Schism may be inevitable and with it may come a deep divide within the structure of world Orthodoxy. Those who align with Constantinople will take a more global approach, while those who align with Moscow will be more inward focused. (There, that was a polite way to put things, wasn't it?)
The UGCC has earned great respect among those who continue to participate in the Maydan in Kyiv for its support etc.
And what was learned was that the voice of its Primate carries a great deal of weight internationally. The link with Rome that the UGCC has means that when its Primate speaks, the world listens.
No fear of the UGCC disappearing. It was once put down, in 1946, but it rose from the dead, so to speak.
Schism may be inevitable and with it may come a deep divide within the structure of world Orthodoxy. Those who align with Constantinople will take a more global approach, while those who align with Moscow will be more inward focused. (There, that was a polite way to put things, wasn't it?)
I don't know about the inward focus. I think the Moscow Patriarchate may be even more active than the Ecumenical Patriarchate in trying to convert others to Orthodoxy. In fact, Constantinople is rather weak when it comes to missionary activity.
Schism may be inevitable and with it may come a deep divide within the structure of world Orthodoxy. Those who align with Constantinople will take a more global approach, while those who align with Moscow will be more inward focused. (There, that was a polite way to put things, wasn't it?)
I don't know about the inward focus. I think the Moscow Patriarchate may be even more active than the Ecumenical Patriarchate in trying to convert others to Orthodoxy. In fact, Constantinople is rather weak when it comes to missionary activity.
It's rather obvious. If the alliance ("symphony" as one Russian posted elsewhere this morning) between the Church and Russian national identity continues to strengthen in the years ahead, the west will view Russian Orthodoxy as having squandered the moral high ground for ideological state purposes. Now, I know that some Orthodox still see the "symphony" as being the model for the future,but polling both within and outside of Russia places that viewpoint in the minority. The Church needs to evangelize within Russia lest it be nothing more than a Potemkin Village or a museum of culture.
To my long westernernized ears, the symphony sounds rather discordant.
First world nations do not engage in country-against-country violent warfare anymore.
Americans can not afford to miss their favorite TV shows, their favorite sports games, or the one thousandth sale of cheap, tainted foreign made goods at their local big box store. Americans only get outraged over soda bans and TV show cancellations.
We are an utterly pathetic excuse for a country. And it breaks my heart to say that, given my extensive genealogy in this land.
Current events remind me of my high school history class. Hitler moved into Sudetenland in 1938 to "re-patriate" the German people with the Motherland and PM Chamberlain said "tsk, tsk".
Russia moves into Ukraine to protect its citizens and the US President says "We won't go to the G8 meeting.
"Russia moves into Ukraine to protect its citizens....." Protect them from what???
Pavloosh,
I suspect that the unspoken finish to that phrase was 'from being free!' Dangerous stuff, that freedom!
Many years,
Neil
"One day all our ethnic traits ... will have disappeared. Time itself is seeing to this. And so we can not think of our communities as ethnic parishes, ... unless we wish to assure the death of our community."
Russia is next door and Ukraine is part of their former empire.
True, but. . . (And here I put on my military analyst's hat):
The Russian army is materially weak, poorly manned, poorly trained, and hasn't conducted any large scale military exercises in more than a decade...Since then, Putin has systematically starved the ground forces for funds, in order to push higher visibility projects (new ICBMs and SLBMs, new submarines, an aircraft carrier, and new combat aircraft) intended mainly to create the impression of strength and competence.
On the other hand, the Ukrainian army has invested seriously in modernization, has participated actively in the NATO Partnership for Peace (PfP) Program and has upgraded its training and doctrine with Western assistance. Fighting in Ukraine, in defense of their homeland, the Ukrainian armed forces by themselves are probably capable of inflicting a decisive defeat upon the Russian army, It is unlikely, though, that any attack on Ukraine would go unsupported, and Ukraine's contiguous neighbors, including Romania and Poland, also have modern, well-trained military forces.
So, from a strictly strategic standpoint, Russia--or more specifically, Putin--loses as soon as the first Russian tank crosses into Ukraine. Nothing would unite the Ukrainian people more.... The army and people would mobilize against the invader, and the invasion itself would probably be defeated quite decisively in short order.
That, in turn, would have catastrophic results for Putin, since his entire regime is based on the appearance of restoring Russia as a great power. Defeat at the hands of what most Russians consider a rebellious province would shatter that illusion, and all the pent up dissatisfaction in Russia would boil over--most probably led by the military itself, which would blame Putin's policies for its failure.
Stuart,
Are you mistaken on which of the two nations is more modernized from a military standpoint? I am not debating your analysis on the situation at large or how things would/could go poorly for Russia once all the global cards are played, but according to this article it is the Ukraines military that suffers more from outdated military and spends like 99 billion less on their military yearly. I would think Ukraine stands little to no chance resisting them without intervention. Granted you did make that assumption too, but I am just wondering if I read you correctly on the point of Ukraine's military being more up to date or capable of thwarting Russia if it were just the two of them fighting. And forgive me if I am misunderstanding something.
I will quote from the article that makes me question your assesment...
Ukraine's underfunded and outdated military, with Cold War-era technology and salaries to match, would be an anemic deterrent if the Russian invasion of Crimea were to widen into a bigger confrontation, according to a 2012 Ukrainian Ministry of Defense report.... Obsolete tanks and fighter planes, a miniscule navy and a dwindling army whose approximately 100,000 soldiers earn about half the nation’s average salary all bode poorly for the nation of 45 million what declared its independence from Russia in 1991.
While Russia spends just less than $100 billion per year on defense, Ukraine’s military budget for 2011 was $1.27 billion, according to the report, whose authors complained that the cash-strapped government routinely provided even less funding than it allocated on paper.
“The expenditure and allocation of the Ministry of Defense in 2011 failed to fully meet the resource requirements of the Armed Forces,” the report, which was issued in both Ukrainian and English, states.
The report says that Ukrainian forces have archaic equipment as a result.
“At the end of 2011, most of the technical communications are analog, and the digital communications element accounts for less than 10 percent of the whole communications system,” the report reads.
“This does not meet the needs of the troops,” it adds.
The Ukrainian military report also notes that out of 22 tanks that needed to be modernized between 2006 and 2011, only 10 were finished due to budget constraints. Out of 31 combat aircraft needing modernization, only three were finished. For combat ships it was four out of 22, and for combat helicopters zero out of 38.
The Byzantine Forum provides
message boards for discussions focusing on Eastern Christianity (though
discussions of other topics are welcome). The views expressed herein are
those of the participants and may or may not reflect the teachings of the
Byzantine Catholic or any other Church. The Byzantine Forum and the
www.byzcath.org site exist to help build up the Church but are unofficial,
have no connection with any Church entity, and should not be looked to as
a source for official information for any Church. All posts become
property of byzcath.org. Contents copyright - 1996-2024 (Forum 1998-2024). All rights
reserved.
