|
0 members (),
89
guests, and
25
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums26
Topics35,219
Posts415,299
Members5,881
| |
Most Online3,380 Dec 29th, 2019
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,133
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,133 |
LOL
If I were you I would bring that horse into your house and place it in the living room. OVERNIGHT!
Last edited by Subdeacon Borislav; 05/31/07 09:18 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317 Likes: 21
Member
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317 Likes: 21 |
Dear Borislave and AMM, Actually, I thought you two would say that . . . To be Ukrainian Orthodox is not how you characterize it at all. In fact, your perspective shows that your cultural orientation is mainstream North American without, perhaps, you evening realizing it. There is no "Orthodox" identity today, nor "Catholic" for that matter that is not linked to a specific cultural identity, as much as we like to talk about "universalism" etc. Sociologically, that is an impossibility and when people say otherwise, it is just, well, nonsense (in the best sense of the word!  ). Yes, Ukrainian Orthodox are related to the Russians, Borislave. Moscow is the Orthodox Daughter of its Mother which is Orthodox Kyiv. And the Daughter has been rather nasty towards its Mother in history, wouldn't you say? For you, Borislave, to say that the Russian is not the enemy is simply historically uninformed (again, in the most positive sense of that term!  ). I don't know any Ukrainian Orthodox who would agree with you - perhaps of the "Little Russian" variety but then again their place is with Moscow and not with Kyiv as they will always readily agree which is why the very idea of an Orthodox Kyivan Patriarchate is, to them, laughable. To affirm the historical and contemporary role that culture plays as an integral part of one's religious identity (and religion in and of itself is a cultural system) is not to engage in any kind of phyletistic narrowness of Gospel vision. It is simply to affirm the composite reality of the ontological being of the Particular Church within the Eucharistic ecclesial model. Yes, there is nationalism in the Churches. That too is historically determined and conditioned and it will change over time as new socio-cultural realities affect the Churches. That nationalism affects the Russian Church as much as the Ukrainian or others. I don't see it as a minus. And the historical issues of colonial domination of one by the other is something that will work itself out. Although, right now, Russia itself is recovering a sense of its own imperial past and contemporary identity. I don't think Russia, including her Church, is ready to give up imperialism as an integral part of her own identity - in fact, I think we'll see a resurgence of Russian imperialism in the years ahead, beginning with Putin's own desire to return the traditions of the Red Army, including its symbols - a desire that has already been realized. Alex
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317 Likes: 21
Member
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317 Likes: 21 |
Dear Borislave and AMM, Actually, I thought you two would say that . . . To be Ukrainian Orthodox is not how you characterize it at all. In fact, your perspective shows that your cultural orientation is mainstream North American without, perhaps, you evening realizing it. There is no "Orthodox" identity today, nor "Catholic" for that matter that is not linked to a specific cultural identity, as much as we like to talk about "universalism" etc. Sociologically, that is an impossibility and when people say otherwise, it is just, well, nonsense (in the best sense of the word!  ). Yes, Ukrainian Orthodox are related to the Russians, Borislave. Moscow is the Orthodox Daughter of its Mother which is Orthodox Kyiv. And the Daughter has been rather nasty towards its Mother in history, wouldn't you say? For you, Borislave, to say that the Russian is not the enemy is simply historically uninformed (again, in the most positive sense of that term!  ). I don't know any Ukrainian Orthodox who would agree with you - perhaps of the "Little Russian" variety but then again their place is with Moscow and not with Kyiv as they will always readily agree which is why the very idea of an Orthodox Kyivan Patriarchate is, to them, laughable. To affirm the historical and contemporary role that culture plays as an integral part of one's religious identity (and religion in and of itself is a cultural system) is not to engage in any kind of phyletistic narrowness of Gospel vision. It is simply to affirm the composite reality of the ontological being of the Particular Church within the Eucharistic ecclesial model. Yes, there is nationalism in the Churches. That too is historically determined and conditioned and it will change over time as new socio-cultural realities affect the Churches. That nationalism affects the Russian Church as much as the Ukrainian or others. I don't see it as a minus. And the historical issues of colonial domination of one by the other is something that will work itself out. Although, right now, Russia itself is recovering a sense of its own imperial past and contemporary identity. I don't think Russia, including her Church, is ready to give up imperialism as an integral part of her own identity - in fact, I think we'll see a resurgence of Russian imperialism in the years ahead, beginning with Putin's own desire to return the traditions of the Red Army, including its symbols - a desire that has already been realized. Alex
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317 Likes: 21
Member
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317 Likes: 21 |
Sorry for the double post - I guess some things bear repeating . . .
Alex
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,133
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,133 |
I don't know any Ukrainian Orthodox who would agree with you - perhaps of the "Little Russian" variety but then again their place is with Moscow and not with Kyiv as they will always readily agree which is why the very idea of an Orthodox Kyivan Patriarchate is, to them, laughable. Wrong. There are 10-20 Russians who are a part of our Parish. There are still more who come for Christmas and Pascha. Our Priest makes it a point to address them in Russian in front of the whole congregation, and no one with the notable exception of 1 or 2 very special people objects. When the Parish Priest of the local ROCOR Church passed on, our Priest, Deacon and myself accompanied by several Ukrainian members of our Parish joined ROCOR in the panakhida and burial services. All the people were at the ROCOR Parish including both the Matushkas asked Father for a blessing and kissed his hand. One of the most prominent HeiroMonks of our Church told me that the Russians are not an enemy on the 14th of April when I was blessed to be Sub Deacon. Please do not try to force the UCC nationalist world view on Ukrainian Orthodox Christians under the Patriarchate of Constantinople. Yes, Ukrainian Orthodox are related to the Russians, Borislave. Moscow is the Orthodox Daughter of its Mother which is Orthodox Kyiv. This is precisely the kind of talk that is the trouble on both sides. Both peoples need to forget the MOTHER/DAUGHTER thing. The Orthodox Church in Moscow is a sister Orthodox Church of the one in Kyiv, as it is the sister of the Church in Belorus, Bulgaria, Serbia, you name it. There is nationalism in both the Ukrainian Orthodox and the Russian Orthodox Church, yes, but please do not present that as being a positive aspect of our faith. This is something that we need to fight. The love for your own mother does not need to be heated up by the hate for the mother of your neighbor. Preserving culture and language - YES Thinking your culture and language are better than others - NO I don't really understand where you get this aggressive world view. I walked into a Bulgarian Orthodox Parish the other week, and not only did the 2 Priests, 1 of whom appends to be Jewish came out to greet me, but invited me to serve with them and commemorated the Saints of BULGARIA, RUSSIA AND UKRAINE! Guess what, the SUN did not stop shining, the Vigil went on, and everybody was very happy. Do I believe that Russia needs to grant Ukraine Autocephaly? ABSOLUTELY. In fact I am not sure that the supremacy of Moscow is fully Canonical. Do I think this can be accomplished by Filaret and His Pseudo Kyivan Patriarchate? Absolutely not. Filaret like I said above was the biggest opponent of Ukrainian Autocephaly when he still though He had a chance to be a Patriarch of All Rus' The Ukrainian Orthodox Church MP needs to either be granted Autocephaly or needs to come under Constantinople, the later being our rightful place until we establish a Canonical Kyivan Patriarchate.
Last edited by Subdeacon Borislav; 06/01/07 03:12 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317 Likes: 21
Member
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317 Likes: 21 |
Dear Borislave,
Actually, you are also letting your own particular world-view influence your response - and I think you are much more agressive than I in this.
I never said the Ukies are better than anyone. That is silly from any point of view. The Ukies are unique, the Russkies are unique etc. They have a right to their uniqueness and we are all equal in every which way except that we are distinct in our uniqueness from one another - the foundation of true diversity.
My UGCC parish also welcomes Russian Orthodox who attend Liturgy and they are welcomed to our coffee hour - we do not charge them any fees as we know a number of them are struggling financially. We are also working to establish a FREE child care service here for them and our Ukrainian newcomers and I have, this morning, contacted a local politician to get his support for our parish's application for this. I am going to work all weekend to serve our Russian Orthodox brothers and sisters.
And I am also working to promote and assist our Russian community at my place of work and am regularly sent to attend Russian flag-raisings where I speak to the community in Ukrainian and tell them we are "all East Slavs" etc. I have been on Russian TV and am currently working with Red Army veterans on a petition to declare May 9th a provincial observance - Big Guy, THAT is not easy for me!
Just so you know. Again, the internet medium is an imperfect one and you don't know me and I don't know you so we must be careful when we assume we know everything about the other person we are communicating with.
The fact that Kyiv is the Mother Church, just as Constantinple is our Mother Church - that is simply a fact of history. I hope we are not led to revise history in order to be more ecumenical and loving, like North American historians often like to do.
There is nothing personal against Russians, only against an ideology that persists at the ecclesial and other levels.
The Russians too can do some review of their history and make some apologies.
I've yet to hear one. If you have, please let me know immediately.
Alex
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,133
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,133 |
Alex, I said that the Russian people are not the enemy, you objected. This led me to believe that you see them as enemies.
Thus my reaction.
I am sorry if I misunderstood you.
As of the ideology that is keeping UOCMP from Autocephaly, I agree 100%.
This is wrong.
Last edited by Subdeacon Borislav; 06/01/07 03:32 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317 Likes: 21
Member
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317 Likes: 21 |
Dear Borislave, Peace and all good, Brother!  I hope to one day hear your singing voice! You don't want to hear mine . . . Alex
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,133
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,133 |
Ahem.... yeah.... Don't think you want to hear mine either. I'm working on it 
Last edited by Subdeacon Borislav; 06/01/07 03:49 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411
Member
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411 |
Alex There is no "Orthodox" identity today, nor "Catholic" for that matter that is not linked to a specific cultural identity, as much as we like to talk about "universalism" etc. The church cannot be understood outside of a specific human framework it exists in. What I think we must accept however is the church is a supra cultural entity; it encompasses all cultures present in it, but trancends all facets of human culture at the same time. All the cultures that make up the church are transitory and will over time change, though each points to what is changeless. Nationality like culture is also transitory, and can be seen in many ways to be a construction of the human experience. It is not something "natural" in other words, and I read something somewhere at one point with words to the effect that a nation is just a group of people who accept the same founding myth. I don't think this has anything to do with being North American, and has more to do with trying to recover the purposes and intentions of the church as it was first formed. North America lends an interesting perspective however because its culture is somewhat unique - i.e. the melting pot. Being North American is no better or worse than being from somewhere else, but it does have its own unique characteristics which can lead to us to re-evaluate how we conceive of the church. To affirm the historical and contemporary role that culture plays as an integral part of one's religious identity (and religion in and of itself is a cultural system) is not to engage in any kind of phyletistic narrowness of Gospel vision. Yet invariably it seems at almost every turn to descend in to this.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317 Likes: 21
Member
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317 Likes: 21 |
Dear AMM,
Bravo! Excellent!
Alex
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,398
Member
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,398 |
I can think of no Scriptural passage more important for this discussion than the following, Galatians 3:27-28: (RSV)
"For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus."
I think that one truly radical aspect of the Christian proclamation from the beginning was that physical and cultural ancestry do not ultimately matter. That we should identify ourselves with Christ and, as Andrew seems to be saying as well, identify ourselves with the super-natural, transcendent mystery of the Church. All physical, natural, cultural differences become accidental. Orthodoxy is just Orthodoxy and whatever is different between the different cultures and jurisdictions is inessential. That is my view anyway. Granted, I am a North American convert who is also fond of the Enlightenment ideal of a universally educated, rational humanity. But, I do think that there is something to be said for it, just as there was something to be said for the ancient Stoic notion of being a "citizen of the world," and identifying with all of humanity. St. Paul clearly uses some of these Stoic ideas in his epistles.
Joe
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317 Likes: 21
Member
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,317 Likes: 21 |
Dear Joe,
Well, we need to actually understand who we are (Jew or Greek or Ukrainian or Melkite) before we can meaningfully say that we are all one in Christ.
We can truly be citizens of the world but we are so with our own identity that derives from the small part of the world from whence we come.
In addition, I did not invent the various Particular Churches with their national/cultural identities that they have.
They're the way they are, they have a long history of service to their respective countries and they are celebrated by their respective peoples - they identify with Christ in the particular historical circumstances of their social context in which they live. They serve Christ very well!
More power to them, I say!!
And our Lord did tell His Apostles to go and baptize all NATIONS and this has been the inspiration for the Cyrillo-Methodian Slavic movement.
Alex
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,398
Member
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,398 |
Alex, I'm not disagreeing with you. The same ideal that persuades me to relativize my own cultural/ethnic community requires me to permit others to be who they are. So, both the one who tries to impose a foreign culture on another and the one who clings to a native culture to the extent that it comes into conflict with the Gospel are wrong.
Joe
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,133
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,133 |
Joe, that is a very astute observation.
If we think back to Patriarch Nikon and Protopop Avakum it is clear that going to extremes on either side isn't good.
|
|
|
|
|