Comments Posted By Dean Calvert
Displaying 1 To 30 Of 39 Comments
I can confirm everything Cal Oren has just said.
While I personally do not agree with the statements that were posted, I consider the way this entire matter (ie the removing of the posts) was handled by OCL to be abhorrent and completely at odds with the stated purpose of the OCL website and Forum.
Is it possible to be disappointed, but not surprised?
Finally, I can attest to Joel’s commitment and dedication. It was a pleasure to serve with Joel, Cal, Ken and Deacon David. Any disparaging remarks about ANY of the above gentlemen should be disregarded as simply ignorant. We need more like them all.
» Posted By Dean Calvert On October 5, 2012 @ 10:57 am
Yeah..you are absolutely right. I’d much rather be abused by those openly gay Greek metropolitans, with their unvarnished “legitimacy”, derived straight from that See with no people, than these terrible OCA hierarchs.
Give me a break. On their WORST DAY, I’ll still take the OCA, with all it’s warts, over those bozos.
Ten Years ago I was told by one of your “top lay leaders” at a Clergy Laity Congress, “Look up at that dais and tell me, which one of those CLOWNS would you like to have as your next archbishop.” Those were his exact words used to describe your bishops…CLOWNS.
The OCA has no monopoly on bad bishops. I’ll bet if we go back into the history books, we could even find a few (dozen) crooked Ecumenical Patriarchs.
What the OCA HAS (and the GOA and AOCA do NOT have) is the ability to fix the situation.
As far as “time for parishes to start looking at how they can transition to other jurisdictions” – in your dreams.
» Posted By Dean Calvert On September 1, 2012 @ 1:02 pm
Yeah…I’ll call Fr. Mark Arey the next time I want to find out what is going on in the American church.
The guy representing a synod in a Turkish country composed of bishops from dioceses with no people, and who conducts liturgy in a language that hasn’t been spoken in 1000 years.
Give me a break.
The metropolitan is in my prayers daily. Personally, I’m convinced there’s a lot more going on here than meets the eye.
I’m also optimistic because it seems the synod of bishops is finally acting like a synod of bishops.
That’s a good thing in my view.
Nevertheless, the metropolitan remains in my prayers.
» Posted By Dean Calvert On July 10, 2012 @ 10:05 am
Re: must we forever cram the square peg of English words into the round holes of Slavonic and Greek music?
Well put. St Cyril said that any idiot could do a mechanical translation. the real genius is to convey the essence of the original, while also conveying the poetry, cadence and beauty of the original. I’m paraphrasing (with quite a bit of editorial license).
My hair still stands straight up when I hear “Christ is Risen” sung in english. I admitted to my (OCA) priest only last week, “Father, I don’t know Christ is Risen in English…each time I hear it, it’s a different version, so I just stopped singing it. On the other hand, I’m more than happy to join in on the Greek.”
Square peg in round holes…that’s EXACTLY what we’re doing…after 200 years. Shame on all of us for tolerating this travesty.
» Posted By Dean Calvert On May 4, 2012 @ 8:26 pm
Christos Anesti George!!! Kai tou chronou.
PS Thanks to Fr. Hans for bringing this back this year – the flashmob singing Christ is Risen at a lebanese mall:
» Posted By Dean Calvert On April 16, 2012 @ 10:57 pm
Kudos to Ted Kalmoukos for staying on top of this one.
» Posted By Dean Calvert On April 6, 2012 @ 7:55 pm
The list of “anti growth” policies of this administration are too long to list comprehensively, but must certainly include:
1.) devaluation of the US dollar
2.) looming multi-trillion dollar tax hikes (jan 2013)
3.) short term, one might say petulant, economic planning (cash for klunkers, payroll tax games)
4.) constant and incessant anti-business rhetoric (nonsensical Buffet rule etc)
5.) support a Federal Reserve policy of accommodating the voracious appetite of the US Treasury, resulting in the FED’s purchasing of 60% of the debt issued (unheard of in history)
6.) an energy policy which verges on schizophrenic (declining leases on Federal lands, Excel pipeline decision etc)
Forgive my bluntness, but I was a money manager for 20 years, with my own business, and studied the Fed as closely as anyone you are likely to ever meet. I left the field in 2001, (pre 911), because the valuation numbers were no longer making sense. By the way, I carried my love of history into the field, and as a result my money supply, interest rate, and economic database statistics go back well over 100 years (more than most banks).
We have had good and bad presidents on both sides of the aisle…this is not about partisanship.
Neither is this about “ordinary incompetence”..Jimmy Carter was simply incompetent. Gerald Ford was not far behind. The Republic can withstand that.
This is magnitudes worse. From an economics point of view, Klugman notwithstanding (to be honest, despite his nobel prize, he is not a particularly highly esteemed economist), the actions of this administration have placed the entire system in jeopardy…SERIOUS jeopardy. For example, the interest on the national debt is approximately $400 billion a year…with t-bill rates at 0.2% What happens when T-bill rates go back to the historical norm of 3.5% (50 year average)?
Here’s what happens..we have already witnessed it in Sweden, Iceland, Argentina, Mexico…all at various points in time. The currenty swoons, and domestic interest rates are forced up (in Iceland they ended up at 49%) to prevent a run on the currency…that’s what happens. Oh, and by the way, the sequel is that the parliament/congress meets, and settles all of these entitlement problems in an afternoon…BY CHOPPING THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS OUT OF ALL OF THEM. Go back and check the history…it happened in every country I’ve listed (1980′s thru 2010). It’s as predictable as the seasons.
All politics aside, this administration will be looked back upon as the American equivalent of Commodus and Nero – and we will be lucky to survive it’s mistakes.
Finally, for a very quick and easy to understand picture of what is really going on in the economy, simply listen to any of Kudlow’s weekly talkshows. He explains more in a couple hours, more clearly, lucidly actually, than the next 10 places I could direct you to.
This is NOT rocket science. The data and economic history proves that most of the policies pursued by this administration lead to ruin. Ronald Reagan understood it, and so did Bill Clinton.
» Posted By Dean Calvert On April 3, 2012 @ 7:49 pm
Just in from the WSJ this morning. Thought it might be instructive:
”At this point, the economy is 12% smaller than it would have been had we stayed on trend growth since 2007.”
Anyone who doesn’t understand who’s to blame for the current mess simply isn’t paying attention.
Oh…and then there’s this little exchange between Larry Kudlow and John Taylor (Hoover Institute, Stanford) last week at 1:18 Do you know what happens to an economy when you double the national debt, and then interest rates rise? Never heard the word “lethal” used before in an economics context.
Wake up people. You can blame “Bush” and the wars all you want. Was Bush (or the Congressional Republicans) a good economic steward? No.
But from an economics point of view, we are in a brand new game now..completely uncharted waters. This chart, of Monetary Base (Fed Res Bk of St Louis) shows everything you need to know. The raw material for money supply (ie the monetary base) has tripled in the past four years. This is not normal incompetence – this is Weimar Republic type stuff.
The bottom line is that the lack of growth caused by this president’s policies, in addition to the debt he has piled on, is quickly sinking this country.
“Lethal” may not be an exaggeration.
» Posted By Dean Calvert On April 3, 2012 @ 10:02 am
One of the comments that struck me years ago was made by one of the Profs at St Vladimir’s during an OCL conference hosted there. I forget who the professor was, but the comment really struck me..and is a corollary of the economic question you raise.
He suggested that Orthodox unity will come first in the smaller towns of America, Des Moines Iowa, Tucson Arizona, Grand Rapids Michigan….because in those places you have smaller churches which are struggling to survive…no one has reached that threshhold of size that you see in the major cities. As a result, they must cooperate out of necessity.
Unity would come last, he suggested, in the large urban areas, New York City, Chicago, etc….because in those places, the ethnic communities are large enough where they can essentially pretend to be in the Old Country…no cooperation with the other Orthodox is necessary.
I think the bottom line may be the same as you suggest: economics may drive us together as the separate jurisdictions begin to appreciate the horrendous cost of operating as they are today (rather than as a united church). Add to that the certainty of the increased needs which will soon be coming from the various Old Countries (C’nople and Antioch particularly) – and you may have a situation where finances become a motivating factor.
Can the private bequests of a few millionaires put off the day of reckoning??? I suppose. But ultimately economics, just as demographics (pointed out by Andrew), is on the side of Orthodox unity.
» Posted By Dean Calvert On January 18, 2012 @ 5:54 pm
If you stop and think about it, our Church grew up in an environment not unlike modern day America – think about it, a world with one superpower; one language was the lingua franca throughout the world; the nation was a commercial colossus; it was essentially a meritocracy, with an educated and literate laity. It’s currency was used throughout the world; and citizenship in that nation was far more important than ethnic or provincial ties. Even the persecution of Christians is not so far removed from today’s USA.
The point is, our Church adapted and thrived in that environment. As successors of the same – we possess all the tools we need to evangelize this country as well. All we really need to do is to get our act together (return to the traditional system of governance).
» Posted By Dean Calvert On January 18, 2012 @ 9:49 am
Gotta love this man…perhaps OCL should issue an invitation to the next meeting?
Dean Calvert (Calvert = Kalavrytinos – from Kalavryta)
» Posted By Dean Calvert On January 17, 2012 @ 3:13 pm
Very interesting article. Too bad it’s such an awful translation.
Example: What do they mean by “temples”?
Thanks in any case…had not heard this.
Honestly, I’ve always admired Patriarch Ilia.
» Posted By Dean Calvert On January 16, 2012 @ 10:12 pm
Pozdravlayoo c’novim godim!
I just posted this on AOI blog, but thought it was just as apropos here:
Note to Phanar:
Dead church…meet a LIVE church.
Strong letter to follow.
Seriously – I’ve been observing for some time now that the “fault line” in the Orthodox world was going to change from that of “Greek vs Slavic” to one of “Live vs Dead”. I think this episode is a great example of that. And the response was particularly telling: “When it’s important…simply ignore the Dead church.”
This story is interesting in that it marks a new threshhold for the Russian Church. During the past two years, the ROC has begun to consistently describe the Ecumenical Patriarch as simply “the Patriarch of Constantinople.” This began during the visit of the EP to Moscow (2010) which coincided with the First Assembly of Bishops here in the US, and has continued unabated since then. See for yourself at this http://www.mospat.ru/en/2011/12/26/news55463/ or any number of other stories on the MP website referring to Constantinople. There are no longer (or very few) references to “first among equals” or “His ALL Holiness the Ecumenical Patriarch”…it is now simply Patriarch of Constantinople…presumably the Greek equivalent to the Patriarch of Moscow.
This, however, marks a new step in the process. The Moscow patriarchate is now flexing it’s muscles, using it’s position as a “live” church and a serious organ of the Russian State, to weigh in on political issues anywhere in the Orthodox world.
The ancient patriarchates, who have lived for centuries on nothing but mythology, may want to reconsider their positions on a few things. Because this is simply a “preview of coming attractions.”
While all the talk about a “Great and Holy Council” makes for important sounding headlines – At the end of the day, churches who are “ALIVE” (Romania, Russia, Bulgaria, Serbia, Georgia, Poland, Czech Lands, Greece, Cyprus, the OCA [arguably]- and I would include even the Oriental Churches of Egypt and Ethiopia) are simply going to ignore those that are “Dead” (Constantinople, Jerusalem, Alexandria, Antioch).
If i were “running strategy” for those Ancient Patriarchates, I’d be cutting deals while I still had something to bargain with.
PS Had not realized that the Georgian Church had publicly scoffed at the idea of a Great and Holy council…I always liked that patriarch!
» Posted By Dean Calvert On January 14, 2012 @ 2:02 pm
Correction Helga..his flock is smaller than many PARISHES in this country.
» Posted By Dean Calvert On January 14, 2012 @ 1:56 pm
As far as Byzantine history 101…
“Roman” meant Roman…not a Christian Greek. They just happened to speak Greek. They no more considered themselves Greeks than the Brazilians consider themselves Portuguese, or the Filipinos consider themselves Spaniards.
And there was always a fairly healthy tension between Christianity and the ancient, pagan learning. It’s not quite the way the modern Hellenists would have us believe.
» Posted By Dean Calvert On November 30, 2011 @ 12:13 am
Since Palamas lived in the 14th century, he was talking about the same Hellenism that New York talks about – ancient Greek learning and philosophy. And he said very correctly that whenever anything but Christ is placed at the center of the church, a heresy has been committed. It was true then, and it’s true now.
As far as demeaning the current or past patriarchs – that was not my intention. I simply believe it is important for people to understand that today’s atrophied state of affairs in Istanbul is just that.. Imagine St. Photios discussing the Slavic mission with St Cyril (Constantine) and Leo the Mathemetician at the patriarchate. It may have been a discussion among the three brightest people on the planet at the time. At the time, people in the West were barking at the Moon.
That’s our tradition, and we should settle for no less, in bishops OR in patriarchs.
» Posted By Dean Calvert On November 29, 2011 @ 8:51 pm
There was a time when the best and the brightest sat on the throne of St. Andrew too…but unfortunately that was 11 centuries ago (St Photios).
And there was also a time when the Fathers of the Eastern Church called Hellenism “a pit of vipers” (Palamas, on the Triads) but that seems to have been forgotten.
Of course, even a broken watch is correct twice a day.
» Posted By Dean Calvert On November 29, 2011 @ 3:06 pm
I hope they are selling these…they’d make big money! Every Papou I know would want one!
» Posted By Dean Calvert On September 28, 2011 @ 12:10 pm
Well…that’s what it says…”Vandals”….
Personally I like the Byzantine term for the Romanians better…Ououvlachians.
And the Serbs – “pals”….this is just priceless.
Nice job George.
» Posted By Dean Calvert On September 27, 2011 @ 5:31 pm
OMG is that funny!!!
Like the New Yorkers view of America..but funnier.
I particularly like the area of Romania…Vandals and Bats!!! And Asia Minor (lent to Turkey)!!!
Wouldn’t be so funny if it weren’t absolutely true.
» Posted By Dean Calvert On September 25, 2011 @ 7:41 pm
RE: I hope I am dead wrong.
Me too….for many of us out here (many Antiochians included, I suspect), Metropolitan Jonah and the OCA represent our last, best hope for Orthodoxy in America. We’ve seen what interference from the Old World patriarchates does to the Church, and want no part of it.
We need to keep the metropolitan in our prayers.
» Posted By Dean Calvert On October 3, 2011 @ 9:48 am
I can understand your ambivalence – greater minds than ours have tried and failed, let’s face it.
However, as I state below (in another post), I never cease to be amazed at the system of governance setup by the Church Fathers – locally elected bishops forming the core of strong dioceses, operating with a fair amount of local autonomy, yet grouped into local metropolitan areas or patriarchates. It is really an amazing system, designed to be “robust” in the best organizational sense of the word.
I’ve also thought for a long time that the environment in which the Church originally “grew up” in is really not so different than modern day USA. Think about it for a moment – the Eastern Empire was an economic colossus, always the economic core of the Roman Empire. There was one superpower on the planet – Nea Roma – the New Rome based in Constantinople.
Citizenship in that nation was of prime importance, not ethnic or tribal affiliation. The nation was essentially a meritocracy, where intelligence and acumen was recognized and rewarded.
The laity (in the East) were educated, literate in many cases, economically successful, and engaged in the Church. The currency of that nation was accepted round the world. The language of that nation (Greek) was the lingua franca – yet the Church was battling secularism and paganism at every turn.
It that REALLY so different than the environment today?
I guess that’s my roundabout way of saying that we can trust the system of governance bequeathed to us by the Church Fathers – as practiced during the first 15 centuries. It both allows all parties (lay, hierarchs, clergy) to contribute to the successful operation of the system, yet also leaves plenty of room for the operation of the Holy Spirit.
I think we’d have to go a long way to improve on it.
The real problem is that we are dealing not with the Church of the First 15 centuries, but with a bastardized, Turkish imposed version. In many ways we are still dealing with the hangover of the Ottoman occupation – monarchical hierarchs seeking to minimize the involvement of the laity; globe straddling jurisdictions (unheard of during the first 15 centuries. e.g. the catholicoi of Armenia and Georgia were setup to give them maximum autonomy as they resided outside the Empire); competitive ethnic “jurisdictions” (the Byzantines wouldn’t know what a “Greek” Orthodox was!!!).
All of the above were unheard of during the first 15 centuries – the Church Fathers would not have considered them Orthodox. All of these things were introduced into the Church by the Ottomans in an effort to destroy the Church – at a minimum to weaken the potential “fifth column” of Orthodox within the Ottoman Empire.
I hate to sound like a “Moonie”, but I think if you look closely, you will see that the tenets of the Church of the First 15 centuries are something we should aspire to, to go back to. I’m convinced they would work as well today as they did then.
» Posted By Dean Calvert On September 20, 2011 @ 8:45 pm
I never cease to be amazed at the genius of the Church Fathers, setting the original Church up as they did, centered upon the local bishop, and operating with a large degree of autonomy. it’s amazing from an organizational standpoint, particularly given the period of it’s origin (normally considered to be a time of tyrants). It also never ceases to amaze me how shortsighted the Old World jurisdictions have been, both the Greek and now the AOCA, in undermining that structure, thru the use of “auxiliary” bishops, rather than full diocesan bishops.
While I can appreciate that they (the Old World hierarchs) might think that this increases their control – in fact it simply serves to undermine and retard the progress of the Church, by the imposition of bishops deprived of the legitimacy which accompanies local election, and the concomitant yet unintended rise in congregationalism which that breeds.
Another great example, in my opinion, of the wisdom of “returning to the Church of the First 15 centuries”.
I am increasingly convinced that the environment in which the Church began is not so different than that of today.
Just my opinion.
» Posted By Dean Calvert On September 20, 2011 @ 12:25 pm
Your last paragraph is extremely important. One of the reasons that I have hope for the OCA is that it seems to be the only jurisdiction willing to support the establishment of strong dioceses, centered on real bishops.
Until we all begin to form around bishops, and until those bishops are locally elected, and sitting in synod, we will continue to have problems….verging on congregationalism….which is the real danger here.
I could not agree more…the formation of strong dioceses, headed by capable bishops is the essential buidling block of the church in this country.
» Posted By Dean Calvert On September 19, 2011 @ 10:46 pm
I couldn’t agree more. Now consider this – we (Greeks) have been Orthodox for probably 1800 years, conservatively. If you divide that by the average age of each generation (55 years) you get 33 – that is the number of generations we have been Orthodox.
So when we screw up here, and “lose the Church” as you accurately put it, we will be the first in 33 generations to do so. that’s quite a responsibility.
And your comment about Alexander the Great is spot on. I still remember coming home from Greek school the day they told us Christopher Columbus was really Greek. “Are they nuts?” I asked my parents.
Most importantly though, is your comment about the kids and their questions. Good question – why are we always playing catchup? Truth be told, I think it’s because of the emphasis on all the nonsense, much of it cultural, instead of being true descendants of Sts. Cyril Methodios and St Photios. Can you imagine any of them, or St John Chrysostom avoiding questions like that? I can’t.
While i live in Michigan, I spend much of my time in Chicago on business. When I’m there, I like to attend vespers at All Saints, Fr. Pat Reardon’s church. It never ceases to amaze me…in all the years I attended a GO Church, while I heard a LOT of Greek used in the service (BTW – what does “Antilavou” mean anyway?), I never once heard a priest stop to explain what Fr. Pat routinely does.
Fr. Pat will routinely read a passage from Scripture, and then say, “now in the original Greek it is even more emphatic…xxx” and go on to explain what both the Greek and even the Hebrew words originally meant. When placed in that context, you are actually in a position to appreciate the Greek. Think about that for a moment…here’s this Irish, convert teaching us more about the use of the original Greek than the Greeks even know. How’s that for sad? And what would St Photios have to say about that I wonder?
A few years back, Abp Nathaniel (I’m now in the ROEA-OCA) said something i will never forget. He said, “Dean, if we don’t unite these jurisdictions, 25 years from now we are not going to have 15 jurisdictions…we are going to have 15 different DENOMINATIONS, each with their own quaint Eastern flavor.”
i guess that qualifies as “Losing the Church”.
I for one don’t want 33 generations of relatives looking down on me and saying, “Eh buffo…ti ekanes?”
You are absolutely correct – unity is an imperative for evangelization. And without that, we don’t need to be here do we?
» Posted By Dean Calvert On September 19, 2011 @ 6:56 pm
1.) With the Greek govt in virtual default – the number one financier of the EP is being taken out of the picture. This may change things.
2.) Re: Semi- Autonomy – this is the status of the Church of Crete, and has been floated for at least 20 years as the preferred resolution for the American Church (preferred by the EP that is).
My question has always been this: if the roughly 200 churches of the Slovak Republic and the Czech lands can be independent, why should America be “semi autonomous?”
» Posted By Dean Calvert On September 19, 2011 @ 3:53 pm
There’s a particular time period which I’ve always found to be fascinating…and I think illuminates the real motivations behind autocephaly extraordinarily well. That is the Middle Ages, looking particularly at the first and second Bulgarian kingdoms as well as the Serbian church of that time. You can get a real sense of what happened in the same Obelenski book that i cited before (the Byzantine Commonwealth).
Aside from the normal motivations, which are generally political (leaders recognized long ago that the Church is too important an institution to be left under the control of foreigners) – what you will find uniquely in this period are churches which rose to independence, and then FELL – being reincorporated BACK into THE EP – as the fortunes of the home nation declined.
This happened on two different occasions in both countries – the most recent occurring following the Ottoman conquest of the area. It frankly blew my mind to read that both the Serbian and Bulgarian churches were forcibly re-integrated, subsumed back into the control of the ecumenical patriarchate following the Turkish conquest. Obolenski’s book provides actual letters from Greek metropolitans who were assigned to dioceses in Bulgaria. The contempt that they had for their parishioners was palpable.
I have read that the resentment toward the EP and the Greeks was so great in those two nations, that neither country assisted the Greeks in 1821 as a result. The EP, by the way, attempted to pursue a policy of re-hellenization in Bulgaria during that time period. (Sound familiar?)
In any case, i think the answers to the question you raise will be found in that time period. It’s a fascinating example of Orthodox realpolitik – one which strips away any pretense of religious motivations. By the way, the establishment of “autocephalous archdioceses” outside the boundaries of the Empire was generally an imperial, not patriarchal prerogative. Fascinating eh? The Byzantines understood very well the foreign policy implications of a “friendly” national church.
That said, perhaps you will forgive my overexuberance and poor choice of words “they can all pound sand”. I guess that describes the strength of my convictions, but certainly not my wishes.
PS sure wish they would incorporate “autocephaly”into the spell check dictionary!
» Posted By Dean Calvert On September 19, 2011 @ 3:17 pm
The term “granting” (of autocephaly) is extraordinarily misleading.
If you go look, you will see that in about 95% of the cases, the autocephaly was simply “recognized” by the EP, and generally long after the de facto autocephaly was declared. I’d be happy to give you dates church by church if that would help. You will find very few cases in which a church became autocephalous without being branded schismatic first, generally for quite a period of time.
The Russian case is the most interesting – the Russians called a local synod, following the Council of Florence, and elected their own metropolitan. They sent the following letter to C’nople, but it arrived after the City had fallen:
The letter is found in the book, The Byzantine Commonwealth, by Dimitri Obolensky.
“We beseech your Sacred Majesty not to think that what we have done we did out of arrogance, nor to blame us for not writing to our Sovereignty beforehand; we did this from dire necessity, not from pride or arrogance. In all things we hold to the ancient Orthodox faith transmitted to us, and so we shall continue to do until the end of time. And our Russian Church, the holy metropolitanate of Russia, requests and seeks the blessing of the holy, oecumenical, catholic, and apostolic church of St. Sophia, the Wisdom of God, and is obedient to her in all things according to the ancient faith; and our father, the Lord Iona, metropolitan of Kiev and all Russia, likewise requests from her all manner of blessing and union, except for the present recently appeared disagreements.”
For the next 140 years, the Russian church was viewed as schismatic by C’nople.
And, Helga, I’d assume the rest of the ancient patriarchates followed C’nople’s lead for most of that period – which would qualify the Russians under your definition of Protestant. (“but it *is* Protestant to not even care if *anyone* recognizes you, which is precisely what you said.”). Of course at that time all of the ancient patriarchates were being controlled from the Porte, and therefore by the EP.
Folks, you need to get over the idea that there is some system by which a church “matriculates” to autocephaly. The normal progression, as history will show, is 1.) that autocephaly is generally declared 2.) the mother church almost always declares the daughter church as schismatic and 3.) sometime in the future, the Mother Church relents.
That’s about as much of a system as there is. And, as I said, the idea of the EP “granting” anything is a misnomer. It’s much more generally an “after the fact” recognition of reality.
Hope this helps.
» Posted By Dean Calvert On September 19, 2011 @ 12:33 pm
Helga et al,
I see….this is Protestantism eh?
Well..that would sure be news to most of the autocephalous churches on the planet…all of whom, with few exceptions (Serbia, us so far) were deemed schismatic by the rest of the Orthodox world early in their history.
So let’s see…when the EP withdrew recognition from the new Russian church in 1446, following the election of Metropolitan Jonah (tell me God doesn’t have a sense of humor!), they should have folded eh?
No, I am not a prisoner of any narrow OCA interpretation of the tomos. But I can read. And having grown up in the GOA, I tend to take that document a little more seriously than some I suppose.
My reading of history also tells me this: Autocephaly is generally not an easy road. Russia was considered schismatic for 140 years. Even Greece was considered schismatic for 20 years following their autocephaly declaration.
If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. But spare me the “Protestant” lectures.
Metropolitan Philip was right about one thing: Autocephaly is generally not granted, it must be TAKEN.
Sorry folks, but that’s 2000 years of history talking.
» Posted By Dean Calvert On September 17, 2011 @ 11:08 pm
Back To Stats Page
Dear Peter, George and others,
I for one refuse to acquiesce to the idea that the status of our (OCA) autocephaly will be determined in Istanbul, Moscow, Bucharest, Athens or any other foreign capital.
I grew up in the GOA, and witnessed first hand for 45 years the nonsense that comes along with Old World control. I see Pat. Kyrill as no different from the EP or any of the other Old World kleptocrats…they all see America as an ATM machine, one with political advantages attached to it.
Our future will be determined right here in America. If we allow the EP or anyone else to call the shots..shame on us. Then we do not DESERVE autocephaly.
Personally, they can all go pound sand as far as I’m concerned. I don’t care if NO ONE recognizes us. We’re here, and we’re not going away.
Do we have problems? You bet. Is Met. Jonah perfect? No way. But the fact remains that ONLY the OCA contains the mechanism and administrative structure by which the problems can be corrected. It’s the only Orthodox jurisdiction in the country which can right itself. Not the Greeks. Not the Antiochians. And anyone silly enough to be waiting for the Episcopal Assembly to work is smoking something.
We need to stop looking overseas for answers. We have the power in our own hands. Use it or lose it folks. We will either be faithful to the Great Commission in this country, or we will perish (and deservedly so).
PS Nice blog George!!!
PS PS And I think you are misreading the concelebration issue. Met. Kallistos pretty much does what he wants.
» Posted By Dean Calvert On September 17, 2011 @ 4:16 pm