Author Topic: Of the OO churches, which would you say is more "traditional?"  (Read 2450 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline RengehA

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: California
Hi! I myself am a Chaldean Catholic. I've noticed that our church community seems to lose traditions and is getting very quickly Latinized. This does not, I believe, seem to be the case with the Oriental Orthodox communities. One of my grandparents was Syrian Orthodox but I do not know them well.

This is just a question based on my curiosity? Which OO church/community would you say is more ritualistic/traditional/has more literature. In other words, is there a church that has more "rules" and "guidelines" (i.e. praying 7 times a day, praying towards the east, keeping fasts) or strict observances of traditions? Which is the oldest, has more art/culture?

I am also asking because I might be interested in converting to an OO church.
« Last Edit: June 05, 2017, 01:40:44 PM by RengehA »

Offline Antonious Nikolas

  • Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,237
  • Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Oriental Orthodox Church
Re: Of the OO churches, which would you say is more "traditional?"
« Reply #1 on: June 05, 2017, 02:33:07 PM »
All of the Oriental Orthodox Churches fit the bill here to one degree or another.  In terms of which Church keeps its traditions with the least amount of compromise though, I would venture to say the Ethiopian and Eritrean Orthodox Churches.  They have never shortened their fasts, allowed vile Evangelical "praise & worship" music or Protestant books into the life of their church, changed their calendar to coincide with that of the West, replaced individual confession with a "cover all" prayer said by everyone during the liturgy, permitted schmaltzy electronic keyboards in the liturgy, etc.  Interestingly, the Ethiopians, being the most traditional, have also arguably been the most successful at making converts here in the West.  Now, I am sure that some of my good brothers and sisters here are going to rise to the defense of their respective jurisdictions and challenge some of the assertions I have made (and I will be waiting to debate them), but if they are honest, they will have to admit that those jurisdictions have made compromises that the Ethiopian and Eritrean Churches have not made.  Except in the case of permitting Protestant music in the life of the church (which unfortunately has crept into even the liturgy in one tradition), those changes might not speak to the substance of the faith, but they are still there.  So yeah, I would say the Ethiopian and Eritrean Churches are the most uncompromising and traditional.
« Last Edit: June 05, 2017, 02:36:51 PM by Antonious Nikolas »
I'm with the camp of 13 million Americans that believe politicians are, or are controlled by, Reptilians. I think only monks can solve this problem. It doesn't seem right that they prefer to ignore it.

Offline coptic orthodox boy

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 532
Re: Of the OO churches, which would you say is more "traditional?"
« Reply #2 on: June 05, 2017, 02:41:07 PM »
Hi! I myself am a Chaldean Catholic. I've noticed that our church community seems to lose traditions and is getting very quickly Latinized. This does not, I believe, seem to be the case with the Oriental Orthodox communities. One of my grandparents was Syrian Orthodox but I do not know them well.

This is just a question based on my curiosity? Which OO church/community would you say is more ritualistic/traditional/has more literature. In other words, is there a church that has more "rules" and "guidelines" (i.e. praying 7 times a day, praying towards the east, keeping fasts) or strict observances of traditions? Which is the oldest, has more art/culture?

I am also asking because I might be interested in converting to an OO church.

RengehA,

From my perspective the OO have a nice flavor of liturgical traditions.  I don't think there is competition amongst the family of churches to be the most "Orthodox" and "true" to tradition.  There is a mutual respect for the local traditions among respective churches that I found refreshing while practicing. 
I'm not sure if any church has an official prayer "rule" for the laity.  I think the Copts and Ethiopians have the most fasting days per year; additionally I think alcohol is prohibited to Copts (I'm not sure whether this applies to converts or not). 

Offline Antonious Nikolas

  • Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,237
  • Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Oriental Orthodox Church
Re: Of the OO churches, which would you say is more "traditional?"
« Reply #3 on: June 05, 2017, 02:45:50 PM »
Hi! I myself am a Chaldean Catholic. I've noticed that our church community seems to lose traditions and is getting very quickly Latinized. This does not, I believe, seem to be the case with the Oriental Orthodox communities. One of my grandparents was Syrian Orthodox but I do not know them well.

This is just a question based on my curiosity? Which OO church/community would you say is more ritualistic/traditional/has more literature. In other words, is there a church that has more "rules" and "guidelines" (i.e. praying 7 times a day, praying towards the east, keeping fasts) or strict observances of traditions? Which is the oldest, has more art/culture?

I am also asking because I might be interested in converting to an OO church.

RengehA,

From my perspective the OO have a nice flavor of liturgical traditions.  I don't think there is competition amongst the family of churches to be the most "Orthodox" and "true" to tradition.  There is a mutual respect for the local traditions among respective churches that I found refreshing while practicing. 
I'm not sure if any church has an official prayer "rule" for the laity.  I think the Copts and Ethiopians have the most fasting days per year; additionally I think alcohol is prohibited to Copts (I'm not sure whether this applies to converts or not).

He's not saying it's a competition, he's just asking who has compromised the least in terms of making changes in the modern day.  Some churches have reduced the length of their fasting, some have shortened their liturgies, etc.  These things verifiable and objectively true.
I'm with the camp of 13 million Americans that believe politicians are, or are controlled by, Reptilians. I think only monks can solve this problem. It doesn't seem right that they prefer to ignore it.

Offline coptic orthodox boy

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 532
Re: Of the OO churches, which would you say is more "traditional?"
« Reply #4 on: June 05, 2017, 03:00:29 PM »
Hi! I myself am a Chaldean Catholic. I've noticed that our church community seems to lose traditions and is getting very quickly Latinized. This does not, I believe, seem to be the case with the Oriental Orthodox communities. One of my grandparents was Syrian Orthodox but I do not know them well.

This is just a question based on my curiosity? Which OO church/community would you say is more ritualistic/traditional/has more literature. In other words, is there a church that has more "rules" and "guidelines" (i.e. praying 7 times a day, praying towards the east, keeping fasts) or strict observances of traditions? Which is the oldest, has more art/culture?

I am also asking because I might be interested in converting to an OO church.

RengehA,

From my perspective the OO have a nice flavor of liturgical traditions.  I don't think there is competition amongst the family of churches to be the most "Orthodox" and "true" to tradition.  There is a mutual respect for the local traditions among respective churches that I found refreshing while practicing. 
I'm not sure if any church has an official prayer "rule" for the laity.  I think the Copts and Ethiopians have the most fasting days per year; additionally I think alcohol is prohibited to Copts (I'm not sure whether this applies to converts or not).

He's not saying it's a competition, he's just asking who has compromised the least in terms of making changes in the modern day.  Some churches have reduced the length of their fasting, some have shortened their liturgies, etc.  These things verifiable and objectively true.

Perhaps I read too much into RengehA's original post; I was given the impression that RengehA was most interested in the church that could be considered the most orthodox, traditional, strict etc.  and thus why I stated that each church followed its own local traditions that, according to my understanding, are considered equally "orthodox."

Offline Antonious Nikolas

  • Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,237
  • Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Oriental Orthodox Church
Re: Of the OO churches, which would you say is more "traditional?"
« Reply #5 on: June 05, 2017, 03:50:33 PM »
Hi! I myself am a Chaldean Catholic. I've noticed that our church community seems to lose traditions and is getting very quickly Latinized. This does not, I believe, seem to be the case with the Oriental Orthodox communities. One of my grandparents was Syrian Orthodox but I do not know them well.

This is just a question based on my curiosity? Which OO church/community would you say is more ritualistic/traditional/has more literature. In other words, is there a church that has more "rules" and "guidelines" (i.e. praying 7 times a day, praying towards the east, keeping fasts) or strict observances of traditions? Which is the oldest, has more art/culture?

I am also asking because I might be interested in converting to an OO church.

RengehA,

From my perspective the OO have a nice flavor of liturgical traditions.  I don't think there is competition amongst the family of churches to be the most "Orthodox" and "true" to tradition.  There is a mutual respect for the local traditions among respective churches that I found refreshing while practicing. 
I'm not sure if any church has an official prayer "rule" for the laity.  I think the Copts and Ethiopians have the most fasting days per year; additionally I think alcohol is prohibited to Copts (I'm not sure whether this applies to converts or not).

He's not saying it's a competition, he's just asking who has compromised the least in terms of making changes in the modern day.  Some churches have reduced the length of their fasting, some have shortened their liturgies, etc.  These things verifiable and objectively true.

Perhaps I read too much into RengehA's original post; I was given the impression that RengehA was most interested in the church that could be considered the most orthodox, traditional, strict etc.  and thus why I stated that each church followed its own local traditions that, according to my understanding, are considered equally "orthodox."

It's true that each Oriental Orthodox Church has its own local traditions and that each of those traditions are considered to be equally Orthodox.  What I thought he was asking, however, was which of those churches was the most faithful to its own traditions in the modern day?  I guess maybe we should take his individual questions point-by-point:

Which OO church/community would you say is more ritualistic

All of the churches have their own respective rituals.

traditional

As I stated above, I think that all of the churches are traditional to one degree or another, but the Ethiopian/Eritrean churches have changed the least in terms of trying to cater to modern sensibilities.  I love all of the Oriental Orthodox Churches dearly, but I don't think it is unfair to point out that the Syriac Church has relaxed its fasting rules in the modern day, the Malankara Church has taken to incorporating 80s type synthesizer keyboards into the liturgy, and certain parts of the Coptic Church are unfortunately so infested with Evangelical/Protestant music that it has crept into the Divine Liturgy itself.

has more literature.

All of the churches have their own treasure troves of wonderful literature.

praying 7 times a day

All of the churches have their own version of the hours of prayer.  How strictly you keep it is between you and your Father of Confession.

praying towards the east

All of the churches pray facing the east.

keeping fasts

The Copts, Ethiopians, and Eritreans have the longest fasts, but the Ethiopians and Eritreans keep vegetarian fasts on many of the days where the Copts permit fish.  The other churches have shorter fasts, and in some cases, they have shortened them in the modern day.

strict observances of traditions

Again, each church has its own traditions, but in terms of fastidiously maintaining those traditions, I would say this has to go to the Ethiopians and Eritreans.  For example, it is traditional in the Coptic Church to remove your shoes upon entering the church, for women to cover their heads, and for men and women to sit separately, but in any given Coptic Church, you might find people wearing their shoes inside, women not covering their heads, and the odd family defying the gender segregation and sitting together.  In the Ethiopian/Eritrean Church, they will physically walk over and hand a woman something to cover with, ask people to move to the right side for them, and they definitely will stop you before you walk in the church with your shoes on.

Which is the oldest

That's a tough call.  All of the churches can be said to have been established in the first century.

has more art/culture?

They all have their own beautiful art and culture.

I am also asking because I might be interested in converting to an OO church.

Glory to God.  Feel free to ask questions at any time.
I'm with the camp of 13 million Americans that believe politicians are, or are controlled by, Reptilians. I think only monks can solve this problem. It doesn't seem right that they prefer to ignore it.

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 33,220
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: Of the OO churches, which would you say is more "traditional?"
« Reply #6 on: June 06, 2017, 05:51:19 PM »
He's not saying it's a competition, he's just asking who has compromised the least in terms of making changes in the modern day.  Some churches have reduced the length of their fasting, some have shortened their liturgies, etc.  These things verifiable and objectively true.

As I stated above, I think that all of the churches are traditional to one degree or another, but the Ethiopian/Eritrean churches have changed the least in terms of trying to cater to modern sensibilities.  I love all of the Oriental Orthodox Churches dearly, but I don't think it is unfair to point out that the Syriac Church has relaxed its fasting rules in the modern day, the Malankara Church has taken to incorporating 80s type synthesizer keyboards into the liturgy, and certain parts of the Coptic Church are unfortunately so infested with Evangelical/Protestant music that it has crept into the Divine Liturgy itself.

I think it's unfortunate that "relaxed fasting rules" has been lumped in uncritically with Yamaha keyboards and "Refiner's Fire" as examples of "cater(ing) to modern sensibilities" (in the past, I have done this myself, so I am not "pointing fingers" in an accusatory manner). 

In the canonical literature of the Syriac tradition, the only fasts whose lengths are the same as in the other local Churches are Wednesday and Friday.  Everything else is different. 

Quote
Nativity Fast:

a) Ascetics (i.e., monastics) fast from 15 November to 24 December inclusive, breaking the fast after the Liturgy of 25 December.
b) Westerners (i.e., Syrians) begin this fast on 10 December.
c) Easterners (i.e., Persians, Indians) begin this fast on 1 December.

Fast of Nineveh:

a) Begins on the third Monday before Great Lent and ends on Thursday morning after the Liturgy (i.e., three full days), but
b) Some fast for the whole week.

Great Lent:

a) Begins on the seventh Monday before Easter and ends forty days later on the Friday before the Saturday of Lazarus, which is forty days of abstinence and thirty days of abstinence and fasting.

Holy Week:

a) Begins on the Monday after Palm Sunday and ends on Holy Saturday, which is six days of abstinence and five days of abstinence and fasting.  The fast is broken on Easter.

Apostles' Fast

a) Some begin this fast on the first Monday after Pentecost (i.e., the day after) and end on 29 June after the Liturgy for the feast of SS Peter and Paul.
b) Others begin this fast on the second Monday after Pentecost and end on 29 June, observing the week after Pentecost as they observed the week after Easter.
c) Easterners begin this fast on the first Monday after Pentecost and end it seven weeks later, observing the feast of SS Peter and Paul in the middle of this period.
d) "There is no canon regarding its observance." (Bar Ebroyo)
e) "Though this fast is not necessary, it would be impious not to keep it."  (Jacob of Edessa)
f) Ascetics fast for seven weeks throughout the year and eat and drink for seven weeks and repeat this cycle until Great Lent arrives.

Dormition Fast

a) Begins on 1 August and ends on 15 August after the Liturgy. 

The fasting rules are fairly standard:

Quote
Great Lent

Monday through Friday

a) Total fasting from food and drink until the ninth hour (i.e., 3pm).
b) Abstinence from meat, fish, dairy products, and alcohol at any meal(s) after the end of the day's fast.
c) Ascetics also fast from oil.     

Saturday and Sunday
 
a) Same rules as above, except that the fast is broken after the morning Liturgy.

Quote
All Other Fasts

a) Total fasting from food and drink until the sixth hour (i.e., 12 noon)
b) Abstinence from meat and dairy products at any meal(s) after the end of the day's fast.

These rules are not identical to the practice of the other local Churches.  Most of this is different from Armenian and Coptic practice due to differences in the temporal and sanctoral cycles of the calendar as well as allowed food/drink.  Furthermore, there is variation even within the same local Church in terms of duration and obligation.  These rules also predate the use of electronic keyboards by at least seven hundred years. 

Based on the canonical literature, I could make a similar case for some of the other things you mentioned in this thread as examples of compromise.  For instance, with regard to "shortening liturgies", there is a canon directing priests not to bore the people by "babbling" an excessive number of prayers when offering incense, but to be content with reciting one.  Is that shortening?  Yes.  But it is presented as a good thing when compared with long services that do not edify the faithful.     

So I think it is unfair to criticise our fasting regulations as a matter of compromising to modern times.  When the tradition itself allows leeway on certain things, choosing a practice that is less strict than what the Ethiopians/Eritreans do doesn't suddenly make us untraditional or modernist or what have you.  It just makes us different.     
How this relates to the coming Antichrist? I don't know...

Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

Offline Antonious Nikolas

  • Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,237
  • Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Oriental Orthodox Church
Re: Of the OO churches, which would you say is more "traditional?"
« Reply #7 on: June 06, 2017, 07:04:34 PM »
I think it's unfortunate that "relaxed fasting rules" has been lumped in uncritically with Yamaha keyboards and "Refiner's Fire" as examples of "cater(ing) to modern sensibilities" (in the past, I have done this myself, so I am not "pointing fingers" in an accusatory manner). 

I'm not talking about longstanding regional variations in the length of fasts or what foods are allowed, Mor.  If Syriac fasts were always shorter and less strident than Ethiopian or Coptic fasts, so be it.  I make no judgment either way, as that all falls under the category of legitimate local custom.  I'm talking about modern clergy in the West resigning themselves to the fact that many of the faithful simply aren't going to keep the fasts like they used to or pray long liturgies like they used to, and accommodating them accordingly.  I've had conversations with clergymen of some of our sister churches which lead me to believe that this might be the case, at least to a certain degree.  I've heard the refrain of, "We've been here since the 19th century.  Wait until your people have been here longer.  Then we'll see if they'll still tolerate long liturgies and fasts, and taking their shoes off, and being told they can only marry other Orthodox" quite a bit from some of our beloved brethren.  On one level, I get it, but on another, I think we should be trying to inculcate in the laity - even those who are coming primarily for cultural reasons or out of habit - an appreciation for why things are done the way they're done instead of caving in to the fact they have scheduled their kids soccer games for 11 o'clock and need to be out of church by 10 or whatever.  This constitutes something of a slippery slope to me.  Forgive me, but I'm impressed by the fact that the Ethiopians/Eritreans never budge on this sort of thing.  I believe that this is something to aspire to.  I don't believe that in three or four generations, we'll all have Halloween decorations up in the parish hall, we'll all leave our shoes on, and we'll all get out of liturgy in time for the game.  If we do, that's a tragedy.

These rules are not identical to the practice of the other local Churches. 

Again, I never said that they were.  Forgive me if I didn't make it clear what I was talking about or how I took the question in the OP.

Most of this is different from Armenian and Coptic practice due to differences in the temporal and sanctoral cycles of the calendar as well as allowed food/drink.  Furthermore, there is variation even within the same local Church in terms of duration and obligation.

Very true.  Again, I never asserted that the practices or cycles of the Sister Churches were ever exactly the same and that someone deviated from a mythical common practice that never existed.  I am simply talking about the approaches the different churches seem to take in the 20th/21st century regarding the issue of whether or not their faithful in the modern West are still willing to "play by the old rules" and how to deal with that.

These rules also predate the use of electronic keyboards by at least seven hundred years. 

LOL.  Of course they do.  Yeah, I lumped a lot of things in together, and I could've gone through each item one by one in more detail and discussed in what precise ways they represented compromise in my view, but I didn't think that was necessary for the purposes of the OP.

Based on the canonical literature, I could make a similar case for some of the other things you mentioned in this thread as examples of compromise.  For instance, with regard to "shortening liturgies", there is a canon directing priests not to bore the people by "babbling" an excessive number of prayers when offering incense, but to be content with reciting one.  Is that shortening?  Yes.  But it is presented as a good thing when compared with long services that do not edify the faithful. 

I agree with the concept of not imposing a lengthy monastic typikon on the laity.  What I don't agree with is the concept of acquiescing to the whims of people who regard liturgy as an obligation to be gotten through as quickly as possible on a Sunday morning, so let's see what we can cut.  I do believe that this is a problem in some (if not all) quarters of our communion, and how we address it varies from church to church.  I have been blessed to witness clergy from our respective churches discuss frankly some of the "problems of the people" relative to this sort of thing.  They agree that the people come up with questions like: "Can we shorten the liturgy to its most essential parts?"  "Would the liturgy be invalid if we skipped the [insert long diptych or whatever here]?"  "Can we say 'Lord have mercy' once with feeling instead of 41 times?" and other such very modern (and to my mind repulsive) questions.  The difference seems to me to be in how each jurisdiction address such questions.  Some seem not to even take them under consideration.  Others seem to wince and say, "Well, we don't want them to leave, so..."  I think at the end of the day, all of us need to be teaching our people to appreciate why we pray and fast the way we do, whatever our respective traditions may be.  If the dude smoking outside the church, or the dude who comes in after the kiss of peace on purpose because he doesn't like people "in his space" is gonna leave, either teach him why he needs to be inside, or let him leave, but don't change things to "make him more comfortable".

So I think it is unfair to criticise our fasting regulations as a matter of compromising to modern times.  When the tradition itself allows leeway on certain things, choosing a practice that is less strict than what the Ethiopians/Eritreans do doesn't suddenly make us untraditional or modernist or what have you.  It just makes us different.     

Again, I am not saying that everyone has to fast in precisely the same way as the Ethiopians or Eritreans.  I am saying that while I appreciate the canons you are referencing - and more importantly, I appreciate the pastoral concerns involved - we have to draw a line in the sand in terms of accommodating people who want a later liturgy so they can sleep in and yet simultaneously want the liturgy to end earlier so they can have their day of leisure, or who just want to give up chocolate or something for lent like the Catholics, or something silly like that.  I am not criticizing legitimate regional practice.  I am criticizing the lengths we are sometimes willing to go to to make the nominal Orthodox Christian or the "I'm mostly here because it's what I feel people of my ethnicity are supposed to do" Orthodox Christian feel like he should still hang around and pay his dues.
« Last Edit: June 06, 2017, 07:15:02 PM by Antonious Nikolas »
I'm with the camp of 13 million Americans that believe politicians are, or are controlled by, Reptilians. I think only monks can solve this problem. It doesn't seem right that they prefer to ignore it.

Offline Alpha60

  • Pray without ceasing!
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,591
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox
Re: Of the OO churches, which would you say is more "traditional?"
« Reply #8 on: June 07, 2017, 02:05:24 AM »
What about the Armenians?  They adhere precisely to Classical Armenian and are doctrinaire on that point.  I haven't seen praise and worship music in an Armenian parish.  More specifically, the Armenian Patriarchate of Jerusalem keeps the Old Calendar; the Armenians are the only Christians who still follow the ancient practice of celebrating the Nativity and Baptism of our Lord on the same feast, and the Armenians of Jerusalem are the only Christians left doing this on the Julian Calendar (before the feasts began to be separated in the late fourth century, this is the date, January 6th, Old Style, that all Christians who celebrated the Nativity used).

Yes, their liturgy is Latinized and Byzantinized, and a number of historic aspects of it including various anaphorae, the presanctified and so on, fell into disuse, but what they do have, they have preserved more aggressively than most.  If the Ethiopians are the most traditional, I think Armenians are easily in second place.

Note it was not a part of their tradition to not wear shoes in the nave; that is a Coptic-Ethiopic praxis (and perhaps a disused Syriac one) related to ancient Judaism.  There is no evidence of any change there, either.   Also, their churches retain the Bema, along with Chaldean Catholic churches, something that was more common in ancient times.  An Armenian Bema looks very different from a Jewish or an Assyrian/Chaldean Bema, but it is liturgically and technically a Bema.

Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, they alone universally continue to reserve the Eucharist in the tabernacle for distribution to the sick.   We should all be reserving the Eucharist, but only the Armenians, and a few Syriacs who are attempting to revive the Presanctified, including the Independent Syrac Orthodox jurisdiction (Thuringyor or somesuch), actually do it, and only in the case of the Armenian Church does this represent the living and uninterrupted tradition.
"It is logical that the actions of the human race over time will lead to its destruction.  I, Alpha 60, am merely the agent of this destruction."

- The computer Alpha 60, from Alphaville (1964) by Jean Luc Godard, the obvious inspiration for HAL-9000 from 2001: A Space Odyssey. 

This signature is not intended to offend any user, nor the relatives of Discovery 1 deputy commander Dr. Frank Poole,  and crew members Dr. Victor Kaminsky, Dr. Jack Kimball, and Dr. Charles Hunter.

Offline Antonious Nikolas

  • Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,237
  • Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Oriental Orthodox Church
Re: Of the OO churches, which would you say is more "traditional?"
« Reply #9 on: June 07, 2017, 08:16:46 AM »
All good points.
I'm with the camp of 13 million Americans that believe politicians are, or are controlled by, Reptilians. I think only monks can solve this problem. It doesn't seem right that they prefer to ignore it.

Offline coptic orthodox boy

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 532
Re: Of the OO churches, which would you say is more "traditional?"
« Reply #10 on: June 07, 2017, 01:46:50 PM »
What about the Armenians?  They adhere precisely to Classical Armenian and are doctrinaire on that point.  I haven't seen praise and worship music in an Armenian parish.  More specifically, the Armenian Patriarchate of Jerusalem keeps the Old Calendar; the Armenians are the only Christians who still follow the ancient practice of celebrating the Nativity and Baptism of our Lord on the same feast, and the Armenians of Jerusalem are the only Christians left doing this on the Julian Calendar (before the feasts began to be separated in the late fourth century, this is the date, January 6th, Old Style, that all Christians who celebrated the Nativity used).

Yes, their liturgy is Latinized and Byzantinized, and a number of historic aspects of it including various anaphorae, the presanctified and so on, fell into disuse, but what they do have, they have preserved more aggressively than most.  If the Ethiopians are the most traditional, I think Armenians are easily in second place.

Note it was not a part of their tradition to not wear shoes in the nave; that is a Coptic-Ethiopic praxis (and perhaps a disused Syriac one) related to ancient Judaism.  There is no evidence of any change there, either.   Also, their churches retain the Bema, along with Chaldean Catholic churches, something that was more common in ancient times.  An Armenian Bema looks very different from a Jewish or an Assyrian/Chaldean Bema, but it is liturgically and technically a Bema.

Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, they alone universally continue to reserve the Eucharist in the tabernacle for distribution to the sick.   We should all be reserving the Eucharist, but only the Armenians, and a few Syriacs who are attempting to revive the Presanctified, including the Independent Syrac Orthodox jurisdiction (Thuringyor or somesuch), actually do it, and only in the case of the Armenian Church does this represent the living and uninterrupted tradition.

That's cool that Armenians have a tabernacle.  I remember Fr. Benedict Groeschel telling a story of him entering an Armenian parish and genuflecting towards the tabernacle and the Armenian priest complimenting the Latin Rite Catholics on this particular tradition and stating he wished it was apart of the Armenian tradition as well.  When I was a practicing Catholic one of my favorite devotions was Eucharistic Adoration while the host was placed in the monstrance.   

Offline Antonious Nikolas

  • Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,237
  • Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Oriental Orthodox Church
Re: Of the OO churches, which would you say is more "traditional?"
« Reply #11 on: June 07, 2017, 03:30:27 PM »
I also wish our faithful showed more reverence towards the altar.
I'm with the camp of 13 million Americans that believe politicians are, or are controlled by, Reptilians. I think only monks can solve this problem. It doesn't seem right that they prefer to ignore it.

Offline rakovsky

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,516
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Of the OO churches, which would you say is more "traditional?"
« Reply #12 on: June 07, 2017, 03:58:02 PM »
What about the Armenians?  They adhere precisely to Classical Armenian and are doctrinaire on that point.  I haven't seen praise and worship music in an Armenian parish.  More specifically, the Armenian Patriarchate of Jerusalem keeps the Old Calendar; the Armenians are the only Christians who still follow the ancient practice of celebrating the Nativity and Baptism of our Lord on the same feast, and the Armenians of Jerusalem are the only Christians left doing this on the Julian Calendar (before the feasts began to be separated in the late fourth century, this is the date, January 6th, Old Style, that all Christians who celebrated the Nativity used).

Yes, their liturgy is Latinized
Can someone please say how and when the Armenian services got Latinized?
The ocean, infinite to men, and the worlds beyond it, are directed by the same ordinances of the Lord. ~ I Clement 20

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 33,220
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: Of the OO churches, which would you say is more "traditional?"
« Reply #13 on: June 07, 2017, 03:59:29 PM »
How and when the Armenian services got Latinized.
How this relates to the coming Antichrist? I don't know...

Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

Offline Alpha60

  • Pray without ceasing!
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,591
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox
Re: Of the OO churches, which would you say is more "traditional?"
« Reply #14 on: June 07, 2017, 04:15:00 PM »
How and when the Armenian services got Latinized.

Nice.
"It is logical that the actions of the human race over time will lead to its destruction.  I, Alpha 60, am merely the agent of this destruction."

- The computer Alpha 60, from Alphaville (1964) by Jean Luc Godard, the obvious inspiration for HAL-9000 from 2001: A Space Odyssey. 

This signature is not intended to offend any user, nor the relatives of Discovery 1 deputy commander Dr. Frank Poole,  and crew members Dr. Victor Kaminsky, Dr. Jack Kimball, and Dr. Charles Hunter.

Offline Antonious Nikolas

  • Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,237
  • Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Oriental Orthodox Church
Re: Of the OO churches, which would you say is more "traditional?"
« Reply #15 on: June 07, 2017, 04:26:38 PM »
How and when the Armenian services got Latinized.

 ;D ;D ;D
I'm with the camp of 13 million Americans that believe politicians are, or are controlled by, Reptilians. I think only monks can solve this problem. It doesn't seem right that they prefer to ignore it.

Offline Aram

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 524
  • Faith: Armenian Orthodox
Re: Of the OO churches, which would you say is more "traditional?"
« Reply #16 on: June 07, 2017, 07:39:27 PM »
What about the Armenians?  They adhere precisely to Classical Armenian and are doctrinaire on that point.  I haven't seen praise and worship music in an Armenian parish.  More specifically, the Armenian Patriarchate of Jerusalem keeps the Old Calendar; the Armenians are the only Christians who still follow the ancient practice of celebrating the Nativity and Baptism of our Lord on the same feast, and the Armenians of Jerusalem are the only Christians left doing this on the Julian Calendar (before the feasts began to be separated in the late fourth century, this is the date, January 6th, Old Style, that all Christians who celebrated the Nativity used).

Yes, their liturgy is Latinized and Byzantinized, and a number of historic aspects of it including various anaphorae, the presanctified and so on, fell into disuse, but what they do have, they have preserved more aggressively than most.  If the Ethiopians are the most traditional, I think Armenians are easily in second place.

Note it was not a part of their tradition to not wear shoes in the nave; that is a Coptic-Ethiopic praxis (and perhaps a disused Syriac one) related to ancient Judaism.  There is no evidence of any change there, either.   Also, their churches retain the Bema, along with Chaldean Catholic churches, something that was more common in ancient times.  An Armenian Bema looks very different from a Jewish or an Assyrian/Chaldean Bema, but it is liturgically and technically a Bema.

Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, they alone universally continue to reserve the Eucharist in the tabernacle for distribution to the sick.   We should all be reserving the Eucharist, but only the Armenians, and a few Syriacs who are attempting to revive the Presanctified, including the Independent Syrac Orthodox jurisdiction (Thuringyor or somesuch), actually do it, and only in the case of the Armenian Church does this represent the living and uninterrupted tradition.
Listen, I'm Armenian. I'm not a person who gets uppity about "Latinized" liturgical practices and such, but let's face it. I like my church. I don't mean this in any kind of denigrating way. In terms of how the Armenian tradition is practiced across the globe, the answer to the question in the OP is definitively not the Armenian Church. Sure, Jerusalem does everything the "right" way, but the other 99.9% of us, your mileage may vary.

Offline Brigidsboy

  • Section Moderator
  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 469
  • Faith: Armenian Apostolic
  • Jurisdiction: Holy See of Cilicia
Re: Of the OO churches, which would you say is more "traditional?"
« Reply #17 on: June 08, 2017, 02:01:12 AM »
What about the Armenians?  They adhere precisely to Classical Armenian and are doctrinaire on that point.  I haven't seen praise and worship music in an Armenian parish.  More specifically, the Armenian Patriarchate of Jerusalem keeps the Old Calendar; the Armenians are the only Christians who still follow the ancient practice of celebrating the Nativity and Baptism of our Lord on the same feast, and the Armenians of Jerusalem are the only Christians left doing this on the Julian Calendar (before the feasts began to be separated in the late fourth century, this is the date, January 6th, Old Style, that all Christians who celebrated the Nativity used).

Yes, their liturgy is Latinized and Byzantinized, and a number of historic aspects of it including various anaphorae, the presanctified and so on, fell into disuse, but what they do have, they have preserved more aggressively than most.  If the Ethiopians are the most traditional, I think Armenians are easily in second place.

Note it was not a part of their tradition to not wear shoes in the nave; that is a Coptic-Ethiopic praxis (and perhaps a disused Syriac one) related to ancient Judaism.  There is no evidence of any change there, either.   Also, their churches retain the Bema, along with Chaldean Catholic churches, something that was more common in ancient times.  An Armenian Bema looks very different from a Jewish or an Assyrian/Chaldean Bema, but it is liturgically and technically a Bema.

Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, they alone universally continue to reserve the Eucharist in the tabernacle for distribution to the sick.   We should all be reserving the Eucharist, but only the Armenians, and a few Syriacs who are attempting to revive the Presanctified, including the Independent Syrac Orthodox jurisdiction (Thuringyor or somesuch), actually do it, and only in the case of the Armenian Church does this represent the living and uninterrupted tradition.
Listen, I'm Armenian. I'm not a person who gets uppity about "Latinized" liturgical practices and such, but let's face it. I like my church. I don't mean this in any kind of denigrating way. In terms of how the Armenian tradition is practiced across the globe, the answer to the question in the OP is definitively not the Armenian Church. Sure, Jerusalem does everything the "right" way, but the other 99.9% of us, your mileage may vary.

Agreed 100%!🇦🇲
"I don't think I've ever eaten anything Armenian I didn't like.  I even drink my non-Armenian coffee out of a St Nersess Seminary coffee mug because it is better that way." --Mor Ephrem

Offline rakovsky

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,516
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Of the OO churches, which would you say is more "traditional?"
« Reply #18 on: June 08, 2017, 08:32:47 AM »

Yes, their liturgy is Latinized and Byzantinized, and a number of historic aspects of it including various anaphorae, the presanctified and so on, fell into disuse, but what they do have, they have preserved more aggressively than most.  If the Ethiopians are the most traditional, I think Armenians are easily in second place.

Note it was not a part of their tradition to not wear shoes in the nave; that is a Coptic-Ethiopic praxis (and perhaps a disused Syriac one) related to ancient Judaism.  There is no evidence of any change there, either.   Also, their churches retain the Bema, along with Chaldean Catholic churches, something that was more common in ancient times.  An Armenian Bema looks very different from a Jewish or an Assyrian/Chaldean Bema, but it is liturgically and technically a Bema.

Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, they alone universally continue to reserve the Eucharist in the tabernacle for distribution to the sick.   We should all be reserving the Eucharist, but only the Armenians, and a few Syriacs who are attempting to revive the Presanctified, including the Independent Syrac Orthodox jurisdiction (Thuringyor or somesuch), actually do it, and only in the case of the Armenian Church does this represent the living and uninterrupted tradition.
Listen, I'm Armenian. I'm not a person who gets uppity about "Latinized" liturgical practices and such, but let's face it. I like my church. I don't mean this in any kind of denigrating way. In terms of how the Armenian tradition is practiced across the globe, the answer to the question in the OP is definitively not the Armenian Church. Sure, Jerusalem does everything the "right" way, but the other 99.9% of us, your mileage may vary.

Agreed 100%!🇦🇲
Aram and Brigidsboy,
I am interested in early Christian liturgies and like it that Armenia was evangelized in apostolic times. Can you please tell me if you think the Armenian rite has much in continuation of the 1st to mid 2nd c. Armenian Christian practices, and how and when it got Latinized?
« Last Edit: June 08, 2017, 08:33:19 AM by rakovsky »
The ocean, infinite to men, and the worlds beyond it, are directed by the same ordinances of the Lord. ~ I Clement 20

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,606
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Of the OO churches, which would you say is more "traditional?"
« Reply #19 on: June 08, 2017, 12:01:39 PM »
I like it that Armenia was evangelized in apostolic times.

Armenian salvation, now Rakovsky-approved!
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 33,220
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: Of the OO churches, which would you say is more "traditional?"
« Reply #20 on: June 08, 2017, 12:30:55 PM »
I like it that Armenia was evangelized in apostolic times.

Armenian salvation, now Rakovsky-approved!

Now wait just a minute!!1!11!!
How this relates to the coming Antichrist? I don't know...

Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 33,220
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: Of the OO churches, which would you say is more "traditional?"
« Reply #21 on: June 08, 2017, 06:47:21 PM »
I'm talking about modern clergy in the West resigning themselves to the fact that many of the faithful simply aren't going to keep the fasts like they used to or pray long liturgies like they used to, and accommodating them accordingly.  I've had conversations with clergymen of some of our sister churches which lead me to believe that this might be the case, at least to a certain degree.  I've heard the refrain of, "We've been here since the 19th century.  Wait until your people have been here longer.  Then we'll see if they'll still tolerate long liturgies and fasts, and taking their shoes off, and being told they can only marry other Orthodox" quite a bit from some of our beloved brethren.  On one level, I get it, but on another, I think we should be trying to inculcate in the laity - even those who are coming primarily for cultural reasons or out of habit - an appreciation for why things are done the way they're done instead of caving in to the fact they have scheduled their kids soccer games for 11 o'clock and need to be out of church by 10 or whatever.  This constitutes something of a slippery slope to me.  Forgive me, but I'm impressed by the fact that the Ethiopians/Eritreans never budge on this sort of thing.  I believe that this is something to aspire to.  I don't believe that in three or four generations, we'll all have Halloween decorations up in the parish hall, we'll all leave our shoes on, and we'll all get out of liturgy in time for the game.  If we do, that's a tragedy.

Without knowing more about the discussions you've had, it's hard for me to comment on them.  I do agree with you that we would do better to explain why we do things a certain way rather than sheepishly and ignorantly conceding defeat and advocating change.  At the same time, I think some evolution over the course of generations is unavoidable, and the Church needs to be able to address that constructively. 

Quote
I agree with the concept of not imposing a lengthy monastic typikon on the laity.  What I don't agree with is the concept of acquiescing to the whims of people who regard liturgy as an obligation to be gotten through as quickly as possible on a Sunday morning, so let's see what we can cut. 

In principle, I agree with you.  But in my experience, the problem is a combination of not understanding what we're doing and why we're doing it and having some legitimate concerns that should be considered. 

For instance, the current liturgical books of the Malankara Orthodox Church prescribe that the Rite of Kneeling on Pentecost be served during the course of the Liturgy, between "Holy things for the holy" and Communion.  That service, composed of three smaller services served consecutively, takes between 1.5-2hrs if served in full in the typical style.  Combined with Matins, Hours, and Liturgy, it is one of the longest continuous services of the liturgical year, and it's not uncommon for both priests and people to wonder why these rites are so long, how if at all to abbreviate it, etc.  I know people who just don't bother showing up to church on Pentecost because they find the service burdensome: it's long, it's theologically dense, it's physically demanding, and so on. 

But the canonical literature of our Church specifically says that even though the Spirit descended at the third hour, we do the Rite of Kneeling at the ninth hour (i.e., in conjunction with the evening service of that day) because "it is not possible for us to do everything (the Liturgy, the kneeling, and the preaching) all at once".  At some point, this service was inserted into the Liturgy, perhaps to accommodate people who could not make repeated trips to church or hang around all day, and now that is all we know how to do. 

I mentioned this to a priest-friend, and even though he can point to legitimate ecclesiastical authorities to advocate moving that service out of the Liturgy, the only way he would consider actually doing it is if his bishop has any recollection of that ever being done anywhere in his lifetime (to ensure he has back-up in case of complaints).  IOW, there are some traditions which are not necessarily entirely legit but have crept in over time, and now we feel stuck with them, even when the pastoral "problems" they cause are recognised and validated by canon law; moreover, if you try to change them responsibly, you will be accused of impiety by some and of not going far enough by others. 

So I think it is important to tread carefully and with as much knowledge as possible, but there are instances in which "the problems of the people" are valid and the possible solutions, even when well founded and thoroughly explained, will not please everyone.  At a certain point, I'd agree that people either need to adjust or leave, but in given situations I think there are ways to "change" without really changing.  Discerning what is a legitimate pastoral issue and what is just people's ignorance and laziness is important.  But I think it's not impossible to have an evolution in our practices over a few generations and for that evolution not to be a bad or tragic thing.   

Quote
I am not criticizing legitimate regional practice.  I am criticizing the lengths we are sometimes willing to go to to make the nominal Orthodox Christian or the "I'm mostly here because it's what I feel people of my ethnicity are supposed to do" Orthodox Christian feel like he should still hang around and pay his dues.

In my experience, priests are sometimes willing to go to such lengths not as much to stop a loss of income to the parish (though it would be foolish to dismiss that entirely) as to prevent the loss of parishioners.  The crappy sheep are still their crappy sheep.  ;)
How this relates to the coming Antichrist? I don't know...

Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

Offline Antonious Nikolas

  • Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,237
  • Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Oriental Orthodox Church
Re: Of the OO churches, which would you say is more "traditional?"
« Reply #22 on: June 08, 2017, 07:51:50 PM »
I'm talking about modern clergy in the West resigning themselves to the fact that many of the faithful simply aren't going to keep the fasts like they used to or pray long liturgies like they used to, and accommodating them accordingly.  I've had conversations with clergymen of some of our sister churches which lead me to believe that this might be the case, at least to a certain degree.  I've heard the refrain of, "We've been here since the 19th century.  Wait until your people have been here longer.  Then we'll see if they'll still tolerate long liturgies and fasts, and taking their shoes off, and being told they can only marry other Orthodox" quite a bit from some of our beloved brethren.  On one level, I get it, but on another, I think we should be trying to inculcate in the laity - even those who are coming primarily for cultural reasons or out of habit - an appreciation for why things are done the way they're done instead of caving in to the fact they have scheduled their kids soccer games for 11 o'clock and need to be out of church by 10 or whatever.  This constitutes something of a slippery slope to me.  Forgive me, but I'm impressed by the fact that the Ethiopians/Eritreans never budge on this sort of thing.  I believe that this is something to aspire to.  I don't believe that in three or four generations, we'll all have Halloween decorations up in the parish hall, we'll all leave our shoes on, and we'll all get out of liturgy in time for the game.  If we do, that's a tragedy.

Without knowing more about the discussions you've had, it's hard for me to comment on them.  I do agree with you that we would do better to explain why we do things a certain way rather than sheepishly and ignorantly conceding defeat and advocating change.  At the same time, I think some evolution over the course of generations is unavoidable, and the Church needs to be able to address that constructively. 

Quote
I agree with the concept of not imposing a lengthy monastic typikon on the laity.  What I don't agree with is the concept of acquiescing to the whims of people who regard liturgy as an obligation to be gotten through as quickly as possible on a Sunday morning, so let's see what we can cut. 

In principle, I agree with you.  But in my experience, the problem is a combination of not understanding what we're doing and why we're doing it and having some legitimate concerns that should be considered. 

For instance, the current liturgical books of the Malankara Orthodox Church prescribe that the Rite of Kneeling on Pentecost be served during the course of the Liturgy, between "Holy things for the holy" and Communion.  That service, composed of three smaller services served consecutively, takes between 1.5-2hrs if served in full in the typical style.  Combined with Matins, Hours, and Liturgy, it is one of the longest continuous services of the liturgical year, and it's not uncommon for both priests and people to wonder why these rites are so long, how if at all to abbreviate it, etc.  I know people who just don't bother showing up to church on Pentecost because they find the service burdensome: it's long, it's theologically dense, it's physically demanding, and so on. 

But the canonical literature of our Church specifically says that even though the Spirit descended at the third hour, we do the Rite of Kneeling at the ninth hour (i.e., in conjunction with the evening service of that day) because "it is not possible for us to do everything (the Liturgy, the kneeling, and the preaching) all at once".  At some point, this service was inserted into the Liturgy, perhaps to accommodate people who could not make repeated trips to church or hang around all day, and now that is all we know how to do. 

I mentioned this to a priest-friend, and even though he can point to legitimate ecclesiastical authorities to advocate moving that service out of the Liturgy, the only way he would consider actually doing it is if his bishop has any recollection of that ever being done anywhere in his lifetime (to ensure he has back-up in case of complaints).  IOW, there are some traditions which are not necessarily entirely legit but have crept in over time, and now we feel stuck with them, even when the pastoral "problems" they cause are recognised and validated by canon law; moreover, if you try to change them responsibly, you will be accused of impiety by some and of not going far enough by others. 

So I think it is important to tread carefully and with as much knowledge as possible, but there are instances in which "the problems of the people" are valid and the possible solutions, even when well founded and thoroughly explained, will not please everyone.  At a certain point, I'd agree that people either need to adjust or leave, but in given situations I think there are ways to "change" without really changing.  Discerning what is a legitimate pastoral issue and what is just people's ignorance and laziness is important.  But I think it's not impossible to have an evolution in our practices over a few generations and for that evolution not to be a bad or tragic thing.   

Quote
I am not criticizing legitimate regional practice.  I am criticizing the lengths we are sometimes willing to go to to make the nominal Orthodox Christian or the "I'm mostly here because it's what I feel people of my ethnicity are supposed to do" Orthodox Christian feel like he should still hang around and pay his dues.

In my experience, priests are sometimes willing to go to such lengths not as much to stop a loss of income to the parish (though it would be foolish to dismiss that entirely) as to prevent the loss of parishioners.  The crappy sheep are still their crappy sheep.  ;)

I saw this long post, and expected to begin dissecting it for easier rebuttal, but in truth, I don't really disagree with anything you've said here.
I'm with the camp of 13 million Americans that believe politicians are, or are controlled by, Reptilians. I think only monks can solve this problem. It doesn't seem right that they prefer to ignore it.

Offline Alpha60

  • Pray without ceasing!
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,591
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox
Re: Of the OO churches, which would you say is more "traditional?"
« Reply #23 on: June 09, 2017, 08:16:24 AM »
Dissecting the posts of Mor would be an exercise in futility.  One might as well seek to dissect a marble statue.
"It is logical that the actions of the human race over time will lead to its destruction.  I, Alpha 60, am merely the agent of this destruction."

- The computer Alpha 60, from Alphaville (1964) by Jean Luc Godard, the obvious inspiration for HAL-9000 from 2001: A Space Odyssey. 

This signature is not intended to offend any user, nor the relatives of Discovery 1 deputy commander Dr. Frank Poole,  and crew members Dr. Victor Kaminsky, Dr. Jack Kimball, and Dr. Charles Hunter.

Offline Antonious Nikolas

  • Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,237
  • Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Oriental Orthodox Church
Re: Of the OO churches, which would you say is more "traditional?"
« Reply #24 on: June 09, 2017, 09:51:26 AM »
Dissecting the posts of Mor would be an exercise in futility.  One might as well seek to dissect a marble statue.

No, you're thinking of dissecting the posts of a guy who used to post here named wgw.  Honestly speaking, Mor's posts are actually worth a closer look most of the time.  ;)
I'm with the camp of 13 million Americans that believe politicians are, or are controlled by, Reptilians. I think only monks can solve this problem. It doesn't seem right that they prefer to ignore it.

Offline Iconodule

  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,463
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Ecumenical Patriarchate (ACROD)
Re: Of the OO churches, which would you say is more "traditional?"
« Reply #25 on: June 09, 2017, 10:04:58 AM »
Dissecting the posts of Mor would be an exercise in futility.  One might as well seek to dissect a marble statue.

That's what happens when someone speaks from knowledge and experience. You should try it some time.
Quote
Don John pounding from the slaughter-painted poop
- GK Chesteron, "Lepanto"

Offline rakovsky

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,516
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Of the OO churches, which would you say is more "traditional?"
« Reply #26 on: June 09, 2017, 12:39:20 PM »
Dissecting the posts of Mor would be an exercise in futility.  One might as well seek to dissect a marble statue.
Imagine if someone created a second forum account and signature line so that every message that they ever posted was meant to personally insult and troll another user who never did that to them.
« Last Edit: June 09, 2017, 12:46:26 PM by rakovsky »
The ocean, infinite to men, and the worlds beyond it, are directed by the same ordinances of the Lord. ~ I Clement 20

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 33,220
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: Of the OO churches, which would you say is more "traditional?"
« Reply #27 on: June 09, 2017, 01:19:32 PM »
Dissecting the posts of Mor would be an exercise in futility.  One might as well seek to dissect a marble statue.
Imagine if someone created a second forum account and signature line so that every message that they ever posted was meant to personally insult and troll another user who never did that to them.

Imagine if someone kept his original forum account and posted all over the forum about how everyone's persecuting him when he's really just a nice guy with wide ranging academic interests.
How this relates to the coming Antichrist? I don't know...

Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

Offline rakovsky

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,516
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Of the OO churches, which would you say is more "traditional?"
« Reply #28 on: June 09, 2017, 01:42:35 PM »
Imagine if someone created a second forum account and signature line so that every message that they ever posted was meant to personally insult and troll another user who never did that to them.

Imagine if someone kept his original forum account and posted all over the forum about how everyone's persecuting him when he's really just a nice guy with wide ranging academic interests.
Please, Mor, let's consider these two scenarios.
Multiple forum accounts and personal attacks on the public section are both forbidden under forum rules.

On other hand, is saying that everyone is persecuting someone with a wide range of academic interests, particularly when each instance they point to can be reasonably interpreted that way, a forum rule violation?
« Last Edit: June 09, 2017, 01:43:18 PM by rakovsky »
The ocean, infinite to men, and the worlds beyond it, are directed by the same ordinances of the Lord. ~ I Clement 20

Offline Antonious Nikolas

  • Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,237
  • Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Oriental Orthodox Church
Re: Of the OO churches, which would you say is more "traditional?"
« Reply #29 on: June 09, 2017, 01:43:15 PM »
Dissecting the posts of Mor would be an exercise in futility.  One might as well seek to dissect a marble statue.
Imagine if someone created a second forum account and signature line so that every message that they ever posted was meant to personally insult and troll another user who never did that to them.

Persecution complex much?  ::)
I'm with the camp of 13 million Americans that believe politicians are, or are controlled by, Reptilians. I think only monks can solve this problem. It doesn't seem right that they prefer to ignore it.

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 33,220
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: Of the OO churches, which would you say is more "traditional?"
« Reply #30 on: June 09, 2017, 02:03:27 PM »
Imagine if someone created a second forum account and signature line so that every message that they ever posted was meant to personally insult and troll another user who never did that to them.

Imagine if someone kept his original forum account and posted all over the forum about how everyone's persecuting him when he's really just a nice guy with wide ranging academic interests.
Please, Mor, let's consider these two scenarios.

OK.

Quote
Multiple forum accounts and personal attacks on the public section are both forbidden under forum rules.

You are making an allegation without evidence (or even much fleshing out of your accusation, presumably for plausible deniability when challenged), and you are doing so in order to discredit another forum member.  That's an ad hominem attack, which is also forbidden under forum rules. 

Quote
On other hand, is saying that everyone is persecuting someone with a wide range of academic interests, particularly when each instance they point to can be reasonably interpreted that way, a forum rule violation?

When you do it, it's often a violation of the "contain conflict" rule because you raise it in threads where it doesn't belong.  Often, in order to further your argument, you twist others' words, adjust their quotations, manipulate conversation chains, etc. in order to give the appearance that you have a legitimate grievance when the full context demonstrates you don't. 

If you have a complaint against Alpha60, report him to the moderators, including your reasons for reporting him.  Don't quote him talking about something else that has nothing to do with you in order to attack him in a thread where it doesn't belong. 

This is a friendly warning.  Don't tempt me to go green. 
How this relates to the coming Antichrist? I don't know...

Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

Offline Alpha60

  • Pray without ceasing!
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,591
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox
Re: Of the OO churches, which would you say is more "traditional?"
« Reply #31 on: June 09, 2017, 06:57:54 PM »
Dissecting the posts of Mor would be an exercise in futility.  One might as well seek to dissect a marble statue.

No, you're thinking of dissecting the posts of a guy who used to post here named wgw.  Honestly speaking, Mor's posts are actually worth a closer look most of the time.  ;)

Indeed, but they also happen to be invariably correct, or at least interesting enough to warrant not doing detailed paragraph by paragraph rebuttals.   On those occasions where I have disagreed with Mor, I have usually come to agree with his perspective in time, owing to his training from a seminary that publishes most of what I agree with (a disproportionate amount of the Orthodox literature in my library that I like and enjoy comes from SVS, and a lecture delivered by Fr. John Behr was instrumental in persuading me to convert, in making me realize how watered down and weak and inadequete the Christology I'd been fed for all those years in Methodism was; where Orthodox priests like Fr. John Behr talk about the mystery of the incarnation, Methodist "preachers" engaged in moralistic babbling.

Really, it was so bad, in retrospect, that even the conservative high-church Anglican vicar of the nearby ECUSA did a better job.  I attended his parish for a while and consider him a friend; he retired after my conversion.  I could only tolerate their said services due to awful music, but that was a pit stop on the journey to Orthodoxy basically, and I am glad I had the experience of a functional Episcopal parish on my way out of Protestantism as it helped to smooth the transition.  Such parishes are now quite rare, the parish in question having since degenerated.

But basically, Mor was trained by the school of thought in Orthodoxy I generally agree with the most, at least with regards to pastoral care and ecumenical relations.  The ROCOR school of liturgical maximalism can produce better liturgical aesthetics, when it is not derailed by silly debates about whether to use the Obikhod and various recent compositions or ancient 16th century Znamenny Chant (the correct answer IMO is both).  He also happens to be a member of the other half of the Orthodox jurisdiction I decided to join personally; we are divided by a stupid and destructive political schism the reasons for which I can't understand and have stopped caring about, but are indirectly in communion via the other OO churches, and are basically members of the same liturgical rite, just under different hierarchies (and Mor's hierarchy seems to be doing slightly more work than mine to make that rite accessible to English speakers).
"It is logical that the actions of the human race over time will lead to its destruction.  I, Alpha 60, am merely the agent of this destruction."

- The computer Alpha 60, from Alphaville (1964) by Jean Luc Godard, the obvious inspiration for HAL-9000 from 2001: A Space Odyssey. 

This signature is not intended to offend any user, nor the relatives of Discovery 1 deputy commander Dr. Frank Poole,  and crew members Dr. Victor Kaminsky, Dr. Jack Kimball, and Dr. Charles Hunter.

Offline Aram

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 524
  • Faith: Armenian Orthodox
Re: Of the OO churches, which would you say is more "traditional?"
« Reply #32 on: June 09, 2017, 06:59:05 PM »
I dunno, you guys, I just like Mor. #tweetable

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 33,220
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: Of the OO churches, which would you say is more "traditional?"
« Reply #33 on: June 09, 2017, 07:14:20 PM »
I dunno, you guys, I just like Mor. #tweetable

You win my internets. 
How this relates to the coming Antichrist? I don't know...

Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

Offline Antonious Nikolas

  • Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,237
  • Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Oriental Orthodox Church
Re: Of the OO churches, which would you say is more "traditional?"
« Reply #34 on: June 09, 2017, 08:35:50 PM »
Dissecting the posts of Mor would be an exercise in futility.  One might as well seek to dissect a marble statue.

No, you're thinking of dissecting the posts of a guy who used to post here named wgw.  Honestly speaking, Mor's posts are actually worth a closer look most of the time.  ;)

Indeed, but they also happen to be invariably correct, or at least interesting enough to warrant not doing detailed paragraph by paragraph rebuttals...tl;dr...

Geez, you really broke your Chapstick out on that one, huh?  Mor and I have done detailed paragraph by paragraph rebuttals on one another before, and we're none the worse for wear.  Iron sharpens iron.  It's called mutual respect.
I'm with the camp of 13 million Americans that believe politicians are, or are controlled by, Reptilians. I think only monks can solve this problem. It doesn't seem right that they prefer to ignore it.

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Protospatharios
  • *****
  • Posts: 33,220
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: East
Re: Of the OO churches, which would you say is more "traditional?"
« Reply #35 on: June 09, 2017, 08:44:39 PM »
Mor and I have done detailed paragraph by paragraph rebuttals on one another before, and we're none the worse for wear.  Iron sharpens iron.  It's called mutual respect.

+∞
How this relates to the coming Antichrist? I don't know...

Quote
The erection of one’s rod counts as a form of glory (Theophylaktos of Ohrid, A Defense of Eunuchs, p. 329).

Offline Alpha60

  • Pray without ceasing!
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,591
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox
Re: Of the OO churches, which would you say is more "traditional?"
« Reply #36 on: June 10, 2017, 10:06:33 PM »
Dissecting the posts of Mor would be an exercise in futility.  One might as well seek to dissect a marble statue.

No, you're thinking of dissecting the posts of a guy who used to post here named wgw.  Honestly speaking, Mor's posts are actually worth a closer look most of the time.  ;)

Indeed, but they also happen to be invariably correct, or at least interesting enough to warrant not doing detailed paragraph by paragraph rebuttals...tl;dr...

Geez, you really broke your Chapstick out on that one, huh?  Mor and I have done detailed paragraph by paragraph rebuttals on one another before, and we're none the worse for wear.  Iron sharpens iron.  It's called mutual respect.

Interesting.
"It is logical that the actions of the human race over time will lead to its destruction.  I, Alpha 60, am merely the agent of this destruction."

- The computer Alpha 60, from Alphaville (1964) by Jean Luc Godard, the obvious inspiration for HAL-9000 from 2001: A Space Odyssey. 

This signature is not intended to offend any user, nor the relatives of Discovery 1 deputy commander Dr. Frank Poole,  and crew members Dr. Victor Kaminsky, Dr. Jack Kimball, and Dr. Charles Hunter.

Offline griego catolico

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 312
  • ...for the union of all, let us pray to the Lord.
Re: Of the OO churches, which would you say is more "traditional?"
« Reply #37 on: July 03, 2017, 12:50:34 AM »
What about the Armenians?  They adhere precisely to Classical Armenian and are doctrinaire on that point.  I haven't seen praise and worship music in an Armenian parish.  More specifically, the Armenian Patriarchate of Jerusalem keeps the Old Calendar; the Armenians are the only Christians who still follow the ancient practice of celebrating the Nativity and Baptism of our Lord on the same feast, and the Armenians of Jerusalem are the only Christians left doing this on the Julian Calendar (before the feasts began to be separated in the late fourth century, this is the date, January 6th, Old Style, that all Christians who celebrated the Nativity used).

Yes, their liturgy is Latinized and Byzantinized, and a number of historic aspects of it including various anaphorae, the presanctified and so on, fell into disuse, but what they do have, they have preserved more aggressively than most.  If the Ethiopians are the most traditional, I think Armenians are easily in second place.

Note it was not a part of their tradition to not wear shoes in the nave; that is a Coptic-Ethiopic praxis (and perhaps a disused Syriac one) related to ancient Judaism.  There is no evidence of any change there, either.   Also, their churches retain the Bema, along with Chaldean Catholic churches, something that was more common in ancient times.  An Armenian Bema looks very different from a Jewish or an Assyrian/Chaldean Bema, but it is liturgically and technically a Bema.

Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, they alone universally continue to reserve the Eucharist in the tabernacle for distribution to the sick.   We should all be reserving the Eucharist, but only the Armenians, and a few Syriacs who are attempting to revive the Presanctified, including the Independent Syrac Orthodox jurisdiction (Thuringyor or somesuch), actually do it, and only in the case of the Armenian Church does this represent the living and uninterrupted tradition.

That's cool that Armenians have a tabernacle.  I remember Fr. Benedict Groeschel telling a story of him entering an Armenian parish and genuflecting towards the tabernacle and the Armenian priest complimenting the Latin Rite Catholics on this particular tradition and stating he wished it was apart of the Armenian tradition as well.  When I was a practicing Catholic one of my favorite devotions was Eucharistic Adoration while the host was placed in the monstrance.   

There appear to be several ways in which the Eucharist is reserved in the Armenian Apostolic Church:

1) in an artophorion, which is commonly used in the Eastern Orthodox Church.
2) in a chalice
3) in a pyx
4) reserved in a side niche

I have also seen monstrances with nushkars displayed on the altars.

Are monstrances also used to reserve the Eucharist? This would mean the Eucharist is exposed on the altar during a Soorp Badarak.

Or are these monstrances that are used to reserve unconsecrated nushkars for future use?

Offline Aram

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 524
  • Faith: Armenian Orthodox
Re: Of the OO churches, which would you say is more "traditional?"
« Reply #38 on: July 03, 2017, 10:22:27 AM »
The monstrance-esque displays have unconsecrated nushkars in them. Most of the ones I've seen are super old and brittle, and are just always in there. No harm, no foul--they're unconsecrated. Usually, reserve nushkars are kept in a fridge or freezer until they're needed, then brought out a couple at a time (more for larger feast days). Priests or deacons will make a large batch and then work through them until they run out.

Reserved communion, in my experience, is held in a pyx, tabernacle, or small chalice directly on the altar, in the center, normally on the main or first level. It's not held on the side altar, though the empty chalice is returned to the side altar at the end of the liturgy.

Armenians don't "display" the eucharist, nor is it exposed.