Question...

[choirfiend]

"breaking of the Church into twain"

It is this portion that I distinctly remember reading on an Orthodox website, which was not written by you.

You are mistaken, and I'm rather insulted by the implication that I am both a liar and a plagarizer. Have I ever failed to note what I have not written in the past when people attempted to give me credit for it?

Oh well. It's obviously all a conspiracy.

 

[rusmeister]

I'm sorry if I have contributed to that.

kamikat

No, least of all you! I didn't mean that, although I see how it could've been taken that way.
I just hope we find the Spirit of unity and love, affirming our Faith in love. I'm battle-weary right now.

 

[Vedant]

I'm glad I went to bed before posting out of anger.

Basically, why did I learn that the Orthodox church is the one true church? Apostolic succession. That was the most valuable thing I learned, because through the sacrament of Holy Orders, discerning which church is more true got easier...all the oldschool churches, Oriental Orthodox, Eastern Orthodox, and the Catholic church are ones that in my belief have valid apostolic succession. Michael the Iconographer told me that the Roman Catholic church no longer has valid apostolic succession, but I don't believe that. If you can intelligibly explain why you don't believe they have valid apostolic succession, that would help me more than saying that I'm wrong. I'm neither Catholic nor Orthodox.

In the Catholic forum I haven't gotten the same response that I got here. They recognize your church as equally apostolic and valid in the Eastern approach to theology, in general, but that Catholics and Orthodoxy are in a state of schism.

Eastern Catholics in my belief are very similar to Eastern Orthodoxy say for a few big things like papal infallibility, primacy, supremacy, lack of relative moral discernment in deciding what actions to take (such as with birth control between married people). The latest discovery is the annulment of marriage thing. All of these things bother me about Catholics, trust me. The dogmas of Mary? Right now I don't really believe any of them.

Finally, someone did say I would have to make a "painful" choice between the two. Where I am right now, I can't say that Orthodoxy is complete without Rome, nor is Rome complete without Orthodoxy. That is where I am right now, but that could of course change. Yes, I'll choose one or the other, but choosing one doesn't mean disregarding the other, only recognizing which church is the most valid for me.

There has been no other schism in Orthodoxy for 1,000 years, there has been no protestant movement away from Orthodoxy in recent times, and it could be thought of that the first protestant church was the Roman Catholic church, and not the Lutherans.

I don't think talking about Rome will get any progress, but in the same way that Orthodoxy taught me a great deal about Catholicism, perhaps Oriental Orthodoxy could teach me more about Eastern Orthodoxy?

So here is a question. Why is Eastern Orthodoxy the one true church as opposed to Oriental Orthodoxy? Or perhaps I'm asking this question incorrectly or obliviously?

 

[Vedant]

Totally unrelated...I opened a package of food my mom made me...on the top there's a sticker...St. Peter and Paul Orthodox church...what a coincidence lol.

 

[kamikat]

Michael the Iconographer told me that the Roman Catholic church no longer has valid apostolic succession, but I don't believe that. If you can intelligibly explain why you don't believe they have valid apostolic succession, that would help me more than saying that I'm wrong.

They no longer have valid Apostolic Succession because they do not teach the same doctrines that were handed down from the Apostles. Apostolic Succession is MORE than just being able to name your predecessors back to an Apostle. The Anglicans claim to have Apostolic Succession, but once they started allowing female ministers and gay ministers, they lost the right to claim valid succession. Once the Catholic Church officially endorsed the concept of Holy Spirit proceding from the Father and the Son, they changed the nature of the Godhead/Trinity. This means they are no longer teaching or practicing the faith that the Apostles handed down.

In the Catholic forum I haven't gotten the same response that I got here. They recognize your church as equally apostolic and valid in the Eastern approach to theology, in general, but that Catholics and Orthodoxy are in a state of schism.

My guess, as a former Catholic, is because they understand that Orthodoxy is the same faith today as it was 1,000 years ago. It has not changed. No one denies that. They have come to believe that the faith that the Apostles taught was not complete and that dogma is continually being revealed, this is why the dogmas of the Immaculate Conception and Papal infallibilty were adopted later in history.

So here is a question. Why is Eastern Orthodoxy the one true church as opposed to Oriental Orthodoxy? Or perhaps I'm asking this question incorrectly or obliviously?

I have very little info on this, but I believe they broke off because of a dogma about the nature of Christ. I believe the dogma is called Monophysitism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monophysite
However, I believe many Oriental Orthodox churches claim to not be Monophysite.
http://cdsp.edu/~mgrau/courses/hsst2189/studweb/WebsitesFall02/welcha/index.html

kamikat

 

[Vedant]

They no longer have valid Apostolic Succession because they do not teach the same doctrines that were handed down from the Apostles. Apostolic Succession is MORE than just being able to name your predecessors back to an Apostle. The Anglicans claim to have Apostolic Succession, but once they started allowing female ministers and gay ministers, they lost the right to claim valid succession. Once the Catholic Church officially endorsed the concept of Holy Spirit proceding from the Father and the Son, they changed the nature of the Godhead/Trinity. This means they are no longer teaching or practicing the faith that the Apostles handed down.




My guess, as a former Catholic, is because they understand that Orthodoxy is the same faith today as it was 1,000 years ago. It has not changed. No one denies that. They have come to believe that the faith that the Apostles taught was not complete and that dogma is continually being revealed, this is why the dogmas of the Immaculate Conception and Papal infallibilty were adopted later in history.


I have very little info on this, but I believe they broke off because of a dogma about the nature of Christ. I believe the dogma is called Monophysitism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monophysite
However, I believe many Oriental Orthodox churches claim to not be Monophysite.
http://cdsp.edu/~mgrau/courses/hsst2189/studweb/WebsitesFall02/welcha/index.html

kamikat

Ahhhh, okay. It would also be fair to say, in the Orthodox sense of apostolic succession, that only an ecumenical council could enhance theology to address current challenges/heresies, correct?

 

[Vedant]

Also, from the Eastern Orthodox perspective, do the Oriental Orthodox have valid apostolic succession? If so, why/how is this different from not recognizing Rome's apostolic succesion?

 

[MariaRegina]

You are mistaken, and I'm rather insulted by the implication that I am both a liar and a plagarizer. Have I ever failed to note what I have not written in the past when people attempted to give me credit for it?

Oh well. It's obviously all a conspiracy.

Yes, and I distinctly remember that you sometimes failed to cite your references in a hurry to post, and had to go back to acknowledge your sources.

"breaking of the Church into twain"

It is this portion that I distinctly remember reading on an Orthodox website, which was not written by you.

No, it is not a conspiracy and I am not accusing you of either. In other cultures (not the English law system) people use the quotes of others and they quickly become idiomatic and free use actually honors the original inventor of that phrase.

In God-centered cultures (again not the English system), it may well be that phrases are attributed to God and the Holy Spirit as He gives us breath, and so ultimately God is given the credit not the first 'human' author of these expressions, but we in the West are so greedy for money. So, yes there is an anti-God conspiracy of sorts in our secular humanistic western society.

Since I am being prepared at the graduate level for writing a thesis and a dissertation, it is required that we give credit for all clauses we use in a very strict accounting. And that small clause you used has been published both in print and on the internet, but I guess you weren't aware of that fact.

If you had submitted that clause as part of a dissertation or thesis you probably would have lost your defense of your scholastic paper. Even a paraphrase of an original idea (not the exact quote) without an acknowledgement of the original source can be the basis for denying a thesis, dissertation, research paper, or college textbook.

CF tells us to also be careful because of copyright violations. Thankfully, religious editors aren't usually as strict as authors who write books such as The DaVinci Code where there was recently such a lawsuit.

With our litigious greedy society, we must be so very careful.

 

[Prisca2006]

Hey Guys--

Well, to the origial poster, this is the belief I have encountered w/ in the church in terms of your question:

On the eve of a major feast day and on Saturday evenings (when the Vigil to the Resurrection of Christ is celebrated each week), Orthodox Christian husbands and wives abstain from sexual relations in order that they can direct all their thoughts, actions and concerns to spiritual growth and not be occupied with non-spiritual matters. The Christian Church does not view sexual relations between husband and wife as a base act brought about by the sin of Adam and Eve for the sole purpose of conceiving children. The abstention from physical relations at these and other times is not motivated by a mentality that views these relations as unclean or sinful. The Church Council of Gangra held in 340 A.D. decreed four canons which uphold the respectability of the marriage bed.

Canon One states:

If anyone disparages marriage, or abominates or disparages a woman sleeping with her husband, notwithstanding that she is faithful and reverent, as though she could not enter the Kingdom, let him be anathema. [42]

​

Canon Nine states:

If anyone should remain a virgin or observe continence as if, abominating marriage, he had become an anchorite, and not for the good standard and holy feature of virginity, let him be anathema. [43]

​

Canon Ten states:

If anyone leading a life of virginity for the Lord should regard married persons superciliously, let him be anathema. [44]

​

Canon Fourteen states:

If any woman should abandon her husband and wish to depart, because she abominates marriage, let her be anathema. [45]

​

The abstention from sexual relations is for the sake of spiritual matters and preparation. This reasoning is as old as the Church itself, since St. Paul in his letter to the Corinthians (1 Cor. 7:5) indicates that husband and wife should not refuse each other except for times when they devote themselves to prayer.
-http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/praxis/xc_home.aspx

I haven't found or heard much else on the "specifics" except that everything must be done in love w/in the marriage act. I wont be explicit, but there are some sexual practices that are just not "loving." Anyway, I hope this thread remains peaceful and loving. I think this is a good question!

 

[choirfiend]

Yes, and I distinctly remember that you sometimes failed to cite your references in a hurry to post, and had to go back to acknowledge your sources.

No, it is not a conspiracy and I am not accusing you of either. In other cultures (not the English law system) people use the quotes of others and they quickly become idiomatic and free use actually honors the original inventor of that phrase.

In God-centered cultures (again not the English system), it may well be that phrases are attributed to God and the Holy Spirit as He gives us breath, and so ultimately God is given the credit not the first 'human' author of these expressions, but we in the West are so greedy for money. So, yes there is an anti-God conspiracy of sorts in our secular humanistic western society.

Since I am being prepared at the graduate level for writing a thesis and a dissertation, it is required that we give credit for all clauses we use in a very strict accounting. And that small clause you used has been published both in print and on the internet, but I guess you weren't aware of that fact.

If you had submitted that clause as part of a dissertation or thesis you probably would have lost your defense of your scholastic paper. Even a paraphrase of an original idea (not the exact quote) without an acknowledgement of the original source can be the basis for denying a thesis, dissertation, research paper, or college textbook.

CF tells us to also be careful because of copyright violations. Thankfully, religious editors aren't usually as strict as authors who write books such as The DaVinci Code where there was recently such a lawsuit.

With our litigious greedy society, we must be so very careful.

I have never failed to inform others that something is not my writing when others have credied me with it. You are wrong on that account as well. Your memory otherwise serves you well, as you are assuredly recalling how I do inform others that what I posted was not my work when they think it is eeven if I don't have a source to credit (though I may think it quite obvious, being in article format.)

Aria, its not even a partial quote of anything, or a clause taken from anywhere--It's quite completely original out of my head, whether or not anyone else has ever put those same words together in that particular order before.

We just spent 7 weeks doing St. Basils. My priest's service book, referencing the Cherubim, says, "With twain they cover their faces, with twain they cover their feet, and with twain they fly." I had a conversation with a fellow church-goer last week about the useage of the word twain, being archaic, when she would prefer the more simple "two." I've got twain on the brain.

So thanks for your dissertation, and your knowledge, and your authoritative commanding post which is very obviously helpful, concise, and totally relevant.

Unfortunately, it has nothing to do with what I wrote or this thread. So drop it.

 

[choirfiend]

PS. Please note how I place words that are not my own within quotation marks, wether or not I have anything more concrete to reference (aka the priest's service book).

 

[MariaRegina]

Hey Guys--

Well, to the origial poster, this is the belief I have encountered w/ in the church in terms of your question:

On the eve of a major feast day and on Saturday evenings (when the Vigil to the Resurrection of Christ is celebrated each week), Orthodox Christian husbands and wives abstain from sexual relations in order that they can direct all their thoughts, actions and concerns to spiritual growth and not be occupied with non-spiritual matters. The Christian Church does not view sexual relations between husband and wife as a base act brought about by the sin of Adam and Eve for the sole purpose of conceiving children. The abstention from physical relations at these and other times is not motivated by a mentality that views these relations as unclean or sinful. The Church Council of Gangra held in 340 A.D. decreed four canons which uphold the respectability of the marriage bed.

Canon One states:

If anyone disparages marriage, or abominates or disparages a woman sleeping with her husband, notwithstanding that she is faithful and reverent, as though she could not enter the Kingdom, let him be anathema. [42]

​

Canon Nine states:

If anyone should remain a virgin or observe continence as if, abominating marriage, he had become an anchorite, and not for the good standard and holy feature of virginity, let him be anathema. [43]

​

Canon Ten states:

If anyone leading a life of virginity for the Lord should regard married persons superciliously, let him be anathema. [44]

​

Canon Fourteen states:

If any woman should abandon her husband and wish to depart, because she abominates marriage, let her be anathema. [45]

​

The abstention from sexual relations is for the sake of spiritual matters and preparation. This reasoning is as old as the Church itself, since St. Paul in his letter to the Corinthians (1 Cor. 7:5) indicates that husband and wife should not refuse each other except for times when they devote themselves to prayer.
-http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/praxis/xc_home.aspx

I haven't found or heard much else on the "specifics" except that everything must be done in love w/in the marriage act. I wont be explicit, but there are some sexual practices that are just not "loving." Anyway, I hope this thread remains peaceful and loving. I think this is a good question!

posting this on a new page to resume the OP topic

 

[jckstraw72]

Aria and Choifiend--i have a good plan for the twain of you:

Aria--you post "Christ is Risen!"
Choirfiend--you respond with "Indeed He is Risen!" in the same language or even in another language perchance for some fun.

 

[choirfiend]

Kharistosu Fukkastu!

Mwahahahah Nihongo!

 

[jckstraw72]

umm excuse me Choifiend, but you reversed the appointed order. Aria first hot dangit!

 

[MariaRegina]

To: aintway onay ethay ainbray

Christ is Risen
Indeed He is Risen.

 

[Akathist]

Mod Hat On

Members are reminded of the following rule:
2.2 b. The Congregation subforums only allow debate between people belonging to the Congregation - others can only post fellowship and ask questions.

Up to this point staff have addressed violation(s) of this rule. Please do not report previous posts to this mod hat for violation of this rule.​