www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West What Do You Believe?

Dear Cizinec,

Yes, "convert mentality" is about overzealousness, to be sure.

We all want converts, but if they come with their convert, holier-than-thou attitudes, they should stay where they are (or at home).

Is my Church a Ukie-only club? In many parishes up here - YOU BETTER BELIEVE IT!

The cultural situation in the U.S. is admittedly different from that in Canada. It's not just that new immigrants are coming here from "da Yookrane."

I'm teaching several dozen children who are fourth waves immigrants and who know English as their "first language" by now.

Canada's multicultural society truly does support linguistic and cultural identity retention in a way other nations, i.e. the USA, do not.

And I wasn't trying to discuss "convert mentality" when I said that.

I was trying to defend Greg.

So, please, let's get our contexts straight, Big GUy!

Alex

In the light of all these patriarchal and passion threads....to lessen all the pressure perhaps we should start a Guinness appreciation society? That's bound to cause a few unions but knowing how the world works....a schism could start...........

Anton

Whew, thanks Roy, that was a close one. I thougt for a second if you were serious I was going to have to (1) go to my spiritual father for more penance (2) give up Guinness and (3) get the Surgeon General of Ireland on the horn to back up all of Guinness' advertising.

Dear Anton,

You are right.

Your way is the only way we'll find out what "ales" the Eastern Church situation . . .

Alex

Dear Alex, Yes I forgive you; please forgive me. May I suggest again that we not speak to or about one another, but only address the subjects being discussed?
To whit: Greg is like the combative Latins in that he seems to be looking for trouble, is stuck in a polemical mode and feels free to call members of another Church "heretics". Unlike them he is tolerated; I have seen even courteous Latins run off for asking well-intentioned questions.

Hmmmmm...
We are not, of course, McDonald's, such that you can rely, for better or worse, on exactly the same food in every outlet, in every location. Our identity cannot be measured by any such standard, IMO. We are composed of parishes which are composed of individuals. How each community works things out, within the framework of tradition and episcopal oversight, varies. In my travels, I have visited more than a few of our parishes, and for all the variation they exhibited, they also had an an obvious common identity: home!


Huh?
I think you will find individuals with opinions. But a church making such proclamations?

DJS,

Yes, but what is acceptable variance vs. disagreements unsuitable for discussion? What, for instance does immaculate conception mean? The very understanding of original sin seems to vary from bishop to bishop, parish to parish, priest to priest, and person to person. Is that really an acceptable variance?


Concerning the first, Augustinian original sin, if you can find a consensus on this issue among EC priests or, for that matter, EC bishops I will stand corrected.

I have heard a few EC educators define Papal infallibility in a way that does not mean anything beyond what the Orthodox see as "infallibility" in any bishop. This view seems to be tolerated in the EC church, although most teach the Latin view of it.

Finally, you know as well as I that some EC parishes, priests and bishops see the Orthodox as hated enemies to be despised. Do we have to name names? We also know many parishes, especially in the "New World", who see themselves as Orthodox.

I know that some priests who I really love and respect will say that these variances are acceptable. I don't know of many who pretend these variances don't exist.

Hard to imagine anyone pretending that they don't exist; although some folks may just not know much about what is going on outside their own parish, or be acquainted with the teaching of more than the few priests that they have had over a lifetime.

I actually and honestly don't know this. I can't even imagine the priests I've known sharing any such ideas even if they harbored them. And I've not personally known any bishops at all. I know people old enough to have lived through some tough times and to have some barely lingering bitterness about choices made and actions taken. This includes people on both sides of the divide. But "hated enemies to be despised"? No; I can honestly say that that is totally outside of my experience.

I wouldn't even expect a consensus from RC priests and/or bishops! And I certainly would not expect a consensus on the significance of any such consensus. By the way, you know that I've posted on the subject of Ancestral Sin from Orthodox catechisms, which exhibit a pretty wide variance in the teaching. Important? Apparently not.

I don't know about such teaching or tolerance for it. While this de minimis sense is, of course, fundamental, limiting the concept to this level misses too much, IMO - FWIW. I am grateful for priests, under most any circumstance, coupled with Augustine's success against Donatism which allows me not to be overly concerned about theological training or opinions.

And I also have some tolerance for the fact that some people seem to imagine that their very salvation hinges on taking a position on this issue - even though I don't know of anyone whose musings on this matter improved their devotion to liturgy, adherence to commandments, or ministry to the less fortunate. And this insouciance on such matters, btw, I might tentatively consider to be a salient part of our identity: it's so easy to imagine a stara baba hearing such questions and responding with totally sincere concern - and a little exasperation - How is this helping you to love God and your neighbor?

djs,

I believe I misunderstood something you said earlier on this thread. I am not trying to get into arguments about specific aspects of EC, but was trying to state my opinion that there is an identity crisis within EC chruches (East? West? how much East? how much West? do we have statues? do we kneel? do we say the filique? do we skip vespers and have stations of the cross? are married priests accepable? is NOT having married priests acceptable? etc.).

I thought you were originally stating that there were no such identity issues. After re-reading the thread, I don't belive that was what you were stating. I apologize.

No need whatsoever to apologize.
I certainly do not argue that these issues that you raise are indeed issues. To what extent that these issues-being-issues somehow constitutes an "identity crisis" is, however, another matter altogether.