Orthodoxy makes the most sence. protestantism is just man made division. the question is latin or eastern Church?

  • Thread starter Thread starter excaliber
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Could we all drop this “you can’t REALLY be Orthodox and speak English/some other not Greek-Russian-Arabic language” nonsense? It’s embarrassing. I was raised Presbyterian, but I grew up speaking English and Spanish, not Scottish Gaelic or whatever! There are Orthodox Christians in plenty of not traditionally “Orthodox” areas, like Mexico, Chile, Bolivia, Brazil, etc.

While their founders are generally immigrants, a large and increasing number of their parishioners are not. In other words, they’re not all that different than most Catholic Churches, just newer in the “new world” than most Catholic Churches are.
Apparently Marvel and DC comics attribute religion to their characters based on their ethnic background. Clearly this applies to real life as well.

I personally follow a syncretic blend of the Anglican, Presbyterian, and Catholic religion. 😉
 
We are speaking Liturgy appart from the outside cultures. If you attend an Orthodox Church, does your liturgy practice in the original Language and culture from its origin? Or does Orothodoxy make a false claim to being Orthodox by celebrating her Liturgy in a foreign tongue such as English, Spanish, German, Italian, Polish etc. Help us out here?
So by that logic it isn’t true Catholicism if it isn’t in Latin?
 
QUOTE=Nine_Two;6452988]So by that logic it isn’t true Catholicism if it isn’t in Latin?
No, I will never think of such a thing, nor does the Latin Rite think in such a way. This thinking comes from Orthodoxy. I am just calling it to the front. Orthodoxy prides herself from her Orthodox Liturgy in Language and culture. To me it is not significant, in what language or culture God hears his Children say “I love you” from a valid liturgy.
 
Apparently Marvel and DC comics attribute religion to their characters based on their ethnic background. Clearly this applies to real life as well.

I personally follow a syncretic blend of the Anglican, Presbyterian, and Catholic religion. 😉
There is a difference between comics and real life.
 
I find the personal lived out faith witnessed here more interesting than facts and figures, although we are never in short supply of these. I write from experience, do you have more to add to my experience? That I can learn from? Please feel free to correct me if I missed something?
Sure. I’m born and raised American, a generic Euro-mutt who speaks English (and some Spanish). I’ve been to a handful of Orthodox parishes in different parts of the country, and not once did I feel like I had to trade my culture for another one. Everyone has been extremely welcoming, and only once was the service in anything other than 100% English (it was about 50% Greek with a book for those who didn’t speak it).
 
We are speaking Liturgy appart from the outside cultures. If you attend an Orthodox Church, does your liturgy practice in the original Language and culture from its origin? Or does Orothodoxy make a false claim to being Orthodox by celebrating her Liturgy in a foreign tongue such as English, Spanish, German, Italian, Polish etc. Help us out here?
You sound to me like you are trying too hard.

How has it come to this?
 
No, I will never think of such a thing, nor does the Latin Rite think in such a way. This thinking comes from Orthodoxy. I am just calling it to the front. Orthodoxy prides herself from her Orthodox Liturgy in Language and culture. To me it is not significant, in what language or culture God hears his Children say “I love you” from a valid liturgy.
Orthodoxy has no such belief. I don’t know how you got it in your head that it does.
 
QUOTE=Nine_Two;6454618]Orthodoxy has no such belief. I don’t know how you got it in your head that it does.
SURPRISED; then how much do you know of Orthodoxy?
 
SURPRISED; then how much do you know of Orthodoxy?
I’m just a member, who has communed with Churches under multiple juristictions, including that of the Ecumenical Patriarch, in a service that contained a significant amount of English.

How about you answer my question properly, and tell me where you get your facts. Or am I to assume you are a troll, and report you as such?
 
QUOTE=Nine_Two;6454982]I’m just a member, who has communed with Churches under multiple juristictions, including that of the Ecumenical Patriarch, in a service that contained a significant amount of English.
How about you answer my question properly, and tell me where you get your facts. Or am I to assume you are a troll, and report you as such?
I find it difficult to answer a western Orthodox with an Eastern Orthodox mindset who would never waver his faith to a foreign language in his liturgy? How is this possible? Maybe that is why Orthodoxy does what ever it wants too, when it does not have Peter to recall their Apostolic origin. I am inviiting pure Orthodox Catholics to this forum, I don’t think they would disagree with what Iam saying here?

Peace be with you
 
I find it difficult to answer a western Orthodox with an Eastern Orthodox mindset who would never waver his faith to a foreign language in his liturgy? How is this possible? Maybe that is why Orthodoxy does what ever it wants too, when it does not have Peter to recall their Apostolic origin. I am inviiting pure Orthodox Catholics to this forum, I don’t think they would disagree with what Iam saying here?

Peace be with you
Your posts are confusing. In the same way that Roman Catholic liturgies are not all in Latin, Orthodox liturgies are not all in Greek/Arabic/Slavonic/etc. You do realize that the Eastern Catholic churches do the same thing, where some parishes may have liturgies in all Arabic/Slavonic/Ukrainian/etc., while others may have English liturgies (or whatever the vernacular is). As far as Orthodoxy goes, I have been to Russian Orthodox and Orthodox Church in America parishes that have English liturgies, and they are no less “Orthodox” than the Slavonic liturgy that may be later in the day. Similarly, some Roman Catholic parishes that I have attended have an Extraordinary Form Mass (obviously in Latin), an English Mass, a Spanish Mass, and/or a Creole Mass. So, your post isn’t making any sense at all.

Can you cite a source for this understanding of Orthodoxy you have? From what I have read and experienced, Orthodoxy prides itself on having liturgies in the language of the people, which is why many immigrant parishes have services in the “mother language”, which is no different than the Creole Mass or Spanish Catholic parish in my neighborhood.
 
I find it difficult to answer a western Orthodox with an Eastern Orthodox mindset who would never waver his faith to a foreign language in his liturgy? How is this possible? Maybe that is why Orthodoxy does what ever it wants too, when it does not have Peter to recall their Apostolic origin. I am inviiting pure Orthodox Catholics to this forum, I don’t think they would disagree with what Iam saying here?

Peace be with you
What are you talking about? The language of the liturgy has nothing to do with the faith. We do the same thing as you Latins or the Eastern Catholics presently do, except we have always done it this way, which is more than can be said of the Latin church. Central authority and “doing whatever we want” have nothing to do with it.

So either give your sources that the liturgy can’t be done in a language other than Koine (Old Church Slavonic being allowed makes no sense as it wasn’t used liturgically until the 9th century, well after the faith was established), or admit you’re just a troll looking to libel the Church.
 
What are you talking about? The language of the liturgy has nothing to do with the faith. We do the same thing as you Latins or the Eastern Catholics presently do, except we have always done it this way, which is more than can be said of the Latin church. Central authority and “doing whatever we want” have nothing to do with it.

So either give your sources that the liturgy can’t be done in a language other than Koine (Old Church Slavonic being allowed makes no sense as it wasn’t used liturgically until the 9th century, well after the faith was established), or admit you’re just a troll looking to libel the Church.
Calm down! It could be that he is simply misinformed. Fraternal correction does not include knee-jerk accusations.
 
Calm down! It could be that he is simply misinformed. Fraternal correction does not include knee-jerk accusations.
One who is misinformed on a topic he might not know about does not reply “You don’t know much about…” to someone who is demonstratably more familiar with the topic at hand when asked where he got the information. However giving him the benifit of the doubt I have asked him where he got this information from three times now. If he can neither admit he may have been misinformed nor give reference to what has mislead him than the only alternative is that he is libelling the Faith for his own purpose, and is a troll.
 
Actually from what I have read about your two examples thus far, most of the information available about them seems to have come from them and the source of their provocative points are widely available.
You made the following negative remark:My response was to explain why there is likely to be little information available when a Catholic monk or clergy converts to Orthodoxy. This was in contrast to the examples you gave of Catholics who had become Protestant and Muslim respectively, so I fail to see why you have a problem with that.
Your first point was the following
:

Would you expect a Franciscan monastery to publish details of any of their brotherhood, let alone one who left their flock?
  • I pointed out Catholic priests who left the priesthood and Catholicism. There’s no secret there. You asked a general question and I gave you a general answer. Namely priests who left.
  • Next, I said if I showed Orthodox priests who left to become Catholics how would that advance the conversation? You KNOW there are Orthodox priests who have become Catholic. But how does it advance this discussion
p:
While we’re at it, perhaps you could explain how your above remark advances the conversation, since you have assumed the role of judge and critic 🤷

John
You mean regarding the East West issue of free press and how the free flow of information differs dramatically between the two?
 
Free press is hardly a religious belief, and if it is to be coupled with religion it would be protestantism, not Catholicism.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top