smaller than the 100,000+ Western Catholics in Greece (assuming it matters whether your comparison makes sense or not Smiley).
« Last Edit: June 12, 2014, 11:23:11 PM by Peter J » Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 17,410


The Pope Emeritus reading OCNet


WWW
« Reply #89 on: June 12, 2014, 11:35:55 PM »

Quote
You want to be eastern be Orthodox, you want to be Latin be Catholic
This is why the WRO are misunderstood, because of ignorant statements like this.

Perhaps we're seeing here why e.g. there are no WRO in Greece.

Last time I checked, neither Antioch nor ROCOR have a jurisdictional presence on Greece.

I'm not sure if this was meant as a serious response or not, but you're right, neither Antioch nor ROCOR have a jurisdictional presence on Greece.

I won't speak for LBK, but I'm not sure if your questions/comments are serious to begin with.  

Well, that's really a very broad-based attack, so I'm not really sure what to say in defense of myself or my participation on this forum. But regardless, it truly amazes me that the lack of Western-Rite Orthodox in Greece would be explained (if that is in fact what LBK meant) in terms of the Antiochians and ROCOR not being present there.

Why would you expect Western Rite Orthodox in a country which is predominantly Eastern Orthodox?  It's like criticising the Vatican for not having a Syro-Malankara parish within its geographic bounds.  

Um, sure, it's like criticising the Vatican for not having a Syro-Malankara parish within its geographic bounds.
[/sarcasm]

Sorry couldn't resist. But unless I'm greatly misinformed, the number of Malankara Christians in Italy is, if not non-existent, certainly much smaller than the 100,000+ Western Catholics in Greece (assuming it matters whether your comparison makes sense or not Smiley).

You still didn't answer the question.  But I won't begrudge anyone their laughter. 
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 is a jerk." - kelly
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 0.167 seconds with 72 queries.