An American Orthodoxy? II [Archive] - Monachos.net Discussion Community

Marie-Duquette

08-08-2007, 09:45 PM

Don't know who created pizza in NYC; but, I do know that Greeks do make delicious pizza and have great restaurants here in America!

All humor aside, what is meant by American?

A known fact: Orthodoxy is already present in America through the immigration of Greeks, Russians, Rumanians, Ukranians, Syrians, Albanians, Bulgarians, (not wanting to omit any of dear Orthodox peoples, I'll just insert a capital and bold ETC.)

Can we people living in America truly say that someday, there will be existant here in the WEST a true American Orthodoxy, grounded in this Western soil. The EAST is already here in our beloved immigrants who bring with them their rich traditions, culture and religious beliefs.

So, where does the West stand within the East? and the East within the West? without forgetting the Far East and Middle East, Africa and Australia, Russia, China and the Islands.

The peoples who have colonized this soil, mostly from European extraction, as we all know, have come seeking freedom of worship, as well as new horizons, and improved life-styles. Much un-heard of suffering accompanied these endeavors! And, most of us and our ancestors, have been part of the sweat and blood of settling into this "NEW LAND". I am not trying to give a course in sociology, psychology, geography, history, or philosophy, at present ... only attempting to give a glimpse of the ORTHODOX WORLD as it is implanting and forming itself on this USA's soil, through new waves of immigrants.

As far as I can see, Orthodox immigrant peoples are dropping many of their "particular" traditions, customs and taking on the so-called American way of life! The American Dream way of life, freedom, prosperity, riches, work, technologies, education, and so much diversity in entertainment and foods, that a sort of "American intoxication" takes over. I'm not trying to be critical of all of this. Please forgive me! But, isn't it the truth of the matter? Even Orthodox peoples are re-discovering their own Orthodoxy at this time in History, in relation to the "new American life-style".

Where does real Orthodoxy, that is, the Orthodox Church fit into this inter-weaving of cultures, customs, traditions, nationalities, and religious backgrounds? As a "NEW" perspective comes into view, where do we all fit into this "new, can I call it paradigm" or "pattern" as it designs itself in our midst?

There is no doubt in my mind that God is already here, Present as GOD; and has always been, even before any thought of Orthodoxy even enterred our American(USA) experience. And, at present some of us Americans are discovering; or re-discovering what it means to be or to become Orthodox in the TRUE and REAL sense of the WORD in relation to GOD and to one another.

All of this is a challenge, a kenotic or self-emptying kind of phenomena that is taking taking place for all who are professing to be, or learning to be ORTHODOX in its One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic groaning-into-existence Being, here in the USA, as well as in other Countries around the world, today.

I don't have answers, only a little "Food-for-thought-and-for-prayer" during this Dormition Fast period.

Holy Theotokos save us!

marie_duquette

p.s. Sometimes I find it confusing to use the WORD: American! I live in the USA; but there is also, Canada, Central and South America, which have "particulars" in their discovery, growth and development as Continents, Countries, Nations. I don't ask where God fits in, but where does the Orthodox Church fit in, revealing itself as the so-called-TRUE-Church!

Andrew

08-08-2007, 11:00 PM

There will be an American Orthodoxy when we Americans become truly Orthodox and produce American born saints.

Nina

08-08-2007, 11:05 PM

Don't know who created pizza in NYC; but, I do know that Greeks do make delicious pizza and have great restaurants here in America!

Dear Marie,

I like your posts in general because you have such an encompassing love for all and that is so admirable.

Now concerning food: The pizza was born in Napoli/Neapolis/Naples, Italy. Since Neapolis was populated by greeks, it follows that pizza is a greek invention. I am joking. But for me nothing beats the pizza of Italy, especially that of Naples. The controversy about NYC pizza was because some guys with Italian backgrounds (3rd generation) are competing for the title, and the documentary was hilarious.

Some of the gr restaurants here are ok, some nothing spectacular, and some closer to the original back in Gr. It is very interesting how things become as you say here. They receive a new flavor here and the same is with the church here. There is an American Orthodoxy. We are living it. There is a movie called 'The rat race' and while the people are in a hotel/casino room, an Italian character (played actually by the famous, and hilarious Mr. Bean) marveled by the room keeps asking with an Italian accent: "Do you see this room?!!! Do you see this room?!!!" and another guy frustrated by an independent problem they had and by the repetitive questions of Mr. Bean says: "Yes we see it! We are in it!"

The Orthodoxy here does not have to follow a certain pattern. Let say in the days of catacombs in Rome was the same Church, but we do not have to have that to be Orthodoxy. So I agree with the point you make.

Another very interesting thing, which fascinates me here are the converts. Because you mention the immigrants, but we also have the converts here, which sets America apart. In America I think at this period of time, Orthodoxy is being embraced from converts like nowhere else in the world. I remember my mother always showed me the news of the church when it talked about how many new converts there were here and she would rejoice. So these are two obvious flavors of the Orthodoxy here.

Fr Raphael Vereshack

09-08-2007, 12:33 AM

marie_duquette wrote:

p.s. Sometimes I find it confusing to use the WORD: American! I live in the USA; but there is also, Canada, Central and South America, which have "particulars" in their discovery, growth and development as Continents, Countries, Nations. I don't ask where God fits in, but where does the Orthodox Church fit in, revealing itself as the so-called-TRUE-Church!

Yes indeed there is a unique Orthodox culture in Canada. This is so especially in western Canada which was one of the original centers of Orthodoxy from the 1890s on. We have historic parishes on the prairies in our cities, towns, and in the country-side which date back to the original Russian mission. These parishes are now with OCA, ROCOR, the MP and the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of Canada. A few blocks from here is the OCA Holy Trinity cathedral which was consecrated by St Tikhon Patriarch of Russia. Hierarchs like Archbishop Arseny Chahovetz of Winnipeg, Bishop Sava of Edmonton and Metropolitan Vitaly founded parishes, monasteries and pastoral schools.

Our parish was founded by refugee/immigrants from the War which is fairly typical for a ROCOR parish. A certain amount of interaction with other Orthodox parishes always existed even in the most difficult times.

The most basic principle which guides our life here is: if we don't do it using our own initiative it will never get done and turn to your Orthodox neighbour.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

Marie-Duquette

09-08-2007, 04:26 AM

Rev. Father Raphael,

Thank you for expanding upon your experience of the Orthodox Church in Canada, especially in Western Canada, which was populated by refugees-imigrants from the wars; and earliest immigrants from 1890.

The new immigration arriving here in the USA in the 1940s and present-day people from Russia, the Balkans, the Middle East is bringing into our Country a "new Orthodox flavor" as Nina expressed in her post above. This "newness" is not only concerning "foods"; though I find that "food" is certainly somewhat central in the Orthodox Cultures that I've encountered: Greek, Russian, Syrian, Coptic. This is interesting, but personally I have experienced a "hunger and thirst for more than earthly food" ... and this is true of our present-day American people, I feel, who without knowing it are being led astray by a materialistic, secularized world!
So, what is the will of God for me, today? for us American Orthodox, today?

Your last remark, Father: "If you don't use your own initiative, it will never get done! AND turn to your Orthodox neighbor!"is certainly the basic experience of most refugee/immigrant peoples, as is experienced today. not only in the Orthodox Cultures, but also seen in most other immigrant/refugees communities. Certainly, they work together, live together, help one-another to become securely implanted in this "new land". In a way the inner-cities are being colonized by peoples who come with a big DREAM! Perhaps, we American refugee/immigrants to Orthodoxy, have to come into our own "big DREAM"., and live it!

Others, that is, refugee/immigrants, come sponsored by "foreign wealth", buying land, building Ashrams, Mosques, Retreat Centers, Monasteries, providing programs, conferences, books, magazines and whatever else is needed to FEED the SPIRITUAL HUNGER and THIRST of the already resident citizens. It is an implantation, and outreach that is being provided by Buddist, Hindus, and others. Very attractive indeed! and, is happening extensively in New England, in my experience. Other places in these USA can speak for themselves.

So, perhaps we so-called 'converts' to Orthodoxy need to perceive ourselves in the Light of Christ, not as second-rate Orthodox, because we are not Greek, Russian, Serbian, Syrian, etc. If we come from English, Italian, Irish, French, Spanish or other stock, we are Orthodox, also! It is the Holy Spirit at work, inspiring and elightening our path in Christ, to the Father, Isn't it? In a sense "the leopard cannot change its spots," as the saying goes, neither can we. The change - Metanoia needs to come from our own hearts and mind and not in our nationalities!!.

True, we are learning from our parishes, as well as from the , writings of the Fathers and Mothers of the Orthodox Church, also from the resources provided to us through the Church, as well as from the Scriptures, the WORD of God living among us! and especially from participation in the Divine Liturgy- eucharist, and the Services provided.

Perhaps we need to gather together, not to quarrel among ourselves, but to live in unity: "see how they love one-another!" and do this ourselves! Buy land, build our Churches, Parishes, Retreat/Spiritual Life Centers, Monasteries/Sketes/Hermitages on our American soil with the fervor of the Early Christians, who have encountered Christ, and want to live the TRUTH of the GOSPEL as Orthodox Christians. Many of us are doing this already! thanks be to God! We need to start where we are, now!

It's good to be sent out on Mission around the world; but, sometimes I think that "mission" has to be done right here in America -- not a prozeletizing mission, but a mission of presence, hospitality, instruction, and guidance, to "the lost sheep of Israel" as Jesus Christ taught his disciple to do! Something more than instruction from our Seminaries, for Seminarians and future priests. The Orthodox people need to be educated in all aspects of Orthodoxy!

Hopefully this long-windedness of mine is not only "empty talk" ... forgive me a sinner!

Holy Theotokos save us!

marie_duquette

Nina

09-08-2007, 04:56 AM

So, perhaps we so-called 'converts' to Orthodoxy need to perceive ourselves in the Light of Christ, not as second-rate Orthodox, because we are not Greek, Russian, Serbian, Syrian, etc. If we come from English, Italian, Irish, French, Spanish or other stock, we are Orthodox, also!
marie_duquette

Dear Marie,

I agree with your post here as always and thank you for all your thoughts which are so valuable to me.

About the "so-called 'converts'" as you say - I am sorry I was the first one on this thread to use that word as it was taught to me here, and which maybe offends you- I am sorry. I also learned here the word cradle-Orthodox etc. I do not know what other name to use for the adults who have embraced Orthodoxy recently... But I still think that those people are a unique trait of the Orthodoxy here and are supplying new blood to Orthodoxy and that is amazing I think. I hope all continents follow what is happening here in this continent with people embracing Orthodoxy (it was even on the news some months ago) so fervently and in large numbers - Thank God!

And honestly I believe (and always I have mentioned it here on monachos) that the converts are the real Orthodox heroes, because it takes a lot of sacrifice to embrace what the forefathers might have disregarded. So it never crossed my mind they are second-rate Orthodox. I have a high respect about them. They are the unity we seek, they are the real example of kenosis and metanoia you speak above.

It is not a big achievement to be an Orthodox when one is born in a place surrounded by Orthodox icons, and feels the incense and hears the Orthodox hymns all the time.

Marie-Duquette

09-08-2007, 05:09 AM

I like your posts in general because you have such an encompassing love for all and that is so admirable

Thank you, Nina, for your kind words. "Encompassing love" is certainly the message of the Gospel!" Love one-another, as I have loved you! Jesus taught!

Some of the gr restaurants here are ok, some nothing spectacular, and some closer to the original back in Gr. It is very interesting how things become as you say here. They receive a new flavor here and the same is with the church here. There is an American Orthodoxy. We are living it. There is a movie called 'The rat race' and while the people are in a hotel/casino room, an Italian character (played actually by the famous, and hilarious Mr. Bean) marveled by the room keeps asking with an Italian accent: "Do you see this room?!!! Do you see this room?!!!" and another guy frustrated by an independent problem they had and by the repetitive questions of Mr. Bean says: "Yes we see it! We are in it!"

A good example you point out, Nina. "Yes we see it! We are in it!" I haven't seen the movie and don't watch TV, so these rats are novel for me.

The Orthodoxy here does not have to follow a certain pattern. Let say in the days of catacombs in Rome was the same Church, but we do not have to have that to be Orthodoxy. So I agree with the point you make.

Concerning "patterns" I don't think we need to follow a "pattern" either. Since here in USA we are multi-cultural, from a wide variety of Nationalities. So, perhaps the "New pattern or paradigm" is developping itself somehow .. most so-called "converts" are from a variety of nationalities and cultures --- quite a "melting pot" as American like to say! Definitely our main "Pattern" is Christ Jesus, Himself, as well as the Theotokos, and the saints. What do you think, Nina?

Another very interesting thing, which fascinates me here are the converts. Because you mention the immigrants, but we also have the converts here, which sets America apart. In America I think at this period of time, Orthodoxy is being embraced from converts like nowhere else in the world. I remember my mother always showed me the news of the church when it talked about how many new converts there were here and she would rejoice. So these are two obvious flavors of the Orthodoxy here.

Fr. Raphael's post, and my reply to Fr. Raphael, have exppounded on this question of "converts" and "refugee/immigrant" issue.

May the Holy Theotokos save us! as we live out this pre-Dormition fast period.

marie_duquette

Nina

09-08-2007, 05:40 AM

A good example you point out, Nina. "Yes we see it! We are in it!" I haven't seen the movie and don't watch TV, so these rats are novel for me.

Dear Marie,

:) No, these are real people and not rats like in the 'Ratatouille' movie. It is a great movie from a non-religious point of view that all is vanity here, hence the title 'The rat race'. But the characters, especially Mr. Bean are so easy to love and be empathetic with.

Concerning "patterns" I don't think we need to follow a "pattern" either. Definitely (that is why I mention it), so when the question is raised: Is there an American Orthodoxy? The answer is: yes and it is unique. This is the beauty of Orthodoxy: a pluralism of examples. We have so many Saints, who all imitated Christ, but all are like the flowers of the field - different shapes, colors, aromas etc.

Since here in USA we are multi-cultural, from a wide variety of Nationalities. So, perhaps the "New pattern or paradigm" is developping itself somehow .. most so-called "converts" are from a variety of nationalities and cultures --- quite a "melting pot" as American like to say!Sorry again about the word convert - as I wrote in my post above. Please teach me another word about it, and I will use it as long as it is the appropriate one.

Definitely our main "Pattern" is Christ Jesus, Himself, as well as the Theotokos, and the saints. What do you think, Nina?Of course, Christ is the Prototype! We are followers, as He asked us: 'Follow Me!'

Fr. Raphael's post, and my reply to Fr. Raphael, have exppounded on this question of "converts" and "refugee/immigrant" issue.Yes, I like to learn from you, and thank you to you both for all you teach us and post here.

A new pattern within the pattern of the Orthodoxy here, I think is that many Orthodox newcomers in this continent, are not any longer escaping wars, or poverty etc. like in the past. Of course there are some, but we also have the other contingent of professors, scientists, researchers, physicians etc. While yesterday an orthodox church here had to cater to the grandmother coming from a poor/rural area, today the priorities shift, because the diversity increases. It is all so beautiful and growing and I am glad that we are in it and watching it.

Marie-Duquette

09-08-2007, 05:50 AM

Dearest Nina,

We were on line at the same time! So, to answer your newset post.

I agree with your post here as always and thank you for all your thoughts which are so valuable to me.

About the "so-called 'converts'" as you say - I am sorry I was the first one on this thread to use that word as it was taught to me here, and which maybe offends you- I am sorry. I also learned here the word cradle-Orthodox etc. I do not know what other name to use for the adults who have embraced Orthodoxy recently... But I still think that those people are a unique trait of the Orthodoxy here and are supplying new blood to Orthodoxy and that is amazing I think. I hope all continents follow what is happening here in this continent with people embracing Orthodoxy (it was even on the news some months ago) so fervently and in large numbers - Thank God!

I guess I used the term "so-called" converts for myself, or any others who may feel not-quite Orthodox because we may be made to feel not Greek, etc. Please forgive my lack of proper words. I often have difficulty expressing myself clearly.

And honestly I believe (and always I have mentioned it here on monachos) that the converts are the real Orthodox heroes, because it takes a lot of sacrifice to embrace what the forefathers might have disregarded. So it never crossed my mind they are second-rate Orthodox. I have a high respect about them. They are the unity we seek, they are the real example of kenosis and metanoia you speak above.

It is not a big achievement to be an Orthodox when one is born in a place surrounded by Orthodox icons, and feels the incense and hears the Orthodox hymns all the time.

Forgive me, I am much too sensitive. Being born and raised Roman Catholic, of very pious parents who were faithful Church goers and quite fervent in the Faith, teaching us 4 children the road to Church, to the Eucharistic Liturgy. At an early age I personally had a great love for Christ Jesus, Mary, the Angels and Saints who were for me my friends indeed! I learned this at home and from Catholic School education, taught by Nuns. Prayer was primary in our family with daily Rosary around our supper table. Daily Communion and weekly confession was part of my spiritual up-bringing, as well as reading of the lives of the Saints and of Holy Scripture. This was an inheritance of my French, Canadian (Quebequois) and American life. Sometimes, because of where I am coming from, I experience myself being a "stranger" in a foreign land. It is my own personal struggle, with family members and friends who are for the most part RC. I still have love for RC Saints, especially the French and Latin Saints, who have been my spiritual guides for many years.

Most Orthodox people I know, Greek, Russian, Syrian, etc are very loving, kind and welcoming. for this I am thankful!

pray for me a sinner! much "kenosis" to undergo in this "metanoia"! ...

marie_duquette

p.s. It has been said to me recently, "You are being stretched between East and West, stay where you are ... crucified with Christ Jesus!"

Nina

09-08-2007, 06:19 AM

I guess I used the term "so-called" converts for myself, or any others who may feel not-quite Orthodox because we may be made to feel not Greek, etc. Please forgive my lack of proper words. I often have difficulty expressing myself clearly.

Dear Marie,

I am sorry that makes you feel not Greek. And I know what you mean about different words or terms and their connotations - (I do not like to characterize people for example as from the third-world etc). You do not have to be/feel Greek to be Orthodox. You have your own identity which you describe below which is so beautiful and makes me happy to hear it. I imagine when people like you will be Saints and those stories will be part of their lives, like we read today about various Saints who had their unique upbringing, family, country etc.

Being born and raised Roman Catholic, of very pious parents who were faithful Church goers and quite fervent in the Faith, teaching us 4 children the road to Church, to the Eucharistic Liturgy. At an early age I personally had a great love for Christ Jesus, Mary, the Angels and Saints who were for me my friends indeed! I learned this at home and from Catholic School education, taught by Nuns. Prayer was primary in our family with daily Rosary around our supper table. Daily Communion and weekly confession was part of my spiritual up-bringing, as well as reading of the lives of the Saints and of Holy Scripture. This was an inheritance of my French, Canadian (Quebequois) and American life. Sometimes, because of where I am coming from, I experience myself being a "stranger" in a foreign land. It is my own personal struggle, with family members and friends who are for the most part RC. I still have love for RC Saints, especially the French and Latin Saints, who have been my spiritual guides for many years.

That is a beautiful story and path and it is so wonderful to hear about pious parents and beautiful families from all religions, not only from Christian ones.

pray for me a sinner! much "kenosis" to undergo in this "metanoia"! ...

And I am not even there...

With love in Christ,
Nina

M.C. Steenberg

09-08-2007, 08:44 AM

Dear all,

Thus far the comments here seem to be almost identical to the old 'American Orthodoxy' thread, with little orientation around the patristic focus of the site. Please let's try to see if there is something here that relates to the theme of the forum itself.

INXC, Matthew

John Charmley

09-08-2007, 02:24 PM

Dear Rick,

If we take the quotation I provided as you intended, as a starting point, let is see where we go.

"Schmemann often said, the task and purpose of Orthodoxy is not to perpetuate and preserve ethnic or national identity, or to correct the course of the American way of life, but to perpetuate the catholicity of the church within and through the particularity of Russianness, Greekness or Americanness."

Phyletism has been a heresy for some time, so that is not where we are going with this. I am reading an uncertainty about what the 'particularity' of 'Americanness' might be, and it is hardly for an Englishman to comment on that. But one of those particularities, and it appears so often here, is surely liberalism as an organising idea? Perhaps Americans would disagree, but perhaps if one were to outline what is meant by 'liberalism' in a religious context?

It is the doctrine that there is no positive truth in religion, that one creed is as good as another; all religions are to be tolerated because essentially religion is a private matter of opinion; as Newman put it
Revealed religion is not a truth, but a sentiment and a taste; not an objective fact, not miraculous; but the right of each individual that makes him say just what strikes his fancy. Men may go to Protestant Churches and to Catholic, may get good from both and belong to neither ... Religion is in no sense the bond of society.

Of course, America was hardly the origin of such a doctrine (disguised as a non-doctrine), but it has become the pre-eminent champion in this world of such a position. If we look at its effect on education we see Newman was correct when he predicted:

Instead of the Church's authority and teaching, they would substitute first of all a universal and thoroughly secular education, calculated to bring home to every individual that to be orderly, industrious and sober is his personal interest. Then for great working principles to take the place of religion, for the use of the masses thus educated, it provides the broad ethical truths, of justice, benevolence, veracity and the like ...

Not anticipating contemporary moral relativism, Newman could not see how far liberty would lead to license - but he had the heart of the matter. But he also wrote that:

I lament it deeply, because I foresee it may the ruin of many souls; but I have no fear that it can do aught of serious harm to the Word of God, to the Holy Church, to Our Almighty King ... Christianity has been too often in what seemed deadly peril, that we should fear for it any trial now

His confidence in the sovereignty of the catholic truth is the witness which the Church bears in contemporary America. It is the Church, the life-giving presence and act of God in history, which has to shine through the particularity of the moral relativism of the contemporary west, bearing witness to the light that was uncreated. It is one of the challenges of Orthodoxy everywhere that has been touched by theological liberalism; since no where has it taken deeper root than in the USA, it would seem entirely appropriate that we should discuss how Orthodoxy interacts with it.

Whether Orthodoxy engages with it is another matter, but that the sinners it is called to save live and work in such an atmosphere, obliges a degree of interaction.

In Christ,

John

p.s. I hope I shall be forgiven the Newman quotations, but although not a member of a Church recognised by the TOU as Orthodox, he was one of the most orthodox Christians, and his warnings about theological liberalism were remarkably prescient. I am sure those more schooled in the Orthodox tradition can provide their own examples.

Rick H.

09-08-2007, 02:26 PM

Precedents in Church History for Unprecedented Events (viz. 'particular' needs)

Dear All,

In the History of the Church, in the History of Christian thought we see some perfect parallels to our present day situation in which we consider the question, "An American Orthodoxy?"

Via monastic studies we can see at a glance that the monastic concept of spiritual direction was instituted as a special vocation designed to meet a particular need for a particular task. It was unnecessary for the members of the primitive Christian assemblies. For these members of these assemblies there was a bishop who lived in the community in which he served. This bishop was helped by presbyters and deacons to meet the spiritual needs of his flock. At this time one bishop for one local visible church and the presbyters and deacons took CARE of the members of the their flock. Possibly, during this beginning point we see an example of pastoral care and nurturing like not since. The Greek word for shepherd(s) in the New Testament is almost always used as a verb, a function! But, during this time the individual in the community received his formation and guidance from these ordained men in the local church. There were also "informal admonitions provided from one's parents, one's spouse, friends and fellow Christians," as said by a modern day monk. But, the point is for ALL those who WITHDREW from these Christian assemblies to live as solitaries in the desert, there was a particular need for those connected with this special ascetic task. This particular need was filled by a particular vocation.

For the member of the local visible community there was not need for personal spiritual direction, guidance, and service because the bishop, presbyters, and deacons nurtured the flock, and as said above the community as a whole provided a formation and a guidance for the individual by means of the individuals PARTICIPATION in the Life of the Community (the Life of the Spirit, the Spirit of Life).

And, here we see a precedent set for such times as we find ourselves in today in America. There has never been a time in the History of the Church as we find ourselves in today. But, as we consider the first solitaries who withdrew, separated themselves and departed to the dessert, we see as another has said, "Their departure into the wilderness was approved, and in a sense, canonized by no less a bishop than St. Athanasius, soon followed by many others."

But, this deliberate withdrawal from the normal life of the visible Church invoked the institution of the "spiritual father." And, "in this case the spiritual father replaced the bishop and presbyter as representative of Christ. And yet there was a difference because there was nothing hierarchical about his function. It was purely and simply charismatic."

So what do we see here?

We see that in this case, "Direction" then was God's Answer[!] to this particular need for this peculiar time.

And, this is what we are talking about here Mike! The answer to your questions is yes. But, there is no particularism to be found in an American Orthodoxy. In fact there cannot be. From where I sit an American Orthodoxy is diametrically opposed to all forms of rank particularism which are manifested by a cycle of ignorance-separation-dysfunction/dysfunction.

But, look back at another time in the History of the Church through Father Raphael's pen we read in a post from A.O. I, about post revolution Russian Orthodoxy:

Canonicity relates both to the spirit in which something within the Church is done and also to the situation the Church is in. In other words there are guiding principles that guide the Church- the canons, Scripture, writings of the Fathers- but all of this must be applied with discernment to the actual situation at hand.

This is critical because if we separate principles from the need to apply them to actual situations the Church lives through then we will always neglect discernment. And in a real way we can act according to the outward injunctions of the canons while denying the spirit of the Church.

I am not always known for my great ability to read in-between the lines at times, but here this ability is not required. Who can hear what Fr. R. is saying here?

I am sorry, but one has to be willfully deaf, dumb, and blind to not see what is going on in Orthodoxy in America today! As it relates to "the situation the Church is in," as it relates to "the actual situation at hand," it does not require the special gift of Grace, the special gift of discernment to accurately assess the situation here. Yes, Father . . . "The spirit of the Church!"

as Fr. R. continues (notice the starting point here and the precedent set for *this* unprecedented time) :

The starting point in understanding the situation we now find ourselves in North America is the chaos which followed the Russian revolution. Few would argue that there was up to this time a canonical situation in the N American church. From the chaos which followed the Revolution however multiple jurisdictions were set up.

Here I think lies a critical step which was taken which to this day is not examined enough. Often this situation of multiple jurisdictions is described as if itself being non-canonical. This overlooks however the fact that the Church must deal with the actual situations it is given. The Church was given a situation of unprecedented social and spiritual chaos in which often the most basic canonical connections with the rest of the Church were compromised. In this situation it was often necessary- and canonical- for the local Church to oversee and maintain care for the flock in the best way it could. And in the actual situation of the 20th century this care at times was like that of a triage hospital; ie care for those in most critical need and immediately entrusted to ones care.

Even though in many ways unprecedented this kind of care by the Church is not in itself non-canonical. Indeed we could even say that the alternative- leaving the flock to be scattered for the sake of formal administrative links to the rest of the Church- is what would have been non-canonical. In any case the main point here is that what can be overlooked is how multiple jurisdictions arose as a direct way of caring for the flock.

There are some repeating themes here from the beginning/primitive Christian commuinties, but clearly there are also precedents set for unprecidented times as we see through a 'brief'' looke at monastic studies and the history of the Church.

And, in each of these circumstances we see that there was a heavenly transcendence by means of the Spirit of Life of the Church.

But, enough said here . . . let's just let Father Raphael take us home and close this post with the remainder of his post that I have been quoting so far:

Of course we can question the legitimacy of these jurisdictions. At the time almost every jurisdiction was out of communion with some other(s) precisely because it questioned their legitimacy or whether they were 'canonical'. This time however seems to have passed & for the most part we now accept the basic legitimacy of each others' jurisdictions. This should not be taken for granted for it shows in fact what great strides forward have in fact been made towards unity in the past while.

Basically it seems that we are approaching a time when we are no longer a real threat to each others' sense of what it means to be part of the Church. For in fact one of the most tragic legacies of the time of chaos was that gradually many jurisdictions came to represent a particular kind of Orthodoxy- 'traditional', or 'liberal' or 'N American' or 'ethnic'- to the exclusion of whatever it felt was most threatening to it. In this atmosphere it was inevitable that jurisdictions became brand names and fortresses with their own mentalities.

Perhaps this too served a purpose in its time but then it came to be only of harm for even the most worthy causes within the Church can be distorted from lack of balance. And that is what the accusations of each other not being 'canonical' were coming to mean.

It is wonderful that we have entered a time when the situation which gave rise to multiple jurisdictions has passed away. Also passing away is the time when each jurisdiction finds its legitimacy in comparison with how some other jurisdiction is wrong. Instead we seem to be entering a time when we can call on the experience of each other as people of One Church regardless of jurisdiction.

This brings us to the thought that we will find ourselves part of one Church only insomuch as we see and find that we are part of One Church.

As someone wisely said: administrative and official recognition can only follow the recognition which the people have already achieved as members of the One Church.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

Who has ears to hear and eyes to see an American Orthodoxy?

In Christ,
Rick

Father David Moser

09-08-2007, 04:13 PM

Rick H.

10-08-2007, 02:51 PM

Dear Father David,

I appreciate your transparency here, and am glad to have the chance for open and honest dialogue when you say:

To answer the question, I guess I would have to say that I don't really see the point you are making.

And, from this point, I would ask you if you understand what Father Raphael is saying in my post?

Because, I think if you can understand what Fr. R. is saying then you can also understand what I am saying, because it is one in the same as he presents it. While I do go further than Fr. R. does, we both have the same starting place.

And, I don't have time now to work with John Charmley's last post in this thread, but, God willing we will come back to this. However, I think in John's work we may find an aid to understanding my post (which was intended to move us back to the focus of this forum somewhat as requested).

Also, for that matter, there is much that I would like to address in your last post, but God willing, all in due time. So for now, I will just say thank you for your participation and for this opportunity, and give a short answer by pointing to Fr. R. and John's work in this thread. Knowing Fr. R.'s post was made to the American Orthodoxy I thread, both his and John's speak volumes to what is on the table at the present. But, again as last time, I think, this is not a conversation to be held over just one cup of joe.

In Christ,
Rick

Rick H.

10-08-2007, 03:32 PM

Afterthought: Shortround

Dear Mike,

I was just thinking about your last post where you raised the issues of geography, content, practice, and experience: And, a term came to mind that was used by Evelyn Underhill in an essay. This term was:

"Spiritual Patriot"

So, when you work towards 'defining an American Orthodoxy!' as I am doing, I appreciate the aspects you raise, and would simply like to add that this above term may also be a helpful addition to our pocket dictionary of Amercian Orthodoxy.

In Christ,
Rick

Fr Raphael Vereshack

10-08-2007, 03:58 PM

Most of the time I have no understanding of what I'm talking about.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

And, from this point, I would ask you if you understand what Father Raphael is saying in my post?

Because, I think if you can understand what Fr. R. is saying then you can also understand what I am saying, because it is one in the same as he presents it. While I do go further than Fr. R. does, we both have the same starting place.

And, I don't have time now to work with John Charmley's last post in this thread, but, God willing we will come back to this. However, I think in John's work we may find an aid to understanding my post (which was intended to move us back to the focus of this forum somewhat as requested).

Also, for that matter, there is much that I would like to address in your last post, but God willing, all in due time. So for now, I will just say thank you for your participation and for this opportunity, and give a short answer by pointing to Fr. R. and John's work in this thread. Knowing Fr. R.'s post was made to the American Orthodoxy I thread, both his and John's speak volumes to what is on the table at the present. But, again as last time, I think, this is not a conversation to be held over just one cup of joe.

Rick H.

10-08-2007, 04:07 PM

Most of the time I have no understanding of what I'm talking about.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

This has never happened to me before, in my life, (that I am aware of), but this makes twice in one week that I absolutely cannot believe it's not Thursday!

Effie Ganatsios

11-08-2007, 09:28 AM

[QUOTE=marie_duquette;48379]Don't know who created pizza in NYC; but, I do know that Greeks do make delicious pizza and have great restaurants here in America!

All humor aside, what is meant by American?"

Marie, Greeks here in Greece are crazy about pizza, judging by all the pizza shops available to us. Pizzas can also be very healthy, and lots of people order 2 or 3 when unexpected guests arrive.

Pizza, as a dish though, is definitely not Greek. We have our pittas, which are puff pastry with different fillings - the most common being spinach, feta cheese and eggs, but you can fill them with anything you like. In fact, the ladies in my city - or I should say those descended from the original inhabitants - are reknowned for their pittas all over Greece. On New Year's Day we make a special minced meat pitta that is making my mouth water just thinking of it.

America and countries like it are lucky in that so many different nationalities have contributed to the culture of this country - cuisine included. This is one of the benefits of lots of different people living together - as long as what is offered as ethnic food or anything else is genuine and not just a very poor subsitute for the real thing.

Concerning religion as related to the above : I have no idea what the Orthodox religion is like in the US so I can't have an opinion about it. My husband's family on his father's side have all been there for nearly 100 years now and although some of the younger members don't even speak Greek I know that they are Greek Orthodox. A cousin sent me the liturgy book from her church. Greek on one side, English on the other and also an explanation in English about details of some things e.g. the meaning behind the clothes that priests wear during the liturgy.

Everything changes, language included, so why not certain religious practices. Surely orthodoxy in America will take on some of the characteristics of life there. I don't think that that is such a bad thing. Hasn't our religion always adopted some of the characteristics of whatever country it is in? The Russian Orthodox have their beautiful choir singing - singing that reaches right into your heart. Choir singing in this way is not part of our traditional orthodoxy but I believe that it is a beautiful addition. (If I am wrong here, someone please correct me because I am speaking from memory of what I have read). Here we have the chanting during the liturgy and we also have men and women's choirs, I believe that they sing according to our Byzantine tradition. I have noticed though that some choirs are branching out in what they choose to sing.

My husband tells me that I should not use the word "singing" when describing the chanters and the choirs. Here they use the word "psalming".

Effie

[

Effie Ganatsios

11-08-2007, 09:47 AM

[QUOTE=marie_duquette;48379]

The peoples who have colonized this soil, mostly from European extraction, as we all know, have come seeking freedom of worship, as well as new horizons, and improved life-styles. Much un-heard of suffering accompanied these endeavors! And, most of us and our ancestors, have been part of the sweat and blood of settling into this "NEW LAND". I am not trying to give a course in sociology, psychology, geography, history, or philosophy, at present ... only attempting to give a glimpse of the ORTHODOX WORLD as it is implanting and forming itself on this USA's soil, through new waves of immigrants..............................

'''''''''''''''''''''

Where does real Orthodoxy, that is, the Orthodox Church fit into this inter-weaving of cultures, customs, traditions, nationalities, and religious backgrounds? As a "NEW" perspective comes into view, where do we all fit into this "new, can I call it paradigm" or "pattern" as it designs itself in our midst?

There is no doubt in my mind that God is already here, Present as GOD; and has always been, even before any thought of Orthodoxy even enterred our American(USA) experience. And, at present some of us Americans are discovering; or re-discovering what it means to be or to become Orthodox in the TRUE and REAL sense of the WORD in relation to GOD and to one another.

All of this is a challenge, a kenotic or self-emptying kind of phenomena that is taking taking place for all who are professing to be, or learning to be ORTHODOX in its One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic groaning-into-existence Being, here in the USA, as well as in other Countries around the world, today.

I don't have answers, only a little "Food-for-thought-and-for-prayer" during this Dormition fast.."

Marie, your post (no. 9) was very interesting. I too believe that something is happening today, and not just in America. People are trying to find some purpose in life other than just the pursuit of wealth that has been presented to us as the ultimate purpose in life. This "blossoming" if you will, of the Orthodox faith can only be to the good of all.

I am very lucky that I live in a land where I am surrounded by people who practice their faith daily. In whatever country we live, if we live in such communities we are blessed and are helped in our journey towards God.

Effie

Karena Hryniuk

11-08-2007, 10:18 PM

Most of the time I have no understanding of what I'm talking about.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

What???!!

(If Karena reads anymore of this thread she is going to fall off her chair...)

M.C. Steenberg

12-08-2007, 12:05 AM

Most of the time I have no understanding of what I'm talking about.

That's okay. I can honestly say that in the 'American Orthodoxy' thread(s), I have never understood what anyone is talking about.

INXC, Matthew

Rick H.

12-08-2007, 05:01 AM

Dear All,

Assuming the Sergeant Shultz contest has concluded (for which Father Raphael remains the undefeated champion of monachos!), I would like to share a quote from the first post I ever made in the A.O. I thread:

But, on the other hand, Jürgen Moltmann, who is also no stranger to the halls of Tübingen, provides a theology of hope in his work, In the End, The Beginning, when he writes:

"Creative powers are awakened at every age, when new possibilities emerge and if they are recognized as such. In this sense we are always standing at the beginning."

and to this, before I hit the hay for the night, I would like to share one more by the author of the Cloud of Unknowing:

"Angels do not have the mental capacity, nor do we, to grasp the total reality of God, but what cannot be ours by intelligence can be ours as we embrace love."

And, if none of these hit the spot, I'll leave off with one more for the road ahead, as Tom Bodett used to say from Motel 6:

"We'll leave the light on for you."

In Christ,
Rick

Marie-Duquette

12-08-2007, 06:34 PM

Dear All,

Assuming the Sergeant Shultz contest has concluded (for which Father Raphael remains the undefeated champion of monachos!), I would like to share a quote from the first post I ever made in the A.O. I thread:

and to this, before I hit the hay for the night, I would like to share one more by the author of the Cloud of Unknowing:

And, if none of these hit the spot, I'll leave off with one more for the road ahead, as Tom Bodett used to say from Motel 6:

In Christ,
Rick

Dear Rick and all posting on this thread,

So where have all the inter-quotes gone? ...

They are all "blow'in the WIND" as the song goes!

These inter-quotes can be read again by going back to post #31. Just a little patience-practice... All three are truly worth while reflecting upon, as far as I can see through "the light that has been left on in the dark of night" at Motel 6.

Hope no one else "falls off their chair", at this point because not many of us know what we are talking about! and also, because each thread of the Weaving is needed at this point of the Orthodox experience in America, as far as I can "understand it".

Listen well to the Troparion of the Feast of the Transfiguration:

"O Christ Our God, at your transfiguration on the mount, You showed your disciples as much of your glory as they could hold. Through the prayers of the Theotokos, let your eternal light shine also upon us sinners. O GIVER of LIGHT, glory to You!"

For, AO is a "new experience" indeed for us Americans in the USA. (And now I am not talking about those who have brought Orthodoxy with them into this "dark wild place called USA") Hope the rest of the big round world won't give up on us! For, in a sense, we are the future of the CHURCH in Christ Jesus our Lord! Each of us is learning, a little at a time what Orthodoxy is all about! While going back to read, reflect upon and interpret the Fathers and Mothers of the Church for our times, there is a lot of myopic stumbling, detours, and struggling. The Church today in America is still quite young and needs guidance, as it has been pointed out before by some of the posters.

In 1999 there was an in-ter European conference held at Paray-le-Monial in France, where hierarches, priest , nuns, and many lay delegates participated. It was just wonderful, because it was called:

"CHRISTIANITY IS ONLY BEGINNING!"

After 2000 years Christianity is truly only beginning!!!

So let's not be afraid of the DARK of investigating what Orthodoxy IS for each of us. We accept the whole of it - - this weaving undertaken by God-Himself through His energies, in Creation, Revelation, Incarnation, Redemption, Sanctification,
......................... -- but we also need to know understand, this "treasure" which dwells among us and in our deepest heart, by reading, study, discussion, reflection and prayer!

Of course obedience, humility, prayer, guidance and struggle and all else are needed as we tred this Way, Truth and Life opened up for us through Christ Jesus! but, especially how to live this intermediate way "being in the world and not of it! is necessary, and quite a challence. And this, we are all attempting to do now at this point in History, each in our own millieu, knowing that our millieu is a "Divine Milieu" where God dwells. HE has told us this himself so many time as stated in the Holy Scriptures.

Let us trust the guidance of the Holy Spirit given to us as we pray daily:

"O heavenly King, the Comforter, the Spirit of Truth who art everywhere and fillest all things, come and abide in us, cleanse of of every impurity and save our souls, Oh Good One!

marie_duquette

Marie-Duquette

12-08-2007, 08:15 PM

Dear Rick,

Perhaps, Tradition, Scripture, Intellect and Experience are being inter-woven here in AO thus a true American Orthodoxy will immerge. Glory to God!

marie_duquette

Rick H.

12-08-2007, 11:04 PM

Dear Rick,

Perhaps, Tradition, Scripture, Intellect and Experience are being inter-woven here in AO thus a true American Orthodoxy will immerge. Glory to God!

marie_duquette

Dear Marie,

I think there is an interlacing/employment here just as you have suggested. Thank you for your contributions to this thread and to an American Orthodoxy! My experience/exposure is limited, but it seems clear to me that there is an emergence of an American Orthodoxy taking place in our day and age. Or, as Fr. Metrakos has said, "There is an American Orthodoxy." I suspect, those whose main interest is defending a particular system or sect will not be able to see this no matter how hard they try, those in the ethnic social clubs don't care, but they who believe the Tradition of the historical Orthodox Church is alive and well should have no problem *understanding*, no problem seeing what is already here and hearing what has been said. What a cosmic irony there may be at play here in all of this as it relates to how we understand! But, as you say Marie, in the End, it is Glory be to God for the great things He has done!

In Christ,
Rick

Rick H.

27-12-2007, 02:11 PM

An American Orthodoxy?

There is neither Jew, nor Greek - nor English, Russian nor American. We are all one in Christ Jesus: cf Gal. 3:28

I brought this in from the other thread because it seems to perfect, and I thought it should find a home here in this thread. All one in Christ. There is no particularism in Christ is there?

And, when Effie asks Dave in the following:

What does "blazing a new trail" mean to you Dave? What is "a life style based on AMERICAN Orthodoxy"? Orthodoxy is not something that was thought up by funny little people in European countries in the last century or so.

I might be wrong, but I think I know where Effie is coming from and I sympathize with her. And, as well, I might be wrong, but I think I know where Dave is coming from, and while he possibly could have worded things differently, I sympathize with what he is saying.

And, it occurs to me that as I referenced a dominant principle in the Baptist History thread today, the same holds true. Whether we are talking about such things as "Baptist History," or "The True Church," or a "Greek Orthodoxy" or "An American Orthodoxy," we need to speak in love. Because, as has been said, Without love we are nothing. Without love we are noisy gongs and clanging cymbals. 'Without love, our work and our lives are miserable polemics and a waste.' And, to paraphrase another, unless this principle is valid and effective, our theology will at no time or place ever become such a good work.

Again we are back to eros and agape here. And, while these have always been with us and probably always will, I wonder at the present, who can hear the words of the Spirit of Life in the verse referenced above by Andreas? As well, who can recognize the work/movement of the Holy Spirit while he is moving?

In Christ,
Rick

PS The Baptist History thread is being moderated, so my comments here will make a little more sense after that post hits the board later today.

Rick H.

27-12-2007, 04:29 PM

"Tradition: Transcending all places, times, and generations"

I hope that I don't get in trouble for stealing posts and bringing them here; however, this post is really good and I'd like it to be here in case this thread gets going again one day.

Thanks Mary.

In Christ,
Rick

Blazing trails in orthodoxy sounds like a dangerous thing to do. Plus, all American 'life style' is based on some other life style, from some other old country.

So, an "American Orthodoxy" would be based on all other Orthodox traditions. It wouldn't be something totally new. If it is, it's not orthodox.

The thing that would make it American, would be the Language. All services would have to be in English. Although I like hearing a song or two in the Old languages, every once in a while, I prefer to understand what's going on, and for that to happen, it absolutely has to be in English.

I've heard it said that saying "Lord have mercy" in Greek or some other old language is more effective than saying it in English. I think that's ridiculous. I like English. I'm not Greek. I'm not Russian. For me to pray from my heart, I'll have to do it in English. BUT - the Orthodox Traditions aren't 'English'. Neither are they Greek/Russian, etc. They are Orthodox and I love them dearly. So just change the language, and voila, you have an American Orthodoxy. Just don't mess with the Traditions. They are perfect. They transcend all places and times and generations.

in Christ,
Mary.

Andreas Moran

27-12-2007, 05:42 PM

I assume the 'all American way of life' is rooted in the tenets of the Declaration of Independence which is hardly a pattern for Orthodox spiritual life (and which did not apply to Jefferson's 200 slaves).

Father David Moser

27-12-2007, 10:24 PM

Father Anthony

27-12-2007, 11:13 PM

I do not believe that it is possible to "create" an American Orthodoxy - just as it was impossible to "create" Greek or Russian Orthodoxy. It is only possible to "grow" an American Orthodoxy and that takes time and care and the proper environment. In order for Russian Orthodoxy to "grow" it took more than 200 years. Because the "environment" of the current American culture is not really supportive of Orthodoxy (the soil is poor), it will require a longer "growing season". We who are American and Orthodox are only at the forefront of this growing season and all we can do is plant the seeds that our children and grandchildren will hopefully "nourish" and "care for" so that perhaps at some time in the future this new flower of "American Orthodoxy" can bloom. I don't look for it in my lifetime, nor even in the lifetimes of my children. But it will come. In the meantime we draw our sustenance from the mature Orthodox traditions of our Greek and Russian and Serbian and Arabic etc brethren.

Fr David Moser

I have to agree 100% with Father David's assessment. Knowing the history of the Orthodox Church in America (and I don't mean the OCA), the two previous premature attempts at forcing the creation of an American Orthodox Church have proven to be disastrous. The first attempt was almost still-born in the late 20's leading to a major scandal that did nothing for the Church, except to increase the number of vagantes running around today claiming to represent the faith. The present attempt has not lived up to its vision and is desperately floundering, with another jurisdiction now foisting unity under it, seemingly to be leading to the death or minimalizing of the current bearer of that goal.

The church has to have a few healthy generations to grow into this goal. At the moment, it has not had that. Monasticism is just starting to flourish which is an important part of the life of the church. Many "isms" are beginning to fall by the way side. Education of our young is just beginning in earnest, teaching them the faith properly. When this all takes proper and healthy root and begins to flower with fruit, then and only then will it be time to consider an American Orthodoxy. You can not create a Church anymore than you can create God. Until to those healthy seeds are planted, nourished, and then bear fruit, any attempts at American Orthodoxy will not be healthy as a Church and for the spiritual life of those within it.

In IC XC,
Father Anthony+

Andrew

28-12-2007, 06:52 AM

I think the future of Orthodoxy in America is rooted in the spread of healthy monasteries linked to tradition... those who have lived in obedience and come to see Christ in glory. Or, modern apostles. My own home parish has experienced a spiritual explosion this past year with much thanks to two monasteries under an Athonite elder. My own spiritual father's spiritual father is linked with the "line" of Saint Silouan and Elder Sophrony. Greek, Russian, whatever, whatever leads us to salvation. What has worked for the past millenia continues to work today, so we should try to live it.

Rick H.

28-12-2007, 03:29 PM

"An Ecclesiastical Legend?"

It is very interesting to me to see the most recent contributions to this thread. From a response including a reference to President Jefferson's slaves to a report of a spiritual explosion during the past year, we move forward once again as we consider the original question of "An American Orthodoxy?"

And, while I both appreciate and agree 100% with what Andrew has said above (which is parallel to what Robert has said repeatedly in the original AO thread) about the place of an Amercian monasticism, I would like to attempt to focus our attention on the contribution by the two fathers above at the present. These two posts are very well written/reasoned and it is easy to see that each line in these posts is written from the position that Orthodox unity is years away and that there is *simply* no such thing as an American Orthodoxy in the present.

However there is another view. As the author of the article referenced in post #1 of the AO I thread would say, the position promoted above is a myth. Father Aris explains that this is a myth that keeps us frozen in a state of tribalism and territorialism that prevents us from planting Orthodoxy more firmly in America. So this is a harmful position to hold and to share according to Father Aris, who says this is a myth that is advanced by people who focus on what the Church in the United States is not, and this is a myth "that needs to be debunked."

In Christ,
Rick

Father David Moser

28-12-2007, 05:35 PM

"An Ecclesiastical Legend?"
I would like to attempt to focus our attention on the contribution by the two fathers above at the present. These two posts are very well written/reasoned and it is easy to see that each line in these posts is written from the position that Orthodox unity is years away and that there is *simply* no such thing as an American Orthodoxy in the present.

However there is another view. As the author of the article referenced in post #1 of the AO I thread would say, the position promoted above is a myth. Father Aris

I would note here that I disagreed with Fr Aris then and I disagree with him now. Fr Aris may indeed feel the need to "create" an American Orthodoxy, however as an American convert I have never been able to find (and believe me I've looked) this "American Orthodoxy". I think that Fr Aris vision of an American Church is itself a myth that keeps us running down a multitude of "dead ends" instead of applying ourselves to the long and slow growth of a truly American Orthodox Church. I would say that the view which he presents is "a myth that keeps us frozen in a state of tribalism and territorialism that prevents us from planting Orthodoxy more firmly in America" and that it is "a harmful position to hold and share [and] is a 'myth that needs to be debunked.'"

Fr David Moser

Fr Raphael Vereshack

28-12-2007, 06:18 PM

I would note here that I disagreed with Fr Aris then and I disagree with him now. Fr Aris may indeed feel the need to "create" an American Orthodoxy, however as an American convert I have never been able to find (and believe me I've looked) this "American Orthodoxy". I think that Fr Aris vision of an American Church is itself a myth that keeps us running down a multitude of "dead ends" instead of applying ourselves to the long and slow growth of a truly American Orthodox Church. I would say that the view which he presents is "a myth that keeps us frozen in a state of tribalism and territorialism that prevents us from planting Orthodoxy more firmly in America" and that it is "a harmful position to hold and share [and] is a 'myth that needs to be debunked.'"

Fr David Moser

I have to say that I really agree with Fr David on this one. As I've pointed out before if in Canada for example one was to say, "we need to create a Canadian Orthodoxy" you would most likely get the most incredible look of surprise. This is because this already is Canada- no denying that! And anything planted by the Church will already grow of its own means according to the circumstances it finds itself in.

The above is a natural process of faithfulness and discernment and not at all the result of purposeful projects that address cultural identity. After all what projects to create a Canadian Orthodoxy would we propose? A Mountie Liturgy or saying 'eh' at the end of every petition of the litanies?

Instead we need to keep in mind that sinking the roots of the Church into a given soil takes time. The balance between faithfulness to what we have been given and to those who come before us has always been a very delicate one not given to precise formulas.

It isn't that culture plays no role in this. But if it is looked at in the abstract apart from the actual people who come before us then we risk cutting off the roots of the very plant we should be trying to grow. Inevitably it will become selfish.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

Bogdan

28-12-2007, 09:00 PM

Mary

29-12-2007, 04:34 AM

A few posters have repeatedly expressed the greater need for Orthodoxy to plant it's seed instead of focusing on creating an American Orthodoxy.

My question is twofold.

If we are planting the seed of Orthodoxy, are we not in some sense planting it from the linguistic and cultural perspective that seed fell from? Is it not contradictory to say that an American Orthodoxy will grow on it's own, when we are persistantly planting Orthodox seeds from Greek, Serbian, Russian fruit?

I see no contradiction. The Seeds and the Fruit, are neither Greek, nor Serbian, nor Russian. I haven't read of any saint who is identical to another, and yet, they're equally saints. God takes what we are and makes us orthodox. We dont' have to be like each other. We can't be like each other. The orthodoxy that's growing in my home, is different from the one that's growing in yours, and it will also be different from my kids' homes, when they're all grown and on their own. Mine is an experimental one... my kids homes/lives won't be as experimental as mine. They'll already know things well, that I'm only now finding out about.

If I like something that someone else does, and I start doing it at home, it's still going to be slightly different than the person I learned it from. I suppose, it's like food. There's curry, and there's curry. I've never tasted two that are the same, none as good as my mom's, and yet, it's all called 'curry'. I use the curry powder that my mom mixes together, I follow her instructions, and I still end up with something that's totally pathetic, compared to hers.

Secondly, if Orthodoxy does manage to grow within the sphere of American culture on it's own and establish a healthy sphere of faith on this continent, can we be sure that we would actually see this happening and allow it to? We have examples of both good and bad happening within many attempts at american orthodoxy. Most of the bad has been looked at as proof that it's a bad idea. The good has mostly been quenched.

I wonder how open the Orthodox faith in general is to new Autosepholous divisions. We could even throw the growing Japaneese Orthodox contingent into this conversation for the sake of the argument.

What do you think?

I'm afraid I've no idea what you're trying to say here.

In Christ,
Mary

Father David Moser

29-12-2007, 05:34 AM

I The orthodoxy that's growing in my home, is different from the one that's growing in yours, and it will also be different from my kids' homes, when they're all grown and on their own.

Consider wine. The various varieties of grapes which are used to make wine are grown in many different places of the world and yet even when the grape is the same the Australian, Californian, or French versions end up each with their own characteristics. This is the effect of the "terroir" or soil. The soil and growing conditions in which the vine grows and produces the grape affects the final flavor, texture, nose and color of the wine. In this way we can compare with Orthodoxy. The seed/cutting/vine is the same, the same "variety" of grape is being grown in Greece, Russia, Serbia, the US and where ever - the resulting fruit will all be the same "Orthodoxy" but with distinct characteristics of taste that reflect the soil in which it is grown. The vines of Greece and Russia are old and strong - tested by time and struggle. The vines in North America are still young and fragile and are not yet ready to produce their own characteristic wine - but with time and care, those vines too will reach "bearing" maturity and we will begin to see a new "varietele" of Orthodoxy - (North) American Orthodoxy.

Fr David Moser

Father David Moser

29-12-2007, 05:45 AM

Secondly, if Orthodoxy does manage to grow within the sphere of American culture on it's own and establish a healthy sphere of faith on this continent, can we be sure that we would actually see this happening and allow it to? ...
I wonder how open the Orthodox faith in general is to new Autosepholous divisions.

Well, the care and nurture of our faith is up to us now isn't it? I can't speak for the Greek/Byzantine Churches, but I can point to the actions of the Russian Church in the granting of autocephaly to its former North American Metropolia (now the OCA). Whether this cutting off the vine was premature and will produce viable fruit remains to be seen. The Russian Church as the fruit of the reconciliation between Moscow and ROCOR has established ROCOR as an essentially autonomous Church which is itself multicultural, spanning 6 continents. The Antiochian Patriarch has granted autonomy to its North American Archdiocese as well. Will these "cuttings" off the vine of the mother Church take root and grow and develop as autocephalus Churches? That remains to be seen. But now that these cuttings have been planted, it is up to us who are part of these Churches to nurture and grow our new Churches so that they will take root, grow and bear fruit.

Fr David Moser

Fr Raphael Vereshack

29-12-2007, 04:38 PM

Well, the care and nurture of our faith is up to us now isn't it? I can't speak for the Greek/Byzantine Churches, but I can point to the actions of the Russian Church in the granting of autocephaly to its former North American Metropolia (now the OCA). Whether this cutting off the vine was premature and will produce viable fruit remains to be seen. The Russian Church as the fruit of the reconciliation between Moscow and ROCOR has established ROCOR as an essentially autonomous Church which is itself multicultural, spanning 6 continents. The Antiochian Patriarch has granted autonomy to its North American Archdiocese as well. Will these "cuttings" off the vine of the mother Church take root and grow and develop as autocephalus Churches? That remains to be seen. But now that these cuttings have been planted, it is up to us who are part of these Churches to nurture and grow our new Churches so that they will take root, grow and bear fruit.

Fr David Moser

I admit my ideas have changed about how this rootedness will work here in North America.

I used to think that if we commit ourselves within our parishes to the use of local languages then naturally a second local language parish would spring from this.

Instead I see that in our city for example what has actually happened is that missions using local languages have sprung up on their own initiative. In other words there has not occurred that gradual shift from 'ethnic parishes' to the local Church using the local language in the way this has often been thought of in the past.

I would say then that the reality of the given situation shows that the growth of the local Church is more complex than we often think of; almost like an 'ethnic vs local' scenario.

Instead I would suggest that both in fact are part of the one local Church. As Fr David says the roots are one. But the way in which these roots grow is various & are not meant to be identical or all 'non-ethnic'.

Rather, if experience in our city is any indication of what is really occurring ( and I think it is only a microcosm of what is seen elsewhere in North America) then at best what is happening is that these different expressions of the One Church are meant to provide inspiration to each other in the very way they are different. Although this ends up urging us to think outside the box, here at least, it has only led to a more healthy mind-set in our different parishes. The one Church will grow as a mosaic not as a clean slate.

The fact is that beyond language we each also have our distinct jurisdictional and local church cultures. The idea that to create the One local Church we need to wipe the entire slate clean so as to end up with one generic colour seems both unrealistic and harmful.

The fact is that parishes work and grow with who God sends to them. We don't then proceed to dismantle these real people according to an abstraction about local culture. We work with them as real people giving them the spiritual tools as each of our parishes knows this.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

Bogdan

30-12-2007, 04:30 AM

Interesting perspective mary. I appreciate your comments and will have to think on them more.

Fr. Vereshack, couldn't agree more with your synapsis of the ethnic to local transition, or lack thereof. It is interesting to see the ways that Orthodoxy is celebrated in today's world. If you think about it, you have 2nd, 3rd etc. generation ethnic groups, using the faith as more of a tool to keep their ETHNICITY than their faith. Perhaps my opion here is a bit harsh, but I see it happen more often than not. This does not in any way take away from the God centered life that I am sure most Orthodox people live, but it is a truth for the church abroad as a whole.

As our esteemed moderator has asked a page back, I would like to switch gears and focus more on what this site aims at.

Fr. Moser, I am not sure if the cutting from the vine would bear fruit. There was a time when Orthodoxy was still young within my Serbian culture. All it took to become autosepholous was for St. Sava to go to Constantinople and simply ask. Ironically, we technically became a church before the Russians, even though they had Orthodoxy for a much longer time. This happened at a time when things were a lot more fluid in the church. This way of doing things not apear to be possible anymore within the framework of the church.

I don't really know of any true patristic teaching or writing that outlines any "formal" path to autosephalous status. It would be interested to hear from anyone if any such writing exists. Or at least an opinion from a Father of the church? I know that in the writings of St. Sava, he describes his experience as though he were walking on the clouds and listening to the angels praise God during his time with the Patriarch.

In any event, this topic, while interesting, is one that has tended to deviate from intended goals here ( I am probobly one of the biggest perpetraitors of this deviation). If anyone has any decent writings on this topic from early church organizers, I would love to read it. And with that I will gracefully bow out of this conversation..if this can be considered graceful :)

Merry Christmas and Hristos Se Rodi.

Rick H.

30-12-2007, 09:44 PM

Determination vs. Discovery

I do not believe that it is possible to "create" an American Orthodoxy - just as it was impossible to "create" Greek or Russian Orthodoxy.

Knowing the history of the Orthodox Church in America (and I don't mean the OCA), the two previous premature attempts at forcing the creation of an American Orthodox Church have proven to be disastrous.

[. . . ] You can not create a Church anymore than you can create God.

As I've pointed out before if in Canada for example one was to say, "we need to create a Canadian Orthodoxy" you would most likely get the most incredible look of surprise. This is because this already is Canada- no denying that!

Aside from the question, "Is there an American Orthodoxy?" . . . as I read the word 'create,' used repeatedly above, it occurs to me that no one hitting on all eight would think it possible to 'cause to exist' or 'bring into *being*' an American Orthodoxy. This or a Japanese Orthodoxy, or an Australian Orthodoxy, or a whatever Orthodoxy can only come about and be recognized by those coming together (and others) via an organic or naturally occurring process. This can only be orchestrated by the Spirit of Life working through those who are surrendered to His soveriegnty. But this coming about and recognition is nothing new, and it is represented in the following thought unit presented before in the AO I thread (via the thinking of Tonnies):

Community and society are two opposed basic possibilities of human corporate life. The relationship of men to one another is either understood as a real organic life, and this is the nature of community; or it is understood as only an ideal and mechanical formation, and this is the concept of society. Community means a lasting and genuine corporate life, society only a transient and apparent one. Community is to be understood as a living organism, society as a rather mechanical aggregate of the total existing of men, as a man-made institution. In community men are bound together by a natural process; in society they are divided by their very nature. While in community men remain bound together in spite of their divisions, in society they are divided in spite of all their bonds that link them. Communities are original and primordial relationships of life, like marriage, family, or clan. Here man understands himself on the basis of his corporate life. Societies on the other hand are associations made for a purpose. They last only for a time . . .and are formed on the basis of services expected in return, and of personal advantage.

To try to "create," or determine something, as the word is used above by the three fathers, is to be compared to 'society' in the above.

However, as 'community' is spoken of above, this to be related to the discovery process found in this very question.

In Christ,
Rick

PS I especially appreciate the line by Tonnies where he wrote, " . . . in community men remain bound together in spite of their divisions." This speaks of Eastern Orthodoxy in general and an American Orthodoxy in particular!

M.C. Steenberg

31-12-2007, 01:55 PM

Dear friends,

As a few posts have trickled in to this thread over the past days, I have been given pause to think about the discussion as a whole. I largely did not participate in the first ‘American Orthodoxy’ thread, nor this the second, because I felt uncomfortable with the nature of the topic overall. I feel essentially the same way now. But as some time has passed without the discussion ongoing, and seeing it now with a few posts once again, I’ve had time to ponder a bit more the ‘why’ of my initial and ongoing reaction. I don’t really see that I’ll be too involved in any re-invigoration of the discussion myself, but perhaps I can piece together a few thoughts as a one-off offering to the conversation.

There are a number of general, basic issues that have repeatedly come up, and which I don’t need to go into in any great length on that account. These include the need for time before autonomy and self-headship are obtained (though the question of ecclesiastical self-governance is not really the focus of these discussions); the need for authentic localization of practice and spirit to come through and out of reception, rather than determination; the false possibility of the creation of a specifically ethnicised Orthodox heritage (and ‘American’ is just as much an ethnic grouping as ‘Greek’ or ‘Russian’); the difficult and problematic relationship between ‘Russian / Greek / other Orthodoxy’ and a fabled ‘just Orthodoxy’; the different timelines for localization imagined by differing groups; the impossibility of using as practical patterns the past experiences of lands such as Russia, whose encounter and transition into Orthodoxy happened in entirely different circumstances than that of North America; etc., etc. This is but a small sampling; but these are also entirely standard issues, well trouped over and worn in any discussion on this topic.

My main discomfort with such discussions comes not from any of these. They are essentially practical issues – however nuanced – and thus secondary. My main discomfort comes from the perspective of ascetical awareness and practice in the life of the Church. The main ‘venue’ in Orthodoxy for the ‘hammering out’ of patterns and methods is the monastic context. Monasticism is the ‘icon in praxis’ of the ascetical life of the whole Church, which is why so much of the Church’s liturgical and ascetical practice has its origins in it (e.g. the shape, form and practical elements of Lenten fasting, of the liturgical cycle, etc.). I don’t raise this point simply as a way of suggesting that ‘the way forward is to have more monasteries’ (though I sometimes suffer for breath for saying that there should be); this is not really the issue. What is necessary is to engage with the question of developing local Orthodox practice and ‘ethos’ from within the testimony of the monastic icon of the Church.

One of the fundamental principles of monastic life is obedience. Not freedom, not personality, but obedience. The ‘not’ before ‘freedom’ and ‘personality’ isn’t there because these are negative things, but because they are divine realities imaged in human existence, marred by the passions in a most invidious way. Holy freedom, pure freedom, is divine life: the fruit and possession of the saints – but unpurified freedom is worse than slavery. St Paul’s favourite term for himself is ‘slave’, a title he uses with great joy in the face of its alternatives. Freedom saw him crucify and persecute his Saviour. Slavery saw him transform the world around him. Similarly personality. To be fully person, individual in divine communion, is to reflect purely God as persons in communion. But to be a ‘person’ as driven by individualizing traits, defined as much by pattern, custom, habit, and passion as anything else, is to debase personhood into a mythology of the will. My ‘personality’ is my will personified. So the monastic context insists that personality is secondary to obedience. Obedient asceticism reveals the person, it is not driven by it. The true personality of the saints is not the fruit of their wills, but the genuine personhood of the creature in purified communion with its creator.

In the monastic context, these realities are brought to life through a specific kind of obedience that cannot be mirrored outside it. There is a deliberate submission to the life of the monastic community, and an absolute obedience to it. Elder Ephrem of Katounaikia one received in his cell Elder Joseph, who introduced him to one of his attendant monks. Fr Ephrem’s first question was simply, ‘Is he obedient?’ Obedience in the monastic context often takes harsh, external forms; but like all ascetical practices, they are aimed at interior as well as exterior transformation. And they are engaged in willingly, as the means of purifying the fallen will. So the monk is not asked ‘Would you like to do this?’, nor is he invited to say ‘In my background we do it this way’, but he enters into obedience to the life of the monastic community. This obedience aims to transfigure the will, so that it learns how to say truly, and not just as a well-intentioned pious flourish, ‘not my will, but thine be done’. As this process takes place – and it can often be harsh, and long – the will is indeed transformed, and trappings of false freedom and false personality are etched away. What is revealed is true freedom in Christ, which is only ever found in real submission; together with true personhood and personality, borne out of union with God.

This monastic context, though not every aspect of monastic praxis, is the icon of ascetical life in the Church as a whole. Freedom must come through obedience – for everyone. Similarly, no one will discover their true personality apart from obedience and transformation. What one brings to the life in Christ can be good, holy, wonderful. But it can only be so if it is brought in the context of obedient freedom, rather than wilful freedom, and embraced in a personality borne of obedient truth, rather than self-will personified.

This is true of the Church in whole localities, as much as it is true of individual persons. Genuine local Orthodox customs and ‘flavours’ will emerge out of local practice, but not simply because many local groups come together with various habits, contexts, personalities, tendencies, etc., and eventually patterns work their way out of the mish-mash. Such patterns are nothing more than collective habits, filtered and generalized over time. Nor can things that ‘resonate particularly well in this culture’ emerge in a healthy way simply as trends that pool and unite. Rather, genuine emergence of local Orthodox life comes through the purification of obedience. When a locality – a parish, a city, a diocese, a nation, a land – submits will and habit in obedience to the Church, that obedience transforms will and habit into things truly authentic to the real persons that make them up. A fear of ‘ethnicising’ (which is a real issue in some contexts) often causes this pattern to be looked at with suspicion. ‘This land should not have to become [Insert mother ethnos here] to be authentically Orthodox’. This is true, and this abuse of the maternity of mother-churches must be rooted out. But the baby is infinitely more important than the bath water. Genuine ecclesiastical maternity is not about causing the child church to become a mirror of the mother church, any more than a mother wishes her own child to become an exact mirror of her, or a monastic elder wishes his novice to become a mirror of himself. The obedience demanded of this relationship is designed to free the child, but not into a false-freedom of the will, but into a real freedom of purified personhood in Christ. The child is only able to discover himself, as the genuine creature uniquely, irrepeatably created by God, when the child is reared to stop attempting to create himself.

Orthodoxy in North America is young. This is not simply a factor of time (Orthodoxy has been lived in parts of North America for a great long period of time), but of life lived in obedience. There are great gems of this transformed, obedient life in the Americas; but Orthodoxy in North America struggles in a context that – almost more than any other in history – battles against true obedience, and sees ‘freedom’ and ‘personality’ in debased terms. The jurisdictional divisions that came about in the early twentieth century, following the Russian revolution and the implications for its daughter churches throughout the world, only exacerbated this situation by introducing a context of multiple ‘options’ and ‘choices’ of ‘styles’ – all of which pose additional dangers to will and obedience. The lack of a single ‘mother’ to Orthodoxy in North America makes the kind of obedience necessary for the authentic discovery of a true local Orthodox life extremely difficult. What one often finds instead are swirling pools of customs, practices, styles – many of which contain wonderful elements – but which are often not the fruit of obedience, and thus of transfigured life. Focusing on these elements, even the best among them, with an aim toward distilling that which uniquely comprises an ‘American Orthodoxy’, is to go in the wrong direction entirely. It is to emulate a novice saying to his igumen, ‘Here are the bits of my life I would like to embrace and to flourish’.

Local Orthodoxy will always rise out of obedient life. The new birth of monasticism in North America is a great sign – not simply of the embrace of the monastic way itself (a great blessing), but because it is evidence of a more widespread turning toward the authentic call of obedient life as the foundation of the Christian way. It is this that gives flower to true, authentic local Orthodoxy. In the meantime, the way to address ‘an American Orthodoxy’, or Orthodoxy in any other locality, cannot be to focus on what makes it ‘American’, but to focus on what strengthens its struggle in this ascetical task. How shall obedience be fostered? How does it live in submission to a will other than its own? How can it enter more fully into this ascetical freedom-bearing slavery? These are the kinds of questions that must fuel a real desire to understand any local Orthodoxy. Can we find the obedience to find true poverty of spirit? True purity of heart?

These are the questions that truly matter to developing local Orthodoxy.

INXC, Dcn Matthew

Andreas Moran

31-12-2007, 02:52 PM

It is for all the reasons which Fr DCn Matthew has delineated that the situation for Orthodoxy in Britain is, so far as I can judge, more dire than anywhere. Whether one be in the New World or the Old makes no difference: monasteries are the engine of the Church. I didn't understand this until I became acquainted with Russia where contact between parish and monastery is constant and taken for granted. It also made me realise what we lack here. I have long lamented and been puzzled by the lack of monastic presence in Britain. In the centre of Moscow, there are dozens of monasteries. In Cyprus, with its population of some 600,000 (about the same as Sheffield), there are about ten monasteries. If America is seeing the growth of authentic monastic presence, then the situation there is better than it is here.

Fr Raphael Vereshack

31-12-2007, 04:01 PM

Many thanks for your post Fr Dn Matthew.

The presence among us of those from other parts of the world where ascetic obedience is much more to the fore also helps our situation here I think.

In our parish for example which has about quadrupled in size from ten years ago with the arrival of new arrivals from Russia/Ukraine, etc. These arrivals are from the new generation in Russia who have returned to the Church not out of habit or from curiosity but from commitment.

For some reason the main characteristics of the spirituality of these people are humble obedience and ascetic piety. This in turn seems to have been affected by the different culture in Russia (even the Soviet Union) compared to here.

Whatever the reasons for this piety however, the presence of such people has led to a deepening of life in our parish in the past few years. And this I think is a fairly typical phenomenon throughout North America in the past few years.

I would say that what is described here is similar to what Fr Dn Matthew describes. In this case though these people are laity from another world far more attuned to humility, obedience, asceticism and suffering than we are here.

Which as I tried to say in my last week's post shows that the inspiration for our Church will come not necessarily from those local factors we often look to. Of course it this will have to be grounded in our local reality. But in order for this reality to be transformed into the Church it could well be that we need to be continually open to that which externally seems counter productive.

After all, with the humility it takes to look beyond ourselves, what a solution God could be providing to the question of a local Church!

In Christ- Fr Raphael

Owen Jones

02-01-2008, 02:41 AM

Perhaps the real question is whether there can or should be a kind of Americanized monasticism that incorporates certain American cultural traits, such as "individualism?" rather than simply trying to transplant Athonite monasticism here. The only person I know who seriously attempted to address this in a postive way in his writings was Fr. Seraphim Rose, and I think because of other controversies, his thoughts on this have been obscured. There are many many people in America who don't quite fit into the society, but at the same time aren't the angry alienated types. Sensitive souls, Fr. Serpahim would have called them. And perhaps a more severe, Athonite type of monasticism is not the answer. Maybe there is something in between that and something that's just loose and touchy-feely, something not quite so organized, but still spiritually real. Certain organizational/institutional problems seems to be at the core. But these are just tentative thoughts. Sacrifice is not really the problem. Many people in America are not averse to personal sacrifice. Many people live simply already. So institutional obstacles really seem to be the problem, i.e. a real like of options. Americans like to have options. That is one of the things most criticized about American, but why not turn it to a positive?

Father David Moser

02-01-2008, 05:52 AM

Perhaps the real question is whether there can or should be a kind of Americanized monasticism...rather than simply trying to transplant Athonite monasticism here. ... And perhaps a more severe, Athonite type of monasticism is not the answer. Maybe there is something in between that and something that's just loose and touchy-feely, something not quite so organized, but still spiritually real.

Actually the Russian idiorhythmic monastic tradition may be what you are thinking of. This would be more in the line of the Optina tradition rather than the Athonite tradition (and since St Herman's monastery was founded on the Optina model, that may be the kind of thing that Fr Seraphim was promoting.) Idiorhythmic monastic life tends to be somewhat more "individual" than the cenobitic Athonite model. Holy Trinity Monastery at Jordanville NY is based on that model as well.

Fr David Moser

Effie Ganatsios

02-01-2008, 10:27 AM

Without being a theologian or an expert on the orthodox religion, I would like to ask why Americans feel the need to name their orthodox religion, American. Why is this important? Is it pride? Is there a feeling of superiority towards other nationalities? Does this feeling of superiority create a need to have a name for their own "particular brand" of orthodoxy?

Customs, traditions, etc. might change from country to country but our religion remains the same. Why do people convert to a religion if they feel the need to change it once they belong to it?

I'm sorry that I don't understand the basis for this discussion. If I'm not mistaken the name "Greek Orthodox" came about because Greek was the common language of the early church. Is my information incorrect?

Orthodoxy is orthodoxy. We have many Russians here now and they attend our church. They are not referred to as "Russian Orthodox" rather people refer to them as Russians who are Orthodox.

Why this need to "create" a so-called American Orthodoxy. There can be no such thing. Do those who support this idea want to change Orthodoxy itself, make it into something more or less than it is now.

More American? And what is American? Nothing and everything. When a country is comprised of so many different nationalities, when people from countries outside Europe continue to arrive and to make a marvellous new mixture that can only benefit their new home, which of these many countries will be the role model for this new American Orthodoxy. Which traditions? English, Dutch, German, Italian, Mexican, Chinese.......... It just doesn't make sense.

How wonderful that the Orthodox religion is flourishing in America and that new monasteries, which are the heart of our religion, are increasing. This is what is important.

I sincerely hope I haven't offended anyone.

Effie

From M.M. Steenberg's post which I have downloaded in order to read it carefully.

"This is true of the Church in whole localities, as much as it is true of individual persons. Genuine local Orthodox customs and ‘flavours’ will emerge out of local practice, but not simply because many local groups come together with various habits, contexts, personalities, tendencies, etc., and eventually patterns work their way out of the mish-mash. Such patterns are nothing more than collective habits, filtered and generalized over time. Nor can things that ‘resonate particularly well in this culture’ emerge in a healthy way simply as trends that pool and unite. Rather, genuine emergence of local Orthodox life comes through the purification of obedience. When a locality – a parish, a city, a diocese, a nation, a land – submits will and habit in obedience to the Church, that obedience transforms will and habit into things truly authentic to the real persons that make them up. A fear of ‘ethnicising’ (which is a real issue in some contexts) often causes this pattern to be looked at with suspicion. ‘This land should not have to become [Insert mother ethnos here] to be authentically Orthodox’. This is true, and this abuse of the maternity of mother-churches must be rooted out. But the baby is infinitely more important than the bath water. Genuine ecclesiastical maternity is not about causing the child church to become a mirror of the mother church, any more than a mother wishes her own child to become an exact mirror of her, or a monastic elder wishes his novice to become a mirror of himself. The obedience demanded of this relationship is designed to free the child, but not into a false-freedom of the will, but into a real freedom of purified personhood in Christ. The child is only able to discover himself, as the genuine creature uniquely, irrepeatably created by God, when the child is reared to stop attempting to create himself."

Herman Blaydoe

02-01-2008, 11:12 AM

Effie Ganatsios

02-01-2008, 11:57 AM

Why does the sign say "Greek Orthodox" Church? Or Russian Orthodox? Why should I worship in a language I don't understand? Why should I be made to feel uncomfortable or unwelcome in God's house because I am not a particular nationality? Why should I pray for the "motherland" of "my" ancestors when MY ancestors did not come from that country? Why should a Greek flag be displayed next to an American iconostas?

There is a Greek Church, a Russian Church, why can't there be an American Church? Or really, why can't there simply be THE Church in America? That is all that is really desired. ONE Church, ONE organization with ONE bishop in charge of ONE city, where mission and outreach are more important than ethnic identity. It is not about "branding", it is about getting beyond ethnic enclaves. Many Americans pass by churches calling themselves "Greek" or Russian" or "Korean" (Protestant) and never think to go inside, because they are not Greek or Russian or Korean, and those that do, sometimes get chased out. It doesn't have to say "American" on the sign, but neither does it have to say Russian or Greek or Bulgarian or Antiochian. Why can't it simply say "Orthodox" and leave it at that?

I understand that not all Greek or Russian churches are like that, some can be friendly, but many are not. I am lucky. I go to an "American" parish, even if it is in the Carpatho-Russian Diocese, but it is still complicated to explain to visitors. We want something that is not complicated to explain, that is all, really.

I'm sorry Herman that people experience such negative situations in the US. I didn't know that such things happen. Concerning the above, I totally agree with you - of course the names Greek, Russian and Bulgarian etc. are not necessary. It's so simple here. Our churches are named for their saints - St. Demetrius, St. Nicholas, etc.
no nationalities at all. Do people really get "chased out" of churches?
In Australia recently I found that the orthodox churches were locked up when the liturgy finishes. I was very surprised.

In this context I can understand that people who desire an "American" orthodoxy are doing so in reaction to what they have experienced. But, it is not right. As M.M. Steenberg told us in his post - orthodoxy is not for any specific ethnic group. If it were, I would be the first to leave - my heart would not change but my actions definitely would.

I should consider changing the description of myself from Greek Orthodox to just Orthodox. I added the Greek because of the language but it is not necessary.

Effie

Andreas Moran

02-01-2008, 12:16 PM

For some reason the main characteristics of the spirituality of these people are humble obedience and ascetic piety. This in turn seems to have been affected by the different culture in Russia (even the Soviet Union) compared to here.

In this case though these people are laity from another world far more attuned to humility, obedience, asceticism and suffering than we are here.

People of faith who live in Russia have the qualities Fr Raphael describes thus because they don't have 'options'. Life is difficult and they have no option but to trust in God and to rely on His Providence for them. Miracles great and small happen in life in Russia because you can't manage without them.

Why do people convert to a religion if they feel the need to change it once they belong to it?

Always something to keep in mind.

I'm thinking of the spread of the Church around the Roman Empire in the first centuries and comparing this with the spread of the faith to the New World. I'm no historian so I may be speaking nonsense, but when, in those first centuries, the faith spread to and became established in places such as Britain and Spain, the faithful did not think of themselves as British Christians or Spanish Christians, did they? True, these were not nation states but they were distinct geographical areas with a sense of identity. True also that there were not the jusidictional divisions we have now but there were clear areas of responsibility for the leading archbishops.

Why does the sign say "Greek Orthodox" Church? Or Russian Orthodox? Why should I worship in a language I don't understand? Why should I be made to feel uncomfortable or unwelcome in God's house because I am not a particular nationality? Why should I pray for the "motherland" of "my" ancestors when MY ancestors did not come from that country? Why should a Greek flag be displayed next to an American iconostas?

One can feel just the same in a Greek/Cypriot parish here in England. To see a church festooned in Greek flags for 'Ochi Day' means nothing to me.

There is a Greek Church, a Russian Church, why can't there be an American Church? Or really, why can't there simply be THE Church in America? That is all that is really desired. ONE Church, ONE organization with ONE bishop in charge of ONE city, where mission and outreach are more important than ethnic identity. It is not about "branding", it is about getting beyond ethnic enclaves.

I broadly agree. Not because I'm against people having a national identity but because the world is hostile to the Orthodox Church and will try to split it to reduce its effectiveness. Situations such as those in Ukraine or Montenegro - divisions and uncanonical splinter groups - are the result of worldly pressures on the Church which ought to be resisted with all possible vigour. As we sail into the last times, the Church should be one ship, the good ship 'Orthodox'.

Andreas Moran

02-01-2008, 12:22 PM

I have just seen Effie's post and agree. I prefer to call myself just 'Orthodox' - after all, I'm not sure now whether I'm Greek or Russian! The story (which is not apocryphal because I heard it) of the pilgrim arriving at the monastery here is well known. The pilgrim was from abroad but it was not obvious from where. We greeted him, and one man asked, 'what is your nationality?' The pilgrim replied, 'Orthodox'.

Effie Ganatsios

02-01-2008, 12:27 PM

John W.

02-01-2008, 12:43 PM

If the subject of my religion ever comes up in a conversation, I say that I'm Orthodox. Usually this is followed up by the other person with, "Orthodox? Is that like Greek Orthodox or Russian Orthodox?" or variations on that theme. I answer, "yes," and that it is all the same Faith and that the ethnic distinctions are due to the national origin of the particular Churches.

Like others on this thread, I have never understood this need to define an "American Orthodox Church" beyond how the Orthodox Church exists in the United States. All Orthodox Christians in the Americas make up the "American Orthodox Church." Orthodox Christians of various backgrounds: Greek, Bulgarian, Russian, Serbian, Antiochian, etc. and the American-born converts, THESE are the American Orthodox Church.

It's obvious to me that the Enemy is using xenophobia and "American First" nationalism to divide and thus weaken the Church in America.

Father David Moser

02-01-2008, 04:20 PM

"Orthodox? Is that like Greek Orthodox or Russian Orthodox?" or variations on that theme. I answer, "yes," and that it is all the same Faith and that the ethnic distinctions are due to the national origin of the particular Churches.

My reply is similar. When people ask about Greek Orthodox? or Russian Orthodox? I reply "Well, Greeks speak Greek, Russians speak Russian, Americans speak English and Orthodox is Orthodox" That usually gets the idea across

Fr David Moser

Herman Blaydoe

02-01-2008, 04:42 PM

Rick H.

02-01-2008, 04:51 PM

"Orthodox is Orthodox"

First of all, on a personal note, I just want to say thank you very much for the recent substantive posts. This is the very type of interaction that I hoped for over a year ago when AO I was first initiated. Beginning with Father Deacon Matthew's blockbuster contribution on New Years Eve, the ground has been cleared (and defined) in a most helpful way. With Owen's post and Father David's response the feast has continued for me in a fantastic personal manner. Now I am motivated more than ever to learn more about the Optina tradition/Fathers. From Effie's sincere/heartfelt questions to Herman's sincere/heartfelt answers, this has been a true blessing to me. After reading this last exchange by Effie and Herman (and John's opening paragraph), I have been inspired, as well, to change my personal profile to show my religion as *simply* Orthodox.

I think it is possible that beginning with Deacon Matthew's last post and inclusive of all of the following posts, almost everything that is crucial to this conversation has been presented in the form of first level subheadings. On one hand, this is the kind of interaction that one hopes for in terms of a great return on the investment of one's time; however, on the other hand at times great and precious jewels are prone to be not seen and passed by along the way.

But, in terms of where to go with all of this, I know where I want to go (which is straightway to Father Deacon Matthew's post); but, possibly in due time. I wonder how many folks read what was presented in a parenthetical expression in his post? When he reviewed some of the general/practical issues, the basics/bases, that have been covered in this thread and the other, he mentioned

. . . (though the question of ecclesiastical self-governance is not really the focus of these discussions); . . .

And, as we may consider why Father Deacon Matthew (and others) have "felt uncomfortable with the nature of the topic overall" during the past year and to this very day, I am convinced to explore and understand this very point, is to find the Holy Grail so to say of our topic. One would think this topic is all about ecclesiastical self-governance; but, this is all about, ascetical awareness and practice in the life of the Church in the United States at the present, and nothing else. In this sense, everything that is said about an American Orthodoxy should apply to a Russian, Greek, Japanese, British, or whatever Orthodoxy. However, specifically, as it relates to our topic at hand we are talking about 'American Orthodoxy Today.' And, exactly as Fr. Dcn. Matthew has broken this down is where I hope that we can work towards here.

But, on another side note I have learned that this will either happen or it won't. When I first became a member of the Monachos discussion community, I was so dumb that I thought when I initiated a thread I was like the host of the thread, and you can see this reflected in my early writings here. This is the first electronic discussion group I have ever tried to participate in and I was so naive I thought I was supposed to be M.C. Henry (Master of Ceremonies Henry). While being sensitive to the work of the Holy Spirit, I thought, it was up to me to keep things going and offer fodder (provocative at times) in order to move things along to a certain degree. But, I think I have learned for the last time here, based on the above posts, that that can be counter productive.

So with this in mind, with my contributions, I would like to begin working slowly backward to our New Year's Eve blockbuster.

John W.--I love what you have shared in your opening paragraph of your last post. You actually pushed me over the edge, after reading Effie and Herman's exchange, whereby I changed my personal profile to reflect my 'religion' as being "Orthodox." I am asked the same thing as you are by other folks, in my neck of the woods, and I think I am going to *simply* begin responding just as you do. Thank you. And, now I wonder if you might feel a 'but' or an 'however' coming? :) . . . but, after nodding in agreement with the first part of your post, my head became more steady when I read the following:

It's obvious to me that the Enemy is using xenophobia and "American First" nationalism to divide and thus weaken the Church in America.

frankly, I thought to myself, what an ignorant statement. It occurred to me that if the Enemy would use anything to divide and weaken the Church in America, or if we should be on guard for anything, that it would be more along the lines of the selfishness that Father Raphael spoke of above. If you are speaking of xenophobia as an irrational fear of foreigners, then I have seen zero evidence of this. In fact, I would be on guard for just the opposite of what you have presented here as it relates to Effie's question about some with a feeling of superiority. While we do not have a corner on the market with selfishness, pride, and a feeling of superiority in the US, I would think this would be more accurate to post warning signs about here.

But, unless you see evidence of this here in this thread, which I don't, I will assume that you like most of us write from time to time based on your own personal experience, in your own neck of the woods, and a degree of intuition. However, again, I do not see fear of foreigners/strangers as being a factor at all.

And, I guess this is enough for now . . .

Thanks again!

In Christ,
Rick

PS I just want to tag Andrea's post on the end of this because I think it speaks well to many aspects of the task at hand:

Worship takes many forms, liturgical and private, and is closely linked to time. But in all its forms, it is the expression of faith.

John W.

03-01-2008, 01:27 AM

Hi Rick,

Yes, sadly I wrote out of personal experience. Xenophobia and America First-ism manifested itself routinely within my former parish within a "leading" American Orthodox jurisdiction, usually in the form of the disparagement of "ethnics" and the "little t traditions" associated with them. One might expect this sort of nonsense from certain non-conformist type converts, but I found it kind of sickening coming from second and third generation American "ethnics."

I'm happy to read that you have not experienced any of this sort of silliness.

John

"Orthodox is Orthodox"

frankly, I thought to myself, what an ignorant statement. It occurred to me that if the Enemy would use anything to divide and weaken the Church in America, or if we should be on guard for anything, that it would be more along the lines of the selfishness that Father Raphael spoke of above. If you are speaking of xenophobia as an irrational fear of foreigners, then I have seen zero evidence of this.

Nina

03-01-2008, 03:43 AM

. Do people really get "chased out" of churches?
Effie

Dear Effie,

I have never experienced such a thing. And I should know very well. My fiance is a non-Greek, non-Russian, non-Antiochian and non-from-a-traditionally-Orthodox-country. Also he is a baptized Catholic. He is exploring Orthodoxy at the moment and we attend a GO church and wherever we travel in US we go to the Orthodox church (we visit mainly those under GOA since we visit mainly the goarch website for addresses of parishes to our destination). Everywhere we have visited, we have been welcomed with much love and opened arms (also to Antiochian and Russian churches). We were never chased out. In contrary we were always invited to come back the next Sunday, or the next time we were visiting the state. People are so nice and all start talking to us and the priests and different parishioners. But this is just my personal experience. Others may have different ones. However we must not depict situations in such dramatic tone, since we need not nourish xenophobia as John W. rightly mentioned. We must all be ambassadors of Christ wherever we are.

P.S And I have never seen a Greek (or other flag here) near the iconostasis without being accompanied by the American flag. Although how do flags fit with iconostasis - I have no idea, and I was very surprised to see such thing in an Orthodox church here. Because if you ask me we need first to place near our iconostasis the flag of Israel since that is where Christ was born, however since we did not see Him with any flags when He was on earth, we get the idea.

Also the church I went to for celebrating St. Basil's yesterday (I could not attend in my parish since it was not possible), here in US which is a GO church did not pray for the old country (Greece) - and the majority of the people were older ladies and men who spoke solely Greek and the service was 99% in Greek; however I heard from the prayers of the chanters and the priest, that they prayed for America, for the President, leaders and Government of US, and Armed forces and for the American Troops in Iraq and other areas. These are all facts that I have heard continuously with my own ears and that my conscience does not allow me to keep silent about because people are good here and that's how it happens. And that's the truth I have experienced personally.

Irene

03-01-2008, 04:45 AM

My ancestors are from various countries (including Serbia) and I have always called myself just "Orthodox". It really confuses people though.

Father David Moser

03-01-2008, 05:53 AM

I do not think it is a bad thing at all to include the name of the national Church when you identify yourself as Orthodox. Greek, Serbian, Arabic, Russian and their various diasporal communities all have different "flavors" if you will. When I see that Nina is Greek Orthodox or that Andreas is Russian Orthodox (forgive me for singling you out) it tells me something about how your faith is lived out in your life. I think that the different flavors of Orthodox bring a richness and depth to our relationships with one another and to our Orthodox communities (like this one) that is somehow diminished when we drop the national identifiers. I am in the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia and that says something about how Orthodoxy impacts my life. I have friends who are in the Greek Church and the Antiochian Church and the OCA and the Serbian Church and the Bulgarian Church and the Romanian Church and so on. With each of us, the heritage of our different Churches and how it acts in our lives brings a richness to our friendship that I would really hate to lose. I do not think that going to the plain vanilla "Orthodox" is necessarily a good idea - we lose something by going for the lowest common denominator. Mention was made of Xenophobia and America First ethnocentrism - and I think that when we abandon our national Church identifiers it just plays into those negatives. So I for one will remain in the Russian Orthodox Church, particularly the Russian Church Outside Russia.

Fr David Moser

Matthew Panchisin

03-01-2008, 06:20 AM

Dear Father,

Did you know since you are in the Russian Orthodox Church that you are considered a "High Russian" by the older Carpatho Russians?

As a Carpatho Russian, our goal was always to get a Carpatho Russian in charge of ROCOR...

In Christ,

Matthew Panchisin

Irene

03-01-2008, 06:29 AM

Father David Moser's post (no. 69) makes sense. My personal bias comes from being in a country where the people of the Church, at the time I converted, really couldn't comprehend that there were non-Russians attending Church. Many times I have had people come up to me speaking in Russian and when I said I don't understand the language they would say "but I thought you were Russian" and look really puzzled.

In this country my Orthodox friends who are converts have said that they felt so alone and so overwhelmed by the Russianess when the Church is supposed to be for all of us. I can't tell you what a relief it was to finally find out that I am not alone that there are others, and now with the Internet I have found out that there are many, many others who have converted to Orthodoxy. In Australia at that time there was no interest in missionary work or bringing in converts and some of those that have converted to Orthodoxy went back to their Protestant Churches because they never felt like they fitted in. (In fact I really wanted to go back myself I was so lonely.) It seems to me that the situation in America has been much better for converts, I could be wrong, but I have envied the impression of warm friendly convert communities that I read about in that country.

In more recent years the situation in Australia has become much better for converts and gradually more people are finding the richness of Orthodoxy to their liking. At one Church I was attending the services were in English and the congregation were Russian, Greek, Serbian, Syrian, there was a man who I was told was Arabic and those from English speaking backgrounds. At Easter when the food was blessed it was an interesting and colourful multi-cultural array. To make the congregation feel more at home parts of the service were sung in the different languages for each of the known nationalities attending.

Father David Moser

03-01-2008, 06:40 AM

In more recent years the situation in Australia has become much better for converts and gradually more people are finding the richness of Orthodoxy to their liking. At one Church I was attending the services were in English ...

You are fortunate in Australia to have Archbishop Hilarion. Even when a vicar bishop here in the US he was known for his missionary outreach and sympathy towards non-Russian speakers in the Russian Church. His influence on the Church in Australia is one of the things that has brought about those changes that you note.

Fr David Moser

Matthew Panchisin

03-01-2008, 06:45 AM

Dear Father,

By the way, the reason the Russian Orthodox had been seen as "High Russians" by the Carpatho Russians was because in the villages of Carpatho Rus' things had been much more simple. You can imagine simple people hearing the Russian Orthodox liturgical music, high backs on the Priests vestments with high head coverings etc. Also the Russian Churches had often been very tall compared to the small log cabin type of Churches in the villages. Even the Russian Bishops had a chair in the middle of the Church that sat higher up, they didn't have such things in the villages. As such that's how you would be seen as a "High Russian" in older days. I remember my grandmother and my grandfather talking about the "High Russians" when I was kid, there was much flavor there.

In Christ,

Matthew Panchisin

Andreas Moran

03-01-2008, 06:56 AM

Some time ago, I was asked about my religion and I replied, 'Orthodox'. The response was, 'Jewish?'!!!

Effie Ganatsios

03-01-2008, 07:24 AM

Dear Effie,

These are all facts that I have heard continuously with my own ears and that my conscience does not allow me to keep silent about because people are good here and that's how it happens. And that's the truth I have experienced personally.

Nina, that's the one thing each of us can do. Stand up and state the truth as we have experienced it. Second hand knowledge is not always reliable.

Thank you.

Effie

Effie Ganatsios

03-01-2008, 07:25 AM

Some time ago, I was asked about my religion and I replied, 'Orthodox'. The response was, 'Jewish?'!!!

Andreas, I have found on the Internet that if you type just Orthodox when trying to research something, a lot of Jewish sites will appear. You need to type Christian Orthodox to find what you are looking for.

Effie

Effie Ganatsios

03-01-2008, 07:34 AM

St. John the Baptist Orthodox Church in Indianapolis, IN has few, if any, Russians, Greeks, Syrians, or Bulgarians. They mostly go to the Russian, Greek, Antiochian, or Bulgarian churches in the city. What they DO have is Blacks, Asians, Hispanics, and most every traditionally non-Orthodox ethnic group there is.

How many Orthodox churches go out of their way to make Blacks or Hispanics or Asians welcome? Not many, I am very sorry to say. What I hear from most people advocating for an "American" Church is really simply a Church that is NOT specifically identified with any specific ethnic group. After all, what is an American? Can it be identified with ANY specific race or ethnicity or tribe? What we want is a church that is able to welcome whoever comes through the door, regardless of their background, without fear of losing the "old country identity", where a Church bazaar is as likely to have fried chicken or hamburgers or grilled steak alongside the kibbi or mousaka or halupki, apple pie along with baklava (or is it baklawa?). We want a church that reaches out to the local community, to the people who live in the same neighborhood as the Church itself, regardless of their color or ethnicity.

To this day, Orthodoxy remains a well-kept secret in America. We want that to change. We want to bring America to Orthodoxy, not to Little Greece or Russia outside of Russia. That is happening in Indianapolis, and in as much as it happens elsewhere, Orthodoxy will blossom and grow in America.

Herman, here I have found that when we see a black convert (on TV), at first we might find it to be a little curious, but then we feel proud and aware that we are being honoured. One of my favourite TV programmes is one here on our local TV station. I personally know the TV host, who is a very religious person. He has frequently presented programmes concerning the missionary activities of the Orthodox Church of Greece in Africa. Young priests spend many years of their lives helping others and spreading Orthodoxy there.
In fact Mother Gabriela, in her book, Ascetic of Love, urges young people - especially young women - to go to Africa and help the people there in any way they can.

Effie

Baklava??? Mmmmmm. Wish I had a piece just now. The temperature outside is -10C and a lovely piece of baklava would warm me up nicely. What's Halupki? You've included it in your greek foods but its the first time I have heard this name.

Effie Ganatsios

03-01-2008, 08:00 AM

I stole this from Andrew's profile. Sorry Andrew!

"I do not know a Greek Christ, a Russian Christ, an English Christ, an Arab Christ... Christ, for me, is everything, the supra-cosmic Being.
-Words of Life, Elder Sophrony"

Effie

M.C. Steenberg

03-01-2008, 12:35 PM

In his post above, Fr David wrote:

I do not think it is a bad thing at all to include the name of the national Church when you identify yourself as Orthodox. Greek, Serbian, Arabic, Russian and their various diasporal communities all have different "flavors" if you will. When I see that Nina is Greek Orthodox or that Andreas is Russian Orthodox (forgive me for singling you out) it tells me something about how your faith is lived out in your life. I think that the different flavors of Orthodox bring a richness and depth to our relationships with one another and to our Orthodox communities (like this one) that is somehow diminished when we drop the national identifiers.

I would go further than this, and would say that I think that to deny the 'ethnic' dimension of the Church is to strip something away from its incarnational reality. In my earlier post (http://www.monachos.net/forum/showpost.php?p=55789&postcount=51), I mentioned
"the difficult and problematic relationship between ‘Russian / Greek / other Orthodoxy’ and a fabled ‘just Orthodoxy’"
as one of standard issues of address in any conversations such as this. While I still believe it is rather tangential to the real issues of concern, which are ascetical, I would just note that this tendency to speak of 'just Orthodoxy' rather than 'Russian Orthodoxy', 'Greek Orthodoxy', 'Serbian Orthodoxy', etc., is most often reflective of a failure to understand that the Church lives an incarnate life, bound up in the persons and locales in which it thrives. The ethnos is a real, holy, necessary dimension of the Church -- as it was and is part of the reality of the incarnate Christ. This is not to say that the Church is bound to or restricted by particular ethnic national traits (this is a debased view of ethnic identity); such practice is an abuse of locality. But the Orthodox Church has always been a Church incarnate in locales and in peoples. To deny this in response to abuse misunderstanding of ethnic realities is to deny something central to Orthodox ecclesiology. It is short sighted. There is no such thing as 'just Orthodoxy'.

INXC, Dcn Matthew

John W.

03-01-2008, 01:09 PM

Dear Irene,

I think that your experience of "what are you doing here?" towards non-Russians is an example of growing pains, or rather, your experience shows that both "cradles" and "converts" have things we must learn together in order to grow as a Church.

My family and I will never be mistaken for Slavs, Greeks, Arabs, etc. Yet we have always been made to feel welcome in every Orthodox parish that we have visited - especially just after venerating the icons and lighting candles (or lighting candles and then venerating the icons).

Our wonderful experiences in our present ROCOR parish has stimulated us all to try to learn the Russian language. Why? To "become Russian?" Not at all. Whatever Russian and Slavonic that we are able to learn can only enrich our already rich experience of the Orthodox Faith as expressed in the Russian Church. Learning another language is a very, very, very small price to pay in order to pay for such riches! For example, think of pilgrimage to Russia: Trinity St. Sergius Lavra, Optina Pustyn, Diveyevo!

Your average Russian immigrant must learn a more English in order to function in American society than
the amount of Russian/Slavonic that we converts in the Russian Church must learn in order to participate in the liturgical life of the Church.

In our experience, there have never been any shortage of kind, caring "cradle" brethren who have stepped forward with translation and other help during times of linguistic trial!

"Fitting in" takes work on all sides.

John

Father David Moser's post (no. 69) makes sense. My personal bias comes from being in a country where the people of the Church, at the time I converted, really couldn't comprehend that there were non-Russians attending Church. Many times I have had people come up to me speaking in Russian and when I said I don't understand the language they would say "but I thought you were Russian" and look really puzzled.

In this country my Orthodox friends who are converts have said that they felt so alone and so overwhelmed by the Russianess when the Church is supposed to be for all of us. I can't tell you what a relief it was to finally find out that I am not alone that there are others, and now with the Internet I have found out that there are many, many others who have converted to Orthodoxy. In Australia at that time there was no interest in missionary work or bringing in converts and some of those that have converted to Orthodoxy went back to their Protestant Churches because they never felt like they fitted in.

John W.

03-01-2008, 01:22 PM

Herman Blaydoe

03-01-2008, 02:26 PM

Deacon Matthew wrote:
I would go further than this, and would say that I think that to deny the 'ethnic' dimension of the Church is to strip something away from its incarnational reality.

I wonder. Perhaps yes, perhaps no. Certainly the Jewish culture influenced the early Church, but St. Paul and St. John Chrysostom warn us that there can be a negative side to this as well, it can easily go too far. Balance is necessary, I suspect.

Fr. David wrote:
I do not think it is a bad thing at all to include the name of the national Church when you identify yourself as Orthodox. Greek, Serbian, Arabic, Russian and their various diasporal communities all have different "flavors" if you will.

Fine for one who knows what is going on, but to the uneducated newcomer, it can be quite overwhelming and off-putting, to the point of keeping prospective converts outside the doors. For example, how do I identify myself? I am not Russian, nor Greek, nor Syrian, although I have attended Russian, Greek, and Antiochian churches. I am not a Lemko, but I attend a Carpatho-Russian Church by accident of geography, even though I was accepted into the Church in the OCA. Telling someone who is not Orthodox that I am a member of a Carpatho-Russian parish means absolutely nothing to him. Having attended a wide variety of churches in my day, I have experienced a wide range of welcomes, from open arms to open hostility. I have been subject to amused curiosity and alarmed suspicion. I have been tolerated but not engaged. It might be fine if you want to attend the Liturgy but if you actually want to get involved on the council, or suggest an "outreach" program in some parishes, Heaven help you, you will not be welcome long. Been there, done that, bought the T-shirt.

I am also sorrowfully aware of missionary efforts in some areas that have been squashed because the local ethnic church felt it would be competative. Not that they wanted new members, but feared that some of their current financial support base might be lost if an English-speaking alternative was nearby. These things happen, and I think it is useful to be aware of it.

I have no problem with there being ethnic churches. They certainly do provide a wealth of experience and Tradition that we do well not to ignore. But I think there needs to be more parishes that are interested in making more Orthodox Christians and not so much about preserving Hellenism or recreating Russia outside of Russia. Greeks did not have to become Jews to become Orthodox. Russians did not have to become Greek to become Orthodox. Why should Americans have to become Greek or Russian to be Orthodox? Just wond'rin'.

Herman

Mary

03-01-2008, 02:39 PM

Amen, Fr. Deacon Matthew!

Pardon me, if this has already been stated in previous "American Orthodoxy" threads...

The fatal flaw in the ethos of those who seek to create a "truly American Expression of Orthodoxy" (a slogan of a U.S. Orthodox jurisdiction) is that Orthodox Christianity can only be deformed and corrupted if shaped by the American culture. There is a difference between church cultures that have been shaped and informed by centuries of Orthodox Christianity (e.g. the Greek Church, the Russian Church) and a church culture shaped and formed by the culture of the surrounds.

Personally, I find it a relief to retreat from "American Expressions" whenever I am in the Church.

John

I must disagree with you that "...Orthodox Christianity can only be deformed and corrupted if shaped by the American Culture." I'm not American myself. But all my life, the greatest kindness that has been shown to me, was by Americans, far more than even my own family. (And I come from an excellent family.) For that matter, the Canadians, the Australians, the New Zealanders, the English, the Scots, the Germans, the Polish, the Czech, the Ethiopians, the Eritreans, the Malawians, the Kenyans, the Ghanians and the Liberians, and more recently, the Greeks and the Russians that I've known - have all been good friends. Perhaps, I find more kindness in Americans, because I've known more Americans. I dont' know. But I wouldn't say that American culture deforms and corrupts. If it does, then I am happily deformed and corrupt.

Perhaps this whole thing about culture and orthodoxy is backwards. It isn't the culture that shapes orthodoxy, but orthodoxy that shapes the culture - or rather - heals the culture. So, the Russian Orthodox, are Russians according to Orthodoxy - they'll have similarities to their non-orthodox Russian neighbors, but they've been Orthodoxified by God. Same with the Greek Orthodox, and every other one out there. So, the American Orthodox are simply Americans Orthodoxified.

Just like, a person who is orthodox, does not deform and corrupt the Church, regardless of how sinful he is, but rather, the Church changes him and he becomes whole... so, a whole culture can be transformed and healed by the Church. Not the other way round. If even hades can't overcome the Church, how can a man-made culture? So, there's isn't ever going to be an Orthodoxy that's Americanized.

Herman, here I have found that when we see a black convert (on TV), at first we might find it to be a little curious, but then we feel proud and aware that we are being honoured.
Effie

Have you ever considered how ridiculous white orthodox look to the black orthodox? =) When I told my Eritrean friend that we were going to be baptised, she got histerical. She thought it was the biggest joke of the century, and she wanted to know who was in the congregation. I told her, we were the only asians, but the rest of the folks were white, and she thought I'd really gone nuts, she couldn't believe we were truly orthodoxy. So I asked her, if she lit candles, kissed icons, crossed herself and bowed, if her priest censed the church and the icons, etc... and she was speechless. She kept mumbling... "White people do all that?" It's so unwestern...

We were missionaries amongst a rural tribe in Ethiopia, and so many times, I've seen how Orthodoxy would fit them, so much better than the twisted immitation we took to them. Orthodoxy, would've tenderly taken what they were and healed them. What we took them... destroyed what they were, westernized them.

There is value in all cultures, just like there's worth in all people. God doesn't force us to look like each other. He made us different. He's only going to get all the sin out of us, not the things that make us unique, not the things that make us American, Russian, Greek, or even cultureless like myself.

In Christ,
Mary being Orthodoxified and trying not to Mary-fy Orthodoxy.

Fr Raphael Vereshack

03-01-2008, 03:40 PM

Perhaps this whole thing about culture and orthodoxy is backwards. It isn't the culture that shapes orthodoxy, but orthodoxy that shapes the culture - or rather - heals the culture. So, the Russian Orthodox, are Russians according to Orthodoxy - they'll have similarities to their non-orthodox Russian neighbors, but they've been Orthodoxified by God. Same with the Greek Orthodox, and every other one out there. So, the American Orthodox are simply Americans Orthodoxified.

I think this sums up the answer to Herman's question very well. After all everyone is different; some are more able to adapt to and learn the more outward expression of the national church they are part of. But some are much less able to.

The anchor point that remains however is a particular ethos that I think Fr David refers to. We each according to the church we are part of share in this ethos.

But because of what Mary refers to- culture transfigured- there is an aspect to this which always transcends its local expression. For example the Russian church now has many years experience (at least a century) of how it can be transplanted into local cultures and still retain its Russian spiritual ethos. Interestingly this ethos at the same time takes in and transforms these local cultures so that they also shine through. Even in parishes of the Church Abroad which are all Russian and Slavonic the ethos is not the same as in Russia. This is interesting as an example.

I agree then that in whatever form it takes - and the local culture must be allowed also- there is an anchor point which each of our churches must retain for its inner health.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

Rick H.

03-01-2008, 05:57 PM

A Place of Balance: "The Work of the Holy Spirit"

Herman the Simple wrote:

Balance is necessary, I suspect.

Yes, Herman, it can be quite overwhelming (and off-putting) for both the new convert and the prospective convert; however, with the balance that is presented in your post and Mary's, on this page, there is a peace that passes all understanding. And, your comment about missions is well received--discussion in this area can prove to be a barometer of sorts. But, thanks to both very much--in these two posts it is made clear that even regarding this topic there is a 'tightrope' that comes into view quickly.

Yes, keyword: 'balance.' Regarding topics such as this very one, how much instability in the Church of God has been brought about by those who jump to conclusions and provide knee jerk reactions to perceived/imagined extremist positions? This type of thing is at best, a flatfooted approach, or one bordering on psychotic behavior at worst. As John has spoken of and warned of the wiles of the Old Deluder, I would like to add this as a red flag to be recognized for what it is regardless of the vehicle in which it manifests itself. It is not hard to spot, and unfortunately this is a condition that only escalates when it is not recognized for what it is. There is help from the good doctor, John Cassian, as he writes of the demon of anger and the demon of pride in On the Eight Vices. However, as it relates specifically to our topic at hand, I think we find a great help/remedy in the words of Elder Sophrony via Effie (via Andrew):

"I do not know a Greek Christ, a Russian Christ, an English Christ, an Arab Christ... Christ, for me, is everything, the supra-cosmic Being.

-Words of Life, Elder Sophrony"

These are two of my favorite words, "supra" and "cosmic."

But, on the level at which we are at now, albeit in varied ways, this is a matter of recognition that we are dealing with here. For example, above, on this page, there is further conversation about those who would seek to "create" an American expression of Orthodoxy, and on the previous page there is a piece about those who would deny the ethnic dimension of the church. Maybe, I live too sheltered of a life, but who are these folks? Or possibly the use of the far demonstrative, 'those' folks, is telling in and of itself. I think, as Fr. Dcn. Matthew has well said, "short sighted" is the correct expression to link with those who would both attempt to "deny" and to "create." The few local churches that I have been exposed to are about half American and half ethnic (that just doesn't even sound right to type out--we are one family), or the majority is made up of American converts; but, I am not seeing this personally, and I am not reading this in articles, books, or papers. Is this a growing movement? Or is this possibly a vocal minority?

But, again as we consider the subject of a balanced approach to this topic, I appreciate Fr. Raphael's last post. Please look at the understanding, and his pastor's heart for the individual that is shared in his post. Please look at what he says about what is always transcended. And, finally, please look at his conclusion whereby he employs the use of the imperative speaking of the place of local culture in relation to the anchor point and the inner health of a functional local visible church.

I can see how some might possibly feel inclined to take issue with his statement about the anchor point being a particular ethos, or as he refers to Fr. David's post, whereby the anchor point would be a particular flavor. But, I see his post as a thing of beauty as a whole, and I am reminded of his very first post in the AO I thread (#15) which I think would also fit very nicely in this very place (which we seem to have camped on for a bit). It's hard to disagree with someone who accurately and characteristically presents both sides of an issue when assessing an issue. Yes, a heavenly balance, as it relates to the big picture, as we see in the following from Fr. Raphael:

I think that in all of this balance is needed.

For sure there is a tendency at times especially here in the west to hole up in our own parishes and never get to see the rest of Orthodoxy. Jurisdictions & geographic isolation both of which are mostly unique to our non-Orthodox countries greatly contribute to this. Very often we know only our own parish & perhaps about our own jurisdiction with little contact with the rest of the Church. So making the extra effort to get to know the rest of our Orthodox brothers & sisters, their parishes and jurisdictions is important.

We do however need to have a home parish. This is like having a family. Other families are also equally families. But our family has been given us by God especially so that we can achieve our salvation. In this sense we need to keep our minds and hearts focused on where God wants us to be.

This having a home parish is very important not just because we feel at home when there. More than this the home parish is that unplannable combination of persons & situations through which we achieve our salvation; through which we learn patience and love, which after all are the criterion by which we shall be judged.

This also is why many people in fact have been brought by God to parishes where there is that slight, or greater even, tension point, so that precisely they do not feel too much at home, where they cannot settle into too comfortably and have everything their own way. Something- language, customs, their being a new-comer- makes it so that they must continually go beyond themselves & make that extra effort.

In fact one of the greatest temptations of the modern parish is its tendency to drift towards being custom designed in the image of its human members. On the one hand there is some need of management but on the other hand things can get to such a level of control that the Holy Spirit barely has room to work anymore.

A home parish which allows for us to show responsibility but in which we also have to navigate through uncharted waters is the best combination in terms of our salvation.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

Yes, "uncharted waters."

In Christ,
Rick

Mary

03-01-2008, 06:48 PM

Dear Rick,

Thanks for bringing up that previous post of Fr Raphael's! I hadn't seen it before. How totally beautiful it is!

I can see how some might possibly feel inclined to take issue with his statement about the anchor point being a particular ethos, or as he refers to Fr. David's post, whereby the anchor point would be a particular flavor.

I agree, that the 'anchor point' is some flavor, but it's not an ethnic flavor, it's a heavenly flavor. So there's nothing there to take an issue with. I had to look up the word 'ethos' to make sure I knew what I was trying to say:

e·thos n. The disposition, character, or fundamental values peculiar to a specific person, people, culture, or movement.

We may all have similarities to our non-orthodox neighbors, but something makes us different from them (at least, it should!) That something that makes us different from the non-orthodox around is, is the same thing that makes us one with the orthodox from all around the world.

I really liked everything that Fr Dcn Matthew said about obedience:

One of the fundamental principles of monastic life is obedience. Not freedom, not personality, but obedience. ..... Obedient asceticism reveals the person, it is not driven by it. The true personality of the saints is not the fruit of their wills, but the genuine personhood of the creature in purified communion with its creator.

Local Orthodoxy will always rise out of obedient life. The new birth of monasticism in North America is a great sign – not simply of the embrace of the monastic way itself (a great blessing), but because it is evidence of a more widespread turning toward the authentic call of obedient life as the foundation of the Christian way. It is this that gives flower to true, authentic local Orthodoxy. INXC, Dcn Matthew

I've been reading more about the saints lately and I've been amazed at how different their lives were, and yet, they were alike. Their love for people, their kindness, their gentleness, etc. All of these were expressed in different ways. But one is the same in all of them - their obedience. So total, so complete, so drastic, so sacrificial. They had no thought for themselves, they didn't let anything get in the way of their obedience to God.

But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and desires. Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit. (Gal 5:22-25)

Maybe, that's the Orthodox flavor. And Obedience is the anchor. I like an anchor better than a tightrope to balance on. I could fall off a tight rope with the wind blows a bit harder than it should. But if I'm anchored, I'm safe. I'm also free, to fly as far as I can fly, to be myself.

Mary

John W.

04-01-2008, 12:32 AM

From today's Daily Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/portal/main.jhtml?xml=/portal/2008/01/03/ftsiberia103.xml):

"Two years ago Moscow dipped to -40F (-40C) just as the Orthodox Church marked the Feast of the Epiphany on January 19. Undaunted, hundreds of hardy "walruses" (as ice swimmers are known) jumped into the freezing waters of lakes and rivers, as tradition dictates, emerging a minute or two later with their hair coated in ice.

'This is why the Americans can't understand us Russians,' boomed the ultra-nationalist politician Vladimir Zhirinovsky , who dived in wearing only floral boxer shorts. 'We've been doing this for a thousand years!'"

===

C'mon American Orthodox Christians, jump on in! The water's fine!

John

Nina

04-01-2008, 12:54 AM

Some time ago, I was asked about my religion and I replied, 'Orthodox'. The response was, 'Jewish?'!!!

:) I always get the same since I always say Orthodox when asked about my faith. And some of the favorite responses are:

"Practicing?" (the person told me that without my hair covered, and with hair that look so real and not a wig it made him wonder)

"But you do not look Jewish! Did you convert?"

"Hmm Orthodox and wearing a cross?"

etc...

Nina

04-01-2008, 01:10 AM

Telling someone who is not Orthodox that I am a member of a Carpatho-Russian parish means absolutely nothing to him.

Herman

Dear Herman,

How about focusing the attention to Christ when you speak to a non-Orthodox? As ambassadors for Christ we need to focus the spotlight on Christ and His Church when we first talk to someone about Him and Orthodoxy, or introduce ourselves as Orthodox. This is the best opportunity to attract attention to Christ - you never know this might be the last opportunity for that poor soul to hear about Christ. The rest is just background scenography, be it the Maroon Bells, or the Eiffel Tower, or a slice of ice in Antarctica with a lost penguin on it.

John W.

04-01-2008, 01:14 AM

A Greek monk told me that he admired the ROCOR because they had the vision to plant the best of the Russian Orthodox monastic tradition, the monastic tradition of Optina Pustyn, in the U.S. in the form of Holy Trinity Monastery (Jordanville, NY) and the other monasteries. He told me that Elder Ephraim has a similar mission to plant the best of the Greek Orthodox monastic tradition, Mount Athos, here in America. This Father then explained to me that both "best" traditions are the same.

The fruits of these plantings will determine the future of the American Orthodox Church.

John

Father David Moser

04-01-2008, 01:16 AM

The rest is just background scenography, be it the Maroon Bells, or the Eiffel Tower, or a slice of ice in Antarctica with a lost penguin on it.

But I gotta tell you - Maroon Bells beats em all! There used to be a store that featured a huge backlit photomural of Maroon Bells and I would just go in there and stare. It was almost (almost mind you) like being there. And if you've been there, nothing else compares.

Fr David Moser

Nina

04-01-2008, 01:31 AM

But I gotta tell you - Maroon Bells beats em all! There used to be a store that featured a huge backlit photomural of Maroon Bells and I would just go in there and stare. It was almost (almost mind you) like being there. And if you've been there, nothing else compares.

Fr David Moser

Why my heart leaps and I have a big smile? I LOVE Maroon Bells!!! I have been there and fell in love with it that I changed all plans for the next day and went (early, early, early) to have breakfast picnic (one of the most memorable and best breakfasts of my life) and stare at Maroon Bells before hiking! And it rewarded us generously. The previous day was a lovely August day. The next morning it was covered with some snow! In August! The previous day I was saying "please can it snow so I can see it with snow as in those amazing photos?" And it is the most photographed spot in all North America! Pity that we visited it the day before we left. I would have gone daily to visit it- that's how much it stole my heart.

P.S I can post some of the pictures from the 2 days without snow and with snow but it is waaaaay more beautiful than my poor photographic skills could capture.

Nina

04-01-2008, 01:46 AM

Nina, that's the one thing each of us can do. Stand up and state the truth as we have experienced it. Second hand knowledge is not always reliable.

Thank you.

Effie

:) Then by default you need to prepare your luggage and come and visit us here.

Effie Ganatsios

04-01-2008, 09:26 AM

:) Then by default you need to prepare your luggage and come and visit us here.

Thank you, I would love to. My husband's family have all been there since the early 1900's and we have been invited countless times, but
it has just never happened.

I have lived there though through my books. As I have lived in many other countries. At the moment I am reading LOOK BACK ON HAPPINESS by KNUT HAMSUN, so I am experiencing this author's depiction of Norway. Have just started it but I am already entranced by it.

Effie

Rick H.

04-01-2008, 01:49 PM

A Supra-Epistemology:

"Rising Above/Transcending All Divisions (and All Divisiveness)"

I woke up this morning thinking about Herman's references here in this thread and elsewhere about an Orthodox Evangelism/Missiology. And, I started thinking about Effie's post about the Africans as well as Andrew's post about what he feels is behind the spiritual explosion of his local visible church.

And, then I read John's last post. By the way John, I appreciate the spirit of your writing (viz. 'come on in boys the waters fine'--free cup of coffee for any who can tell me what movie that line is from). And, it occurred to me that to move away from a way of thinking whereby one attempts to 'create' a certain Orthodoxy, and move toward some of the discussion where horticultural metaphors and discussion of 'growth' has been offered we see clearly just as Herman has shared in the following:

St. John the Baptist Orthodox Church in Indianapolis, IN has few, if any, Russians, Greeks, Syrians, or Bulgarians. They mostly go to the Russian, Greek, Antiochian, or Bulgarian churches in the city. What they DO have is Blacks, Asians, Hispanics, and most every traditionally non-Orthodox ethnic group there is.

How many Orthodox churches go out of their way to make Blacks or Hispanics or Asians welcome? Not many, I am very sorry to say. What I hear from most people advocating for an "American" Church is really simply a Church that is NOT specifically identified with any specific ethnic group. After all, what is an American? Can it be identified with ANY specific race or ethnicity or tribe? What we want is a church that is able to welcome whoever comes through the door, regardless of their background, without fear of losing the "old country identity", where a Church bazaar is as likely to have fried chicken or hamburgers or grilled steak alongside the kibbi or mousaka or halupki, apple pie along with baklava (or is it baklawa?). We want a church that reaches out to the local community, to the people who live in the same neighborhood as the Church itself, regardless of their color or ethnicity.

To this day, Orthodoxy remains a well-kept secret in America. We want that to change. We want to bring America to Orthodoxy, not to Little Greece or Russia outside of Russia. That is happening in Indianapolis, and in as much as it happens elsewhere, Orthodoxy will blossom and grow in America.

and, as John has shared in the following:

A Greek monk told me that he admired the ROCOR because they had the vision to plant the best of the Russian Orthodox monastic tradition, the monastic tradition of Optina Pustyn, in the U.S. in the form of Holy Trinity Monastery (Jordanville, NY) and the other monasteries. He told me that Elder Ephraim has a similar mission to plant the best of the Greek Orthodox monastic tradition, Mount Athos, here in America. This Father then explained to me that both "best" traditions are the same.

The fruit of these plantings are the future of the American Orthodox Church.

as we consider evangelism/missiology and monasticism together, this is a both/and situation. As we look at what has happened in America so far in the Orthodox churches and as we look back on the history of the Church it is clear that from the days of the Apostles (the ones sent) to our present day, to do God's work God's way without a doubt involves evangelism/missions. And, I know this thread is not about Orthodox Evangelism, but is seems appropriate at this juncture to make this clear as there have been so many references to what seems to be being promoted as the primacy of the institution of monasticism; but only one voice in the wilderness, so to say, promoting the way of the Apostles as given by our Lord Jesus Christ Himself.

As we may consider the wandering Hebrews in the desert, as we might consider their stumbling and fumbling and faltering along, we see it was their introversion and lack of trust [I](betach) in Yahweh that yielded/prolonged the environment/consequences they found themselves in. In this light I would suggest that the above discussion of evangelism and monasticism together, or in any discussion of an American Orthodoxy or any other--would eventually come to the realization that mature 'growth,' of a Orthodoxy, in particular, will be directly proportioned to the degree that its members simply turn to God and trust in Him. This was God's call to the wandering Hebrews . . . over and over and over He called to them with outstretched arms to turn to Him and trust/[I]betach in Him.

But, I'm not very awake now, as evidenced by the last sentence, and I feel myself going out to sea here this morning, so possibly I will turn to an address given about 24 years ago by Metropolitan +PHILIP, Archbishop (http://monachos.net/library/Orthodox_Dictionary#Archbishop) if the Antiochian Christian Archdiocese of North America.

Speaking of American Orthodoxy, and her various jurisdictions, he said:

Collectively, however, we have not been able to rise above our ethnicity and work together with one mind and one accord for the glory of Orthodoxy. Our efforts continue to be scattered in different directions.

And, please look very carefully at what he said following this:

I am not asking you to deny your own history and your own culture . . . I am not against ethnicism, if ethnicism means a return to the spirit of the desert fathers, the Syrian fathers, the Greek fathers, and the Slavic fathers. But if ethnicism means a narrow, fanatic ghetto mentality which separates us from each other, then I am definitely against such ethnicism.

That is right on target. This is clear level headed thinking. As Mary said yesterday:

I agree, that the 'anchor point' is some flavor, but it's not an ethnic flavor, it's a heavenly flavor.

Mary well points out what is at the heart of an American Orthodoxy, what is the highest common denominator of all Eastern Orthodoxy--a (monos) "heavenly flavor."

In American Orthodoxy today, there is a beautiful, heavenly ethnicism, but there is also a rank ethnicism. It requires no special gift, it is not hard to see the difference between the two.

And, this heavenly ethnicism in an American Orthodoxy can be recognized very easily, it is the same spirit as we see in the spirit of the desert Fathers--the spirit of the Greek, Syrian, and Slavic Fathers which is the Spirit of Life.

But, possibly there is something here that makes some feel uncomfortable as it relates to the individual monachos in relation to his/her local particular visible community? Or possibly, for some, there is something disturbing about the logical outcome of what is being said as it relates to Eastern Orthodoxy in general?

In Christ,
Rick

Fr Raphael Vereshack

04-01-2008, 03:20 PM

Andreas Moran

05-01-2008, 12:15 AM

Quotation:
Originally Posted by John W.
From today's Daily Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/portal/ma...beria103.xml):

"Two years ago Moscow dipped to -40F (-40C) just as the Orthodox Church marked the Feast of the Epiphany on January 19. Undaunted, hundreds of hardy "walruses" (as ice swimmers are known) jumped into the freezing waters of lakes and rivers, as tradition dictates, emerging a minute or two later with their hair coated in ice.

Don't believe everything you read in the Daily Telegraph! It has not been -40C in Moscow for very many years, and it certainly wasn't anything like that cold two years ago - I was there! This year, there is no snow and the temprature is -18C. The Daily Telegraph is the newspaper that reported about four years ago that a 'killer icon' in the Hermitage in St Petersburg was striking people dead from its influence on them. The icon was described as being the one of Christ by St Andrei Rublev - the icon which is in the Tretyakov Gallery in Moscow!

John W.

05-01-2008, 02:41 AM

Don't believe everything read in the Daily Telegraph! It has not been -40C in Moscow for very many years, and it certainly wasn't anything like that cold two years ago - I was there! This year, there is no snow and the temprature is -18C. The Daily Telegraph is the newspaper that reported about four years ago that a 'killer icon' in the Hermitage in St Petersburg was striking people dead from its influence on them. The icon was described as being the one of Christ by St Andrei Rublev - the icon which is in the Tretyakov Gallery in Moscow!

I remember that story! You can still find the Daily Telegraph piece online. DT erroneously used a photo of the Rublev icon of Christ to illustrate the story. I recall reading the story in English from a Russian source (Interfax? Pravda? ITAR-TASS?) that called the icon "Christ of the Burning Eye" or "Burning Eyes." I found a picture of it on the now defunct site: www.russiantreasures.net.

It was pretty intense. Scary, even. I copied it and used it as my desktop wallpaper for awhile until the wife told me to change it. If anyone has a link to an image of this icon, I'd love to look at it again!

John

Effie Ganatsios

05-01-2008, 08:40 AM

This January 19th (Old Calendar Theophany) Orthodox clergy from all of the Orthodox churches here will celebrate the Great Blessing of the Water on the Red river. Due to the fact that our small city has a high proportion of Ukrainian Orthodox from emigration over a century ago, this service used to be done 'in the old days'. But now after a pause of many years we will all gather together on this day once again to bless the river.

Just the fact that we can gather together is a sign of what can be achieved in North America. Also since our common language of communication is English this will be the language the service is done in.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

Sadly this beautiful tradition of young men (sometimes old, and sometimes girls and women) jumping into the sea, or river, or lake, after the priest has thrown the cross into the water, was abolished in my city last year. Our new (I should say fairly new and an American import. He was a loyal supporter of the previous Archbishop of America, Spiridon) Metropolitan of Servia and Kozani, Paulus, decided that he need not go to Aliamon Lake and throw the cross in but contented himself with a large tub of water in the main square. People were very upset about this. In fact, the 2nd largest town in our prefecture decided to separate and the priest there carried out a separate ceremony in the Aliakmon. This town, Servia, has a long and rich history. St. Paul visited it during his travels in Macedonia. (Kozani is the capital of West Macedonia, Greece).

What will happen this year is anyone's guess.

The temperature has been from -10C to 1C for the last week or so but the temperature of the water is not an issue.

Effie

Effie Ganatsios

05-01-2008, 10:32 AM

Rick H.

05-01-2008, 01:24 PM

Ice Swimming and Bobbing for Crosses

The term "ice swimmer" sounds about right if the temp was -40F.

And, I guess we take the good with the less than good Effie. As we see what serves to unite in a most heavenly way in Winnipeg is what serves to divide in Servia. I wonder what this says about such things as genuine unity, obedience to the bishop, and tradition where Orthodoxy has grown, matured, and flowered as it has in the great nation of Greece. Possibly, human nature is human nature and people are people regardless of the presupposed level of health and spiritual maturity of any given generation--regardless of geography and what soil our feet touch. In fact, as I consider this more, in relation to the situation you share and our topic as a whole, I think the ever popular Martin Luther's words, in his commentary on Galatians, are appropriate here when he said, "Into the ashcan with your presuppositions."

In Christ,
Rick

Rick H.

05-01-2008, 03:20 PM

Hmmm . . .

Dear Effie,

I woke up on the right side of the bed today; however, I must say that your last post has 'bothered me' ever since I read it. I suspect there are not many here who are familiar with the way Barth uses the term Church Dogmatics, and while I don't want to go into this now, I think it is possible that just as the Apostle Paul was a dogmatician of the highest order, this is an innate quality of yours as well when you wrote:

Something that bothered me in what I just heard (and I am aware that this is out of context) is that he said that those who read the New Testament and are not "of the Church" are not supposed to, it is like reading someone else's e-mail????????????? What on earth could he have meant?

This touches possibly the greatest problem that exists in any organism that names the name of Christ. And, there is a very fine line here that really requires a powerful microscope to see. One that is really even hard to describe.

Possibly, those who have seen the look on Bilbo Baggins's face, or Gollum's face, when each one says of the ring, "IT'S MINE" have started to focus the lens of the microscope in order to bring this thing, this mood, into view.

As we consider the kerygma of Christ, as we consider the gospel proclaimed by Paul, what does the expression, as used above, "IT'S MINE" have to do with the Kingdom of God or the Good News of the Gospel of Christ?

Or, let's take this one step further. 'What in the world' does the expression "IT'S OURS" used of the Written Word, the Living Word, the Divine Logos, have to do with the speech/logos of any professing learner/disciple of Christ?

Think about this dysfunctional introversion this isolationism. There is no positive disengagement here at all. There is a defensiveness and a selfishness in all of this that rises above the level of mere fear. All discussion on evangelism/missions aside, there can be no justification for this mood, this attitude. I am not without compassion for those who have had their way of knowing formed, and been formed spiritually, by focusing on the heresies that have plagued the Church since the beginning. And, it occurs to me that much of the core doctrine of the Church was formed during a time of fighting against heresies. But, here again, we see there must be a balanced approach employed to avoid being ensnared in an unhealthy extremist position. However, for any who have seen the movie that I speak of above and can hear the voice of Bilbo or Gollum in their mind right now, I feel strongly that the expressions as used in that context of 'the precious', "IT'S MINE" or "IT'S OURS" are without any intelligent meaning in relation to an historic Orthodox Christian approach.

On a more positive note, as I think back to the beginning of the New Testament Church, and I consider the Apostle Paul as the first human Orthodoxy Dogmatician for the first time today, I thank you for being the catalyst for this understanding, and for showing me that there is an Orthodox Dogmatics alive and well in Orthodoxy today as in the days of the first disciples of Christ. And, I thank you for showing me another aspect of American Orthodoxy which includes a strong dose of Church Dogmatics as evidenced by some of the North American writing clergy that have been quoted in this thread and the other. In fact, the more I think about this the more the words in a previous post about this thread not being about ecclesiological governance ring true. In this sense, my earlier intuitive thoughts about the future of an American Orthodoxy grow stronger as I consider the juridical verses the existential ways of recognizing an American Orthodoxy. In other words, I have suspected that while existentially there *IS* an American Orthodoxy (one must be completely introverted/ostrichlike--with the fingers in the ears while humming a melody--or completely deaf, dumb, and blind to not see it), possibly, there never will be an American Orthodoxy juridically. In this sense there never will be one ring to rule them all by which it can be said, "IT'S MINE" by any individual or particular group/society. Hmm . . .

In Christ,
Rick

John W.

05-01-2008, 03:27 PM

I am listening to Ancient Faith radio at the moment, while working at my computer. I have been listening to a sermon on the Church by
Fr. Steven Freeman, who was formerly an Anglican as he just said.

Something that bothered me in what I just heard (and I am aware that this is out of context) is that he said that those who read the New Testament and are not "of the Church" are not supposed to, it is like reading someone else's e-mail????????????? What on earth could he have meant?

Effie

Bishop Kallistos Ware of Diokleia:

"[W]e should receive and interpret Scripture through the Church and in the Church. Our approach to the Bible is not only obedient but ecclesial.

It is the Church that tells us what is Scripture. A book is not part of Scripture because of any particular theory about its dating and authorship. Even if it could be proved, for example, that the Fourth Gospel was not actually written by John the beloved disciple of Christ, this would not alter the fact that we Orthodox accept the Fourth Gospel as Holy Scripture. Why? Because the Gospel of John is accepted by the Church and in the Church.

It is the Church that tells us what is Scripture, and it is also the Church that tells us how Scripture is to be understood. Coming upon the Ethiopian as he read the Old Testament in his chariot, Philip the Apostle asked him, 'Understandest thou what thou readest?' And the Ethiopian answered, 'How can I, unless some man should guide me?' (Acts 8:30-31). We are all in the position of the Ethiopian. The words of Scripture are not always self-explanatory. God speaks directly to the heart of each one of us as we read our Bible. Scripture reading is a personal dialogue between each one of us and Christ - but we also need guidance. And our guide is the Church. We make full use of our own personal understanding, assisted by the Spirit, we make full use of the findings of modern Biblical research, but always we submit private opinion - whether our own or that of the scholars - to the total experience of the Church throughout the ages.

The Orthodox standpoint here is summed up in the question asked of a convert at the reception service used by the Russian Church: 'Do you acknowledge that the Holy Scripture must be accepted and interpreted in accordance with the belief which has been handed down by the Holy Fathers, and which the Holy Orthodox Church, our Mother, has always held and still does hold?'

We read the Bible personally, but not as isolated individuals. We read as the members of a family, the family of the Orthodox Catholic Church. When reading Scripture, we say not 'I' but 'We.' We read in communion with all the other members of the Body of Christ, in all parts of the world and in all generations of time. The decisive test and criterion for our understanding of what the Scripture means is the mind of the Church. The Bible is the book of the Church."

From:
How to Read the Bible
http://orthodoxeurope.org/page/11/1/4.aspx#church

Fr Raphael Vereshack

05-01-2008, 03:42 PM

Something that bothered me in what I just heard (and I am aware that this is out of context) is that he said that those who read the New Testament and are not "of the Church" are not supposed to, it is like reading someone else's e-mail????????????? What on earth could he have meant?

It could be that the priest is saying that it is only from within the Church that one can understand Scripture. Although the next part of this statement is usually, it is so because Scripture comes from within the Church, it could be that the priest meant that only within the context of the Church (ie like reading someone else's email) can one understand Scripture.

In any case an important point, at least in the Church's understanding, is what it means to understand or to know. Within the Church, to know is along the lines of knowing someone. Everybody who meets that person in a sense knows them. But only within a certain close & committed relationship does anyone really know them.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

Rick H.

05-01-2008, 04:06 PM

In any case an important point, at least in the Church's understanding, is what it means to understand or to know. Within the Church, to know is along the lines of knowing someone. Everybody who meets that person in a sense knows them. But only within a certain close & committed relationship does anyone really know them.

This is IT. This is crucial. All chasing of rabbits and "Who's on First?" routines aside . . . this is the crux as it relates to 'what it means to know' or to 'really know.' And, I'm trying to avoid this type of language as much as possible here, but beyond a stand alone epistemology, to really know implies a reciprocal relationship, a being known, a relational ontology whereby those who name the name of Christ will not hear those dreadful words on that day:

'Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?' "And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!'

Mat 7:22-23

So as it relates to me, you, Bilbo, Gollum, or any individual or particular group it is true that one's ontology models one's epistemology, and there is nothing that matters more in this world than to understand or stand under the meaning of this. Sometimes words and phrases just get in the way; however, at other times they point directly to the Way.

Yes, an [I]interpersonal relationship with Jesus Christ, without this, one is left only with a theology of hope in order to avoid the helpless laughter of the agnostic.

In Christ,
Rick

Owen Jones

06-01-2008, 02:35 AM

Many younger generation Greeks in America want to see a church that is different in tone, shall we say, from the traditional Greek parish, that would be more attractive to non-Greeks. Language is only one of the issues. I think the stress on families and parents in our society is simply not being met in the typical parish environment, and so the need for more spiritual orientation and "support" is something one hears about. One such parish is in the north suburban Atlanta area. As a convert, if you are traveling to, or moving to Atlanta, and ask a Greek parish priest where to go, he will likely steer you there, rather than to the cathedral. While I have never felt unwanted in a Greek parish, there is nevertheless an implicit kind of distinction that exists. At the same time, it is really important for Greeks to maintain their cultural traditions that are linked to the Church. But the problem remains that the Greek Church, and perhaps this is true of other jurisdictions, feels very uncomfortable with the whole idea of evangelizing. It's like they see themselves as guests here. In America, it is expected that if you believe in something strongly, you shout it out!

Effie Ganatsios

06-01-2008, 09:28 AM

It could be that the priest is saying that it is only from within the Church that one can understand Scripture. Although the next part of this statement is usually, it is so because Scripture comes from within the Church, it could be that the priest meant that only within the context of the Church (ie like reading someone else's email) can one understand Scripture.

In any case an important point, at least in the Church's understanding, is what it means to understand or to know. Within the Church, to know is along the lines of knowing someone. Everybody who meets that person in a sense knows them. But only within a certain close & committed relationship does anyone really know them.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

Thank you Father. This makes sense to me. I had the impression that this priest was saying that people who don't belong to the Orthodox Church have no business reading the bible. But I can now see that perhaps he wasn't saying this at all. His sermon can be found on Ancient Faith radio podcasts.

Effie

Effie Ganatsios

06-01-2008, 09:31 AM

Bishop Kallistos Ware of Diokleia:

"[W]e should receive and interpret Scripture through the Church and in the Church. Our approach to the Bible is not only obedient but ecclesial.

It is the Church that tells us what is Scripture. A book is not part of Scripture because of any particular theory about its dating and authorship. Even if it could be proved, for example, that the Fourth Gospel was not actually written by John the beloved disciple of Christ, this would not alter the fact that we Orthodox accept the Fourth Gospel as Holy Scripture. Why? Because the Gospel of John is accepted by the Church and in the Church.

http://orthodoxeurope.org/page/11/1/4.aspx#church

The above is clear. This seems to be what the comment I posted was based on. It was my ignorance, obviously, that made the comment seem so inappropriate. Thank you John for this and the link you posted.

Effie

Effie Ganatsios

06-01-2008, 10:22 AM

Effie Ganatsios

06-01-2008, 10:35 AM

. In America, it is expected that if you believe in something strongly, you shout it out!

Owen, I was taught that the way we live our lives is the way we attract non-Orthodox to Orthodoxy. We do not need to "shout it out". Silence is often a surer indicator of believing in something strongly that all the shouting in the world.

BUT, obviously this is not true of America, so I can agree with your statement.

"
As the presence of the Universal Church, the parish is called to witness to those within and those outside the community of believers. If we believe that in Orthodoxy we have the fullness of the Truth, then we have the great responsibility - the Great Commission - to share it with all people. All aspects of the parish may be seen as apostolic, and the Orthodox faithful are called to incorporate Christian mission in all aspects of life. When Christ said, "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations..." he commissioned us to transform the parish into an agency of Christian outreach.

The American culture offers us great opportunities to conduct successful parish renewal, outreach and evangelism. It is time for a new beginning and a renewed effort to inspire creativity and revival in Orthodox Christianity in the United States. It is our duty and obligation not to hide our light under the bushel, but to let it shine before all people - to regain the missionary model that established the early Church. We must let our light so shine - because unless people see in us the light and the love of Christ, they will not believe. "

The above is from
http://www.goarch.org/en/archdiocese/departments/outreach/

However, isn't the last sentence compatible with my assertion that we must allow our lives to be what draws people and makes them curious about our religion? "We must let our light so shine ' because unless people see in us the light and the love of Christ, they will not believe."?

Effie

Rick H.

06-01-2008, 03:37 PM

While I have never felt unwanted in a Greek parish, there is nevertheless an implicit kind of distinction that exists.

. . . It's like they [Greeks] see themselves as guests here.

This is very insightful. This has been my experience too, whereby the Greek parish is made up of 'guests' entertaining other 'guests'--not the best definition of church as community; but none the less possibly a good description of an American Orthodoxy today from a juridical view.

In Christ,
Rick

Rick H.

06-01-2008, 04:07 PM

Rick, I feel that you have misunderstood me. I found it strange that an Orthodox priest would say such a thing i.e. that only those of the Church are entitled to read the New Testament. I realize now (due to two posts on this thread) that I must have misunderstood what was being said.

Dear Effie,

I think I understood you well when you quoted Father Steven Freeman as saying:

those who read the New Testament and are not "of the Church" are not supposed to, it is like reading someone else's e-mail

and, then as you asked, "what on earth could he have meant?" (keyword 'could') and as you commented that this bothered you, I think it is very clear what you were saying. And, if he did not develop what he was saying any further than this, it is very clear what Fr. Steven said as well.

Father Steven's words indicate that one who is not 'of the Church' should not read the Bible. He says it is like reading someone else's mail.

You have received two other posts speculating about what he meant. However, I don't think we have enough information to guess about his meaning here as it relates to his comments directed specifically toward those "not of the Church."

Otherwise, when you say:

Am I showing my great ignorance again??? I have not read Barth's Church Dogmatics but, as words, dogma and dogmatic seem to have different meanings in the way they are used today.

I'm afraid there is a bit of ignorance on your part as it relates to Church Dogmatics as used by Barth and other Swiss and German theologians, but I shouldn't have brought that up here. For any who care, one can be brought up to speed very quickly on this in the first volume of his 14 vol. set "Church Dogmatics." This is I.1 "The Doctrine of the Word of God."

Although, I kind of went off a bit yesterday after reading your post, I still stand behind what was written 100% . . . especially my insinuation that you may be an Orthoodox Dogmatician unaware! :)

In fact, after reading your last post, I am convinced of this as you wrote:

It is time for a new beginning and a renewed effort to inspire creativity and revival in Orthodox Christianity in the United States. It is our duty and obligation not to hide our light under the bushel, but to let it shine before all people - to regain the missionary model that established the early Church.

As with the Apostle Paul this was seemingly an innate operation/unction. Possibly, this brings to light another characteristic somewhat unique to an American Orthodoxy. As Paul was known to shout out his message from time to time (especially when legalism/formalism reared its head in his new church plants via Judaizers or St. Peter), we may see some of this, in some, in an American Orthodoxy--although hopefully this is not limited to an AO.

Peace to you and yours Effie,
Rick

Owen Jones

06-01-2008, 06:20 PM

The great success of Protestantism is that any man who can read now has access to Scripture in a language he can understand, without the Church telling him how to think. It is at the very least an insufficient doctrine for Orthodoxy to tell people that they can only know what is in the Bible by consulting the pronouncements of a Church council. The problem is largely with the preaching in our churches, which gets back to deficiencies in seminary training. Most sermons provide some historical background to explicate the text, or an historical review of a saint's life. This offers little spiritual connection. I would love to hear just one sermon on a topic such as "seeing God" in Scripture, or in other people, or in daily life. Or a sermon on how we are to be changed. What is our role in the transfiguration and glorification of our nature?

Scripture, as we know, is to be read and understood on several levels at once: historical; common sense teachings on morality and how to live our lives; transformative. The first two levels are presumably open to anyone picking up the book and reading it. The latter is something that requires our therapeutic theology. That is to say, in order to read and understand Scripture's transformative message, one must first be transformed. And this transformation begins with practicing the ascetical virtues. But when is the last time we heard a sermon about how fasting and alms giving transforms our ability to know and understand? It is simply offered as a duty and obligation. At best, we do it because this is the way Christ lived, but it is not connected to glorification of the body and the spiritual senses. This is because the truths conveyed in seminary are of an apodictic nature, not directly connected to our teachings on glorification. i.e. there are assumed to be a priori truths rather than a posteriori.

Andreas Moran

07-01-2008, 01:58 AM

The great success of Protestantism is that any man who can read now has access to Scripture in a language he can understand, without the Church telling him how to think.

This is the great failure of Protestantism. Individual Protestants can think what they please. What a person thinks may be erroneous. Avoidance of error comes from being guided by the Church. We Orthodox know how to read the scriptures because we have the commentaries of the Holy Fathers (not the pronouncements of the Councils which were guides to how to avoid heresy, not how positively to understand the scriptures). If an individual pastor's sermons do not deliver the necessary message, that is the shortfall of that pastor, not of the Church.

That is to say, in order to read and understand Scripture's transformative message, one must first be transformed.

This is putting the cart before the horse. We are to be transformed by reading of the scriptures - in the light of the guidance of the Holy Fathers. Thanks be to God, our priest tells us very clearly about fasting and giving alms.

Rick H.

07-01-2008, 03:08 AM

This is the great failure of Protestantism.

Andreas--I'm not sure if you are referring directly to Owen's comment here about the translation and transmission of the Scriptures or not. But, if you are then possibly we will have to take at least a glance to the area of biblilology, afterall, and possibly the English Reformation. Ironically, I think it was Anthony who just the other day indicated that he was having trouble retrieving a post with the search feature that included the name 'Hus.' For that matter I have noticed that some of my posts (viz. eros and agape) seem to have disappeared as well.

But, lest we become completely censor happy here as it relates to the Holy Writ, it should be clear to all that the sacrifices of men like Hus were not in vain and were clearly vehicles of the grace of God to the many.

In Christ,
Rick

Owen Jones

07-01-2008, 05:14 AM

The Protestants have certainly been successful in finding converts. According to some reports there are 200 million Christians in China. Anyone want to bet how many of them are Protestants? 99.5% maybe? The reason is that it is simple to become a protestant, and you don't have to wait around for a hierarch to give you a blessing before you form a house Church, and you don't need a year to learn the service books. I'm not suggesting we get rid of hierarchs and service books, I'm simply looking at it pragmatically. If a hundred or a thousand or five thousand or ten thousand people in rural Georgia or South Carolina wanted to become Orthodox, it simply could not happen. From a practical standpoint, it would just be impossible. Too complicated and unworkable. So there is precious little point in arguing that our theology is sublime, when there is no practical way of actually putting it into practice in most of America today, or in any country that does not have a strong cultural background in Orthodoxy already. This was the idea behind the Orthodox study Bible, which, for all its limitations, is designed to help people who are used to just picking up their Bible and reading it to begin to see that there is a deeper meaning, and not just a bunch of slogans.

I think we ought to resist any hint of smarmyness toward protestants and their success in finding converts, and their commitment to evangelization. Perhaps we can learn a few things. So if it's OK for the Greek Churches in America to continue to celebrate their ethnic and national heritage as incarnational (and I agree that it is OK) perhaps there is also a way to make Orthodoxy incarnational for American individualists, without in any way degrading or cheapening what we have.

Many, many American protestants are filled with anxiety about the direction of the culture and world around them, because protestantism is a very worldly type of religion. I'm not suggesting that Orthodoxy become more like protestantism, just the opposite. Only that the cultural environment of individualism is not something just to be scorned, but something we ought to incorporate into our thinking. The people in the ancient world who fled the cosmopolitan form of imperial Christianity for the desert were the ultimate individualists. They didn't wait for an episcopal blessing. The story of Melania and Evagrius is a good case in point. The ultimate individualist is one who scorns mass psychology, who scorns the corruption of worldly authorities, but instead of whining and complaining, or instead of becoming an activist bent on changing the world, commits himself to a different way of life -- of bringing about a revolution within himself. There is no reason why three or four people can't go into the woods with a Bible and some service books and a book of patristic sermons, maybe a copy of the Prologue, and become monastics, instead of waiting around for someone to tell them what they can and cannot do. That's the American way!

Andrew

07-01-2008, 05:37 AM

The great success of Protestantism is that any man who can read now has access to Scripture in a language he can understand, without the Church telling him how to think. It is at the very least an insufficient doctrine for Orthodoxy to tell people that they can only know what is in the Bible by consulting the pronouncements of a Church council. The problem is largely with the preaching in our churches, which gets back to deficiencies in seminary training. Most sermons provide some historical background to explicate the text, or an historical review of a saint's life. This offers little spiritual connection. I would love to hear just one sermon on a topic such as "seeing God" in Scripture, or in other people, or in daily life. Or a sermon on how we are to be changed. What is our role in the transfiguration and glorification of our nature?

At my church, every single sermon (seriously, every single one) is about the deification of man in Christ, asceticism, and the enlargement of the heart. With this priest, the church went from maybe forty people attending on a Sunday three years ago to 180 and growing even more now... last week we had eight baptisms. There are constantly new catechumens, new babies being born, and such things. People see that the way that the Fathers have laid out works, and they want to grow in Christ, so they come.

On an average week, we have three divine liturgies. The Monday morning liturgy is at six in the morning, and attendance is increasing dramatically. It started off with maybe me and another altar server, a reader, the priest, and maybe one or two other parishioners. Now there are probably about twenty people, sometimes more, sometimes less. Thursday morning liturgies at 9:30 usually attract house wives, older women, and children. In addition, we have Wednesday night Vespers, and Great Vespers every Saturday night.

My priest is not a monk... he has four kids, and another on the way. We are blessed to have him as our priest.

Owen Jones

07-01-2008, 05:53 AM

He's shouting it out!

Andreas Moran

07-01-2008, 11:13 AM

There is no reason why three or four people can't go into the woods with a Bible and some service books and a book of patristic sermons, maybe a copy of the Prologue, and become monastics, instead of waiting around for someone to tell them what they can and cannot do. That's the American way!

But not, according to what I have learned, the Orthodox way.

Effie Ganatsios

07-01-2008, 02:50 PM

Dear Effie,

I think I understood you well when you quoted Father Steven Freeman as saying:

and, then as you asked, "what on earth could he have meant?" (keyword 'could') and as you commented that this bothered you, I think it is very clear what you were saying. And, if he did not develop what he was saying any further than this, it is very clear what Fr. Steven said as well.

Father Steven's words indicate that one who is not 'of the Church' should not read the Bible. He says it is like reading someone else's mail.

..Peace to you and yours Effie,
Rick

Thank you Rick. Peace to you too. I was very irritated by this priest's comment, as I understood it when I first heard it. You seem to be saying that I agree with it.

I don't. At least not in the way I first understood it. I can now see (from further posts) that he might have meant something else.

Effie

Rick H.

07-01-2008, 02:54 PM

Only that the cultural environment of individualism is not something just to be scorned, but something we ought to incorporate into our thinking. The people in the ancient world who fled the cosmopolitan form of imperial Christianity for the desert were the ultimate individualists. They didn't wait for an episcopal blessing. The story of Melania and Evagrius is a good case in point. The ultimate individualist is one who scorns mass psychology, who scorns the corruption of worldly authorities, but instead of whining and complaining, or instead of becoming an activist bent on changing the world, commits himself to a different way of life -- of bringing about a revolution within himself.

Dear Owen,

I see what you meant now when you made some negative comments about the field of psychology several months back. There is so much wisdom that you have presented in your last post as a whole. I wish I had more time to interact with it this morning; but in short thank you for this. You both present and model the Beauty and the potential to be found in an American Orthodoxy! You present great wisdom in your comments above regarding individualism as you begin to highlight the 'ultimate individualist' as I have suggested in the past the way to genuine community is via a radical individualism. This is not a short conversation though for most and it needs to be developed more I think. And, I suspect this is what is at the root of the discomfort of more than a few as we consider our topic further God willing.

In Christ,
Rick

Nina

07-01-2008, 03:15 PM

In America, it is expected that if you believe in something strongly, you shout it out!

Dear Owen,

:) Sorry, but the results of the "Dean Scream" prove you wrong. When the "shout it out" is not successful in politics, how can it be in religion? And what about the phrase 'actions speak louder than words'?

Concerning the GO and evangelism: Do you not know of OCMC?

Concerning guests who welcome guests. I see that attitude aligned with what Fathers say: we are all guests on this earth. That is not even an argument.

Dear all,

We should keep something in mind. In religion as in other walks of life we need to have high expectations of ourselves and lower expectations for others. This is an unprocessed form of the saying of the Fathers that say 'regard others higher than you, and regard yourself as the lowest of the creatures'. It is not like I am a loyal follower of that precious advise. However thinking that this is an Orthodox thread and reading so many complaints it will make even an agnostic wonder.

Effie Ganatsios

07-01-2008, 03:34 PM

There still exists a chasm between some converts and so-called cradle Orthodox. What do we each want from Orthodoxy? What do I want? In Orthodoxy I feel free to pursue my path towards God, I don't feel the need to try to convince protestants, or buddhists, or whatever that MY religion is better, I try to respect the fact that other people believe in other things, I know that other religions or christian denominations have some good things to offer us but I believe that all I need to know is in the Orthodox religion. I don't need to prove that the Orthodox religion is best because it does not concern me what other people think. I don't need to be a theologian and know all about what A did to B in the 3rd century.

For me, my religion is intensely personal and is not something that has to be "sold" to anyone, it does not need to be the subject of an advertising campaign. I do not need to learn all about other Christian denominations so that I can "destroy" their adherents in spiritual battle. I have enough troubles with my own battles and weaknesses. As I said, my religion is very personal and I don't feel the need to apologize or explain it to anyone.

What do other people want from Orthodoxy? Or what do they want to give to Orthodoxy?

Here you will find Father Averky's and Father Moser's posts (hope I haven't taken too much of a liberty with your post, Father).

http://www.monachos.net/forum/showthread.php?p=44132&highlight=father+Averky+American+orthodoxy#post441 32

Effie

Herman Blaydoe

07-01-2008, 03:37 PM

Sorry, but the results of the "Dean Scream" prove you wrong. When the "shout it out" is not successful in politics, how can it be in religion? And what about the phrase 'actions speak louder than words'?

I do not think that Owen is advocating being "loud", but merely stating what seems to be a demonstrated tendency in America, which seems to be if it is worth doing, it is worth overdoing. We see it in our marketing, we certainly see it in politics, and we absolutely see it in religion. To say it doesn't exist means you haven't really studied the American scene, I'm afraid. Many people are very tired of it, there is a negative reaction to it, but that simply goes to show that it does exist, regardless.

This cacophony of ideas that is America does represent a challenge to a Faith that emphasizes the "quiet voice" of God. I don't think anyone here, least of all Owen, will disagree that actions speak louder than words on an individual level, but such things often get lost in the numbers and certainly in the media, which emphasizes loud, extravagant, shocking, and extreme. Not saying it is a good thing, but it is a thing to be aware of.

Nina

07-01-2008, 04:55 PM

To say it doesn't exist means you haven't really studied the American scene, I'm afraid.

What does not exist?

Nina

07-01-2008, 05:25 PM

What do we each want from Orthodoxy? What do I want?
Effie

Effie I agree with what you say and about the humility we should approach matters with. Honestly, we need to accept the fact that Orthodoxy does not need us (as God said in the OT, He can create descendants of Abraham out of dead matter). We need Orthodoxy. And as you say, all that matters at the end is our soul's salvation. And it is often repeated here and in other threads by Father Moser, by Andrew and many others the beautiful saying of St. Seraphim of Sarov: 'Save your soul and hundreds of people around you will be saved'. So the person responsible here is the 'I' instead of 'them'. We need to save our souls and just by default others will be saved. Because that is the kind of action that speaks even louder than everything. I mean in Sarov probably they have a digital gap even today compared to other technologically advanced places, not to mention in the times of Saint Seraphim. However we all know about this Saint and what he did and what he taught.

Mary

08-01-2008, 04:17 AM

If a hundred or a thousand or five thousand or ten thousand people in rural Georgia or South Carolina wanted to become Orthodox, it simply could not happen.

Sure it can!
Those who accepted his message were baptized, and about three thousand were added to their number that day....And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved. (Acts 2:41, 47)
The time was right. The harvest was ripe. Peter preached. And the people responded. Same can happen again. When the time is right. Till then, it's going to be more one on one. But all heaven rejoices over the repentance of even one little sinner, so we're still doing pretty well.

No need to do what the protestants do and cause mass confusion. =)

In Christ,
Mary

Effie Ganatsios

08-01-2008, 08:41 AM

Effie I agree with what you say and about the humility we should approach matters with. Honestly, we need to accept the fact that Orthodoxy does not need us (as God said in the OT, He can create descendants of Abraham out of dead matter). We need Orthodoxy. And as you say, all that matters at the end is our soul's salvation. And it is often repeated here and in other threads by Father Moser, by Andrew and many others the beautiful saying of St. Seraphim of Sarov: 'Save your soul and hundreds of people around you will be saved'. So the person responsible here is the 'I' instead of 'them'. We need to save our souls and just by default others will be saved. Because that is the kind of action that speaks even louder than everything. I mean in Sarov probably they have a digital gap even today compared to other technologically advanced places, not to mention in the times of Saint Seraphim. However we all know about this Saint and what he did and what he taught.

Exactly Nina!

Effie

Andreas Moran

08-01-2008, 09:18 AM

we need to accept the fact that Orthodoxy does not need us

Though, we could think that, Orthodoxy being Christ, He will leave the 99 and search for the 1 lost sheep. Orthodoxy/Christ doesn't need us but He does love us so much.

Nina

08-01-2008, 03:04 PM

Though, we could think that, Orthodoxy being Christ, He will leave the 99 and search for the 1 lost sheep. Orthodoxy/Christ doesn't need us but He does love us so much.

Yes that is the love of God for us. Since we are not exactly talking about that, but about our relation to others, and therefore about our love for Him, we should remember what Fathers say. 'If you do not love your brother that you see, how can you love God that you do not see?' 'Everything you do to other men, you are doing to God.'

Rick H.

08-01-2008, 03:32 PM

Can anyone hear/discern what Owen is saying about the 'ultimate individualist?'

In Christ,
Rick

John W.

09-01-2008, 01:19 PM

I don't need to prove that the Orthodox religion is best because it does not concern me what other people think.

"Orthodoxy does not prove itself; it manifests itself."

- St Paul Florensky, the New Martyr

Andreas Moran

09-01-2008, 01:44 PM

- St Paul Florensky, the New Martyr

I'm not aware that Florensky has been canonised.

John W.

10-01-2008, 04:09 AM

I'm not aware that Florensky has been canonised.

I'm reading 'Salt of the Earth' (Saint Herman Press). The author is given as "St. Paul Florensky."

I added "New Martyr" (forgive me if I was mistaken) because I saw a small display about him that mentioned his martyrdom at the "Russian Orthodox Church in the 20th Century" exhibit at the Shrine of the Immaculate Conception in Washington, DC.

John W.

10-01-2008, 04:39 AM

The ultimate individualist is one who scorns mass psychology, who scorns the corruption of worldly authorities, but instead of whining and complaining, or instead of becoming an activist bent on changing the world, commits himself to a different way of life -- of bringing about a revolution within himself. There is no reason why three or four people can't go into the woods with a Bible and some service books and a book of patristic sermons, maybe a copy of the Prologue, and become monastics, instead of waiting around for someone to tell them what they can and cannot do. That's the American way!

Here are some reasons why people shouldn't become monastics in an "American way":

* "Knights of Prayer Monastic Order": http://www.prayerfoundation.org/become_a_monk.htm
30 bucks gets you a Monastic Registration Wall Certificate and Wallet-sized Registration Card!

*The Order of the Mustard Seed: http://www.mustardseedorder.com/cm/home/?category=1
Make a vow and then buy a cool ring to show off your commitment.

* "New Monasticism": http://www.newmonasticism.org/

* Northumbria Community: http://www.northumbriacommunity.org/WhoWeAre/whoweareAnewMonasticism.htm

Here's an 8th Century criticism of some ultimate individualist types:

"[T]here are many places as we know, given the name of monasteries by a very foolish way of speaking, yet have none of the reality of a monastic way of life...It is indeed shameful to say how many places called 'monasteries' these men who are entirely ignorant of monastic life have taken under control...Having thus usurped for themselves small or large estates, free from both human and divine service they serve in reality only their own desires as laymen in charge of monks. Moreover they do not assemble real monks there, but rather wanderers who have been expelled from genuine monasteries for the sin of disobedience, or whoever they may have enticed out of them, or any of their own followers whom they can persuade to receive tonsure and promise monastic obedience to themselves. They thus fill the 'monasteries' they have built with groups of these deformed people and - a very ugly and unprecedented spectacle - the very same men are now occupied with wives and procreating children and now rise from their beds and accomplish assiduously whatever needs to be done inside the monastic precincts. Moreover, they obtain with similar audacity places for their wives, as they say, to build 'monasteries': as these are laywomen they authorize themselves to be rulers of the handmaids of Christ. To all these people the popular proverb applies: 'Wasps can indeed make honeycomb but they fill it with poison, not honey'...Thus by a perverse state of affairs many are found who call themselves 'abbots'...although as laymen they could have learnt something about monastic life by hearsay if not be experience, yet they are complete strangers to the character and profession which should teach it. Indeed these people suddenly as you know, receive tonsure at their own pleasure and by their judgement instantly become not monks but abbots. Because they clearly have neither the knowledge nor the zeal for monastic virtues, what more can be appropriate to them than the curse of the gospel where it is said: 'If the blind lead the blind, both will fall into the pit?'"

The Venerable Bede, 'Ecclesiastical History of the English People' (Penguin 1990), pp. 344-346

Andreas Moran

10-01-2008, 09:30 AM

Quotation:
Originally Posted by Andreas Moran
I'm not aware that Florensky has been canonised.

I'm reading 'Salt of the Earth' (Saint Herman Press). The author is given as "St. Paul Florensky."

I added "New Martyr" (forgive me if I was mistaken) because I saw a small display about him that mentioned his martyrdom at the "Russian Orthodox Church in the 20th Century" exhibit at the Shrine of the Immaculate Conception in Washington, DC.

Pavel Florensky was indeed a victim and may be called a martyr but the view in Russia is that he laid aside his priesthood and therefore is not ranked with the canonised New Martyrs. Such is what I have been given to understand. This is not, of course, to take anything away from his achievements and qualities.

Andreas Moran

10-01-2008, 09:56 AM

John W posted:
Here are some reasons why people shouldn't become monastics in an "American way": . .

Brilliant! Though I thought the green habits of those in the 'Knights [pun?] of Prayer Monastic Order looked rather fetching! A Celtic Cross and a picture of Lindisfarne can lend a semblance of veracity to anything!

Actually, it is grievous to visit Lindisfarne and Iona and witness the activities which are perpetrated there. When visiting Iona last June with Fathers from the Holy Trinity St Sergius Lavra, there was in progress in the church a 'service': you can imagine the sort of thing. As these misguided folk emerged, Archimandrite Alipiy shook his head and said, 'poor people - they do not know what prayer is'.

Rick H.

10-01-2008, 01:39 PM

The American Orthodox Way: The Eastern Orthodox Way

Can anyone here discern what Owen is saying about the 'ultimate individualist?' John's post and websites provided would be good in the American Monasticism thread. This info may provide some help there. Here it brings a good contrast to what has been presented as the 'ultimate individualist' or a 'radical individualism' in the spirit of the desert fathers.

It requires an investment from most of us to fully grasp what is being said about this. Possibly, not many have the time or the appetite for this. But, as we have spilled a fair amount of ink on the crocuses in Marie's backyard, it occurs to me that they will be blooming in a couple months. And, as Owen has written in another thread recently about one's own backyard this is what we are talking about, really. As he wrote about 'the desert in the backyard,' we move from those who find their identity in T-shirts and club ID cards (and all outward symbols/criteria) and onto another plane altogether.

I wonder if any in our small band can see/recognize what Owen is saying about the 'ultimate individualist?'

In Christ,
Rick

Herman Blaydoe

10-01-2008, 02:25 PM

What is an individualist? One definition is "a person who shows great independence in thought or action". "To thine own self be true." But Christians are not so much called to be true to themselves as they are called to be true to Truth, which is Christ Himself.

The Holy Apostle Paul could be termed an "individualist" in that he separated himself from the group thinking of his Jewish brethren in proclaiming Jesus as the Christ. Being able to "rise above" that which is simply socially acceptable to see beyond the relative is considered a distinguishing feature of "individualism", being able to "make your own decisions regardless of societal pressure".

But I don't know that Christians are called to be individualists, even if only in Christ do we become true individuals. We are a people, called to be holy, obviously making us distinct from other peoples who do not see holiness as a priority.

Individualists march to their own drums. But we have a boss who is not ourselves. We are called to follow Christ. We must be able to resist the societal pressures that keep us from doing so, which might make us appear to be "individualists", but we must do so in the manner Christ wants us to, regardless of our individual preferences, but in full awareness of the unique gifts He has given each one of us as individuals.

So I cannot quite bring myself to agree that we are or need to be "individualists", although I do think that we are all called to be individuals who are united in Christ, perhaps we are individuals attempting to overcome individualism? Just some confused thoughts from a simple mind.

You are special, just like everybody else.

Herman the Pooh

Owen Jones

10-01-2008, 02:34 PM

Rick H.

10-01-2008, 02:35 PM

Thanks Herman, I think there is some helpful stuff there. Another primary definition of "individualism" is 'a
belief in the primary importance of the individual and in the virtues of self-reliance and personal independence.' In the Light of Eastern Orthodoxy that one doesn't sound too good either, because this speaks of the sin of individualism.

A mere individualism or a rank individualism leads to increasing separation and division. This has nothing to do with an American Orthodoxy or an Eastern Orthodoxy, or any Orthodoxy does it? But, that is not what Owen is saying is it?

In Christ,
Rick

Rick H.

10-01-2008, 02:41 PM

Betach!

But so what? Are we not confident that the true form will be recognized. Are we not going to suggest a different way, out of fear that some will get it wrong?

Recogintion. Fear. These are the two greatest obstacles thrown in the path by the enemy. These two seem to slay us at every turn in this conversation.

In Christ,
Rick

Andreas Moran

10-01-2008, 02:51 PM

You are special, just like everybody else.

As someone said, God can't count - everyone is number one.

Rick H.

10-01-2008, 02:52 PM

Afterthought:

". . . In Palamas, theology is about seeing."

In Christ,
Rick

Fr Raphael Vereshack

10-01-2008, 03:52 PM

Pavel Florensky was indeed a victim and may be called a martyr but the view in Russia is that he laid aside his priesthood and therefore is not ranked with the canonised New Martyrs. Such is what I have been given to understand. This is not, of course, to take anything away from his achievements and qualities.

Yes- I have just looked through the complete list of saints in the Moscow Patriarchate Calendar for 2008 and there is no St Paul (Pavel) Florensky on the list.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

Andreas Moran

10-01-2008, 04:45 PM

Florensky was brilliant but unsteady, a troubled soul, a mariner without a pilot. He got mixed up in Sophianism and is bracketed with Bulgakov and Soloviev.

John W.

11-01-2008, 03:38 AM

There has been some mention of Christianity being incarnational. That is, it does not just drop out of the sky but is grounded in culture and history. Well, perhaps instead of just dismissing everything American as anti-Orthodox, we ought to take that which is American, for example, it's individualism, and make it incarnational, alongside obvious American idealism, capacity for heroism and sacrifice, etc. Indeed, one might end up finding many instances of the problems cited by Bede. But so what? Are we not confident that the true form will be recognized. Are we not going to suggest a different way, out of fear that some will get it wrong?

Find a genuine Orthodox Elder (Geronda/Gerondissa/Staretz) in America. Confess to him/her. Obey him/her. Do these things and you'll be on your way to living ascetically in the most traditional Orthodox sense IN AMERICA. Living your obedience"IN AMERICA" probably qualifies said obedience as "American."
So there you have it, a truly American Expression of Orthodoxy; a truly American Expression of Monasticism/Asceticism.

Re: "Are we not going to suggest a different way, out of fear that some will get it wrong?"

Yes, we are not going to suggest a different way out of fear that some will get it wrong.

John

John W.

11-01-2008, 04:05 AM

Actually, it is grievous to visit Lindisfarne and Iona and witness the activities which are perpetrated there. When visiting Iona last June with Fathers from the Holy Trinity St Sergius Lavra, there was in progress in the church a 'service': you can imagine the sort of thing. As these misguided folk emerged, Archimandrite Alipiy shook his head and said, 'poor people - they do not know what prayer is'.

From the BBC 4 program: 'The Long Search'

Donald Meek is professor of Scottish and Gaelic studies at Edinburgh University, and a native of the Inner Hebridean island of Tiree:

"I do feel personally from time to time, that part of my heritage is being appropriated. I would say misappropriated. The reason for that is that those who take to do with Celtic Heritage don't want the languages. They don't want those things that I feel makes the Celtic people what they are. And so there is an element of appropriation. It is selective appropriation. The market, the consumers, are taking what they want, and leaving behind what they don't want. I sometimes too, see parallels here between the ways in which...the British at the time of Empire would take the treasures of other nations and store them up, and display them in museums, which had grand imperial names above the doors. I sometimes in my worst moments, see a parallel with what's happening with the hymns and traditions of the Celtic West, that they are being taken, repackaged, and put on display elsewhere."

BBC: The source which seems to underlay much modern writing on Celtic Christianity is not from the seventh and eighth centuries but a full 1200 years later. The Carmina Gadelica is a collection of beautiful Gaelic charms, prayers and incantations collected and translated in the Victorian period in the western isles by one Alexander Carmichael. - ours is not the first generation to project back onto the Celts nostalgic dreams about a simpler, purer past.

BBC: As one of the most prolific writers on Celtic Christianity, Ian Bradley has nevertheless become more cautious over the last few years in arguing for the distinctiveness of the Celtic tradition. As for claims that it was more inclusive and egalitarian, he now thinks the evidence points the other way.

Ian Bradley: "It certainly isn't feminist, in the sense that there was actually a pretty chauvinist side to a lot of these early Irish monasteries. And certainly a character like Columba didn't have much time for women at all. I mean Columba's Iona was, was famously an all-male monastery, When women were not allowed, except on sufferance I think, if they were coming in as, as penitents and sinners. Nor do I think it was particularly egalitarian. I mean actually it was quite hierarchical. We, we mustn't forget that, that er, Celtic society was about tribal loyalty to the head of your clan, who was often a prince.. Now the monasteries were organised on the same basis. Columba clearly ran his monasteries like an autocratic high king. He didn't any difficulties or any kind of messing around. So I don't think it was particularly egalitarian and I certainly don't think it was particularly feminine-friendly."

BBC: The other great claim for Celtic Christianity made today is that it was somehow "green Christianity". Do you think that's true?

Ian Bradley: "It pains me to say so. But, but I have to say that I don't think it was particularly green. I think again, we've been deceived by a whole genre of literature, which really came later. Which is very appealing to those of us of a 'green' hue, which is all about beauty , of the hermit's cell out among the birds, and the trees. Much of this writing actually came later, and was written by urban monks in a sense, who were in large, monastic, centres and, were again, longingly looking back to a kind of primitive, rural idyll, that they were looking for."

BBC: So it's a load of "townies", imagining the countryside?

Ian Bradley: "It looks a bit like it."

========

Ultimate Individualist American incarnational individualism looks a bit like a load of "townies" imagining the Thebaid.

Rick H.

11-01-2008, 01:36 PM

Definitions

Dear John,

A word was used the other day, in this thread, that I had to look up in order to understand what was being said. Sometimes we use words and terms and don't know what we are saying. In this case I found out that smarmy means:

smarm·y (smärm)
adj. smarm·i·er, smarm·i·est
1. Hypocritically, complacently, or effusively earnest; unctuous

As you have used the term:

Ultimate Individualist American incarnational individualism . . .

I'm not sure what you are saying. In Owen's post where he spoke of the 'ultimate individualist' it is apparent what he is suggesting. But, I wonder if you can put some meat on these bones so that there is some substance here?

No one seems to want to engage on this (and possibly this speaks to the maddness of an activism on this point); however, it's hard to have a discussion in a community such as this when folks want to limit their play to the sidelines. Possibly you could reproduce Owen's post and interact with what he is saying about the ultimate individualist and we could move forward from there.

In Christ,
Rick

John W.

11-01-2008, 01:58 PM

I'm not sure what you are saying. In Owen's post where he spoke of the 'ultimate individualist' it is apparent what he is suggesting.

Please explain in plain words. I am obviously lacking your gnosis on the connection between "ultimate individualist"-ism and the Orthodox Faith. Is it like some kind of Truly American Expression of an anchoritic/eremetic calling? If so, then there is nothing to stop anyone from retiring to the desert, woods or their own back yard to follow this calling.

As I recall, the eremetic Desert Fathers retired for decades before returning to the world to share the fruit of their ascesis. Are we to expect this type of withdrawal from society from ultimate individualists or are we going to get daily dispatches on their progress?

John

Owen Jones

11-01-2008, 03:08 PM

Owen Jones

11-01-2008, 03:11 PM

I don't know if some individualistic brand of American monasticism might take place, in which hermits are wi-fied. But I'm not going to worry my pretty little head about it now. We all make mistakes. Are we going to keep our feet in the sand because of the fear of making mistakes?

Andreas Moran

11-01-2008, 03:21 PM

Because if you were to go out and live in the forest now, with a Bible, some service books, and a copy of the Prologue, there is too much risk of heresy?

The risk is not so much heresy but error and delusion. Doing anything like that without permission and a blessing can lead to danger. It's too self willed. Is there a greater saint in recent times than St Seraphim of Sarov? Yet he did not dare to go into the desert/forest without the blessing of his hegumen - and not only a blessing but a formal release document. And even after that, he dared not even change his way of eating without a blessing. How would you cope with attacks of demons as he had to? In fact, they probably wouldn't even bother you: 'c'mon, guys, let's leg it - he's proud enough', they would say. You can't have Frank Sinatra monasticism: 'I did it my way'.

Mary

11-01-2008, 05:03 PM

We all make mistakes. Are we going to keep our feet in the sand because of the fear of making mistakes?

If my mistakes could cost me my life, and the life of my children... I'd rather be safe than sorry. Only one life to live, only one way to save my soul. I'd like to know without a doubt I'm on the right path. I'd rather follow those I trust, through the path that they've already cleared.

I always considered myself an extremely levelheaded, logical person, so, I've always done my own thinking, always doing what seemed right to me, and the mess I've found myself in is immeasurable. So, what are the chances that I'll save my soul, if I insist on making my own individual decisions and choices? In light of my past, the chances are, I'll dig a very fast hole straight to hell, without any help from the demons. I'll even get there before I die, convinced the whole time, that I'm doing the right thing, living according to my conscience...

If therefore the light that is in you is darkness, how great is that darkness!
Mt 6:23
There is a way that seems right to a man, but in the end it leads to death.
Pr 14:12 & Pr 16:25
The way of a fool seems right to him, but a wise man listens to advice. Pr 12:15In Christ,
Mary

Herman Blaydoe

11-01-2008, 05:39 PM

We all make mistakes. Are we going to keep our feet in the sand because of the fear of making mistakes?

What do you mean "we", paleface?*

When an American St. Anthony emerges from the Mojave, who will it be? Does it have to be you or me? It will be the person that God calls in His appointed time from His appointed place. I do suspect that Fr. Seraphim Rose was one such "individual", although I don't know that he was an "individualist".

But yes, an American St. Anthony would certainly be a good thing, I suspect, God grant it be so.

Herman the Pooh

* The Lone Ranger, with his faithful Indian companion Tonto, is fleeing from a band of Comanches intent on taking his scalp. As they ride furiously over a pass, they confront another band of Apaches, evidently with the same intent. They are hopelessly trapped.

The Lone Ranger turns to Tonto and says, "Well, old friend, looks as if we've about had it."

Tonto replies, "What you mean 'we,' paleface?"

Andrew

11-01-2008, 06:23 PM

So, let me get this straight. People should not consider becoming a monastic in America, unless and until generations of development have taken place already, so that there are firmly established monasteries, each associated with a staretz so that you can get good guidance? Because if you were to go out and live in the forest now, with a Bible, some service books, and a copy of the Prologue, there is too much risk of heresy?

There are many monasteries in the US that are linked in obedience to traditional Orthodox praxis that has been effective in bringing about man's salvation. Holy Trinity in New York, the various monasteries of Elder Ephraim, etc. There are many different places to pursue the monastic life in the US that are healthy, flourishing monasteries.

To go off as a hermit without being grounded in obedience first would probably be a harmful mistake.

Nina

11-01-2008, 06:27 PM

When an American St. Anthony emerges from the Mojave, who will it be? Does it have to be you or me?

It has to be one of these (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UxS5c2Q7ar0&feature=related)guys. They have to enter an OC. Hear the words of the Lord. Take them to heart and literally. Decide seriously to work for their repentance. Sell everything and distribute it to the poor. Maybe before, they can go on a pilgrimage to consult a wonderful spiritual father. And then go on to Mojave.

PS Vanilla is the modern version of paleface.

Owen Jones

11-01-2008, 07:16 PM

St. Seraphim was already Orthodox, and he lived in an Orthodox society and culture. I guess what I am talking about is how to be a Christian in America. How to become a Christian. If someone were to walk into an Orthodox parish today in America wanting to be a Christian, what would be the outcome? I'm not condemning parish life, but let's face it, it's not exactly on fire. What if someone is on fire? Do you give him a list of 100 things that he's not supposed to do? Do you tell him, OK, come to some parish suppers with a covered dish and get to meet some people? Do you tell him, a la a Woody Allen movie, go read Bishop Ware and come back and we can talk about it? Do you tell him, gee do you want to volunteer to work at a booth at the Greek festival next month? Do you say, well, Father has a class he's teaching that starts in a couple months? I realize that Americans are all in a hurry and impulsive and impatient and we want instant answers and instant results and instant salvation, but what if someone is on fire? What if he wants to do something or be something heroic for Christ? Even if there is initially a ton of ego involved in it? Or what if you are on fire and you want to light some fires? What do you do? I'm not trying to make any absolute statements. I'm just posing some what if's. But a great way to put out the fire in some people is to say, just join a parish...or, don't do that because it might be heretical, or, don't do anything until a staretz tells you. It might not be God's will, yada, yada, yada...

Evagrius was an impulse driven Christian. Further, it was an impulse he got in a dream! I imagine there were a number of people who, when he told them about it, they tried to pour cold water all over it. But he let his impulse guide him.

Andreas Moran

11-01-2008, 07:47 PM

Evagrius was an impulse driven Christian.

It's worth noting that Evagrius isn't a saint! One of his impulses was to fancy the wife of a Roman senator which is why he did a runner to Jerusalem! But he had a spiritual father or mother at all times.

Nina

11-01-2008, 08:04 PM

Just something that I would like to mention. Like many Orthodox I am very fond of the Desert Fathers and of St. Mary of Egypt etc. I always thought with great reverence about their sacrifice and their zeal and passion for God that made them go through their life in a dessert. However some days ago I was watching a documentary about survival in the desert. And the reality of multiple dangers in every step was much more than I had imagined. And to think that the crew had aid at hand and also could call for evacuation help at any time. Also the plot was if someone is stranded in the desert how to reach safety and help in some days, and it wasn't about spending a life in the desert as several saints did; also a major part of survival wisdom that they shared was borrowed from the Bedouins. One survival lesson in desperate moments was for instance to kill a camel and drink its blood, or enter in the carcass and eat some parts of it, or eat some other small lizard-like animals in the desert. My mind was always to the Fathers and Saints of the desert and I was in awe. They could not consume meat. They could not drink blood. They were not allowed to kill animals. And with all thousands of dangers surrounding them how did they survive? Of course God's grace and Divine Providence provided for them like for everyone else in the OT. But still in my so inexperienced brain I always thought I could do something heroic like St. Mary of Egypt. I know that had I suggested that to my spiritual father he would have laughed since the fact is that I got scared from what I saw in that documentary even from the comforts of home. It was very clear from this documentary, that retreating to the desert is not a game and in the majority of cases there is a need of a spiritual elder who can assess the spiritual situation and level of the prospective desert-dweller and give or withhold the blessing according to the inspiration God provides. Of course there is St. Mary's example, but that is a totally different story and we do not hear that often. Her sacrifice was so great and she attracted even more grace from God because of that. I wonder if the fact that she was a woman was also to her advantage in terms of her sacrifice, since men are stronger and braver by nature.

Rick H.

11-01-2008, 08:26 PM

A Middle Ground?

First of all, thanks to Nina for the above post, I appreciate what is said about both fear and bravery, and I enjoyed reading it.

Secondly, (and with the content of Nina's great post in mind), I wonder if many here have noticed how many times the word "fear" has been used in this thread recently. If I had more time I would cut and paste all the individual quotes and strip them in here. But, it seems, as a whole, we keep crisscrossing back and forth over a middle point without stopping to consider a more balanced presentation of what has been said. Not all who went out into the desert became desert fathers and saints, did they? Questions are being answered with questions, and predictable polar positions are being promoted.

It is true that we are to work out our salvation with fear and trembling, but it is also true that God hasn't given us the spirit of fear.

In Christ,
Rick

Mary

11-01-2008, 08:45 PM

Or what if you are on fire and you want to light some fires? What do you do?

A forest fire is destructive. On the other hand, even a smaller fire, within the confines of a forge, can produce much heat, that can be used to shape something as delicate as glass, or as hard as metal.

Nina

11-01-2008, 10:32 PM

Dear Rick,

Maybe the word 'fear' connotes different things. For instance 'fear of God' is good and considered to be the beginning of wisdom. A spirit of fear if I understand you correctly may be a demon, and from the life of Saint Nephon actually God helped him by casting away that spirit of fear and showing him that it was really a demon.

As I used the word fear, means that I recognize my weakness and I also recognize that if I am to serve God I am not ready to hit the desert because I will be destroyed by the evil one probably by the end of the first hour, and of course I know that I will never have the blessing to go to the desert. So by admitting my weakness I admit that God's will for me at the moment is to stay where I am. Not everyone can fill the shoes of the desert saints. Or they wore slippers? Or some harsh strings to make their feet bleed even more from the friction with sand?

P.S Mary great reply about fire qualities by the way, which reminded me of something from the Fathers. But until you start indexing my brain I will not remember who said it. So many Orthodox Saints! Thank God!

John W.

12-01-2008, 01:43 AM

There are many monasteries in the US that are linked in obedience to traditional Orthodox praxis that has been effective in bringing about man's salvation. Holy Trinity in New York, the various monasteries of Elder Ephraim, etc. There are many different places to pursue the monastic life in the US that are healthy, flourishing monasteries.

To go off as a hermit without being grounded in obedience first would probably be a harmful mistake.

St. Anthony the Great, the "real monks" seen by St. Makarios of Egypt in the wilderness, St. Mary of Egypt, even the 12 invisible Elders of Mount Athos, all are shining examples of the eremitic struggle in the Desert. What else do they have in common? We know about them because they had some form of contact with others so that the Church has memory of their deeds, not only that they survived their time in the Desert but through the grace of God, thrived. They lived (and still live) to tell their tales...

We can read in the Sayings of the Desert Fathers of the terrible struggles that the monastics had against their demonic foes, the constant danger of plani/prelest/spiritual beguilement. Most of the stories that we read are of victories over these dangers, others serve as cautionary tales - those horrible stories of those fathers who were defeated. Again we know both kinds of stories, because there were witnesses.

What about those hermits who were all alone in the Desert who struggled against the demons and lost? What do we know about them?

In the Gospels and in the monastic literature, the desert is not a place where one goes to flee distractions, to get away from it all. The desert is the place where one goes to engage the Enemy and his minions in hand to hand combat.

Matthew 4:1
Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil.

Luke 8:29
(For he had commanded the unclean spirit to come out of the man. For oftentimes it had caught him: and he was kept bound with chains and in fetters; and he brake the bands, and was driven of the devil into the wilderness.)

An Athonite monk told me that when a demon is cast out, it is sent into the wilderness, into the desert places. This is confirmed in the Gospels:

Matthew 12:43
When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through dry places, seeking rest, and findeth none.

The monk told me this in the context of talking about the reality "evil places," places where the demons feel that they have "rights" to inhabit. Even on Mount Athos, there is a desert place that the fathers avoid, a known evil place where people have died under mysterious circumstances.

Being a monk means constant warfare, both of the subtle variety (e.g. temptations, beautiful "angel of light" type visions, delusions) and the openly aggressive variety (e.g. physical attacks, strangling, terrorizing appearances). This type of combat is experienced daily within the monastery.

We should all be thankful to the monastics for engaging the demonic hordes on our behalf, "guarding the walls" (see:http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3664/is_200404/ai_n9374344) so that we might have a chance to be saved.

It's a dangerous enough fight within a monastery. What chance does the ultimate individualist have alone in the desert against Satan and his minions?

Rick H.

12-01-2008, 02:19 AM

Rick/Owen, what you are advocating is very dangerous- to yourself and to others.

John--This is ludicrous! Seriously, I'm still laughing as I type this. :) I'm not sure what you think I have presented here--there has been no engagment on my broad comments. Possibly you could quote me from my posts here to demonstrate what it is you think I am advocating and we can discuss this?

In Christ,
Rick

Mary

12-01-2008, 04:04 AM

But until you start indexing my brain I will not remember who said it.

Gee, I thought I said it! Next time, I'll remember to sign my posts. =)

Mary

John W.

12-01-2008, 06:19 AM

John--This is ludicrous! Seriously, I'm still laughing as I type this. :) I'm not sure what you think I have presented here--there has been no engagment on my broad comments. Possibly you could quote me from my posts here to demonstrate what it is you think I am advocating and we can discuss this?

In Christ,
Rick

Sorry Rick, but engagement with your broad comments is something that is beyond my ability!

John

Nina

12-01-2008, 06:27 AM

Gee, I thought I said it! Next time, I'll remember to sign my posts. =)

Mary

You are right. You said I index your brain. And I invited you to index my brain in return. Since as a team we are more successful at indexing. :P

Owen Jones

12-01-2008, 02:11 PM

Of course it's dangerous. That's the whole point. Faith is dangerous. Living it out is dangerous. Always. The point of taking American individualism as a starting point is not that it should be the end point, but it should be "incarnated" rather than simply scorned or suppressed.Otherwise, you have a stultifying ecclesiastical entropy that is even more dangerous and deadly to the spirit.

Every decision involves risk. There is no risk-free "spirituality." A risk-free faith is a clinging faith, a worldly faith, a possessive faith. It is no different than the kind of simplistic protestant sloganeering that Orthodoxy rejects.

John W.

12-01-2008, 04:00 PM

Possibly you could quote me from my posts here to demonstrate what it is you think I am advocating and we can discuss this?

Better to get thee to a monastery!

John

Mary

12-01-2008, 04:28 PM

I believe they are two different people! =) But, of course, who can know anything online??!

Mary

Owen Jones

12-01-2008, 05:03 PM

My wife might protest!!!

John W.

12-01-2008, 05:10 PM

I believe they are two different people! =) But, of course, who can know anything online??!

Mary

You're right, who can know? Better to abstain from all accusations based on suspicion. Better to focus on learning and applying the "alphabet" of Abba Dorotheos who said we should never, ever trust our suspicions and thereby hand our heart over to the evil one. Also, it is better to stand corrected by a Priest of the Church.

Father David Moser

12-01-2008, 05:18 PM

I believe they are two different people! =) But, of course, who can know anything online??!

Mary

First I want to make clear that I am not singling Mary out - rather I am using her post as a platform for response. That being said:

I might remind everyone that if you have concerns about a violation of the Terms of Use (such as one person posing as two and posting fraudulently) that this is not a matter for public discussion, but rather something that should be reported to the moderators (click on the little red flag "report this post" icon on the upper bar of each message is one way to do so). Public speculation and confrontation on such matters are also a violation of the Terms of Use and should be avoided.

Fr David Moser

Father David Moser

13-01-2008, 04:15 PM

We have gone waaay off course on this and so I moved the more playful posts to their own thread here (http://www.monachos.net/forum/showthread.php?t=4494) so that we can continue our more sober discussion of American Orthodoxy in this thread.

Fr David Moser

Owen Jones

13-01-2008, 07:21 PM

John W.

13-01-2008, 07:34 PM

Better to abstain from all accusations based on suspicion. Better to focus on learning and applying the "alphabet" of Abba Dorotheos who said we should never, ever trust our suspicions and thereby hand our heart over to the evil one.

Some of the "alphabet" of Abba Dorotheos of Gaza that I offer to American Orthodox by way of repentance:

" I was once standing still when a woman passed in front of me carrying a pitcher. I do not know how I was carried away and stared into her eyes. Immediately, my thoughts told me that she was a prostitute. As I had told myself that, I was greatly troubled and I referred the whole thing to the elder Abba John in this way, 'Master, if without wanting to, I see someone's gesture and my thoughts tell me his inner dispositions, what should I do?' The elder answered me thus, 'What! Surely, it happens that a person may have a natural defect and through inner struggle manage to overcome it! It is impossible to learn the state of a person's soul from that. Therefore, never trust your suspicions for even a straight rule can be made crooked by a crooked one. Suspicions are not true and harm us.' From that time on, even if my mind told me that the sun was the sun or that darkness was darkness, I would not believe it. Nothing is graver than suspicions. They are so harmful that if we keep them for a long time, they begin to convince us that we clearly see things that do not exist and have never happened."

"Therefore brethren, let us try not to trust our suspicions, with all our strength. For there is nothing that distances a person from taking care of his own sins, or from always being curious about what does not concern him more than this. No good comes of it, rather manifold troubles and affliction. They leave a person no time to acquire fear of God. Therefore, if suspicions are sown in us through our own evil, let us immediately transform them into good thoughts. Thus, we will not harm ourselves. Suspicions are evil and they never allow the soul to find peace. This is a falsehood of understanding."

Near the beginning of the chapter, Abba Dorotheos recounted a hypothetical situation where a monk suspected something that turned out to be true. Perhaps this is most dangerous trap within this "falsehood of understanding" because:

"First of all this principle is from the devil, since he started with lies. That is to say, he suspected what he did not know. How is it possible for an evil tree to produce good fruits?"

From: 'Abba Dorotheos - Practical Teaching on Christian Life', translated by Constantine Scouteris, from the Chapter: On Lies. It took me awhile to find it again because I kept looking in the chapters about judging others.

Mary

13-01-2008, 10:47 PM

A forest fire is in fact very productive and necessary for burning off dead wood and allowing for new growth. One of the worst policies we have seen in our country is the movement to prevent forest fires. It has done far more damage than good. Analogically, if the Church is all about preventing potential fires, then we will eventually whither and die. What happens is that all new growth is choked off, the light is prevented from reaching the ground, the forest lacks any diversity, and is more susceptible to pestilence.

The forest fire should be raging within you, destroying the death inside, so new Growth can happen. I shouldn't be setting others on fire, I should make sure that my new found fervor and love for God first proves itself in how much of my own Self I am willing to cut off, for love of Him. If I'm not willing to cut my Self off, my Love for God isn't strong enough, because, I'm still in love with my Self. As long as my Love is split between God and me, I'll very ineffective in touching others, (at best), or else quite destructive - driving them further away from God.

How many children of 'ministers' have been driven away from God, because of the 'fire' in their parents! A child knows the true hypocrisy of the parent. First, my fire should burn me up. Then, if God finds me useful to set others on fire... He will use me to do so.

When you have become God's in the measure he desires, then he himself will bestow you upon others; unless, to your greater glory, he choose to keep you all to himself. - St Basil the Great In Christ,
Mary

Nina

14-01-2008, 02:19 AM

Thank you John W. for the text from Abba Dorotheos.

Owen Jones

14-01-2008, 05:14 AM

In America, Fr. Anatoly would be sent by his priest to a therapist. (This is perhaps more appropriately an Ostrov post). He lives alone, without proper guidance, driving himself and others nuts. I don't want to over-extend the fire symbolism. But the boss monk is trying to put it out, and he keeps stoking it, creating lots of heat that is overwhelming to the Abbot.

There will always be this tension between the need for institutional order and individual fire. Let's just say for argument sake that a kind of penitential fever struck 100,000 people, and 100,000 Anatolys showed up on the front doors of the Church. They wouldn't know what to do with them. They would send them home. Or to amazon.com for some books. So I'm just saying, it's OK to allow some fires to burn out of control now and then. We should not be in the business of controlling everything. We don't know in advance what good might come out of something that we see as not quite according to the rules of orderly procedure.

John W.

14-01-2008, 05:58 AM

So I'm just saying, it's OK to allow some fires to burn out of control now and then. We should not be in the business of controlling everything. We don't know in advance what good might come out of something that we see as not quite according to the rules of orderly procedure.

"Willful passion runs counter to our conscience, which tries to enlighten and to keep us from ungodly desires. Willful passion kills the spirit and cuts off spiritual life. This you must fear most of all—as fire, as death itself" - St. Theophan the Recluse

John W.

14-01-2008, 01:50 PM

There will always be this tension between the need for institutional order and individual fire. Let's just say for argument sake that a kind of penitential fever struck 100,000 people, and 100,000 Anatolys showed up on the front doors of the Church. They wouldn't know what to do with them. They would send them home. Or to amazon.com for some books. So I'm just saying, it's OK to allow some fires to burn out of control now and then. We should not be in the business of controlling everything. We don't know in advance what good might come out of something that we see as not quite according to the rules of orderly procedure.

A brother came to Monachos.net and began to converse with members about things which he had never yet put into practice. Abba Theodore of Pherme might have said this to him, "You have not yet found a ship nor put your cargo aboard it and before you have sailed, you have already arrived at the city. Do the work first; then you will have the speed you are making now."

p.s.

In the version of 'Ostrov' that I watched, Fr. Anatoly lived in a monastery.

Tim Grass

14-01-2008, 02:24 PM

A brother came to Monachos.net and began to converse with members about things which he had never yet put into practice. Abba Theodore of Pherme might have said this to him, "You have not yet found a ship nor put your cargo aboard it and before you have sailed, you have already arrived at the city. Do the work first; then you will have the speed you are making now."

p.s.

In the version of 'Ostrov' that I watched, Fr. Anatoly lived in a monastery.

John.... the unmitigated arrogance of these comments is getting tiring. We're all glad you've got everything worked out..... including being wise enough to think Owen and Rick are the same person and to make public accusations about this....... since the moderators appear to have removed that piece of personal attack, you're response seems to be to just criticize Owen everywhere you can find an opening. Great.

We're all happy that you've achieved perfection and so can correct everyone else. But seriously, nothing disproves the points you want to make as much as the arrogance of your own posts.

--tim

John W.

14-01-2008, 05:51 PM

I’m trying to find out what this “ultimate individualist” brand of monasticism is, because it is very obvious what it isn’t: monasticism as it is practiced in the Church today.

There has been many solicitations on this board for feedback on certain “broad comments” made by either Rick or Owen on this call to action that they are advocating, but I am confused as to what exactly it is, because monasticism (i.e. “living out the Gospel”) has classically been defined as the “narrow way.”

As I have asked before, is u.i-ism a call for an American style eremeticism? If I recall correctly, u.i.-ism was said to be a kind of monasticism that could exist without the blessing of hierarchs. All that was required: willing individuals, the Prologue and other writings (and a desert type venue?).

Is “ultimate individualist”-ism, a call for a new St. Anthony? The Church has always needed an St. Anthony and has always had a type of Anthony (thank God) throughout its history. Is the Church going to get this new Anthony by following in the foosteps of St. Anthony (In the Life of St. Anthony, we read that he was the disciple of at least one hermit and a number of “good men” – see bottom) or some other way, like ultimate individualist-ism?

The St. Anthonys of our Church, went into the wilderness and came back into the world in order to share the fruits of their struggles.

Ultimately the proof of this new brand of monasticism will come out of its practice and the fruit that is produced and shared with the wider Church, not from the talking about it (cf. Abba Theodore of Pherme).

To the advocates of this new method, please answer this one question: Do we Orthodox Christians have to wait and see what the fruits ultimate individualism are or are these new Desert Fathers ready to share now?

If it’s “wait and see” then I guess the rest of us are going to have to go about our ascesis the old fashioned way.

From the Life of St. Anthony:
Now there was then in the next village an old man who had lived the life of a hermit from his youth up. Antony, after he had seen this man, imitated him in piety. And at first he began to abide in places out side the village: then if he heard of a good man anywhere, like the prudent bee, he went forth and sought him, nor turned back to his own palace until he had seen him; and he returned, having got from the good man as it were supplies for his journey in the way of virtue…. Thus conducting himself, Antony was beloved by all. He subjected himself in sincerity to the good men whom he visited, and learned thoroughly where each surpassed him in zeal and discipline. He observed the graciousness of one; the unceasing prayer of another; he took knowledge of another's freedom from anger and another's loving-kindness; he gave heed to one as he watched, to another as he studied; one he admired for his endurance, another for his fasting and sleeping on the ground; the meekness of one and the long-suffering of another he watched with care, while he took note of the piety towards Christ and the mutual love which animated all. Thus filled, he returned to his own place of discipline, and henceforth would strive to unite the qualities of each, and was eager to show in himself the virtues of all. With others of the same age he had no rivalry; save this only, that he should not be second to them in higher things.

Herman Blaydoe

14-01-2008, 06:48 PM

It took a particular sort of individual to set out from their home country or settled region to travel to and settle an unknown world. Perhaps "American Individualism" is a poor choice of words. How about "rugged individual", "pioneer integrity" and all those other ideals of early Americana, where your word was your bond ("let your yes be yes, and your no be no"). The perseverance that tamed the wilderness in the face of incredible obstacles. The intestinal fortitude that we like to think is a character trait unique to Americans (I speak facetiously).

To set out against the odds despite discouragement is something that has a great deal of sympathy in American cultural history: pioneers, cowboys, explorers, settlers, the ideal simplicity of the native Americans personify repeated and consistant themes in American folklore. Perhaps this is what Owen and Rick are trying to capture. Is this unique to America? Probably not. I imagine that St. Anthony was a rather rugged individual, as were many of the Desert Fathers. But we do speak of the Syriac Fathers, the Egyptian Fathers as unique expressions of "individuality" if we can perhaps discard the rather loaded term "individualism". Can we not hope for American Fathers as well? Is the Church static or dynamic? Can we hope to speak some day of a distinct American flavor, even as we talk today about Greek or Russian piety? Our Lord was fond of allegories to grapes. The flavor of the grape depends on the kind of soil it is planted in. American grapes taste different from European grapes, even if they come from the same plants. Can't a transplanted Orthodoxy eventually take on a unique American flavor? Does this have to be a bad thing?

Perhaps even now, a future American Anthony works out his salvation in one of the monasteries founded on US soil by Fr. Ephraim, or at Holy Trinity, and will be inspired by the Holy Spirit to strike out, establish his roots in local soil and mature, that we all may partake of spiritual fruit that has become native and no longer foreign.

Just a thought.

Rick H.

14-01-2008, 07:57 PM

Dear Tim,

Your point is well taken. Nothing disproves the points one desires to make as much as the arrogance of one's own posts. I know I am guilty of this at times, as I think we all are. Even with our use of humour, as Effie said in a recent post, in the same way the spirit with which we offer our contributions shines through very clearly and can either buttress or discredit.

A recent post from Owen in another thread comes to mind about those:

. . . who are theologically/dogmatically correct but spiritually obtuse, who thereby turn religion into a burden and a curse, rather than that which sets us free.

In this we see that we may be right as rain in what we are presenting/considering; however, in the end we are a curse and a form of bondage to those who seek to be free indeed.

And, I think this exactly why I appreciate Herman so much.

Dear Herman,

I don't have time to write what I want to now. But, I just have to say thanks (again) for your above post. Possibly, the choice of the word "individualism" is a curse for some readers; however, again as Effie has said recently, possibly the intentional use of this word makes some others think who wouldn't have otherwise. And, in this sense, there is a burden lifting which results in blessings. Sometimes words really do get in the way, but at other times they are clearly heavenly vehicles/transports of the path to salvation.

But, simply put, thank you very much for the above post which I think gets us back on the right track here with great speed. Characteristically you bring a heavenly balance where it is needed most.

As I consider your comments above, it occurs to me that when another set out from his home country (with his family) for an unknown place, he was known as Abram. It was after he set out to find this land that he was known as Father Abraham.

In Christ,
Rick

Owen Jones

14-01-2008, 10:04 PM

I picked the term individualism intentionally because it is a term that a lot of people around the world love to hate, and is also a kind of taboo for many Orthodox, like it sums up everything that is wrong about America, etc. But Herman sums up my point for me quite nicely. That if we are to incarnate something about a culture, then one really has to take into account how to do that with American individualism, instead of just condemning it outright, and look at some of its virtues, as Herman did so eloquently. This does not mean one has to necessarily advocate a kind of defiant monasticism that intentionally goes against the common rules and norms. But the idea that only Athonite Greek monasticism transplanted into the U.S. -- as much as it should be respected and welcomed -- does not seem to me to be a very practical position to take. I'm thinking primarily about practicality here. And I'm concerned that so many people are concerned and worried about not being in control of monastics and monasteries. There has always been a tension between monastics and ecclesiastical authorities to some degree. I'm not suggesting we promote that for its own sake. What I am suggesting is that we not go to the opposite extreme. Many good things have been done in the Church on the basis of individual initiative and blessed later. There is more than one way to skin a cat.

John W.

15-01-2008, 12:20 AM

Perhaps even now, a future American Anthony works out his salvation in one of the monasteries founded on US soil by Fr. Ephraim, or at Holy Trinity, and will be inspired by the Holy Spirit to strike out, establish his roots in local soil and mature, that we all may partake of spiritual fruit that has become native and no longer foreign.

Future saints are indeed working out their salvation at Holy Trinity and the monasteries of Elder Ephraim. The majority of the Fathers that I have met at these monasteries are Made in the USA. They are native and have never been foreign. No need to wait for some future event when Orthodox monasteries in America are suddenly American. They are American Orthodox monasteries - we only need to see them as such.

John W.

15-01-2008, 12:27 AM

The online directory Orthodox Monasteries of North America: http://omna.malf.net/indexjurs.html
is a good map to use while exploring monasteries that are already in existence in the USA.

I'm obviously biased towards Holy Trinity Monastery (Jordanville, NY) and the monasteries of Elder Ephraim, but there are a lot more out there- some with a definite (by self description) American flavor.

John W.

15-01-2008, 02:38 AM

St. Theodore the Studite: "Monks are the sinews and foundations of the church." Someone posted something earlier to the effect that "the church is only as strong as its monasteries." Both statements are saying the same thing.

One of the most prominent teachers (he's often quoted as if he was a Church Father) of a leading American Orthodox jurisdiction wrote: "More and more often it seems to me that reviving the monasticism that everybody so ecstatically talks about –or at least trying to revive it- can only be done by liquidating first of all the monastic institution itself, i.e. the whole vaudeville of klobuks, cowls, stylization, etc."

This attitude of the "liquidation" of the "vaudeville...stylization" (read: ethnic, Old World) shows up in the monasteries of this jurisdiction. My spouse (100% American) went with a friend to one of their monasteries and told me, "I kept thinking to myself, I wish I was at [one of Elder Ephraim's monasteries]." A pilgrim told me that he was served beef at the most famous of this jurisdiction's monasteries (they have their own show on cable). When he pointed out that it was a fast day, he was dismissively told, "We eat what God gives us." This pilgrim told me that the monks were quite defensive about their American-style monasticism to the point of disparaging the anachronistic (to their minds) practices of the "foreign" monasteries.

In America, we have the whole spectrum of monasteries, from "liberal" to "traditional" to those in the middle. From where, within this spectrum of monasteries in America , do you think the next will "Anthony" come?

Mary

15-01-2008, 04:20 AM

In America, we have the whole spectrum of monasteries, from "liberal" to "traditional" to those in the middle. From where, within this spectrum of monasteries in America , do you think the next will "Anthony" come?

From where you least expect.

John W.

15-01-2008, 05:02 AM

From where you least expect.

Aha! Got you on the trick question! I've met one of them. And he is where any Orthodox Christian should expect to find such a one.

Mary

15-01-2008, 02:02 PM

Aha! Got you on the trick question! I've met one of them. And he is where any Orthodox Christian should expect to find such a one.

A trick question, huh?

Well... I've met a bunch of them in all the expected places as well. They would be appalled to know that I think they're saint material, so I will post this anonymously.

But, I've seen, amongst those of us who are exceedingly pious, that we are quick to judge those, who seem to not be as serious about their faith as we are. Like those monasteries that serve meat...

Dear Friend, there was at least one saint, a fool for Christ, who ate meat during Great Lent. He was a wonderworker too.

And there are many parishes, big and small. At our parish, 10% attend all the time and the rest show up once or twice a year. I've wondered, whenever I get judgemental, if those who barely make it to church once or twice, are far more acceptable in God's eyes than I am. Perhaps the next saint will be from amongst one of them.

These hidden saints in the making, none of us have met yet, or we've met them, but failed to recognize them.

In Christ,

Rick H.

15-01-2008, 03:01 PM

Dear All,

That's a good post Mary. We see that the answer to the question is that God will raise up the next saint where and when he chooses. God is not limited to any one setting. This should go without saying.

It might be from a monastic setting, a local visible church, a shack in the dessert, or somewhere else. As said above, there is more than one way to skin a cat.

But, now my sincere question is if God calls/raises up a Saint Anthony from within American Orthodoxy, then what? Or, in other words, if a Saint Anthony would emerge in the near future does this mean it is revival/renewal time for the city/area in which he lives and then a great awakening will occur for this country?

Would this mean that we would finally be on our way towards the same caliber or state of being of Orthodoxy in Athens today? Would this mean that our direction/course would be set toward the same high level of spirituality that is present in modern day Greece and Russia? Possibly some can help me to understand what the significance of this question is as it relates to this conversation and as we look at the history of the Church . . . as it relates to Orthodoxy in other countries in which God has raised up our saints for thousands of years.

I don't mean to focus on any one region now, but I am thinking of a conversation I had once with Greek Orthodox priest. I was telling him that I would love to visit Athens. He told me that there is much beauty there, as I had speculated based on my research of the culture and landscape; but he also told me that I would also probably be surprised to find what a Greek Orthodoxy today has in common with an American Orthodoxy. A couple of years ago a friend from Russia brought me a book on the churches and monasteries in Russia. She gave me an egg with an icon on it, and shared her photos she took while there of the churches and monasteries in Moscow, Kiev, and St. Petersburg. I expressed the same desire to visit her country as I did with priest. Her response to this was the same as priests reply to me.

Ultimately, the answer to this question is what Mary has already said. However, possibly, in the End, the real question here, today, is in Whom does the hope of the Church lie? In Whom does your hope lie?

In Christ,
Rick

Owen Jones

15-01-2008, 03:24 PM

My understanding is that there was a movement some time ago on Athos that claimed that the Jesus Prayer was communion, and so its practitioners did not need to receive the Eucharist. It got resolved. (Maybe they were all killed!) I don't know that anyone advocated shutting down Athos because it bred heretics.

John W.

15-01-2008, 06:06 PM

A trick question, huh?

Well... I've met a bunch of them in all the expected places as well. They would be appalled to know that I think they're saint material, so I will post this anonymously.

But, I've seen, amongst those of us who are exceedingly pious, that we are quick to judge those, who seem to not be as serious about their faith as we are. Like those monasteries that serve meat...

Dear Friend, there was at least one saint, a fool for Christ, who ate meat during Great Lent. He was a wonderworker too.

And there are many parishes, big and small. At our parish, 10% attend all the time and the rest show up once or twice a year. I've wondered, whenever I get judgemental, if those who barely make it to church once or twice, are far more acceptable in God's eyes than I am. Perhaps the next saint will be from amongst one of them.

These hidden saints in the making, none of us have met yet, or we've met them, but failed to recognize them.

In Christ,

I’m just playing around with the “Aha trick question” stuff. I just wanted to make the point that the Church has a 2000 year history in the Saintmaking business. Her means and methods are tried and true. I think that trying to come up with a method beyond what has been tried and proven is just a dodge. If I may paraphrase G.K. Chesterton: “The [Orthodox] Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting. It has been found difficult; and left untried.” If I want to find out how shoes are made, I would go to a shoe factory. If I want to find out how St. Anthonys are made, I would get myself to a monastery that follows his blueprints.

About that meat eating Saint. St. Basil the Blessed, right? I’m pretty sure that the meat snack that he had on the cathedral steps in front of Tsar Ivan the Terrible, was not a part of his regular diet. He did this “foolish” thing to shame the mighty and the hypocritical. If fast-breaking is a path to sanctity, then why don’t we have saints with names like: “John the Fast Breaker”or “Tom the Glutton”? We sing, “It is meet and right” not, “It is meat and right.”

Maybe some people are thinking that since there is an unconventional path to sainthood, the Holy Fool/Fool for Christ, then there are probably other unconventional paths that have not yet been tried that might lead to the same holy destination. Perhaps something even more foolish? I don’t know anything other than what I have read about the Fools for Christ, but I understand that it is one of the most difficult podvigs to undertake in this world and that many who have undertaken this podvig have done so, to hide the holiness that they have already attained. I have no idea how one is called to be a Holy Fool. If one chooses the unconventional ascetic path, then one should go with the prayers of St. Basil the Blessed, St Xenia of Petersburg and Blessed Pelagia, Seraphim’s Seraphim, asking for protection from wholly foolishness.

An amendment to the “one” that I referred to in the earlier post. I would never reveal his name or monastery for fear of bringing temptation to him. This one is more of a “Fr. Anatoly” type (of Ostrov depiction). Completely nondescript. Yet in casual conversation he talked about specific details in my life: comings and goings, troubles, persons I had to reconcile with… The weird thing about it was his completely offhand manner – he didn’t seem to realize that he was doing, just talking off the top of his head while putting out the garbage.

Nina

15-01-2008, 06:37 PM

Now I do not know what to do. One says a saint ate meat for Lent, the other one says he did not but that instance. (I am a normal person and often I think I can do spiritually heroic things. It occurred to me that this is self-flattery.) One says Athos bred heresy and kills, the other one calls it the Garden of Panagia. Do we have always to compare? Or do we have to put others down, or up to make ourselves feel better?

And yes Mary you are right. Of course we have saints from all walks of life. And we have martyrs that were all their lives something else, 1 minute Christian and the next martyred. In Heaven there will be some surprises like Father Amphilokios (I think) said.

And John W. you are also right that a didactic instance in the life of a saint does not mean it was the norm in the life of that saint. But even if it was. I am not that saint and I can not teach people a thing about not being hypocritical. If I can manage to subdue my cravings during lent - that's the most heroic thing that is needed from me, for now.

Nina

15-01-2008, 06:51 PM

Dear All,

But, now my sincere question is if God calls/raises up a Saint Anthony from within American Orthodoxy, then what? Or, in other words, if a Saint Anthony would emerge in the near future does this mean it is revival/renewal time for the city/area in which he lives and then a great awakening will occur for this country?

In Christ,
Rick

Dear Rick,

Yes your question is right. Then what?

As Fathers say, a saint attracts the grace of God. Saints are the lightning rod for attracting the grace of God on our earth.

Knowing the love a saint has, he prays for the entire world though without singling out. So if I have a saint of the caliber of Saint Anthony (or of any caliber) in my land, he will pray for all people of the world, even for the people I deem unworthy, annoying, unbearable etc. But as an angel said to someone who was visiting Paradise: "Do not look here for Saint Anthony, because he is the closest to the Throne of God."

Herman Blaydoe

15-01-2008, 07:25 PM

John W,

Exotic is nice, mostly because it is unfamiliar. We keep it in zoos and in protected greenhouses behind glass, because we know IT DOES NOT BELONG HERE. Take it out of its protected environment and it will wither and die. Or it might "contaminate" and take over. So it must be kept SEPARATE. At any rate, at some point it will no longer be exotic, but familiar. No longer considered "foreign" but thought of as "native. But once it becomes familiar, it is no longer exotic. Of course, some people prefer exotic for its own sake. Something is lost but something else is gained: Exotic is easier to set aside and once the novelty has worn off, to ignore. On the other hand, that which is native must be accomodated, it must be ACKNOWLEDGED. It becomes part of the native consciousness, like Orthodoxy in, say, Alaska, where it is considered the NATIVE religion.

I have been to St. Anthony Monastery in Arizona. It is a wonderful place, truly an oasis of Heaven in the dry secular desert. It is beautiful, it is otherworldly, it is exotic. But that can be a problem as well as a blessing. For many simple 'Mericuns, it is simply TOO otherworldly, it is TOO exotic. I don't expect to walk into a monastery in Greece to hear English, and most Americans are going to be a bit consternated on hearing Greek in a monastery in America. I am not criticizing. It is not my place to question the wonderful and even miraculous work that Geronda Ephraim has accomplished here. Praise be to God. But still...

I don't think we need to be "unconventional", but do we HAVE to be Greek or Russian or foreign and "exotic"? Monasticism in America doesn't have to be unconventional, but it would be nice if it was in English. I pray some of those monastics growing in the imported soil pots in the greenhouses of Fr. Ephraim and Holy Trinity get transplanted in the ground of that wild and wooly place we call America, so that more people whose parents weren't born in another country might also discover something that is not so "exotic", but might become "familiar". So that the average "Joe" simply thinks "I am in Heaven" rather than "I must be in the Greek Heaven", I wonder where the Americans are put?" If we keep our faith under bushels and behind glass or in walled cities in the desert, speaking foreign languages, how will it TRANSFORM America? Do we really need to "protect" the Faith from being contaminated? Are we so insecure and afraid that Orthodoxy is not "up to" flourishing outside the green house, that it cannot supplant the native flora or thrive in native soil?

I bet it can, I know it will, I see it happening. And I and Owen and Rick and others want to do all we can to help it along. That's all, really.

Herman the gardener, or is that Chauncy Gardner?*

*Oblique reference to the movie "Being There" (1979) starring Peter Sellers

Herman Blaydoe

15-01-2008, 07:47 PM

But, now my sincere question is if God calls/raises up a Saint Anthony from within American Orthodoxy, then what? Or, in other words, if a Saint Anthony would emerge in the near future does this mean it is revival/renewal time for the city/area in which he lives and then a great awakening will occur for this country?

A good, old-fashioned tent revival! Actually, our parish has played around with the idea a little. Not in the "Dwight Moody" or "Billy Sunday" sense, but how about simply setting up a big tent, chairs, maybe a cookout and have a simple Akathist type of service in the open air on a Saturday or Sunday afternoon with several talks on, say, things like the relevance of the Fathers to the "Church" today sort of thing. An open-air retreat, free to all passers-by. Signs, balloons, enticing food....sort of like an ethnic festival, but specifically focussing on Christ instead of Hellenism or halupki.

But more practically, perhaps those monastics will simply be approachable by a wider audience--meaning more people being exposed to authentic Orthodoxy, who might have otherwise simply passed it by thinking "I'm not Greek so it must not be for me".

Nina

15-01-2008, 07:56 PM

I have to borrow Nike's ad here: "Just do it!"

While we sit and talk here Geronda Ephraim is doing things. So whoever has a different approach "just do it".

Can't American Orthodoxy be diverse and embracing like the country itself? Why are worldly people here more open minded than what I read in this thread? I take pride actually that America is way ahead of Europe in this aspect.

As Herman says the average 'Mericun, Joe or whatever can feel home in a monastery that is Mericun and where the language is Merican. There is nothing wrong with it. However when we point out at others that is when the problem begins. Can't we play nicely? We do not need to put others down like a calculating person. After all this is the earth of all, borders, or no borders and God created land without borders. And we know that Orthodoxy is above that, it is Universal.

So please can one explain why is there a problem that Geronda Ephraim is doing what he is doing. That's how God has enlightened him. We are wholeheartedly waiting to hear about a Mericun equivalent and maybe there is but we do not know it. Or while they are on the making we should not put others down.

Effie Ganatsios

15-01-2008, 07:59 PM

I agree that services should be in the language of the country the service is being held in. If people can't understand what is being said, what is the point. I disagree with this need to tear down the trappings of a religion one has decided to convert to. Go back to why you felt you wanted to become Orthodox. You must have seen something you liked, something that attracted you to this particular religion. So, what happened? Why do you need to make it into a replica of one of the religions you decided you didn't feel comfortable with anymore.

Of course Orthodoxy in America will acquire some of the characteristics Americans feel are part of their society. This is natural. But trust your new religion. It has existed for hundreds and hundreds of years. Being Orthodox does not make you either Greek or Russian if that is what you are afraid of. But neither can it become an American version of a watered down Orthodoxy that resembles Protestant social gatherings on rainy Sunday afternoons.

What you will end up with is something very like what you decided you didn't want in the first place.

There is potential for a bright, power filled Orthodox movement in America, but it is not something that should be rushed into just because converts feel uncomfortable with people thinking they might be Greek or Russian or whatever, just because they are Orthodox.

What is really important? Just bring to mind the beauty and wonder of our liturgy and the fact of being Orthodox.

Effie

"St. John of Damascus: "Brethren, let us stand on the rock of faith and the Tradition of the Church, not removing the landmarks which our holy Fathers set, nor giving any place to those who want to innovate and destroy the structure of the Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church of God."

Nina

15-01-2008, 08:06 PM

Being Orthodox does not make you either Greek nor Russian if that is what you are afraid of.
Effie

Exactly!

Effie you took such a spiritual approach and I love your emphasis on Orthodoxy and what made one convert.

Mary

15-01-2008, 08:13 PM

So please can one explain why is there a problem that Geronda Ephraim is doing what he is doing. That's how God has enlightened him. We are wholeheartedly waiting to hear about a Mericun equivalent and maybe there is but we do not know it. Or while they are on the making we should not put others down.

Dear Nina,

There is absolutely no problem with what Geronda Ephraim is doing, neither is there anyone else around who is capable of what he's doing. But he's getting old. Who's going to take his place?

The saying goes: Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day, teach him how to fish and you feed him for a life time. (Something like that).

Thing is, I loved going to a service all in Greek, this past Sunday. It was totally beautiful. But I was totally clueless and nothing stuck to me. I do want to go back, but I cannot survive there, inspite of the fact, that I felt as much at home there as if I"d been a member there all my life. My heart was full, but my head was empty.

Forgive me. Just a personal experience.

In Christ,
Mary.

Effie Ganatsios

15-01-2008, 08:16 PM

Mary

15-01-2008, 08:16 PM

Exactly!

Effie you took such a spiritual approach and I love your emphasis on Orthodoxy and what made one convert.

Definitely a spiritual approach, but not the whole story. I wouldn't have, I couldn't have, converted, if I hadn't been able to read anything in English, or ask questions in English or if my friend had answered my questions in Greek.

I lived in Ethiopia all my life, surrounded by Orthodox, I spoke Amaharic perfectly, but for all their services and their writings were in the ancient form of Amharic that common folk couldnt' speak anymore. So - I didn't even try to understand, I didn't want to understand, I was too lazy to learn a new language, so I could understand....

In Christ,
Mary.

Nina

15-01-2008, 08:26 PM

Dear Nina,

There is absolutely no problem with what Geronda Ephraim is doing, neither is there anyone else around who is capable of what he's doing. But he's getting old. Who's going to take his place?

The saying goes: Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day, teach him how to fish and you feed him for a life time. (Something like that).

Thing is, I loved going to a service all in Greek, this past Sunday. It was totally beautiful. But I was totally clueless and nothing stuck to me. I do want to go back, but I cannot survive there, inspite of the fact, that I felt as much at home there as if I"d been a member there all my life. My heart was full, but my head was empty.

Forgive me. Just a personal experience.

In Christ,
Mary.

I realize what you say about language dear Mary and agree fully with you that you need to understand.

But if we need something, is it right to take something away, or deny it from another person?
Plus is that other person being a barrier for what I need? Geronda Ephraim is doing what he is doing as God enlightened him. He never said that there should no be other monasteries. Why do we have to mention him, or others in such way because we are not getting what we want. The logic here seems to go like: I do not have a red shirt and it is my dream. Lila has one. Uncle Marco gave her the shirt. Therefore uncle Marco is doing something wrong.
This is America and it is diverse.

About the Geronda Ephraim getting old... I am not sure what that means because of course we are not permanently here. Although the other day I read the life of Saint Irene Chrisovalantou and she was an abbess until she departed at 102. And God provides, therefore we need not worry.

Mary

15-01-2008, 08:28 PM

I agree that services should be in the language of the country the service is being held in. If people can't understand what is being said, what is the point. I disagree with this need to tear down the trappings of a religion one has decided to convert to. Go back to why you felt you wanted to become Orthodox. You must have seen something you liked, something that attracted you to this particular religion. So, what happened? Why do you need to make it into a replica of one of the religions you decided you didn't feel comfortable with anymore.

Dear Effie,

slight misunderstanding here. No one wants to change orthodoxy to what we left behind. In fact, you'll find that most converts are quite fanatical about Traditions. None of the 'cradle' orthodox in my parish, Greek or Russian, wear head scarves. I do, and so do many of my convert sisters. Some of us, wear them all the time. We love our long skirts and our long sleeves, and find ways to stay in them, even in winter. We're obssessive about fasting, our homes are filled with icons and beeswax candles and vigil lamps. We love to stand, the longer the service, the better, we hate pews, we love prostrations, Holy Water is our favorite beverage...

We've gotten rid of all the books we used to love and filled our shelves with orthodox books, whether we're ever going to read them or not. We turn up at every service they have in church, and go to every funeral and Panikhida even though we dont' know who it's for. We visit every monastery we can afford to and even Mount Athos.

And we constantly wonder why the Orthodox are not more Orthodox and we get judgmental....

In Christ,
mary.

Nina

15-01-2008, 08:30 PM

Definitely a spiritual approach, but not the whole story. I wouldn't have, I couldn't have, converted, if I hadn't been able to read anything in English, or ask questions in English or if my friend had answered my questions in Greek.

I lived in Ethiopia all my life, surrounded by Orthodox, I spoke Amaharic perfectly, but for all their services and their writings were in the ancient form of Amharic that common folk couldnt' speak anymore. So - I didn't even try to understand, I didn't want to understand, I was too lazy to learn a new language, so I could understand....

In Christ,
Mary.

You do understand by now that I agree on the language thingy, do not you?

However I do not get it why should not other things exist?

Mary

15-01-2008, 08:31 PM

But if we need something, is it right to take something away, or deny it from another person?
Plus is that other person being a barrier for what I need? Geronda Ephraim is doing what he is doing as God enlightened him. He never said that there should no be other monasteries. Why do we have to mention him, or others in such way because we are not getting what we want. The logic here seems to go like: I do not have a red shirt and it is my dream. Lila has one. Uncle Marco gave her the shirt. Therefore uncle Marco is doing something wrong.
This is America and it is diverse.

You're right, we shouldn't be talking about Geronda Ephraim, because he's a saint.

We just want more like him, in English.

Mary.

Rick H.

15-01-2008, 08:33 PM

Definitely a spiritual approach, but not the whole story. I wouldn't have, I couldn't have, converted, if I hadn't been able to read anything in English, or ask questions in English or if my friend had answered my questions in Greek.

:) . . . I was waiting to see if anyone would point that out! Thanks to the part-time anonymous writer. :)

Herman--I thought I was the only one who saw that movie. Possibly as Chauncey won the election with the "I am a gardener" thing, you could run by doing the "I am Pooh" thing. Otherwise, bravo on your last post.

Nina--yes diversity is the word! (along with transcend). Thanks for your comments about 'then what.'

Effie--I don't see anyone trying to force or create or replicate (in the way you have suggested), not here anyway.

Yes, diversity . . . good word for both an Eastern Orthodoxy and an American Orthodoxy. There is one heavenly Flavor that permeates all of Orthodoxy, as its highest common denominator, as we have discussed before. But, how many flavors are there in an Eastern Orthodoxy? How many flavors are there in an American Orthodoxy?

How many licks does it take to get to the center of a Tootsie Pop?

In Christ,
Rick

Nina

15-01-2008, 08:40 PM

You're right, we shouldn't be talking about Geronda Ephraim, because he's a saint.

We just want more like him, in English.

Mary.

Ok it is proceeding in a good way the revelation. I am pleased you are able to explain until now to me. Thank you.

Now whose fault is it that we do not have more in English? Are the Greeks (or should that be the French?) to be guillotined? Is Geronda Ephraim responsible? Are the Russians to be sent to the freezing Siberia?

Effie Ganatsios

15-01-2008, 08:45 PM

Dear Effie,

slight misunderstanding here. No one wants to change orthodoxy to what we left behind. In fact, you'll find that most converts are quite fanatical about Traditions. None of the 'cradle' orthodox in my parish, Greek or Russian, wear head scarves. I do, and so do many of my convert sisters. Some of us, wear them all the time. We love our long skirts and our long sleeves, and find ways to stay in them, even in winter. We're obssessive about fasting, our homes are filled with icons and beeswax candles and vigil lamps. We love to stand, the longer the service, the better, we hate pews, we love prostrations, Holy Water is our favorite beverage...

We've gotten rid of all the books we used to love and filled our shelves with orthodox books, whether we're ever going to read them or not. We turn up at every service they have in church, and go to every funeral and Panikhida even though we dont' know who it's for. We visit every monastery we can afford to and even Mount Athos.

And we constantly wonder why the Orthodox are not more Orthodox and we get judgmental....

In Christ,
mary.

Mary, are you perhaps the exception to the rule, because I have the impression from the posts on this thread that tradition is the first thing that needs to be changed for a more individualistic orthodoxy, whatever that means.

And dear Mary, I love and respect the fact that you do the things you and your sisters do. Remember our first discussion concerning traditional dress and the misunderstandings that resulted?

It's clear that Greeks who are Orthodox are sometimes put to shame by the earnestness of devoted converts such as yourself.

Effie

Mary

15-01-2008, 08:45 PM

You do understand by now that I agree on the language thingy, do not you?

However I do not get it why should not other things exist?

Didn't say the other shouldln't exist. They're both needed.

We were at an Antiochian church, and they did the service in both Arabic and in English. The priest told his new immigrants who couldn't speak much English:

"You are in America now. And the language here is English. I know you will learn English very fast, so you can make lots of money. But I also want you to learn to pray in English."

I liked his approach. He didn't want them to do something, just for money. Neither did he want them to leave the church feeling totally lost, so there was plenty of Arabic. The readings were done in both.

The parts of the service that were completely in English, were the litanies, the Creed, the Lord's prayer, and the Prayer just before taking communion. That was perfect, because I was able to pray along before going forward to receive communion.

However, at the all Greek service - I coudlnt' tell one part from the other, and never knew when the Creed was said, the Lord's prayer, or the Pre-communion prayer, and all of a sudden, everyone was lining up to receive communion...

For a new comer, the Antiochian service would've been more beneficial. My very first Divine Liturgy, was all in English, But the only parts that I was touched by, were the litanies!! That's all my mind had the capacity for... Actually, I was quite overwhelmed by them. There's one line: For those who have no one to pray for them, Lord have mercy. - I couldnt' listen to the rest of the service. I cried, thinking, all these years, that I'd thought no one cared enough to pray for me, all the Orthodox have been praying for me. Everyday. All over the world.

In Christ,
mary.

Mary

15-01-2008, 08:49 PM

Is Geronda Ephraim responsible?

I told you to stop picking on Geronda Ephraim! Since your mama can't spank you, I will - go to your room, and I'll be there with my wooden stick as soon as I get my annoyance under control.

Your big sister, Mary.

Effie Ganatsios

15-01-2008, 08:49 PM

Definitely a spiritual approach, but not the whole story. I wouldn't have, I couldn't have, converted, if I hadn't been able to read anything in English, or ask questions in English or if my friend had answered my questions in Greek.

I lived in Ethiopia all my life, surrounded by Orthodox, I spoke Amaharic perfectly, but for all their services and their writings were in the ancient form of Amharic that common folk couldnt' speak anymore. So - I didn't even try to understand, I didn't want to understand, I was too lazy to learn a new language, so I could understand....

In Christ,
Mary.

But Mary, you will notice that the first sentence in my post was about the need to have the liturgy in the language of the country it is being held in. If you can't understand what is being said, then how can you introduce it into your heart.

Effie

Nina

15-01-2008, 08:50 PM

Mary

15-01-2008, 08:53 PM

Mary, are you perhaps the exception to the rule, because I have the impression from the posts on this thread that tradition is the first thing that needs to be changed for a more individualistic orthodoxy, whatever that means.

And dear Mary, I love and respect the fact that you do the things you and your sisters do. Remember our first discussion concerning traditional dress and the misunderstandings that resulted?

It's clear that Greeks who are Orthodox are sometimes put to shame by the earnestness of devoted converts such as yourself.

Effie

I do, indeed remember our first encounter! LOL =)

It's not possible to know a person's actual stance through just one thread, though. Discussions flow along, and people try to balance each other off when they feel one side is supported and the other side of the issue is being overlooked. So, you end up with funny conversations, and tangles and misunderstandings.

But, meet up with the same folks on another thread, and you'll see a totally new side to them...

Mary.

PS - I'm not an exception. I am a product of those whom I've learned from. So, if you see anything that's good, it's because I've had good teachers.

Nina

15-01-2008, 08:55 PM

I told you to stop picking on Geronda Ephraim! Since your mama can't spank you, I will - go to your room, and I'll be there with my wooden stick as soon as I get my annoyance under control.

Your big sister, Mary.

You are not the boss of me! :p

Seriously now:

Why do those people who left their countries to start a life here and actually contributed to the betterment of the place, and who are free to exercise their right to religion, be blamed? Why should they be blamed for something they are not responsible for?

Mary

15-01-2008, 09:05 PM

The language thingy is settled and we both agree that people need to understand the language first so they can get it. Because for some the story goes that some people understand the language (any language) very well because the are native and they still do not get Orthodoxy.

I am asking whom do we blame? Why do we read in the AO thread: Greek, Russians. Greek, Russians. Greek, Russians.

Dear Nina, why are you looking for someone to blame? There is no one to blame. Everyone is doing their best, everyone has to learn, everyone makes mistakes. The most responsible people would be the priests, monks, bishops, etc, because they're our teachers and our shepherds. But, lay people who are capable of learning and teaching also become responsible, because they 'know more' and therefore, they will have more to answer for.

I could choose to learn more about my faith and make myself available to my friends and family, or play dumb and send them all to my overworked priest. I for one, can't pass the buck to anyone, because I can talk to my friends/family about orthodoxy. In fact, I'm obligated to talk to them and answer them, because they will NOT go to my priest. I am their only contact with Orthodoxy, so I have to prepare myself.

So, in short, we're all responsible, we don't have to blame each other.

In Christ,
mary.

Mary

15-01-2008, 09:13 PM

But Mary, you will notice that the first sentence in my post was about the need to have the liturgy in the language of the country it is being held in. If you can't understand what is being said, then how can you introduce it into your heart.

Effie

It wasn't the first sentence. I was thinking of the rest of what you wrote:

I disagree with this need to tear down the trappings of a religion one has decided to convert to. Go back to why you felt you wanted to become Orthodox. You must have seen something you liked, something that attracted you to this particular religion. So, what happened? Why do you need to make it into a replica of one of the religions you decided you didn't feel comfortable with anymore.

... which just seemed to be a misunderstanding of what kind of changes we want...

In Christ,
mary

Nina

15-01-2008, 09:17 PM

Dear Nina, why are you looking for someone to blame? There is no one to blame. Everyone is doing their best,
In Christ,
mary.

Exactly! You came to the point I was trying to make. Why should we blame, as we have seen in this thread? Why should we make scapegoats? Why should we complain so much? I started to feel like around some jealous woman (I knew a couple like that) who is trying with all her might to put another female down just because she is intimidated.

About the AO, Nike is right: 'Just do it'.

Mary

15-01-2008, 09:20 PM

Exactly! You came to the point I was trying to make. Why should we blame, as we have seen in this thread? Why should we make scapegoats? Why should we complain so much? I started to feel like around some jealous woman (I knew a couple like that) who is trying with all her might to put another female down just because she is intimidated.

About the AO, Nike is right: 'Just do it'.

LOL! You're funny. Better check that heart, and make sure you're not the one who's jealous. ;)

To the pure... all things are pure. Read that somewhere.

Father David Moser

15-01-2008, 09:26 PM

A good, old-fashioned tent revival! Actually, our parish has played around with the idea a little. Not in the "Dwight Moody" or "Billy Sunday" sense, but how about simply setting up a big tent, chairs, maybe a cookout and have a simple Akathist type of service in the open air on a Saturday or Sunday afternoon with several talks on, say, things like the relevance of the Fathers to the "Church" today sort of thing. An open-air retreat, free to all passers-by. Signs, balloons, enticing food....sort of like an ethnic festival, but specifically focussing on Christ instead of Hellenism or halupki.

Oh I like this idea. I'm going to appropriate it to see if I can make it happen here in Idaho.

Fr David Moser

Nina

15-01-2008, 09:27 PM

LOL! You're funny. Better check that heart, and make sure you're not the one who's jealous. ;)

To the pure... all things are pure. Read that somewhere.

I guess you misunderstood me. Some of the posts here kept mentioning other nationalities and figures like Geronda Ephraim. Why do they need to belittle others? And it felt like in a jealous woman's world.

I am not pure. I have all the sins of the world and universe. But a jealous woman who keeps saying negative things about every woman passing on the street will not have the honor of my presence for long. ;) I am picky and choosy when choosing my friends.

Effie Ganatsios

15-01-2008, 09:36 PM

It wasn't the first sentence. I was thinking of the rest of what you wrote:

... which just seemed to be a misunderstanding of what kind of changes we want...

In Christ,
mary

Mary, it seemed to me after reading some of the posts, that the emphasis was on a dislike of the ethnic qualities of Orthodoxy and that this is what has to be changed. Language is the first and I suppose most important obstacle and I can understand that. I don't live in the US so I cannot know just what irritates those that want nothing ethnic in their chosen religion. Surely all Americans know that their ancestors came from European countries - I don't suppose there are many native Americans on this forum - and that the traditions their ancestors brought from Europe have evolved into this so-called American way of life.

One of the great truths about immigrants to new countries is that those who were adventurous and those who had courage were the ones who migrated from their original country. These qualities were part of the character of all first generation immigrants. And I realize that present-day Americans are proud of these qualities and of their ancestors, just as I am of my own ancestors.

Whether we like it or not, Orthodoxy did not originate in the US, so it is natural that there would be ethnic undertones. I cannot understand why there exists a dislike of this aspect of Orthodoxy in the US. This dislike apparently extends even to the food of these foreign countries.

I suppose that having a "good old tent revival" type of meeting, as Herman I think suggested, would be great fun and would attract a lot of people that would come to hear about Orthodoxy, especially if only traditional American food (if there is such a thing) were served. But would these people really be learning anything about Orthodoxy, not even being invited into an Orthodox church, but into a tent?

Surely a middle road can be found.

Nina

15-01-2008, 10:25 PM

Whether we like it or not, Orthodoxy did not originate in the US, so it is natural that there would be ethnic undertones.

Of course there will be. Like in the tent meeting, Herman suggested to talk about the relevance of the Fathers. Those Fathers were made in other countries. Should we skip talking about them altogether because they are not from this soil?

I received an email from a very pious Orthodox friend some time ago. It spoke about immigrants. How they get free education, and free medical aid and other opportunities here -things about which I am unaware of, but anyhow- and for these reasons, continued the email, and to save our tax money we should kick them out of US. I had to rub my eyes. I went back and checked if it was the email address of my friend for whom I have such a high esteem. It was an email from another person and was forwarded to him, but he also forwarded it to his contact list and with an approval.

This is a guy from whom indirectly I have learned so much about religion and God. I did not know what to say. I was at loss for words. I wanted to ask if these people who were links in the message were gods, and were planing to live forever here on earth. That would have justified a bit the overt hate in that email and the eagerness to make life miserable for other human beings. But I never could reconcile the name Orthodox of my friend and such an email. I closed the file and repeated in my mind that it was purely a mistake and he did not have time to read the entire email but forwarded it carelessly. Still it was interesting to read that such opinions exist (what century are we in?) and are perpetrated in so many ways.

Mary

15-01-2008, 11:05 PM

Mary, it seemed to me after reading some of the posts, that the emphasis was on a dislike of the ethnic qualities of Orthodoxy and that this is what has to be changed.

Whether we like it or not, Orthodoxy did not originate in the US, so it is natural that there would be ethnic undertones. I cannot understand why there exists a dislike of this aspect of Orthodoxy in the US. This dislike apparently extends even to the food of these foreign countries.

Personally, I've never met an American who didn't like some kind of ethnic food or other. I have, however, met Indians who'd rather starve than eat anything other than rice, and Ethiopians who truly were starving, but wouldn't eat rice! =)

Mary.

Mary

15-01-2008, 11:07 PM

No work, no eat. That's not Un-orthodox. Nothing is free, somebody, somewhere is paying.

Owen Jones

15-01-2008, 11:10 PM

I haven't seen any post here that is anti-Greek or anti-ethnicity and I suspect the issue regarding sending immigrants home had to do with illegal immigrants, of which we have about 20 million. Let's get a grip.

Nor do I think having an American "brand" of monasticism means allowing monks to eat meat. Although I must say that unless these meat eating monks are in some quasi-jurisdiction without a bishop, it must be that their bishop doesn't care.

I hosted an event one time on a Friday after Vespers. It included quite a number of non-Orthodox people. I asked a number of people what we should do about what to serve. Two opinions. Don't serve meat, it's Friday. Do serve meat, it's Saturday. We did serve meat. Bishop Kallistos ate it. A monk ate it and I asked him about it and he said it would have been uncharitable to not eat it. But some people were a bit incensed about the whole thing.

Now, maybe this kind of thing is extremely important. On the other hand, maybe it isn't quite as important as we think, and maybe an American Orthodox ascetical tradition has to build up on its own merits, while making mistakes along the way. It's all pretty hypothetical anyway, since I don't see Americans in droves wanting to become monks anytime soon. On the other hand, there are many spiritually hungry people in this country, and in the world. And a Greek language Athonite monastery can't possibly be the only word, or the last word on the subject, as good and holy as it is. People will eventually be able to tell the difference between what is really serious and what isn't.

Rick H.

15-01-2008, 11:14 PM

But would these people really be learning anything about Orthodoxy, not even being invited into an Orthodox church, but into a tent?

Surely a middle road can be found.

I think without a doubt there would be great learning and increase of awareness in this setting Effie. This proposition is one that should be met with the expression, praise God.

In America, the tent next to the Church building is a middle ground.

For that matter, the people/church members who are the Church will be hosting the event, so let us not confuse the building with the Church.

Possibly, you will like my story better. And, this is not to say that I converted because of a Greek festival, because that would be innaccurate. It was a help; but, in my case, when I visited the Greek Festival (which was a bunch of little tents for the most part, and one big tent) I took the church tour and learned about the icons on the wall and listened to a man talk about Orthodoxy. In this case I was in both the tents and the Church building. But, the following year I was the head coffee maker in the Greek Coffee tent, and I was an Orthodox Church member. Actually, I wasn't the head Greek coffee maker, but I should have been alright! Some folks say, you've never had Greek coffee until you've had Rick's Greek coffee. I use Bravo brand. Okay, no one actually has said that either, but they should have! I do make a mean cup of Greek joe.

. . . Anyway, possibly I've had too much joe as evidenced by this post. But, the point is only Good will come from what Herman has shared. What he shared is much different than a Greek festival for sure, but it brings joy to my heart to consider this picture especially as it relates to our conversation here about an American Orthodoxy! I might even have to make a road trip if this becomes reality.

In Christ,
Rick

Nina

15-01-2008, 11:27 PM

No work, no eat. That's not Un-orthodox. Nothing is free, somebody, somewhere is paying.

How do you know they are not working?

Rick H.

15-01-2008, 11:30 PM

On the other hand, there are many spiritually hungry people in this country, and in the world.

And, this is why it matters. Yes, pitch those tents, as Nina/Nike says, 'just do it.'

Nina

16-01-2008, 12:41 AM

No work, no eat. That's not Un-orthodox. Nothing is free, somebody, somewhere is paying.

PS When a beggar will approach me, I will mention these words. I am afraid these are un-Orthodox though.

Rick, yes, Nike is right: "just do it". Or as Elvis Presley sung yesterday in my radio "A little less conversation, a little more action please". Because if we dream something and allow ourselves to be caught up in words, our mission does not fulfill itself.

And the frustration that is felt often here is maybe not because of Greeks, Russians, Hispanics etc. but maybe because of this what Owen says:

:
It's all pretty hypothetical anyway, since I don't see Americans in droves wanting to become monks anytime soon.

It is maybe an eagerness to place the US in the spiritual map. We can not judge this way though because maybe there are saints here abound, about whom we are not aware given the fact that we have anonymous saints in Orthodoxy. And although there are no hordes of people heading to the desert, we do not know, but maybe there are hordes of people heading for sainthood. For instance all these converts is a very peculiar reality of the last centuries in the history of Orthodoxy. It is major. And it attracts blessing and grace. If there is need for AO why should it be according to some model. Of course there will be Oneness in Christ with other Orthodox Churches, however by this eagerness to imitate, equal and top some other Orthodox Church maybe makes it a torture and that what we feel in this thread. Stop comparing. Let AO grow in the way God wants it and blesses it to.

Another thought I need to keep secret from Fr. Dcn. Matthew: if you are him please do not read further!

You guys of the AO thread should get him to come back to US. Because if he stays in England, sometime in the future of the future he will have the appellation of the region where he would spent most of his ministry. There, I said it.

John W.

16-01-2008, 12:46 AM

If I want to find out how St. Anthonys are made, I would get myself to a monastery that follows his blueprints.

Yeah, I know, bad form to respond to one's own post...but this looks like a good a place as any to plug:

St. Anthony's Greek Orthodox Monastery
http://www.stanthonysmonastery.org/

Rick H.

16-01-2008, 12:52 AM

You guys of the AO thread should get him to come back to US. Because if he stays in England, sometime in the future of the future he will have the appellation of the region where he would spent most of his ministry. There, I said it.

Are you saying this certain bow tie wearing English professor of Early Church History is an American?

John W.

16-01-2008, 12:57 AM

I have been to St. Anthony Monastery in Arizona. It is a wonderful place, truly an oasis of Heaven in the dry secular desert. It is beautiful, it is otherworldly, it is exotic. But that can be a problem as well as a blessing. For many simple 'Mericuns, it is simply TOO otherworldly, it is TOO exotic. I don't expect to walk into a monastery in Greece to hear English, and most Americans are going to be a bit consternated on hearing Greek in a monastery in America. I am not criticizing. It is not my place to question the wonderful and even miraculous work that Geronda Ephraim has accomplished here. Praise be to God. But still...

Geronda Ephraim is the Man with a plan.

Have you checked out: St. Anthony's Monastery's ,"The Divine Music Project?"

"This website contains more than 5000 pages of Byzantine music in Western and Byzantine notation in the style of chanting used on the Holy Mountain. The scope of this project covers the liturgies of St. John Chrysostom, St. Basil the Great, St. James, and the Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts, as well as various doxologies, and hymns for Vespers, Orthros, the Mysteries, and the Menaion. The words of the hymns are provided in Elizabethan English, Modern English, and Greek. Click on the ten orange buttons below to access these hymns."

Here: http://stanthonysmonastery.org/music/Index.html

Phase II of the Athonite Invasion?

Nina

16-01-2008, 12:58 AM

Yeah, I know, bad form to respond to one's own post...but this looks like a good a place as any to plug:

St. Anthony's Greek Orthodox Monastery
http://www.stanthonysmonastery.org/

Giggles... I do that all the time with my posts, John! Haven't you noticed?

P.S Loved the Athonite Invasion title. And yes there are many contributions in English.

Nina

16-01-2008, 01:05 AM

Are you saying this certain bow tie wearing English professor of Early Church History is an American?

No I am not saying anything because I have no idea who he is apart from what we have read here about ordination, translation etc. I have never met him, or seen him. I am no prophet, I am not a saint, I have no gift of clairvoyance etc. from God. I am just a poor sinner. But I feel something. And as we know in Orthodoxy the saint carries with his name the place where his ministry and spiritual life thrived. Therefore it does not matter where the saint comes from. It matters in which place he struggles for salvation.

PS Are you sure he wears bow tie as a monk professor now?

Rick H.

16-01-2008, 01:13 AM

Nina, the older I get, the less sure I am about many things; however, what you have said today about 'just do it' and accepting diversity sounds right on the money.

Father David Moser

16-01-2008, 01:29 AM

Are you saying this certain bow tie wearing English professor of Early Church History is an American?

Yep. From Idaho no less! And believe me we have tried to get him back in the US, back in the US, back in the USA (to paraphrase the Beatles) - but nothing has worked out yet (but it won't stop us from trying).

Fr David Moser

Nina

16-01-2008, 01:51 AM

Yep. From Idaho no less! And believe me we have tried to get him back in the US, back in the US, back in the USA (to paraphrase the Beatles) - but nothing has worked out yet (but it won't stop us from trying).

Fr David Moser

See Rick. Told you, I feel something. Maybe you can say that Europe has too many saints and we need people working in this field here. But at the end he will go where God calls him to.

Also, Rick look at so many people from here come in the forum and say they love monasticism. It is not that they are connected to a GPS and we can see them going to the desert. And of course they will hide their spiritual deeds for the sake of the humility. I am starting to agree with Father Moser that next generations maybe will buy books with saints' lives from here, if God does not come before that. But while we are talking here things are happening. People are set on the path to theosis. Look at the forum. So many people with thirst and questions. Thank God!

Herman Blaydoe

16-01-2008, 02:25 AM

Have you checked out: St. Anthony's Monastery's ,"The Divine Music Project?"

Yeah, well, having already started a veritable firestorm already, and fortified by a couple shots of 12 year old Glen Fiddich, I'll add some gasoline to the mix:

I was listening to some Greek chant at work one day. One of my co-workers asked me who was torturing that cat. Believe it or not, not everyone is driven to spiritual ecstasy by Greek chant. To be honest, I find some Russian music way too operatic. I have grown to love my little diocese's plain chant tradition, like Scotch it is an acquired taste, but well worth the effort (IMHO). But I digress....

To make a short story long, the MUSIC is exactly one place where a truly American tradition could be allowed to take hold, even if it will no doubt cause no end of controversy amongst the purists. The tradition of my diocese is, in a real sense, MOUNTAIN MUSIC, not dissimilar to the bluegrass tradition or the music of the Appalachians (which I also enjoy). Being a polyglot music tradition to begin with, the Carpatho-Russian plain chant could be a wonderful transition to a unique American music tradition. It already represents a transition from the Greek monophonic tradition to the Russian polyphonic. But there are Greeks who don't like Russian music, and Russians who perhaps think of Greek music in similar terms as my co-worker.

On another topic , but related....Effie, sorry, but no. A Greek-on-one-side-English-on-the-other-side book doesn't cut it, not here in America. You still miss out on the changeable parts, the tropars and kondaks that impart such incredible wisdom and knowledge about the Faith! Let us not keep it a secret any more! Let us not keep the Good News locked in a greenhouse or in a museum, to be dusted off on holy days and Sundays! Let us not keep it as exotic, secret teachings hidden in foreign "holy" languages that only the adept may understand. Let us invite to the banquet anyone who will come (Matthew 22:9). Let us share the Good News in the language that the people will understand (Acts 2:1-4).

Nobody is being anti-ethnic, but is it wrong to be pro-anything? If I want to be happy to be American, is that a bad thing? Do I have to wish I was Russian or Greek or Serbian? Mr. Portokalos says there are two kinds of people, those who are Greek and those who wish they were. Am I a heretic to declare publicly that he is wrong? That to be glad I am American does not have to mean that I am glad I am not Greek?

There are Americans who actually dress like Russian peasants. Some of the most vociferous defenders of Slavonic are converts. I try to avoid such people, but hey, that's just me.

Herman the Pooh and firestarter

John W.

16-01-2008, 03:17 AM

Yeah, well, having already started a veritable firestorm already, and fortified by a couple shots of 12 year old Glen Fiddich, I'll add some gasoline to the mix:

I was listening to some Greek chant at work one day. One of my co-workers asked me who was torturing that cat. Believe it or not, not everyone is driven to spiritual ecstasy by Greek chant. To be honest, I find some Russian music way too operatic. I have grown to love my little diocese's plain chant tradition, like Scotch it is an acquired taste, but well worth the effort (IMHO). But I digress....

To make a short story long, the MUSIC is exactly one place where a truly American tradition could be allowed to take hold, even if it will no doubt cause no end of controversy amongst the purists. The tradition of my diocese is, in a real sense, MOUNTAIN MUSIC, not dissimilar to the bluegrass tradition or the music of the Appalachians (which I also enjoy).

Ian Bradley is lecturer in theology at St Andrew's University: "We know for example, that Egyptian Monks appear in Ireland very early on. We know that there are motifs from the some of the desert saints on Irish high-standing crosses - indeed there's one not far from here where St Paul and St Anthony appear on a cross in the middle of Perthshire. So I think there is a lot of evidence, and its because of course, of trading links between the Eastern Mediterranean and the Western seaboard of Britain. There are lots of links, undoubtedly, between Egyptian, Syrian desert monasticism, and the monasticism of Ireland and then of Scotland and Wales."

BBC4: So you could argue that in fact Ireland and Scotland if you like, the Celtic Churches, are closer to the Middle Eastern roots of Christianity than their continental counterparts?

Ian Bradley: "Yes. I think you could actually. And I mean I think this would fit in with some of their, their practices. And I mean, er, an interesting example of this might be a contemporary example. The survival of Gaelic psalm chanting. Now musicologists have pointed to the fact that these extraordinarily mournful falling cadences that you get in the, in the pentatonic scale in Gaelic psalm chanting, are tremendously similar to a Byzantine chant - the chant of Coptic monks in Egypt. And probably take us back to the earliest kind of Christian chant, based on synagogue chant, based on the Hebrew chants in the synagogue. And so that's a kind of...actual living example of how we may well be in the Western extremities of Christianity, close to its, its Middle Eastern heartland."

John W.

16-01-2008, 03:34 AM

Now musicologists have pointed to the fact that these extraordinarily mournful falling cadences that you get in the, in the pentatonic scale in Gaelic psalm chanting, are tremendously similar to a Byzantine chant - the chant of Coptic monks in Egypt. And probably take us back to the earliest kind of Christian chant, based on synagogue chant, based on the Hebrew chants in the synagogue. And so that's a kind of...actual living example of how we may well be in the Western extremities of Christianity, close to its, its Middle Eastern heartland."

"The bluegrass singer, " wrote folklorist Alan Lomax, "hollers in the high lonesome style beloved in the American backwoods." This high lonesome sound of bluegrass has its roots, too, in traditional psalm singing; its links with Gaelic psalm and shape-note singing are particularly strong...In theme alone, bluegrass-and for that matter, many of the old country ballads-evokes a peculiarly Celtic feeling in its intense longing for home that is almost evangelical in tone, as if the singer is pining for some childhood Eden or mythical Paradise Lost."

From: 'Celtic Music: A Complete Guide' by June Skinner Sawyers

John W.

16-01-2008, 04:53 AM

Some samples of Gaelic-psalm singing can be heard here:
http://www.gaelicpsalmsinging.com/audio/

Yeah, this stuff could definitely be used in a Celtic (Irish, Scottish) Orthodox Church, but I wonder if it would be considered too ethnic for the American Orthodox Church?

John W.

16-01-2008, 05:23 AM

Yeah, well, having already started a veritable firestorm already, and fortified by a couple shots of 12 year old Glen Fiddich

Maybe you'll feel a differently tomorrow night if you fortify yourself with a couple of shots of Balvenie (Glenfiddich's sister distillery) instead. BTW, "balvenie" is Gaelic for "village of monks."

Effie Ganatsios

16-01-2008, 11:58 AM

On another topic , but related....Effie, sorry, but no. A Greek-on-one-side-English-on-the-other-side book doesn't cut it, not here in America.
Herman the Pooh and firestarter

Herman I used this example in reply to Mary who said that when she attended church and heard the liturgy in Greek she didn't understand a word. I completely agree - I believe this is the 3rd or 4th time I have said this - that the liturgy should be in the language of the country it is being celebrated in.

I use the above book - which is published by the Australian Orthodox church - in church so that I can enjoy the liturgy in Greek but also understand everything that is being said. I understand the Greek but I can't seem to connect to it. Since using this book I have felt that I am truly a part of the liturgy.

As to mountain music as a substitute for the Byzantine chant I just cannot comment. Perhaps Glenfiddich whiskey helps here.

Effie

Effie Ganatsios

16-01-2008, 12:07 PM

"So you could argue that in fact Ireland and Scotland if you like, the Celtic Churches, are closer to the Middle Eastern roots of Christianity than their continental counterparts?

Ian Bradley: "Yes. I think you could actually. And I mean I think this would fit in with some of their, their practices. And I mean, er, an interesting example of this might be a contemporary example. The survival of Gaelic psalm chanting. Now musicologists have pointed to the fact that these extraordinarily mournful falling cadences that you get in the, in the pentatonic scale in Gaelic psalm chanting, are tremendously similar to a Byzantine chant - the chant of Coptic monks in Egypt. And probably take us back to the earliest kind of Christian chant, based on synagogue chant, based on the Hebrew chants in the synagogue. And so that's a kind of...actual living example of how we may well be in the Western extremities of Christianity, close to its, its Middle Eastern heartland."

It is interesting that there is no mention of Greece and the Byzantine chant. Is Greece also included in the "continental counterparts"?

The Byzantine chant is one of the oldest chants in the world - it's origins are thought to date back to Ancient Greece. After Greece become Christianized, they kept the style of chanting, and wrote Orthodox hymns with them. So for about 2000 years Greece has remained steadfast in the True Teachings with the same music."

"In some cases, one can find in Orthodox chant remnants of the metrical schemes of classical Greek poetry."

""Alternatively, this style (Byzantine chant) could be closer to the ancient Christian practice from Jerusalem, Syria, Lebanon, and so forth; in that case, the style that developed in western Europe would be the aberrant musical style. We likely shall never know the truth about this, however, due to the uncertainty of inferring sound from written music."

"

http://homoecumenicus.com/Ioannidis_Music_and_Religion.htm

Tracks

1. Ie paean
Original music Ioannidis Nikolaos 2003 - Language: Greek
2. Orphic Hymn to Nature
Original music Ioannidis Nikolaos 2003 - Language: Greek- mp3 (sample)
3. Hymn to Nemesis
Extant ancient Greek - Mesomedes (1st c. AD) - Language: Greek- mp3 (sample)
4. Invocation of Calliope and Apollo
Extant ancient Greek - Mesomedes (1st c. AD) - Language: Greek mp3 (sample)
5. First Delphic Hymn to Apollo
Extant ancient Greek - Athenaeus (127 BC) - Language: Greek mp3 (sample)
6. Hymn to the Holy Trinity
Extant early Christian hymn (Oxyrhynchus Papyrus 1786) -Anonymous c. 2nd-3rd c. A.D - Language: Greek mp3 (sample)

"It is well known that the early Christian church modes drew upon the ancient Greek modes. First the Gnostics used the Greek scale in their incantations, and then Byzantium not only adopted the Greek modes but also adapted the verses of ancient poetry to praise the God of the new religion. In the hymns of today's Greek Orthodox Church which saved unaltered the Byzantine tradition of the early Christian church, the relationship with the ancient Orphic hymns, as well as with the whole range of Greek poetry, both Lyrical and Dramatic, is obvious. Also, the huge legacy of ancient Greek writings on music theory served as models for later theoretical treatises and helped shaped the course of Western and, of course, Middle Eastern music theory. There is no aspect of the musical art that the ancient authors did not deal with: Writings on theory, musical education and the role of music in society (by Plato and Aristotle), on practical aspects of music performance (Aristoxenus), on acoustics (Pythagoras, Euclid, Ptolemeos) etc. Even the notational system, on which today's Western music theory is based, comes from the philosopher and mathematician Pythagoras (6th century B.C.) who was the first to define musical intervals in mathematical terms and thus create the first system of musical notation. Finally, the organized system of Western harmony, as expressed in the so called classical music is actually the evolution of the music of the Middle Ages, the organization of which, in turn, derives from the medieval theorists' knowledge of ancient Greek music transmitted to Europe by means of the works of Boethius in the 5th century A.D and the writings of Arabs later. "

http://homoecumenicus.com/ioannidis_music_ancient_greeks.htm

Reply to Herman's anecdote concerning Byzantine chants and cats :

"The aim of this music is not to display the fine voices of the chanters, or to entertain the congregation, or to evoke aesthetic experience…. The aim of Byzantine sacred music is spiritual. The music is, in the first place, a means of worship and veneration; and in the second place, a means of self-perfection, of eliciting and cultivating man’s higher thoughts and feelings and of opposing and eliminating his lower, undesirable ones. —C. Cavernos"

Herman, as an Orthodox how did you reply to this smart remark?

http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/general/irishorthodoxchurch.aspx

http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/general/history1.aspx

The Apostolic Church
The history of the Christian Church begins, with the descent of the Holy Spirit on the Apostles at Jerusalem during the feast of Pentecost, the first Whit Sunday. On that same day through the preaching of St Peter three thousand men and women were baptized, and the first Christian community at Jerusalem was formed.

Before long the members of the Jerusalem Church were scattered by the persecution which followed the stoning of St Stephen. 'Go forth therefore,' Christ had said, 'and make all nations My disciples' (Matthew xxviii, 19). Obedient to this command they preached wherever they went, at first to Jews, but before long to Gentiles also. Some stories of these Apostolic journeys are recorded by St Luke in the book of Acts; others are preserved in the tradition of the Church. Within an astonishingly short time small Christian communities had sprung up in all the main centres of the Roman Empire and even in places beyond the Roman frontiers.

Rick H.

16-01-2008, 01:41 PM

Dear John,

Thank you so very much for this link to the Gaelic sound samples! As I sit here in the dark before the sun rises for the day listening to it, I have a chill runnig up my spine listening to it. I love this. It effects the very fiber of my being. It carries me away to a very good place. I am going to see if Amazon carries this CD.

Thank you.

Dear Herman,

I was floored last night when I read your post about the mountain music/bluegrass style or type of music used in your church. Hopefully, I understood this correctly. Is there any link to a site where I could hear your church's music or some that you feel is very close. I have the highest level of interest in what you have shared.

If any listened to the sample provided above by John, especially the first track, and if any have seen the movie "Cold Mountain" I wonder if you see a direct correlation between the "Gaelic" and the "Mountain." And, also, as I listen to the "Gaelic" I feel I am hearing a distinct Middle Eastern influence. I wonder if any others hear this?

What a Beautiful way to start the day. Thanks very much Herman and John!

And, what does all of this talk of the different flavors of music have to do with an American Orthodoxy? One word answer, EVERYTHING! An American Orthodoxy appreciates and values a wide variety of flavors. None are excluded, ALL are included.

If any here think that an American Orthodoxy is made up of bigots or those prejudice in some way to ethnicity you could not possibly be more ignorant and confused! You are hearing things that are not being said! Herman has said it all very plainly, and as Nina references the diversity here in America it should be more than clear that there is a great Beauty here and a many flavors that together comprise a most heavenly Flavor.

And, this is really the point for any who will take just one second to consider/hear it . . . there never will be just a Greek Orthodoxy in the US. There never will be just a Russian Orthodoxy in the US, and so on and so on. But, these will always be here (just as you hear the Middle Eastern influence in the Gaelic music) even if and when there is some sort of judicial institution in place that is called American Orthodoxy. And, the irony of this is if and when the US is recoginzed judicially, it won't matter. There is and probably always will be such a running behind here, barring Divine intervention in the prevaling leadership of the individual groups of Orthodox. And, there's a subect about individualism/particularism for another day. American Orthodoxy views all particularism as being schismatic, and these individual schismatic groups are to be transcended by the one who would transcend ALL divisions in Christ.

And, this is the whole point. While there is not American Orthodoxy judicially, there is an American Orthodoxy existentially! And, it is a very Beautiful Orthodoxy which is representative, a perfect representation/image of what we call Eastern Orthodoxy.

Does anyone see this yet? There is an Eastern Orthodoxy! One would have to be deaf and blind to not know this. The same is true of an American Orthodoxy. There is an American Orthodoxy! But, just as you cannot point to an Eastern Orthodoxy, you cannot point to an American Orthodoxy.

Think about it. If we started a thread here on monachos titled, "An Eastern Orthodoxy?" how much of the very same ground would be covered as we have covered in the past 1.2 years in the "An American Orthodoxy?" thread?

The same Beauty and diversity that is found in the Gaelic music is found in an American Orthodoxy for which there should only be one response, praise God!

In Christ,
Rick