Orthodoxys Image in the world
JOH...@webtv.net
the Orthodox churchs in the world.
Milosevic uses the Orthodox church like Stalin did. It is most Important
that the Orthodox churchs be even handed in their Comments.
To be seen as being Pro-Serbian could do great harm to Orthodoxy's Image
and credibility.
evagr...@my-dejanews.com
Correct. Orthodoxy's great weakness is the inability to remove itself from
nationalistic concerns. I believe that this is the major reason why Orthodoxy
does not present a unified presence in the world. Philetism is a present
heresy in the Orthodox church. It should not lead, as it does, to a knee-jerk
support of Orthodox no matter what they do. Of course, I expect all types of
posting citing the Roman Catholic church etc;etc; The discussion is not about
them but about Orthodoxy. Respond to that concern only.
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
GS
Please hie thee to a Papal newsgroup
evagr...@my-dejanews.com wrote: Orthodoxy's great weakness is the inability to
remove itself from
> nationalistic concerns.
The West's worse contribution to Orthodox lands was nationalism. As nationalism
always has been incompatible with nationalism, and nationalism was nurtured under
western ROman Catholicism, one can only conclude that it is a result of the
following:
ROman Catholicism's greatest weakness is incorrect belief.
Hoping that all Romans west and east come back to the true faith,
Galina
Vassili Gronoff
Orthodox church to the present conflict. Where on CNN, Fox News, etc. have
you heard of the 1972 pan-orthodox council ? Where have you heard Patriarch
Paul of Serbia excommunicating Milosevic and his supporters ?
Only lack of information can harm people by making them hate the true
Orthodox Church.
VG
JOH...@webtv.net a écrit dans le message
<9048-371...@newsd-111.bryant.webtv.net>...
JOH...@webtv.net
the Catholic church has no part in this.
The Pope asked the Allies to have an Easter cease fire,he was wrong.
He has tried to be balanced in his statements about the War.
This is an Orthodox matter,its up to them to handle it,if they can.
Regards
JOH...@webtv.net
Yes the Patriarch of Belgrades pronouncements against the
Serbian govt. are known in the West.No I did'nt know that Milosevic had
been formaly Excommunicated
,are you sure?
The Primte of the Greek Orthodox church says the war is a Conspiracy of
Western christians and Jews.Oh well hes Greek after all.
The Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America is trying to maintain balance.
At the Same time the Grrek Orthodox Bishop of
Denver is on TV in America saying he does;nt know if Ethnic cleansing
is going on,and asking for his people to pray for themselfs and Serbia.
Regards
John
GS
Vassili Gronoff wrote:
> The problem is that Western media have never showed the opposition of the
> Orthodox church to the present conflict. Where on CNN, Fox News, etc. have
> you heard of the 1972 pan-orthodox council ? Where have you heard Patriarch
> Paul of Serbia excommunicating Milosevic and his supporters ?
>
> Only lack of information can harm people by making them hate the true
> Orthodox Church.
>
> VG
>
Vasilli,
To be fair, I have been asking for the whole sermon from 1992for five years.
Haven't seen it yet. Only a couple excerpts.
V. Gronoff
JOH...@webtv.net a écrit dans le message
<27661-37...@newsd-112.bryant.webtv.net>...
JOH...@webtv.net
Lead by black robed Orthodox clerics,just the image for Orthodoxy in
America.
Two Orthodox bishops in U.S. make pro Serbian public statements.
At the Same Time Rumania is up for Membership in NATO. Maybe she can
take Greece's place.
John
GS
JOH...@webtv.net wrote:
I could not see who was there because the view was obscured. I heard
that a bunch of people from Saint Sava's in New York came down. The
slogans, though i could hear, except whenever the horns for announcing a
new head of state appeared and also there are helicopters all over the
place around here.
Mostly it was anti NATO sloganeering. Bill Clinton's name was changed to
WIlliam Jefferson Hitler at one point, there was a lot of peppering of
other slogans, all run with a megaphone and a female leader, with
interdispursed thing like "Kosovo je Serbija" Kosovo is Serbia, Zhiveli
Serbia (long live Serbia) and other mild things. There was a lot of
blowing with whistles. There were very few people overall but not so
pathetic a showing as yesterday when there were only a couple dozen.
Marina
Rumania is of course another mainly Orthodox country --thus invalidating his
rather pointless point.
Marina
<JOH...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:10956-37...@newsd-112.bryant.webtv.net...
frank w elliott jr
: Another informed saying from Johnny-hasn't-got-a-computer
: Rumania is of course another mainly Orthodox country --thus invalidating his
: rather pointless point.
Don't confuse him with facts or logic.
: Marina
jreeder
public engages its brain and gets the truth. The truth is, that the
leaders of America, since WW2, have been leading us down the
path of destruction in foreign wars. There has been a huge loss
of life, material, money, natural resources, etc. in these stupid
wars that we keep getting into and ultimately being made to look
like fools. Look at Korea, Vietnam, Panama, Iraq and now Serbia,
with a lot of other stupidities in between.
GS wrote in message <3722D072...@erols.com>...
>
>
>JOH...@webtv.net wrote:
>
>> Anti Nato rally across from the White House.
>> Lead by black robed Orthodox clerics,just the image for Orthodoxy in
>> America.
>> Two Orthodox bishops in U.S. make pro Serbian public statements.
>> At the Same Time Rumania is up for Membership in NATO. Maybe she can
>> take Greece's place.
>> John
>
JOH...@webtv.net
You were right about the Demonstration
,I heard one of the Priests say he was Ruso-Carpahian,am not familiar
with that church.
Who was in some of those limo's going into the white house.The heads of
govt. of ever major
Orthodox country in the world, some former
Russian Republics, some former Russian satalites.Every Orthodox County
in the world
except Russa.I geuss they've decided whos side they are on.
At the same time the next country up for Membership in NATO. Is an
Orthodox country and she is pushing hard,very hard to be
admitted,Rumania.To show her good intentions
and suppport for the Alliance,Rumania will allow
NATO Warplanes to use her air space.Almost
as soon as that was announced Bulgaria also agreed.Add Hungary which
officialy joined NATO tis weekend.Serbia is now open to attack
from every direction.
John
evagr...@my-dejanews.com
GS <sp...@erols.com> wrote:
> Dear Evagrius,
>
> Please hie thee to a Papal newsgroup
>
> evagr...@my-dejanews.com wrote: Orthodoxy's great weakness is the
inability to
> remove itself from
>
> > nationalistic concerns.
>
> The West's worse contribution to Orthodox lands was nationalism. As
nationalism
> always has been incompatible with nationalism, and nationalism was nurtured
under
> western ROman Catholicism, one can only conclude that it is a result of the
> following:
Excuse me, please explain "as nationalism always has been incompatible with
nationalism"? I'm not quite sure what you mean here. Also, you mean that
Philetism is a "western" heresy? Please, be a little less arrogant about
Orthodoxy's innocence in all this. Who refused to speak any other language
but Greek when discussing theology? Who attacked others if their theological
formulations did not accord with Greek meaning? Who has confused Hellenism
and Orthodoxy? Who confuses their country with Orthodoxy, their nationality
with Orthodoxy? Who maintains that the Serbs are a "holy people" with a
"sacred destiny". Who founded the Serbian natinal church, who founded the
Bulgarian national church? It is a fact, nationalism and Orthodoxy are deeply
intertwined. It has little to do with Roman Catholicism or the West. It had
to do with being under Ottoman rule, for the Greeks and others in the
Balkans, and it had to do with identifying Russia as the Third Rome. In the
nineteenth century, the rise of nationalism was in response to the overthrow
of nobilities. It was in response to ideas of freedom , from the West, but
should these ideas be banned because they are western? Quit confusing
criticizing Orthodoxy with being anti-Orthodox. I have seen with my own eyes
how nationalism affects Orthodoxy in this country the good ol USA. Greeks
don't deal with Russians, Arabs, Serbians, Bulgarians etc;etc; AND
vice-versa. That's why there is no "American" Orthodox Church. So-please look
objectively at the situation. Quit blaming everything on the West. I'm sick
of that cop-out!!!!!!!
>
> ROman Catholicism's greatest weakness is incorrect belief.
>
> Hoping that all Romans west and east come back to the true faith,
I do too but with truth and sincerity on all sides and with a mutual
confession of faults for all sides!!!!
>
> Galina
Yojimbo
JOH...@webtv.net wrote:
> Anti Nato rally across from the White House.
> Lead by black robed Orthodox clerics,just the image for Orthodoxy in
> America.
I actually agree with Johnny's sentiment on this one. Public protest is a
right, but I find the use of icons and clergy in them wrong.
> Two Orthodox bishops in U.S. make pro Serbian public statements.
Can you give us specific quotes instead of these broad statements colored by
your obvious bias.
> At the Same Time Rumania is up for Membership in NATO. Maybe she can
> take Greece's place.
First of all, ROMania is an Orthodox country, secondly her and Bulgaria are
interested in NATO membership and they are being sponsored by GREECE. IOW,
they are going to strengthen the Greek position within the alliance if they
do decide to join, which is still in some doubt.
Best Regards,
Derek Copold
--
*******************************************************************
Weapons are instruments of ill omen, despised by the Way of Heaven. To
use them only when unavoidable is the Way of Heaven--
Miyamoto Musashi--The Book of Five Rings
GS
evagr...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> I> The West's worse contribution to Orthodox lands was nationalism. As
> nationalism
> > always has been incompatible with nationalism, and nationalism was nurtured
> under
> > western ROman Catholicism, one can only conclude that it is a result of the
> > following:
>
> Excuse me, please explain "as nationalism always has been incompatible with
> nationalism"?
I meant to say "as nationalism has always been incompatible with Christianity,"
> I'm not quite sure what you mean here. Also, you mean that
> Philetism is a "western" heresy?
All of the monarchies of the period of nationalism in the Balkans were imports or
a direct result of the policies of the west.
> Please, be a little less arrogant about
> Orthodoxy's innocence in all this. Who refused to speak any other language
> but Greek when discussing theology?
Before we start, let me state that I am an American member of the Macedonian
Orthodox Church. So my context is the best, multiethnicity and historically.
> Who attacked others if their theological
> formulations did not accord with Greek meaning?
that Greek wa the language does not pertain to the MEANING, which Canonically !
is Orthodox.
> Who has confused Hellenism
> and Orthodoxy?
not me, got an ultra clean record on that one. THere are aspects of hellenism in
Christianity, however, which I would like ot call the best of hellenism, artistic
expression being one of these, the architectural tradition being another, but
these aspects of hellenism were already a part of the synagogue tradition in the
last Roman period, from which they derive. Understand that these late ROman
hellenistic traditions were presented, for the most part, in the Balkan in LATIN
as well as GREEK, and as soon as a methodology was established for representing a
kind of patois that would be understood by a great number of peoples, , in
slavonic as well.
> Who confuses their country with Orthodoxy, their nationality
> with Orthodoxy?
Actually, I think that way.
> Who maintains that the Serbs are a "holy people" with a
> "sacred destiny".
Yo, not me. That is wishful thinking. Some are holy, but like we say in our
liturgy every Sunday "One is Holy , One is Lord, Jesus Christ, SOn of the
Father. Amen" only one person is definitely given such an appellation in
lifetime. When we even use phrases like "the holy saints" we refer to our Lord's
determination of who precisely that might be, and when we say Patriarch, we
normally put the phraseology like this "Patriarch of the Holy Orthodox Church of
BUlgaria:, emphasizing he holiness of the Patriarchate itself, not the holiness
of the individual, which contrasts rather unfavorably with ROman Catholicism's
papal infallibility, the very idea of which is anathema to an Orthodox christian.
> Who founded the Serbian natinal church,
a monk who could have been, but chose not to be, a prince.
> who founded the
> Bulgarian national church?
a pious Orthodox ruler
> It is a fact, nationalism and Orthodoxy are deeply
> intertwined.
no, the expression of Orthodoxy comes in many languages to assure as much praise
of our Lord as possible, and so that as many people as possible can understand
the Word of God.
> It has little to do with Roman Catholicism or the West. It had
> to do with being under Ottoman rule, for the Greeks and others in the
> Balkans,
nationalism figured prominently in the middle Ottoman period for administrative
reasons (all the djimi conveniently under one church) and in the late Ottoman
period accompanying the west's association with freedom movements from the sick
man of Europe. The west was also involved substantially in the formation of the
Serbian Orthodox Church.
> and it had to do with identifying Russia as the Third Rome. In the
> nineteenth century, the rise of nationalism was in response to the overthrow
> of nobilities. It was in response to ideas of freedom , from the West, but
> should these ideas be banned because they are western?
The first presumption is as untenable as the second.
> Quit confusing
> criticizing Orthodoxy with being anti-Orthodox. I have seen with my own eyes
> how nationalism affects Orthodoxy in this country the good ol USA. Greeks
> don't deal with Russians, Arabs, Serbians, Bulgarians etc;etc; AND
> vice-versa. That's why there is no "American" Orthodox Church. So-please look
> objectively at the situation. Quit blaming everything on the West. I'm sick
> of that cop-out!!!!!!!
I od NOT at all confuse these topics and regularly write on them. THe fact that
you accuse me of failing to address the same puts you strongly in the category of
those who fail to read my posts but are willing to bash me for ideas I have never
promoted. When I get a sense that you have read my writing on the issues (and
they are numerous) then let's talk about them. Until then, you are back on the
Roman Catholic regular bashers of Orthodoxy Killfile list)
>
>
> >
> > ROman Catholicism's greatest weakness is incorrect belief.
> >
> > Hoping that all Romans west and east come back to the true faith,
>
> I do too but with truth and sincerity on all sides and with a mutual
> confession of faults for all sides!!!!
I do not think you do. I only see you examining, often in ignorance, the sins of
individuals who call themselves Orthodox christians and not the faith itself, and
ignoring the sins of ROman Catholicism both historically, in terms of doctrine
and dogma, and actions today.
>
>
> >
> > Galina
evagr...@my-dejanews.com
You seem quite reasonable, until the West is brought in.
I am Orthodox, but I come from a Roman Catholic background.
I do not like statements made in ignorance about Roman Catholics.
The faults of Roman Catholics?
They are numerous, easy to find and document.
Their faith?
It is wrong?
I don't think it's wrong, just not completed.
Orthodoxy?
To be honest, I don't think it's perfect either.
Not until it learns humility.
Until then, it is imperfect. It is perfect in intention, perfect in hope, but
imperfect in this world.
I don't think you quite understand doctrine either.
How can Orthodox doctrine be perfect canonically in Greek when others do not
understand the Greek? Or that the Greek is mistranslated, as happened with the
idea of prosopon and personae., ousia and esse, hypostasis and personae, and
these are Latin only!
It is perfect only in intention. Our languages do not approximate the truth
they dare to utter.
Orthodoxy points to the Truth, but it is not the TRUTH;
It is the way to the Truth, but it is not the Truth.
And it does not belong to Orthodox.
Orthodoxy belongs to anyone who seeks God.
So, at the Last Judgement, there will be many Orthodox surprised as to who
enters the kingdom before them.
And they thought they owned it!
JOH...@webtv.net
The bishops I was refering to were.The Greek Othodox bishop of
Denver,I personaly saw him ask his people on Easter to pray for
Themselfs and the Serbs,period. By omission he is supporting Serbia.
Also Comments by An Orthodox bishop in Boston,I am not sure of his
afilation.Showed a definite Pro-Serbian bias.
Am I bias,yes I am, My country is at war with an Adolph Hitler
Disciple,I support My country.
Regards
John
JOH...@webtv.net
The French President said France was sponsorig Rumanian and
Slovenian membership in Nato,
Also Rumania has announced that she will allow NATO warplanes to use her
airspace.Bulgaria has followed suit and also will
allow NATO to usr her Airspace.
IN Attendance at the NATO Summit were every Major Orthodox Country
except Russia and Byleorussia.
Some were acting against the wishs of many of their people who had been
mislead b Serbian lies.
John
GS
evagr...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Galina
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
> > > http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
> >
> >
> I have read your postings.
> You seem quite reasonable, until the West is brought in.
> I am Orthodox, but I come from a Roman Catholic background.
that is patently obvious. The only part I do not quite buy is that you are
Orthodox.
>
> I do not like statements made in ignorance about Roman Catholics.
> The faults of Roman Catholics?
> They are numerous, easy to find and document.
> Their faith?
Faith is wonderful. Especially when it is an acocmpanyment to THE FAITH.
>
> It is wrong?
> I don't think it's wrong, just not completed.
that is true! You have an essentially good point.
>
> Orthodoxy?
> To be honest, I don't think it's perfect either.
> Not until it learns humility.
It is intrinsic. You just don't see a lot of it on a newsgroup
>
> Until then, it is imperfect. It is perfect in intention, perfect in hope, but
> imperfect in this world.
Not really, as Orthodox do not proseletyze but this makes it difficult
>
> I don't think you quite understand doctrine either.
> How can Orthodox doctrine be perfect canonically in Greek when others do not
> understand the Greek?
because it has been tanslated well into other languages. Into slavonic, when I was
reading Greek test an OCS together, i was amazed at teh genius in the translations.
> Or that the Greek is mistranslated, as happened with the
> idea of prosopon and personae., ousia and esse, hypostasis and personae, and
> these are Latin only!
> It is perfect only in intention. Our languages do not approximate the truth
> they dare to utter.
> Orthodoxy points to the Truth, but it is not the TRUTH;
> It is the way to the Truth, but it is not the Truth.
> And it does not belong to Orthodox.
right . It is belonging to God and accessible to us through the work of teh Holy
Spirit.
>
> Orthodoxy belongs to anyone who seeks God.
> So, at the Last Judgement, there will be many Orthodox surprised as to who
> enters the kingdom before them.
> And they thought they owned it!
No I have reminded everyone that the last shall be first and that the least of the
brethren will be foremost. We cannot afford hate. But neither can we afford to
stray from the Faith into acceptance of another mindset or practice.
Theosis is for everyone, but takes a lot of other than worldliness
Galina
Yojimbo
JOH...@webtv.net wrote:
> dear Derek Mon.26th posting / a P.s.
> The bishops I was refering to were.The Greek Othodox bishop of
> Denver,I personaly saw him ask his people on Easter to pray for
> Themselfs and the Serbs,period. By omission he is supporting Serbia.
That's kind of weak Johnny. You have specific source we can go to beyond your
dubious eyewitness testimony.
> Also Comments by An Orthodox bishop in Boston,I am not sure of his
> afilation.Showed a definite Pro-Serbian bias.
How did he show a "Pro-Serbian" bias, Johnny?
> Am I bias,yes I am, My country is at war with an Adolph Hitler
> Disciple,I support My country.
Disciple of Stalin actually.
Well as our country is expending great amounts of treasure, and should we go
to ground (highly unlikely), a great amount of blood will be shed, we have
done nothing to help the Kosovars, and, in fact, have far worsened the
situation, and NATO will never again be an effective organization. All this
over a situation that is far less worse than half a dozen other hot spots
around the world where we are doing absolutely nothing at all. You're
unthinking support is draining our country to no good end.
Derek Copold
Yojimbo
JOH...@webtv.net wrote:
> Dear Dereke Mon. April 26th posting
> The French President said France was sponsorig Rumanian and
> Slovenian membership in Nato,
1. France may be signing the note, but it's a Greek idea.
2. The French are always seeking to undercut our position, so this
doesn't bode well either.
> Also Rumania has announced that she will allow NATO warplanes to use her
> airspace.Bulgaria has followed suit and also will
> allow NATO to usr her Airspace.
As their facilities are worthless for Nato operations, that's a worthless
gesture.
> IN Attendance at the NATO Summit were every Major Orthodox Country
> except Russia and Byleorussia.
Observer status only. Costless.
> Some were acting against the wishs of many of their people
They have all explicitly condemned and opposed the bombing, and they are now
starting to re-examine NATO membership. Sticking with the GUUAM organiziation
is appearing to be a more attractive alternative.
> who had been
> mislead b Serbian lies.
NATO hasn't been the font of honesty either.
GS
JOH...@webtv.net wrote:
> dear Derek Mon.26th posting / a P.s.
> The bishops I was refering to were.The Greek Othodox bishop of
> Denver,I personaly saw him ask his people on Easter to pray for
> Themselfs and the Serbs,period. By omission he is supporting Serbia.
> Also Comments by An Orthodox bishop in Boston,I am not sure of his
> afilation.Showed a definite Pro-Serbian bias.
> Am I bias,yes I am, My country is at war with an Adolph Hitler
> Disciple,I support My country.
> Regards
> John
I personally heard the priest in the church I attended last Sunday
(Bulgarian Church, visiting Father Constantine from the OCA) ask for
peace for ALL peoples in Kosovo.
evagr...@my-dejanews.com
GS <sp...@erols.com> wrote:
>
>
> evagr...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> > > > >
> > > > > Galina
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
> > > > http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
> > >
> > >
> > I have read your postings.
> > You seem quite reasonable, until the West is brought in.
> > I am Orthodox, but I come from a Roman Catholic background.
>
> Orthodox.
>
Why? Orthodoxy is faith in Jesus Christ, fully human, fully divine, and in
the Trinity of Father, son, and Holy Spirit. This faith cannot be divided
into parts;to believe in Christ entails the Trinity and vice-versa. Orthodoxy
is faith in the Church as the Body of Christ; fullfilled in the Age to Come,
yet being perfected in this aeon;requiring struggle. Orthodoxy is faith that
the end or purpose of humanity is theosis or transformation; that this
transformation occurs daily and that this transformation or theosis is the
foundation of all human achievement towards the Good. Orthodoxy is faith in
the Eucharist, itself the Body and Blood and itself the instrument of
salvation/theosis. Orthodoxy is faith in the sacramentality of matter; that
it is a vehicle of the divine. That's Orthodoxy. ( I was chrismated 17 years
ago and have gone to Liturgy at Orthodox churches since. I am Orthodox, just
not your type. I thought Orthodox were tolerant of diverse opinions. Or do
Orthodox conform to the stereotype of Roman Catholics, (who obey the Pope's
every whim), obeying every whim of a Patriarch?)
> I do not like statements made in ignorance about Roman Catholics.
> > The faults of Roman Catholics?
> > They are numerous, easy to find and document.
> > Their faith?
>
> Faith is wonderful. Especially when it is an acocmpanyment to THE FAITH.
>
> >
> > It is wrong?
> > I don't think it's wrong, just not completed.
>
> that is true! You have an essentially good point.
>
> >
> > Orthodoxy?
> > To be honest, I don't think it's perfect either.
> > Not until it learns humility.
>
> It is intrinsic. You just don't see a lot of it on a newsgroup
>
> >
> > Until then, it is imperfect. It is perfect in intention, perfect in hope,
but
> > imperfect in this world.
>
> Not really, as Orthodox do not proseletyze but this makes it difficult
According to the N.T. the Church is to make Christ known to the world. Why
doesn't Orthodoxy proselytize? In my opinion, it is because, at the present
time, it has limited itself to proselytizing nations, not individuals. The age
of nation conversion is over; there are no kings who can be baptised and then
order their people to convert. Orthodoxy must now learn individual
proselytizing, a difficult effort. It cannot immitate Protestant evangelicals
since that way is really a lot of emotionalism. It cannot immitate the old
Roman Catholic way of "rational" argument of syllogisms since that only
exercises the reason. A "middle way" between the two needs to be found.
> >
> > I don't think you quite understand doctrine either.
> > How can Orthodox doctrine be perfect canonically in Greek when others do not
> > understand the Greek?
>
> because it has been tanslated well into other languages. Into slavonic, when
I was
> reading Greek test an OCS together, i was amazed at teh genius in the
translations.
Those translations may have been excellent, but not those into Latin nor into
Syriac or other Near Eastern languages. I believe that the Slavonic
translations came well after those failures.
>
> > Or that the Greek is mistranslated, as happened with the
> > idea of prosopon and personae., ousia and esse, hypostasis and personae, and
> > these are Latin only!
> > It is perfect only in intention. Our languages do not approximate the truth
> > they dare to utter.
> > Orthodoxy points to the Truth, but it is not the TRUTH;
> > It is the way to the Truth, but it is not the Truth.
> > And it does not belong to Orthodox.
>
> right . It is belonging to God and accessible to us through the work of teh
Holy
> Spirit.
>
> >
> > Orthodoxy belongs to anyone who seeks God.
> > So, at the Last Judgement, there will be many Orthodox surprised as to who
> > enters the kingdom before them.
> > And they thought they owned it!
>
> No I have reminded everyone that the last shall be first and that the least
of the
> brethren will be foremost. We cannot afford hate. But neither can we afford
to
> stray from the Faith into acceptance of another mindset or practice.
What mindset or practice?
To ask questions, to examine the practice of holiness troughout the world, in
all faiths?
I don't think that's straying.
> Theosis is for everyone, but takes a lot of other than worldliness
>
I'm always curious by what people mean by "wordliness".
For me, it implies being "removed" from the world rather than being "in" the
world.
Our Lord was incarnated "in" this world, from its matter. His presence
transformed the world into His world.
We don't need to become "other-worldly" but "this-worldly", to discover the
Presence in every piece of matter or being, animal or human.
That is real "other-wordliness" not the pseudo-angelic life-style promulgated
by those who really don't like people.
That approach removes us from others' suffering and joy.
Real monasticism seeks the transforming Presence, not removal from the world.
Real Orthodoxy seeks that transformation for all people, not just monastics.
(P.S. Thanks for provoking thought.)
GS
evagr...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> In article <37258947...@erols.com>,
> GS <sp...@erols.com> wrote:
> >
> >. The only part I do not quite buy is that you are
> > Orthodox.
> >
>
> Why? Orthodoxy is faith in Jesus Christ, fully human, fully divine, and in
> the Trinity of Father, son, and Holy Spirit. This faith cannot be divided
> into parts;to believe in Christ entails the Trinity and vice-versa. Orthodoxy
> is faith in the Church as the Body of Christ; fullfilled in the Age to Come,
> yet being perfected in this aeon;requiring struggle. Orthodoxy is faith that
> the end or purpose of humanity is theosis or transformation; that this
> transformation occurs daily and that this transformation or theosis is the
> foundation of all human achievement towards the Good. Orthodoxy is faith in
> the Eucharist, itself the Body and Blood and itself the instrument of
> salvation/theosis. Orthodoxy is faith in the sacramentality of matter; that
> it is a vehicle of the divine. That's Orthodoxy. ( I was chrismated 17 years
> ago and have gone to Liturgy at Orthodox churches since. I am Orthodox, just
> not your type. I thought Orthodox were tolerant of diverse opinions. Or do
> Orthodox conform to the stereotype of Roman Catholics, (who obey the Pope's
> every whim), obeying every whim of a Patriarch?)
I think this is your long winded way of saying that you visit Orthodox churches form
tiem to time. So, since you are into beating around the bush month after month,
let's ask that question another way and ask :
In which specific church nad jurisdiciton do you belong (as in card caryring member)
or do you belong to nowhere and nothing? What does that jurisdiciton and chruch
call itself? Melkite? Coptic? (doubt it) MAronite? WHAT?
>
>
> > >
> > > Until then, it is imperfect. It is perfect in intention, perfect in hope,
> but
> > > imperfect in this world.
> >
> > Not really, as Orthodox do not proseletyze but this makes it difficult
> According to the N.T. the Church is to make Christ known to the world. Why
> doesn't Orthodoxy proselytize? In my opinion, it is because, at the present
> time, it has limited itself to proselytizing nations, not individuals. The age
> of nation conversion is over; there are no kings who can be baptised and then
> order their people to convert. Orthodoxy must now learn individual
> proselytizing, a difficult effort. It cannot immitate Protestant evangelicals
> since that way is really a lot of emotionalism. It cannot immitate the old
> Roman Catholic way of "rational" argument of syllogisms since that only
> exercises the reason. A "middle way" between the two needs to be found.
No rational syllogisms are insufficient. We do not, nor should we proseletyze. We
should, of course, baptize and we should live as Orthodox. That is hard enough
>
>
> Those translations may have been excellent, but not those into Latin nor into
> Syriac or other Near Eastern languages. I believe that the Slavonic
> translations came well after those failures.
I had one Syrian friend who understood the concept perfectly so that when she
translated them they were as Orhodox. That would nto render Syriac incapable of
subtlety
>
> >
> > right . It is belonging to God and accessible to us through the work of teh
> Holy
> > Spirit.
> >
>
> > No I have reminded everyone that the last shall be first and that the least
> of the
> > brethren will be foremost. We cannot afford hate. But neither can we afford
> to
> > stray from the Faith into acceptance of another mindset or practice.
> What mindset or practice?
> To ask questions, to examine the practice of holiness troughout the world, in
> all faiths?
> I don't think that's straying.
no point in this
>
>
> > Theosis is for everyone, but takes a lot of other than worldliness
> >
> I'm always curious by what people mean by "wordliness".
read OTHER THAN worldliness, soemthing else.
>
> For me, it implies being "removed" from the world rather than being "in" the
> world.
> Our Lord was incarnated "in" this world, from its matter. His presence
> transformed the world into His world.
> We don't need to become "other-worldly" but "this-worldly", to discover the
> Presence in every piece of matter or being, animal or human.
> That is real "other-wordliness" not the pseudo-angelic life-style promulgated
> by those who really don't like people.
no! you can be with people and still be less worldly
>
> That approach removes us from others' suffering and joy.
> Real monasticism seeks the transforming Presence, not removal from the world.
I would correct this to say like Pachomius that real monasticism is devoteed to an
emptying out of this world in ourselves to make room for the Holy Spirit through
faith that this might be possible, hope that this CAN and WILL occur, given love as
much as we can as we were oursleves shown love in abundance. Faith , Hope and Love
>
> Real Orthodoxy seeks that transformation for all people, not just monastics.
Of course not, as Saint Paul said "If you cannot be like me, then marry". This is
not a weakness but another form of good life. Making another person or persons
happy as much as possible is a way of showing whether we recognize the love of our
Father and model it, being in awe of it. Again, another form of Faith, Hope and
Love. And this kind of love implies charity or giving freely of our love and care.
>
>
> (P.S. Thanks for provoking thought.)
welcome
>
> > Galina
> >
balg...@yahoo.com
evagr...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
[del]
> Why? Orthodoxy is faith in Jesus Christ, fully human, fully divine, and in
> the Trinity of Father, son, and Holy Spirit. This faith cannot be divided
> into parts;to believe in Christ entails the Trinity and vice-versa. Orthodoxy
> is faith in the Church as the Body of Christ; fullfilled in the Age to Come,
> yet being perfected in this aeon;requiring struggle. Orthodoxy is faith that
> the end or purpose of humanity is theosis or transformation; that this
> transformation occurs daily and that this transformation or theosis is the
> foundation of all human achievement towards the Good. Orthodoxy is faith in
> the Eucharist, itself the Body and Blood and itself the instrument of
> salvation/theosis. Orthodoxy is faith in the sacramentality of matter; that
> it is a vehicle of the divine. That's Orthodoxy. ( I was chrismated 17 years
> ago and have gone to Liturgy at Orthodox churches since. I am Orthodox, just
> not your type. I thought Orthodox were tolerant of diverse opinions. Or do
> Orthodox conform to the stereotype of Roman Catholics, (who obey the Pope's
> every whim), obeying every whim of a Patriarch?)
How does your chrismation into Orthodoxy 17 years ago square with one of your
earliest statements (about 6 weeks ago) in this group that you "[were] and
still [are] a 'Roman' Catholic"? And then the claim in the very same post
that you were chrismated in the Antiochian Orthodox Church 15 (and not 17)
years ago?
--
balgaryan®
evagr...@my-dejanews.com
I ask you. Why do you ask? Can't believe that someone could be Orthodox and
not like you? I go to an Antiochene Orthodox church if you want to know. I go
more often than those there who are "cradle" Orthodox; that's because as a
Catholic I was raised by my parents to go every week, unlike, it seems many
Orthodox.
> >
> >
> > > >
> > > > Until then, it is imperfect. It is perfect in intention, perfect in
hope,
> > but
> > > > imperfect in this world.
> > >
> > > Not really, as Orthodox do not proseletyze but this makes it difficult
> > According to the N.T. the Church is to make Christ known to the world. Why
> > doesn't Orthodoxy proselytize? In my opinion, it is because, at the present
> > time, it has limited itself to proselytizing nations, not individuals. The
age
> > of nation conversion is over; there are no kings who can be baptised and
then
> > order their people to convert. Orthodoxy must now learn individual
> > proselytizing, a difficult effort. It cannot immitate Protestant
evangelicals
> > since that way is really a lot of emotionalism. It cannot immitate the old
> > Roman Catholic way of "rational" argument of syllogisms since that only
> > exercises the reason. A "middle way" between the two needs to be found.
>
> No rational syllogisms are insufficient. We do not, nor should we
proseletyze. We
> should, of course, baptize and we should live as Orthodox. That is hard
enough
>
And why not proselitize? You just want to live in a shell like an Orthodox
snail? Orthodox have a duty to speak their values, beliefs and opinions
especially in a society like ours. If they do not, then don't complain that
people are prejudiced and don't understand the ORTHODOX WAY!
> >
> >
> > Those translations may have been excellent, but not those into Latin nor
into
> > Syriac or other Near Eastern languages. I believe that the Slavonic
> > translations came well after those failures.
>
> I had one Syrian friend who understood the concept perfectly so that when she
> translated them they were as Orhodox. That would nto render Syriac incapable
of
> subtlety
>
Are you sure? That is no proof. I'm talking about the syriac of 300 to 500
a.d. not contemporary.
> >
> > >
> > > right . It is belonging to God and accessible to us through the work of
teh
> > Holy
> > > Spirit.
> > >
> >
> > > No I have reminded everyone that the last shall be first and that the
least
> > of the
> > > brethren will be foremost. We cannot afford hate. But neither can we
afford
> > to
> > > stray from the Faith into acceptance of another mindset or practice.
> > What mindset or practice?
> > To ask questions, to examine the practice of holiness troughout the world,
in
> > all faiths?
> > I don't think that's straying.
>
> no point in this
Why not? Have you looked at other traditions and their understanding of
holiness? Or do you just want to live in an Orthodox ghetto? The more one
knows about other traditions, the more one becomes sensitized to the depths
of one's own tradition and the more prejudice and misunderstandings are
removed.
>
> >
> >
> > > Theosis is for everyone, but takes a lot of other than worldliness
> > >
> > I'm always curious by what people mean by "wordliness".
>
> read OTHER THAN worldliness, soemthing else.
>
> >
> > For me, it implies being "removed" from the world rather than being "in" the
> > world.
> > Our Lord was incarnated "in" this world, from its matter. His presence
> > transformed the world into His world.
> > We don't need to become "other-worldly" but "this-worldly", to discover the
> > Presence in every piece of matter or being, animal or human.
> > That is real "other-wordliness" not the pseudo-angelic life-style
promulgated
> > by those who really don't like people.
>
> no! you can be with people and still be less worldly
>
No! you can be with people and still be more wordly than them by being aware
of the Presence in the world and in them.!
>
> > That approach removes us from others' suffering and joy.
> > Real monasticism seeks the transforming Presence, not removal from the
world.
>
> I would correct this to say like Pachomius that real monasticism is devoteed
to an
> emptying out of this world in ourselves to make room for the Holy Spirit
through
> faith that this might be possible, hope that this CAN and WILL occur, given
love as
> much as we can as we were oursleves shown love in abundance. Faith , Hope
and Love
>
To empty the world is to empty attachment to the world; emptiness is a lack of
attachment to wanting the world to remain as it is.
> >
> > Real Orthodoxy seeks that transformation for all people, not just monastics.
>
> Of course not, as Saint Paul said "If you cannot be like me, then marry".
This is
> not a weakness but another form of good life. Making another person or
persons
> happy as much as possible is a way of showing whether we recognize the love
of our
> Father and model it, being in awe of it. Again, another form of Faith, Hope
and
> Love. And this kind of love implies charity or giving freely of our love and
care.
I have to disagree. All of us are called to the monastic life. We will all
attain the monastic life when we die for then we will be stripped of all
attachments, physical, emotional, psychological, epistemelogical,spiritual.
We will then confront the Absolute completely alone and naked. We will go
through the same purgation as monks. That is why monasticism is called a
preparation for death.
This is one way to be monastic. The other is prayer. Every time one prays,
especially pure prayer, contemplative prayer, one is a monastic, even if only
for fifteen minutes.
That contemplative prayer seeks to be in the Presence.
From that prayer one can love others and one can have a true family life.
Don't segregate monastics and lay people as separate. They are the same; there
are just different degrees of monastic practice.
>
> >
> >
> > (P.S. Thanks for provoking thought.)
>
> welcome
>
> >
> > > Galina
> > >
>
>
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
GS
evagr...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> In article <37261815...@erols.com>,
> GS <sp...@erols.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > evagr...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> >
> > > In article <37258947...@erols.com>,
> > > GS <sp...@erols.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >. The only part I do not quite buy is that you are
> > WHAT?
> >
>
> I ask you. Why do you ask? Can't believe that someone could be Orthodox and
> not like you? I go to an Antiochene Orthodox church if you want to know. I go
> more often than those there who are "cradle" Orthodox; that's because as a
> Catholic I was raised by my parents to go every week, unlike, it seems many
> Orthodox.
>
that's a good boy. If you miss a week, my opinion, it is like self abuse
>
> > No rational syllogisms are insufficient. We do not, nor should we
> proseletyze. We
> > should, of course, baptize and we should live as Orthodox. That is hard
> enough
> >
> And why not proselitize? You just want to live in a shell like an Orthodox
> snail? Orthodox have a duty to speak their values, beliefs and opinions
> especially in a society like ours. If they do not, then don't complain that
> people are prejudiced and don't understand the ORTHODOX WAY!
oh, i think we all have bookstores and if someone asks a question we are there? And
it is nice to hug the odd visitor, even if you embarrass them and have to explain
how they look just like your cousin, aunt, uncle, high school friend. Surely
everyone looks a bit like someone, eh?. That would not render Syriac incapable
> of
> > subtlety
> >
>
> Are you sure? That is no proof. I'm talking about the syriac of 300 to 500
> a.d. not contemporary.
Hmm, if you say so. Seems like we all believe as Orthodox the same.
>
> > > To ask questions, to examine the practice of holiness troughout the world,
> in
> > > all faiths?
> > > I don't think that's straying.
> >
> > no point in this
>
> Why not? Have you looked at other traditions and their understanding of
> holiness? Or do you just want to live in an Orthodox ghetto?
I love the Orthodox ghetto.
> The more one
> knows about other traditions, the more one becomes sensitized to the depths
> of one's own tradition and the more prejudice and misunderstandings are
> removed.
I know what I like.
> > no! you can be with people and still be less worldly
> >
>
> No! you can be with people and still be more wordly than them by being aware
> of the Presence in the world and in them.!
they are part of what you perceive. So is nature
>
>
> >
> > > That approach removes us from others' suffering and joy.
> > > Real monasticism seeks the transforming Presence, not removal from the
> world.
> >
> > I would correct this to say like Pachomius that real monasticism is devoteed
> to an
> > emptying out of this world in ourselves to make room for the Holy Spirit
> through
> > faith that this might be possible, hope that this CAN and WILL occur, given
> love as
> > much as we can as we were oursleves shown love in abundance. Faith , Hope
> and Love
> >
> To empty the world is to empty attachment to the world; emptiness is a lack of
> attachment to wanting the world to remain as it is.
It is surprising how little we need and how much is i that little
> . Again, another form of Faith, Hope
> and
> > Love. And this kind of love implies charity or giving freely of our love and
> care.
> I have to disagree. All of us are called to the monastic life.
not all, no. But it is nice for us to visit the monastic life form time to time and
experience that. It is beautiful.
> We will all
> attain the monastic life when we die for then we will be stripped of all
> attachments, physical, emotional, psychological, epistemelogical,spiritual.
> We will then confront the Absolute completely alone and naked. We will go
> through the same purgation as monks.
purgation????
> That is why monasticism is called a
> preparation for death.
> This is one way to be monastic. The other is prayer. Every time one prays,
> especially pure prayer, contemplative prayer, one is a monastic, even if only
> for fifteen minutes.
OR not a monastic and praying. Sometimes when i see people with hurt in their eyes,
then pray. They might not know I am praying but the prayer was needed. This is not
monastic but response to some need that was seen?
>
> That contemplative prayer seeks to be in the Presence.
> From that prayer one can love others and one can have a true family life.
> Don't segregate monastics and lay people as separate. They are the same; there
> are just different degrees of monastic practice.
No, i do know the difference and the world can be abstracted to an extent but is the
world. A life of prayer is different. In the world we often focus on other people
and what they need. We ask help in providing it or what to do and watch how we
react to this, to that, and have many kinds of prayer. In the monastery, there is a
rhythm to life and you do not have to think about a lot of other things. The prayer
comes in a different context. Outside the world. You can do that in private in
outside life but it is still different. I wish I could now. My desktop is a
monastery where I have stayed. It calms me to look at it, as if I am there. And I
wish I was.
evagr...@my-dejanews.com
balg...@yahoo.com wrote:
> In article <7g4p31$174$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
> evagr...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> [del]
>
> > the Trinity of Father, son, and Holy Spirit. This faith cannot be divided
> > into parts;to believe in Christ entails the Trinity and vice-versa.
Orthodoxy
> > is faith in the Church as the Body of Christ; fullfilled in the Age to Come,
> > yet being perfected in this aeon;requiring struggle. Orthodoxy is faith that
> > the end or purpose of humanity is theosis or transformation; that this
> > transformation occurs daily and that this transformation or theosis is the
> > foundation of all human achievement towards the Good. Orthodoxy is faith in
> > the Eucharist, itself the Body and Blood and itself the instrument of
> > salvation/theosis. Orthodoxy is faith in the sacramentality of matter; that
> > it is a vehicle of the divine. That's Orthodoxy. ( I was chrismated 17 years
> > ago and have gone to Liturgy at Orthodox churches since. I am Orthodox, just
> > not your type. I thought Orthodox were tolerant of diverse opinions. Or do
> > Orthodox conform to the stereotype of Roman Catholics, (who obey the Pope's
> > every whim), obeying every whim of a Patriarch?)
>
> earliest statements (about 6 weeks ago) in this group that you "[were] and
> still [are] a 'Roman' Catholic"? And then the claim in the very same post
> that you were chrismated in the Antiochian Orthodox Church 15 (and not 17)
> years ago?
>
> --
> balgaryan®
>
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
>
years ago, does it matter?
I am Roman Catholic in the sense that I still instinctively react when
confronted by some thing specificallty Roman Catholic, ie; the Virgin of
Guadalupe, for instance, and I automatically know what is about.
I do not ever want to lose that.
I grew up with it and it is part of my identity. My parents are Roman Catholic
etc;etc;
So do you remember when you were baptized or chrismated or took communion?
evagr...@my-dejanews.com
> > >
> >
> > Are you sure? That is no proof. I'm talking about the syriac of 300 to 500
> > a.d. not contemporary.
>
> Hmm, if you say so. Seems like we all believe as Orthodox the same.
>
> >
> > > > To ask questions, to examine the practice of holiness troughout the
world,
> > in
> > > > all faiths?
> > > > I don't think that's straying.
> > >
> > > no point in this
> >
> > Why not? Have you looked at other traditions and their understanding of
> > holiness? Or do you just want to live in an Orthodox ghetto?
>
> I love the Orthodox ghetto.
>
There's no need not to but its like travelling to other countries; one
discovers the similarities and differences and also the humanity and, in the
case of religions, the Logos that enlightens all who are in the world. By
studying other religions one finds a deeper meaning to what it is to be human
and consequently a deeper meaning to what the Incarnation means. Our Lord did
not just come to save Jews or Greeks, but the peoples of India, China Africa
etc;. Should they be obligated to understand Jesus Christ as did the Jews or
Greeks, with only their conceptual undestanding allowed? They, these other
people, cannot be allowed to use their "Old Testament" to elucidate what
Christ means to them? If so, it is the highest arrogance. For Orthodox not to
go out of their ghetto, physically or conceptually, is irresponsible. It is
to abandon the Gospels, bury the talent, and wait, just wait, not acting in
the world because there is no need to,; they are not Orthodox, so why bother?
> > The more one
> > knows about other traditions, the more one becomes sensitized to the depths
> > of one's own tradition and the more prejudice and misunderstandings are
> > removed.
>
> I know what I like.
But have you tasted guacamole,salsa, dim sum, vindaloo,creme fraiche, brie,
sushi,tagaroshi,nigari,borscht, pirogies,crepes, bangers, haggis,oatmeal,bran,
dolmas,falafel,shawarma,beef,escargots,chicken mole?
GS
evagr...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
Don't be absurd. one does not have as much knowledge as god of the whole world to
know that Orthodoxy is the true religion. You are denying the concept of faith.
God created all people and has that knowledge. It is up to Him to decde on the
validty of someof His peoples's religions and not me. We act all the time becuase
we are Orthodox and react even more often becuse we are Orthodox and that affects
other people when our actions and reactions are Orthodox at the same time. This is
no isolation, but a ocntent laden focus and mindset.
>
>
> > > The more one
> > > knows about other traditions, the more one becomes sensitized to the depths
> > > of one's own tradition and the more prejudice and misunderstandings are
> > > removed.
> >
> > I know what I like.
> But have you tasted guacamole,salsa, dim sum, vindaloo,creme fraiche, brie,
> sushi,tagaroshi,nigari,borscht, pirogies,crepes, bangers, haggis,oatmeal,bran,
> dolmas,falafel,shawarma,beef,escargots,chicken mole?
Sho nuff. God invented the ingredients and put them on our earth for our enjoyment.
He made Adam and from him Eve to rpocreate and enable the rest. Why should we not
enjoy the handiwork of our Lord and the multitude of hs works?
balg...@yahoo.com
evagr...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> In article <7g5h6b$oaq$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
> balg...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > In article <7g4p31$174$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
> > evagr...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> >
> > [del]
> >
> > > the Trinity of Father, son, and Holy Spirit. This faith cannot be divided
> > > into parts;to believe in Christ entails the Trinity and vice-versa.
> Orthodoxy
> > > is faith in the Church as the Body of Christ; fullfilled in the Age to
Come,
> > > yet being perfected in this aeon;requiring struggle. Orthodoxy is faith
that
> > > the end or purpose of humanity is theosis or transformation; that this
> > > transformation occurs daily and that this transformation or theosis is the
> > > foundation of all human achievement towards the Good. Orthodoxy is faith
in
> > > the Eucharist, itself the Body and Blood and itself the instrument of
> > > salvation/theosis. Orthodoxy is faith in the sacramentality of matter;
that
> > > it is a vehicle of the divine. That's Orthodoxy. ( I was chrismated 17
years
> > > ago and have gone to Liturgy at Orthodox churches since. I am Orthodox,
just
> > > not your type. I thought Orthodox were tolerant of diverse opinions. Or do
> > > Orthodox conform to the stereotype of Roman Catholics, (who obey the
Pope's
> > > every whim), obeying every whim of a Patriarch?)
> >
your
> > earliest statements (about 6 weeks ago) in this group that you "[were] and
> > still [are] a 'Roman' Catholic"? And then the claim in the very same post
> > that you were chrismated in the Antiochian Orthodox Church 15 (and not 17)
> > years ago?
[del]
> Because one is always one's history.
Very deterministic. Not much room for something like "metanoia." In fact it
stands in stark contrast with your telos-centered view of Xty above.
> As for the date of chrismation 15 or 17
> years ago, does it matter?
Not at all. For me, it was only an issue of credibility.
> I am Roman Catholic in the sense that I still instinctively react when
> confronted by some thing specificallty Roman Catholic, ie; the Virgin of
> Guadalupe, for instance, and I automatically know what is about.
> I do not ever want to lose that.
> I grew up with it and it is part of my identity. My parents are Roman Catholic
> etc;etc;
This gets my sympathy, despite it coming across as obscurantist.
But I agree with you that we must be open to other opinions.
> So do you remember when you were baptized or chrismated or took communion?
Having been baptized/chrismated Orthodox as an infant, the answer is no to the
first two questions. Re: my last communion, yes.
--
balgaryan®
evagr...@my-dejanews.com
I don't understand what you mean here. Do you mean that Orthodoxy is already
"set in concrete" and that there is no need to elucidate it for those who are
not of European ( Greco-Latin-Slavic) descent? That the truths have been
stated for all time and if someone from a non-European culture does not
understand what is said, too bad? That attitude is what I call being an
Orthodox snail. Where did Orthodoxy come from if not the
confrontation/meeting of Judaism and Hellenism? Why should Orthodoxy not
confront non-Hellenistic religions and cultures? Confront them in love, not
triumphalism.
> >
> >
> > > > The more one
> > > > knows about other traditions, the more one becomes sensitized to the
depths
> > > > of one's own tradition and the more prejudice and misunderstandings are
> > > > removed.
> > >
> > > I know what I like.
> > But have you tasted guacamole,salsa, dim sum, vindaloo,creme fraiche, brie,
> > sushi,tagaroshi,nigari,borscht, pirogies,crepes, bangers,
haggis,oatmeal,bran,
> > dolmas,falafel,shawarma,beef,escargots,chicken mole?
>
> Sho nuff. God invented the ingredients and put them on our earth for our
enjoyment.
> He made Adam and from him Eve to rpocreate and enable the rest. Why should
we not
> enjoy the handiwork of our Lord and the multitude of hs works?
>
The food is metaphor.
GS
evagr...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
no, full of content. The councils are used to elucidate to people who
misinterpret. If the explanation is stellar, then the council is called ecumenical.
> and that there is no need to elucidate it for those who are
> not of European ( Greco-Latin-Slavic) descent?
see council above
> That the truths have been
> stated for all time and if someone from a non-European culture does not
> understand what is said, too bad?
The Faith is for all time. We are sometimes capable of misinterpreting it.
> That attitude is what I call being an
> Orthodox snail. Where did Orthodoxy come from if not the
> confrontation/meeting of Judaism and Hellenism?
It is a continuation of the Old Law. It is the old law fulfilled by the New Law.
> Why should Orthodoxy not
> confront non-Hellenistic religions and cultures?
It has already done so
> Confront them in love, not
> triumphalism.
It has already done so. Why spend too much time with paganism or unreformed
concepts
>
>
>
> >
> > Sho nuff. God invented the ingredients and put them on our earth for our
> enjoyment.
> > He made Adam and from him Eve to procreate and enable the rest. Why should
> we not
> > enjoy the handiwork of our Lord and the multitude of hs works?
> >
> The food is metaphor.
yes, see above. So is Hieronomous Bosch's "Garden of Eartthly Delight"
evagr...@my-dejanews.com
> misinterpret. If the explanation is stellar, then the council is called
ecumenical.
>
> > and that there is no need to elucidate it for those who are
> > not of European ( Greco-Latin-Slavic) descent?
>
Not a good response. Example just learned this weekend; In some Sout African
cultures Chist cannot be called the "only" Son of God. In their culture this
would mean He would be totally alone; He is considered the Elder Brother.
Is this Orthodox?
>
> > That the truths have been
> > stated for all time and if someone from a non-European culture does not
> > understand what is said, too bad?
>
> The Faith is for all time. We are sometimes capable of misinterpreting it.
If we are capable of misinterpreting it, does that not imply that a non-
European understanding may be MORE correct than ours?
> > That attitude is what I call being an
> > Orthodox snail. Where did Orthodoxy come from if not the
> > confrontation/meeting of Judaism and Hellenism?
>
> It is a continuation of the Old Law. It is the old law fulfilled by the New
Law.
That's not completely correct. Orthodoxy may be the fulfillment of Judaism but
that understanding took centuries to develop. In the meantime, the Church
developed a theological language dependent not on Jewish language but Greek,
Latin and Syriac. Those languages had concepts a bit different than Judaism.
After all, the Incarnation was already something "new", out of the boundaries
of Judaism. How can a Jew explain the Incarnation within his/her language?
>
> > Why should Orthodoxy not
> > confront non-Hellenistic religions and cultures?
>
> It has already done so
Not really. Orthodoxy has not confronted but only dismissed. I am talking here
of India and China. Orthodoxy has never confronted those civilizations!
>
> > Confront them in love, not
> > triumphalism.
>
> It has already done so. Why spend too much time with paganism or unreformed
> concepts
>
What paganism? Who is a pagan. A Hindu is not a pagan, neither is a Buddhist,
nor a Confucianisats. The animists of Africa are not pagans either.
Please remove your prejudice. Please start seeing that the Logos is everywhere
and has given wisdom everywhere.
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Sho nuff. God invented the ingredients and put them on our earth for our
> > enjoyment.
> > > He made Adam and from him Eve to procreate and enable the rest. Why
should
> > we not
> > > enjoy the handiwork of our Lord and the multitude of hs works?
> > >
> > The food is metaphor.
>
> yes, see above. So is Hieronomous Bosch's "Garden of Eartthly Delight"
Bosch has nothing to do here.
Rachael Kenoyer
evagr...@my-dejanews.com wrote :
>Not really. Orthodoxy has not confronted but only dismissed. I am
talking here
>of India and China. Orthodoxy has never confronted those civilizations!
Ummm...Orthodoxy has had a thriving existence in BOTH of those
nations. Pick up any good book on world Orthodoxy.
And please, could you trim your posts, and include only those parts
that you are responding to? Thanks! :-)
~~Rachael
kal...@usa.net
evagr...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> Not really. Orthodoxy has not confronted but only dismissed. I am talking here
> of India and China. Orthodoxy has never confronted those civilizations!
Again, why show off your ignorance.
The Orthodox Faith is in China, has been for a long time. The Orthodox Faith
is in India, has been for a long time. It also is in Thailand and other
traditionally non-Christian lands.
So, before you get back onto your soap box, why not spend a little time
learning about Christ and His Church before you go off attacking both.
Evan
evagr...@my-dejanews.com
kal...@usa.net wrote:
> In article <7glaql$sca$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
> evagr...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> > Not really. Orthodoxy has not confronted but only dismissed. I am talking
here
> > of India and China. Orthodoxy has never confronted those civilizations!
>
> Again, why show off your ignorance.
>
> The Orthodox Faith is in China, has been for a long time. The Orthodox Faith
> is in India, has been for a long time. It also is in Thailand and other
> traditionally non-Christian lands.
>
> So, before you get back onto your soap box, why not spend a little time
> learning about Christ and His Church before you go off attacking both.
>
> Evan
>
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
>
I don't need any irrigation from you. I know that the Church "has been
present"in China,India etc; In India, the Church has been limited in scope;
the St. Thomas Christians claim to have been present since at least the
second century. Unfortunately, that Church was split from the rest of
Orthodoxy through distance and war. It has also become a kind of caste; the
Church has done little in the way of preaching etc;. Other Christian Churches
in India have suffered similar situation. Quite often, the Church is seen as
a means of economic advancement. In China, the Nestorians had a very early
presence wiped out by the Mongols, Tamerlane in particular. The Orthodox
Church had a very limited presence, due to refugees from Russia. I suspect
that has gone. The Churches in China are, at present, having great difficulty
since they are seen as agents of the West. My question has to do with how the
Church can truly talk to the indigenous people in their own languages and
concepts. Is Orthodoxy just Greek and Slavic languages with just Greek
concepts to explain it? If yes, then forget about being a true universal
religion. If no, then start by looking at those societies, their concepts,
their vision of the world, their understanding of what it is to be a saint,
their understanding of the Divine. Ask, after doing that, ask then what
Orthodoxy has to say. I deeply resent your statement that I "attack Christ
and His Church". I am not doing that at all, just asking some serious
questions. If asking questions is an attack in your eyes, then you deserve
the insult at the beginning. If not apologies for attempting a poor pun.
evagr...@my-dejanews.com
"Rachael Kenoyer" <rach...@NOSPAMaa.net> wrote:
>
> evagr...@my-dejanews.com wrote :
>
> >Not really. Orthodoxy has not confronted but only dismissed. I am
> talking here
> >of India and China. Orthodoxy has never confronted those civilizations!
>
> nations. Pick up any good book on world Orthodoxy.
>
> And please, could you trim your posts, and include only those parts
> that you are responding to? Thanks! :-)
>
> ~~Rachael
>
>
Orthodoxy has had a presence in those countries, yes, but I would not say
thriving. It has had a stable presence. It has not had a very deep
confrontation with those civilizations. I have a few theological works by Mar
Gregorios of the St. Thomas Church. His work is interesting because he does
confront Indian thought and does it very well. However, his voice is not
heard very well.His essays are short and not in- depth. They can be
considered as prologomena to the real theological work. The St. Thomas Church
is not large and has been reduced to somewhat of a caste in India. In China,
of course the Nestorians were there but they died out long ago. I don't think
there is much Orthodoxy left in China since the Revolution. At any rate, I am
talking about a real theological dialogue with those civilizations. Is
Orthodoxy to be limited to Greek expression? Or do the civilizations of
India, China and Africa have something to say to Orthodox about the Absolute,
sainthood, holiness? If not, then Orthodoxy is not a universal religion. If
yes, then Orthodox should start listening and responding.
Rudy A Carrera
>Not a good response. Example just learned this weekend; In some Sout
African
>cultures Chist cannot be called the "only" Son of God. In their culture
this
>would mean He would be totally alone; He is considered the Elder Brother.
>Is this Orthodox?
No.
>> > That attitude is what I call being an
>> > Orthodox snail. Where did Orthodoxy come from if not the
>> > confrontation/meeting of Judaism and Hellenism?
>>
>> It is a continuation of the Old Law. It is the old law fulfilled by the
New
>Law.
>That's not completely correct. Orthodoxy may be the fulfillment of Judaism
but
>that understanding took centuries to develop. In the meantime, the Church
>developed a theological language dependent not on Jewish language but
Greek,
>Latin and Syriac. Those languages had concepts a bit different than
Judaism.
>After all, the Incarnation was already something "new", out of the
boundaries
>of Judaism. How can a Jew explain the Incarnation within his/her language?
Pay close attention folks. This is because it is Hellenism and something
more akin to Zoroasterism or Hinduism, not at all Judaism, a mere corruption
of old Abrahamic principles. Judeo-Christianity has got to be the biggest
hoax of all time. Ask non-PC Christian Church leaders or Rabbis. Both will
concur.
>> It has already done so
>Not really. Orthodoxy has not confronted but only dismissed. I am talking
here
>of India and China. Orthodoxy has never confronted those civilizations!
China and India had long ago been Christianized. The only mistake was not
to continually care for the lands. Even court members of Kublai Khan were
Nestorians.
>What paganism? Who is a pagan. A Hindu is not a pagan, neither is a
Buddhist,
>nor a Confucianisats. The animists of Africa are not pagans either.
>Please remove your prejudice. Please start seeing that the Logos is
everywhere
>and has given wisdom everywhere.
They are indeed pagan in the Christian sense of the word. Please remove
your anti-Christianness. You will lose out in the end.
Yojimbo
evagr...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
[...]
> My question has to do with how the
> Church can truly talk to the indigenous people in their own languages and
> concepts. Is Orthodoxy just Greek and Slavic languages with just Greek
> concepts to explain it? If yes, then forget about being a true universal
> religion. If no, then start by looking at those societies, their concepts,
> their vision of the world, their understanding of what it is to be a saint,
> their understanding of the Divine. Ask, after doing that, ask then what
> Orthodoxy has to say. I deeply resent your statement that I "attack Christ
> and His Church".
I think you've raised a good point here. I believe we have the answer for
this from the example of Armenia and the Slavs themselves (via St. Cyril and
St. Methodius].
We need to preserve what is good in the cultures themselves and unite them
with the essential truth of the scriptures. That means we don't have to
shove particular traditions suitable for a Hellenic environment down the
throats of those from India or China.
I believe the Catholic Church is actually doing this in both India and China.
They failed to do it during the 17th[?] century under the M'ing dynasty with
the Jesuit priest Mattea Ricci (who had developed a complete Mandarin rite)
and lost out big time. Unlike the Roman Catholic Church though, the Orthodox
Church has a means of missionizing that doesn't threaten national identity as
allegiance to the Pope might be construed.
And, in answer to the Chinese question, there are Chinese Orthodox as well as
Japanese. You are right about the Indians. They are fractured, and under
severe duress as well.
Best Regards,
Derek Copold
evagr...@my-dejanews.com
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
>
Finally! A response that deals with the question I asked. You are right; the
approach of Cyril/Methodius is the correct one. However, with these cultures,
deep refection is needed to fully comprehend what is compatible/incompatible
with the Christian Gospel. This also entails looking seriously at what is
specifically essential to faith and what is not. This takes effort. It will
probably take generations of patient dialogue and reflection. I know there
are some Chinese and Japanese Orthodox. I wonder how they translate the
liturgy? Anyone know? (P.S. I recently received through the mail an
interesting book; Ascent to the Depths of the Heart, the diary of
Abishiktananda, (Henery Le Saux), He was a Benedictine monk who became a
sanyasa (renunciant) in India. His work is difficult since he is attempting
to embody, if that's the right word, both the Christian and Hindu religious
ways. A very interesting challenging work!) ( As for China, I like the Tao Te
Ching, translated by John C.H. Wu a Roman Catholic Confucian Taoist). Du you
know of any Japanese Orthodox writings?
Yojimbo
evagr...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
[...]
>
> Finally! A response that deals with the question I asked. You are
right; the
> approach of Cyril/Methodius is the correct one. However, with these
cultures,
> deep refection is needed to fully comprehend what is
compatible/incompatible
> with the Christian Gospel. This also entails looking seriously at
what is
> specifically essential to faith and what is not. This takes effort.
It will
> probably take generations of patient dialogue and reflection.
Nothing worth doing is ever easy. I believe that there actually may be
a bridge here (China) for the Roman Catholics and the Orthodox to work
together if they can ever iron out their own differences and ambitions.
Russia currently has a great deal of influence with China, and there is
a great population of Chinese Catholics. If the Russian and Roman
Church can't work in close cooperation, there's no reason that the
Russian Church can't use a little influence to ameliorate the plight of
Chinese Christians, Orthodox, Catholic and Protestant. (I'm not holding
my breath though.)
> I know there
> are some Chinese and Japanese Orthodox. I wonder how they translate
the
> liturgy? Anyone know?
I believe the Chinese is in Mandarin and Cantonese, and the Japanese is
Nihongo. I also believe (subject to correction) that they use
Chrysostom's liturgy.
> (P.S. I recently received through the mail an
> interesting book; Ascent to the Depths of the Heart, the diary of
> Abishiktananda, (Henery Le Saux), He was a Benedictine monk who
became a
> sanyasa (renunciant) in India. His work is difficult since he is
attempting
> to embody, if that's the right word, both the Christian and Hindu
religious
> ways. A very interesting challenging work!)
Hinduism (and its daughter Buddhism) is a pagan religion, but like
Christianity it is able to see beyond matter and time. I believe that
Christianity can use Vedic concepts (of which I'm not all to familiar,
so once again, subject to correction!) as it used Platonic concepts to
explain the mystery of the Trinity to a pagan Roman society.
With the Orthodox preservation of the Holy Spirit's role in the
Trinity, and Catholicism's renewed interest in the Spirit, both
apostolic faiths can offer a historical religion that offers dignity to
untouchable and oppressed classes of Asia like the other monotheisms
(Judaism and Islam), yet holds a mystery, transcedence and
sophistication not found in Islam and a universality explicitly
rejected by Judaism.
Also, of course, it holds the truth and salvation.
> ( As for China, I like the Tao Te
> Ching, translated by John C.H. Wu a Roman Catholic Confucian Taoist).
Du you
> know of any Japanese Orthodox writings?
I'm afraid not. I'd check under St. Nicholaus of Japan.
Good Luck,
Derek Copold
--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.---
evagr...@my-dejanews.com
perhaps too much P.C. here but pagan strictly means a country dweller.
Neither Hinduism nor Buddhism are rural religions but depend heavily on
a certain level of civilization in order to articulate themselves.
I just prefer non-Christian religion. (Picky, picky, I know, but
"pagan" conjures images of wild orgies, sacrifice, blood etc; you know
good ol' Baal and his gang- neither Hinduism nor Buddhism have that as
a central core of their worship).
I hope you are right about Russian influence on China. It could result
in a real renewal of Christianity across the Asian continent.