www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Case Study #1

This is a hypothetical case. I bring this to the readers of this forum to pick your brains and read your comments. Since we do not have a Metropolitan Archbishop as of yet, I thought I would let you (whoever "you' are) be the big cheese for the day and be allowed to make some important decisions.

Here is the case …

It is Labor Day weekend and four busloads of clergy and their wives stop in at the Uniontown Pilgrimage at Mt. St. Macrina. This is not a busload of Byzantine Catholic priests or Orthodox or even Latin Catholics taking their annual retreat at "someplace different' than the usual. It is a busload of Evangelical ministers belonging to the Fire and Brimstone (F&B) Church for Evangelical Faith. They somehow got lost on their way to a convention in New York and got off their route to get a bite to eat. While eating at a nearby restaurant, one of the ministers inquired about all the people walking about on the hill across the street. One of the servers told them about the Otpust. They got interested and decided to take a peak by wandering over to see what it was all about. A hierarchical liturgy was going on when they made it to the top of the hill and they stood off to the side to witness what was taking place. “Wow!” they thought, “No instruments.” At the end of the liturgy, they heard someone mention John Chrysostom's name. Their ears perked up. They had such a deep admiration for John since he too was a "fire and brimstone' preacher, but couldn't understand how such a "preacher' had anything to do with these folks wearing interesting vestments and swinging smoke around. And why did the main clerics(?) face away from the people? But before I continue with this story, let me tell you some more about the F&B Church.

You see, the F&B Church began with a man named Jerry Witkins. Jerry grew up in an evangelical church down South, but later grew dissatisfied with his communities of faith. He studied at the Moody Bible Institute and eventually became a minister to a struggling church community. He found his inspiration in one of the lady members named Vanessa (who occasionally gave him a wink when he preached, which caused him to loose his train of thought) and they soon wedded. Babies then followed. He was known in the area as a passionate preacher-man. His congregation grew tenfold in only three years. Not bad for a tiny church community in the countryside. Other evangelicals liked his preaching and love for the people and soon got on the wagon with Jerry leading them.

In the next four years, Jerry's church began networking and growing to the point that he and the other ministers accounted for fifteen bible-believing communities with close to three thousand members. Jerry avoided the television/cable route and concentrated in working directly with his members. A bible and ministry school was set up and a publishing house. The F&B Church grew considerably in the following decade. By the end of their fifteenth year as an independent church, there were eighty-three Christian communities in his fold.

At the bible and ministry school, a great interest was brewing over the writings of John the “Golden-mouthed.” Copies of his writings and homilies were snatched up and devoured by the students and instructors. Who was this man that he could write and preach so well way back before the Reformation? They loved his analogies and deep insights into the scriptures. Within two years time, a regular John Golden-Mouth Study Group developed within the F&B Church, with Jerry often acting as moderator of the intensive studies.

At one of their annual clergy meetings, considerable debate ensued over the profession of John Golden-Mouth. He was a bishop! This proved to be a problem for the clergy of the F&B Church because they were anti-episcopal to begin with and couldn't understand how John could be associated with such an “institutional” position while being such an outstanding bible preacher. Then the worst occurred; someone stated that he read about his life and learned that in the middle of some troubles with other bishops, their favored John petitioned Rome and several other “bishops” for support. He was a Papist!

After the furor died down over the alleged "impurity' of John, a real debate began over what this all meant for them as a bible-believing community. In the end, it was decided that they would look into things a bit further. And they did; they studied church history much deeper and learned many things they never heard of before. They heard about the Orthodox but never quite understood what all the fights were about between East and West. It was decided that at their next convention they would discuss the issue of their evangelical faith and its relation to church institution. They decided to conduct their convention in New York City to help bring back business, especially after September 11. The next convention was scheduled for the week after Labor Day, 2002. And when the time came, four busloads of F&B ministers and their wives began their trip to New York through the hills of West Virginia and Pennsylvania. In Uniontown, PA, they decided to get a bite to eat before proceeding further. And that is when they heard their favorite preacher's name, John Chrysostom, being mentioned. “Who were these people?” they asked themselves.

After the liturgy, the clerics and their wives intermingled and began talking to all those folks wearing black. They looked official, right? They asked for a meeting with some of them back at their buses to discuss their favorite preacher – their hero – and to ask questions on how everyone on the hillside revival (very subdued according to their tent meetings) were related to him. A number of priests, a few students and nuns answered all their questions. Two things stood out in their minds that shocked them. First, they realized that musical instruments were not part of early Christian worship, and second, their preacher-man Johnny C. was actually a full-blooded Episcopal kind of guy, a "leader' of an entire church. “Wow!” The discussion continued for five hours with the pilgrims offering them some haluski and beverages. At the end of their talk it was decided that some sort of learning seminar be conducted after their convention in New York City.

The F&B Church conducted their convention and their experience of the heavenly liturgy having Johhny C's name on it was the topic of all the sidebar discussions. Study groups were conducted at the ByzCath seminary and their Church headquarters. They read up on the Antiochian phenomenon but decided to go the Catholic route. If “Bishop” Johnny thought well enough to go to the Pope (and a few other Western bishops) during times of trouble then valuing that relationship became critical. They wanted to “go back” to the times of New Testament worship and so they got rid of their guitars, pianos, organs and other devices. Their electric bills went down and their candle purchases went up. They even enthroned an icon of St. John Chrysostom in their houses of worship for inspiration. They were looking forward to the day when they would meet with the new Metropolitan Archbishop to discuss what path they need to take in order to get "revived.'

Speed ahead several months. It is December 2002 and a new archbishop is announced; it is YOU. The installation goes smoothly and soon the "honeymoon' runs its course. You begin your first day at the "office' and are excited to meet the challenges. Your trusted assistant at the Chancery Office meets with you to announce that there is a group of evangelical ministers wanting to discuss possible acceptance into the ByzCath Church. You are surprised, “Didn't something happen like this with the Antiochians?” you thought. You agree to meet with them.

Your meeting with Jerry and a handful of his associate preacher-ministers happens the following week. The meeting ends after a lively and friendly discussion with a few concerns and questions that they want you to consider:

1. The request for "ordination' and permission to remain married.
2. To keep trustee-ownership of their properties.
3. They will adopt the Byzantine Tradition but with some "changes' to match their tastes – such as a new livelier chant based on the Prostopinije and church interiors that resemble earlier Constantinopolitan-style altars with three-sided iconostasis/chancel wall that is open.
4. That they keep their ultra-colorful liturgical robes but with agreed alterations to look somewhat similar to the traditional Byzantine vestments.
5. Assurance that the bishops their communities are under don't move their clergy at will for the original "class' of convert-ministers.
6. Ordination of deaconesses.
7. Immediate ordination of all their ministers to the order of reader since they wanted that connection between the Bible and any sort of hierarchical similarity with Johnny C.
8. That they rename their "church' as the Byzantine Evangelical Catholic Church.
9. That foreign languages and "ethnic' programs NOT be enacted.
10. The conversion of their Bible and Ministry Academy into a "seminary' and institute for theological studies.

You take their petitions and requests to an extraordinary meeting with the clergy. The clergy (including representatives from Passaic, Parma and Van Nuys) are surprised with such news of a possible incorporation of 80+ Bible Communities. The meeting eventually got heated between certain groups of clergy. The problems they raised were:

1. Some of the priests wanted to keep mandatory celibacy.
2. Other clergy wanted to leave their dying parishes immediately to assist them in their mission; there is talk of another string of bible communities (the Riverside Bible Thumping and Pounding Gospel Shouters) looking into what the F&B Church was doing and were interested too.
3. A few presbyters demanded that they learn Old Slavonic.
4. A few traditionalists didn't want them to adopt an older form of church style; they wanted them to build "Carpatho-Ruthenian' style church buildings.
5. The issue of trustee-ownership bug most of the participants but the fact that the F&B Church actually tithes all members a full 10% (read: a big annual cathedral tax) interests a few. The F&B Church takes contributions per capita amounting to five times the amount the average ByzCath parishioner gives.
6. Deaconesses were a hot topic. Jerry assures that the order is not for worship but a New Testament style of waiting on tables or charity; the F&B Church runs ten soup kitchens, eight day-care centers; conducts meetings for AA and manages a home for battered women; their deaconesses were a real New Testament ministry that they wanted to receive official recognition by the ByzChurch.
7. A minority of the participating clergy do not like the idea at all; they don't want to have anything to do with “Bible Christians” because they are heretics; they also threaten to leave if the Archbishop accepts them.
8. Three presbyters ask if they could send them rosaries.
9. Several members suggest revamping Sts. Cyril & Methodius Seminary to become an Evangelical Missionary Center.
10. The question of whether they should become Latin Catholics came up; Didn't Rome have claims on all Westerners?

After your meeting, you sit in your chancery office chair to contemplate all these things. What do you do now?

[ 01-09-2002: Message edited by: Edwin ]

Edwin:

You might enjoy reading a book entitled "Becoming Orthodox" by Father Peter Gillquest. It is the story of a group of Fundemental Protestants and their 20 year search for the 'original church' which resulted in their conversion to Orthodoxy. Many of them were the leaders of the "Campus Crusade for Christ" in the 50's and 60's and are now Orthodox priests. You can obtain the book from Conciliar Press which has a website.

OrthoMan

Dear Orthoman,

An excellent book indeed!

I've recommended it to some Protestant acquaintances. Some of them became Orthodox and others became Catholic.

We can all benefit from it and from the Orthodox Study Bible.

Alex

Orthoman,

Is this your final answer - give a book to all the priests?

I did make a reference to the Antiochians in my case. The purpose of this thread is to see what you would do as the new Metropolitan Archbishop of the Byzantine Ruthenian Church, not what already happened in the Orthodox Church. Given the circumstances and hypothetical situation I give, what would you do? Let's stick to the case. Thanks.


Alex,

I am familiar with the book mentioned. But the purpose of this 'case study' was to elicit a response on what YOU would do, not what Archbishop Philip did. Any wisdom?

[ 01-09-2002: Message edited by: Edwin ]

Edwin, this is one of my favorite posts from you. It certainly parallels the ex-Evangelical Antiochian experience, and I too have read Fr Peter Gillquist's book.

The forum member whose reaction to this thread I'd like to read is Dan Lauffer, himself a former longtime United Methodist minister.

OK... suppose this happens about 15-20 years from now and someone resembling me is Ruthenian metropolitan of Pittsburgh, perhaps by now the first hierarch or patriarch of the whole Ruthenian Church... What would Metropolitan Sergius do ( WWMSD™ )?

<naughty egotistical fun with Photoshop>

[Linked Image]

Imagined portrait of the metropolitan

</naughty fun>

1. The request for "ordination' and permission to remain married.

Yes! Even bucking Rome on behalf of the whole Ruthenian Church on this issue if it has not been resolved by the time period of this scenario.

2. To keep trustee-ownership of their properties.

It really would depend on where the rest of the Ruthenian Church is by that point on this issue. I've read here that some churches are still trustee-owned but know that the forced transfer of properties to the bishop after 1929 was a cause of the split in the family that produced the Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese. Still, neither trusteeship nor episcopal ownership are matters of dogma and neither arrangement affects the bishop's mission as apostle and liturgiarch of his diocese, so there is room for leeway here. OK, yes.

3. They will adopt the Byzantine Tradition but with some "changes' to match their tastes &#8211; such as a new livelier chant based on the Prostopinije and church interiors that resemble earlier Constantinopolitan-style altars with three-sided iconostasis/chancel wall that is open.

New Skete-type variations or the experimentation at the Antiochian converts' old flagship church, SS. Peter & Paul, Ben Lomond, CA, under the liturgical scholarship of Fr David Anderson, don't faze me. It's still the Byzantine Rite and not liberalization or latinization. Of course such should coexist with the wonderful 19th-century wedding-cake iconostases of some of the churches "up home' in PA and OH (&#1055;&#1077;&#1085;&#1085;&#1089;&#1099;&#1083;&#1100;&#1074;&#1072;&#1085;&#1089;&#1082;&#1072;&#1103; &#1080; &#1054;&#1093;&#1072;&#1081;&#1086;&#1089;&#1082;&#1072;&#1103; &#1056;&#1091;&#1089;&#1100; ).

4. That they keep their ultra-colorful liturgical robes but with agreed alterations to look somewhat similar to the traditional Byzantine vestments.

The Evangelical Orthodox Church denomination already had adopted actual Greek-style Byzantine vestments and clergy attire (the riassa) before it merged with the Antiochian Orthodox Church.

I have no problem with point 4. I really like the colorful vestments made partly of African kente cloth used at the liberal St Gregory of Nyssa Episcopal Church [saintgregorys.org] in San Francisco &#8212; entirely in the spirit of the traditional rites, and actually every bit as ornate! So, most resoundingly, yes.

5. Assurance that the bishops their communities are under don't move their clergy at will for the original "class' of convert-ministers.

The Orthodox faith teaches the Church in its fullness is wherever the local community celebrates the Eucharist, so keeping priests in their home communities, not unnecessarily disrupting them, is good for the Church. Yes!

6. Ordination of deaconesses.

No. Inopportune with the siege against the Church by the seculars and a few quisling Catholics demanding women's ordination. I understand some Greek women's monasteries have them, though, so it remains an unresolved matter.

7. Immediate ordination of all their ministers to the order of reader since they wanted that connection between the Bible and any sort of hierarchical similarity with Johnny C.

This would depend on how long their ministers have been studying the Church and learning to worship liturgically. I understand the EOC ministers had been functionally Byzantine a long while and were impressively self-taught in theology &#8212; Metropolitan Philip priested their pastors almost immediately after their conversions. (The EOC pastors, married men, were bishops in their denomination &#8212; the Orthodox made them priests.)

So if they know the basics of the rite, yes, tonsure them right after chrismating them. After appropriate studies, then make deacons and priests.

8. That they rename their "church' as the Byzantine Evangelical Catholic Church.

Too confusing what with the welter of bogus churches out there with convoluted names that sound like the above. Impractical. However, the Antiochians let the ex-EOC stay one unit, the Antiochian Evangelical Orthodox Mission, for a while after their conversion. They are now integrated into the regular Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese, with no special moniker anymore.

For the ex-Evangelicals turned Byzantine Catholics, Metropolitan Sergius would have no problem setting up a special vicariate for them &#8212; the Evangelical Byzantine Catholic Mission? &#8212; since they are and may remain slightly different from the rest of the churches in the Ruthenian eparchies. (Another issue: the receptivitity or lack thereof from the Byzantine eparchs in place at the time of this fantasy scenario.) Much like the special ethnic vicariates in the OCA today or, more precisely, like the Western Rite Vicariate in the Antiochian archdiocese: an integral part of the eparchies in which they are situated but also with a special status as a group.

This group also would have a special mission &#8212; apostolate in good Roman Catholic parlance &#8212; to their Evangelical former colleagues and to the great unchurched in America!

9. That foreign languages and "ethnic' programs NOT be enacted.

Believe it or not, ROCOR, the most Russian Church in America, has enacted the same policy with its all-convert churches! St Elias in Placerville, CA, for example, once was a Vineyard Fellowship church that came to ROCOR from the Antiochians. Their old minister is now a priest and their pastor. He knows no Russian or Slavonic, and the archbishop of San Francisco and Bishop Kirill never have asked him to learn them.

So, yes. The Evangelical vicariate's priests would not be required to learn Slavonic to serve Liturgy. Their churches would remain all-English-speaking... or, in the case of evangelizing functionally unchurched Hispanics, �solamente en espa�ol?

I might, however, consider having their clergy, now my ordinands, learn some Slavonic as well as New Testament Greek and the Latin language as part of their diaconal or priestly formation.

10. The conversion of their Bible and Ministry Academy into a "seminary' and institute for theological studies.

Worth considering &#8212; why close down a successful school? OK. Yes.

1. Some of the priests wanted to keep mandatory celibacy.

Wrong.

2. Other clergy wanted to leave their dying parishes immediately to assist them in their mission; there is talk of another string of bible communities (the Riverside Bible Thumping and Pounding Gospel Shouters) looking into what the F&B Church was doing and were interested too.

Consider it case by case.

3. A few presbyters demanded that they learn Old Slavonic.

No.

4. A few traditionalists didn't want them to adopt an older form of church style; they wanted them to build "Carpatho-Ruthenian' style church buildings.

No.

5. The issue of trustee-ownership bug most of the participants but the fact that the F&B Church actually tithes all members a full 10% (read: a big annual cathedral tax) interests a few. The F&B Church takes contributions per capita amounting to five times the amount the average ByzCath parishioner gives.

Promote tithing but let's not be pharisaical about it.

6. Deaconesses were a hot topic. Jerry assures that the order is not for worship but a New Testament style of waiting on tables or charity; the F&B Church runs ten soup kitchens, eight day-care centers; conducts meetings for AA and manages a home for battered women; their deaconesses were a real New Testament ministry that they wanted to receive official recognition by the ByzChurch.

Tonsure them nuns and organize them along the lines of the St Herman of Alaska Brotherhood in California, now part of the Serbian Church. They do active charitable work in northern CA much like RC active religious orders years ago. Still, the answer is no to the deaconess proposal.

7. A minority of the participating clergy do not like the idea at all; they don't want to have anything to do with &#8220;Bible Christians&#8221; because they are heretics; they also threaten to leave if the Archbishop accepts them.

They aren't in heresy anymore; that's the whole point! Educate.

8. Three presbyters ask if they could send them rosaries.

Sure, but with a lot of explaining that this is a devotion coming from outside the Byzantine patrimony and that Latin devotions are not to be pushed in church.

9. Several members suggest revamping Sts. Cyril & Methodius Seminary to become an Evangelical Missionary Center.

I'm game.

10. The question of whether they should become Latin Catholics came up; Didn't Rome have claims on all Westerners?

No.

http://oldworldrus.com

[ 01-09-2002: Message edited by: Serge ]

I have some questions about this but I will put those along with my comments below.

1. The request for 'ordination' and permission to remain married.

I think he would have to show the same knowledge and competency that we ask of our own men before we ordain them, but I see nothing wrong with the married part.

2. To keep trustee-ownership of their properties.

I think this could be negotiable but I would want to go with the trend in the Church here.

3. They will adopt the Byzantine Tradition but with some "changes' to match their tastes &#8211; such as a new livelier chant based on the Prostopinije and church interiors that resemble earlier Constantinopolitan-style altars with three-sided iconostasis/chancel wall that is open.

I will comment on this below, but it seem like they want to create their own Divine Liturgy.

4. That they keep their ultra-colorful liturgical robes but with agreed alterations to look somewhat similar to the traditional Byzantine vestments.

See comments below

5. Assurance that the bishops their communities are under don't move their clergy at will for the original "class' of convert-ministers.

I am a novice here in regards to the jurisdiction of the Bishops, but does the Metropolitian have a right to limit the authority of the other Bishops?

6. Ordination of deaconesses.

No

7. Immediate ordination of all their ministers to the order of reader since they wanted that connection between the Bible and any sort of hierarchical similarity with Johnny C.

Again, like I said for the ordination to the priesthood above, they must show the same knowledge and competency that we ask of our own men before we ordain them readers

8. That they rename their "church' as the Byzantine Evangelical Catholic Church.

Here are the comments that also go for 3 and 4 above and maybe for 5 also.

They have approached the Byzantine Catholic Church and wish to join with it, yet they wish to stay separate from it?

I could not agree with this. Maybe they should approach the Vatican and see if they could be made a Church of their own then.

9. That foreign languages and "ethnic' programs NOT be enacted.

No problem here, I have been to Divine Liturgies celebrate in English only.

10. The conversion of their Bible and Ministry Academy into a "seminary' and institute for theological studies.

Again, like my comments on ordination to the priesthood and reader, if they can be proven to match the competency of other institutions like them, then no problem.


As for what the clergy have to say.

1. Some of the priests wanted to keep manatory celibacy.

I would say get real and learn your own traditions before you try to enforce things on others.

2. Other clergy wanted to leave their dying parishes immediately to assist them in their mission; there is talk of another string of bible communities (the Riverside Bible Thumping and Pounding Gospel Shouters) looking into what the F&B Church was doing and were interested too.

Something to look into and consider, but I would wait a couple of years and make sure that this F&B Chruch thing would last and is not a flash in the pan.

3. A few presbyters demanded that they learn Old Slavonic.

Not in issue for me, it wouldn't be required.

4. A few traditionalists didn't want them to adopt an older form of church style; they wanted them to build "Carpatho-Ruthenian' style church buildings.

This goes with what I said above, if they don't like how we do things, why do they wish to join with us?

5. The issue of trustee-ownership bug most of the participants but the fact that the F&B Church actually tithes all members a full 10% (read: a big annual cathedral tax) interests a few. The F&B Church takes contributions per capita amounting to five times the amount the average ByzCath parishioner gives.

Don't see a problem here but I would try to stay with the norm of the Chruch.

6. Deaconesses were a hot topic. Jerry assures that the order is not for worship but a New Testament style of waiting on tables or charity; the F&B Church runs ten soup kitchens, eight day-care centers; conducts meetings for AA and manages a home for battered women; their deaconesses were a real New Testament ministry that they wanted to receive official recognition by the ByzChurch.

I liked the nun idea above, but for those women that are married, and for men who wish to assist, how about an attempt at creating some type of lay third order?

7. A minority of the participating clergy do not like the idea at all; they don't want to have anything to do with &#8220;Bible Christians&#8221; because they are heretics; they also threaten to leave if the Archbishop accepts them.

It must be remembered that the Chruch is not a democracy and a Metroploitian must not allow his clergy to push him around.

8. Three presbyters ask if they could send them rosaries.

Ok, as long as they explain the devotion and where it orginated and that they also include a prayer rope with the same description.

9. Several members suggest revamping Sts. Cyril & Methodius Seminary to become an Evangelical Missionary Center.

I don't think so. Right now we have only one model for someone with a vocation to follow.

We need more. I would leave Sts. Cyril & Methodius as it is, let them have thiers and try to develope something for those with a monastic vocation.

10. The question of whether they should become Latin Catholics came up; Didn't Rome have claims on all Westerners?

I don't know about this, as they seem to wish to join the Byzantine Catholic Church but to stay separate, maybe it would be better if the Metropolitian played the middle man for them with Rome.

Well, what do y'all think?


David

[ 01-09-2002: Message edited by: DavidB ]

Serge,

Naughty, naughty! But given the hypothetical case I submitted and assuming YOU were the new Metropolitan Archbishop then I guess your photo fits the bill. Black beard? I guess we will get many years out of ya.
I enjoyed reading your responses. I hope to read more.

David,

Thank you for your response. The members of the F&B Church have no problems with Ruthenian Church traditions, but desire to maintain some of their traditions if acceptable. They want to keep what works for them. As for involving the other bishops to accept a no-transfer policy, your meeting does involve the other eparchies, including two new bishops who are both young and energetic. One of them knows where the members of the F&B Church are coming from since he is of Mexican descent and keeps an icon of Our Lady of Guadelupe chained around his neck at all times.

[ 01-09-2002: Message edited by: Edwin ]

Edwin,

Thank you for a thought provoking thread. Serge looks great in episcopal vestments, by the way. If by some miracle he was made an Eastern Catholic bishop I would consider relocating just to join his eparchy.


1. The request for "ordination' and permission to remain married.

Unfortunately, given the current situation I do not believe that things can progress beyond point number one. After all, your scenario is set in the year 2002.

Because these ministers are married men, they are not welcome to serve the Ruthenian Church as priests. It's very tragic, but it is the current reality.

They better look elsewhere.

Anthony,

You are now the Metropolitan Archbishop. You call the shots on a married priesthood. What will you say for yourself when you stand someday before the awesome Judgment Seat of Christ? Will you quote John Ireland by saying "What's a few thousand souls if discipline can be maintained?"

[ 01-09-2002: Message edited by: Edwin ]

Dear Edwin,

O.K., O.K., keep your epitracheli-on!

I would organize this group, under me as Metropolitan-Patriarch of course, as the reconstituted "Evangelical Orthodox Catholic Church of the Hussites."

This way, by following a venerable, tried and true Orthodox group with converts from a former Evangelical movement, we could avoid the liberal-conservative pitfalls similar such movements suffer from.

In addition to Orthodox saints, the new converts could honour Jan Hus, Jerome of Prague, Konstantinos Anglikos and Karl Polivka of that tradition, just to show that we're open-minded within some reason.

All of there "ritual requests" would be automatically taken care of under this 500 year old Orthodox community and, by appealing to its authority, all future temptation aimed at changing the liturgy would be quashed.

Deaconnesses could come in, since they were a part of the Hussite Orthodox tradition. Married priests? Hus died to have them. They are most definitely in - you know what I mean . . .

We could launch an immediate mission outreach to the remaining Old Catholic and Protestant Hussites in the Czech Republic and elsewhere. Perhaps even among the Moravians.

Since Hus and the Orthodox Church that takes him as its inspiration allowed for both Old Slavonic and modern languages, no problem, man!

The emphasis on preaching and additional reading of the Scriptures was also "taken care of" 500 years ago.

This would, predictably, impress the heck out of these converts who would realize that their Evangelical movement was and is truly aimed at an Apostolic restoration with an Eastern focus.

Who else would be so accommodating?

And maybe we could even beat Rome to canonize Hus, who knows? I could commission an icon to be written immediately, I already have an Akathist in his honour, Vesperal and Matins sections would have to be organized . . . Sorry, I forgot, this isn't for real.

I guess it all overwhelmed me. Back to reality. Thanks for this wonderful day-dream, Edwin!

My Apostolic Blessing to you and yours!

+ Alexandros Romanos I
Archbishop-Metropolitan
Evangelical Orthodox Catholic Church
of the Hussites

[ 01-09-2002: Message edited by: Orthodox Catholic ]

Alex,

Your post saddens me. I wasn't attempting to be funny. But I do know clergy who would consider such events as silly and simply write off these folks. The case study had absolutely nothing to do with canonizing Jan Hus et al.

Case studies and hypothetical situations are helpful in recognizing leadership skills and determining if some people are ready to handle the real thing.

Since antidotes are your thing, I will tell you this one: once upon a time a priest was invited to attend a parish church to conduct vespers - a service the people were not accustomed to. After the service, to which only five people showed up, the visiting priest went on and on about how it wasn't worth it coming the distance for only a few people and that it was a joke. The people caught whiff of his flipant comments and stopped coming to participate in vespers, a service their pastor was trying hard to re-institute.

Think about it, my friend.

[ 01-09-2002: Message edited by: Edwin ]

Dear Edwin,

If you think I was being funny, I wasn't.

There actually is or was such a jurisdiction and it was proposed that it be a model for some Evangelical groups coming into the Catholic and Orthodox Churches.

Hus' rehabilitation has been started in Rome and there are those who promote his canonization. He was certainly honoured privately by the Orthodox community that he served to inspire and the Czech Orthodox Church is investigating the canonization of his colleague, Jerome of Prague.

I thought Serge's picture was flippant, but if you didn't understand what I was saying, you could have asked first, rather than assume your own (misinformed) assessment was correct.

I wouldn't want you in the department of public relations dealing with an issue like this.

Sorry . . .

Alexs

Alex,

You wrote: "We could launch an immediate mission outreach to the remaining Old Catholic and Protestant Hussites in the Czech Republic and elsewhere. Perhaps even among the Moravians."


Please return to Pittsburgh, Alex. The members of the F&B Church don't care about models of Hussite Churches. Jerry Witkins and company grew dis-satisfied with their non-Catholic background, as stated in the case, and are opting for Catholicism, but you are trying to take them back there. They want YOUR attention to THEIR concerns. Missions to the Czech Republic and Moravia were no on their punch list.

How would you address their concerns and the concerns of your clergy?

[ 01-09-2002: Message edited by: Edwin ]

Dear Edwin,

I don't want to take them back "there."

I do want to be pastorally sensitive, as St Alexis Toth was to the Eastern Catholics who became Orthodox.

If they don't care about Protestantism and its history beginning with Hus, then why don't they just become Catholic (go the "whole way" and become Tridentine, why not) and be done with it?

The Hussites didn't, after all, provide a model, but were Catholics who wished for some basic reforms that Vatican II assumed and we now take for granted.

My point still remains - the best way to incorporate such groups is to point to an historical situation where this has happened before, the Hussites and the Waldensians being two examples.

We are then in charted waters and can avoid pitfalls of "I want this, let's do it" in liturgy and church discipline.

And perhaps we should begin by familiarizing ourselves with the history of such situations.

I'm having a bad day, perhaps I should never have started with this.

My apologies, and I'm going . . .

Alex

First of all, Edwin, thank you for your invitation to be Metropolitan. I didn't know you were a believer in womans ordination.

So, if I was, I would say:

Jerry, you got a long list year of canon law fine points, church practices and legalisms. How about we put all of this aside and talk about Jesus.

Olga Nimchek