Posted on 04/19/2006 10:16:30 AM PDT by x5452
We need to both return to the sources of our faith, considering that Latin and Byzantine Christianity always were different. I don't think there really was a time when they weren't from whe I have been able to discern.
THe faith was the same, the practice always differed but there was a time the faith was the same. When the councils we accepted were the same, and when folks did not selectively take portions of councils as valid, and portions as invalid.
In my original post, I agreed that such practical strategic alliances were a good thing. I of course believe that any talk of intercommunion is extremely premature.
My real point was that Metr. Hilarion shouldn't overestimate the level of practical support such ideas would get within a largely liberal Catholic laity and clergy, at least in America.
And of course, as has been pointed out, we Orthodox are not without our problem children ourselves (Dukakis, etc...), although I think that our laity and clergy as a whole in America are far more traditional than are the Catholic laity and clergy.
Tih'on of San Fransico comes to mind...
Well, I must confess to still being fond of that old curmudgeon, for many reasons. He has, though, been acting and talking strangely lately.
Recent event actually are most of what I know of him.
It seems to me its the Catholics who disagree about Chalcedon.
Bp. Tikhon inherited a Diocese of the West that had been in great liturgical disorder. Sort of an "every man did what was right in his own eyes" kind of situation, to hear the tales from the olden days.
Through sheer force of will and determination, he turned that around completely, and today, the DOW is probably the place with the soundest liturgical life in the OCA. His knowledge of the Typikon and service books is legendary, and he has inspired an entire generation of priests, deacons, readers, choir directors, etc... to strive for excellence in this regard.
The effect that a stable and traditional liturgical life has on healthy parish life is profound.
As for me, I guess I'd rather have a bishop who has goofy political ideas like thinking that Jimmy Carter was a great president, but who is sound theologically and liturgically, than one who supports Bush (as I do), but who is goofy liturgically and theologically...
I'll remain loyal to him until he gives me something that outweighs all of the good he has done.
Seriously:
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03555a.htm
They disagree much over the authenticity and the canons, like man councils Rome accepts they ignore ome canons basically saying it was only the greeks who wanted those so it doesn't apply to us.
What I have found bad is the way both Ti'hon and Herman seem intent to fight a battle over the OCA financial problems in the press using harsh and very public rhetoric, and publishing in the press letters which specifically state they should not be given to the press or non-clergy.
This public arguing has made the OCA look very chaotic and childish especially to the churches abroad.
The OCA should get togethr have a meeting without involving the media, and try to do what the Holy Spirit moves them to so as to fix the present situation.
I totally agree. Airing this in public in this fashion is unseemly, and unbecoming. I find it very distasteful and embarrassing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.