www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Orthodox in Communion

Christ indeed is Risen!
My earliest recollection of what I was taught, way back in Catholic grade school, on the Assumption of Mary into Heaven is that she did die before being assumed into Heaven. An Orthodox church in my local area was listed in the phone book and referred to by everyone, including the Orthodox themselves, as the "Greek Orthodox Church of the Assumption". Only in recent years has it become appropriately known as the "Greek Orthodox Church of The Dormition of the Theotokos".
As for the attacks on Alice, when I read her posts I do not read them as coming from an "Orthodox" or a "Catholic" perspective but as from a true "Christian" who is firm in her faith. She grasps better than many of us the calling to follow Christ. Do we perhaps have a saint in our midst?

Alex,

Please refer back to prior discussions on this point. I have quoted extensively from the Catholic Encyclopedia on this precise point - what is meant by "stain". Moreover, if we (still) agree that the CCC teaches against inherited guilt, but nevertheless talks in terms of stain, then stain cannot equal guilt.

I don't make any sport of accommodating Latin perspectives. Or resisting them.

Dear Bill,

I think we do have a saint - but she couldn't be recognized as such by Rome since she's Orthodox!

Perhaps, in due course . . .

But the use of the term "Assumption" even by Orthodox parishes is as a result of borrowing from the Latin Church.

Latinization is something that also affects Orthodox and not just Eastern Catholics.

Very often, when one has a large migration of converts from the Eastern Catholic churches to Orthodoxy, these bring with them their Latin practices when then become "normative" for even long periods of time within Orthodoxy - as happened in Canada with the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, 90 percent of which are descendants of former Eastern Catholics.

Assimilationist pressures account for other issues.

But Alice is her own person and is uniquely ecumenical as an Orthodox Christian.

May her spirit imbue both Orthodox and Catholics!

Alex

Dear djs,

Yes, I remember those discussions . . .

Historically, "stain of Original Sin" as used by Catholic theologians meant what the "stain of Actual Sin" means.

In other words, to use graphic imagery, we are born with a "black mark" on our souls which is the same "black mark" that Adam had when he committed his personal sin of disobedience aka Original Sin.

The Western Church also asserts, with the East, that our human nature was impacted by Original Sin.

It is just that in recent times the West, quite correctly, is moving away from the extreme Augustinian view of Original Sin as inherited guilt and is redefining a few things.

"Stain" is an ambiguous word at best. But if the RC Church wants it to mean what the Orthodox mean by Original Sin, then there should be no problem.

And you don't participate in that sport? Aw, you're not fun then . . .

Alex

Greg,

You can trust me on the fact that, Melkite ties to the earliest years of the Russian Catholic Church and to its current parish in El Segundo notwithstanding, there is no Melkite-Russian emigree sub-culture meeting in the basement of the Melkite Cathedral to provide me with cues. In fact, as far as I know, we don't have a single parishoner of Russian ancestry (the possible exception is a woman who is a convert from Judaism); we do, however, have one family of Ukrainian descent - they have likewise not cued me, obviously. Frankly, I found that remark on your part to be unwarranted and insulting.

I have a definite and fervent personal interest in the future of the Byzantine Russian Church (which I can only explain in terms of a life-long affection for waifs and orphans - I have a similar interest in the other very small Byzantine Churches - hope springs eternal in my heart that the likely extinct Georgian Church can and will someday be reconstituted). That said, I don't consider myself a Russophile - and certainly not a Ukrainophobe.

I understand and am aware of the history of the Ukrainians under Russian rule and have been long before I came to this Forum; that doesn't mean that I know the details of which villages suffered what abomination and when - nor do I think such is necessary for me to be appropriately appalled at what transpired. By the same token, I will agree with one statement that Balaban made during his tenure here - that suffering under Russian tyranny (both tsaristic and communistic) was not limited to the Ukrainian nation or peoples. It was widespread and it remains indefensible.

History is replete with horrors such as the Holodomor, some of larger, some of lesser scale; some meet the accepted definition of a genocide, others do not but are no less horrific, if one considers that inhumanity of man toward his brothers and sisters is perhaps the furthest one can come from the Judeo-Christian ethos of charity toward and love for one's fellow human beings. I started to catalogue some of them in this post, to illustrate my point, but the list of genuine horrors goes on and on and starts to chill one's soul to think how many millions have died for who they are, where they lived, where they came from, the color of their skin, what tongue they spoke, what God they worshipped, with whom they slept, for whom they voted, that they bore a "mark", the list of "justifications" goes on and on. The perpetrators are as diverse, ranging from our Churches - Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant, as well as other religions, governments, racial groups, tribes, political fanatics, individual ideologues, and others with agendas forged in their personal hells.

My point? What is a valid response or reaction to these atrocities? When does it cease to be that and become "rabid nationalism" (or, in instances which didn't turn on 'nationalism', replace it with a more apt descriptor)?

I think that there are few here who aren't sympathetic to the Ukrainian peoples for what happened to them. Most of us also concur that, unless Rome has decided to not further extend the concept of patriarchates (which would be at odds with its earlier pronouncements), the sheer numbers of faithful who comprise the Ukrainian Catholic Church persuasively argue for its ruling hierarch to be so designated. Thus, extended and incessant presentations on either point are "preaching to the choir".

The point is made. The Patriarch of Moscow opposes the establishment of a Patriarchate for the UGCC and, at least for now, Rome appears to be acquiesing to his wishes in order to advance its own agenda with respect to the further re-establishment of Roman Catholicism in Russia (because I don't believe that it is any concern for negative effects on Orthodox-Catholic reunion which motivates Kaspar and company). We have discussed the issue ad infinitum, ad nauseam, with nothing new being said in a long time. I have no issue with analysis of new developments (e.g., statements by the MP, Kaspar, the Major-Archbishop, political figures, other Church leaders) as they occur; however, multiple (I started counting - it got out of hand) messages by the same poster over a few months, each having as its main point a near- identical prophecy as to the timeframe within which Rome will create the Patriachate, beg the question and amount to posting for the sake of doing so - to my mind, a type of "rabid nationalism".

More to that point though is the rehash of centuries of Russo-Ukrainian intertwined religious and geo-political interaction, particularly when it amounts to feeding a troll. It became obvious within days of Balaban's first post that he was not just a Russophile (which, in and of itself, is not necessarily a terrible thing), but a vicious provocateur and hate-monger, whose principal thrust was to be as domineering and antagonistic as possible. There are web forums which thrive on that type of baiting and consist chiefly of invective aimed back and forth between the posters. To my eye, such serves no purpose and, I may be wrong but, I think that there are many here who agree with me. You allowed yourself to be sucked into his web and, ultimately, it was no longer a question of who was right - it was a question of who got in the last shot.

It's not the examples or the information; it's the sheer volume of it. Enough already. As to Ireland and the US, no one is routinely posting on either country's religious or geo-political history; there is no issue of it in this venue, thus it doesn't lend itself to comparison.

Alex,

To your point in reply to my epitath on Balaban,

As you know, I have an ongoing concern for the future of our Churches to the extent that they choose to remain closed ethnic enclaves that are less than inviting to the highly assimilated society in the US (and that of Canada, which admittedly, at least as yet, is less assimilated, but moving in that direction).

At the same time, I firmly believe that our Churches need to retain their individual identity (I am not a fan of a homogeneous North Americanized Byzantine Church), just that they have to find a happy medium between that homogeniety and a village sobor.

And, as has been said of the sack of Constantinople, we cannot live in the past. We cannot and must not forget and, admittedly, the Ukrainians are faced with history of much more recent vintage than are the Greeks. But, as I said to Greg above, this is not the audience to whom the point needs to be made; maybe at one time it did, but now it more than has been. We need to move on. Doing so will not deny the memory of what has happened or dishonor those who suffered it. But, this is not a productive venue in which to continue an ongoing, in-depth, and repetitive analysis of the circumstances by which the Ukrainian Church came to be where it is. Discussing new developments as they arise is fruitful; rehashing to the extent that it is being done here gives one a picture of those parent birds who masticate their food, then regurgitate it to feed their young - the difference, the nutritional value has been sucked out by the time we've been force-fed multiple times.

Many years,

Neil

Dear Neil,

Hrystos Voskres ! Vojistyno Voskres ! i Voskresaje Ukrajina !

I never originate posts, therefore, it would appear that other forum members have an interest in the matters you mention.

Contrary to what you state, the threads I'm involved in, seem to enjoy the MOST activity. All members have the choice of either ignoring or joining the thread. Nobody forces them to read or participate in the threads.

Not that I need to defend someone as intelligent and articulate as the 'lurker' but do you remember how this site s _ _ _ _ _ when he was banished ? I do. If the 'lurker', or anyone else thinks that these issues need to be examined (sometimes from many different perspectives) then so do I.

At least from the days of Grand Prince Volodymyr's baptism of Kyiv-Rus, religion and politics have been integral elements of church history in Eastern Europe.

My posts attempt to provide a political & historical context to the postings of other members. Unless otherwise stated, the content of my posts can always be supported with published scholarly information.

My posts are almost always limited to Ukraine. If you note I do not get involved in the internal politics of the Russians Federation. When I refer to the 'Moscow Patriarch', it is in reference to his Kyivan Metropololitan's meddling in internal Ukrainian religious or state matters.

Once I make a post, I wait for a response. If there are none, I end the direction in which I was taking the thread. It would appear that I get some responses and I can reasonably assume there is at least some interest. I even get private e-mails from members who want additional information which they prefer not to discuss on the site.

Contrary to what you state, not everyone seems to understand the church, politics, history dynamics - including many of the UGCC members who are members of the world's largest Greek Catholic Church.

The UGCC will soon merge with her sister Ukrainian churches. This is perhaps the single biggest news story in Church Orthodoxy at this time. The story is evolving at lightning pace and warrants discussion. It will affect all Orthodoxy (including Greek Catholics) in North America, Slovakia, and elsewhere in one way or another. We are living in exciting times. I'm sorry you feel otherwise.

Stalin one said that if a lie was told 100 times it became the truth. Let's just say that balaban was at the 50 count on almost everything he was stating which even by Imperial Russian history stadards were absurd. I decide to corner him on the biggest lie he made, and which was insulting to the millions of Ukrainians who died at the hands of the Russian engineered genocidal famine of 1932 - 1933. He was exposed for the fraud he was. I do not consider this being "suckered" as you say. It's good debating.

The genocidal famine in Ukraine, is the single most important issue, which the Russian Federation and emigree commmunity is not willing to acknowledge and is why the Russian Orthodox Church has lost complete legitimacy in Ukraine (and perhaps abroad). The ROC-MP goes so far as to forbid the commemoration of the dead to his Ukrainian Kyivan Metropolitan, bishops, and priests.

I only wish there was a forum member who would be willing to debate this horrific chapter in an intelligent manner. Ignoring it, or pretending it did not happen, will only lead to the further demise of the ROC and it's allies. Our "Ukrajinoznavstvo" (Ukrainian studies) as balaban mentioned several times will guarantee interesting and constructive debate.

In any case, it would appear that a lot of people were "suckered" in by balaban. Remember Alice the Greek Saint and the Ukie Lurker ? I'm sure you just forgot to mention them also.

Finaly, Neil, it would appear that we have been here with you before. So again, let us just agree to disagree.

Your rabid nationalist...arrrr ruf ! ruf ! - arrrr ruf ! ruf !

Hritzko

PS: I'm off to see the Boston Marathon today. I love to see those 1000's of people running like one big swarm of lucusts. Maybe I will see you there.

Dear Hritzko,

Dear brother, you are correct-- yes, there was something irresistably tempting about balaban's insults and innacuracies which suckered people in to correct him, myself included.

And--although I am flattered by the title given me on this thread, I am far from a saint. I am just a big time sinner, trying my best to follow the path of 'theosis', often stumbling and falling, but as my priest says, (whose commitment to the holy priesthood and Christ I admire and greatly respect)--I simply try to get up again the best I can.

I am sorry for the horrific actions perpetrated on the holy people of Ukraine. It is indeed more fresh in memory than those actions committed in the sacking of Constantinople, and I know that it must be very hard for you.

It is easier to be angry than not be angry...I once felt that way for the massacre of Chios by the Ottoman Turks (memorialized, infact, by the famous artist Delacroix in the Louvre) of a few centuries ago, (my maternal grandmother was from that island), but have now found peace in my heart towards my Turkish brethren. (..and trust me, it is not easy to love when one faces skulls of men, women and children in a monastery where they ran for protection but were butchered...and when one still sees their blood which was spilled in the the marble floor of the church they ran to...)

May Almighty God forgive the actions of man towards his fellow man throughout the history of this world, and may we, His followers find the love of His Resurrection in our hearts, so that these atrocitites may never, ever happen again.

Wishing you every blessing,
With love in Christ,
Alice