www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News And We Call Ourselves Christian - SHAME!

Hristos a inviat!

"Besides, how do you say "crap" in either Greek or Armenian?
Alex"

There is a word. I won't share it. More common, though is the Turksih word for such, at least for those whose ancestors came from the Ottoman Empire.

The report about the unholy brawl brought to mind how our human nature is so frail when temptation comes knocking.

God bless,
Christopher
Armenian Catholic

Dr John
Metinks, as in many of your post you have been infected by all those portestants there in Virginia.
Stephanos I

I'm trying to understand what's being discussed on this thread (besides the shoving)--

The Holy Fire/Light descends for the Greek Patriarch on Pascha? So, that's the Patriarch of Constantinople?

On April 27 this year? (not April 20?)

So Our Lord Jesus Christ is on the so-called Old Calendar?

And the Patriarch of Constantinople is the one He recognizes as Head of His Church?

Actually I am confused by the last post!

It is actually the Patriarch of Jerusalem who is responsible for the Holy Fire; in all its history, it has only appeared to the Greek line.......which obviously tells you something about the WILL OF GOD. God is probably an Old Calenderist when it comes to the Pascha, and has proper taste in whom he shows His signs to....




Anton

Christ is risen!

[QUOTE]Originally posted by amonasticbeginner:

"The Holy Fire/Light descends for the Greek Patriarch on Pascha? So, that's the Patriarch of Constantinople?"

No, not the Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Constantinopel, but the Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem.

"On April 27 this year? (not April 20?)"

Yes, Old Calendar Pascha fell on this day this year. However, I think the Holy Fire actually decends on Great and Holy Saturday, April 26 this year, not on Pacha.

"So Our Lord Jesus Christ is on the so-called Old Calendar?"

As I think Alex once said, both New Calendarists and Old Calendarist worship the same God, but in different ways. The New Calendarists worship Him in their way, and the Old Calendarists worship Him in HIS way!

"And the Patriarch of Constantinople is the one He recognizes as Head of His Church?"

From an Orthodox POW, only Christ himself is Head of His Church, not some patriarch.

Christian

I think something that gets lost in the discussions of calendars, and fires, anointings, talismans, and ecclesiastical structures is the fact that we have an obligation to truth.

I can understand, for example, the penchant a large number of people have to wear these little Hallmark angels. While this can be a good thing insofar as it reminds us of the power of the Lord in providing us with guiding graces, we fickle humans have a tendency to take things to realms of superstition, and then turn around and use our basic faith confessions to justify the superstition. E.g., I'm wearing my cross that Father had in the sanctuary during liturgy, so God will protect me, and I can jaywalk in traffic. This kind of attitude, and others like it that fly in the face of common sense, seem to be a type of perversion of the spiritual realm.

I see the calendar issue as a type of this stretching spirituality to cover our own desires, i.e., the Julian calendar was used during the time of Our Lord, and because it was Roman scientists who re-did the math, and it was the Pope who promulgated the adjustment, we can't accept it because somehow we would be losing our Orthodox Christianity. The same can be said for those who use the Tridentine liturgy as a talisman for liturgical life, going so far as to denigrate the current usage and its practitioners.

It is perhaps a disease of our current society in which we focus more on the externals of life - clothing, cars, electronics, money, vacations, the 'in crowd' - and let the spiritual values fly out the window. While externals can be seen as manifestations of the internal spiritual life - almsgiving, patience with difficult people, generosity, prayer for those in need, care for the sick, the elderly and those with few talents - using other externals like calendars, vestments, languages, beards, left-to-right/right-to-left sign of the cross, leavened/unleavened bread, and the ever-popular 'MY jurisdiction/YOUR jurisdiction' seem to fall far short of the mark as true and viable manifestations of one's commitment to Jesus, the Christ.

When we worship as gods, our own interpretations of how we (and others) should conduct ourselves, and then go so far as to condemn others for their lack of acquiesence to our norms, I think we are in serious spiritual danger. And it is here that reason comes into play.

Castigate priests for not having a beard? Chastise nuns for not wearing yards of black serge and starched linen while working in a hospice? Condemn churches for using the common language while catechizing in liturgy? Condemn astronomers for rendering a more accurate depiction of celestial reality? Reject a married man who wishes to serve the church as a priest? Foster the "pray, pay and obey" principle for parish members?

None of these has anything to do with the Gospel. They are mere frippery. And, I'll be bold here: they are false gods that detract from our obligation to worship the Lord and follow His mandates for life. It is the sin of "Look-At-Me-ism", an offshoot of the sin of pride. ["I/We do it God's way; you don't."]

Perhaps we ought to have a year-round Lent for intense self-assessment and prayer.

Christ is Risen!!

Dr. John:

Christ is Risen!!! Indeed He is Risen!!!

Man, you are right on the mark!!!

Well said.

BOB

We should be careful not to paint with too wide a brush. Likewise we should not castigate or marginalize those persons and communities of whom tradition is an important aspect and respect their desires to keep, hold and protect those traditions received from their forefathers, to the extent they feel compelled, whether it is the Julian Calendar, beards, clerical garb, etc. etc. etc. This faith cannot simply be dismissed by reduction to talismans or some kind of perceived shamanism. Externals are important, some more than others. The externals of bread and wine, for example underlying a most profound reality.

We can see what the elimination of many of the externals did to some Roman churches after Vatican II. Bare walls, folk gatherings which only give a minor appereance sometimes of a Mass, etc.

Perhaps not intended, I see a sort of dismissal or minimalization in Dr. John's post above of aspects of tradition which to some are very important and are external manifestations of a deep faith and spirituality rooted in tradition which includes the Gospels.

I agree that often with humans the externals become themselves the focus of our attention and thoughts. But at the same time we need to be careful of sweeping judgements and should respect those who love a deeper level of tradition and not assume they are all some superstitious ecclesial simpletons. Pride works more ways than one, and usually works overtime.

An excellent posting Diak. God bless you!

Spasi Khristos -
Mark, monk and sinner.

Brother Diak's points are well taken. But I think that the interpretation has gone beyond what I proposed.

"Perhaps not intended, I see a sort of dismissal or minimalization in Dr. John's post above of aspects of tradition which to some are very important and are external manifestations of a deep faith and spirituality rooted in tradition which includes the Gospels."

It's not a question of dismissal or minimalization, but rather a question of the "necessary" linkage between the faith and the external manifestation. That is: why is this linkage apparently sacrosanct? As an item of personal preference, it can certainly be valid from someone's perspective. But to irrevocably link it to the faith? Dubious. For someone to say that the bishop or the pastor has to have a beard is to impose upon that cleric something that the mandator doesn't have the right to do. Whether they believe it to be spiritually efficacious or not.

Borther Diak further notes: "I agree that often with humans the externals become themselves the focus of our attention and thoughts. But at the same time we need to be careful of sweeping judgements and who respect those who love a deeper level of tradition and not assume they are all some superstitious ecclesial simpletons. Pride works more ways than one, and usually works overtime."

My thought was not to give a sweeping judgement or to show disrespect, but rather to pose the question: "Is there really a necessary linkage between the Faith and certain external manifestations?" If the priest doesn't have a beard, is the faith lost? If the mission church can only afford printed paper icons, is it not a church? If a priest consecrates the Eucharist in a painted wooden vessel with no gold, is it less the Body and Blood of Christ?

I get unnerved when I encounter the idea that the externals are sacrosanct. Indeed, some things - like bread and wine - are determined by the Church to be core manifestations, and the early Church squashed the milk-and-honey eucharist for good reason.

But to use the idea that bare-walled church buildings or "town meeting" seating is a validation to eschew any and all change misses the mark. Some places do things poorly, even very poorly. I don't like K-Mart plastic liturgics at all. And I absolutely HATE guitars at liturgical celebrations - not because I hate guitars (Segovia was a musical master!) but because usually Billy-Three-Chord is at the microphone. And the priest sings like Big Bird and walks like a longshoreman.

I am afraid that sometimes people hide themselves in the externals because they are afraid, nay: terrified, of having to stand up and profess what is in their own souls. It is easier, for a poor example, to recite the Our Father than to "make up" one's own praise and petitions to God in one's own words. It is easier to insist upon kneeling at the consecration and epiclesis than to stand. And so anything that removes the algorithm of practicing the "faith" can be condemned as destroying the faith. And that is truly sad.

Our relationship with God has got to be much more than this.

Christ is Risen!!

Guess they never heard about the first being last and the last being first, eh?

Perhaps these priests need to revert to the lesson all of our mommies and daddies tried to teach us: i.e. share. It is most Christianlike to share. God is big enough for all of us. No need to shove.

To let my jock angle overcome by Franciscan angle for a moment, I would suggest that these priests might engage in some good old fashioned sport to take their hyper-competitive edge (which really has no place in religion) off.

Not to go too far off topic - okay, I fibbed - to go really far off topic: I know a priest who is a fellow runner and a doggoned competitive one at that. You won't meet a more even-headed, kind fellow anywhere. It's an interesting thing - I've noticed that so many people feel comfortable talking to him because they see him at sporting events when he's not in a collar. (You can't run a race in a collar.) Anyway, father handily beat me in the last race I was at.

My most dear friends,

ΧΡΙΣΤΟΣ ΑΝΕΣΤΗ! ΑΛΗΘΩΣ ΑΝΕΣΤΗ!

I hope that nobody (specially our favourite Old rite monk, Father Mark) will take any offence from my commentary but, if I am not wrong, Ι am the first person writing in this forum about the recents developments at the "Greek" Orthodox Patriarchate of Jerusalem. Patriarch Irineos, whose election to the throne of Sion is not recognised by the goverment of Israel as he was excluded from the list for the election of the new patriarch toguether with metropolitan Timotheos for their extra-ecclesiastical activities, acussed few days after Holy Pascha metropolitan Timotheos of giving money to an Orthodox palestinian to kill him. The ashamed Greek goverment tried to solve the problem but unfortunately the acussation is now in the (Greek)courts (a patriarch acusses a metropolitan of trying to kill him!!! DO they celebrate the Divine Liturgy toguether? What do they say when the embrace each other at The Divine Liturgy? "the Lord is among us and he will be" or "I see you at the court"). If I am not wrong metropolitan Timotheos was he who took the Holy Fire when Patriarch Diodoros was too ill to do it for himself. According to the tradition only the Greek Orthodox patriarch receives the Holy Fire. Now, according to Patriarch Irineos, also a Greek metropolitan who tries to kill his patriarch, also can receive the Holy Fire from Heaven. I fill completely ashamed!!! So that the point is to be Greek and Orthodox, to be a murderer is no so important for God!!! Obviously some people in Jerusalem whant to take advanteges from humble people's faith. And we can call ourselves Christians? Kyrie elison. By the way this year I had in my hands Holy Fire from Jerusalem, well that what they told me.
Yours in Christ

Dear Francisco, I've heared a different version of the events....ah well!

According to my knowledge, the accusation was made by a Palestinian Muslim. The Patriarch has never actually said anything about the possible attempt in January - at least in public. But in any case, I think that during the election, the Metropolitan mentioned came third behind +Ireneous and +Cornelias. It could just be malicious gossip, or as some conspiracy theories state a way for the Jewish state to cause dissention in fear that the Knesset Land is sold off. But that is probably idiotic in any case...I think that its probably some half-baked idea...

Dear Anton I,

Unfortunately, I repeat, unfortunately things are not as they told you, the situation is worse:

Macedonian Press Agency (http://www.mpa.gr/)

PATRIARCH SUES BISHOP FOR MURDER ATTEMPT
Athens, 5 May 2003 (13:28 UTC+2)


A lawsuit was submitted to Athens DA of First Instance D. Asprogerakas, against the Metropolite of Vostra Timotheos, by Patriarch of Jerusalem Irineos. In his lawsuit, the Patriarch of Jerusalem accused Metropolite Timotheos of planning to have him killed, using hired killers.

The case came to light last month, when an Orthodox Arab, 40-year-old Yussef El Mufti, who is in the custody of the Palestinian Authorities, confessed that he had received orders from a Metropolite of the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Jerusalem to kill Irineos in Palestinian territories, for 500,000 USA dollars.

After being questioned by the authorities of the Palestinian Direction, he confessed that he received 100,000 dollars as a down payment, and tried to kill the Patriarch shortly after the Christmas holidays.

Jordan Times
Tuesday, August 14, 2001

Greek Orthodox Church elects new patriarch

By Suha Ma'ayeh

AMMAN — In a closely contested race, the Greek Orthodox Church on Monday, elected Metropolitan Irineos I, a 62-year-old bishop, as its new patriarch in the Holy City.
Irineos I, born on the Greek island of Samos, was elected in two rounds of voting. He is expected to help unify the church's ranks, months after the run-up to the elections opened sensitive fissures, Amman-based church sources said.

In the second round of voting, Irineos I received seven of the ballots cast by the 17-member Holy Synod, and the remainder were split equally between his two opponents, Metropolitan Cornelius and Timotheos, a church official told The Jordan Times.

Before narrowing the list to three contenders, 48 clergymen from Jordan, the Palestinian self-rule areas and Israel participated in the first round of balloting, in which Cornelius claimed 14 votes, Timotheos and Irineos 12 each, and Palavios 10, said the official.

Irineos I, who came to Jerusalem in 1953, graduated from the church's theological seminary in 1963. He was among those who Israel sought to disqualify last month.

He represented the Jerusalem church in Athens in 1972 before returning to the Holy Land nine years later to become a bishop and member of the Synod.

In a speech following his election, Irineos I thanked the priests and sent special regards to His Majesty King Abdullah and Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, AP reported from occupied Jerusalem.

“I will serve the church and support the Palestinian people and their just issues,” he said in a statement.

The church is to ask Jordan and the Palestinian National Authority for their approval of the new patriarch. The statement did not mention whether the church would seek approval from Israel.

Church officials in Jordan said that Irineos I, representative of the Patriarchate in Athens, will face a challenging task to “unify church ranks,” especially given Israel's measure last month to disqualify five of the 15 contenders and then rescinding its decision.

The incident sparked tensions in the world's oldest Christian establishment.

“The new patriarch will embark on a comprehensive reform programme for the church, internally and externally,” Archimandrite Christofos Hanna told The Jordan Times adding, “he will seek to unify the church's ranks.”

The eight months leading up to the elections, following the death of Diodoros, created schisms in the church, chief among them being the “management of the patriarchate's property,” observers say, as the top clergyman is armed with considerable powers, including that of controlling the patriarchate's funds and properties.

Another issue which surfaced with the elections was the inequitable Arab representation in the church, especially since the vast majority of the 200,000 Orthodox congregation on both sides of the Jordan River are Arabs.

Therefore, the council called for reform inside the church by eliminating what it termed unlawful practices, and by allowing Arab followers to seek further participation in the church's affairs.

Raouf Abujaber, chairman of the Orthodox Central Council in Jordan, claimed that the late patriarch had acted illegally when he sold and leased the church's properties for Israeli settlements.

“I hope that the new patriarch will be a good shepherd and correct the mistakes committed by his predecessor during the past 20 years,” said Abujaber.