What follows are the postings on NFTU and my responses to them. The tone was mostly polite and I found it to be a good experience overall.
"Anglican Diocese" of the OCA?!?!?
Posted by Subdeacon Joseph Tuesday, October 20
We can't really be reading this. More Angliochians? More semi-convert Anglican parishes? More people who have no clue as to what Western Orthodoxy is taken in to the OCA? More "Liturgy Of St Tikhon" (Or "LOST" for short) parishes?
The whole post can be found linked to the title but if this really came from St Mark's Angliochian Parish in Denver, then we can be sure this may well be happening.
Click the story below to see it....
Wed Oct 21 2009
From: Notes from the underground.
True Orthodox and Ecumenical News
"Anglican Diocese" of the OCA?!?!?
Posted by Subdeacon Joseph Tuesday, October 20
We can't really be reading this. More Angliochians? More semi-convert Anglican parishes? More people who have no clue as to what Western Orthodoxy is taken in to the OCA? More "Liturgy Of St Tikhon" (Or "LOST" for short) parishes?
The whole post can be found linked to the title but if this really came from St Mark's Angliochian Parish in Denver, then we can be sure this may well be happening.
Click the story below to see it....
Comments that followed:
Okay, that would be my web blog. Thanks for increasing traffic on it. I wasn't aware it was even searchable. Nice.
My name is Columba Silouan and I'm a tonsured lay reader at Saint Marks.
It's high time for the Eastern Orthodox Church as a whole to broaden their view of reaching out to Anglicans.
The Roman Catholic Church has just announced that their doors are open for the Traditional Anglican Communion to enter in large numbers.
And so we are going to do . . . what exactly?
In my opinion, we need to be as generous and proactive as the Romans. Bravo for Metropolitan Jonah's efforts and vision. A Western Rite in the OCA might be a better one than the one we have in Antioch.
Otherwise, Rome will gain all the Anglican converts while we sit on our hands with our noses in the air.
I, too am an ex-Anglican and I fervently pray that all that was good and beautiful in the church of my heritage and ancestry will be redeemed and preserved in Holy Orthodoxy. The Anglican movement is dead, and those of us who were Anglicans are looking for Good Samaritans, not those who pass by the road on the other side.
I know many Eastern Rite Orthodox who are warm, humble and holy people, including my Greek Orthodox Confessor, Fr. Lou at Saint Catherine's in Denver.
I also have encountered some who are disdainful snobs who think that anything western at all is heterodox and off limits.
I can assure you that you won't win many converts from Anglicanism with attitudes of the latter nature.
Sincerely in the Blessed Trinity,
Columba Silouan
Note: I have to admit here that I was a tad frustrated at the time I posted my first comment. I had just learned of the Roman Catholic action of setting up a "constitution" by which Anglicans can be received into the RCC. I didn't believe it was time to quibble when our biggest ecclesiastical competitors had made such a bold, and in my estimation, generous move.
I also may have been a bit harsh in my assessment that the overall Anglican movement is dead. Apart from Holy Church, however, it is certainly wounded.
I also may have been a bit harsh in my assessment that the overall Anglican movement is dead. Apart from Holy Church, however, it is certainly wounded.
The next post is from Subdeacon Joseph from New York:
Dear Columba Silouan,
You write, "I also have encountered some who are disdainful snobs who think that anything western at all is heterodox and off limits.... I can assure you that you won't win many converts from Anglicanism with attitudes of the latter nature. "
I don't have a problem with Western rites as long as they are Orthodox; it has long been a position of mine that the "Liturgy of St Tikhon" is very questionable. I myself pray using a Western Rite, but I am certain it is Orthodox by *its nature* (knowing where the text comes from) as opposed to it being Orthodox by *my nature* (because it is familiar to me in my youth-- much of what is Western and actually Orthodox was not-- and I just happen to be Orthodox).
In my Archdiocese we allow the use of a generally Sarum (11th century) recension of the Roman rite. These texts are clearly Orthodox in their doctrinal content and we know how to use them. It's not "liturgical archaeology", as many falsely claim, since any educated High Church Anglican has seen a Sarum Liturgy. I see no reason to use false BCP or
AM constructions. We shall never see properly converted English Orthodox of Western provenance if we keep offering bread for a stone. As for Rome taking them; well, Rome approved many of Cranmer's modifications with the New Mass, so I think we can agree that at the least, Rome is a place where those who cannot accept that the post-schism and Protestant nature of their liturgical and spiritual practices are actually post schism and Protestant would be more than
welcome.
Still, I sense we'll be seeing more of the LOST. And that saddens me. Because in the desire to preserve Anglican tradition, we are forgetting genuine English Orthodox tradition.
--
In Christ,
Subdeacon Joseph Suaiden
St Eulalia Orthodox Mission, Bronx NY
Jonathan· 1 day ago
You write, "I also have encountered some who are disdainful snobs who think that anything western at all is heterodox and off limits.... I can assure you that you won't win many converts from Anglicanism with attitudes of the latter nature. "
I don't have a problem with Western rites as long as they are Orthodox; it has long been a position of mine that the "Liturgy of St Tikhon" is very questionable. I myself pray using a Western Rite, but I am certain it is Orthodox by *its nature* (knowing where the text comes from) as opposed to it being Orthodox by *my nature* (because it is familiar to me in my youth-- much of what is Western and actually Orthodox was not-- and I just happen to be Orthodox).
In my Archdiocese we allow the use of a generally Sarum (11th century) recension of the Roman rite. These texts are clearly Orthodox in their doctrinal content and we know how to use them. It's not "liturgical archaeology", as many falsely claim, since any educated High Church Anglican has seen a Sarum Liturgy. I see no reason to use false BCP or
AM constructions. We shall never see properly converted English Orthodox of Western provenance if we keep offering bread for a stone. As for Rome taking them; well, Rome approved many of Cranmer's modifications with the New Mass, so I think we can agree that at the least, Rome is a place where those who cannot accept that the post-schism and Protestant nature of their liturgical and spiritual practices are actually post schism and Protestant would be more than
welcome.
Still, I sense we'll be seeing more of the LOST. And that saddens me. Because in the desire to preserve Anglican tradition, we are forgetting genuine English Orthodox tradition.
--
In Christ,
Subdeacon Joseph Suaiden
St Eulalia Orthodox Mission, Bronx NY
The Second Comment in response to my first posting was
less sympathetic to Western Rite Orthodoxy in general:
I personally feel that 'Western Rite' Orthodoxy is a strange and possibly dangerous thing, since it doesn't have a continuous tradition in Orthodoxy, unlike the Eastern Rite. It would certainly be better to dig up an old Latin rite from the days when the Latin Church still held to Orthodox doctrine, as St John Maximovich tried to do when he was Archbishop of Western Europe, rather than try to adapt a rite born in the midst of heresy, such as the Anglican Book of Common Prayer, as St Tikhon tried to do.
But even the ancient Orthodox Latin rites have fallen into disuse, and I think it's unwise to take any liturgy out of its historical context, mainly because in all these rites there is a wealth of unwritten tradition that accompanies what has been written down. In the Eastern Rite, it is possible for Westerners to draw upon this unbroken tradition to supplement the codified rituals; in the 'Western Rite', the oral tradition is lost and one has to 'reconstruct' it based on one's personal reading of history, which is almost bound to lead to errors.
If even St Tikhon, who was born and bred in the Orthodox faith, was unable successfully to recreate the heretical Anglican rite as an Orthodox rite, how much less are we unsaintly converts?
My next posting follows and was partly in response to the idea that the Sarum Rite would be a better Western Rite to use than the 1928 BCP / Liturgy of Saint Tikhon:
If even St Tikhon, who was born and bred in the Orthodox faith, was unable successfully to recreate the heretical Anglican rite as an Orthodox rite, how much less are we unsaintly converts?
My next posting follows and was partly in response to the idea that the Sarum Rite would be a better Western Rite to use than the 1928 BCP / Liturgy of Saint Tikhon:
Good evening. This is Columba again.
I've got no problem with the idea of using the Sarum Rite. Supposedly much of the BCP had as it's primary source the Sarum Rite. But the Western Rite goes beyond just the core liturgy. One small for instance is that we sometimes pray The Stations of the Cross as Western Rite Orthodox. And many Orthodox parishes of both rites have started to use stained glass in their churches.
The Western Rite in the Antiochian Archdiocese also allows the use of music from various western sources, including Gregorian Chant, Anglican Plainchant and hymns drawn from sources as late as the 19th century.
I'm thinking here of hymnody by John and Charles Wesley and Isaac Watts, to name only three sources.
In the Western Rite, we also use Bach, Handel, Brahms, Mendohlsen, Motzart, Beethoven, Haydn and countless other western composers whose music became the backbone of some of the greatest western hymns, anthems and oratorios of the faith.
These hymns don't take over the entire service by any means, but they do well at various points in a Western Rite service. The predominate form of music in our services is still chanting, which is the backbone of Orthodox music.
And of course, I wouldn't advocate changing things like Icons or Iconography AT ALL. But using western music is a different matter in my opinion. Most converts come to the use of Icons without a background involving them. They don't come to church music without a background, however.
Now as Orthodox Christians, we should screen the words of western hymns to ensure that they fully comply with Eastern Orthodox Theology, but if you truly want to reach Christians from all the western confessions you need to have the option of incorporating their greatest works of music.
Bishop Basil of the Diocese of Wichita once attended a high mass at an Episcopal Cathedral back in the days before many of the modern Episcopal innovations and heresies occurred. He wept because he realized this form of worship was in serious danger of dying out.
Its in danger of dying out because modern protestants are stampeding en - masse to entertainment based and trendy worship forms. And Vatican II in the Roman Catholic Church didn't help matters, either.
The only places left where traditional style western worship is truly safe is in isolated pockets of traditional Roman Catholics, a few Presbyterian churches, the LCMS, perhaps WELS, the Traditional Anglican Communion, other traditional groups of a similar nature, and Western Rite Orthodoxy.
In my opinion, reaching America for Eastern Orthodoxy must take into account the entire remaining ecclesiastical church culture of the target country. We can't do it exactly like Saint's Cyril and Methodius did it because this culture already has a remnant christian culture present where Holy Russia was a completely pagan country.
I was taught as a catechumen that the Orthodox Church knows where The Church is, but can't state where The Church isn't. It isn't entirely the fault of my American and English forefathers that Holy Orthodoxy was lost to them. And I believe in a God who preserved a "faithful remnant" in the middle of imperfect "church" situations.
The holiest of the Protestants and Roman Catholics of non-orthodox countries nevertheless knew God. Even the Orthodox believe that men like George Herbert, C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkein walked with God and had creative works that were inspired by the life (energies) of God.
I've got no problem with the idea of using the Sarum Rite. Supposedly much of the BCP had as it's primary source the Sarum Rite. But the Western Rite goes beyond just the core liturgy. One small for instance is that we sometimes pray The Stations of the Cross as Western Rite Orthodox. And many Orthodox parishes of both rites have started to use stained glass in their churches.
The Western Rite in the Antiochian Archdiocese also allows the use of music from various western sources, including Gregorian Chant, Anglican Plainchant and hymns drawn from sources as late as the 19th century.
I'm thinking here of hymnody by John and Charles Wesley and Isaac Watts, to name only three sources.
In the Western Rite, we also use Bach, Handel, Brahms, Mendohlsen, Motzart, Beethoven, Haydn and countless other western composers whose music became the backbone of some of the greatest western hymns, anthems and oratorios of the faith.
These hymns don't take over the entire service by any means, but they do well at various points in a Western Rite service. The predominate form of music in our services is still chanting, which is the backbone of Orthodox music.
And of course, I wouldn't advocate changing things like Icons or Iconography AT ALL. But using western music is a different matter in my opinion. Most converts come to the use of Icons without a background involving them. They don't come to church music without a background, however.
Now as Orthodox Christians, we should screen the words of western hymns to ensure that they fully comply with Eastern Orthodox Theology, but if you truly want to reach Christians from all the western confessions you need to have the option of incorporating their greatest works of music.
Bishop Basil of the Diocese of Wichita once attended a high mass at an Episcopal Cathedral back in the days before many of the modern Episcopal innovations and heresies occurred. He wept because he realized this form of worship was in serious danger of dying out.
Its in danger of dying out because modern protestants are stampeding en - masse to entertainment based and trendy worship forms. And Vatican II in the Roman Catholic Church didn't help matters, either.
The only places left where traditional style western worship is truly safe is in isolated pockets of traditional Roman Catholics, a few Presbyterian churches, the LCMS, perhaps WELS, the Traditional Anglican Communion, other traditional groups of a similar nature, and Western Rite Orthodoxy.
In my opinion, reaching America for Eastern Orthodoxy must take into account the entire remaining ecclesiastical church culture of the target country. We can't do it exactly like Saint's Cyril and Methodius did it because this culture already has a remnant christian culture present where Holy Russia was a completely pagan country.
I was taught as a catechumen that the Orthodox Church knows where The Church is, but can't state where The Church isn't. It isn't entirely the fault of my American and English forefathers that Holy Orthodoxy was lost to them. And I believe in a God who preserved a "faithful remnant" in the middle of imperfect "church" situations.
The holiest of the Protestants and Roman Catholics of non-orthodox countries nevertheless knew God. Even the Orthodox believe that men like George Herbert, C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkein walked with God and had creative works that were inspired by the life (energies) of God.
And think of Johann Sebastian Bach who titled all of his music "To The Glory of God."
The Great Schism was a terrible tragedy, not just a crime committed by the Roman Catholic Church. The Protestant Reformation was also a great tragedy.
I'm sure God has grieved the consequences that millions of innocent Christians suffered from these two events.
We can have a larger view of Orthodox cultural engagement without compromising our beliefs. Our God is big enough to handle it if we adopt such a perspective.
You may win converts and deny them their heritage, but that will make for converts who are saddened at their very core by the loss of that heritage. And that sadness is an unnecessary burden in a world that already saddles us with many a burden.
I believe that BOTH rites are necessary to have a healthy Orthodox Church in America. There are many people who have been cut off from the heritage of the west due to their education or background or through complete disinterest. The Eastern Rite can be for them a great discovery of faith and the joy of worshipping in a traditional and rooted way. I don't see why we can't use both Rites to grow parishes.
For instance, why can't a parish be planted with two services available, one Eastern Rite and one Western Rite with both done with the greatest amount of excellence possible?
Doing such a thing would be casting the widest possible net.
Many times as Orthodox Christians we limit ourselves unnecessarily.
At any rate, I need to be humble and open to whatever God is trying to teach me personally about this subject. If the Western Rite is truly wrong, I would hope that the entire Orthodox Church would convene a church council of some sort to come to a resolution about it.
I took my family for a visit to an OCA Eastern Rite parish last Sunday to try and make some contacts for dreams of an Orthodox mission in Parker. This dream and hope was the original idea behind my small blog. I found the Eastern Rite that was practiced there to be uplifting and holy.
But I still love the Western Rite and hope to see God work through it as well.
Sincerely in the Blessed, Kind, Merciful and Holy Trinity,
Columba Silouan
Columba Silouan, you wrote:"It's high time for the Eastern Orthodox Church as a whole to broaden their view of reaching out to Anglicans."
Please define what you mean by, "reaching out"?
Also, include the rudder index to each canon you may specify, as well as to which rudder you are using.
I am unfamiliar with such a canon or an economia made on behalf of the Orthodox Church, please, exemplify what you mean to demonstrate by Church Law.
The Great Schism was a terrible tragedy, not just a crime committed by the Roman Catholic Church. The Protestant Reformation was also a great tragedy.
I'm sure God has grieved the consequences that millions of innocent Christians suffered from these two events.
We can have a larger view of Orthodox cultural engagement without compromising our beliefs. Our God is big enough to handle it if we adopt such a perspective.
You may win converts and deny them their heritage, but that will make for converts who are saddened at their very core by the loss of that heritage. And that sadness is an unnecessary burden in a world that already saddles us with many a burden.
I believe that BOTH rites are necessary to have a healthy Orthodox Church in America. There are many people who have been cut off from the heritage of the west due to their education or background or through complete disinterest. The Eastern Rite can be for them a great discovery of faith and the joy of worshipping in a traditional and rooted way. I don't see why we can't use both Rites to grow parishes.
For instance, why can't a parish be planted with two services available, one Eastern Rite and one Western Rite with both done with the greatest amount of excellence possible?
Doing such a thing would be casting the widest possible net.
Many times as Orthodox Christians we limit ourselves unnecessarily.
At any rate, I need to be humble and open to whatever God is trying to teach me personally about this subject. If the Western Rite is truly wrong, I would hope that the entire Orthodox Church would convene a church council of some sort to come to a resolution about it.
I took my family for a visit to an OCA Eastern Rite parish last Sunday to try and make some contacts for dreams of an Orthodox mission in Parker. This dream and hope was the original idea behind my small blog. I found the Eastern Rite that was practiced there to be uplifting and holy.
But I still love the Western Rite and hope to see God work through it as well.
Sincerely in the Blessed, Kind, Merciful and Holy Trinity,
Columba Silouan
Brother Jonathan then wrote the following:
Columba Silouan, you wrote:"It's high time for the Eastern Orthodox Church as a whole to broaden their view of reaching out to Anglicans."
Please define what you mean by, "reaching out"?
Also, include the rudder index to each canon you may specify, as well as to which rudder you are using.
I am unfamiliar with such a canon or an economia made on behalf of the Orthodox Church, please, exemplify what you mean to demonstrate by Church Law.
Columba, my main suspicion about Western Rite Orthodoxy is that it is not organic. Tradition is not something that can be invented anew. Think of it as the life-force of a tree or a vine: you can graft branches onto the tree, but it depends how long the branch has been severed. If the branch still has life in it, it will continue to grow after being grafted, but if it has long since died and dried out, it will not come back to life. The West has been cut off from the life-giving Tree of the Church for a thousand years. Its ancient rites are like dried out branches, which have lost the life of unbroken Tradition, while the post-Schism rites never had life to begin with.
If converts are unwilling to accept that, that means they have not accepted that hitherto they have not been practicing true Orthodox Christianity, but a heretical pseudo-Christianity, which means they are still not fully converted.Reply0Jonathan· 1 hour agoAnd no, the Orthodox do NOT believe that the 'holiest' of the Catholics and Protestants (whatever 'holy' is supposed to mean outside the Church) 'knew' God or 'walked with' God.
This doesn't mean everything they wrote was worthless, but if they happened to write something compatible with our Faith, that does not take away from the fact that they were heretics and not part of the Church. Their ultimate fates are in God's hands, but we cannot use them to say it's possible to be saved outside the Church, which goes clear against Orthodox teaching. It's like saying that it's fine to be a pagan because many pagan Greek philosophers happened to say wise things despite their spiritual darkness.
To which I responded thusly:
Hello again, brothers and sisters.
As far as referring to The Rudder and The Canons goes about this subject, all I have to say in response is that our Holy Orthodox Church is already in violation of some of the canons and especially when it comes to multiple Orthodox jurisdictions in the United States, which is a far more serious matter than how we set up a structure for converts from Anglicanism.
And the Western Rite isn't just an outreach to Anglicans, either. I was a Baptist before I converted to Anglicanism and then later to Holy Orthodoxy. Some of the music in our Hymns at Saint Marks was even sung by the baptist churches I was a part of.
Western Rite Orthodoxy can appeal to Anglicans, Lutherans, Methodists, Presbyterians and even Baptists. That's why I believe it's a good thing.
Okay, Orthodoxy OFFICIALLY might not state that people such as C.S. Lewis, J.R.R. Tolkein, or for that matter, Corrie Ten Boom and Mother Theresa of Calcutta knew God, but most Orthodox people know better than that. We might not think these heterodox christians knew Him as well as they should, but it is an extremely strange view of GOD to hold that only those Christians who have the blessing of being within The Church truly know God. Even Jesus told those who were offficially "IN" the ancient Jewish "church" that they DIDN'T know him. I'm talking about the Scribes and Pharisees, folks, who were "Officially" spotless but inwardly were wolves that Christ didn't recognize as being His.
I'm sure Jesus hasn't changed in the past 2,000 years in these matters.
Even our Holy Monks hope that all people may one day be saved. That speaks to me of a very generous attitude on the part of our Lord. Now, I do think some people will be lost, but one thing I love about Orthodoxy is the hope that the majority of all people God has created might be saved in the end. I found Protestantism pretty negative in that regard where most people would be lost in the end.
Again, with the formula that I was taught as a Catechumen, you can't state with certainty that the people I've mentioned here were not imperfectly a part of The Church, even if they were outside it's visible boundaries. Even the Roman Catholic Church isn't so narrow about this issue.
As far as referring to The Rudder and The Canons goes about this subject, all I have to say in response is that our Holy Orthodox Church is already in violation of some of the canons and especially when it comes to multiple Orthodox jurisdictions in the United States, which is a far more serious matter than how we set up a structure for converts from Anglicanism.
And the Western Rite isn't just an outreach to Anglicans, either. I was a Baptist before I converted to Anglicanism and then later to Holy Orthodoxy. Some of the music in our Hymns at Saint Marks was even sung by the baptist churches I was a part of.
Western Rite Orthodoxy can appeal to Anglicans, Lutherans, Methodists, Presbyterians and even Baptists. That's why I believe it's a good thing.
Okay, Orthodoxy OFFICIALLY might not state that people such as C.S. Lewis, J.R.R. Tolkein, or for that matter, Corrie Ten Boom and Mother Theresa of Calcutta knew God, but most Orthodox people know better than that. We might not think these heterodox christians knew Him as well as they should, but it is an extremely strange view of GOD to hold that only those Christians who have the blessing of being within The Church truly know God. Even Jesus told those who were offficially "IN" the ancient Jewish "church" that they DIDN'T know him. I'm talking about the Scribes and Pharisees, folks, who were "Officially" spotless but inwardly were wolves that Christ didn't recognize as being His.
I'm sure Jesus hasn't changed in the past 2,000 years in these matters.
Even our Holy Monks hope that all people may one day be saved. That speaks to me of a very generous attitude on the part of our Lord. Now, I do think some people will be lost, but one thing I love about Orthodoxy is the hope that the majority of all people God has created might be saved in the end. I found Protestantism pretty negative in that regard where most people would be lost in the end.
Again, with the formula that I was taught as a Catechumen, you can't state with certainty that the people I've mentioned here were not imperfectly a part of The Church, even if they were outside it's visible boundaries. Even the Roman Catholic Church isn't so narrow about this issue.
Jesus said to us that "we will know them by their fruit." He also told His Disciples that "Everyone who is not against us is for us."
I will say in conclusion that I don't accept all modern views about what Orthodoxy believes about these matters. One of my Orthodox textbooks I've read, The Mystery of Faith, posits the idea that the Fathers of the Church were less narrow in their views than we modern Orthodox are and have become about them.
Why does the heterodox Roman Catholic Church seem to have a more wholesome and generous attitude about these matters than some of us? We are the Church, they are short of the Church. But sometimes they do put us to shame with their liberality of spirit.
I learned some of these ways of thinking from the Greek Orthodox Church, not the Western Rite. I do think the Greeks are sometimes more open minded about these things. Sometimes some of them are too open minded. But I appreciate their warm and generous attitudes as well.
Saint Silouan the Athonite would probably emphasize more of God's love and compassion. This is in part why I adopted his name as one of my Orthodox names. He was a remarkable example of the love of Christ.
I adopted the other name, Columba, in honor of Saint Columba, who was a very flawed monk before he became a holy saint. So it is with me currently and a layperson who tries to repent in the "monastery" of my family, church and job, so I hope to become someday.
I'm looking forward to the first modern Western Rite saint being canonized. I think someday it will happen.
Sincerely in Christ,
Columba
I will say in conclusion that I don't accept all modern views about what Orthodoxy believes about these matters. One of my Orthodox textbooks I've read, The Mystery of Faith, posits the idea that the Fathers of the Church were less narrow in their views than we modern Orthodox are and have become about them.
Why does the heterodox Roman Catholic Church seem to have a more wholesome and generous attitude about these matters than some of us? We are the Church, they are short of the Church. But sometimes they do put us to shame with their liberality of spirit.
I learned some of these ways of thinking from the Greek Orthodox Church, not the Western Rite. I do think the Greeks are sometimes more open minded about these things. Sometimes some of them are too open minded. But I appreciate their warm and generous attitudes as well.
Saint Silouan the Athonite would probably emphasize more of God's love and compassion. This is in part why I adopted his name as one of my Orthodox names. He was a remarkable example of the love of Christ.
I adopted the other name, Columba, in honor of Saint Columba, who was a very flawed monk before he became a holy saint. So it is with me currently and a layperson who tries to repent in the "monastery" of my family, church and job, so I hope to become someday.
I'm looking forward to the first modern Western Rite saint being canonized. I think someday it will happen.
Sincerely in Christ,
Columba
No comments:
Post a Comment