0 members (),
493
guests, and
111
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums26
Topics35,530
Posts417,670
Members6,182
|
Most Online4,112 Mar 25th, 2025
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 844
Member
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 844 |
Found an interesting article that came to my attention on my Facebook News Feed, and this seemed to be something to read and scratch my head about... Interesting read, imo: 1. How Did Orthodoxy Reach Ireland?
How did Orthodox Christianity come to this small green island off the shores of the European continent in the uttermost West? Unknown to many, Christianity in Ireland does have an Apostolic foundation, through the Apostles James and John, although the Apostles themselves never actually visited there.
The Irish people were the westernmost extension of the vast Celtic civilization—whose people called themselves the Gauls—which stretched from southern Russia through Europe and eventually into the British Isles. The vastness of Celtic/Gallic civilization is evident in the names used to designate countries within its entire territory: the land of Galatia in Asia Minor, Gaul (France), Galicia (northwest Spain), and the land of the Gaels (Ireland). The Celtic peoples (like the Jews) kept in very close contact with their kinfolk across the Eurasian continent. When Christianity was first being spread by the Apostles, those Celts who heard their preaching and accepted it (seeing it as the completion of the best parts of their ancient traditions and beliefs) immediately told their relatives, traveling by sea and land along routes their ancestors had followed since before 1000 b.c.
The two Apostles whose teachings had the greatest influence upon the Celtic peoples were the brothers James and John, the sons of Zebedee. After Pentecost, James first preached the Gospel to the dispersed Israelites in Sardinia (an island in the Mediterranean Sea off the east coast of Spain, which was used as a penal colony). From there he went on to the Spanish mainland and traveled throughout the northern part of Spain along the river Ebro, where his message was eagerly heard by the Celtic/Iberian peoples, especially those in Galicia. This area continued to be a portal to Ireland for many centuries, especially for the transmission of the Good News. Source Link & Rest of Article: http://orthodoxinfo.com/general/irishorthodoxchurch.aspx
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,405 Likes: 38
Member
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,405 Likes: 38 |
Of course, there was no such thing.
In those days, there was only the "Catholic Church" which Orthodox polemical historians will always say is really the "Orthodox Church" in brackets (as does a friend of mine who is a convert to Orthodoxy).
One could say that the early Church was "Orthodox" including the Church in Ireland since the faith of both was the same at the time (save for the fact that the Pope of Rome had a primacy in Orthodoxy that he does not now have - or does he since some Orthodox texts seem to suggest that Orthodox continue to give him a "primacy of honour" (K. Ware, "The Orthodox Church").
The spirituality of Irish monasticism was also formed in the Egyptian desert and there were exchanges between the two (the invocation of the "Seven Coptic Saints" buried in Ireland is interesting).
The Irish monks, the "Celi De" or "Friends of God" would pray the Psalms the same way as the monks of St Pachomios - 12 psalms at a time, once at the turn of every day hour and then again at the turn of every night hour.
Alex
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,405 Likes: 38
Member
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,405 Likes: 38 |
The website celticchristianity.org offers some interesting insights into the devotional life of Irish monasticism.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 1,953
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 1,953 |
Orthodox info is an "interesting" site, but I rarely endorse it to others as its editors just can't let the "better angels " of their nature prevail. Lots of good background clouded by loopy polemics make it tough to discern.
Using modern descriptive terminology to "prove" a point can be misleading, if not disingenuous.
For example, it is accurate to state that during the iconoclast era Rome retained the Orthodox faith and helped lead the heterodox churches of Constantinople and Byzantium back into the Catholic faith of the Apostolic Church. Rome's stalwart defense of icons throughout the time of the Iconoclastic controversy and following the false iconoclast Council of Hieria through its role in the true Second Ecumenical Council of Nicea which we of the East commemorate on the Sunday of Orthodoxy were essential to preserving Orthodoxy as we know it today. (Keep in mind that iconoclasm was revived by subsequent Emporers following second Nicea well into the early 9th century in Constantinople while Rome never fell under the sway of the iconoclasts.)
Make that statement in some Roman Catholic circles and you will get a puzzled look. Say that in many Orthodox circles and you will be engaged in at the least a heated argument. (Of course there were many influential iconodules in the east, St.John of Damascus being among the more influential thinkers in that movement.)
Words matter, but their meanings don't necessarily remain static.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,405 Likes: 38
Member
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,405 Likes: 38 |
Dear DMD,
You are a lawyer I positively admire and like!
Alex
|
|
|
|
|