2 Nuns murdered by robber in Peleponnese
OrthoNews
Nuns killed for convent treasure
By Malcolm Brabant
BBC News, Athens
Police in southern Greece are hunting the killers of two elderly nuns found
suffocated in their hillside convent.
The motive appears to be robbery - the killers are believed to have taken a
crucifix containing wood reputedly from the cross on which Jesus Christ
died.
The two murdered nuns were 83 and 61 years old.
They were the sole occupants of the monastery of the Assumption of the
Virgin
near Astros, about 130km (80 miles) south-west of Athens.
A nephew of the younger victim said the mother superior had had a
premonition
that thieves would come to the hillside sanctuary, kill them and take
everything.
Police say the two women were suffocated with pillows.
An inventory is being checked to determine exactly what was stolen.
This region of the Peloponnese is full of historic monasteries and convents,
most of which contain valuable icons and gold artefacts.
Until now, their protection has been the faith and reverence for the Church
of
local people.
The double murder follows last year's widely publicised theft from a convent
of
a precious icon of the Virgin Mary said to possess miraculous powers.
The crimes are being portrayed as the end of an age of innocence, and
theologians are calling on the Church to access European Union funds to beef
up
security.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/europe/6591467.stm
Published: 2007/04/25 10:24:18 GMT
LiamToo
> 2 Nuns murdered by robber in Peleponnese
Are these Catholic Nuns or you have Nuns too?
Olympiada
Olympiada
OrthoNews
"LiamToo" <liamt...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1177608161....@r3g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 26, 6:56 am, "OrthoNews" <OrthoN...@nospam.org> wrote:
>> 2 Nuns murdered by robber in Peleponnese
>
> Are these Catholic Nuns or you have Nuns too?
***Orthodoxy has a rich tradition of male and female monasticism.
***(Forwhat it's worth, so do the Anglicans.)
Catherine Jefferson
Liam, you really don't know about Orthodox monastacism? This astounded me!
Yes, we decidedly have nuns. We have a history of active monasticism
going to well before the schism. Our monastics, unlike yours, are all
under the same rule/order -- the rule of St. Basil. They would
correspond to your contemplative orders, and tend to be quite
conservative -- Catholic friends who have visited monasteries of ours
are prone to comparing them to Trappist monasteries.
I've visited or corresponded with women's monasteries in California
(three of them), Massachusetts (one), Wisconsin (one), and (as I recall)
North Carolina (one) in the U.S. In one case, I spent the majority of
my weekends for much of a year at a women's monastery in San Francisco.
(I was helping with an elderly and disabled nun.) I also know nuns at
several women's monasteries in Russia and two in Jerusalem.
While there is a small Catholic presence in Greece, it is by far the
most likely that the nuns in this story were Orthodox. :( And
regardless of which, may God have mercy on their souls and grant them peace.
Under His mercy,
--
Catherine (Hampton) Jefferson <ar...@spambouncer.org>
The SpamBouncer * <http://www.spambouncer.org/>
Personal Home Page * <http://www.devsite.org/>
OrthoNews
"Catherine Jefferson" <spam...@spambouncer.org> wrote in message
news:13326kd...@news.supernews.com...
> LiamToo wrote:
>> On Apr 26, 6:56 am, "OrthoNews" <OrthoN...@nospam.org> wrote:
>>> 2 Nuns murdered by robber in Peleponnese
>>
>> Are these Catholic Nuns or you have Nuns too?
>
> Liam, you really don't know about Orthodox monastacism? This astounded
> me!
>
> Yes, we decidedly have nuns. We have a history of active monasticism
> going to well before the schism. Our monastics, unlike yours, are all
> under the same rule/order -- the rule of St. Basil. They would
> correspond to your contemplative orders, and tend to be quite
> conservative -- Catholic friends who have visited monasteries of ours
> are prone to comparing them to Trappist monasteries.
***There are some Orthodox monastic communities that follow the rule of St.
Benedict. And at the OCA's New Skete, the monks and nuns follow the rule of
the Roman Catholic Francis of Assissi!!!
Catherine Jefferson
> "Catherine Jefferson" <spam...@spambouncer.org> wrote in message
> news:13326kd...@news.supernews.com...
>> Yes, we decidedly have nuns. We have a history of active monasticism
>> going to well before the schism. Our monastics, unlike yours, are all
>> under the same rule/order -- the rule of St. Basil. They would
>> correspond to your contemplative orders, and tend to be quite
>> conservative -- Catholic friends who have visited monasteries of ours
>> are prone to comparing them to Trappist monasteries.
> ***There are some Orthodox monastic communities that follow the rule of St.
> Benedict. And at the OCA's New Skete, the monks and nuns follow the rule of
> the Roman Catholic Francis of Assissi!!!
Really? St. Benedict is an Orthodox saint as well as a Catholic saint,
so I see no problem with an Orthodox monastery following that rule. I
just didn't know of any that did so currently. In any event, that's a
new thing in the Orthodox Church; our great monasteries have always
followed the rule of St. Basil in the past and the vast majority still do.
St. Francis is a problem from a traditional Orthodox POV, since he's a
post-schism Catholic saint and therefore not recognized by any Orthodox
jurisdiction I know of. At the same time, I have to admit I'm an
admirer of his and find the early/traditional Franciscan ideas of
brotherhood fascinating. Any group following that rule, however, are
not monks at all, at least not as understood by the Franciscans
themselves. They're "friars", a term that just means "brother", and the
life they follow should be very different from that of a monk in many
ways, at least in theory.
But that's about the limit of what I know on that subject, and even that
much was mostly thanks to a Catholic friend who tried to explain the ins
and outs of Catholic monastacism/friardom to me. I admired the variety,
and tried to get my head to quit whirling. ;)
OrthoNews
> OrthoNews wrote:
>> "Catherine Jefferson" <spam...@spambouncer.org> wrote in message
>> news:13326kd...@news.supernews.com...
>
>>> Yes, we decidedly have nuns. We have a history of active monasticism
>>> going to well before the schism. Our monastics, unlike yours, are all
>>> under the same rule/order -- the rule of St. Basil. They would
>>> correspond to your contemplative orders, and tend to be quite
>>> conservative -- Catholic friends who have visited monasteries of ours
>>> are prone to comparing them to Trappist monasteries.
>
>> ***There are some Orthodox monastic communities that follow the rule of
>> St.
>> Benedict. And at the OCA's New Skete, the monks and nuns follow the rule
>> of
>> the Roman Catholic Francis of Assissi!!!
>
> Really? St. Benedict is an Orthodox saint as well as a Catholic saint,
> so I see no problem with an Orthodox monastery following that rule.
***Although he is the founder of western monasticism, Beneeict is a
pre-schism saint by many centuries. He was born at Nursia, c. 480; died at
Monte Cassino, in 543.
I just didn't know of any that did so currently. In any event, that's a
> new thing in the Orthodox Church; our great monasteries have always
> followed the rule of St. Basil in the past and the vast majority still do.
>
> St. Francis is a problem from a traditional Orthodox POV, since he's a
> post-schism Catholic saint and therefore not recognized by any Orthodox
> jurisdiction I know of. At the same time, I have to admit I'm an
> admirer of his and find the early/traditional Franciscan ideas of
> brotherhood fascinating. Any group following that rule, however, are
> not monks at all, at least not as understood by the Franciscans
> themselves. They're "friars", a term that just means "brother", and the
> life they follow should be very different from that of a monk in many
> ways, at least in theory.
***The monks and nuns at New Skete in New York State were once Franciscan
eastern rite Roman Ctholics (Uniates), and they were allowed to retain their
Franciscan identity when the group converted to Orthodoxy. Visiting New
Skete is an interesting pilgrimmage...and a sad one for Orthodox
traditionalists. There is no iconostas, and in the hallway outside the
chapel are icons of Dorothy Day, the Archbishop of Canterbury, and at least
one Roman Catholic pope.
Dan
> "Catherine Jefferson" <spamt...@spambouncer.org> wrote in message
>
> news:1332rg0...@news.supernews.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > OrthoNews wrote:
> >> "Catherine Jefferson" <spamt...@spambouncer.org> wrote in message
Which Archbishop of Canterbury and which pope? There are Orthodox
saints under both of these headings.
Dorothy Day is another matter. :-)
> > But that's about the limit of what I know on that subject, and even that
> > much was mostly thanks to a Catholic friend who tried to explain the ins
> > and outs of Catholic monastacism/friardom to me. I admired the variety,
> > and tried to get my head to quit whirling. ;)- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
OrthoNews
"Dan" <pras...@communitymail.net> wrote in message
news:1177676296.0...@n35g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> ***The monks and nuns at New Skete in New York State were once Franciscan
>> eastern rite Roman Ctholics (Uniates), and they were allowed to retain
>> their
>> Franciscan identity when the group converted to Orthodoxy. Visiting New
>> Skete is an interesting pilgrimmage...and a sad one for Orthodox
>> traditionalists. There is no iconostas, and in the hallway outside the
>> chapel are icons of Dorothy Day, the Archbishop of Canterbury, and at
>> least
>> one Roman Catholic pope.
>
> Which Archbishop of Canterbury and which pope? There are Orthodox
> saints under both of these headings.
>
> Dorothy Day is another matter. :-)
***The archbishop of Canterbury is Ramsey (if memory serves) and note that I
said "Roman Catholic pope" under which there are no Orthodox saints.
***Dorothy Day was a journalist turned political activist. She was a devout
Roman Catholic and founded the Catholic Workers Party, said to be a
communist organization.
***By the way, Autocephalous means self-governing and Autonomous means
self-ruling. To me, there's not much difference between the two.
Dan
> "Dan" <prass...@communitymail.net> wrote in message
>
> news:1177676296.0...@n35g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> >> ***The monks and nuns at New Skete in New York State were once Franciscan
> >> eastern rite Roman Ctholics (Uniates), and they were allowed to retain
> >> their
> >> Franciscan identity when the group converted to Orthodoxy. Visiting New
> >> Skete is an interesting pilgrimmage...and a sad one for Orthodox
> >> traditionalists. There is no iconostas, and in the hallway outside the
> >> chapel are icons of Dorothy Day, the Archbishop of Canterbury, and at
> >> least
> >> one Roman Catholic pope.
>
> > Which Archbishop of Canterbury and which pope? There are Orthodox
> > saints under both of these headings.
>
> > Dorothy Day is another matter. :-)
>
> ***The archbishop of Canterbury is Ramsey (if memory serves) and note that I
> said "Roman Catholic pope" under which there are no Orthodox saints.
>
> ***Dorothy Day was a journalist turned political activist. She was a devout
> Roman Catholic and founded the Catholic Workers Party, said to be a
> communist organization.
Are you sure that these images are venerated as icons?
After all, they are outside the chapel.
Catherine Jefferson
>> ***The monks and nuns at New Skete in New York State were once Franciscan
>> eastern rite Roman Ctholics (Uniates), and they were allowed to retain their
>> Franciscan identity when the group converted to Orthodoxy. Visiting New
>> Skete is an interesting pilgrimmage...and a sad one for Orthodox
>> traditionalists. There is no iconostas, and in the hallway outside the
>> chapel are icons of Dorothy Day, the Archbishop of Canterbury, and at least
>> one Roman Catholic pope.
> Which Archbishop of Canterbury and which pope? There are Orthodox
> saints under both of these headings.
Indeed, several of both.
> Dorothy Day is another matter. :-)
True. However, a devoutly Orthodox Christian friend of mine who is
known in some circles as a writer on things Orthodox was an associate of
hers in the past -- Jim Forest. Recently he was interviewed about his
memories of her, and that interview was posted on the web site of the
Orthodox Peace Fellowship, which I believe he founded. (The web site is
http://www.incommunion.org. Not sure about the exact URL.) Apparently
Dorothy Day loved Orthodox Christianity and was a major part of
introducing Jim to the tradition, although she was herself Catholic.
It is traditional, at least among the Russian Orthodox, to put pictures
of deceased family members and close friends on your icon wall at home.
I read once that it is perfectly appropriate for an Orthodox child
whose parent(s) are dead to ask their prayers in addition to his/her
guardian angel and the saints. That isn't a proclamation of the parents
as saints, just a reminder that "death is overcome" in Christ.
However, I think the underlying assumption in that practice is that the
parents were themselves Orthodox Christians. I admit to being a bit
non-plussed at what Al said is present at New Skete, although I might
feel differently if I visited the place and saw what they actually do.
Dan
wrote:
> Dan wrote:
> >> ***The monks and nuns at New Skete in New York State were once Franciscan
> >> eastern rite Roman Ctholics (Uniates), and they were allowed to retain their
> >> Franciscan identity when the group converted to Orthodoxy. Visiting New
> >> Skete is an interesting pilgrimmage...and a sad one for Orthodox
> >> traditionalists. There is no iconostas, and in the hallway outside the
> >> chapel are icons of Dorothy Day, the Archbishop of Canterbury, and at least
> >> one Roman Catholic pope.
> > Which Archbishop of Canterbury and which pope? There are Orthodox
> > saints under both of these headings.
>
> Indeed, several of both.
>
> > Dorothy Day is another matter. :-)
>
> True. However, a devoutly Orthodox Christian friend of mine who is
> known in some circles as a writer on things Orthodox was an associate of
> hers in the past -- Jim Forest. Recently he was interviewed about his
> memories of her, and that interview was posted on the web site of the
He also wrote a biography of Dorothy Day ("Love is the Measure").
>Apparently
> Dorothy Day loved Orthodox Christianity and was a major part of
> introducing Jim to the tradition, although she was herself Catholic.
>
> It is traditional, at least among the Russian Orthodox, to put pictures
> of deceased family members and close friends on your icon wall at home.
> I read once that it is perfectly appropriate for an Orthodox child
> whose parent(s) are dead to ask their prayers in addition to his/her
> guardian angel and the saints. That isn't a proclamation of the parents
> as saints, just a reminder that "death is overcome" in Christ.
>
> However, I think the underlying assumption in that practice is that the
> parents were themselves Orthodox Christians. I admit to being a bit
> non-plussed at what Al said is present at New Skete, although I might
> feel differently if I visited the place and saw what they actually do.
People always seem to have strong feelings about New Skete (for or
against). At some point, I'd like to visit them and make up my own
mind.
LiamToo
> ***The archbishop of Canterbury is Ramsey (if memory serves) and
> note that I said "Roman Catholic pope" under which there are no
> Orthodox saints.
I have learned a lot about Orthodox Nuns and Monks today. And I found
out that the New Skete's temple features iconographic portraits of
prominent non-Orthodox such as Pope John XXIII, Archbishop Michael
Ramsey, and Mother Teresa of Calcutta, and the communities celebrate
the feast of the Roman Catholic saint Francis of Assisi.
OrthoNews
***No, I'm not sure about that at all. Venerated or not, should they be
there at all? That's my question.
OrthoNews
***This is a very good, but lamentable (in my opinion) summation.
OrthoNews
> People always seem to have strong feelings about New Skete (for or
> against). At some point, I'd like to visit them and make up my own
> mind.
>
***A good decision, Dan. But before you go, consider whether abberations in
traditional Orthodox practice are good for Orthodoxy as a whole. If we are
truly the True Church, do we need innovations and abberations to remain
relevant?
OrthoNews
"OrthoNews" <Orth...@nospam.org> wrote in message
news:f0t44...@enews2.newsguy.com...
***BTW, you can learn more about monasticism in the Orthodox Church by
following these links on this web site:
http://aggreen.net/monasteries/monastic.html
Catherine Jefferson
>> True. However, a devoutly Orthodox Christian friend of mine who is
>> known in some circles as a writer on things Orthodox was an associate of
>> hers in the past -- Jim Forest. Recently he was interviewed about his
>> memories of her, and that interview was posted on the web site of the
>> Orthodox Peace Fellowship, which I believe he founded. (The web site ishttp://www.incommunion.org. Not sure >about the exact URL.)
> He also wrote a biography of Dorothy Day ("Love is the Measure").
Yes, he did. It's a good book -- I have it and have read it. Jim is
actually quite a good and engaging writer. His book, "Praying with
Icons," is an excellent introduction to Orthodox Christian prayer for
those who weren't raised in the tradition. Recommended!
Catherine Jefferson
> ***A good decision, Dan. But before you go, consider whether abberations in
> traditional Orthodox practice are good for Orthodoxy as a whole. If we are
> truly the True Church, do we need innovations and abberations to remain
> relevant?
Fairly prejudicial language here, and I don't think most of us can know
whether it is justified or not. :/ I have to admit that what I'm
hearing about New Skete leaves me wondering whether what they are doing
is Orthodox, though. (Or rightly represented as Orthodox.)
LiamToo
> ***This is a very good, but lamentable (in my opinion) summation.
Would you care to elaborate. Are the presence of the icons lamentable
or just my summation?
Dan
If they are not there for veneration, they are not icons, just images
in iconographic style.
If that is the case, their presence may not be a great idea, because
it might tend to mislead people, but at least they are not trying to
claim that Michael Ramsey and Dorothy Day are saints.
Catherine Jefferson
Not the presence of icons, but the presence of icons of people that the
Orthodox Church does not recognize as saints and who are not Orthodox
Christians. However much respect we may have for people outside of the
Orthodox Church, and whatever some of us may want to do at home, it
isn't appropriate to venerate non-Orthodox in an Orthodox Church. That
violates some explicit rules, and no Orthodox Bishop I've ever known
would allow it.
So, if the "icons" in question are just pictures in the hall, that's one
thing. If they're in the church and venerated, it's an entirely
different (and much more serious) matter.
It isn't that some of these people might not be saints. God knows who
His saints are; we merely recognize some subcategory of people as
saints. But the knowledge of the Orthodox Church (as opposed to the
opinions, feelings, and thoughts of some individual Orthodox Christians)
extends only to the saints within the Orthodox Church. I believe the
Catholic Church takes the same basic position when canonizing saints;
they've first got to be Catholic. :)
Dan
> "Dan" <prass...@communitymail.net> wrote in message
>
> news:1177680266....@r35g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
>
> > People always seem to have strong feelings about New Skete (for or
> > against). At some point, I'd like to visit them and make up my own
> > mind.
>
> ***A good decision, Dan. But before you go, consider whether abberations in
> traditional Orthodox practice are good for Orthodoxy as a whole.
It all depends on what you mean by "abberations". There have been many
changes in recent decades in some jurisdictions: open iconostases,
silent prayers read out loud, female readers, frequent communion,
common confession, etc. All of these may strike some people as
abberations.
OrthoNews
***Interesting. But does lack of veneration make an icon any less than an
icon? I don't think so. If this were the case, all of the icons in russia,
for instance, that are stored and not on public view are no longer icons.
>
> If that is the case, their presence may not be a great idea, because
> it might tend to mislead people, but at least they are not trying to
> claim that Michael Ramsey and Dorothy Day are saints.
***I sure hope not.
OrthoNews
***I guess my wording was confusing. I applaud your increase in knowledge,
but lament the questionable images at New Skete. ;-)
OrthoNews
> LiamToo wrote:
>> On Apr 27, 10:16 am, "OrthoNews" <OrthoN...@nospam.org> wrote:
>>> ***This is a very good, but lamentable (in my opinion) summation.
>>
>> Would you care to elaborate. Are the presence of the icons lamentable
>> or just my summation?
>
> Not the presence of icons, but the presence of icons of people that the
> Orthodox Church does not recognize as saints and who are not Orthodox
> Christians. However much respect we may have for people outside of the
> Orthodox Church, and whatever some of us may want to do at home, it
> isn't appropriate to venerate non-Orthodox in an Orthodox Church. That
> violates some explicit rules, and no Orthodox Bishop I've ever known
> would allow it.
>
> So, if the "icons" in question are just pictures in the hall, that's one
> thing. If they're in the church and venerated, it's an entirely
> different (and much more serious) matter.
***There's another dimension: Icons do not have to be in a church proper to
be venerated. An icon placed anywhere can be venerated.
OrthoNews
> OrthoNews wrote:
>
>> ***A good decision, Dan. But before you go, consider whether abberations
>> in
>> traditional Orthodox practice are good for Orthodoxy as a whole. If we
>> are
>> truly the True Church, do we need innovations and abberations to remain
>> relevant?
>
> Fairly prejudicial language here, and I don't think most of us can know
> whether it is justified or not. :/ I have to admit that what I'm
> hearing about New Skete leaves me wondering whether what they are doing
> is Orthodox, though. (Or rightly represented as Orthodox.)
***I don't mind people being prejudicial about The Orthodox Church,
especially when The Church claims to be the True Faith. True, we don't know
where Christ is not, but we have chosen to be (or remain to be, if cradle
born) Orthodox and that by its nature is a prejudicial act.
OrthoNews
> On Apr 27, 11:19 am, "OrthoNews" <OrthoN...@nospam.org> wrote:
>> "Dan" <prass...@communitymail.net> wrote in message
>>
>> news:1177680266....@r35g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> > People always seem to have strong feelings about New Skete (for or
>> > against). At some point, I'd like to visit them and make up my own
>> > mind.
>>
>> ***A good decision, Dan. But before you go, consider whether abberations
>> in
>> traditional Orthodox practice are good for Orthodoxy as a whole.
>
> It all depends on what you mean by "abberations". There have been many
> changes in recent decades in some jurisdictions: open iconostases,
> silent prayers read out loud, female readers, frequent communion,
> common confession, etc. All of these may strike some people as
> abberations.
***How very, very true. And deviations from the "norm" has led to many, many
schisms. See: http://aggreen.net/other_orthodox/other.html
LiamToo
wrote:
> Not the presence of icons, but the presence of icons of
> people that the Orthodox Church does not recognize as
> saints and who are not Orthodox Christians.
After reading their history below, I could understand them. They were
from the Franciscans, a religious order in the Roman Catholic Church.
"The Monks of New Skete began in 1966 with a small group of monks.
Having originally been members of the Byzantine-Rite Franciscans, our
first brothers sought to live a more explicitly monastic life within
the Eastern Christian tradition. To do this, they left the Franciscans
and established New Skete as a separate monastic community. "
"As members of the Orthodox Church for the past twenty five years, New
Skete works actively for the reconciliation and mutual understanding
of all Christians, particularly the Orthodox Church with the Roman
Catholic Church."
LiamToo
> ***I guess my wording was confusing. I applaud your
> increase in knowledge, but lament the questionable
> images at New Skete. ;-)
Thanks for clearing that up. I posted my opinion on why the pictures
are there in my response to Catherine.
Dan
True, but that doesn't mean that any image made in the style of an
icon is an icon.
I am assuming that if the images in the hallway at New Skete are not
venerated, it is because they are not regarded as icons.
Catherine Jefferson
>> Fairly prejudicial language here, and I don't think most of us can know
>> whether it is justified or not. :/ I have to admit that what I'm
>> hearing about New Skete leaves me wondering whether what they are doing
>> is Orthodox, though. (Or rightly represented as Orthodox.)
> ***I don't mind people being prejudicial about The Orthodox Church,
> especially when The Church claims to be the True Faith. True, we don't know
> where Christ is not, but we have chosen to be (or remain to be, if cradle
> born) Orthodox and that by its nature is a prejudicial act.
You and I may be using the word "prejudicial" in a different way. I
decidedly object to anything prejudicial, because that means coming to a
judgement about something before you have the facts. (The original
Latin roots mean "pre-judge".) My choice to be Orthodox was decidedly
not prejudicial in that sense -- it was a considered decision after a
number of years of learning about our faith.
It was a choice to be one thing instead of something else, however, and
any time you choose one thing, you exclude others. That's the nature of
choice.
So if you meant "prejudicial" in the second sense, I agree with your
sentiment. I just think you need to practice your English vocabulary! ;P
Catherine Jefferson
> After reading their history below, I could understand them. They were
> from the Franciscans, a religious order in the Roman Catholic Church.
> "The Monks of New Skete began in 1966 with a small group of monks.
> Having originally been members of the Byzantine-Rite Franciscans, our
> first brothers sought to live a more explicitly monastic life within
> the Eastern Christian tradition. To do this, they left the Franciscans
> and established New Skete as a separate monastic community. "
> "As members of the Orthodox Church for the past twenty five years, New
> Skete works actively for the reconciliation and mutual understanding
> of all Christians, particularly the Orthodox Church with the Roman
> Catholic Church."
> http://www.newsketemonks.com/history.htm
Okay, that paints a clearer picture of who they are and where they're
coming from. I'm not that comfortable with it, but they didn't ask me,
and (as usual) I'll withhold judgement til I see for myself what they
are doing and why. (Too often things that sound black and white are a
lot more complex, or even very different, when you look at the details.)
By the way, referring back to another discussion we had recently,
yesterday was the feast day of St. Martin the Confessor, Pope of Rome in
the mid 600's AD, on the Orthodox Old Calendar (Julian Calendar). St.
Martin was a an opponent of the Monothelite heresy and a contemporary
and colleague of St. Maximus the Confessor, whom he supported at the
Lateran Council of 649 AD. I know there was a Pope Gregory who is
recognized as an Orthodox saint, don't know why I'd thought he was the
Pope who supported St. Maximus.... (Or maybe he was, and St. Maximus
was supported by *two* holy men who happened to be Popes of Rome.)
++
>[first he qoted some 35 lines of thread text then he said:]
>
>
please trim quotes, especially if you are going to only issue aone or
two liner. Otherwise whatever you have to say may not get read, being
buried.
>True, but that doesn't mean that any image made in the style of an
>icon is an icon.
>
>I am assuming that if the images in the hallway at New Skete are not
>venerated, it is because they are not regarded as icons.
>
>
I have seen lots of photos, paintings and other pictures venerated
before their time. For example, Mother Theresa go put on many an icon
stand when she died and there was almost no Russian Orthodox Church
without Saint Seraphim of Sarov BEFORE he was declared a saint.
LiamToo
wrote:
> By the way, referring back to another discussion we had recently,
> yesterday was the feast day of St. Martin the Confessor,
> Pope of Rome in the mid 600's AD, on the Orthodox Old
> Calendar (Julian Calendar). St. Martin was a an opponent
> of the Monothelite heresy and a contemporary and colleague
> of St. Maximus the Confessor, whom he supported at the
> Lateran Council of 649 AD. I know there was a Pope Gregory
> who is recognized as an Orthodox saint, don't know why I'd
> thought he was the Pope who supported St. Maximus....
> (Or maybe he was, and St. Maximus was supported by *two*
> holy men who happened to be Popes of Rome.)
They were Pope St. Martin and Pope Severinus.
St. Maximus was vindicated by the Third Council of Constantinople (the
Sixth Ecumenical Council, 680-681), which declared that Christ
possessed both a human and a divine will. With this declaration
Monothelitism became heresy, and St. Maximus was declared innocent of
all charges against him.
The three Popes, Gregory I, II, and III are also the saints of the
Orthodox Church.
OrthoNews
"++" <sp...@erols.com> wrote in message
news:3qOdnUlKbpYyzq_b...@rcn.net...
***It is a tradition in Orthodoxy that a person can become a saint through
popular support, which leads to a "declaration" of sainthood. To have a holy
person depicted on a icon before sainthood is not all that unusual.
Dan
> "++" <s...@erols.com> wrote in message
>From the website of the Antiochian Archdiocese:
"The rules regarding the creation of an icon are rigorous. The
iconographer must prepare himself for the task of painting an icon by
following a strict discipline of fasting and prayer. He must quiet his
spirit and submit himself to God...The icon will be created to inspire
and lead others into worship. Painting the icon is not a use of
imagination. Instead, the icon will be painted using the prescribed
regimen and style that has been passed down through the centuries.
Everything from the facial expressions to the colors used is
predetermined."
This would not be possible with regard to departed persons who have
not been glorified as saints. Paintings of them of them might look
like icons, but they would only be "would-be icons".
++
>
>***It is a tradition in Orthodoxy that a person can become a saint through
>popular support, which leads to a "declaration" of sainthood. To have a holy
>person depicted on a icon before sainthood is not all that unusual.
>
>
>
>
>
I was speaking about photos and paintings but iconography is different.
If someone feel that someone is a saint, perhaps from a vision, and
writes them as an icon, they must use no halo but a square, indicating
that they are not yet saints. This is the same device to depict the
blessed, such as Augustine, who, justifiably is kept in the limbo of his
waiting state for a real halo among Orthodox
OrthoNews
>
>>From the website of the Antiochian Archdiocese:
>
> "The rules regarding the creation of an icon are rigorous. The
> iconographer must prepare himself for the task of painting an icon by
> following a strict discipline of fasting and prayer. He must quiet his
> spirit and submit himself to God...The icon will be created to inspire
> and lead others into worship. Painting the icon is not a use of
> imagination. Instead, the icon will be painted using the prescribed
> regimen and style that has been passed down through the centuries.
> Everything from the facial expressions to the colors used is
> predetermined."
>
> This would not be possible with regard to departed persons who have
> not been glorified as saints. Paintings of them of them might look
> like icons, but they would only be "would-be icons".
***This paragraph contains an erroneous supposition. The preparation
required before writing an icon does not have anything to do with what is
being depicted. Geesh! Yes, it would be possible.
OrthoNews
***However, since Augustine is a recognized saint in the Orthodox Church,
I've seen round halos on his icon. A contemporary icon of Augustine with
round halo can be seen at http://www.odox.net/Icons-Augustine-Africa.htm.
Another with round halo can be found in the middle of this page:
http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/jod/augustine/bless_aug.htm
***Saint Augustine's feast day is June 14, and the dismissal hymn chanted
for that day states: "O blessed Augustine, you have been proved to be a
bright vessel of the divine Spirit and revealer of the city of God; you have
also righteously served the Saviour as a wise hierarch who has received God.
O righteous father, pray to Christ God that he may grant to us great mercy."
OrthoNews
> OrthoNews wrote:
>
>>> Fairly prejudicial language here, and I don't think most of us can know
>>> whether it is justified or not. :/ I have to admit that what I'm
>>> hearing about New Skete leaves me wondering whether what they are doing
>>> is Orthodox, though. (Or rightly represented as Orthodox.)
>
>> ***I don't mind people being prejudicial about The Orthodox Church,
>> especially when The Church claims to be the True Faith. True, we don't
>> know
>> where Christ is not, but we have chosen to be (or remain to be, if cradle
>> born) Orthodox and that by its nature is a prejudicial act.
>
> You and I may be using the word "prejudicial" in a different way. I
> decidedly object to anything prejudicial, because that means coming to a
> judgement about something before you have the facts. (The original
> Latin roots mean "pre-judge".) My choice to be Orthodox was decidedly
> not prejudicial in that sense -- it was a considered decision after a
> number of years of learning about our faith.
***Essentially my story, too, although it didn't take several years. But
now, I'm prejudiced for our Holy Church! <G>
>
> It was a choice to be one thing instead of something else, however, and
> any time you choose one thing, you exclude others. That's the nature of
> choice.
>
> So if you meant "prejudicial" in the second sense, I agree with your
> sentiment. I just think you need to practice your English vocabulary! ;P
***Hey, just because I've been a professional writer all of mty life doesn't
mean I write good!! ;-) Even Ernest Hemingway was edited!
Alexander Arnakis
>
>"The rules regarding the creation of an icon are rigorous. The
>iconographer must prepare himself for the task of painting an icon by
>following a strict discipline of fasting and prayer. He must quiet his
>spirit and submit himself to God...The icon will be created to inspire
>and lead others into worship. Painting the icon is not a use of
>imagination. Instead, the icon will be painted using the prescribed
>regimen and style that has been passed down through the centuries.
>Everything from the facial expressions to the colors used is
>predetermined."
>
But what about *mechanical reproductions* of icons? I'd venture to say
that more than 90% of icons sold and used for private devotions are
mass-printed in some way. Maybe they're even made by coolie labor in
China!
Hand-painted icons (done in the proper way) are exceedingly expensive.
Once, my father and I, on one of our trips to Mt. Athos, commissioned
an icon on behalf of our local Orthodox church in Texas from some
monks at St. Anne's Skete. We paid them quite a bit of money up front,
but as it turned out they never delivered. I don't attribute this to
ill will on their part, but rather that we were unable to follow up on
this in person (which is how everything in Greece needs to be done,
even on Mt. Athos).
There are also commercial workshops where hand-painted icons are done
on a semi-assembly-line basis. A friend of mine once asked me to bring
him a hand-painted icon of the Virgin Mary from one of my trips to
Greece. Having learned the lesson from the Mt. Athos experience, I
went to a workshop in Thessaloniki, where they produced the required
icon overnight. I saw them working -- there was no prayer or spiritual
preparation involved. They just paint on wooden panels according to
the formula. These people do this dozens of times a week.
As an experiment, I once made some reproduction icons myself. I found
some good prototypes on the Internet, processed them in Photoshop, and
then printed them on decal paper on my Alps printer -- this printer
even printed gold foil for the halos. Then I transferred the decals to
wooden panels prepared with sealer. They looked really good!
Considering the fact that veneration of an icon involves the *idea*
behind the icon, and not the wood and paint themselves, what
difference does it really make if the icon is a mechanical
reproduction? One could as easily light a candle in front of a picture
of an icon torn out of a magazine.
++
Interesting story, Alexo,
I actually was able to purchase a handpainted set in Macedonia at St.
Naum monastery church but they had to make sure I was Orthodox. A local
priest and a monk had to vouch for me as so much prayer had gone into
them. The only other handpainted icons I have are Greek which I got in
a thrift shop in Westover shopping center.
In Sofia, Bulgaria, outside the Alexander Nevski Cathedral on Saturdays,
one can visit a kind of flea market with artists exhibiting as well in
the open air, even in Winter. Rather well painted icons are there and
the iconographer or their wives, husbands, mothers, whoever, usually
will tell you that they have prayer and how while making them, whether
or not they are based on originals from where, and I found most everyone
to know the major historic pattern books that scholars of iconography
are familiar with (ex. Dionysios of Fourna), as well as famous panel
icons or frescoes upon which they have based their work.
I found not as much actual knowledge in Roumania and rather a lot of
westernization in some of the icons for sale BUT I also saw the most
innovative within how icons are supposed to be painted theoretically
being made there in many media. Romania, like Belorus (ex. Hutzuli) and
Croatia are famous places (for different historic trends and reasons) in
reverse painting on glass icons. The icon of the handmade wooden block
is also alive there as well as everything from sketchily
representational to surrealisticly iconographically representational
variations on how an icon might be done, all in a form easy to pray
with. The sheer joy of seeing something like this is indescribable.
Two of the more interesting series of modern works are wood carved icons
by the Miak people (who originated in Asia Minor and are now mixed
ancestry - living in the Debar area of Macedonia) and the metalwork
iconography of Atanas Dudanovski/aka Atanas Dudan.
Members of this family carved iconostases in many places, but famously
at St. John Bigorski Monastery in Macedonia (see this old Soros site
for the iconostasis
http://www.soros.org.mk/konkurs/076/angver/manastir_bigorski.html) and
at the monastery of Sveti Spas (Saint Savior) in Skopje.
Atanas I have met. I walked into St. Mary Perebleptos Church in Ohrid
one day and he had an exhibit of his icons there. He definately prays
about each one and basically has decided to take details of riza and
other icon covers and Gospel and lectionary covers and replicate them
into icons on their own, sometimes quite large scale with silver or
silverplate. He still makes metal book and icon covers , too and is an
incredible young man. Let me see if he is on the web? I wish I had had
the faith to think I'd have enough money left in order to buy something
on the spot. He sells out of a shop that is seldom open except through
arrangement in Struga. He is listed on this webpage working on a silver
and copper piece:
http://www.ohrid.gov.mk/angliska%20verzija/Traditional%20arts%20and%20crafts.htm
By the way, on the website above, Vangel (Evangelist) Dereban that you
see pictured there is one of the Alabanian/Turkish Orthodox filigrani
family members. One sees more of these related families these days in
Croatia and Montenegro. They have been making crosses, reliquaries and
etc. since at least the 11th century.
So the handpainted, handcrafted icon is alive and well some places, hard
to find in others. Been over to that icon shop where you live? It is
run like a gallery by non Orthodox and they have a tendency to use the
same restoration person who cannot do slavonic lettering very well and
so ruins many of their icons, but still there are a lot available.
The way I think about repreductions (your printer sounds cool if it can
apply gold leaf!) is that once that paper/plastic/paper
mache/embroidered/metal icon is blessed, it's an icon. If it hasn't
been blessed, it's a piece of crat or art, depending on the quality of
the finished product, and non religious at all. THese days, I wonder
how we should spend our money, when we have it. Pleasing ourselves with
religious works of art? Helping the poor? I would rather spend a lot
of time helping the homeless one way or another than have a valuable
peice of Orthodox antiquity in my possession.
++
++
exhibit of his I saw was really at Sveti Nikola Bolnichki (ie the church
associated with Saint Nicholas Hospital, as I recall an historic
hospital/hospice for women.
his icons click on them at http://www.geocities.com/adudan/ikoni.htm
look at the Gospel covers http://www.geocities.com/adudan/aplikacii.htm
M Shirley Chong
> ***The monks and nuns at New Skete in New York State were once Franciscan
> eastern rite Roman Ctholics (Uniates), and they were allowed to retain
> their Franciscan identity when the group converted to Orthodoxy. Visiting
> New Skete is an interesting pilgrimmage...and a sad one for Orthodox
> traditionalists. There is no iconostas, and in the hallway outside the
> chapel are icons of Dorothy Day, the Archbishop of Canterbury, and at
> least one Roman Catholic pope.
It would be a sad trip for many dog fanciers as well.
NewSkete is basically a puppy mill and their German Shepherds are riddled
with genetic problems.
M. Shirley Chong
OrthoNews
"M Shirley Chong" <eit...@netins.net> wrote in message
news:f0vh7b$k3d$1...@news.netins.net...
***God's revenge???
M Shirley Chong
>> It would be a sad trip for many dog fanciers as well.
>>
>> NewSkete is basically a puppy mill and their German Shepherds are riddled
>> with genetic problems.
OrthoNews wrote:
> ***God's revenge???
I thought that the Christian God didn't operate in that fashion?
I tend to believe that it is the result of humans taking the chance to make
a buck and being unwilling to admit to the consequences of their own
decisions.
M. Shirley Chong
OrthoNews
***You are mostl likely dead on!
Olympiada
could look up the words revenge or avenge or vengeance in an on line
concordance. Try Bible Gateway. It would be the Father who would be
vengeful, perhaps.
Olympiada
Dan
> On 27 Apr 2007 14:13:46 -0700, Dan <prass...@communitymail.net> wrote:
>
> >"The rules regarding the creation of an icon are rigorous. The
> >iconographer must prepare himself for the task of painting an icon by
> >following a strict discipline of fasting and prayer. He must quiet his
> >spirit and submit himself to God...The icon will be created to inspire
> >and lead others into worship. Painting the icon is not a use of
> >imagination. Instead, the icon will be painted using the prescribed
> >regimen and style that has been passed down through the centuries.
> >Everything from the facial expressions to the colors used is
> >predetermined."
>
> Yes, that's a good description of the painting of an *original* icon.
> But what about *mechanical reproductions* of icons? I'd venture to say
> that more than 90% of icons sold and used for private devotions are
> mass-printed in some way.
Reproductions are popular because well-written "original" icons are
not all that easy to come by. It is the image itself that is
important, and not the wood and paint, but the original image must
have been written in the proper manner for the copies to be of any
value.
It makes a difference, but that difference is not critical. I'd much
rather pray before an icon written by Rublev or Kontoglou than before
an unworthy "original".
>One could as easily light a candle in front of a picture
> of an icon torn out of a magazine.
If one were in circumstances in which that was the only possibility,
then it would have to suffice.
Dan
> "Dan" <prass...@communitymail.net> wrote in message
Have a look at the Hermeneia of Dionysius of Fourna and see whether
you still think this way.
Catherine Jefferson
> "M Shirley Chong" <eit...@netins.net> wrote in message
> news:f0vh7b$k3d$1...@news.netins.net...
>> It would be a sad trip for many dog fanciers as well.
>>
>> NewSkete is basically a puppy mill and their German Shepherds are riddled
>> with genetic problems.
> ***God's revenge???
On puppies? Don't be silly. This kind of thing is the consequence of
human sin against the dogs, not God taking revenge by harming innocent
animals. I hope that was a joke; otherwise it was nearly blasphemous. :(
OrthoNews
***The opinion of one individual does not Orthodox theology make.
OrthoNews
> OrthoNews wrote:
>> "M Shirley Chong" <eit...@netins.net> wrote in message
>> news:f0vh7b$k3d$1...@news.netins.net...
>
>>> It would be a sad trip for many dog fanciers as well.
>>>
>>> NewSkete is basically a puppy mill and their German Shepherds are
>>> riddled
>>> with genetic problems.
>
>> ***God's revenge???
>
> On puppies? Don't be silly. This kind of thing is the consequence of
> human sin against the dogs, not God taking revenge by harming innocent
> animals. I hope that was a joke; otherwise it was nearly blasphemous. :(
***I'm known to be a little far out at times. Just ask Nicky-poo!
Alexander Arnakis
>
>Reproductions are popular because well-written "original" icons are
>not all that easy to come by. It is the image itself that is
>important, and not the wood and paint, but the original image must
>have been written in the proper manner for the copies to be of any
>value.
>
is the mechanical reproduction: a properly-painted prototype is
chosen, and then it's reproduced by essentially photographic means.
All the "propriety" of the original, it would seem, passes through to
the reproduction.
But what if the proper original is "copied" freehand by some
self-styled "iconographer" (such as the ones I alluded to, in the
workshop in Thessaloniki)? At what point does such a process become
"improper"? And if an ostensibly proper subject is chosen (say, the
Virgin Mary) and an ostensibly proper style is used, how would the
ordinary believer (not an art critic) know when it was "improper"?
Clearly, if an inappropriate subject is portrayed (say, Dorothy Day),
or an inappropriate style is used (say, the Renaissance style of
Michaelangelo), what we have is not an "icon." But people would
recognize these sorts of things as soon as they saw them. No Orthodox
would venerate what's seen on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel.
Religious art, yes, but iconography, no.
Catherine Jefferson
> "Catherine Jefferson" <spam...@spambouncer.org> wrote in message
> news:133784v...@news.supernews.com...
>> On puppies? Don't be silly. This kind of thing is the consequence of
>> human sin against the dogs, not God taking revenge by harming innocent
>> animals. I hope that was a joke; otherwise it was nearly blasphemous. :(
> ***I'm known to be a little far out at times. Just ask Nicky-poo!
Ah, then that was a joke? :) Good!
Dan
Very true. This is something we all need to remember.
It wasn't opinions I wanted you to see, but very detailed
specifications about how particular saints are to be represented.
Dan
Sometimes we are left having to make judgements - hopefully informed
ones, as to what we will and won't accept.
As I've written, I have no difficulty with mechanical reproductions of
great icons. The Photodotis and the Vladimirska Bozhimata in my icon
corner are both reproductions which spent some time in the altar of
our temple before I brought them home.
Freehand or workshop copies I would probably discuss with my spiritual
father if I decided to purchase one. The painted icons that I now own
were commissioned from monastic iconographers.
OrthoNews
> OrthoNews wrote:
>> "Catherine Jefferson" <spam...@spambouncer.org> wrote in message
>> news:133784v...@news.supernews.com...
>
>>> On puppies? Don't be silly. This kind of thing is the consequence of
>>> human sin against the dogs, not God taking revenge by harming innocent
>>> animals. I hope that was a joke; otherwise it was nearly blasphemous.
>>> :(
>
>> ***I'm known to be a little far out at times. Just ask Nicky-poo!
>
> Ah, then that was a joke? :) Good!
***Yes, it was, but you can almost count on one of the self-righteous ones
herein taking me to task for being judgmental.