OrthodoxChristianity.net
December 22, 2014, 03:18:12 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: That's it.....I'm going Trad!  (Read 9027 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #45 on: November 01, 2005, 05:59:31 PM »

As for the 28th Canon of Chalcedon, I think President Andrew Jackson's reply to Chief Justice Marshall is apt, "John Marshall has made his decision; let him enforce it now if he can."ÂÂ  Or better yet when in the history of the Church has Istanbul actually had jurisdiction over all non-imperial lands?ÂÂ  And since the empire is defunct now (in case you hadn't noticed its been gone a lot time now) the definition of who exactly are the Barbari remains.ÂÂ  In imperial days a barbarus was one who didn't speak Latin or Greek.ÂÂ  If you transfer the meaning of that concept and get past your literal fundamentalism you'd be able to accept that English, French and German are the Greek and Latin of the world today - so who really are the babarians now?

What happens when the formerly great Church of Istanbul is finally eradicated off the face of the earth?ÂÂ  Istanbul has long ceased to be the center of the Orthodox world...

As for you assertation that non Greek jurisdictions are in America by the grace of the Istanbul Patriarchate - that would be like Saddam Hussein saying the American/British occupation is allowed to administer the situation in Iraq.ÂÂ  

Ah, yes, the Nietzschean approach to Orthodox Ecclesiology, why didn't I consider this perspective and take it seriously? Hmmm...if you want to be Nietzschean fine, I actually respect the guy for the consistancy of his Philosophy, but his epistemology is fundamentally different than that of the Orthodox and really has no rational place in the discussion of Ecclesiology.

As far as who the barbarians are, that's an easy one, since our canonical structure is based on the civil law system of Rome, and not common law, barbarian lands can be defined to be all lands outside the bounds of the Empire on the day the canon was promulgated in A.D. 451. Since our canonical system is based on civil law this will continue to be the definition until such time as the canonical legislation is amended by a future Oecumenical Synod.

Regarding this here is a summary of the Russian understanding of Chalcedon 28:
http://www.stlukeorthodox.com/html/currentissues/diaspora.cfm

I have read the article and the assumptions are based upon a flaw in logic, as well as being inconsonant with the implications of the canonical interpreters:

Quote
It seems to me that the canon only gives Constantinople authority over Barbarians in the Pontic, Asian, and Thracian dioceses. Not anywhere where "Barbarians" are found.

This assumption, which is the the Assumption of Patriarch Alexis, is based on a fundamental problem in the understanding of Orthodox Ecclesiology, His Beatitude states in the article you cited:

Quote
It seems obvious that this inaccurate interpretation derives from an erroneous understanding of the term 'among the barbarians' (en tois barbarikois) and of the context of this _expression. It is erroneous in that it assumes that the issue here does not concern 'barbarian' peoples living either in the Roman Empire or beyond its limits, but administrative entities (defined by the State) and inhabited primarily by 'barbarians'. Yet there is no doubt but that this _expression refers not to provinces but to peoples; it is not used in an administrative, but in an ethnic sense.

This essentially states that the Episcopal boundaries established by the Fourth Oecumenical Synod were not Geographical but rather Ethnic, which is inconsonant with every notion of Orthodox Ecclesiology and quite unreasonable to assume that this was the intention of the Canon. In fact it was a notion so foreign to the Church that the interpretors automatically assumed the meaning was in reference to the barbarian nations, which would have been lands beyond the Empire. It was not an attempt to create overlaping jurisdictions giving Constantinople direct control over certain 'Barbarian Bishops' within the Dioceseses of Asia, Thrace, and Pontus independent of the Metropolitans. Along these lines, His Eminence Metropolitan Panteleimon Rodopoulos of Tyroloe and Serentios, in his article 'Territorial Jurisdiction According to Orthodox Canon Law. The Phenomenon of Ethnophyletism in Recent Years,' states:

Quote
By a decision (Canon 28) which is of universal status and validity, the 4th Ecumenical Synod confirmed a long tradition and action of the Church as regards the canonical jurisdiction and the territory of the Ecumenical Throne. The geographical extent of its own ground was extended to the then administrations of the Roman Empire in Pontus, Asia and Thrace, as well as to the "barbarian" lands, i. e. those which were outside the boundaries of the then Roman Empire: "... only the metropolitans of the Pontic, Asian and Thracian dioceses shall be ordained by the aforesaid Most Holy Throne of the Most Holy Church of Constantinople and likewise the bishops of the aforesaid dioceses which are situated in barbarian lands..."

The adjective “barbarian” defines the noun "nations," which is omitted from the text of the canon, but which is to be inferred, as Zonaras interprets it [Interpretation of Zonaras of the above canon]. Barbarian nations or countries are, as has been said, those provinces which lay beyond the Roman Empire at the time of the 4th Ecumenical Synod: "While it called bishoprics of the barbarians those of Alania, Russia and others" [Interpretation of Valsamon of Canon 28 of the 4th Ecumenical Synod]. The other barbarian lands, apart from Alania and Russia, are, in general, "the Barbarians," according to the interpretation of Aristenos of Canon 28: "... the (bishops ) of Pontus and Thrace and Asia, as well as the Barbarians, are consecrated by the Patriarch of Constantinople..."
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,464


« Reply #46 on: November 01, 2005, 08:47:03 PM »

Liturgical evolution is one thing, such as the development in the differences between the Greek and Slavic liturgies that came about over the last 1000 years, but a significant and fundamental alteration to the Liturgy (e.g. western rite, cathedral rite, etc.) is not acceptable, for that is not an organic development of culture, but rather a revolutionary movement to alter the fundementals of Christian Praxis to be consonant with our own nationalistc biases.
I don't think you have any leg to stand on regarding cathedral vs monastic rite.  Western Rite is reality to live with in the meantime, but the case against it is definitely understandable (I'm torn myself).

In the proper sense of refering to the Culture of the Empire, you are correct, if you think that I want to be Greek in terms of the Modern EU Member Nation-State of Greece, though I have respect for their Culture and People, no I dont want to be Greek.
You're doing a wonderful job of fooling us then.

Is he Greek insofar as he maintains the Customs, Culture, and Traditions of the Empire or does he just have extra vowels in his last name?
Your reference to the Empire is absolutely meaningless...considering that it hasn't existed for quite some time.  Those that follow the C, C & T as you think would be few and far between.  No, this guy is a pious and knowledgeable guy with much experience to draw from.  His family name was shortened from Paniotokopolous (sp?) to Panages by his father (or Grandfather) when they arrived on Ellis Island (and I've been given props for pronouncing it right as well Grin). 

I have respect for all the Orthodox Sees, but the See worthy of the Greatest Respect and Honour is Constantinople, and after her Alexandria, then Antioch, and Jerusalem...you get the picture.
Just because one See outranks another doesn't mean the See can not err or that another See has infeior praxis/customs.  But keep implying otherwise.

I could, but it wouldn't be nearly as much fun Wink
...and you are likewise entitled to keep acting pompous about...even if it is detrimental toward your spiritual health.

Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,146


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #47 on: November 01, 2005, 10:49:26 PM »

Six feet below the earth would suffice.

Not necessary.


Oh, did I mention I like big fonts?
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Silouan
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 818

Bogurodzica dziewica zbaw nas


« Reply #48 on: November 02, 2005, 03:50:12 AM »

In a smaller font...

Quote
Not necessary.

Oh, did I mention I like big fonts?

I guess I was dramatic, but it was to make a point.  If the Patriarchate is wiped out tomorrow (and not just the EP, assume any entire local church or even a few of them) it would not be an impossible loss for Orthodoxy (of course the huminitarian situation of it would be awful).  The other local churches would have to pick up their weight, but essentially their daily life wouldn't change.  It is not like Roman Catholicism that basicly cannot function without the Papal office - that is what I was getting at. 

And I would like to point out that I have no axe to grind against the jurisdiction in which I was brought into Orthodoxy.  I think I was one of the few in the GOA during my time there that thought that OCL style rebellion from the Patriarchate was wrong...

Quote
Ah, yes, the Nietzschean approach to Orthodox Ecclesiology, why didn't I consider this perspective and take it seriously? Hmmm...if you want to be Nietzschean fine, I actually respect the guy for the consistancy of his Philosophy, but his epistemology is fundamentally different than that of the Orthodox and really has no rational place in the discussion of Ecclesiology.

Call it whatever you want, but it is ultimately pragmatic.  EP has never once in its history been able to enforce Patriarch Bartholomew's understanding of the canon.  Nor can it reasonably be demonstrated that previous Patriarchs claimed this jurisdiction over the entire world, and of course none of them did in actuality.  Afterall Russia had a handfull of churches in Western Europe (in real barbarous places like Germany!) for hundreds of years without a protest from the EP. 

What about places like Japan or Alaska that had established missions - do these also belong to the EP?


Logged
Silouan
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 818

Bogurodzica dziewica zbaw nas


« Reply #49 on: November 02, 2005, 03:57:43 AM »

Quote
I see the Old Calendarists and the traditionalist anti-ecumenist New Calendarists as one in spirit albeit currently not united in approach

I have nothing in common with people such as Matthew of Vresthene nor the other opportunists and con artists of the Old Calendarist movement.  Now I do believe many in the movement are probably sincere but the ubiquiety of the Matthewite Ecclesiology completely seperates the movement from those within the Church.  Fr. Seraphim Rose realized this in his later years - that those who he had though were like minded "traditionalists" weren't friends of the church at all if they were infected with super-correctness.
Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,146


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #50 on: November 02, 2005, 07:58:19 AM »

I guess I was dramatic, but it was to make a point.

I understand the desire to get the point across, but in the process you sounded as if you had malice in your heart, a condition I didn't think was true; thus, why I called you out on it.

If the Patriarchate is wiped out tomorrow (and not just the EP, assume any entire local church or even a few of them) it would not be an impossible loss for Orthodoxy (of course the huminitarian situation of it would be awful). The other local churches would have to pick up their weight, but essentially their daily life wouldn't change. It is not like Roman Catholicism that basicly cannot function without the Papal office - that is what I was getting at.   

And I agree 100% that if the EP was some day wiped out (God forbid), then Orthodoxy would continue to march along. 

And I would like to point out that I have no axe to grind against the jurisdiction in which I was brought into Orthodoxy. I think I was one of the few in the GOA during my time there that thought that OCL style rebellion from the Patriarchate was wrong... 

I would happen to be one of the few others that didn't like the OCL's approach; and, of course, I have members of the aforementioned group that are members of my parish (and good people, to boot) - which makes my position a bit more difficult, but no less necessary.  But what I've come to appreciate is that the forces pulling on either side of the Church - in the GOA's case, you have the OCL on the one hand, and the super-Greeks (like those who write about the church in Greek newspapers like the National Herald) on the other - these forces help keep the church centered (as long as we don't let them pull us apart) by helping us see the evil inherent in either extreme, and forcing us to focus on the central way.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,487


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #51 on: November 02, 2005, 09:13:24 AM »

I have nothing in common with people such as Matthew of Vresthene nor the other opportunists and con artists of the Old Calendarist movement.ÂÂ  Now I do believe many in the movement are probably sincere but the ubiquiety of the Matthewite Ecclesiology completely seperates the movement from those within the Church.ÂÂ  Fr. Seraphim Rose realized this in his later years - that those who he had though were like minded "traditionalists" weren't friends of the church at all if they were infected with super-correctness.

Nektarie, like it or not, you have a lot in common with Matthewites and other Old Calendarists in that the majority of Orthodox alive today think people holding either of our positions are right-wing nuts so to speak, and our points of view are both looked down upon in official circles and even in many unofficial ones.

Besides, you are mixing apples and oranges.  Matthewite ecclesiology is not the same thing as super-correctness.  People in any jurisdiction can be super-correct.  Matthewitic ecclesiology--i.e. the theory that grace departed the New Calendarist Church the minute the New Calendar was instituted--is an incorrect and dangerous ecclesiology for sure.  Of course my Synod does not hold a Matthewitic ecclesiology.  We can thank Archbishop Chrysostomos of Etna and company for creating a false dichotomy between "moderates" and "extremists" but in reality the ecclesiology the Florinites is more fluid than that and we cannot be lumped in the same category as Matthewites.  The 1974 Encyclical was close to Matthewitic ecclesiology (but not identical) but that was 32 years ago and many things have changed subsquently, and I would note that encyclicals are not infallible.  I would personally like a little more consistency but at the same time too much consistency can be a danger as well.  The question is just ultimately not that important to Florinite Old Calendarists: the Old Calendarists know they are the Church, hope God's grace is working in the New Calendar Church, but believe either way that all should return to the patristic fullness.  That includes ourselves when we quarrel and bicker amongst ourselves in a rather unbecoming way.  As for Old Calendarist conartists, I agree; and hope that you agree when the tables are turned and we are discussing New Calendarist frauds that exist as well (ultimately the issue is moot as a fraud in a church does not discredit it).

Fr Seraphim of Platina was certainly a great spiritual writer and I hope he becomes a saint, but you quote him as if he were an authority on this issue.  At any rate, he was *quite* close with Archbishop Chrysostomos of Etna when the latter was still a member of the Auxentian Synod; so I would suggest that as Fr Seraphim was able to distinguish between shades of gray, so should you.

Anastasios
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #52 on: November 02, 2005, 10:30:50 AM »

...... and make the Archbishop of Athens patriarch.ÂÂ  

Which one?  Wink
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,487


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #53 on: November 02, 2005, 12:11:11 PM »

Which one?ÂÂ  Wink

hehe Smiley

In all seriousness though, I think that should the Patriarchate be moved to Athens and be more influenced by the living, breathing Church of Greece, that it would lead to significant improvements such as less ecumenism that might bode well for an end to the Old Calendar-New Calendar dispute.

Anastasios
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


"Look At Me! Look At Me Now! " - Bono


« Reply #54 on: November 02, 2005, 12:24:46 PM »

In all seriousness though, I think that should the Patriarchate be moved to Athens and be more influenced by the living, breathing.

Could have stopped there.
Logged
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #55 on: November 02, 2005, 12:48:22 PM »

hehe Smiley

In all seriousness though, I think that should the Patriarchate be moved to Athens and be more influenced by the living, breathing Church of Greece, that it would lead to significant improvements such as less ecumenism that might bode well for an end to the Old Calendar-New Calendar dispute.

Anastasios

Now this is something with which I can readily agree. Especially when one considers that in the 1820s at the initiation of the modern Greek state that the relative backwater of Athens was chosen as the capital because the Turk still held the REAL capital - Constantinople. Too bad the EP couldn't move then, but with 200-300,000 Orthodox still in the City at that time, well...  :'(
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,146


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #56 on: November 02, 2005, 04:20:30 PM »

[quote author=Αριστοκλής link=topic=7487.msg97296#msg97296 date=1130950102]
Now this is something with which I can readily agree. Especially when one considers that in the 1820s at the initiation of the modern Greek state that the relative backwater of Athens was chosen as the capital because the Turk still held the REAL capital - Constantinople. Too bad the EP couldn't move then, but with 200-300,000 Orthodox still in the City at that time, well... :'(     [/quote]

One could even argue that he can't move now either - remember, the first title is "Archbishop of Constantinople" - he is still bishop of the city and responsible for the flock; if the flock is this small and he is there, imagine how it would shrink if he left.  His role as Patriarch of the Ecumeni is nice, and has its responsibilities - but it does not change the fact that his first responsibilities are to his local flock (the flock on whom his salvation largely rests).
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #57 on: November 02, 2005, 04:29:57 PM »

Thank you, brother cleveland.

You are perhaps a little too new here and are not aware of my past spirited defenses (defences, in other circles) for the Ecumenical Patriarchate remaining exactly where it is.

Demetri, whose family still 'owns' property now stolen by the Turks in the City  Undecided
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


"Look At Me! Look At Me Now! " - Bono


« Reply #58 on: November 02, 2005, 04:34:43 PM »

One could even argue that he can't move now either - remember, the first title is "Archbishop of Constantinople" - he is still bishop of the city and responsible for the flock

Hah! Since when do the Greeks worry about a Bishop having a flock? They make them up as needed.
Logged
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #59 on: November 02, 2005, 04:37:32 PM »

Hah! Since when do the Greeks worry about a Bishop having a flock? They make them up as needed.

And apparently include anyone as needed... Grin

Until you go to Turkey my friend and find out for certain how many faithful are really there, this argument goes nowhere.

Until that last γιαγια is gone, the EP will be there.  Wink
« Last Edit: November 02, 2005, 04:38:51 PM by ΑριστÎÂà » Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


"Look At Me! Look At Me Now! " - Bono


« Reply #60 on: November 02, 2005, 04:50:58 PM »

[quote author=Αριστοκλής link=topic=7487.msg97344#msg97344 date=1130963852]
Until that last γιαγια is gone, the EP will be there.ÂÂ  Wink
[/quote]

And even then he will still be there. The Greeks can never let go of the "Glory that was Byzantium!"

Logged
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #61 on: November 02, 2005, 07:10:35 PM »

And even then he will still be there. The Greeks can never let go of the "Glory that was Byzantium!"

By George, I think he's got it!
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Beavis
invertebrateischristian
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 245

Smooth sounds from Squidworth's clarinet....


« Reply #62 on: November 02, 2005, 07:30:37 PM »

May I suggest that we take the last 10 or 15 responses or so of this thread and fuse it with "Hellenism, Romanity, and other issues...."?
Logged

"Every entity is what it loves"----Vladimir Solovyov
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,146


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #63 on: November 02, 2005, 08:23:47 PM »

And even then he will still be there. The Greeks can never let go of the "Glory that was Byzantium!"

You should probably qualify this with "The Greeks in America" - the Greeks in Greece could care less!  The young ones are all Euro-cized, and the old ones aren't fired up anymore.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,487


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #64 on: November 02, 2005, 09:49:20 PM »

One could even argue that he can't move now either - remember, the first title is "Archbishop of Constantinople" - he is still bishop of the city and responsible for the flock; if the flock is this small and he is there, imagine how it would shrink if he left.ÂÂ  His role as Patriarch of the Ecumeni is nice, and has its responsibilities - but it does not change the fact that his first responsibilities are to his local flock (the flock on whom his salvation largely rests).

There are still I believe around a hundred or so Orthodox in Antioch and the patriarch left there to reside in Damascus 800 years ago Wink  I wonder how long the Greeks in Constantinople will actually last.

Anastasios
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,146


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #65 on: November 02, 2005, 10:53:29 PM »

There are still I believe around a hundred or so Orthodox in Antioch and the patriarch left there to reside in Damascus 800 years ago Wink I wonder how long the Greeks in Constantinople will actually last. 

I guess it really doesn't matter how long they will last - the shepherd's responsibility is to his flock, no matter how small they get - the Patriarch in Antioch decided the move was the best thing for his flock, but we get into danger when we decide to compare the actions of two bishops for the sake of criticizing the decisions of the one.  It's not like the EP is committing heresy by staying; if he was preaching things contrary to the faith, then comparison would be warranted.  Otherwise, his relationship to his flock is a unique one, one that shouldn't be compared (even if there is no malice intended - as in this case).
« Last Edit: November 02, 2005, 10:53:46 PM by cleveland » Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Silouan
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 818

Bogurodzica dziewica zbaw nas


« Reply #66 on: November 02, 2005, 10:59:48 PM »

Quote
if he was preaching things contrary to the faith, then comparison would be warranted. 

I don't think that is a debate you would want to start with Anastasios...
Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,146


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #67 on: November 02, 2005, 11:25:19 PM »

I don't think that is a debate you would want to start with Anastasios... 

At the moment, I don't think it's a debate I would start with anyone on this board, just because when issues like this come up, it seems that no one (including myself) is actually willing to grow and learn from the discussion; in fact, it would be better off characterizing the "discussions" as "soapbox sessions."
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
serb1389
Lord, remember me when you come into your Kingdom!
Global Moderator
Merarches
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of San Francisco
Posts: 8,466


Michał Kalina's biggest fan

FrNPantic
WWW
« Reply #68 on: December 15, 2005, 11:35:08 AM »

I wonder if I could ask some questions, pertaining to the original topic. 
Is traditional better than liberal?  I'm sure this is an opinion answer, so see the other questions before you tackle it.
Is a "traditional" liturgy going to save you any more than a "liberal" one?  Isn't the communion the same?
Ultimately, if you don't like what is going on at your church, you could talk to your priest.  Or you could educate people.  Or you could just go to another church if its bothering you that bad.  Maybe i'm wrong on those. 
Didn't mean to stray away from the current conversation, just wanted to ask those questions and see what people thought. 
Logged

I got nothing.
I forgot the maps
March 27th and May 30th 2010 were my Ordination dates, please forgive everything before that
serb1389
Lord, remember me when you come into your Kingdom!
Global Moderator
Merarches
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of San Francisco
Posts: 8,466


Michał Kalina's biggest fan

FrNPantic
WWW
« Reply #69 on: December 15, 2005, 11:41:05 AM »

Cleveland, I was wondering if you could expand on this:

"Liturgical evolution is one thing, such as the development in the differences between the Greek and Slavic liturgies that came about over the last 1000 years, but a significant and fundamental alteration to the Liturgy (e.g. western rite, cathedral rite, etc.) is not acceptable, for that is not an organic development of culture, but rather a revolutionary movement to alter the fundementals of Christian Praxis to be consonant with our own nationalistc biases."

So a "fundamental alteration" would have been the western right and the cathedral right, etc?  IF that is true then we should stick with a "traditional" liturgy because it is not "an organic development of culture"?    Wouldn't you say that today's American culture has organically developed into a cathedral style culture?  There are very few monastic style churches left....right?  It could be half and half I guess...but still, doesn't that call for half the churches to use such "liberal" liturgies for their communities?  Or is it more broad and enveloping.  Sorry for all the questions...take your time, I know you're busy. 
Logged

I got nothing.
I forgot the maps
March 27th and May 30th 2010 were my Ordination dates, please forgive everything before that
BrotherAidan
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,568

OC.net


« Reply #70 on: December 15, 2005, 12:35:14 PM »

Man, I have been through all this before (in terms of the original thread , back on page one; it's gotten so far afield by now; I have this glitsh on my computer - sometimes when I open a thread, there is only one page; I reply, my screen goes blank, I go to a different site, then come back here and find 5 or 3 or 7 pages of discussion. So in terms of being so traditional that you must go through schism after schism to be "pure"...

Man, I have been through all this before

As a former Calvinist we had the TR's the "Totally Reformed" types - more Calvinistic than good old Geneva John was; more Reformed than Johnny " the later iconoclast" Knox of Scotland (who probably destroyed more western church artifacts in one generation than were destroyed during the whole iconoclast controversy in the Eastern church).

we can waste our time straining out knats and swallowing camels, or we can practice love "which covers a multitude of sins."

« Last Edit: December 15, 2005, 12:44:20 PM by BrotherAidan » Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,146


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #71 on: December 15, 2005, 02:47:51 PM »

"Liturgical evolution is one thing, such as the development in the differences between the Greek and Slavic liturgies that came about over the last 1000 years, but a significant and fundamental alteration to the Liturgy (e.g. western rite, cathedral rite, etc.) is not acceptable, for that is not an organic development of culture, but rather a revolutionary movement to alter the fundementals of Christian Praxis to be consonant with our own nationalistc biases."

So a "fundamental alteration" would have been the western right and the cathedral right, etc?  IF that is true then we should stick with a "traditional" liturgy because it is not "an organic development of culture"?    Wouldn't you say that today's American culture has organically developed into a cathedral style culture?  There are very few monastic style churches left....right?  It could be half and half I guess...but still, doesn't that call for half the churches to use such "liberal" liturgies for their communities?  Or is it more broad and enveloping.  Sorry for all the questions...take your time, I know you're busy. 

Basically my point was this: if within the community of the Church the Liturgy changes over time - such as the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, for example, which has changed since the 10th century - then that is Liturgical Development and is the product of the Spirit and the Church working together to incarnate the Liturgy.

But, to no offense to those practicing the Western Rite, what you have here is the introduction of a Liturgy to Orthodoxy that has been developing independently of Orthodoxy for hundreds of years, and thus when introduced into Orthodoxy is a radical change to the Liturgical tradition of the Church.  I understand that at one time a liturgy of this style existed in the West, but because it has been gone from Orthodoxy it is now a foreign element being brought in - and the change is too radical to be calling just an "adaptation of the culture."  Even if one wanted to go back to the Western Liturgy pre-schism, that would be a misstep as well, since that Liturgy has been out of the consciousness of the Church for a thousand years, and would thus be also a radical change to the Liturgical life.

The reason why I don't see the adoption of the Western Rite into Orthodoxy as an "adaptation to culture" is that a change in the Liturgical Worship Core of the Church (the Anaphora) has not been a part of any adaptations to the Church for many centuries.  When the Church has gone to Africa, South America, North America, Russia, etc., it has consecrated the culture, baptizing the elements that are good and discarding the elements that oppose the Christian way of life, but while doing so it has also translated the services of the Ancient Church - using one of the existing Liturgical offices, instead of taking any that were present or whatnot.  So the Anaphoras of John, Basil, James, Mark - these are the consecratory prayers and systems used, translated into the local language and explained to them in their own terms and such.

What I could see happening is, in those local Churches (and by this I mean dioceses, metropolises, synods... not individual parishes) that are more in a "western" liturgical mindset, slow adaptation of elements of the Western Liturgy into their own... since the liturgies we use today in the rest of the Orthodox world have changed over the centuries as well.  But a radical change to the praxis of Orthodoxy I think is problematic.

That said, the bishops of the Antiochian Archdiocese see it fit to have Western Rite parishes, so these points are moot in this place and time.  If one of their bishops asked me my honest opinion, I would give it, but the only way to change it is for the bishops, their synod, their patriarch, or an Ecumenical Synod to do so.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,464


« Reply #72 on: December 15, 2005, 03:05:08 PM »

Basically my point was this: if within the community of the Church the Liturgy changes over time - such as the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, for example, which has changed since the 10th century - then that is Liturgical Development and is the product of the Spirit and the Church working together to incarnate the Liturgy.

But, to no offense to those practicing the Western Rite, what you have here is the introduction of a Liturgy to Orthodoxy that has been developing independently of Orthodoxy for hundreds of years, and thus when introduced into Orthodoxy is a radical change to the Liturgical tradition of the Church.ÂÂ  I understand that at one time a liturgy of this style existed in the West, but because it has been gone from Orthodoxy it is now a foreign element being brought in - and the change is too radical to be calling just an "adaptation of the culture."ÂÂ  Even if one wanted to go back to the Western Liturgy pre-schism, that would be a misstep as well, since that Liturgy has been out of the consciousness of the Church for a thousand years, and would thus be also a radical change to the Liturgical life.

The reason why I don't see the adoption of the Western Rite into Orthodoxy as an "adaptation to culture" is that a change in the Liturgical Worship Core of the Church (the Anaphora) has not been a part of any adaptations to the Church for many centuries.ÂÂ  When the Church has gone to Africa, South America, North America, Russia, etc., it has consecrated the culture, baptizing the elements that are good and discarding the elements that oppose the Christian way of life, but while doing so it has also translated the services of the Ancient Church - using one of the existing Liturgical offices, instead of taking any that were present or whatnot.ÂÂ  So the Anaphoras of John, Basil, James, Mark - these are the consecratory prayers and systems used, translated into the local language and explained to them in their own terms and such.

What I could see happening is, in those local Churches (and by this I mean dioceses, metropolises, synods... not individual parishes) that are more in a "western" liturgical mindset, slow adaptation of elements of the Western Liturgy into their own... since the liturgies we use today in the rest of the Orthodox world have changed over the centuries as well.ÂÂ  But a radical change to the praxis of Orthodoxy I think is problematic.

That said, the bishops of the Antiochian Archdiocese see it fit to have Western Rite parishes, so these points are moot in this place and time.ÂÂ  If one of their bishops asked me my honest opinion, I would give it, but the only way to change it is for the bishops, their synod, their patriarch, or an Ecumenical Synod to do so.

While I may not entirely agree with your opinions above, you have summarized the issues/facts well.  Thanks.
Logged
Ian Lazarus
The Main Man!
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: AOA
Posts: 1,545


yIjah, Qey' 'oH!


« Reply #73 on: December 27, 2005, 01:10:30 AM »

Oy vey and gefeltefish.

I get back and the Antiochian Bashing continues.  Why am I not surprised. 

Well, I guess it's fair game.  They bash everyone else here. 

Rolling with the punches is just part of the game I suppose.

Logged

"For I am With thee, withersoever thou goest"

Joshua 1:9
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,146


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #74 on: December 27, 2005, 01:06:20 PM »

I get back and the Antiochian Bashing continues.  Why am I not surprised.     

I'm not in the business of Antiochian bashing... I don't agree with the adoption of the Western Rite, but I've got my opinion and my reasons... The Hierarchs and people of the Antiochian Archdiocese are free to do what they will within their liturgical tradition.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Thomas
Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,838



« Reply #75 on: December 27, 2005, 01:41:48 PM »

It appears that this discussion has gone far afield from a convert discussion and its original topic so I am closing this down at this point and recommend that this discussion be taken up in one of the other board perhaps Faith, Liturgical, or Free-for-All where it can be allowed to take its flight and debate the issues more directly.  For those who have started the discussion thankyou. I look forward to reading more on the one of the other boards.

In Christ,
Thomas
Board Moderator
Logged

Your brother in Christ ,
Thomas
Tags:
Pages: « 1 2  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 0.136 seconds with 59 queries.