OrthodoxChristianity.net
September 02, 2014, 08:25:10 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: Comments of Dr. Constantine Cavarnos  (Read 8000 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
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: 8,348


Michał Kalina's biggest fan

FrNPantic
WWW
« on: May 04, 2006, 12:54:11 PM »

I went to a retreat recently where Dr. Cavarnos spoke on several different topics.  

One of the topics was speaking in tounges where he mentioned Apostolic understanding of this as being "God given" and therefore scriptural.  He also said that if the speaking in tounges persists and is a regular part of worship, that this is problematic because it has no biblical foundation, or apostolic.  

Would converts see this as a problem?  How important is speaking in tounges?  Just curious!  Thanks for any responses.  

The other topic he brought up was the idea that many words cannot be translated from Greek to English.  For example, there are many extremists who would say that there should be NO Greek at ALL in church and it should be ALL in English.  

Example:  Theotokos = Mother of God

His example, however, was that even these extremists are using Greek and don't even know about it.  Jesus CHRIST was the example he used.  Christ comes from the Greek word "christos" yet everyone uses it b/c it is in the Bible.  

Is this a problem for converts?  Is this extremist point of view prevalent?  Comments...
Logged

I got nothing.
I forgot the maps
March 27th and May 30th 2010 were my Ordination dates, please forgive everything before that
augustin717
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,632



« Reply #1 on: May 04, 2006, 01:11:00 PM »

But how come that "Theotokos" has been translated into Slavonic as "Bogoroditsa" or Romanian as "Nascatoarea de Dumnezeu", but that can't be done in English?
Logged
Pravoslavbob
Section Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 3,181


St. Sisoes the Great


« Reply #2 on: May 04, 2006, 01:26:28 PM »

It can be done in English, it's just very awkward and clumsy to say "Godbirthgiver" or something similar in the English language.  In French (at least in Canada) they only use "Mere de Dieu" (Mother of God) because of the clumsiness of using "Theotokos" liturgically in that language, and I think perhaps because it's very hard for French people to pronounce "Th" very quickly!
Logged

Religion is a disease, and Orthodoxy is its cure.
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: 8,348


Michał Kalina's biggest fan

FrNPantic
WWW
« Reply #3 on: May 04, 2006, 01:41:25 PM »

I've heard the same argument with "Bogoroditsa" before...

The thing is, Cavarnos only talked about Greek to English

The funniest part is, later he said that things SHOULD be translated into other languages, and mentioned that his works have been translated into many other languages, so why not liturgical things.  

he also said that Enliglish is a standardized language???  

I thought that it was a fluid language WITH standardization??  If it were standardized, then why are there so many translations?  

He was very unspecific on this...

Do converts really care about translations??? Huh
Logged

I got nothing.
I forgot the maps
March 27th and May 30th 2010 were my Ordination dates, please forgive everything before that
Thomas
Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,790



« Reply #4 on: May 04, 2006, 04:00:39 PM »

Christ is Risen!

As a convert of many years, I can note something that I have seen in myself and other converts.  There is a tendency to try and become the "super-correct" convert or  what I call the "super-dox".  When one does this we are generally more impacted by the black and white presentations of the most conservative presenters.  It is only as we live the faith that we learn the richness and yes, at time diverse opinions  even among the Saints of what one should be believe and do. Experience has shown those who try to be the "Super-dox" usually burn out and fall away unless someone with a more full world view of Orthodoxy brings them into reality and opens them to the fullness of orthodox teachings and beliefs---these converts then become wonderful teachers and practitioners of the Orthodox Christian Life.

In Christ,
Thomas
Logged

Your brother in Christ ,
Thomas
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Faith: Agnostic
Posts: 29,581



« Reply #5 on: May 04, 2006, 04:08:18 PM »

I always cringed when I attended a parish that used something other than Theotokos. Now, admittedly, it might just be because I was used to the word, and the service seemed disjointed because it wasn't what I was used to hearing. Nonetheless, I think Theotokos sounds much nicer than the alternatives. Besides, it is not uncommon to keep a term from an original language when speaking in English, as this is commonly done with various Latin words used in theological/philosophical discussion, and with words from other languages as well (e.g., zeitgeist)
Logged
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: 8,348


Michał Kalina's biggest fan

FrNPantic
WWW
« Reply #6 on: May 04, 2006, 10:03:45 PM »

Yah but what about those "ultra-extremists" who would say all english or nothing?  

Personally, this is a very scary position.  I look at it as an extreme, but these people usually have all the "right answers" in terms of theological points.  Maybe its because I don't know theology very well, or i'm not good on the spot, but i've never been able to argue against these people...

Is it even worth arguing?  Many converts have said that you should just wait until the person is ready to hear the right message....i'm not the most patient of people, so i'm not sure if this would work for me.  

Any other suggestions??  Thoughts?
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,411


« Reply #7 on: May 04, 2006, 10:13:08 PM »

Yah but what about those "ultra-extremists" who would say all english or nothing?  

My my experience, those fall under the evangelical convert Antiochian camp.  I find it ironic in that they're willing to submit to a Arab (Lebanese) Bishop but yet unwilling to respect that tradition by at least learning a few words of that language...for fear that they won't be "evangelizing America".
Logged
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: 8,348


Michał Kalina's biggest fan

FrNPantic
WWW
« Reply #8 on: May 04, 2006, 10:34:28 PM »

Yah too bad they only have 1 bishop left who really has any of that "Arabic" flavor (this is personal opinion).  

If you're talking about Met. Phillip, you should read some of the things he's said.  He's the vanguard for the ultra-extremists.  Also half their bishops are converts now  Wink (j/k)
Logged

I got nothing.
I forgot the maps
March 27th and May 30th 2010 were my Ordination dates, please forgive everything before that
OrthodoxAndrew
Unworthy of being called Orthodox
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 124

St. Andrew the Apostle


WWW
« Reply #9 on: May 04, 2006, 10:41:28 PM »

Now I like trying to see words translated into English as much as possible. But somebody finding the word Theotokos to be a stumbling block, I find to be a bit much.


Logged

"Do what you want in order to send me as soon as possible from this transient life to eternal life. I am Christ's slave, I follow Christ, for Christ I die that I may live with Him!" - St. John of Decapolis before his martyrdom at the hands of the Turkish Muslims.
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: 8,348


Michał Kalina's biggest fan

FrNPantic
WWW
« Reply #10 on: May 04, 2006, 10:50:40 PM »

Aparantly christ wanted us to be as literal as possible...according to the reasoning of their theology.  Christ, when speaking about talking to other people in their language, wanted us to be as literal as possible....i guess... Undecided
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,411


« Reply #11 on: May 04, 2006, 11:05:46 PM »

Yah too bad they only have 1 bishop left who really has any of that "Arabic" flavor (this is personal opinion).  

If you're talking about Met. Phillip, you should read some of the things he's said.  He's the vanguard for the ultra-extremists.  Also half their bishops are converts now  Wink (j/k)

Really?  I heard a convert deacon whine about Bp. Joseph wanting him to learn a tad bit of Arabic and basically acting offended at using non-english.
Logged
Sleepyhead
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Posts: 27



« Reply #12 on: May 05, 2006, 06:08:57 AM »

"One of the topics was speaking in tounges where he mentioned Apostolic understanding of this as being "God given" and therefore scriptural.  He also said that if the speaking in tounges persists and is a regular part of worship, that this is problematic because it has no biblical foundation, or apostolic.  

Would converts see this as a problem?  How important is speaking in tounges?  Just curious!  Thanks for any responses."  

I agree with Dr. Cavarnos. In my country, where most people are nominal Lutherans, speaking in tongues is associated with charismatic churches run by the Pentecostalists. Now, I might have given you a different answer had I been a former Pentecostalist. One of the reasons I feel drawn to Orthodoxy (I am not even a catechumen yet, mind you) is what I for want of a better word would like to call the seriousness of worship. I can't quite explain it, but I am sure that you people understand what I mean.  Grin
Logged
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: 8,348


Michał Kalina's biggest fan

FrNPantic
WWW
« Reply #13 on: May 05, 2006, 09:16:19 AM »

Really?  I heard a convert deacon whine about Bp. Joseph wanting him to learn a tad bit of Arabic and basically acting offended at using non-english.

yah i've heard some convert students at my school say "if its not in english i don't want to hear about it"  which was pretty hard-core, IMO.  

so the seriousness of church is not a stumbling block?  Its actually a bonus?  
Logged

I got nothing.
I forgot the maps
March 27th and May 30th 2010 were my Ordination dates, please forgive everything before that
Sleepyhead
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Posts: 27



« Reply #14 on: May 05, 2006, 10:27:07 AM »

"so the seriousness of church is not a stumbling block?  Its actually a bonus?"

You can call it a bonus if you like. It certainly is to me.
Logged
Timos
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 856



« Reply #15 on: May 05, 2006, 10:53:54 AM »

English is definitely not standardised. Do you ever notice that like 99% of our liturgical texts use old english or soemthign else weird:

"Hell was vexed"

"Of the vault of the heavens art thou o lord fashioner ,so too, of the church, art  thou founder. Do thou establish me in unfegined love for you...." Ode 3 from the Paraklesis.

OK Eikona's translation is a little better, but not that much.

It sucks because I bought my sister a children's orthodox prayer book  (that one published by the Traditional Russian parish Mother of God) and ALL the prayers were in old english- totally defeats the purpose.

Its kind of like being in greece or russia where all the prayers which are in ancient greek/Slavonic kind of go over your head because you get the main words but the overall meaning doesn't stick.

My theory is this: if the language (not necessarily the meaning since that depends on the person's own understanding of what is being said) in church is not understood by the vast majority of people including grade school children, then it should not be there.

I should probably start another thread somewhere else on this...
Logged
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,411


« Reply #16 on: May 05, 2006, 11:31:19 AM »

English is definitely not standardised. Do you ever notice that like 99% of our liturgical texts use old english or soemthign else weird:

"Hell was vexed"

"Of the vault of the heavens art thou o lord fashioner ,so too, of the church, art  thou founder. Do thou establish me in unfegined love for you...." Ode 3 from the Paraklesis.

OK Eikona's translation is a little better, but not that much.

It sucks because I bought my sister a children's orthodox prayer book  (that one published by the Traditional Russian parish Mother of God) and ALL the prayers were in old english- totally defeats the purpose.

From what I know, the comparison between "modern" or colloquial English and this "old" English you talk of in prayer books to Modern Greek vs Koine or Modern Russian vs Church Slavonic are not even valid comparisons.  The analogy I heard would be like comparing modern English to Chaucer - which is barely intelligible compared to modern English.
Logged
Timos
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 856



« Reply #17 on: May 05, 2006, 02:01:04 PM »

fine but you get my point. The comparison may be off some, but the point remains that if church is gonna be in the vernacular, we might as well understand it.
Logged
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #18 on: May 06, 2006, 05:09:55 AM »

Quote
The analogy I heard would be like comparing modern English to Chaucer - which is barely intelligible compared to modern English.

I don't know how correct any analogy with English can really be in this case as the  changes that occured between Middle English and Modern English are different than between Koine and Demotic Greek.  A Greek person with a standard Greek education ought to be able to understand at least a fair amount of ecclesiastical Greek.  Although it will take some effort to compose in ecclesiastical Greek or to perfectly understand every work of a text.  

Here is the example I would use for native English speakers - you can read this, but not compose in it and will not be familar with every word:

For who euere han synned without the lawe, schulen perische withouten the lawe; and who euere han synned in the lawe, thei schulen be demyd bi the lawe. For the hereris of lawe ben not iust anentis God, but the doeris of the lawe schulen be maad iust. For whanne hethene men that han not lawe, don kyndli tho thingis that ben of the lawe, thei not hauynge suche manere lawe, ben lawe to hem silf, that schewen the werk of the lawe writun in her hertis. For the conscience of hem yeldith to hem a witnessyng bytwixe hem silf of thouytis that ben accusynge or defendynge, in the dai whanne God schal deme the priuy thingis of men aftir my gospel, bi Jhesu Crist.

If you were to deal with this type of English on a weekly liturgical basis, you would be familar with it and develop at least a passive understanding.  


On the issue of translations, I think it is very arbitrary to insist that the KJV style of English be used (although personally, I use and prefer this).  If we are going to use something other than modern English, why use that era opposed to the English that I posted above?  Also using modern English has the benefit of being much more accessible to non-native speakers...    It is a vexing (sorry Timos, I just couldn't resist!) issue, that I wish the Anglophone Orthodox Churches could work together on.  
« Last Edit: May 06, 2006, 05:10:11 AM by ΝεκτάρÃÅ » Logged
Timos
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 856



« Reply #19 on: May 06, 2006, 01:05:56 PM »

[quote author=Νεκτάριος link=topic=8957.msg119398#msg119398 date=1146906595]
 It is a vexing (sorry Timos, I just couldn't resist!) issue, that I wish the Anglophone Orthodox Churches could work together on.  
[/quote]

Alas, you vex me not with your insight Wink
Logged
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 #20 on: May 07, 2006, 12:55:04 AM »

How important is speaking in tounges?  
As one Pentecostal put it:
"Asklom punc hin huet folopimedu lacvedi slabjub nikxue."  Cheesy
I wonder if we should have a section for typing in tongues?
« Last Edit: May 07, 2006, 12:57:07 AM by ozgeorge » Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Thomas
Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,790



« Reply #21 on: May 07, 2006, 08:43:21 PM »

Christ is Risen!

Thanks Nectorios for the ÂÂ Middle English, which ÂÂ I was able to read--- they actually taught that in both my High School English Class and my College ÂÂ English Literature History Class. I do however prefer the use of the King James which is easier to read by the modern English speaker.  My preference for King James when used in translation is that it has a specific ÂÂ "you familiar" tenses of ÂÂ Thee and Thou that are missing in modern English, an important translation issue when one is translating meaning from other languages that do have a "you familiar" . Sadly in the US this tense has developed into an archaic tense and evolved to being a formal rather than familiar use in modern English prayer language---the familiar tense is used in most languages only among those whom you are ÂÂ most familar---i.e. family and very close friends, thus the use of Thee and Thou in prayer is meant to be familiar , not formal.

In Christ,
Thomas
« Last Edit: May 07, 2006, 08:45:23 PM by Thomas » Logged

Your brother in Christ ,
Thomas
Mother Anastasia
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: pre-schism Orthodox/Catholic
Jurisdiction: Independent
Posts: 209

SS Francis & Seraphim praying for unity.


WWW
« Reply #22 on: May 10, 2006, 03:08:28 AM »

One of the topics was speaking in tongues where he mentioned Apostolic understanding of this as being "God given" and therefore scriptural.  He also said that if the speaking in tongues persists and is a regular part of worship, that this is problematic because it has no biblical foundation, or apostolic. 

Would converts see this as a problem?  How important is speaking in tongues?  Just curious! 

From my own personal experience,  speaking in tongues and the beauty and order of the Liturgy seem to be contradictory.   

What we have settled on here,  is an hour and fifteen minutes before Liturgy, we play rousing Celtic worship music, use our tambourines, shakers, Celtic drums and enter in to a dimension of worship that is very suitable for worshiping in tongues, which we do. As this music is coming to a close, we use very quiet contemplative music, chant, etc.  till just before the Liturgy.

Entering into the Liturgy seems to us like another dimension,  and we are much more prepared to be in the presence of the Lord, really there with Him, after worship.  There is also a spiritual warfare  dimension to this worship which just happens naturally, a real sense of liberty.

When people ask us what time our Liturgy begins, we tell them that time, not the time for worship in the Spirit.  We keep that rather private, for those who we know will be comfortable with it.
And also for very serious intercession occasions.

I would not be comfortable giving up this form of worship to join a Church, in fact some criticism about this form of prayer turned us off quickly to a Russion Orthodox Church.  We are in the position where we don't have to give it up, thank God.

Having come from an Evangelical/Charismatic/Non-denominational background, where this type of worship was a part of the service, it was beautiful and heart expanding in a large gathering.  After my conversion to Catholocism,  it seemed out of place and awkward in the Mass proper,  and it kind of fell by the wayside as I enterred a more contemplative time of my life.  But now it has returned in the context of  high praise and spiritual warfare, and as such is very effective.  A lot of inner healing and release of burdens takes place.

We are very cautious though, the people who come for this worship are seasoned Christians and are there for serious praise, so we haven't been exposed to the complicated situations that I have seen arise in Churches.  We are more monastic.

Logged

I pray not only for them, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word, so that they may all be one, as You, Father are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in us, that the world may believe that You sent Me.
Mother Anastasia
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: pre-schism Orthodox/Catholic
Jurisdiction: Independent
Posts: 209

SS Francis & Seraphim praying for unity.


WWW
« Reply #23 on: May 10, 2006, 03:21:32 AM »

My theory is this: if the language (not necessarily the meaning since that depends on the person's own understanding of what is being said) in church is not understood by the vast majority of people including grade school children, then it should not be there.
I should probably start another thread somewhere else on this...

I wish you would.  I would love to hear other opinions.  I totally agree with you.  The Lord made the truth accessable.  I have a very hard time in a staunchly traditional Latin Mass where the reading is taken from the same place every single Sunday. And although the Old English can be very poetic, the NAM and NIV are favorites.  Although I've found a pretty serious error in the NAM Study Version, (I hope it was a typo.)

Our Children had all the very simple Bibles that are available for kids, until they grew out of it.  Regretably they were missing a few of the books, but I felt it was more important for them to understand what they were reading and to find it exciting and interesting.

I would really like to understand why the St. Jerome version is not more popular among Orthodox.
Can anyone tell me?





« Last Edit: May 10, 2006, 03:22:29 AM by Mother Anastasia » Logged

I pray not only for them, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word, so that they may all be one, as You, Father are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in us, that the world may believe that You sent Me.
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: 8,348


Michał Kalina's biggest fan

FrNPantic
WWW
« Reply #24 on: May 10, 2006, 10:35:47 AM »



I would really like to understand why the St. Jerome version is not more popular among Orthodox.
Can anyone tell me?

In short, because we have Greek.  And Jerome wasn't the most popular guy in the neighborhood... Wink
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: 8,348


Michał Kalina's biggest fan

FrNPantic
WWW
« Reply #25 on: May 10, 2006, 10:40:12 AM »

From my own personal experience,  speaking in tongues and the beauty and order of the Liturgy seem to be contradictory.   

What we have settled on here,  is an hour and fifteen minutes before Liturgy, we play rousing Celtic worship music, use our tambourines, shakers, Celtic drums and enter in to a dimension of worship that is very suitable for worshiping in tongues, which we do. As this music is coming to a close, we use very quiet contemplative music, chant, etc.  till just before the Liturgy.


So if it is contradictory then why do you do it? 

Also, your system of speaking in tounges is semi-heretical according to what Dr. Cavarnos said.  Don't you find this problematic?  Just curious. 

Quote
When people ask us what time our Liturgy begins, we tell them that time, not the time for worship in the Spirit.  We keep that rather private, for those who we know will be comfortable with it.

So you keep your worship services private?  You know, Gnostics also believed in church being accessible to only those who were "worthy" or had the proper "knowledge"...that was condemned as a heresy...

Quote
We are very cautious though, the people who come for this worship are seasoned Christians and are there for serious praise, so we haven't been exposed to the complicated situations that I have seen arise in Churches.  We are more monastic.

So you have to be a seasoned Christian to join your church?  What about converts? 

Again...this reminds me of Gnosticism with accesibility only to a few...
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,411


« Reply #26 on: May 10, 2006, 12:38:35 PM »

[quote author=Νεκτάριος link=topic=8957.msg119398#msg119398 date=1146906595]
Here is the example I would use for native English speakers - you can read this, but not compose in it and will not be familar with every word:

For who euere han synned without the lawe, schulen perische withouten the lawe; and who euere han synned in the lawe, thei schulen be demyd bi the lawe. For the hereris of lawe ben not iust anentis God, but the doeris of the lawe schulen be maad iust. For whanne hethene men that han not lawe, don kyndli tho thingis that ben of the lawe, thei not hauynge suche manere lawe, ben lawe to hem silf, that schewen the werk of the lawe writun in her hertis. For the conscience of hem yeldith to hem a witnessyng bytwixe hem silf of thouytis that ben accusynge or defendynge, in the dai whanne God schal deme the priuy thingis of men aftir my gospel, bi Jhesu Crist.
[/quote]

That looks like a hybrid between English and German...interesting.
Logged
Mother Anastasia
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: pre-schism Orthodox/Catholic
Jurisdiction: Independent
Posts: 209

SS Francis & Seraphim praying for unity.


WWW
« Reply #27 on: May 10, 2006, 03:34:41 PM »

author=serb1389
1.  So if it is contradictory then why do you do it?

1.  I'm sorry serb, you have misquoted me, what I did say was,

From my own personal experience,  speaking in tongues and the beauty and order of the Liturgy seem to be contradictory.  I go onto explain:

 "What we have settled on here,  is an hour and fifteen minutes before Liturgy.."

To clarify further, we do not  worship in tongues during the Liturgy.


2. Also, your system of speaking in tounges is semi-heretical according to what Dr. Cavarnos said.  Don't you find this problematic?  Just curious.

2. I don't know Dr. Cavarnos, and even if I did,  I do not serve him.  I worship God in the way He has shown me to worship Him.  I know His voice, and I will not follow the voice of another.


3.  So you keep your worship services private?  You know, Gnostics also believed in church being accessible to only those who were "worthy" or had the proper "knowledge"...that was condemned as a heresy..

3.  As I have mentioned before serb, we are a monastic community, anyone who wants to come to our public Saturday night Liturgy is welcome.  Common sense would dictate propriety in inviting people who have no experience with the Holy Spirit in worship, to the intercession before hand.  Its rather like a ministry team getting together before ministry to pray. 


                                                                   
+I think that sometimes in our zeal to defend the truth (as we know it) we can come across as though we are worthy and others are not, because we have so much more true knowledge than they.+
                           


4.  So you have to be a seasoned Christian to join your church?  What about converts?


4. Again, we are not a Church, we are monastic. 
Anyone who feels drawn to our Liturgy, is most welcome.





« Last Edit: May 10, 2006, 03:44:43 PM by Mother Anastasia » Logged

I pray not only for them, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word, so that they may all be one, as You, Father are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in us, that the world may believe that You sent Me.
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: 8,348


Michał Kalina's biggest fan

FrNPantic
WWW
« Reply #28 on: May 10, 2006, 03:57:13 PM »

author=serb1389
1.  So if it is contradictory then why do you do it?

1.  I'm sorry serb, you have misquoted me, what I did say was,

From my own personal experience,  speaking in tongues and the beauty and order of the Liturgy seem to be contradictory.  I go onto explain:

 "What we have settled on here,  is an hour and fifteen minutes before Liturgy.."

To clarify further, we do not  worship in tongues during the Liturgy.


Sorry about the misunderstanding.  I was just trying to understand better what you were saying, since it was problematic for me.  Thank you for the clarification!   Smiley

So you do speak tounges though right?  Just before the liturgy??  Curious again... Smiley

Quote
2. I don't know Dr. Cavarnos, and even if I did,  I do not serve him.  I worship God in the way He has shown me to worship Him.  I know His voice, and I will not follow the voice of another.

So let me ask you this, if your way of worship were to be found heretical would you stop?  Or would you continue worshiping god "in the way He has shown me to worship Him" ?? 

Quote
3.  As I have mentioned before serb, we are a monastic community, anyone who wants to come to our public Saturday night Liturgy is welcome.  Common sense would dictate propriety in inviting people who have no experience with the Holy Spirit in worship, to the intercession before hand.  Its rather like a ministry team getting together before ministry to pray.

Sure, common sense would dictate propriety.  The problem is, how do YOU know who has experience with the Holy Spirit in worship?  Do you know the heart of man?  This seams rather bold...

I like the ministry team analogy.  However, a ministry team is VERY different from a viable church.  A ministry team would only accept people who are qualified for the job and have experience.  Church is not so stringent...I could be wrong though...


Quote
+I think that sometimes in our zeal to defend the truth (as we know it) we can come across as though we are worthy and others are not, because we have so much more true knowledge than they.+

Is this a quote?  Where is it from?  Thanks for the info...

Logged

I got nothing.
I forgot the maps
March 27th and May 30th 2010 were my Ordination dates, please forgive everything before that
Mother Anastasia
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: pre-schism Orthodox/Catholic
Jurisdiction: Independent
Posts: 209

SS Francis & Seraphim praying for unity.


WWW
« Reply #29 on: May 10, 2006, 05:19:12 PM »

[quote author=serb1389

1.  So you do speak tounges though right?  Just before the liturgy??

No, we play Gregorian chant before liturgy.


2.  So let me ask you this, if your way of worship were to be found heretical would you stop?  Or would you continue worshiping god "in the way He has shown me to worship Him" ?? 

From your intellect you are suggesting to me that this is a heretical practice,
from my heart, I am worshiping my God,  Who is my Spouse. If this is displeasing to Him, please pray for me that He will reveal that.  But  I cannot exchange the pronouncements of men for the workings of God in my conscience and heart. It has taken Him 28 years to get me to this point, and I cannot substitute this discernment for another's theology, no matter how well respected they might be, they do not live in my heart.  "My sheep hear My voice, another they will not follow."

3.  Sure, common sense would dictate propriety.  The problem is, how do YOU know who has experience with the Holy Spirit in worship?  Do you know the heart of man?  This seams rather bold...

We spend lots of time with our people Serb,  they share a lot, we listen a lot.


4.  I like the ministry team analogy.  However, a ministry team is VERY different from a viable church. 

Your not hearing me brother,  we are not a Church, we are monastic.


5.  A ministry team would only accept people who are qualified for the job and have experience.

It's not about a job,  it's simply worship and warfare,  some folks aren't drawn to that so they don't come.  Others do.  I used the ministry team analogy because in that situation people are seasoned, coming with one heart,  one agenda,  to worship God.  They aren't nervous or undecided about what to do, they've already gone through that process years ago and so they are free to enter into worship, one heart, one mind, one Body.




« Last Edit: May 10, 2006, 05:20:22 PM by Mother Anastasia » Logged

I pray not only for them, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word, so that they may all be one, as You, Father are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in us, that the world may believe that You sent Me.
Mother Anastasia
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: pre-schism Orthodox/Catholic
Jurisdiction: Independent
Posts: 209

SS Francis & Seraphim praying for unity.


WWW
« Reply #30 on: May 10, 2006, 05:54:33 PM »

Is this a quote?  Where is it from?  Thanks for the info...

+I think that sometimes in our zeal to defend the truth (as we know it) we can come across as though we are worthy and others are not, because we have so much more true knowledge than they.+

I was commenting on the the Gnostic practice of being exclusive and worthy, before one can be initiated into the truth.  There is a dynamic here that we as Christians can also fall into.

If we in defense of our faith, overwhelm people with the letter of the law,  citing theological and canonical works that are way over their heads,  presenting ourselves as worthy to speak difinitively on God, because of our humanly acquired wisdom; 

exclude those who are coming from a place of prayer and meditation and are sharing infused wisdom received  from the Holy Spirit in prayer,* by telling them they are not "worthy" because they do not have the "proper knowledge" we are falling into a similar trap.
 
You said, "Gnostics also believed in church being accessible to only those who were "worthy" or had the proper "knowledge"...that was condemned as a heresy..."

Here what I see is that "Eucharist is only accessible to those who are "worthy" or have the proper "Orthodox knowledge".

I believe that some day, this exclusivity will be condemned as heresy.  I am not trying to attack you, I am simply sharing my opinion.

The fruits of heresy are division, and that is the condition of the Body of Christ right now.

What we are doing is not working, it is not bringing us closer together, but driving us further apart.  So in childlike logic, it follows that something is out of God's order. 

In all humility, both sides need to look at that.




*And in all  faith and morals issues, are in union with the church.

« Last Edit: May 10, 2006, 05:57:02 PM by Mother Anastasia » Logged

I pray not only for them, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word, so that they may all be one, as You, Father are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in us, that the world may believe that You sent Me.
Gregory1958
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 36


« Reply #31 on: May 10, 2006, 06:10:39 PM »

I don't know if anyone has mentioned this already (I haven't read each post.), but the book, Orthodoxy and the Religion of the Future by the late Fr. Seraphim Rose has a whole chapter on the so-called "Charismatic Movement".  His explanation cannot be ignored in a serious discussion of the subject.
Logged
Mother Anastasia
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: pre-schism Orthodox/Catholic
Jurisdiction: Independent
Posts: 209

SS Francis & Seraphim praying for unity.


WWW
« Reply #32 on: May 10, 2006, 06:31:26 PM »

I don't know if anyone has mentioned this already (I haven't read each post.), but the book, Orthodoxy and the Religion of the Future by the late Fr. Seraphim Rose has a whole chapter on the so-called "Charismatic Movement".  His explanation cannot be ignored in a serious discussion of the subject.

Perhaps you could quote some things for us.

Thank you.
Logged

I pray not only for them, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word, so that they may all be one, as You, Father are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in us, that the world may believe that You sent Me.
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: 8,348


Michał Kalina's biggest fan

FrNPantic
WWW
« Reply #33 on: May 10, 2006, 08:28:23 PM »


If we in defense of our faith, overwhelm people with the letter of the law,ÂÂ  citing theological and canonical works that are way over their heads,ÂÂ  presenting ourselves as worthy to speak difinitively on God, because of our humanly acquired wisdom;ÂÂ  



Thank you for telling me where you got that quote from.  Please don't take my questions as condemnation.  I just don't particularly agree with what you are saying, so i'm trying to be clear about exactly what you are saying before I make any kind of remark or retort.  That would only be fair. 

I wanted to mention that doing things according to the LETTER of the law, and citing canonical works and high theology are 2 very different things. They should not be grouped together as you did. 

Also, if we keep "dumming" things down for people then we will have the situation that is prevalent today where people do not even know why they are crossing themselves.  Higher levels of theology SHOULD be explored by the common person. Otherwise, why care, if we can just walk in and not have to put or whole self into the church (body, soul AND mind). 

Quote
exclude those who are coming from a place of prayer and meditation and are sharing infused wisdom received  from the Holy Spirit in prayer,* by telling them they are not "worthy" because they do not have the "proper knowledge" we are falling into a similar trap.

Right.  You were saying that we need to have discernment about who is comming to these "prayer" services before your "Liturgy", so is this not the same thing?  Picking and chosing? 

Quote
Here what I see is that "Eucharist is only accessible to those who are "worthy" or have the proper "Orthodox knowledge".

I believe that some day, this exclusivity will be condemned as heresy.  I am not trying to attack you, I am simply sharing my opinion.

The fruits of heresy are division, and that is the condition of the Body of Christ right now.

What we are doing is not working, it is not bringing us closer together, but driving us further apart.  So in childlike logic, it follows that something is out of God's order. 

In all humility, both sides need to look at that.

Where do you see Eucharist as only for those who are worthy?  Church Father?  Scripture, etc.? 

Eucharist is exclusive only in the sense that you must understand what the eucharist is.  In order to FULLY understand the Eucharist you must mystically (and really) be connected to the church.  How do you become part of the church?  Baptism/Chrismation. Once that is settled, then you can technically take communion whenever you want. 

So where is the exclusiveness? 


Logged

I got nothing.
I forgot the maps
March 27th and May 30th 2010 were my Ordination dates, please forgive everything before that
Mother Anastasia
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: pre-schism Orthodox/Catholic
Jurisdiction: Independent
Posts: 209

SS Francis & Seraphim praying for unity.


WWW
« Reply #34 on: May 11, 2006, 01:01:21 AM »

  Right.  You were saying that we need to have discernment about who is comming to these "prayer" services before your "Liturgy", so is this not the same thing?  Picking and choosing?

No brother, this again is like a ministry team,  people come with some very personal and heavy burdens that would be inappropriate in a corporate worship setting, they have been Baptised in the Holy Spirit and are familiar and comfortable with it.  We usually mention the worship to everyone, if they sound interested we tell them more, they make their own decision.

« Last Edit: May 11, 2006, 01:41:52 AM by Mother Anastasia » Logged

I pray not only for them, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word, so that they may all be one, as You, Father are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in us, that the world may believe that You sent Me.
Mother Anastasia
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: pre-schism Orthodox/Catholic
Jurisdiction: Independent
Posts: 209

SS Francis & Seraphim praying for unity.


WWW
« Reply #35 on: May 11, 2006, 01:40:34 AM »

Where do you see Eucharist as only for those who are worthy?  Church Father?  Scripture, etc.? Eucharist is exclusive only in the sense that you must understand what the eucharist is.  In order to FULLY understand the Eucharist you must mystically (and really) be connected to the church.  How do you become part of the church?  Baptism/Chrismation. Once that is settled, then you can technically take communion whenever you want. 
So where is the exclusiveness? 

I see exclusivity in the staunch position that everyone has to conform to the Orthodox Church's canonical standards otherwise they may not receive the Eucharist, they are not considered as part of the mystical church.
 
According to most Orthodox posters on this forum,  Baptism must take place in their church, or one their heirarchs agree on.  For instance, in most Orthodox Churches, Mother Theresa would be denied communion.

This is what I mean by exclusivity.

Logged

I pray not only for them, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word, so that they may all be one, as You, Father are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in us, that the world may believe that You sent Me.
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: 8,348


Michał Kalina's biggest fan

FrNPantic
WWW
« Reply #36 on: May 11, 2006, 01:56:55 PM »

No brother, this again is like a ministry team,ÂÂ  people come with some very personal and heavy burdens that would be inappropriate in a corporate worship setting, they have been Baptised in the Holy Spirit and are familiar and comfortable with it.ÂÂ  We usually mention the worship to everyone, if they sound interested we tell them more, they make their own decision.



Thanks for that clarification.  This is definately not how I understood it before. 
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: 8,348


Michał Kalina's biggest fan

FrNPantic
WWW
« Reply #37 on: May 11, 2006, 02:02:34 PM »

I see exclusivity in the staunch position that everyone has to conform to the Orthodox Church's canonical standards otherwise they may not receive the Eucharist, they are not considered as part of the mystical church.
ÂÂ  

If you are not a part of the canonical standards, then you are not a part of the church.  If you are not a part of the church then you can never be fully connected to Christ.  That's the crux of it my friend. 

What do you consider being a "part of the mystical church"?? 

Quote
According to most Orthodox posters on this forum,  Baptism must take place in their church, or one their heirarchs agree on.

That's because most of us still have inter-jurisdictional issues to work out.  like the fact that the Serbian Patriarchate is the best and most correct  Wink   Tongue   Grin 

Quote
For instance, in most Orthodox Churches, Mother Theresa would be denied communion.

This is what I mean by exclusivity.

Giving communion to a heretic is wrong, I don't personally care who the heretic is.  My issue isn't with Mother Theresa and what she did.  My issue is her following Dogmas that most Orthodox Priests would consider wrong or even heretical.  Now we can argue semantics and try to prove how close Catholics are with Orthodox, but the bottomn line is that we are NOT in communion.  (In my opinion). 

If that means that we are being exclusive, by holding fast to the canons and showing meaning to truth and Dogma...then maybe we are exclusive.  Some of us feel that we should not be throwing the body and blood of Christ around like a toy. 
Logged

I got nothing.
I forgot the maps
March 27th and May 30th 2010 were my Ordination dates, please forgive everything before that
Mother Anastasia
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: pre-schism Orthodox/Catholic
Jurisdiction: Independent
Posts: 209

SS Francis & Seraphim praying for unity.


WWW
« Reply #38 on: May 11, 2006, 06:26:49 PM »

If you are not a part of the canonical standards, then you are not a part of the church.  If you are not a part of the church then you can never be fully connected to Christ.  That's the crux of it my friend.   

like the fact that the Serbian Patriarchate is the best and most correct  Wink   Tongue   Grin 

Giving communion to a heretic is wrong, I don't personally care who the heretic is.  My issue isn't with Mother Theresa and what she did.  My issue is her following Dogmas that most Orthodox Priests would consider wrong or even heretical. 
 


I believe that some day, this exclusivity will be condemned as heresy.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2006, 06:28:50 PM by Mother Anastasia » Logged

I pray not only for them, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word, so that they may all be one, as You, Father are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in us, that the world may believe that You sent Me.
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: 8,348


Michał Kalina's biggest fan

FrNPantic
WWW
« Reply #39 on: May 11, 2006, 06:40:15 PM »

And I believe that someday your opinion will be condemned as a heresy.  We could go on like this all day, but the issue is that exclusion is NOT a heresy. 

Even Jesus Christ did not give his blessing to the Samaritan woman (was she Samaritan?)

You know....the one who said that even the dogs eat the scraps off the master's table?  Even then Jesus refused to give EVERYTHING to her.  Remember, scraps are NOT the full meal.  So when we do not give communion, but give scraps, it is my opinion that we are in line with the teachings of Christ (according to this parable). 

Maybe i'm taking it too far, but this is what makes sense to me.  So how is that a heresy?? 
Logged

I got nothing.
I forgot the maps
March 27th and May 30th 2010 were my Ordination dates, please forgive everything before that
Thomas
Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,790



« Reply #40 on: May 11, 2006, 09:20:51 PM »

Both the Orthodox and indeed Roman Catholic have closed communion. Open Communion is a protestant innovation of recent origin, and is not Historic Christianity dating back to the earliest Church Practices. This makes sense as most protestants see communion as only a memorial and not the very Body and Blood of Christ. Communion is only given when full agreement has been made as to what it respresents and those taking the communion are in co-union or agreement on doctrinal issues with each other. This is the Historic teaching and Practice of the Church from the earliest days of the church. When there is disagreement there can be no co-union and thus no communion.

In Christ,
Thomas
« Last Edit: May 11, 2006, 09:25:09 PM by Thomas » Logged

Your brother in Christ ,
Thomas
Mother Anastasia
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: pre-schism Orthodox/Catholic
Jurisdiction: Independent
Posts: 209

SS Francis & Seraphim praying for unity.


WWW
« Reply #41 on: May 12, 2006, 01:03:40 AM »

author=Thomas
1.  Both the Orthodox and indeed Roman Catholic have closed communion.

But the Romans allow intercommunion with the Orthodox, that is why I gave Mother Theresa as an example.

2.  Open Communion is a protestant innovation of recent origin, and is not Historic Christianity dating back to the earliest Church Practices. This makes sense as most protestants see communion as only a memorial and not the very Body and Blood of Christ.

I was not talking about intercommunion with those who do not believe He is truly present under the appearance of the sacred species.

3.  Communion is only given when full agreement has been made as to what it respresents and those taking the communion are in co-union or agreement on doctrinal issues with each other. This is the Historic teaching and Practice of the Church from the earliest days of the church. When there is disagreement there can be no co-union and thus no communion.

The degree of agreement that is being called for exceeds the bounds of Christian charity.

It puts an unecessary legalistic burden on the shoulders of your brothers and sisters,  to conform to your standards,  not Christ's. 

Jesus would not turn Mother Theresa or any sincere believer away from His table to be nourished on His Body, because He is looking at their heart, not their canonical status. 








Logged

I pray not only for them, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word, so that they may all be one, as You, Father are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in us, that the world may believe that You sent Me.
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,411


« Reply #42 on: May 12, 2006, 01:45:30 AM »


The degree of agreement that is being called for exceeds the bounds of Christian charity.

It puts an unecessary legalistic burden on the shoulders of your brothers and sisters,  to conform to your standards,  not Christ's. 

Jesus would not turn Mother Theresa or any sincere believer away from His table to be nourished on His Body, because He is looking at their heart, not their canonical status. 


And YOU are sure of this?  Sounds rather presumptuous to me.
Logged
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 #43 on: May 12, 2006, 06:37:16 AM »

Sounds rather presumptuous to me.
If put some flowers in your hair and dance around to the music of Jefferson Airplane for a while then it won't seem so presumptous.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Timos
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 856



« Reply #44 on: May 12, 2006, 09:54:44 AM »

Mother Anastasia, I don't want to put you on the spot or dissapoint you, but if I may ask, what church do you belong to? The Eastern Orthdoox Church? The Roman Catholic Church? A church which practices a bit of both? I'm just confused because your faith says "pre-schism" and I'm not quite sure what that means since we're definitely after the schism.

Thanks,
           Timos
Logged
pensateomnia
Bibliophylax
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Posts: 2,347


metron ariston


« Reply #45 on: May 12, 2006, 10:01:36 AM »

It puts an unecessary legalistic burden on the shoulders of your brothers and sisters,ÂÂ  to conform to your standards,ÂÂ  not Christ's.

The source of the canonical tradition, as well as its purpose, is not at all legalistic. Canons are only accepted and applied in the Church in so far as the "sobornost" of the Church recognizes that these canons bring salvation and healing. I know others have mentioned this (a very basic point of Christian experience). If you would like to read more, please check out this article by my professor, who is an eminent canonist and a God-fearing Christian: http://goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article7071.asp

Quote
Jesus would not turn Mother Theresa or any sincere believer away from His table to be nourished on His Body, because He is looking at their heart, not their canonical status.

Again, you are completely misunderstanding the nature and purpose of canons. They are not arbitrary "laws" designed to exclude people from salvation. They are pastoral traditions that have, as their main concern, the good order of the Church and the salvation of Her members. Part of good order includes boundaries (this is a point so obviously true that even psychologists recognize it!). The Church does not WANT to exclude people, but She does want to protect that which is sacred from defilement or misuse.

Let's take your statement about Mother Theresa as an example. You claim that Jesus would not turn her away, which, in essence, is a statement that you yourself have personally discerned that Mother Theresa is a right-believing and holy person. That may indeed be true. But the Church, as a Body, must have some criterion in order to discern if She agrees with your personal feelings. While the canons may seem to you to be impersonal (have you actually read them?), they are, in fact, motivated by an extremely personal and charismatic reality. Not only do they come from the Holy Fathers, who prayed and fasted in writing them, but they have been accepted by the Body of Christ in Ecumenical Synod and through the common practice of all Orthodox (well before the "Great Schism", mind you!).

But not only this! When it comes to "closed" communion, the criterion is even MORE spiritual and personal. The Holy Fathers who wrote the canons on this issue realized that it is impossible to come up with some kind of universal "rule." Thus, they declare that any person's status as a communing member of the Body of Christ has to be determined on a personal basis. By whom? Just anyone in the Church? How? Based on one individual's feeling that another individual is, in fact, a faithful Christian? No. By the Bishop, who has been entrusted with the particular charisma to exercise such discernment.

THIS is the fundamental, personal "criterion" for canonicity: That one, in submission and agreement with one's Bishop, humbly professes the universally accepted deposit of Faith and practice -- a deposit whose teaching is entrusted to a person, the Bishop. For the good order of the Church, as St. Paul tells Timothy, only the Bishop should determine if a person actually professes the true faith. He is the man with the charisma of discernment, whose office includes such duties. If we have a system, it is that we trust in our Bishop. We depend on his discernment. And he discerns that only certain other Bishops are true shepherds. With these shepherds, he con-celebrates and communes -- and, thus, so do we.

That's why people asked, "Who is your Bishop?" He may, in fact, teach many things that are good. But until he is recognized by the sobornost of the Church and by the synod of Bishops at large, then we simply cannot be sure of the fact that your Bishop's teaching, liturgy and practice are fitting and holy. To make such a decision -- one way or another -- is not our calling, nor our charisma.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2006, 10:22:03 AM by pensateomnia » Logged

But for I am a man not textueel I wol noght telle of textes neuer a deel. (Chaucer, The Manciple's Tale, 1.131)
pensateomnia
Bibliophylax
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Posts: 2,347


metron ariston


« Reply #46 on: May 12, 2006, 10:09:20 AM »

Mother Anastasia, I don't want to put you on the spot or dissapoint you, but if I may ask, what church do you belong to? The Eastern Orthdoox Church? The Roman Catholic Church? A church which practices a bit of both?

Suffice it to say that Mother Anastasia is a member of a Church which is unfortunately not in communion with any Bishop or Synod of the Eastern Orthodox Church or of the Roman Catholic Church.

I think she would agree with that statement, based on her many posts...
Logged

But for I am a man not textueel I wol noght telle of textes neuer a deel. (Chaucer, The Manciple's Tale, 1.131)
AncientFaith
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 85


« Reply #47 on: May 12, 2006, 11:22:28 AM »

"so the seriousness of church is not a stumbling block?  Its actually a bonus?"

You can call it a bonus if you like. It certainly is to me.

If I may attempt to interpret, its not that the liturgy is somber or serious in that sense (like a serious illness or some such), but rather that it comes across as important - not a game, but not a chore, and definitely not entertainment.  I will add that if feels like the Church really means it when it worships.  Yes, especially at Pascha there are those who show up just for the first part and then bail out, etc., but the what I'm saying is that the behavior of the priests and even the altar boys is that this stuff is important.  Even coming from an AngloCatholic parish, you often got the impression that most of those serving at the Altar were bored and were just doing the liturgy to get the day of obligation out of the way.  You know, get the sacrament over with so you could go on with whatever was next in your life.

It was very difficult teaching our Catechumenate class to adults, or addressing the youth in the Bible study I lead, and telling them that worship is to give us a foretaste of life in heaven.  The reaction is generally that nobody really wants that.  The service is boring, the priests are bored, why do I want to be in heaven doing this?
Logged

---
Patrick
Sleepyhead
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Posts: 27



« Reply #48 on: May 12, 2006, 02:36:48 PM »

AncientFaith: Exactly. It does seem to be a stumbling-block for some, but I think that depends on what kind of background you come from.
Logged
Mother Anastasia
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: pre-schism Orthodox/Catholic
Jurisdiction: Independent
Posts: 209

SS Francis & Seraphim praying for unity.


WWW
« Reply #49 on: May 13, 2006, 04:30:45 AM »

please check out this article by my professor, who is an eminent canonist and a God-fearing Christian: http://goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article7071.asp

Thank you.  This article was very informative and a cause of much hope.  Here are some notes I made on a few points:

1.  Contrary to what some have believed, the Church's law differs essentially from secular law. Its difference lies mainly in the premise that the original source of canon law is found in the will of God to establish His Church on earth.

purpose (humanity's salvation), time (extending beyond this life into the next life), scope (including one's conscience), and place (the universal Church).

The cannons can only be true to the will of God, in the measure that the hearts of the men who created them are pure.


2. The Main Goal of Canon Law

When our Lord entrusted the work of salvation to the Church, which is a society of mortal men and women, He obliged her to provide herself with the necessary means of survival. This was to assist her in organizing herself, in overseeing the orthodoxy of her members, and in guarding against factions.
 
In the present time, the proliferation of factions,  is strong evidence that a revision in the existing canons is needed.


3.  The law which emerged from the earliest times developed in response to the needs of the ecclesiastical community. During both good and bad periods of the Church's history, her law has adapted itself constantly to the circumstances of the time, up to the present day.

The needs of the ecclesiastical community have changed. 

There are authentic signs of  salvation and sanctification by Christ, in non-Orthodox churches.

Despite the fact that they are lacking all the sacraments, there are certain gifts and charisms producing authentic fruit of the Spirit,  that are meritorious and highly developed.

This is a posting on the sharing of authentic gifts between churches.
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php?topic=8972.msg120473#msg120473
 
With the advent of electronic media,  the world has been united in dialogue, which is bringing into sharp contrast the divisions among Christians, creating a disparity that calls into question our authenticity as Believers.

 "All men will know you are my disciples if you love one another."

There is a need for redefining the norms for intercommunion so that all Christians  not possessing the fullness of the true faith,  may without any inference of condemnation or inferiority,  be drawn into the fullness of orthodoxy, and nurtured in His family on His Body.


4.    The collections of laws......they reflect a certain imperfection; however, this imperfection lies not in the institution of the Church but in those individuals of whom it is composed. As an institution of divine origin composed of human beings, the Church is at the same time both a human and a divine institution.

5.  Finally, it must not be forgotten that the Church is not to be identified with her rules. The Church indeed has rules, but she has much else besides.

She has within her treasures of another order and another value besides her canons.

She has her theology, her spirituality, her mysticism, her liturgy, her morality.

And it is most important not to confuse the Gospel and the Pedalion (collection of canons), theology and legislation, morality and jurisprudence.

Each is on a different level and to identify them completely would be to fall into a kind of heresy.

The canons are at the service of the Church; their function is to guide her members on the way to salvation and to make following that way easier.

The Church's legislation is only one aspect of her life, and above all does not represent her essence. The Church is the Mystical Body of Christ.

I see much of Mother Theresa's life as an expression of the essence of the Mystical Body of Christ, and yet she would be denied communion. 

"Each is on a different level and to identify them completely would be to fall into a kind of heresy."


6.  The overriding consideration in the acceptance of a local Church's custom as law is the spiritual well-being of the members of Christ's Mystical Body. What is of importance is how people in any age or place may best serve and worship God.

7.   It is obvious that what is well intentioned for the Church as a whole may not be so well suited to some particular local conditions. Similarly, what is good for one age or place may under different conditions constitute a hindrance. Thus it is that the Church's canonical tradition has such regard for local custom. Having evolved within the context of local conditions, it best expresses the mind of the local Church on how the cause of God may be served in her special conditions.

We have be criticized by some for our Celtic worship before Mass and for worshiping in tongues before Mass.  And yet this is how the Holy Spirit has established our order of worship for this community of Taos, New Mexico, which is a culturally diverse and unique community.


8.  3. The Characteristics of the Church's Law
Applicability of Canon Law

Any discussion of the characteristics of the Church's law must necessarily address the question of the applicability of the holy canons to today's realities.

As I listed above, there are gaping holes that are multiplying factions even as we speak.  This is not an immutable reality,  with God's grace it can in some cases be prevented.


Viewpoints expressed on this vital issue range from one extreme to the other, and are mutually exclusive.

On the one hand, there are those who revere the letter of the canons. But as has already been remarked,

"no one seems to absolutize all of them"

John Meyendorff, "Contemporary Problems of Orthodox Canon Law," The Greek Orthodox Theological Review 17 (1972): 41.)

Then there are those who deny the relevancy of the entire body of canons in its present state. Obviously, both views leave little room for a conciliatory approach but rather tend to polarize.

We cannot please all, but we can please God by creating canons in union with His will,  to establish His Church on earth, and maintain her vitality.


9.  How were the holy canons meant to be understood? Nicholas Afanasiev, in his article entitled "The Canons of the Church: Changeable or Unchangeable?" offers a formula which might be acceptable to all factions, (St. Vladimir's Theological Quarterly 11(1967) 54-68.):

"Canons are a kind of canonical interpretation of the dogmas for a particular moment of the Church's historical existence...

They express the truth about the order of Church life,

but rather than expressing this truth in absolute forms, they conform to historical existence" (Ibid., p. 60).

Such a formula recognizes the absolute validity of all the canons as practical aids which gave expression to doctrinal truths at some point in history.

Some of these aids, however, it sees as having outlived the purpose for which they were originally intended, i.e., they are conditioned by time.

Consequently, they cannot give expression to doctrine without causing distortion, simply because they were intended for another era.


10.  The Concept of "Economy."

Unlike secular law, or Mosaic law, the purpose of the Church's law is the spiritual perfection of her members.

Mere application of the letter of the law is replaced by a sense for the spirit of the law, and adherence to its principles.

This purpose is the determining factor when authority is granted to apply the law when circumstances warrant according to each individual case.

The spirit of love, understood as commitment to the spiritual perfection of the individual, must always prevail in the application of the law.

The abolition of the letter of the law by the spirit of the law has led to the institution of "economy," exercised in nonessential matters. Through "economy," which is always an exception to the general rule, the legal consequences following the violation of a law are lifted.

The "nonessential matters"  needs to be revised to make room for the authentic movement of the Holy Spirit.

11.  "Economy" is granted by the competent ecclesiastical authority and has not so much the character of urgency as it does the character of compassion for human frailty.

The character of compassion is justified by the Church's ardent desire to prevent any adverse effects from the strict observance of the law in exceptional circumstances.

The premise upon which an exception is granted is the general welfare of all concerned. This premise exists in all systems of law but it finds its fullest expression in the Church's law. As the law of grace, it is characterized primarily by the spiritual attributes of compassion, pastoral sensitivity, and forgiveness.

12.  In conclusion, it is the Church's canons and canonical tradition which assure the external means of security within which the life of the spirit is nurtured and preserved.

If the Church's canons and canonical tradition are going to secure the means within which the life of the spirit is nurtured and preserved, they must be relevant to the times we live in, and protect the movement of the Spirit of God which is what animates and gives life to the Body.   


These are just a few observations from my limited perspective, please forgive and correct anything I have taken out of context.  Thank you.
« Last Edit: May 13, 2006, 02:18:35 PM by Mother Anastasia » Logged

I pray not only for them, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word, so that they may all be one, as You, Father are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in us, that the world may believe that You sent Me.
pensateomnia
Bibliophylax
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Posts: 2,347


metron ariston


« Reply #50 on: May 13, 2006, 02:28:47 PM »

Unfortunately, I haven't the time right now to read your post in detail (got to prepare for tomorrow!), although it seems that you certainly have grasped some of the essential points. I'll read everything more carefully when the opportunity presents itself, but, one thing I would stress:

Quote
"Economy" is granted by the competent ecclesiastical authority and has not so much the character of urgency as it does the character of compassion for human frailty.

Economy is a very important concept in Orthodox canon law. But notice -- again! -- how important the "competent ecclesiastical authority" is! It's not important for reasons of power or compulsion, but because of good order and charisma. In the Church we need what St. Basil called "individualization", i.e. the ability to take the canons of the Church and apply them to the particular-life situation of particular people for their salvation. But that "individualization" can't just come from anyone and everyone -- or we would have chaos! Hence, the need for recognized authority and voluntary submission...
Logged

But for I am a man not textueel I wol noght telle of textes neuer a deel. (Chaucer, The Manciple's Tale, 1.131)
Mother Anastasia
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: pre-schism Orthodox/Catholic
Jurisdiction: Independent
Posts: 209

SS Francis & Seraphim praying for unity.


WWW
« Reply #51 on: May 13, 2006, 03:31:19 PM »


In the present time, the proliferation of factions,  is strong evidence that a revision in the existing canons is needed.

3.  The law which emerged from the earliest times developed in response to the needs of the ecclesiastical community. During both good and bad periods of the Church's history, her law has adapted itself constantly to the circumstances of the time, up to the present day.

The needs of the ecclesiastical community have changed. 

There are authentic signs of  salvation and sanctification by Christ, in non-Orthodox churches.

Despite the fact that they are lacking all the sacraments, there are certain gifts and charisms producing authentic fruit of the Spirit,  that are meritorious and highly developed.

There are also those like ourselves that want to adhere to the purity of faith and morals taught by the church, but are tired of political heavy handedness, serious departures from piety and orthodox practice and belief,  and suppression of callings and the gifts entrusted to us by God.

We want to return to the beauty and purity of the first century and early church and to the Desert Fathers, but not by throwing the baby out with the bathwater, i.e. discarding all the RC saints, and every RC tradition.

We want to give our lives for the Church,  but the institutional church is not supportive, rather it is a hostile environment with strong political currents and exclusivism, that distract and weaken, diverting the focus to man's agendas, rather than strengthening the work undertaken purely for Christ. 

We are not the only ones who have been called out of the institution because she was opposing the Holy Spirit,  the internet is full of such groups.  Not all of them can be dismissed as disobedient, rebellious and heretical..rather the majority  of them reflect the very same complaints.  They have no legitimate covering that will beat their swords into ploughshares, repair the nets and get busy with the harvest, so their only recourse is to be self governing.

I believe that those who leave the protestant denominations and naively embrace Orthodoxy as a cure all, are going to find the same problems there that they encountered where they came from.   These problems are not being addressed.  They are being covered over with more tradition, which has a legitimate place in worship and  is novel to the newcomer for a while,  but cannot exist on its own; content has got to support form.

What we need is an entirely new breed of "institution",  one that is Christ centered, holding fast to what is good and relevant in tradition,  and restructuring for the health of the Body, without in anyway compromising the true orthodox faith, and user friendly to those still without the other six sacraments.  It seems to me, from the way Lewis Patsavos presented the canons, that the Church already has the means within her tradition to bring this reform about.






Logged

I pray not only for them, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word, so that they may all be one, as You, Father are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in us, that the world may believe that You sent Me.
Mother Anastasia
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: pre-schism Orthodox/Catholic
Jurisdiction: Independent
Posts: 209

SS Francis & Seraphim praying for unity.


WWW
« Reply #52 on: May 13, 2006, 03:34:38 PM »

In the Church we need what St. Basil called "individualization", i.e. the ability to take the canons of the Church and apply them to the particular-life situation of particular people for their salvation. But that "individualization" can't just come from anyone and everyone -- or we would have chaos! Hence, the need for recognized authority and voluntary submission...

I very much like what you have said here, it addresses the heart of the law and the backbone of the Body as well.
Logged

I pray not only for them, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word, so that they may all be one, as You, Father are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in us, that the world may believe that You sent Me.
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 0.183 seconds with 80 queries.