Why don't monastics eat meat? [Archive] - Monachos.net Discussion Community

Andrew

06-11-2007, 04:42 AM

Then again...
I am told that the monastics at New Skete in Cambridge, NY eat
quite a lot of meat.

Then again...
The preparation and sale of smoked meats is one of
their means of generating income.

Since only certain cuts are sold as smoked meat, why waste what
(according to their market) is just "offal"?

Do not take this the wrong way...
New Skete is atypical in almost all ways in regards to the traditions of Orthodox monasticism. They were originally a liberal Byzantine Catholic monastery, but were accepted into the OCA awhile back. They have open iconostases, liturgical innovations, a modernized liturgical language, icons of people who weren't Orthodox, and other such things. They have a community of "married monastics." The monks take vacations, eat meat, and other things of that sort. You will not find this at any other Orthodox monastery... at least none that I know of.

They are not in any connection to Orthodox spiritual lineages... they do not trace themselves back to an apostolic chain of saints. This can be quite problematic.

Overall, monasticism is weak (except in the Romanian diocese) in the OCA in comparison to the Greek Archdiocese or ROCOR.

David Naess

06-11-2007, 04:55 AM

Olga

06-11-2007, 04:56 AM

Andrew

06-11-2007, 05:35 AM

Howdy Andrew!

Many thanks!

I am in search of a contemplative monastery...

Guess I can cross New Skete off of my places to visit, eh?

They kind of got me scratching my head and wondering...
A place with "skete" in their name that indicates: "if you are
looking for a place without a lot of social interaction, this
probably isn't the place for you" (or words to that effect.)

I was thinking of paying them a visit just because they are
"in state" for me.

There are many good monasteries in New York. Have you looked into Holy Trinity at Jordanville, or Saint Nektarios in Roscoe?

Keep in mind that as you seek to enter the monastic life, they will give you much to contemplate... as you scrub wax off the ground, clean the bathrooms, and clean up after the mess that guests make!

But truly, if you are looking for a monastery to work out your salvation in, be sure it is one that has a spiritual lineage... an unbroken succession of holiness. I'm sure that with God's grace you will find a place for your repentance.

Andreas Moran

06-11-2007, 11:23 AM

Though they are Orthodox

From reading the last few posts about New Skete, I can only conclude that they are not Orthodox.

Herman Blaydoe

06-11-2007, 01:38 PM

From reading the last few posts about New Skete, I can only conclude that they are not Orthodox.

Hmm. Although I am not a big supporter of New Skete, I think the above is a bit harsh. Of course there is much in my little diocese that you would not approve of either. But they (and we) are allowed to commune in other Orthodox Churches, and have not been declared outside the Church by competent authority. That does not you have to approve of what they do, but still, that comment seems a bit over the line.

Mourad Mankarios

06-11-2007, 02:01 PM

I found the following which you may find particularly helpful:
http://www.heimat-fuer-tiere.de/english/articles/ethic/church_fathers.shtml

The Church Fathers and Vegetarianism
The Church Fathers Warned Against Eating Meat
The church fathers or church writers still knew the sources and earliest handwritten texts and quoted from them. At that time many of them lived as vegetarians or vegans and abstained from alcohol, or recommended this. From this one we gain knowledge about the eating habits of the first Christians.

John Chrysostomus
About a group of exemplary Christians 354-407

"No streams of blood flowed at their place; no flesh was slaughtered and cut to pieces ... One does not smell there the awful vapor of meals of meat ... one hears no racket and terrible noise. They eat only bread, which they earn through their work, and water that a pure spring offers them. When they want a lavish meal, then indulgence consists of fruits, and they find thereby higher enjoyment than at the royal tables."

Homil. 69

Clemens of Alexandria
"For within a moderate simplicity is there not a diversity of healthy foods: vegetables, roots, olives, herbs, milk, cheese, fruit and many kinds of dried foods? – Among the foods one should favor those that can be directly eaten without the use of fire, for they are always ready for us and are the simplest. – Accordingly, the apostle Matthew lived from seeds, hard-shelled fruits and vegetables, and ate no meat. And John, who practiced modesty to the utmost degree ate the buds of leaves and wild honey. – I think that the bloody sacrifices were invented solely by those people who sought an excuse for eating meat, which they also could have had without such idolatry."

Clemens of Alexandria, Paidagogos II

Quintus Septimus Tertullianus
ca. 160-221

Tertullianus appeared several times for the defense of the Christians when they were accused of making human sacrifices. "How shall I describe it, that you believe we are thirsty for human blood, for you do know that we loathe the blood of animals."

Apol. Chap. 9; quoted from Robert Springer, p. 292

Gregory von Nazianz
Church father from Kappadozien

"But the seed of a good house father is the good wheat, from which he bakes bread ... The indulgence in meat dishes is a disgraceful wrong and I desire that you may strive to offer your soul nourishment that lasts eternally."

Robert Springer, Enkarpa, 1884

Hieronymus
"It is better that you eat no meat and drink no wine. For drinking wine started with eating meat, after the great flood."

"Innocent foods are foods acquired without letting blood."

"Consuming meat, drinking wine and overfilling the stomach are the cradles of greed."

Hieronymus, Adversus Jovinanum I,30

Aurelius Augustinus
354-430 , Church father and greatest Latin church teacher of antiquity, Augustinus also lived solely from plant foods. He attributed the ruinous passions of man to the eating of meat. In one of his works, he quoted Paul (Rom. 14:21), where Paul recommended that one eat no meat and drink no wine.

De vera Religione II,161,168

Basilius the Great
"The body that is burdened with meat foods is plagued by illnesses; a moderate style of life makes it healthier and stronger and cuts off the root of evil. The vapors of meat foods darken the light of the spirit. It is hard for one to love virtue when one is gladdened by meat dishes and festive meals."

Basilius the Great, Enkarpa, 1884

"Meat is a contradiction to food and it belongs to the world of the past."

Clementine Homilies III, 45

"The Christians abstained from every kind of meat."

Pilinius in a letter to Trajan, Ep. Lib. X. 96.

"In the earthly paradise,
there was no wine,
no one sacrificed animals
and no one ate meat."

"As long as one lives frugally
the luck of the house
will increase;
the animals will be safe;
no blood will be shed,
and no animal will be killed.
The cook’s knife will be useless;
the table will only be set with fruits
which nature offers to us,
and one will be
satisfied with that."

From the epistles of Basilius the Great
(329 - 379)

cited from Carl Anders Skriver,
"The Forgotten Beginnings of Creation and Christianity" p. 161

James Blackstock

06-11-2007, 02:04 PM

From reading the last few posts about New Skete, I can only conclude that they are not Orthodox.

If it looks like a duck and walks and talks like a duck.....it must be an eagle?

At New Skete they also advocate the regular use (by lay people) of Lectio Divina. Seems a bit dangerous to me!

Andreas Moran

06-11-2007, 03:34 PM

True, I don't know what 'liturgical innovations' New Skete made and I don't know what modern language they use. Obviously, if they used modern Greek or Russian, those are not allowed. One wonders what they intended by having wall paintings of non-Orthodox figures. Lectio divina as contemplative reading of scripture was mentioned by St Basil (don't know where) but seems now to be a RC practice (recently promoted by the Pope). It would seem unorthodox where a person's response to scripture is personal and not based upon the exegesis of the Church. But Herman's and James's posts raise an interesting question - when are people who hold themselves out as Orthodox not Orthodox? What lines do they have to have crossed for it to be said, 'they are not Orthodox'? Is it a matter of right belief alone or does praxis have a role in this? At what point, if at all, can it be said that praxis is so awry that the people cannot be called Orthodox? Or is being counted as Orthodox a matter of right faith alone?

James Blackstock

06-11-2007, 05:46 PM

.....faith without works is dead!

Herman Blaydoe

06-11-2007, 07:06 PM

when are people who hold themselves out as Orthodox not Orthodox? What lines do they have to have crossed for it to be said, 'they are not Orthodox'?

Isn't that what we have bishops for?

Mary

06-11-2007, 07:17 PM

Hmm. Although I am not a big supporter of New Skete, I think the above is a bit harsh. Of course there is much in my little diocese that you would not approve of either. But they (and we) are allowed to commune in other Orthodox Churches, and have not been declared outside the Church by competent authority. That does not you have to approve of what they do, but still, that comment seems a bit over the line.

But Herman, should they not, as monastics, hold themselves to a higher standard than us lay people? We look to them, to show us what Orthodoxy at it's best should look like. They're the ones we point non-orthodox to, to see what a pure orthodox life should look like. Should they not take a greater degree of care of their outward appearances? How can one leave the world, while living like the rest of the world?

It's easier to excuse lay people and perhaps, even whole parishes. But what excuse do monastics have? I have kids, so I find that I have less excuses than if I didn't have kids. The more people you have looking to you to show you the right way to live/behave/etc., the more responsible and accountable you are, whether you want it that way or not. And if you don't take that responsibility seriously, you will lead people astray. I live in great fear of leading my children astray. I strive to be strict with myself, so I don't become a stumbling block to them. I can be lenient with them, for they are still children, but I cannot 'enjoy' the same leniency myself, or they'll never grow up.

Forgive me, I don't mean to direct my thoughts at you, since you already said you're not a big supporter of New Skete. It's just that... it makes me uncomfortable that they have the blessing of the Church authority to make up their own rules. I don't know how to accept something that goes so strongly against my conscience. I guess, what really bothers me, isn't so much the New Skete, but whoever gave them the blessing to live the way they do... =(

The only way I can think of 'not being judgemental' is by pretending that there's no problem, or by accepting that I am wrong. While it's not unusual for me to be wrong, I'd really like to know why I'm wrong, so I can adjust my thinking accordingly. So, please, tell me, what's wrong in saying they are not living as Orthodox should? And what's wrong in saying the authority made a mistake here...?

Yikes! I fear I have said something blasphemous. Please forgive me!

In Christ,
Mary.

Linda

06-11-2007, 07:45 PM

[QUOTE=Mourad Mankarios;53017]I found the following which you may find particularly helpful:
http://www.heimat-fuer-tiere.de/english/articles/ethic/church_fathers.shtml

Thanks for this link. This is a very interesting discussion.

Father David Moser

06-11-2007, 07:47 PM

New Skete is an anomaly in the Orthodox Church. For reasons that I don't know, they were accepted "as is" into the OCA quite a number of years ago. At the time, they were allowed to remain intact as far as their discipline and liturgical/monastic routine. Whether that was a wise decision at the time is now a moot point - it was what it was. Today, many years later, we see the fruit of that decision and New Skete is for most Orthodox in the country an example of what monasticism, perhaps even Orthodoxy, is not; however, they continue to operate (and here is the key) in obedience to the direction of their hierarchs. It is not necessarily incumbent on New Skete to change - they are doing as they have been instructed - and if there is anything that is the basis of monastic life, it is obedience. If anything, the Synod of Bishops of the OCA needs to address the issue - but then they have been busy with other more pressing matters lately. I know of one OCA hierarch that has been quite vocal in his criticism of New Skete, however, New Skete is not in his diocese (thus it is outside of his responsibility).

New Skete continues to do what they have always done - and I am sure that there are some things that they do well. Whether or not their life is Orthodox and monastic is a matter for their synod of bishops to undertake. For now, however, the skete operates with the blessing of their bishop and thus I think any of us would be hard pressed to say that they are outside of the Orthodox Church.

Fr David Moser

Herman Blaydoe

06-11-2007, 09:22 PM

Dear Mary,

I have enough to deal with trying to live my own life and account for my own sins that I have little time to worry about how monastics live and account for theirs. God will judge them and me. I cannot "fix" them, I cannot even "fix" me!

Fr. David, I think, speaks for me as well in this matter.

Nina

07-11-2007, 06:39 PM

It would not surprise me that the monks of New Skete eat meat. Though they are Orthodox (under the OCA), they were originally a Roman Catholic (Franciscan, if I remember rightly) order, and it seems eating meat is not the only "unusual" aspect of their way of doing things. The iconography in the church of the Holy Wisdom associated with this community leaves a lot to be desired in terms of the people featured in the murals. Quite a few of them are non-Orthodox, such as Dorothy Day, Mother Theresa of Calcutta, Archbishop Michael Ramsey and Pope Paul VI. Though these figures are painted without haloes, their presence in an Orthodox church cannot be justified.

Olga you are right. Some Orthodox priests here speak about Mother Theresa and publish her sayings all over the place, like Orthodoxy is barren of holy people and divine sayings.

On the feast of St. Phanourios this past August, my priest instead of speaking about the wonderful Saint Phanourios, or other saints of the day/week (since we have no daily Liturgies), preached the entire sermon about Mother Theresa. My fiance (again! who was baptized RC, but right now attends the Orthodox Church) told me afterwards: "For sure there must have been great saints celebrating today, and all we heard was about Mother Theresa. Why?" I was displeased myself from that sermon, however hearing such words from my fiance was so nice.

We Orthodox tend to forget that people come to our Church for that something else!

Mother Theresa while might have been a wonderful person is not part of Orthodoxy. If we start like this I have to go to prepare now the icon of my mother too. Because from my experience she helped the poor and did much more than MT, - people even called my mom MT. And so cool! She is Orthodox so there are no barriers for me. I am joking that I am preparing my mother's icon, but seriously if we continue like this we are diluting and wasting the wonderful example of the Orthodox Saints for the future generations.

Nina

07-11-2007, 06:41 PM

From reading the last few posts about New Skete, I can only conclude that they are not Orthodox.

But look Andreas, they have the open iconostasis (like Andrew mentioned and seen in the links from Olga).

Mourad Mankarios

07-11-2007, 10:04 PM

Olga you are right. Some Orthodox priests here speak about Mother Theresa and publish her sayings all over the place, like Orthodoxy is barren of holy people and divine sayings.

On the feast of St. Phanourios this past August, my priest instead of speaking about the wonderful Saint Phanourios, or other saints of the day/week (since we have no daily Liturgies), preached the entire sermon about Mother Theresa. My fiance (again! who was baptized RC, but right now attends the Orthodox Church) told me afterwards: "For sure there must have been great saints celebrating today, and all we heard was about Mother Theresa. Why?" I was displeased myself from that sermon, however hearing such words from my fiance was so nice.

We Orthodox tend to forget that people come to our Church for that something else!

Mother Theresa while might have been a wonderful person is not part of Orthodoxy. If we start like this I have to go to prepare now the icon of my mother too. Because from my experience she helped the poor and did much more than MT, - people even called my mom MT. And so cool! She is Orthodox so there are no barriers for me. I am joking that I am preparing my mother's icon, but seriously if we continue like this we are diluting and wasting the wonderful example of the Orthodox Saints for the future generations.

"Brethren, whatever things are true, whatever things are noble, whatever things are just, whatever things are pure, whatever things are lovely, whatever things are of good report, if there is any virtue and if there is anything praiseworthy--meditate on these things." (Phil 4:8)

Paul Cowan

08-11-2007, 04:53 AM

"Brethren, whatever things are true, whatever things are noble, whatever things are just, whatever things are pure, whatever things are lovely, whatever things are of good report, if there is any virtue and if there is anything praiseworthy--meditate on these things." (Phil 4:8)

Dear Mourad,

Are you saying we should not talk about Mother Teresa because

if we continue like this we are diluting and wasting the wonderful example of the Orthodox Saints for the future generations.

Or that we should talk about non-orthodox people of faith because

Mother Theresa while might have been a wonderful person...

they too can be a point of inspiration? Please clarify your scripture verse.

Paul

Olga

08-11-2007, 05:23 AM

From the ever-memorable Fr Averky, from the thread "Iconography Outside the Church", 2003:

It seems to be a new fad to paint "icons" of secular, non-Orthodox, or even non-Christian persons. While in the worldly sense, they might have lived good and decent lives, it simply is not possible to portray them in an iconographical manner from the Orthodox point of view.

Since all icons are a reflection of Christ, and since the saints, as St. Ignatii Brichaninov says, "express in themselves daily, the Holy Trinity," and since the Holy Spirit can only reside where there is Truth, then non-Othodox people cannot achieve that sanctity which would put them in the same spiritual realm as St. Nicholas the Wonderworker, The Great Martyr Catherine, or St. John Maximovitch. One can hardly think of Harvey Milk, a slain homosexual city councilman as either a saint or a martyr. It is for God alone to judge his soul, but how coul one list him as among the saints?

Each generation of mankind has produced its heroes, great generals , great rulers, and so on, but it is the province of Christ's Church, the Holy Orthodox Church alone to set aside those who are to be venerated as saints. The memories and lives of great men and women most certainly can be respected and held up as a good example, but the appelation "saint," is in another realm completely. It is a rather curious phenomenon that people have such high opinions of themselves ; "I am a very spiritual person," is often heard, and people write books and go on television to discuss their "Angels", who are some sort of demi-gods, but usually these people never mention God, or Christ!..

It is a slippery slope to allow the portrayal of non-Orthodox people (even if they are recognised as saints by their respective churches) in an Orthodox church, haloes or no haloes. For non-Orthodox artists to take liberties with iconography is unfortunate enough, but to see an Orthodox community perpetuating this confusion is beyond comprehension, and potentially spiritually dangerous.

Mourad Mankarios

08-11-2007, 07:59 AM

Dear Mourad,

Are you saying we should not talk about Mother Teresa because

Or that we should talk about non-orthodox people of faith because

they too can be a point of inspiration? Please clarify your scripture verse.

Paul

I think if I were to properly follow the scriptural instruction given here I would find much beauty in this simple woman, much virtue, much loveliness, much purity, much nobility, much goodness. All in all much that a Christian can meditate upon and exemplify in their own lives.

I am not claiming, contrary to Orthodox heirarchy, that this woman is an Orthodox saint and that we should paint icons of her or build churches in her name but I can contemplate, reflect and meditate on her exemplary character.

I cannot speak for others but I think I can learn and benefit much form her.

More than anything else Mother Teresa is an extremely powerful missionary tool. Whenever I want to demonstrate the power and beauty of Christianity, Mother Teresa is so accessible and I can so easily point to her and show those who are not familiar with Christianity what the faith is truly about.

For those who focus on her not being Orthodox what would they say about St Isaac the Syrian or St Augustine or the fathers and mothers who are revered in other Orthodox churches, at the hands of whom God performed many signs and wonders and through whom He was glorified.

Nina

08-11-2007, 08:01 AM

they [examples like Mother Theresa etc.] too can be a point of inspiration?
Paul

Paul, just a clarification. I do not mean that people should not talk about other people whom they might find inspiring. I was just elaborating about Olga's point for people of other religions depicted in Orthodox icons and in an Orthodox monastery. I do not think that is appropriate, let alone spiritual and/or Orthodox. As we know icons and preaching are very similar in our Tradition, therefore that example reminded me of the sermon of the day of Saint Phanourios. I do not think the entire sermon of that day (or any other) should be dedicated to Mother Theresa, or the Pope, or a rabi, or the Mohamed, or Kant, or Jerome Jerome, or Voltaire, or Gauguin, or Twain, or Pachelbel etc. While Pachelbel is a beloved composer and a source of inspiration for me with his famous Canon in D major; and also his work is a heritage for the humanity, and also it has served the humanity by adding beauty, and lulling many babies to sleep, I still think that I do not go to church to hear an entire sermon about him, over a very beloved, or a very unknown saint of the day. It is an inappropriate sermon same as the depiction in iconic form of those people is inappropriate.

Nina

08-11-2007, 08:12 AM

I think if I were to properly follow the scriptural instruction given here I would find much beauty in this simple woman, much virtue, much loveliness, much purity, much nobility, much goodness. All in all much that a Christian can meditate upon and exemplify in their own lives.

I am not claiming, contrary to Orthodox heirarchy, that this woman is an Orthodox saint and that we should paint icons of her or build churches in her name but I can contemplate, reflect and meditate on her exemplary character.

I cannot speak for others but I think I can learn and benefit much form her.

More than anything else Mother Teresa is an extremely powerful missionary tool. Whenever I want to demonstrate the power and beauty of Christianity, Mother Teresa is so accessible and I can so easily point to her and show those who are not familiar with Christianity what the faith is truly about.

For those who focus on her not being Orthodox what would they say about St Isaac the Syrian or St Augustine or the fathers and mothers who are revered in other Orthodox churches, at the hands of whom God performed many signs and wonders and through whom He was glorified.

Mourad,

I did not say you should not meditate on the things you wish. I did not say that you should not use someone as a missions tool. I am saying that like icons, sermons should focus on the myriads of Orthodox examples. I am saying that I do not go to church on Sunday to hear an entire sermon (and it was very long that day) about Mother Theresa.

And by the way this article (http://hnn.us/roundup/entries/44059.html)was sent to me by email from a friend, a couple of weeks ago. I did not know her and I can never judge, but since for most of us the info about Mother Teresa is hearsay and reading, this is another perspective.

Olga

08-11-2007, 08:21 AM

Paul, just a clarification. I do not mean that people should not talk about other people whom they might find inspiring. I was just elaborating about Olga's point for people of other religions depicted in Orthodox icons and in an Orthodox monastery. I do not think that is appropriate, let alone spiritual and/or Orthodox. As we know icons and preaching are very similar in our Tradition, therefore that example reminded me of the sermon of the day of Saint Phanourios. I do not think the entire sermon of that day (or any other) should be dedicated to Mother Theresa, or the Pope, or a rabi, or the Mohamed, or Kant, or Jerome Jerome, or Voltaire, or Gauguin, or Twain, or Pachelbel etc. While Pachelbel is a beloved composer and a source of inspiration for me with his famous Canon in D major; and also his work is a heritage for the humanity, and also it has served the humanity by adding beauty, and lulling many babies to sleep, I still think that I do not go to church to hear an entire sermon about him, over a very beloved, or a very unknown saint of the day. It is an inappropriate sermon same as the depiction in iconic form of those people is inappropriate.

Bravo, Nina! Well said!

Mourad Mankarios

08-11-2007, 10:31 AM

Mourad,

I did not say you should not meditate on the things you wish. I did not say that you should not use someone as a missions tool. I am saying that like icons, sermons should focus on the myriads of Orthodox examples. I am saying that I do not go to church on Sunday to hear an entire sermon (and it was very long that day) about Mother Theresa.

And by the way this article (http://hnn.us/roundup/entries/44059.html)was sent to me by email from a friend, a couple of weeks ago. I did not know her and I can never judge, but since for most of us the info about Mother Teresa is hearsay and reading, this is another perspective.

Dear Nina,

I really can't understand why you'd be so scandalised. Our good Lord Jesus Himself gave us the example of the good Samaritan, He praised the faith of the Canaanite woman and the Roman centurian and lauded the humility and repentance of the tax collector.

Isn't the most important thing that the subject of the sermon direct towards Christ? Wouldn't the clergyman have done so by contemplating on the virtues of this woman who many the world over both Christian and nonChristian alike consider to be a saint.

Perhaps one person who is listening to her story is moved to repentance, to a better life or to a more profound spirituality. Isn't there much benefit in this? Is there any denying that her story and message is an extremely powerful and compelling one?

Why then should we gaze with a critical eye and sit in judgment? Why not in simplicity reflect on what is good and take of what is benefitial from that? There are many Orthodox saints true and there is much I can learn from them but the saints themselves have taught us that we can learn even from sinners how much more so then from those who lead a virtuous and exemplary life.

Andreas Moran

08-11-2007, 11:37 AM

I'm with Olga and Nina on this. We have to know the bounds of our Church. To me, this issue is related to why non-Orthodox are not permitted to take Holy Communion: that must form a clear boundary, but our Holy Tradition, which includes icon and fresco paintings in church, is not to be compromised by the inclusion of things from outside that Tradition. If the bounds of our Tradition are vague, we risk falling into error and syncretism. That's why it seems to me that, if my impression of New Skete is right, they are not Orthodox. How can they operate outside Holy Tradition and still say, we are Orthodox? We had a thread on uncanonical Orthodoxy but I'm still trying to answer my own question - how far do people have to go for it to be said, they are not Orthodox? Can being Orthodox be a matter of degree? The point about St Isaac the Syrian, who is always held up in this sort of debate, is that the Church has accepted him. It has not accepted and will not accept Mother Theresa. St Augustine is a saint of the Church. The characters in Christ's parables are, of course, characters.

Nicolaj

08-11-2007, 02:22 PM

Dear Brethren!

As I was in the RC church I had the luck to meet this woman personally. And it is true about her feeling left out by God, because her eyes were so empty then! She looked so desperate.
Wherever I meet Orthodox bishops, priests and laity, when they are touched by the Lord it is almost always to see in their eyes, they are like the icons, windows into eternity.

St. Augustine is a Saint of Orthodoxy, because he was a wise man but also had this ability towards those in the church in charge of guarding the doctrine to let it up to them to prove his work and where it was not conform with the teachings to let it reject. He was obedient!

Christos voskrese! Nicolaj

Linda

08-11-2007, 02:25 PM

Olga, thank you so much for that quote from Fr. Averky. Excellent.

Herman Blaydoe

08-11-2007, 02:26 PM

That's why it seems to me that, if my impression of New Skete is right, they are not Orthodox. How can they operate outside Holy Tradition and still say, we are Orthodox? We had a thread on uncanonical Orthodoxy but I'm still trying to answer my own question - how far do people have to go for it to be said, they are not Orthodox? Can being Orthodox be a matter of degree?

Who here is perfect? Who here would dare to judge another master's servant (Romans 14:4)? New Skete is Orthodox because competent authority (i.e. the Bishops of the Church) have not declared them as not Orthodox. Does this mean you have to agree with or accept their "interpretation" of Orthodoxy? I think not. But if you are going to declare them "outside the Church" then I hope you have a blessing to do so. Otherwise anarchy reigns as everybody attempts to come up with their own definition of "what is Orthodox", and schisms result. We see the sad fruit of this already, and I, for one, am not going to be one who encourages it. That being said, I think we are not wrong to express concern with some of the practices that are evidently allowed there. But to unilaterally set ourselves up as judge and jury, and cast people out of the Church even though the bishops we are supposed to be obedient to have not done so, seems to this simple mind to assume more authority to ourselves than we give to our bishops. If your bishop is in error, then you indeed should separate yourself from him and find a "right-believing" bishop. However, be very cautious in such action, least you find yourself wandering from one schismatic group to another, always seeking but never finding the "perfect" Church.

Arius was a priest in the Church, until the Church declared him otherwise. So was Origen. If your bishop says that New Skete is not Orthodox, then you certainly should act accordingly. If not, circumspection on the subject seems appropriate, at least to this bear of little brain.

Herman the Pooh

Nicolaj

08-11-2007, 03:01 PM

Thanks Herman the Pooh, well said! There are often many things that I being the first among sinners willing to throw at others, but as I am not the patriarch, nor a bishop and so on (and for good reason!) it is not to me to condemn others so definitely.

Thanks Nina and Olga, that was right from the heart. This with the icons making, producing and so on, done by persons without any background in faith, nor Orthodoxy is taking overhand.
In RC they are producing icons made by people having doubts about religion at all. And while they have whipped away their own roots in faith, all come to copy icons in a bad mannered way.

In Christ, Nicolaj

Andreas Moran

08-11-2007, 03:29 PM

Who here is perfect?

No one, least of all me. This not a matter of sinfulness but a question of good order or otherwise in the Church.

Who here would dare to judge another master's servant (Romans 14:4)?

No one. This is not a matter of judging a person but of forming a view of what it means to be Orthodox and whether certain conduct leads to an assessment that a person cannot be said to be Orthodox. I don't see how we can be 'as wise as serpents', as Our Lord told us to be regarding the world, without making some sort of assessment of what is going on.

But to unilaterally set ourselves up as judge and jury, and cast people out of the Church even though the bishops we are supposed to be obedient to have not done so, seems to this simple mind to assume more authority to ourselves than we give to our bishops.

For the reasons given, we are not setting ourselves up as judge and jury. We are having a debate. Clearly, we have no locus standi to cast out anyone.

If your bishop is in error, then you indeed should separate yourself from him and find a "right-believing" bishop. However, be very cautious in such action, least you find yourself wandering from one schismatic group to another, always seeking but never finding the "perfect" Church.

I have consistently said there is no such thing as a perfect jurisdiction. Those jurisdictions which are commonly criticised by some, such as MP for its links with the state, are not criticised, as far as I know, for a lack of right belief or Church praxis but for supposed subservience to state authority.

I don't mean this post to come across as abrupt. I'm just trying to be precise.

Herman Blaydoe

08-11-2007, 04:03 PM

No one, least of all me. This not a matter of sinfulness but a question of good order or otherwise in the Church.

Indeed and agreed. How then, is "good order" best achieved within the Church?

This is not a matter of judging a person but of forming a view of what it means to be Orthodox and whether certain conduct leads to an assessment that a person cannot be said to be Orthodox.

True to a point, I suspect. I certainly can apply this assessment to myself, but I would apply the same assessment to others only with great trepidation, because in applying said standard to them, I certainly have to ask myself if I meet my own standards. If I don't meet those standards in every way, is it fair to demand it of others? Again, I prefer to defer to the judgement of others, specifically my own bishop. And if I don't trust his assessment, I certainly need to reassess my own position in general.

We are having a debate. Clearly, we have no locus standi to cast out anyone.

And yet the comment was made: "they are not Orthodox", and I have a problem with that. I can certainly agree that they have some rather questionable practices, but such charges can be made by any group against another. Some Greeks would charge that Russian polyphonic music is not "Orthodox". Does that mean that the Russians are not Orthodox? Who gets to decide? Who sets the standard? Unless we can agree to this, anarchy reigns and this is something none of us want, yes? Individual assessments can be a bit arbitrary, don't you think?

I have consistently said there is no such thing as a perfect jurisdiction. Those jurisdictions which are commonly criticised by some, such as MP for its links with the state, are not criticised, as far as I know, for a lack of right belief or Church praxis but for supposed subservience to state authority.

As I indicated above, this is not entirely correct. Criticism, in and of itself, may indeed be warranted. The wise man loves correction so he might be wiser. We can criticize the perceived failings of a Church without denying they are still part of the Church. This is certainly what the Apostles did, otherwise, what are the Epistles? They criticized the practices of the Churches but did not dare go so far as declare they were no longer part of the Church, even if they warned that the danger existed. Were some of the practices of the Ephesians less aggregious than some of the practices of New Skete? And yet the Apostle still addressed them as the Church, even though they required correction.

I don't mean this post to come across as abrupt. I'm just trying to be precise.

Fine and dandy, but if Catholicism can teach us anything, it shows us the danger of over-precision. As an engineer I learned a long time ago that I can come up with an answer that is precise to 10 decimal points and still be wrong.

Herman the Pooh

Herman Blaydoe

08-11-2007, 04:18 PM

One last admittedly minor point:

I have been rather roundly admonished in other fora for using the word "debate" myself, and I can see their point. A "debate" is often seen as a contest, where contestants are competing to "win" the argument, regardless. In that light, what I might suggest we are having here might better be described as a discussion, a free exchange of ideas and opinions and there need not be any "winners" or "losers", but hopefully everyone might come away a little bit wiser. FWIW, and I think I am finished on the subject.

Herman

Nina

08-11-2007, 04:52 PM

There are many Orthodox saints true and there is much I can learn from them but the saints themselves have taught us that we can learn even from sinners

You are right, but I still do not think there is enough space to allow the depiction of that person in an icon in an Orthodox monastery, or be preached about in an entire sermon. Also how do you know her life was virtuous and exemplary? Because the article above presents facts to the contrary.

When you say:

Our good Lord Jesus Himself gave us the example of the good Samaritan, He praised the faith of the Canaanite woman and the Roman centurian and lauded the humility and repentance of the tax collector.Let's analyze these people:

1. The Good Samaritan - it was an example to love and help everyone. - I did not say I do not love her as another human being, or that she did not have love. But I do not idolize her. By depicting her in that monastery is making her into an idol, since not only in her life time she did not convert to Orthodoxy, but also she is not recognized and accepted by the Church as a saint. When the Church accepts a person as saint, this person is worthy because it is a deified one and it is to be there as a testament of Orthodoxy, but when the Church does not recognize one as a saint, it is there as an idol. If you do not believe me read the Old Testament, read the New Testament. Christ promised something to the thief on the cross who converted, but not to the one who did not.

2. Canaanite woman - converted and went on to become a saint.
3. Tax collector - converted and went on to become a saint.

These became saints but had to convert before. They converted and reformed their hearts not only to believe in Jesus Christ (and He said that not everyone who calls me God will be in Heaven - pardon the paraphrasing please), but also to turn away from sin. Since the Orthodox Church did not confirm she is a saint, since the Orthodox Church did not confirm the validity of this return (although she did not convert, and although she called Him God) we do not have a way of knowing the truth because only God knows it and will judge us. But in obedience to our own Church we can not possibly justify her presence in Orthodox monasteries and sermons.

Did you see the walls of that monastery from the link Olga provided? Did you see how they brought together many personalities recognized by this world? Christ is not of this world as you know from the NT. Antichrist in the name of "peace" will bring together religions and then divest people from them and fill that spot with his cult and make people worship him (that is what prophecies say).

Mary

08-11-2007, 04:56 PM

And yet the comment was made: "they are not Orthodox", and I have a problem with that. ....

We can criticize the perceived failings of a Church without denying they are still part of the Church. This is certainly what the Apostles did, otherwise, what are the Epistles? They criticized the practices of the Churches but did not dare go so far as declare they were no longer part of the Church, even if they warned that the danger existed. Were some of the practices of the Ephesians less aggregious than some of the practices of New Skete? And yet the Apostle still addressed them as the Church, even though they required correction.
Herman the Pooh

Dear Herman,

I think I'm beginning to understand, why you spoke against those of us who feel that the New Skete is 'not Orthodox'... It really helped to see it alongside the Early Churches that the Epistles were written to. They weren't behaving very Orthodox either, and were being a stumbling block to anyone searching for True Orthodoxy, and yet, the Apostles never told them they weren't part of the Church anymore.

I was also going to say that if the first sermon I'd heard in an Orthodox Church was about Mother Theresa, I would've been quite turned off. But that too fits under 'needing correction, but still a part of the Church'. IF I'd heard such a sermon, and pushed Orthodoxy away as just another side of the RC, I'd still have to return to it, if I'm truly searching for God. Where else could I go, to find the Truth?

thanks Herman.
In Christ,
Mary.

Nina

08-11-2007, 05:04 PM

If the bounds of our Tradition are vague, we risk falling into error and syncretism.

This is worthy to be repeated (and others above have said the same) because Fathers warn us to be careful not to compromise the Truth and loose our Treasury. Christ warned us not to be tricked by wolfs in sheep's clothing.

Andreas Moran

08-11-2007, 05:36 PM

I certainly have to ask myself if I meet my own standards. If I don't meet those standards in every way, is it fair to demand it of others?

I'm not sure what is meant by 'standards', but perhaps you mean the criteria by which we test whether we are behaving sinfully or not. (In that sense, we don't have our own standards, do we? We have those prescribed by the Church. I fail to meet them.) But as I suggested, this issue is not one of sin, but of the introduction of un-Orthodox practices. Meeting or failing to meet the standards of the Church is not the same as introducing novelties in praxis, and that I'm sure neither of us does.

And yet the comment was made: "they are not Orthodox", and I have a problem with that . . . Who gets to decide? Who sets the standard? Unless we can agree to this, anarchy reigns and this is something none of us want, yes? Individual assessments can be a bit arbitrary, don't you think?

The Church sets the standards, and if, on any proper and reasonable assessment, a group does not meet those standards and indeed sets its own standards to some extent (by way of un-Orthodox innovations), the question arises, at what point is the group Orthodox but in error, or not Orthodox? Yet, if a group is in error on any proper and reasonable assessment according to what is universally accepted Orthodox praxis, and the group persists in its error, even if it does so by virtue of some canonical authority, what then do we say of that group, and of the authority which impliedly sanctions the group's continuance in error? It would be going too far to say that they (New Skete) are not Orthodox if it were established that persistence in errors of praxis, especially when sanctioned by some canonical authority, were insufficient to make them not Orthodox. But that's the nub of our debate.

Were some of the practices of the Ephesians less aggregious than some of the practices of New Skete? And yet the Apostle still addressed them as the Church, even though they required correction.

The difference, though, is that the Ephesians were being corrected and, presumably accepted that correction.

Quotation:
I don't mean this post to come across as abrupt. I'm just trying to be precise.

Fine and dandy, but if Catholicism can teach us anything, it shows us the danger of over-precision. As an engineer I learned a long time ago that I can come up with an answer that is precise to 10 decimal points and still be wrong.

By 'precise', I meant correctly identifying the issue.

Herman Blaydoe

08-11-2007, 05:51 PM

Yet, if a group is in error on any proper and reasonable assessment according to what is universally accepted Orthodox praxis, and the group persists in its error, even if it does so by virtue of some canonical authority, what then do we say of that group, and of the authority which impliedly sanctions the group's continuance in error?

And therein lies my whole problem with the issue. If New Skete is indeed, not Orthodox, then doesn't that, by this logic, mean that the OCA who sanctions New Skete is not Orthodox? And by further extension, how about any Church that continues to commune with the OCA? Where then, is the Church? I simply find this logic rather vexing. But that does not mean that all the practices found at New Skete are "orthodox", even if New Skete has not been declared not Orthodox because of some unorthodox practices. My own diocese has some practices that I find troublesome as well, but I accept the judgement of my bishop about it and don't let it imperil my own struggle for salvation. That doesn't mean I have to like what is being done, and if asked for an opinion I will gladly give it on the subject, and explain why I don't think it is proper, but I will not call those who follow the practice NOT ORTHODOX until my bishop does.

OK, I am really really done this time. Sorry for the commotion.

Herman

Andrew

08-11-2007, 06:40 PM

Maybe the Church accepted New Skete for their own salvation? I don't know the exact circumstances of what went on. Same goes for a certain person who was accepted as a retired bishop into the OCA. Both have writings, attitudes, and practices that do not reflect Orthodox teaching, but they are in the Church. But at the same time, just because someone's in the Church, for their own salvation, doesn't mean that we should seek out their advice, teachings, or practices. A cassock is no guarantee on truth.

It is not Orthodox to play around with tradition in regards to liturgics, iconography, spiritual teachings and practice. An Orthodox person might do this, but that doesn't mean that what they are doing is Orthodox. I think that is what Andreas meant by the statement "they are not Orthodox." They are Orthodox in that they are within the Church. They are not Orthodox in the sense that their monastic way of life is not in accordance with the rest of the Church, which is an un-Orthodox thing to do. But anyways. It's not for us to judge. If they produce saints, then they will have something.

Andreas Moran

08-11-2007, 10:39 PM

OK, I am really really done this time. Sorry for the commotion.

No commotion, Herman - just the sort of lively exchange of views which makes the forum interesting! The spark that ignites debate! I think you're probaby right. But neither I nor anyone else has answered the question I posited.

Andreas Moran

08-11-2007, 10:42 PM

OK, I am really really done this time. Sorry for the commotion.

No commotion, Herman - just the sort of lively exchange of views which makes the forum interesting! The spark that ignites debate! You may be right, that they are Orthodox but in error, though your further argument does not, I think, have the elasticity you claim for it. But neither I nor anyone else has answered the question I posited.

Bob Sanguinetti

09-11-2007, 03:07 AM

Thank you all who answered my question!

In Christ
~Bob~

“You are a hopeless lot. You know the names of all the charioteers but not even the names of
the evangelists.” — St John Chrysostom

Rick H.

09-11-2007, 05:37 PM

But neither I nor anyone else has answered the question I posited.

What is the question?

And, for any who may be interested, on December 1st, at St. Paul the Apostle Church (OCA) in Dayton, Ohio the following is available:

"Living Spiritually in a Chaotic World." A pre-Christmas retreat will be hosted by our parish on Saturday, December 1. Fr. Christopher of the New Skete Monastery and featured on the Animal Planet's "Divine Canine" TV series, will be in our parish to lead the retreat. The retreat will begin at 10am with the Akathist “GLORY TO GOD FOR ALL THINGS.” There will be two presentations by Fr. Christopher and he will also lead two sessions in practical spirituality - Journaling and Lectio Divina (praying a scripture text). The cost for the retreat will be $10/person which includes lunch. Pre-registration is required. We will limit to the number of people who can attend, so register early if you plan to attend.

In Christ,
Rick

Andreas Moran

09-11-2007, 08:38 PM

What is the question?

How far does someone or some group have to deviate from Orthodoxy for it to be said that they are not simply Orthodox in error but no longer Orthodox?

Father David Moser

09-11-2007, 08:42 PM

How far does someone or some group have to deviate from Orthodoxy for it to be said that they are not simply Orthodox in error but no longer Orthodox?

that's a question for the hierarchs - they have been given the grace and responsibility from God to make those determinations.

Fr David Moser

David Naess

10-11-2007, 04:01 AM

Olga

10-11-2007, 07:02 AM

One must be extremely cautious before going from the objective observation:
This is different

to the personal judgement of:
This is wrong.

A person needs to be aware of all of the history, circumstances and intracacies involved. Hearsay evidence just isn't good enough!

Hello Dave

While your statement has much merit, I feel that there are some lines which have definitely been crossed with regard to New Skete practices, which have little to do with "personal judgement". The "iconography" of the Holy Wisdom church is one such practice where this has happened. The photographs in the link I provided in an earlier post speak for themselves. I cannot speak for or against New Skete's liturgical practices or their commercial activities, but I would be quite prepared to defend the views I have expressed in earlier posts on the uncanonicity of the pictorial presence of non-Orthodox figures among Orthodox saints within an Orthodox church.

It is also worth looking at New Skete's official website for more information.

Andreas Moran

10-11-2007, 09:01 AM

I feel that there are some lines which have definitely been crossed with regard to New Skete practices, which have little to do with "personal judgement". The "iconography" of the Holy Wisdom church is one such practice where this has happened. The photographs in the link I provided in an earlier post speak for themselves. I cannot speak for or against New Skete's liturgical practices or their commercial activities, but I would be quite prepared to defend the views I have expressed in earlier posts on the uncanonicity of the pictorial presence of non-Orthodox figures among Orthodox saints within an Orthodox church.

I agree. Eating meat is also uncanonical for Orthodox monastics.

David Naess

10-11-2007, 11:52 PM

Hello Dave

While your statement has much merit, I feel that there are some lines which have definitely been crossed with regard to New Skete practices, which have little to do with "personal judgement". The "iconography" of the Holy Wisdom church is one such practice where this has happened. The photographs in the link I provided in an earlier post speak for themselves. I cannot speak for or against New Skete's liturgical practices or their commercial activities, but I would be quite prepared to defend the views I have expressed in earlier posts on the uncanonicity of the pictorial presence of non-Orthodox figures among Orthodox saints within an Orthodox church.

It is also worth looking at New Skete's official website for more information.

Howdy Olga!

As I heard the story, the "iconography in question" was either allowed to stay or put there with the approval of the jurisdiction as a reminder of New Skete's origins.

Nina

11-11-2007, 01:53 AM

Rule number one in dating:

Do not talk to your date about your past boyfriend, or girlfriend (if you never had them, even better).

But it does not end here:

If you do get married do not put their (past amors') pictures up on the wall. If you loved them, or they you, you would have been with them.

This is basic human etiquette.

About religious regulations I can not speak, but "nothing changes under the sun".

David Naess

11-11-2007, 02:16 AM

Howdy Nina!

Does this mean that I should no longer hold Miss Millhagen (the teacher who taught me multiplication) in esteem due to the fact that it was Dr. Clarke who taught me The Calculus?

Nina

11-11-2007, 03:58 AM

Ciao Dave,

I am sure Dr. Clarke will not appreciate it if you show up in his classroom with a banner which has the picture of Miss Millhagen. Although love and teachers do not mix well. But faith and love do.

Ancient philosophers taught me very much too, and virtuous people from pagan literature did inspire and teach me, but I do not see the reason why should they be depicted in icons in an Orthodox church/monastery. If we all start bringing our backgrounds for putting them up as icons in the Church we will only serve (maybe unwittingly) the Antichrist (unification of religions). I know many people who converted from other religions and they should have their prominent figures there too for fairness sake. So what happens to Orthodoxy?

Andrew

11-11-2007, 04:46 AM

Some of the people they painted in an iconographic style were either heterodox, or those within the Church who held formally heretical opinions totally at odds with Church teaching. Icons are a window into the life of Deified Human Nature, of the Church Triumphant. How can you pray in front of an icon of someone who denied the means to theosis, or said that there were other ways... that it doesn't matter which confessional group you are a part of, that it's all the same in the end. Saints do not disregard the Ecumenical Councils and traditional Orthodox teaching... Also, there is something wrong with the icons aesthetically. There is someting off about them, like the ones painted by Catholics or New Age groups. The spirit and tone of the icons is off. It does not convey joyful mourning, or the eternal Pascha. These things matter. There is a major difference between those who are within the Church and the way they sing, and some non-Orthodox choir singing Orthodox hymns. The same goes for icons.

Michael Astley

14-12-2007, 12:58 AM

If it looks like a duck and walks and talks like a duck.....it must be an eagle?

At New Skete they also advocate the regular use (by lay people) of Lectio Divina. Seems a bit dangerous to me!

Dear James,

Why do you feel uncomfortable about Lectio Divina by lay people? While I find a great deal of spiritual benefit in the Benedictine tradition, lectio divina is something with which I personally struggle because of my attention difficulties, so I confess to not having much experience of it from which to speak but if the understanding of it here (http://newmartyr.org.uk/files/lectiodivina.pdf) (PDF warning) is correct, then I don't see how it is dangerous, although that, of course, doesn't necessarily mean that I'm right. Perhaps you would be kind enough to elaborate a little. Thank you.

Pax,
Michael.

James Blackstock

14-12-2007, 02:29 AM

Dear James,

Why do you feel uncomfortable about Lectio Divina by lay people? While I find a great deal of spiritual benefit in the Benedictine tradition, lectio divina is something with which I personally struggle because of my attention difficulties, so I confess to not having much experience of it from which to speak but if the understanding of it here (http://newmartyr.org.uk/files/lectiodivina.pdf) (PDF warning) is correct, then I don't see how it is dangerous, although that, of course, doesn't necessarily mean that I'm right. Perhaps you would be kind enough to elaborate a little. Thank you.

Pax,
Michael.

Dear Michael:

Lectio Divina was begun by a catholic monk. To take any scripture, then meditate on whatever comes into you mind is a bit dangerous. I think it is good to look at all meditative practices with caution. Even the Jesus prayer, which I love and practice regularly, should be done under the direction of a Spiritual Father. I refer to the practices of lowering your mind into your heart and seeing your heart beat, then reciting the prayer in cadence with your heart. The problem with these practices is that (especially for lay people) it is possible to focus to the point of being fixed on a technique that was designerd to bring you to a different spiritual place, and be totally misdirected from the true spiritual goal. All of these practices are a means to an end. They are not the end in themselves. Lectio divina is also dangerous because any scripture, focused on, and meditated on for personal growth and revelation without the entire counsel of scripture can lead one to heresy. Reading scripture is good, all of it! In context! Opening up your mind to the spiritual world without experience, guidance and wisdom just might put you in touch with the wrong spirit. One Orthodox author, Fr John Breck has written a book called Scripture in Tradition, where he talks about striving towards an Orthodox Lectio Divina. I do not agree with all of his conclusions on this matter. My advice is to excersice extreme caution, better yet talk to your spiritual father. If you do not have one, contact one of the monasteries founded by Elder Ephraim.

INXC,
Seraphim

James Blackstock

14-12-2007, 03:14 AM

No commotion, Herman - just the sort of lively exchange of views which makes the forum interesting! The spark that ignites debate! You may be right, that they are Orthodox but in error, though your further argument does not, I think, have the elasticity you claim for it. But neither I nor anyone else has answered the question I posited.

Dear Andreas:

I probably won't answer you question completely either, but I can find no fault with your reasoning. At the risk of being a bit incongruous, let me come at this from an entirely different perspective. In the current world of political correctness, it would be wrong to practice racial profiling. So our airports pat down older Scandinavian ladies with blue hair and take away their talcum powder as it might be a security risk on the airplane. As a matter of fact, whatever your race, if you have more than 3.4 oz of shaving cream or shampoo it will be confiscated to protect the public and insure their safety. It goes without saying that our government is "absolutely right" in this security doctrine, and all of us need to be good supportive citizens. On the other hand, Israel uses racial profiling and they don't have problems with terrorists on their airplanes. (needless to say, they are radical and disobedient to global (ecumenical) world views, not to mention bigoted non-conformists!)

Frankly, I see that a lot of ecumenical practice has entered the One, Holy and Apostolic Church. I really don't believe that God wants me to flip the switches in my mind and heart and become brain dead to my own peril. I think it would be better to bring these matters to our hierarchy in the process of making it plain to them that we value our Faith the way Jesus and the Church Fathers gave it to us. We do not need bleeding heart liberals, we need people whose heart bleeds and aches for Truth.

In what Herman shares with us concerning obedience I must say it is admirable albeit somewhat naive. God held the Nation of Israel responsible for following bad leaders. One need only to read the letters to the seven churches in Asia in the Apocalypse to see that due to the disobedience of some Bishops, God removed the Lampstands from those Churches, and they NO LONGER EXIST THERE! Someone in this thread said something about wolves in sheep's clothing...frankly I think we all need to keep an eye out, and then perhaps SCREAM! to the hierarchy about our concerns. If I understand it correctly they are supposed to be paying attention to us anyway?

Love to all,
Seraphim

Andreas Moran

14-12-2007, 08:53 AM

Dear Seraphim,

The answer seems to be, rely on your hierarch.

Frankly, I see that a lot of ecumenical practice has entered the One, Holy and Apostolic Church.

Here and there, yes. So, as you suggest, we have to keep an eye out for hierarchs as well. There are hierarchs and hierarchs! One reason we need to be informed about our faith is to avoid being misled.

Nicolaj

14-12-2007, 12:40 PM

The Future of Orthodoxy is determined not by compromises with Antichrist but by heroic standing and confession.

There have been a great many attempts by the Antichrist to overcome the Orthodox Church, with the various servants he used for his plans to erasure the One Church from Earth. I don't have to name them all here, for I presume all know them.

But the Love of God, always has provided the Church powerful defenders although they might not have looked at themselves in this way. We do not know what is hidden, but we can know our roots and we should be ready to defend them. This is not easy, because Satan uses many back doors to try to fall Orthodoxy.

As Andreas says right, we need to know and to recognise the wrongs, and also if they are spread through misled hierarchs. And to sign up is the less there is to do.

In Christ, Nicolaj

Herman Blaydoe

14-12-2007, 02:14 PM

You don't have to be a bishop to be mislead. Sometimes the evil one also takes "heroic stands". Discernment counts for something, that is all that I am saying. Our task is to work out our own salvation first and foremost. I do not advocate mindless obedience, we are rational sheep, but I guess I tend to have less faith in my own discernment and am willing to grant the benefit of doubt in most cases to my bishop.

If my bishop does something egregious, there are ways to deal with it that preserve good order in the Church. Let all be done for the Glory of God and sometimes He needs less "looking after" than we seem to think. That's all.

Michael Astley

14-12-2007, 05:07 PM

Dear Michael:

Lectio Divina was begun by a catholic monk. To take any scripture, then meditate on whatever comes into you mind is a bit dangerous. I think it is good to look at all meditative practices with caution. Even the Jesus prayer, which I love and practice regularly, should be done under the direction of a Spiritual Father. I refer to the practices of lowering your mind into your heart and seeing your heart beat, then reciting the prayer in cadence with your heart. The problem with these practices is that (especially for lay people) it is possible to focus to the point of being fixed on a technique that was designerd to bring you to a different spiritual place, and be totally misdirected from the true spiritual goal. All of these practices are a means to an end. They are not the end in themselves. Lectio divina is also dangerous because any scripture, focused on, and meditated on for personal growth and revelation without the entire counsel of scripture can lead one to heresy. Reading scripture is good, all of it! In context! Opening up your mind to the spiritual world without experience, guidance and wisdom just might put you in touch with the wrong spirit. One Orthodox author, Fr John Breck has written a book called Scripture in Tradition, where he talks about striving towards an Orthodox Lectio Divina. I do not agree with all of his conclusions on this matter. My advice is to excersice extreme caution, better yet talk to your spiritual father. If you do not have one, contact one of the monasteries founded by Elder Ephraim.

INXC,
Seraphim

Thank you so much for a reasoned and informative reply. I agree entirely about any selection of one aspect of Tradition and elevating it above the rest, treating as something separate from the whole. It is precisely this sort of thing that I am often at pains to explain to my heterodox friends and correspondents when they ask about certain elements of Orthodoxy in light of their interpretation of one aspect of Tradition. However, I'm not sure that such separation is the purpose of Lectio Divina. Granted, your point that lay people, not under proper direction, may miss the point, is worth bearing in mind, but surely that the case with much else in our Orthodox Tradition. All things must be done under some degree of direction and not according to our own whims and fancies. Lectio Divina is no different in this respect.

That said, I must question your attribution of the practice of lectio to a Catholic monk. My understanding is that the practice goes back much further than that, and that St Benedict's mention of devout reading in his 6th-century Rule for his Orthodox monks - centuries before Catholicism existed as a separate system from the unity and Truth of Orthodoxy - under the section about daily work, is a reference to lectio divina, and that it remained a part of the Benedictine tradition thereafter.

Pax,
Michael

Marie-Duquette

14-12-2007, 06:14 PM

Dear Andreas:

I probably won't answer you question completely either, but I can find no fault with your reasoning. At the risk of being a bit incongruous, let me come at this from an entirely different perspective. In the current world of political correctness, it would be wrong to practice racial profiling. So our airports pat down older Scandinavian ladies with blue hair and take away their talcum powder as it might be a security risk on the airplane. As a matter of fact, whatever your race, if you have more than 3.4 oz of shaving cream or shampoo it will be confiscated to protect the public and insure their safety. It goes without saying that our government is "absolutely right" in this security doctrine, and all of us need to be good supportive citizens. On the other hand, Israel uses racial profiling and they don't have problems with terrorists on their airplanes. (needless to say, they are radical and disobedient to global (ecumenical) world views, not to mention bigoted non-conformists!)

Frankly, I see that a lot of ecumenical practice has entered the One, Holy and Apostolic Church. I really don't believe that God wants me to flip the switches in my mind and heart and become brain dead to my own peril. I think it would be better to bring these matters to our hierarchy in the process of making it plain to them that we value our Faith the way Jesus and the Church Fathers gave it to us. We do not need bleeding heart liberals, we need people whose heart bleeds and aches for Truth.

In what Herman shares with us concerning obedience I must say it is admirable albeit somewhat naive. God held the Nation of Israel responsible for following bad leaders. One need only to read the letters to the seven churches in Asia in the Apocalypse to see that due to the disobedience of some Bishops, God removed the Lampstands from those Churches, and they NO LONGER EXIST THERE! Someone in this thread said something about wolves in sheep's clothing...frankly I think we all need to keep an eye out, and then perhaps SCREAM! to the hierarchy about our concerns. If I understand it correctly they are supposed to be paying attention to us anyway?

Love to all,
Seraphim

"What is that to you", Jesus spoke to Peter about his remark concerning John "... you, (Peter) follow me!" John 21:15-25

marie_duquette

PS
"Let's not SCREAM "Wolf!" Too soon! Christ is in our midst! Do we truly believe this?

By the way the CHURCH is also Catholic, as well as One, Holy Apostolic, according to the Nicene Creed.

Effie Ganatsios

21-12-2007, 11:03 AM

"
By the way the CHURCH is also Catholic, as well as One, Holy Apostolic, according to the Nicene Creed.

Marie, I didn't understand this comment. On another thread I have posted exactly what the word "catholic" means.In the Nicene Creed it has nothing to do with the Roman Catholic church.

Am I misunderstanding you? Are you referring to the fact that Mother Teresa was a Roman Catholic?

Father Averky's comments were correct, I believe. We can admire people from other religions, we can take their words to heart and meditate on them, but their images have no place in our churches.

Sermons : As Nina said, why didn't her priest choose a sermon about the saint whose nameday they were celebrating. What motivated him to talk about Mother Teresa on this day?

Effie

Rick H.

21-12-2007, 12:09 PM

Effie Ganatsios

21-12-2007, 12:39 PM

Hi Effie,

Good to have you back! The boards seem to have less zing when you are gone. On your definition that you have provided elsewhere, I will have to search for this. When I find it, I wonder if it will include a view of the word 'catholic' as including or concerning all humankind; universal: “what was of catholic rather than national interest”

In Christ,
Rick

PS Seems like we had some good recipes being offered this time last year. I wonder if any remember my recipe for latte that is good for fasting? Yes, it seems like there was more zing last year during the holidays. Is zing really even a word?

Is zing really even a word? If it's not, it should be.
And yes, Rick, catholic means universal.

" In the Nicene Creed of faith, our Church is described as the "One, Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church." "One" because there can only be one true Church with one head Who is Christ. "Holy" because the church seeks to sanctify and transfigure its members through the Sacraments. "Catholic" because the Church is universal and has members in all parts of the world. The word "Catholic" comes from a Greek word "Katholikos" (kath-oh-lee-KOHS) which means world-wide or universal. '"Apostolic" because its teachings are based on the foundations laid by the Apostles from whom our Church derives its teachings and authority without break or change."
http://www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article7061.asp

Rick you wrote : "Good to have you back! The boards seem to have less zing when you are gone."

Thank you Rick. And as to that "zing" you refer to, if you mean my self-opinionated rushing forward without thinking, you are right! Especially in view of the fact that I just got through posting an apology on one of the threads because of this fault.................................

Good to be back.

Have a wonderful and meaningful Christmas.

Effie

Latte : yum.............

Rick H.

21-12-2007, 12:50 PM

Dear Effie,

I didn't mean zingy as you have defined it above, but if we work by your definition then I think it is pretty obvious that, to varying degrees, all who participate here are a little zingy at times with the only difference being individual levels of awareness.

And, when you say if it isn't a word then it ought to be, I think to myself, now we're talkin! :) In fact, you sound increasingly American to me the more I read your writing. You didn't use to be a redneck too did you? ;) Speaking of Jeff Foxworthy, back when I was an official card carrying redneck, I mowed my lawn once and found a car. Okay, that's the best I can do at this hour.

Thanks again, and Merry Christmas to you and yours!

In Christ,
Rick

Marie-Duquette

21-12-2007, 06:20 PM

Marie, I didn't understand this comment. On another thread I have posted exactly what the word "catholic" means.In the Nicene Creed it has nothing to do with the Roman Catholic church.

Am I misunderstanding you? Are you referring to the fact that Mother Teresa was a Roman Catholic?

Father Averky's comments were correct, I believe. We can admire people from other religions, we can take their words to heart and meditate on them, but their images have no place in our churches.

Sermons : As Nina said, why didn't her priest choose a sermon about the saint whose nameday they were celebrating. What motivated him to talk about Mother Teresa on this day?

Effie

Dear Effie,

Peace of Christ be with you, today at this beautiful time of year, awaiting a new birth of Christ in our hearts and lives!

Concerning my comment, I was not addressing you at all,,or any of your previous posts, which are informative.

Nor, was I referring to Mother Theresa being a Roman Catholic.

Nor to any of Father Averky's ( memory eternal) posts in the past.

I was just simply quickly replying to Serafim(James Blackstock) who seemed to have only named the Church as "One, Holy, and Apostolic! I was simply pointing out that fact; and, not at all attacking any other previous posts!

As to Nina's post concerning a sermon heard with reference to Mother Teresa, that was as far from my mind as the furthest twinkling star in the firmament.

Please forgive me, all posters on MONACHOS; I was only concerned about all the negative comments concerning "NEW SKETE!" and its monastics and members eating meat. I don't believe that this concerns any of us. As most of us are not MONASTICS; and perhaps don't truly understand fully the MONASTIC calling/life style, except through books, and not necessarily through personal experience.

And, my quote from Jn 21 refering to Peter's reaction to John and Christ Jesus' response: "What is that to you? You follow me!" ....... Peter is to do what Peter is to do; and, John is to do what John is to do in God's Kingdom.

Always, I am amazed how people tend to analyse and condemn what is seen from the outside, and perhaps not knowing an iota about the inner spiritual life of a person, a community, a group, be they Monastic, lay or otherwise.

I do understand, that many persons are "inquiring minds" on this Monachos web-site; are searching for the TRUTH, are recent converts, cradle orthodox, and many others .... Let us give them a moment in God's great scheme of things.

We respond as each of us sees, perceives and understands from our personal backgrounds. We are all learning from one another! None of us has all the answers! Each of us is at a differing point of development in all aspects of our life.

If, the Holy Spirit is "the Comforter, the Spirit of Truth, who fillest all things, is everywhere present, Treasury of blessings, and Giver of Life ..." I believe that this Spirit of Truth is at New Skete, as well as at Father's Ephrem's St. Anthony's Monastery in Arizona, in our Parish Churches around the world, with each person on this planet in ways we will never understand; and truly hears our prayers and cries from the depths of our hearts.

When we pray: "... come and abide in us, cleanse us from every impurity, and save our souls, Oh Good One!" What is it that is meant?

"Come, Oh Come Emmanuel and ransome captive Israel" ... set us free from any bondage that ensnares us. Each of us is "ISRAEL" one who struggles with God!

So, at this time of year our hearts and voices should be lifted up in "fervent desire for the new coming of Christ in our lives and hearts"

Please forgive my long-windedness; and cries of "Come! Come Emmanuel (God with us) and save us! Be our Life, our Light, our Love each day; and help us all to grow in awareness of your Divine presence among us your children.

pray for me a sinner,

marie_duquette

p.s.
Let us become as "little children" and see the "wonder of IT all!

Effie Ganatsios

21-12-2007, 06:29 PM

[SIZE="2"][B]Dear Effie,

Peace of Christ be with you, today at this beautiful time of year, awaiting a new birth of Christ in our hearts and lives!

Concerning my comment, I was not addressing you at all,,or any of your previous posts, which are informative.

Nor, was I referring to Mother Theresa being a Roman Catholic.

Nor to any of Father Averky's ( memory eternal) posts in the past.

I was just simply quickly replying to Serafim(James Blackstock) who seemed to have only named the Church as "One, Holy, and Apostolic! I was simply pointing out that fact; and, not at all attacking any other previous posts!

!

No, no Marie. I wasn't criticizing, in fact I like all your posts. I just didn't understand your comment clearly. And I wondered if you were referring to the fact that Mother Teresa was a Roman Catholic and if you were connecting this with the word "catholic" in the Creed.

I obviously misunderstood. I learn such a lot from most of the posts on this forum and I enjoy reading them. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

Effie

Marie-Duquette

22-12-2007, 01:23 AM

No, no Marie. I wasn't criticizing, in fact I like all your posts. I just didn't understand your comment clearly. And I wondered if you were referring to the fact that Mother Teresa was a Roman Catholic and if you were connecting this with the word "catholic" in the Creed.

I obviously misunderstood. I learn such a lot from most of the posts on this forum and I enjoy reading them. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

Effie

Dear Effie,

Peace!

Forgiven, truly!

In reality I haven't read a lot of the present posts, because I have much difficulty reading small print. When I use a large font, it is not to make a "BOLD" statement. Only to be able to better read and understand what is written.

I am sorry that the option of large-print font has been removed from the system. I thought when I chose LARGE FONT that I was the only one to read the large font on my computer, as I selected it at the bottom of the page.

If this has inconvenienced any of you, I am very sorry. Please forgive me.

I have just spent quite a while with my nose close to the computer screen, eyes tearing/burning, trying to read the posts on this particular thread, which I find very helpful. Haven't gotten very far, except to see that "NEW SKETE" monastery had been brought into the fray, because of meat-eating, and the practice of Lectio Divina, which for many Orthodox Christians is seen as a Roman Catholic practice.

This makes me think of the Apostle Paul who speak of children needing milk, while mature Christians should go to the "meat" of the matter. Perhaps it means, truly chewing and pondering upon the Word of God as "the essential" in our spiritual diet.

So, I see a connection between Lectio Divina and Meat in the Scriptural contect.

I personally love Lectio Divina, the slow, introspective reading-praying of the Scriptures, hoping to receive strong, nourishing food for my soul and its salvation. The "meaty" words of the Fathers and Mothers of the Church, I also read slowly-prayerfully, hoping, always that the seeds of TRUTH fall upon the soil of my heart and soul.

in Christ Jesus, Emmanuel, who is here Present, was and is to come.

marie_duquette

Effie Ganatsios

22-12-2007, 08:16 AM

Dear Effie,

Peace!

Forgiven, truly!

In reality I haven't read a lot of the present posts, because I have much difficulty reading small print. When I use a large font, it is not to make a "BOLD" statement. Only to be able to better read and understand what is written.

I am sorry that the option of large-print font has been removed from the system. I thought when I chose LARGE FONT that I was the only one to read the large font on my computer, as I selected it at the bottom of the page.

If this has inconvenienced any of you, I am very sorry. Please forgive me.

I have just spent quite a while with my nose close to the computer screen, eyes tearing/burning, trying to read the posts on this particular thread, which I find very helpful. Haven't gotten very far, except to see that "NEW SKETE" monastery had been brought into the fray, because of meat-eating, and the practice of Lectio Divina, which for many Orthodox Christians is seen as a Roman Catholic practice.

This makes me think of the Apostle Paul who speak of children needing milk, while mature Christians should go to the "meat" of the matter. Perhaps it means, truly chewing and pondering upon the Word of God as "the essential" in our spiritual diet.

So, I see a connection between Lectio Divina and Meat in the Scriptural contect.

I personally love Lectio Divina, the slow, introspective reading-praying of the Scriptures, hoping to receive strong, nourishing food for my soul and its salvation. The "meaty" words of the Fathers and Mothers of the Church, I also read slowly-prayerfully, hoping, always that the seeds of TRUTH fall upon the soil of my heart and soul.

in Christ Jesus, Emmanuel, who is here Present, was and is to come.

marie_duquette

Marie, perhaps you could file each page and then convert to Microsoft Word from HTML. This would mean that you could then change the font so that you could read it easily.

Effie

Nina

22-12-2007, 10:13 AM

Nor, was I referring to Mother Theresa being a Roman Catholic.

Mother Theresa's name is everywhere somewhere and they have a statue of her like a cross. It is interesting to see it there because of the circumstances. Although it can be classified as something else.

Ciao,
nina

P.S That place is not a monastery, and it does not belong to the Orthodox. Although it is in our world and God's Creation.

Marie-Duquette

22-12-2007, 04:42 PM

Marie, perhaps you could file each page and then convert to Microsoft Word from HTML. This would mean that you could then change the font so that you could read it easily.

Effie

Dear Effie,

Thanks for the suggestion. I have no idea how to go about this. will look into it.

marie_duquette

Marie-Duquette

22-12-2007, 11:48 PM

"Glory to God in the Highest and PEACE to all of good will!~" the angels sang in the middle of the still, silent night, as the WORD of GOD lept down into our midst as EMMANUEL!

David Naess

27-12-2007, 04:36 AM

Effie Ganatsios

27-12-2007, 07:43 AM

Howdy!

After being unduely pursuaded by early posters, I have come to the conclusion that the only way I can make a determination about New Skete is to go there and see for myself.

Whether or not meat is eaten at a monastary is, at best, a secondary consideration. My primary interest is whether or not a particular monastary would benefit me in my spiritual growth.

I get the impression that New Skete is blazing a trail because they appear to be the first monastary to attempt a life style based on AMERICAN Orthodoxy rather than something brought to the USA from "the old country."

At this point I have an entirely open mind.

Dave

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.

In the past Father Averky made some very insightful remarks about people who convert to a certain religion (in our case, Orthodoxy) and then systematically try to remove whatever doesn't suit them and doesn't seem "familiar" because of their past. They introduce practices that originate from the baggage they still carry from their previous "religions". Eating meat is I suspect, just one of these practices. A possible next step would be the forbidding of wine to those wishing to take communion. Don't a lot of these American Protestant groups forbid any form of alcohol?

Fasting from meat :

:Who decided that Orthodox fasting must include abstaining from animal products?

RESPONSE:

This form of fasting was passed on in the early Church from Jewish practice. In Matthew, Christ says, "When you fast do not be like the hypocrites," which indicates that the Jews fasted -- it also indicates that Christ assumes that one fasts, for He says "when you fast" not "if you fast." Fasting is not something that only developed alongside Christianity; rather, it is a practice that had been followed by the Jews, and even Scripture mentions that Christ fasted.

YOU WRITE:

Wouldn't it be more sacrificial for someone to give up foods that they really loved such as candy rather than meat which they may not care for that much anyhow?

RESPONSE:

The purpose of fasting is not to "give up" things, nor to do something "sacrificial." The purpose of fasting is to learn discipline, to gain control of those things that are indeed within our control but that we so often allow to control us. In our culture especially, food dominates the lives of many people. We collect cookbooks. We have an entire TV network devoted to food [the "Food Channel"]. We have eating disorders, diets galore, weight loss pills, liposuction treatments, stomach stapling -- all sorts of things that proceed out of the fact that we often allow food, which in an of itself cannot possible control us, to control us. We fast in order to gain control, to discipline ourselves, to gain control of those things that we have allowed to get out of control. Giving up candy -- unless one is controlled by candy -- is not fasting. It is giving up candy, or it is done with the idea that we fast in order to suffer. But we do not fast in order to suffer. We fast in order to get a grip on our lives and to regain control of those things that have gotten out of control. Further, as we sing during the first week of Great Lent, "while fasting from food, let us also fast from our passions."

The above is from http://oca.org/QA.asp?ID=93

St. Paisij Velitchkovsky,
Put together and translated Philokalia into the Slavonic language

"Starets Paisij sent his disciples from Secu to Bucharest in order to study the Greek language. To two such disciples...the elder wrote a letter of warning because they were being persuaded, with the blessing of a bishop, to eat meat. The elder wrote to them thus:

'It seems to me that, in accordance with the correct understanding and ordinance of the Holy Orthodox Church, one should not obey even an Angel in this matter. After the Flood the Lord, because of human weakness, permitted the eating of meat, but the order of monastic life corresponds to the life in Paradise, where there was no eating of meat. And although at the beginning of monastic life there was in places a falling away from this order, especially in large cities, nevertheless St. Sabbas the Sanctified confirmed the non-eating of meat; and such become the general order in all lands. Therefore, one cannot say that the non-eating of meat is only a local custom; and this cannot be left to the free choice of everyone, and it is not true that abstaining from meat harms the health. One should not be put under constraint by those who eat meat, but one must please God rather than men; and those who tempt you, when they see your firmness, will themselves praise you.' The Elder referred his disciples to the work of the Elder Basil of Merlopolyany on the monastic tradition of not eating meat,* and reminded them that the brethren of the monastery and the desert-dwellers would be scandalized and grieved if they knew that these brothers had begun to eat meat.**"

"* Slavonic text of this work in the Optina Life of Blessed Paisij, pp. 134-157.

** This paragraph is from Chetverikov, vol. II, pp. 45-46."

Text from "Little Russian Philokalia, vol. IV: St Paisij Velitchkovsky", page 145.

Effie

Andreas Moran

27-12-2007, 10:18 AM

Whether or not meat is eaten at a monastary is, at best, a secondary consideration. My primary interest is whether or not a particular monastary would benefit me in my spiritual growth.

You can't separate the two. Unless you want a Frank Sinatra religion - 'I did it it my way'. Advising a girl how to tell if a boy would make a good husband, St Seraphim of Sarov said, 'see if he keeps the fasts of the Church - if he does, eveything else will be well'.

a life style

Orthodox monasticism isn't 'a life style'.

AMERICAN Orthodoxy

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

an entirely open mind Very dangerous - anything might fly into it! Better a disciplined mind which guards itself in accordance with the teachings of the Holy Fathers (and which I wish I had!).

Mary

27-12-2007, 03:59 PM

I get the impression that New Skete is blazing a trail because they appear to be the first monastary to attempt a life style based on AMERICAN Orthodoxy rather than something brought to the USA from "the old country."

Dave

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 thing 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.

Fr Raphael Vereshack

27-12-2007, 04:18 PM

Quote:

Whether or not meat is eaten at a monastary is, at best, a secondary consideration. My primary interest is whether or not a particular monastary would benefit me in my spiritual growth. end of Quote

Of course though the two can never be entirely separated, especially when it comes to monasticism.

The order of fasting within monastic life serves two inseparable purposes.

The first is that it serves as a central aspect of a spiritual/ascetic praxis. The results of this are well known and indeed the practice comes from many, many centuries of acquired experience within the Church.

The second point relates directly to the first. The fasting routine as found within monasticism is part & parcel of an ongoing tradition within the Church. As such it serves to bind together in unity all the varying forms of monasticism as found within the Church. The most negative and long lasting negative effects of not following this tradition are not so much whether fasting from this or that is wrong in itself but in the way it breaks the bond of unity create by obedience to the larger tradition.

It should be said as an additional comment here that within the larger monastic tradition which includes its way of fasting there is to be found incredible variety. How the way of fasting within the community is applied varies from monastery to monastery not in the overall tradition but in its detailed application.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

Effie Ganatsios

27-12-2007, 07:23 PM

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 thing 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.

Yes, I completely agree with Mary.

Effie

David Naess

27-12-2007, 09:54 PM

What does "blazing a new trail" mean to you Dave? What is "a life style based on AMERICAN Orthodoxy"?
Effie

Howdy Effie!

I am talking about seperating the church from the nationalistic mindset.
I got more than one inquiry at my church to the effect:

"Why do you want to go to church here --
you're not Greek?"

Separation of the spiritualism from the national identification
is what I am talking about.

Services all in one's own native language in order to prevent the
erronious mindset of "this is the language of God."

Being able to distinguish between:
"It's the Greek/Russian/Ukrainean/Serbian/whatever way."
and
"It's the Orthodox way."

That sort of thing...

Dave

Mary

28-12-2007, 01:26 AM

Howdy Effie!

I am talking about seperating the church from the nationalistic mindset.
I got more than one inquiry at my church to the effect:

"Why do you want to go to church here --
you're not Greek?"

Separation of the spiritualism from the national identification
is what I am talking about.

Services all in one's own native language in order to prevent the
erronious mindset of "this is the language of God."

Being able to distinguish between:
"It's the Greek/Russian/Ukrainean/Serbian/whatever way."
and
"It's the Orthodox way."

That sort of thing...

Dave

Ah, now I understand where you're coming from.

Personally, I don't think the New Skete is the 'the first' monastary to attempt a life style based on AMERICAN Orthodoxy rather than something brought to the USA from "the old country." I'm sure there are many others who've done that, and aren't as controversial.

I'm sorry you had to face The Ethnic question. I haven't, except from one long-time friend who is Eritrean. But you know, I wouldn't take offense at such a question. I think it's a great question for them to ask! When you give them your answer, it will cause them to take a deeper look at the Treasure they've had all their lives, that they've taken for granted to such a degree that they thought it was their earthly, cultural, tradition. And hopefully, through you, they're love for the Church, will be strengthened.

In Christ,
Mary.

Andreas Moran

28-12-2007, 03:29 PM

Paul Cowan

29-12-2007, 06:26 PM

For ethnicity, top this. A few years ago, a Greek postgraduate student came up to me and said, 'Sir, I hear you're Orthodox - is it true?' Surprised, I answered, 'yes'. He responded, 'how can you be Orthodox? You're not Greek!'

Sorry Andreas I can top this one.

While on the Holy Mountain, apparently the only American at the time, I was asked by everyone trying out their English on me, "Where are you from". I said America which raised eyebrows. Then "Are you Orthodox?" Every single response to my yes was, "REALLY?". So much so it was annoying then funny. I would answer, "yes and there are over 2 million more of us."

We would then talk about my background and conversion 6 years ago and why an American would come to Athos since it was so far away and many Greeks don't even visit as it is in their "back yard". My reply was "Because it is important to be here." Much more to the conversation but this opened dialogue everytime and brought the brotherhood of Orthodoxy to life for me and to them.

Paul

Andreas Moran

29-12-2007, 06:57 PM

Well, Paul, at least your encounters led some place positive!

Effie Ganatsios

30-12-2007, 10:42 AM

For ethnicity, top this. A few years ago, a Greek postgraduate student came up to me and said, 'Sir, I hear you're Orthodox - is it true?' Surprised, I answered, 'yes'. He responded, 'how can you be Orthodox? You're not Greek!'

Andreas, I think that this was a sign of the ignorance of this man.
Orthodoxy is not Greek, it is not Russian, it is Orthodoxy. Just that!

Effie

Effie Ganatsios

30-12-2007, 10:54 AM

Howdy Effie!

I am talking about seperating the church from the nationalistic mindset.
I got more than one inquiry at my church to the effect:

"Why do you want to go to church here --
you're not Greek?"

Separation of the spiritualism from the national identification
is what I am talking about.

Services all in one's own native language in order to prevent the
erronious mindset of "this is the language of God."

Being able to distinguish between:
"It's the Greek/Russian/Ukrainean/Serbian/whatever way."
and
"It's the Orthodox way."

That sort of thing...

Dave

David, as I wrote in my reply to Andreas, Orthodoxy has nothing to do with nationality.

I can relate to those who need to hear the liturgy in their own language because we need to understand what we are listening to.
My prayer book has the liturgy in Greek on one side and the English translation on the other. Having this book has been a godsend because I now know and can feel the beautiful words in the liturgy.

Listening to the liturgy in Greek however uplifts me because of the beautiful words that somehow sound "incomplete" in English.
I think it's sad that those you do not know Greek miss the beauty of the liturgy in this language. Perhaps learning Greek might be an option as it was in the past for most educated people - Thomas Jefferson was a master of the Greek language.

Eating meat is another matter and I stand by what I wrote in my first post.

Effie

p.s. perhaps a better understanding of how some Greeks etc. feel might be to imagine the same situation reversed. Imagine a immigrant Greek family attending services in a southern Baptist church 100 years ago. Wouldn't the faithful of that church find this a little strange and even ask them what in the world they were doing there?

Effie Ganatsios

30-12-2007, 11:00 AM

Sorry Andreas I can top this one.

While on the Holy Mountain, apparently the only American at the time, I was asked by everyone trying out their English on me, "Where are you from". I said America which raised eyebrows. Then "Are you Orthodox?" Every single response to my yes was, "REALLY?". So much so it was annoying then funny. I would answer, "yes and there are over 2 million more of us."

We would then talk about my background and conversion 6 years ago and why an American would come to Athos since it was so far away and many Greeks don't even visit as it is in their "back yard". My reply was "Because it is important to be here." Much more to the conversation but this opened dialogue everytime and brought the brotherhood of Orthodoxy to life for me and to them.

Paul

Paul, did you visit Iberon Monastery? It's strange that you met so many monks who have no idea about the spread of Orthodoxy in America. Most of the monasteries have computers and are on the Internet and the Iberon Monastery had an exhibition of it's treasures in New York a few years ago.

Perhaps the fact that so many monastics lead very isolated lives has something to do with their lack of knowledge of what is happening in the world today.

Effie

Andreas Moran

30-12-2007, 05:14 PM

Listening to the liturgy in Greek however uplifts me because of the beautiful words that somehow sound "incomplete" in English.
I think it's sad that those you do not know Greek miss the beauty of the liturgy in this language. Perhaps learning Greek might be an option

It's not that hard. When I started going to church and it was all in Greek, I despaired I'd ever get the hang of it. But after a few weeks with the Greek-English text and a tape of it, I'd got it. And I'm no linguist! I'm finding the Slavonic harder. Everyone finds meaning in their own language - my wife is only really happy with Slavonic, but she does like the English at the monastery here.

Paul Cowan

31-12-2007, 01:09 AM

Paul, did you visit Iberon Monastery? It's strange that you met so many monks who have no idea about the spread of Orthodoxy in America. Most of the monasteries have computers and are on the Internet and the Iberon Monastery had an exhibition of it's treasures in New York a few years ago.

Perhaps the fact that so many monastics lead very isolated lives has something to do with their lack of knowledge of what is happening in the world today.

Effie

Dear Effie,

I was not talking about the monks. I was talking about the average 'Joe' on the mountain. Or is that the average 'Kostos' on the mountain?

Effie Ganatsios

31-12-2007, 10:04 AM

Dear Effie,

I was not talking about the monks. I was talking about the average 'Joe' on the mountain. Or is that the average 'Kostos' on the mountain?

Kostas, Yiannis, Georgios - very common names because of our saints.

I suppose it might seem strange for the average person here in Greece to realize that there are so many converts to the Orthodox religion in America. I was surprised myself, actually, but after being on this forum for so long I have now come to accept it. Perhaps this is because all most people know about Americans and their daily lives are via commerical films and I don't believe that I have ever seen Orthodox converts in any film. Lately, apart from miracles and angels, magic and New Age stuff, it's rare that we get to see films about people who are deeply religious (no matter their religion) and whose everyday lives are devoted to God.

Effie

Kypreos

01-01-2008, 12:19 AM

Perhaps the fact that so many monastics lead very isolated lives has something to do with their lack of knowledge of what is happening in the world today.

Effie

Those who devote their lives to prayer, even when living in isolation, have a better understanding of the world than we do.

We are the ones with a lack of knowledge; the media keeps us in ignorance.

Effie Ganatsios

01-01-2008, 10:41 AM

Those who devote their lives to prayer, even when living in isolation, have a better understanding of the world than we do.

We are the ones with a lack of knowledge; the media keeps us in ignorance.

Elder Paisios was one of those who lead an isolated life and yet knew everything that was happening.

Effie

Andreas Moran

01-01-2008, 09:33 PM

St Silouan's comment about this is well know: see, 'St Silouan the Athonite', p 73.

Michael Astley

04-03-2008, 05:13 PM

I have a Catholic friend who is vegetarian, although this has nothing to do with his religious beliefs or practices. He says that, while he is grateful for people's consideration when they invite him to their houses as a guest in asking whether he has any dietary requirements, he often feels frustrated when he explains that he is vegetarian, only for them to ask whether he eats fish. He says he doesn't understand what makes people think that vegetarians eat fish.

I suggested that he not be too hard on his hosts and that I suspect that the misunderstanding comes from the fact that a vegetarian is usually defined as somebody who does not eat meat, which is extremely unclear. It is true that, in general usage, the word meat is sometimes taken to mean the flesh of animals, which would include fish. However, in culinary language, meat, fish, and poultry are actually three separate types of food. Therefore, saying to somebody who is cooking for you that you don't eat meat does not suggest to that person that you do not eat chicken or cod, because those things are poultry and fish: they are not meat in the culinary sense of the word. I think that the key is for my friend to be clear about what he means, and if he means that he doesn't eat meat, fish, or poultry, then he needs to say that instead of just "meat", only to get frustrated when people ask for clarification.

This got me thinking about our Basilian monks. When we say they do not eat meat, in which sense do we mean it? Do we mean that they do not eat the flesh of animals generally or that they don't eat meat but they do eat fish and poultry? I know that the latter is the case according to the Rule of St Benedict.

Thank you.

Michael

Father David Moser

04-03-2008, 08:42 PM

This got me thinking about our Basilian monks. When we say they do not eat meat, in which sense do we mean it? Do we mean that they do not eat the flesh of animals generally or that they don't eat meat but they do eat fish and poultry? I know that the latter is the case according to the Rule of St Benedict.

The monastic diet is generally meatless in the sense that they do not eat meat or poultry (to use your terms). Fish is in a different category because it is a cold blooded creature - inferior in status to warm blooded animals - thus monks do eat fish.

Fr David Moser

Michael Astley

04-03-2008, 11:36 PM

The monastic diet is generally meatless in the sense that they do not eat meat or poultry (to use your terms). Fish is in a different category because it is a cold blooded creature - inferior in status to warm blooded animals - thus monks do eat fish.

Fr David Moser

Thank you for that, Father David. I'm just intrigued, is all. I knew somebody here would know.

Pax,
Michael

Fr. J. Benedict Cucinotta

05-03-2008, 07:16 AM

I just visited St. Anthony's Monetary in Arizona. I am wandering why they don't eat meat? Is this just for practical reasons or are there spiritual reasons for not eating meat?

Thanks!

In Christ
In very early Christian times meat was not a plentious commodity, monks farmed but generally didn't husband cattle. Of course early monks mortified their bodies, more so then now. But tradition has a lot to do with not eating meat. St. Benedict of Nursia, the Father of Western Monasticisim, was definately against meat, but then again there wasn't much meat on top of the mountain in Italy. Fr. Benedict

Daniel Harrison

11-02-2009, 11:15 AM

New Skete continues to do what they have always done - and I am sure that there are some things that they do well. Whether or not their life is Orthodox and monastic is a matter for their synod of bishops to undertake. For now, however, the skete operates with the blessing of their bishop and thus I think any of us would be hard pressed to say that they are outside of the Orthodox Church.

Fr David Moser

I can say with out being hard pressed that they are Not Orthodox in my book. What Saint Nektarios or any Great Monastic Saint say to this disgustingness?

In Christ
nektarios

Herman Blaydoe

11-02-2009, 01:55 PM

I can say with out being hard pressed that they are Not Orthodox in my book. What Saint Nektarios or any Great Monastic Saint say to this disgustingness?

In Christ
nektarios

Well, you certainly have the choice or even perhaps the responsibility to express your concern and to not support the efforts of a particular monastery. However, I would only add that it is good to remember that "our books" are not what decide what is or is not Orthodox. That path leads to Protetantism! That is why we have bishops, that is why they get to wear the funny hats.

I suspect once Metropolitan Jonah takes care of some more pressing issues, the activities and practices of New Skete may well receive a more critical review.

Herman

Owen Jones

11-02-2009, 03:12 PM

In Acts, after the first Church "Council," one of the few rules laid down was to abstain from "blood."

David Withun

11-02-2009, 04:17 PM

I don't have an opinion one way or the other about New Skete. Even if I did, it's not up to me to judge. I'll leave that for the Bishops and theologians and pretty much everybody else that wants to cast their two cents into the pot.

What I can comment on is a couple of the things that people listed as problems in New Skete:
1. The open iconostasis: While I realize that it's pretty universal now to have a full iconostasis (outside of the Western Rite, which, so far as I've seen, lacks one altogether), this has not always been the case, and I wouldn't say that somebody is "un-Orthodox" for not having one now. Full iconostases only became universal in the Orthodox Church in about the 11th century. To say that churches which lack a full iconostasis are not Orthodox is to kick a whole of churches throughout history outside of Orthodoxy.
2. The "icons" of non-Orthodox figures. I can't tell based on the photos that were shown by someone on this thread earlier which part of the church they were in. If they were in the nave, I can see how this would be a problem. If they were in the narthex, though, this would not entirely be an innovation. A friend who took a recent trip to Greece showed me photos of what he told me was an ancient church there which had "icons" (also lacking halos, as those in New Skete) of Plato, Socrates, Aristotle, and other ancient Greek philosophers and figures in the narthex. I can definitely understand that having these "icons" at New Skete is a mistake for many reasons, especially the message that inquirers may get from seeing them, but I would be very hesitant to say that New Skete is not Orthodox.

In the end, I think that's a judgment call that none of us here can make and it is better left to the Hierarchs of the OCA.

Kusanagi

11-02-2009, 06:53 PM

Fr. Alexander Resnikoff

23-07-2009, 10:23 PM

Then again...
I am told that the monastics at New Skete in Cambridge, NY eat
quite a lot of meat.

Then again...
The preparation and sale of smoked meats is one of
their means of generating income.

Since only certain cuts are sold as smoked meat, why waste what
(according to their market) is just "offal"?

Just a thought or two...
with few (Apostolic) exceptions Christians are permitted to eat all things in their season!

Christ said it is not what goes into the stomach that defiles a man, but what proceeds from his heart (and consequently mouth) that defiles a man.

One of the things that surprised me about Serbian monks is that they are permitted meat. When I mentioned my surprise, I was told that it was a national custom for their monastic communities and excepting the usual Wednesdays and Fridays (and Fasts) meat was permitted them.

Just because we (ROCOR) do things one way, or the Greeks, etc. doesn't mean its the only way! We are not Pharisee's in terms of fasting but seek the higher and spiritual meaning of fasting!

Returning to my earlier paraphrase of Christ's statement about defilement, let's be very careful at what words proceed from our 'virtual' mouths, so we do not find ourselves unwittingly sitting in judgement of our brothers. Look to tending your own spiritual gardens, the weeds in your neighbors garden cannot become a distraction our own weeds.

In XC,
oA

Andreas Moran

24-07-2009, 08:37 AM

Quote:

The order of fasting within monastic life serves two inseparable purposes.

The first is that it serves as a central aspect of a spiritual/ascetic praxis. The results of this are well known and indeed the practice comes from many, many centuries of acquired experience within the Church.

The second point relates directly to the first. The fasting routine as found within monasticism is part & parcel of an ongoing tradition within the Church. As such it serves to bind together in unity all the varying forms of monasticism as found within the Church. The most negative and long lasting negative effects of not following this tradition are not so much whether fasting from this or that is wrong in itself but in the way it breaks the bond of unity create by obedience to the larger tradition.

It should be said as an additional comment here that within the larger monastic tradition which includes its way of fasting there is to be found incredible variety. How the way of fasting within the community is applied varies from monastery to monastery not in the overall tradition but in its detailed application.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

I assume that Father Raphael, in referring to 'the fasting routine' in Orthodox monasteries and the 'ongoing tradition within the Church' and 'the larger tradition', means not eating meat. The expression, 'breaking the bond of unity created by obedience to the larger tradition' is telling. Tradition and patristic authority and are clear that monastics should not eat meat and so any deviation from this must be counted as 'breaking the bond of unity'; to observe where such breach occurs is not being judgmental. The laity have a duty to have regard to what is done in the Church.