As I've read through a lot of these posts a common theme that has emerged is that people are tired of the "independent catholic" church experiment and are longing for a more grounded, established, apostolic church, leaving just two viable options: East and West, or, more specifically, Orthodoxy or Catholicism. Upon reading that a number of folks from Bishop Sly's Cathedral are planning to "go East," I thought I'd take a moment and share my experience, having looked long and hard at Orthodoxy, including spending some time in two different Orthodox parishes.

First, while it is true that the Orthodox Church is the second largest body of Christians in the world, it is horribly splintered in America. There are the Russian Orthodox, Greek Orthodox, Serbian Orthodox, Antiochian Orthodox, Syrian Orthodox, Ethiopian Orthodox, Coptic Orthodox, Ukranian Orthodox, Bulgarian Orthodox, and more. These bodies, while technically in communion with each other, do not interact and do not share an authority structure. With the exception of the Greek Orthodox, most Orthodox parishes in the US are very small, ethnic bodies of immigrant families who are seeking to hold onto their cultural heritage (which often appears to be of greater import to them than the actual tenets of their faith). All efforts to unite the different ethnic splinters in the US have been unsuccessful and there is no reason to hope that this will change any time soon.

In my experience, the Antiochian Orthdox are the most welcoming to American converts, having welcomed and ordained the "Evangelical Orthodox" California group led by Peter Gilquist back in the '80s. They are warm, friendly arabs. Other Orthodox groups are generally less welcoming, and may find the idea of an American convert to be quite puzzling. Keep in mind that most of these churches, including the Antiochians, maintain the usage of their ethnic language in the liturgy, at least in parts.

Given the greater accessibility of the Antiochian Church, what would a former CEC person be likely to experience, were they to become Antiochian? Here's a general picture (keeping in mind that there are differences throughout the denomination): A smallish parish, probably not close to home, filled almost entirely with Syrians. Usually the pre-service music consists of a lone acapella arabic chant. There will likely not be any welcome committee or service leaflet to help you through the service. Parishioners will enter and kiss an icon in the nave, then file into the church with kids in tow (no nursery or Sunday School for children). Remember to wear comfortable shoes, because, with the exception of the Greek churches, there will not be any pews or chairs, and you be STANDING for the entire service, which will last at least two hours. There won't be any instruments; all the singing is done acapella, and you probably will not have a copy of the music. There may or may not be a choir, and people may or may not participate in the singing. The priest will not usually face the congregation; he faces the altar, with his back to the people (except when preaching or reading the scriptures). You will never hear a western hymn that you are familiar with, and don't even think about having any praise or worship music as you are accustomed to in the CEC. There is no opportunity for prophecy or tongues or any of the manifestations of the gifts of the Spirit. There will be lovely, dark, solemn icons everywhere, but no stained glass windows or banners. The incense will be very thick.

Women do not have a prominent part in the service. Some parishes may have women do the readings. Many women are busy tending to their children, who, because of the length of the service and the lack of seats, tend to wander. There is no passing of the peace. Parishioners may be allowed to sit crosslegged during the sermon, or they may stand during that part as well. At communion, the bread is crumbled into the wine and spooned out onto the tongues of the faithful. (You may not take the eucharist until you are a chrismated member). At some parts of the service, parishioners may prostrate themselves entirely on the floor, or kneel and touch their foreheads to the floor. There is always great reverence.

Christmas is a lesser holiday for the Orthodox. You won't be singing any Christmas carols as you know them. Easter is the bigger holiday, and it is called Pasch. It is also not celebrated on the day that the rest of the Christian world celebrates Easter, as the Orthodox follow a different church calendar. (Makes extended family Easter dinners a little more complicated if you are the only Orthodox in the family). For 40 days prior to Pasch, there is a SERIOUS FAST. Most Orthodox fast during this time by abstaining from eating meat, olive oil, chocolate, alcohol, and all dairy products including cheese, eggs, milk, and butter. Pasch is celebrated at midnight after a week of 3+ hour services during Holy Week. The Pasch service is quite grand, lasts usually over 3 hours, and culminates in a huge feast at about 4:00 a.m. The faithful then sleep off their meal and return to church later in the day for another service of several hours. Again, these services are experienced while standing.

This gives a general picture of what to expect in an Orthodox church. It's not meant as a criticism, just an honest portrayal of the very different-ness of eastern worship. It often feels like a visit to a foreign country and may result in severe culture shock. (In fairness, the Orthodox immigrants to America would probably experience the same shock were they to attend a CEC parish; the two experiences are simply worlds apart).

If you can overcome the shock and become active members of an Orthodox church, or even go so far as to become an Orthodox priest, it's important to keep in mind a few things: Your parish will probably always be small, as it caters to a small sliver of the US melting pot. It will probably be in an urban or busy suburban area, as there are simply not enough Orthodox folks out in the country. If you are ordained, you will probably need to keep you day job, as many (most?) Orthodox priests are working priests and their parishes cannot afford to pay them a full-time salary. You will be surrounded by folks of a specific cultural heritage and language and you will need to learn to assimilate. You will need to give up the songs, fellowship, and spirit-filled worship that you are accustomed to. If you ever move to another part of the country, keep in mind that you may not find another parish of the same type anywhere near your house. This is especially important if you have children going off to college or moving away -- they may not be able to find a church home anything like what they have grown up in.

Perhaps you can guess from this post that, having experienced all of this firsthand, my family and I decided that Eastern Orthodoxy, for all its beauty and majesty and orthodox teaching, was just not right for us. I don't knock anyone who "goes East" -- indeed, it's a very tough road to hoe and if you can do it, more power to you. The Eastern Church has much beauty and goodness and its doctrine is wonderful (with the exception of being out of communion with Rome, which results in its aforementioned splintered existence). I just feel that anyone considering this path ought to be fully aware of what they are getting into and what will be in store for them. Even the Orthodox will usually admit that they love and admire their Catholic brothers and sisters and would like to be in communion with Rome. Given this, if you choices are East and West, perhaps it is worth considering going straight home -- to Rome.

What about the OCA ?

http://www.oca.org/

What do you know about them?

I spent 5 years in an OCA parish. It was exactly as I described, except that, instead of having one ethnic language (as the Greeks would, for example), they used almost entirely english. Special services, like Pasch, would include snippets of many foreign languages. Otherwise, it was exactly the same as the Antiochian churches. Perhaps a little less welcoming.

Also the OCA came out of the Russian Orthodox Church, so it has many Russians and Ukranians in it. Currently the OCA is reeling from a financial scandal that is causing much discomfort among the faithful.

I am an Antochian Orthodox Priest and former Charismatic in the Anglican Tradition. I have been Orthodox for over 12 years. Please allow me to clear a few things up, with the deepest respect for the poster. While most of what is said is generally correct it is clear that my brother is stating something he has read or heard. Allow me to set the record stright. First, about half of the Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese are made of of converts. Second, contrary to what was stated the avg. size of a parish outside a large city is about 35 to 50 famlies and are made up of converts and pan-orthodox faithful not arabs, inside large cities one will find large 1000+ ethnic churches. Most of the Antiochian parishes use pews, by the way...some newer churches have chairs. As a rule Russian churches stand. Our Cathedral in NY has stained glass (Tiffany Stained Glass) but this is because it was an Epsiscopal Church in 1895 when it was purchased. The picture you painted is rather dim and not all together fair. If one would take worse case senarios I could counter with some beauties from Rome, but that too would not be fair. It takes more than going to a few Liturgies or hearing from others to give one a clear picture.

I am a pastor of a small mission 5 years old. We are mostly converts and have 60 active faithful (Eastern Rite). As a general rule parishes outside big cities are not Arabic, and must support their clergy by a min. salary yet there are some smaller parishes where the priest may work a secular job however normally this is only true within missions such as mine. We are a small Arcdiocese made up of about 65,000 in the US (real numbers). Further, we are in full communion with all SCOBA Orthodox jurisdictions in America as the poster stated and they are goverened by their own bodies (i.e. Greeks) nevertheless our faithful may receive the Holy Gifts from them, we are One Church, One Faith, One Baptism. Within the Eastern Rite (which by the way our beloved brothers in Rome have as well) is difficult for many and is a different type of worship yet I along with most of the faithful of my mission (many which come from Western Traditions) fully embrace and love the Divine Liturygy. Yet each to his own. I love and respect the Roman tradition I was most blessed to have personally known, met and wrote back and forth to Blessed Mother Teresa. I loved and respected her and I will not say anything against those that choose the Roman Road. But our Eastern Tradition is full of richness as well. Our Eastern Rite mission is full of the Holy Spirit, God has acted through, what some would call "Gifts of the Spirit" many times filling the faithful with awe and this unworthy priest humbled. Yes, there has been healing, people falling in the Spirit, the visable presence of Angels seen by the faithful and much, much more.

As a closing thought, our beloved Archbishop PHILIP supports the Western Rite of Orthodoxy. Presently, there are 21 Western Rite parishes (some over 100 Faithful). The service is closer to your and music is Western. Recently, it was clearly stated at our symposium that contemporay Christian music may be allowe during the Western Rite Mass.

Know that whatever road you choose my deepest prayers go out to you all. May the Holy Spirit be with you all during these difficult times. My heart breaks for many of you. May our True God Jesus Christ through the intercession of His Most Holy Mother and All the Saints be with you all+

Thank you, Guest, for sharing your experience with us. It was highly insightful and I appreciate you taking the time to give some a glimpse into what they will experience as they go East. Perhaps some will heed your advice. However going East, as with going into the CEC, is like getting a degree in something you may never use but nonetheless is never fruitless. I love the Eastern Orthodox Church and look for the day that we Catholics and the Orthodox are reunited. There is so much that I am attracted to in their worship but, honestly, not something too foreign to what I can have in the Catholic Church. As a Catholic, I can have all that is good in Orthodoxy. Eastern and Catholic is a false dichotomy, I am sure you will agree, for there are many Eastern Catholics. (http://www.faswebdesign.com/ECPA/)

I have participated in an Easter Pascha with the Greek and Ukrainian Orthodox and I will add that they are amazingly beautiful. I also have been to many Orthodox churches throughout the world to include visits to four astounding monasteries. Also, I would certainly be Orthodox, with all deference to the Patriarchate of Rome, were there no Catholic Church in the area.

I would add here that even their liturgy and styles differ. For example, one may have the liturgy of St. James while the others have the liturgy of St. Basil, St. Chrysostom, St. Mark or St. Thaddeus. Also, there is much dissension about services being done in the venacular and adopting Western amenities. In my experience in the East, they have kept the ancient liturgy generally in tact but I have noticed there are changes from the ancient liturgies, traditions and doctrines even among the Orthodox. Reading the Early Church liturgies of the first three centuries will prove this. Liturgy has developed just as doctrine has developed in both communions but not at the same rate. It has been the Catholic Church who has changed the most to adapt to the needs of folks today. Personally speaking, we should never leave the ancient 1st century principles and practices but bring them into the modern 21st century in whatever fashion they can be implemented without leaving out the essential elements, to which I trust the Magisterium to determine what is essential.

Additionally, some may be surprised to know the Charismatic renewal of the 60's even affected the Orthodox in various parishes. However some argue that it was never widespread because the Orthodox have always maintained the gifts and did not need a renewal. The Catholic Church could make the same argument.

QUOTE (Fathermac): While most of what is said is generally correct it is clear that my brother is stating something he has read or heard.

I am the "Guest" who wrote the original post. I assure you that I know of what I speak. I spent a year attending an Antiochian church and five years in attendance at an OCA parish. It was not my intention to criticize the Orthodox -- clearly I have much regard for them, or I would not have spent the better part of a decade in their midst! But I do feel it is important to truly relay what the Orthodox world is like, in my experience (which is, of course, limited).

QUOTE: First, about half of the Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese are made of of converts. Second, contrary to what was stated the avg. size of a parish outside a large city is about 35 to 50 famlies and are made up of converts and pan-orthodox faithful not arabs, inside large cities one will find large 1000+ ethnic churches.

I speak only from my own experience, which is that, within 55 miles of my suburban home, there were only two Antiochian parishes. One was an entirely arab parish with about 200 in attendance, and the other was a small parish of converts with about 60 in attendance.

QUOTE: Most of the Antiochian parishes use pews, by the way...some newer churches have chairs. As a rule Russian churches stand.

Neither of the churches I attended had pews. The latter parish bought a small anglican church and actually REMOVED the pews so the parishioners had to stand. There were fold-up chairs available in both churches for those who could not stand, but few people used them (and I always felt uncomfortable when I had to). I have visited one struggling OCA parish that did have pews.

QUOTE: As a general rule parishes outside big cities are not Arabic, and must support their clergy by a min. salary yet there are some smaller parishes where the priest may work a secular job however normally this is only true within missions such as mine.

The small convert church I attended did pay their pastor a small salary, but his wife also had to work. The OCA parish I attended was in existence for 20 years before it could pay its pastor a small salary. Another local OCA parish paid its pastor part-time and he worked outside the church. The larger arab-populated Antiochian church I mentioned was fortunate enough to pay their pastor full-time. My point simply was that CEC priests cannot automatically expect to make their entire living by pastoring an Antiochian Orthodox church.

QUOTE: Our Eastern Rite mission is full of the Holy Spirit, God has acted through, what some would call "Gifts of the Spirit" many times filling the faithful with awe and this unworthy priest humbled. Yes, there has been healing, people falling in the Spirit, the visable presence of Angels seen by the faithful and much, much more.

In my six years in Orthodoxy I never experienced any kind of giftings of the Holy Spirit. When I asked my OCA priest about this he responded by referring to weeping icons as a manifestation of such. I once asked Fr. Gilquist about modern praise songs in the Orthodox world and he responded that, when he first became Orthodox, they would sometimes have guitar-led praise songs during home bible studies (never during liturgy), but that these also fell by the wayside over time. I never, in six years, experienced anyone speak of or demonstrate giftings of prophecy or tongues. There was one story of healing when someone touched the tears of a weeping icon, but that was the extent of it (and I did not witness this incident, only heard of it).

QUOTE: As a closing thought, our beloved Archbishop PHILIP supports the Western Rite of Orthodoxy. Presently, there are 21 Western Rite parishes (some over 100 Faithful). The service is closer to your and music is Western. Recently, it was clearly stated at our symposium that contemporay Christian music may be allowe during the Western Rite Mass.

I do think that Western Rite Orthodoxy is a more viable choice for most western converts. However, my experience of this (limited to a few visits) is that it is similar to most high-Anglican churches (not a very vibrant worship experience), and, again, very sparsely attended. Perhaps this is changing ... that would be of great encouragement.

QUOTE: My heart breaks for many of you.

Mine does as well. Which is why I want my brothers and sisters in the CEC to carefully weigh their options and make informed decisions as to their futures. I don't want any of them to ever have to go through this kind of torment again. It's important that people know what they are getting into, and even if there are some encouraging winds of change blowing through Orthodoxy today, people cannot count on this being the case throughout the Orthodox world. As a parent, it was important to me to know that, wherever my children went, they would have a good local parish, thriving fellowship and worship, and be in communion with a large body of Christians. This is why we have gone to Rome. Perhaps these things are not as important to others. I just want to share my experience and insights and hope that it will be of assistance during this difficult time.

Blessings to all of you.

Thanks very much, Guest, for your insightful sneak peek into Orthodox worship and culture. It's a shame really. Doctrinally-speaking, the Orthodox perspective seems so appealing, but as I suspected, many of us, myself included, would not at all prefer the style of worship encountered. And while the Catholic style of worship is more western-friendly for us (minus the charismatic factors), the Catholic Doctrines offer a minefield of objections. It's a good thing I plan to remain in the CEC.

I actually found the "sneak peek" to be a loving testimony by someone who doesn't want folks headed to Orthodoxy to have unreal expectations. I would prefer to not have pews, the Apostolic Fathers worshipped standing so I see no shame. I find nothing shameful about Orthodoxy. However its those "happy clappy" Nadabs and Abihus who offer strange fire to the tune of Frank Sinatra's "I Did It My Way" that will answer in shame. These are the folks that should stay in the CEC and Protestant, for no Apostolic Christian can be true to the faith unless they are crucified with Christ and can say,"Not my will but Yours be done!"

I never said Orthodox worshp was "shameful", please don't put such words in my mouth! It's an expression not meant to criticize, but to express regret that the Orthodox liturgy and style is not conducive or welcoming to those such as myself and family.

Neither will I allow you to criticize other denominations who don't use Catholic or Orthodox liturgies as being less than acceptable to God. Jesus calls us to worship is spirit and in truth. He never defined a particular "style" or "liturgy" that he prefers one over another. So let's not be critical of those who, like King David, desire to worship God will their heart, mind, soul and strength and could care less whether it meets your sensibilities or not. I'm sure you would have been first in line to mock the King's lack of propriety in worship . . . and missed the point of what worship is.

You sir are mistaken. The Western Rite of the Antiochian Church isn't ethnic at all. They just had a conference at St. Peters in Ft Worth and I didn't see a single Syrian or Arab! The congregation in Ft Worth is American thru and thru! Furthermore, the entire liturgy was in English and was based on the 1928 BCP!

Your experience may have been ethnic.....However, this is not the only option!

Go to Google and look up Orthodox Wester Rite

Or simply visit this site: http://www.antiochian.org/western-rite

Or St Peter's website at: http://www.saintpeterorthodox.org/

Western Rite Orthodoxy is a viable alternative and it is "The Faith" that has been passed down for 2000 years!

Do your research sir before you post untruth!

ev :blink: :blink:

The central reason that most people in the CEC don't want to become Orthodox is because they love their bands, their drums, and their charismania more than they love the Faith.

Everyone on this website that criticizes Orthodoxy is asking the wrong question. They are asking the question of what worship do I prefer? This is the wrong Question.

The Real question is how does God want to be worshiped, and how has he been worshiped for 2000 years? Once you ask this question you have only two viable options Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism.

Ladies and Gentlemen stop trying to become the church and re-invent the Church and simply come to the church!

Project 1054 - East or West!!

ev :blink: :blink:

I am the original Guest who posted concerning Orthodoxy. Do not accuse me of untruth. I did not specifically address Western Rite Orthodoxy in that post. Perhaps you missed my follow-up post in which I responded to Fathermac. I wrote, "I do think that Western Rite Orthodoxy is a more viable choice for most western converts. However, my experience of this (limited to a few visits) is that it is similar to most high-Anglican churches (not a very vibrant worship experience), and, again, very sparsely attended. Perhaps this is changing ... that would be of great encouragement."

I do agree with everyone that the style of worship is not the only, or the most, important thing to consider when looking at churches. However, I also believe that, given the similarities of the doctrines of both East and West, style could be an issue that makes a difference to some, so I wanted to describe, as accurately as I could, my experience in the Orthodox world (some six years' worth). Having experienced both Orthodoxy and Catholicism, I have found myself far more comfortable in Catholicism than Orthodoxy. However, were there no Catholic church available to me (highly unlikely!) I would attend an Orthodox church without hesitation. (What is far more likely is that an Orthodox person might not always find an Orthodox church in their immediate vicinity, another point I was trying to make in my original post, and an important one particularly for parents to consider).

I also wanted to dispel the idea among CEC clergy that they would easily be able to convert to Orthodoxy (of any flavor) and certainly expect to have thriving parishes and full-time salaries. Some will! God can do anything, and I know He has His hand upon the Orthodox church. But there are hurdles ... big ones ... and people need to know what they're getting into.

[QUOTE]=Guest,Aug 7 2006, 08:46 PM][QUOTE=Episcopi vagantes,Aug 7 2006, 08:21 PM] [/QUOTE]
You sir are mistaken. The Western Rite of the Antiochian Church isn't ethnic at all. They just had a conference at St. Peters in Ft Worth and I didn't see a single Syrian or Arab! The congregation in Ft Worth is American thru and thru! Furthermore, the entire liturgy was in English and was based on the 1928 BCP!

Your experience may have been ethnic.....However, this is not the only option!

Go to Google and look up Orthodox Wester Rite

Or simply visit this site: http://www.antiochian.org/western-rite

Or St Peter's website at: http://www.saintpeterorthodox.org/

Western Rite Orthodoxy is a viable alternative and it is "The Faith" that has been passed down for 2000 years!

Do your research sir before you post untruth!

ev :blink: :blink: [/QUOTE]
I am the original Guest who posted concerning Orthodoxy. Do not accuse me of untruth. I did not specifically address Western Rite Orthodoxy in that post. Perhaps you missed my follow-up post in which I responded to Fathermac. I wrote, "I do think that Western Rite Orthodoxy is a more viable choice for most western converts. However, my experience of this (limited to a few visits) is that it is similar to most high-Anglican churches (not a very vibrant worship experience), and, again, very sparsely attended. Perhaps this is changing ... that would be of great encouragement."

I do agree with everyone that the style of worship is not the only, or the most, important thing to consider when looking at churches. However, I also believe that, given the similarities of the doctrines of both East and West, style could be an issue that makes a difference to some, so I wanted to describe, as accurately as I could, my experience in the Orthodox world (some six years' worth). Having experienced both Orthodoxy and Catholicism, I have found myself far more comfortable in Catholicism than Orthodoxy. However, were there no Catholic church available to me (highly unlikely!) I would attend an Orthodox church without hesitation. (What is far more likely is that an Orthodox person might not always find an Orthodox church in their immediate vicinity, another point I was trying to make in my original post, and an important one particularly for parents to consider).

I also wanted to dispel the idea among CEC clergy that they would easily be able to convert to Orthodoxy (of any flavor) and certainly expect to have thriving parishes and full-time salaries. Some will! God can do anything, and I know He has His hand upon the Orthodox church. But there are hurdles ... big ones ... and people need to know what they're getting into.[/QUOTE]


Perhaps it won't be easy. However, it is the pearl of great price and one should do whatever it takes!

Furthermore, with regard to your comment that it resembles "high anglican" worship and isn't very vibrant. Again, the CEC values its bands, its drums, and its unfettered ability to prophecy as the end all to be all. Given the high number of unbridled and unjudged prophecies given in the CEC that have been false, perhaps one should consider that the Orthodox way is superior.

i.e.
rock launched corn prophecy
CEC will replace Rome prophecy
etc.
etc.
etc.

ev :blink: :blink:

[QUOTE=IGUEST,Aug 7 2006, 08:59 PM][QUOTE=Guest,Aug 7 2006, 08:46 PM] [QUOTE=Episcopi vagantes,Aug 7 2006, 08:21 PM] [/QUOTE]
You sir are mistaken. The Western Rite of the Antiochian Church isn't ethnic at all. They just had a conference at St. Peters in Ft Worth and I didn't see a single Syrian or Arab! The congregation in Ft Worth is American thru and thru! Furthermore, the entire liturgy was in English and was based on the 1928 BCP!

Your experience may have been ethnic.....However, this is not the only option!

Go to Google and look up Orthodox Wester Rite

Or simply visit this site: http://www.antiochian.org/western-rite

Or St Peter's website at: http://www.saintpeterorthodox.org/

Western Rite Orthodoxy is a viable alternative and it is "The Faith" that has been passed down for 2000 years!

Do your research sir before you post untruth!

ev :blink: :blink: [/QUOTE]
I am the original Guest who posted concerning Orthodoxy. Do not accuse me of untruth. I did not specifically address Western Rite Orthodoxy in that post. Perhaps you missed my follow-up post in which I responded to Fathermac. I wrote, "I do think that Western Rite Orthodoxy is a more viable choice for most western converts. However, my experience of this (limited to a few visits) is that it is similar to most high-Anglican churches (not a very vibrant worship experience), and, again, very sparsely attended. Perhaps this is changing ... that would be of great encouragement."

I do agree with everyone that the style of worship is not the only, or the most, important thing to consider when looking at churches. However, I also believe that, given the similarities of the doctrines of both East and West, style could be an issue that makes a difference to some, so I wanted to describe, as accurately as I could, my experience in the Orthodox world (some six years' worth). Having experienced both Orthodoxy and Catholicism, I have found myself far more comfortable in Catholicism than Orthodoxy. However, were there no Catholic church available to me (highly unlikely!) I would attend an Orthodox church without hesitation. (What is far more likely is that an Orthodox person might not always find an Orthodox church in their immediate vicinity, another point I was trying to make in my original post, and an important one particularly for parents to consider).

I also wanted to dispel the idea among CEC clergy that they would easily be able to convert to Orthodoxy (of any flavor) and certainly expect to have thriving parishes and full-time salaries. Some will! God can do anything, and I know He has His hand upon the Orthodox church. But there are hurdles ... big ones ... and people need to know what they're getting into. [/QUOTE]

I thought your posting was charitable.


But this place is more of a shooting gallery than a discussion forum.[/QUOTE]


If theres going to be shooting soon I want John Wayne on my side!

LOL

ev :blink: :blink:

I am sorry to have misread you to say Orthodoxy was shameful.

I will add this response to you concerning the man after God's own heart:

David knew about liturgy and followed it.
He knew about the damage invoked by disrespecting the Ark, he saw Uzzah struck dead.
He knew not to go unto the hill of the Lord with unclean hands and an impure heart.
He wasn't introducing a new form of choreographed dance for the congregation to follow.

San Clemente of Rome, companion to the Apostle Paul said, "Since then these things are manifest to us, and we have looked into the depths of the Divine knowledge, we ought to do in order all things which the Master commanded us to perform at appointed times. He commanded us to celebrate Sacrifices and services (the Eucharist), and that it should not be thoughtlessly or disorderly ....He has Himself fixed by His supreme will the places and persons (the appointed priests) whom He desires for these celebrations, in order that all things may be done piously according to His good pleasure, and be acceptable to His will. So then those who offer their oblations at the appointed times are acceptable and blessed, but they follow the laws of the Master and do not sin. For to the high priest (the bishop) his proper ministrations are allotted, and to the priests (the presbyters) the proper place has been appointed, and on the Levites (the deacons) their proper services have been imposed. The layman is bound by the ordinances for the laity. ......Our sin will not be small if we eject from the episcopate those who blamelessly and holily have offered its Sacrifices." (1 Clement to the Corinthians, 44:4)

You wrote, " Jesus calls us to worship is spirit and in truth."

The Holy Spirit tells us through the Apostle John, "God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth" (John 4:24)

What does this mean? A Google search of this verse initially brings up JW, Mormons and Church of Christ sites.

If anyone understood how to interpret "worshipping in spirit and truth", it would be John's disciple Ireneaus (Sante Ireni if you go to his grave in Lyon, France). For he wrote, "Those who have become acquainted with the secondary (i.e., under Christ) constitutions of' the apostles, are aware that the Lord instituted a new oblation in the new covenant, according to [the declaration of] Malachi the prophet. For, "from the rising of the sun even to the setting my name has been glorified among the Gentiles, and in every place incense is offered to my name, and a pure sacrifice;" as John also declares in the Apocalypse: "The incense is the prayers of the saints." Then again, Paul exhorts us "to present our bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service." And again, "Let us offer the sacrifice of praise, that is, the fruit of the lips." Now those oblations are not according to the law, the handwriting of which the Lord took away from the midst by cancelling it; but they are according to the Spirit, for we must worship God "in spirit and in truth." And therefore the oblation of the Eucharist is not a carnal one, but a spiritual; and in this respect it is pure. For we make an oblation to God of the bread and the cup of blessing, giving Him thanks in that He has commanded the earth to bring forth these fruits for our nourishment. And then, when we have perfected the oblation, we invoke the Holy Spirit, that He may exhibit this sacrifice, both the bread the body of Christ, and the cup the blood of Christ, in order that the receivers of these antitypes may obtain remission of sins and life eternal. Those persons, then, who perform these oblations in remembrance of the Lord, do not fall in with Jewish views, but, performing the service after a spiritual manner, they shall be called sons of wisdom."

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0134.htm

Home Messages Mission and Position Facilities Kenya About St. Symeon Events Teaching Media Archive


MESSAGES OF WARNING
From The Loving Heart of God


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

THE BASIC PRINCIPLES OF
ORTHODOX RENEWAL, Part 6
If we are honest with ourselves, we have to admit that, despite the sacraments that are administered in the Orthodox Church, there is no evidence of change in the church. The lives of the people who participate in the sacraments do not seem to be transformed.

I wonder if anyone expects any change? The Eucharistic life and experience do not seem to extend beyond the close of the Liturgy. Raffles, bingos, festivals, carousing continue to absorb much of the attention and energy of the people between Liturgies. Prayer seems to be restricted to public and formal worship.

More often than what we would like to admit, the Divine Liturgy is celebrated unto condemnation. St. Paul warns us: "Ye come together not for the better, but for the worse" (1 Corinthians 11:17). When Orthodox Christians live carnal lives, they receive of the Body and Blood of Christ unto their damnation.

Is it any wonder that we need a special renewal movement in addition to the sacraments that are administered in the Orthodox Church? Anything like this would take us beyond familiar religious routine.


Moving Beyond Abstract Sanctification
The nostalgia, therefore, for Pentecost continues unabated. The awareness for a spiritual renewal keeps growing. Religious formalism does not seem to satisfy this inner hunger in terms of a tangible transformation of lives, which is noticeable outwardly as well as inwardly.

The moment the Divine Liturgy is concluded all thought of God and the Holy Spirit seems to become irrelevant. If anyone names the name of Jesus at the coffee hour after services, he is labeled a religious extremist. He is one of those who doesn't realize that "the Liturgy is over with." This was told by a church board member to a born-again Orthodox who was witnessing about Christ as he greeted people after the service.

Thus the longing for a new Pentecost remains in the hearts of the Orthodox who feel are living a wilderness experience. The thirst for the experience of Pentecost abides unfulfilled. This is true also with regard to Roman Catholics. They, too, have felt indeed painfully the need for renewal in the power of the Spirit of God.

Pope John XXIII at the Second Vatican Council publicly and solemnly shared his vision of "a new Pentecost." He composed a prayer for the Council, which was offered up to God by Catholics the world over: 0 Holy Spirit, sent by the Father in the name ofJesus, You are present in the Church, guiding it infallibly. We pray you to pour forth the fullness of your gifts upon the Ecumenical Council...Renew your wonders in this, our day, as by a new Pentecost...

God answered the appeal and prayer of the Pope and of the Council with the inception of the Charismatic Movement among the Roman Catholics in 1966. How wonderful it would be if our own Orthodox Church leaders would publicly acknowledge the need among Orthodox Christians for a new Pentecost! 0, that God would take away the self-righteousness that desensitizes us!

The Lord, however, is faithful and merciful. Despite our pride and disobedience, He has begun to pour out of His Holy Spirit upon the Orthodox, as well as upon Roman Catholics and Protestants. Believers in all three main branches of the Christian world have been talking about coming into the "baptism in the Holy Spirit" and a born-again experience. They are part of this end-time move of God that bonds them together in a common personal experience of Pentecost.


Legally, But Not Experientially
It is paradoxical that Christians should be looking for Pentecost as if it were a thing of the past, forgotten and irrelevant to the present life of the church. It is an unmistakable sign of the bankruptcy of the church. It is evidence that the apocalyptic apostasy is already upon us!

As I pointed out above, Pentecost should normally be with us as a daily experience of the Holy Spirit. Theoretically, the very life of the church is pentecostal and charismatic. But, while our theology says one thing, the facts tell us something quite different. It is admirable to be concerned over saving our doctrines; I'm all for it. It is, however, much more admirable to be concerned-about saving souls.

. It is not only Orthodoxy. All the mainline churches have felt the need for a new Pentecost. The only difference is that the non-Orthodox are more vocal in expressing the need for a new move of God in their denominations. We Orthodox have Pentecost legally but not experientially. We could use more humility in admitting that we are not enjoying the fullness of our spiritual inheritance.

Whether we like to acknowledge it or not the historical fact remains that the new Pentecost did not take place inside the Orthodox Church. The fire of the Holy Spirit in this twenty-first century did not fall in St. Peter's Cathedral in Rome, nor in the Canterbury Cathedral in London, nor in the Cathedral of Athens.


Things Which Are Despised Hath God Chosen...
It need not surprise us if the end-time outpouring of the Holy Spirit occurred in an old abandoned wooden frame building used variously as a church, a stable and a warehouse. We should know by now that God works in strange and unexpected ways, as He did especially when His only-begotten Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, was born in a stable.

I am well aware that some of my Orthodox readers will rend their garments in outrage and want to stone me when they note what I am about to mention. If God Incarnate appeared for the first time in a stable and the church was born in someone's borrowed attic, why is it unthinkable that the new Pentecost would take place in a building once used as a stable? Why should it be all that reprehensible that God should use the preaching of a black minister, blind in one eye, to spark the apocalyptic outpouring of His Holy Spirit? "Things which are despised hath God chosen..."

How obscure, humble and base the physical surroundings of the new Pentecost! In a day when blacks were looked down at as inferior and were kept segregated from the whites, God singled out William J. Seymour, a black, blind in one eye, to be the central figure of the Azusa Street revival in Los Angeles in April 1906. He was the vessel chosen of the Lord to spark the worldwide Pentecostal revival. I feel inspired and fascinated at the wonders of God, as I read and reread the account of this new Pentecost that came not only to Los Angeles but also to all the cities and nations of the world. It is very simple. I rejoice to see Jesus proclaimed and exalted! And when He is, it has to be the Holy Spirit that does it.


The Gifts of the Holy Spirit
In the Orthodox Renewal movement, God is restoring the charismata or gifts of the Holy Spirit (as enumerated in the New Testament) individually to believers and collectively to the Body of Christ. It represents a new awareness of the importance of the baptism in the Holy Spirit, which leads the believer into a deeper experience of Jesus Christ and makes him a recipient of the spiritual gifts. In other words, it brings him into the charismatic life of the Church.

The gifts of His Holy Spirit are listed in 1 Corinthians 12:8-11: "To one is given through the Spirit a word of wisdom, and to another the word of knowledge according to the same Spirit, to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit, to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another the discerning of spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, to another the interpretations of the tongues."

Then there are also the body ministry gifts: "God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then workers of miracles, the healers, helpers, administrators" (1 Cornthians 12:28). "And his gifts were that some should be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers" (Ephesians. 4:11).

The spiritual gifts are necessary tools for spiritual growth. They are given individually to each believer and to the church collectively for service and effective witness. God's word tells us they are conferred "for the perfection of the saints, for the work of ministry, for the building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ" (Ephesians 4:12, 13).

Unquestionably, gifts (charismata) are part of the spiritual inheritance of each individual who receives Jesus Christ as his personal Savior and is baptized "in water and in the Spirit." They are not for a few elite in the Body. They are not given as a reward for perfection. They are given to repentant, forgiven, but imperfect children of God as a means for growth and perfection. They are a heavenly provision for helping us fulfill our purpose of becoming in the "image and likeness of God"

The spiritual life of the believer suffers when he ignores the gifts of the Holy Spirit. He ends up trying to build up his life in the Spirit without tools and without provisions. Scripture clearly tells us to covet and desire the gifts, indeed the best of the gifts of the Spirit.FONT COLOR="red">"Earnestly covet the most excellent gifts" (1 Corinthians 12:30).

It is a divine ordinance. We have no choice in the matter. In obedience to God's word, every man and woman in the Body, the church, must seek the spiritual gifts. To do otherwise is to miss the power for witnessing and to ministering effectively. Jesus endowed His disciples with the Holy Spirit precisely for this purpose – that they might be effective in their ministry of witness and evangelism.

He promised them:"You shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you" Why this power? Because "you shall be unto me witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria and to the end of the earth" (Acts 1:8).

The major cause of being ineffective in our efforts in the church today is the lack of the power of the Holy Spirit and its manifestation in the diversity of gifts.


Given by Grace
Like salvation, the charismata or gifts of the Holy Spirit are given to the believer by grace and not by reason of our own righteousness. We do not earn them with our good works. The Holy Spirit, like redemption, is a gift that is not merited, but God gives it to us out of His infinite grace and love. Though we are undeserving, He makes us His sons and daughters and recipients of His spiritual gifts. These come with adoption, which is given to the believer by grace.

It is our faith in Jesus Christ that makes us God's children and inheritors of the fullness of the Holy Spirit. We displease our Father when we fail to seek His gifts. Our Lord told us what kind of a heavenly Father we have: "If you then being evil know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?" (Matthew. 7:11).


Gifts vs. Fruit of the Holy Spirit
Both gifts and fruit of the Holy Spirit are necessary for a balanced growth in the "image and likeness of God." Fruit cannot take the place of gifts, nor vice versa. One cannot substitute for the other. There is a distinct difference between the fruit and the gifts of the Holy Spirit. Scripture tells us that the "fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control" (Galatians 5:22).

Fruit comes with growth and cultivation, like apples, pears and oranges on a tree. The gifts are conferred on the believer for ministry and witness. They are like the trimmings on a Christmas tree. They do not come with effort and growth. Fruit, on the one hand, involve the character of the believer, while the gifts involve service and do not of necessity change character directly and immediately.

In order to be sure of salvation you need to meet all the conditions set down in the Word of God. You cannot pick arbitrarily and choose what pleases your fancy. To refuse or fail to seek everything that God has for us is displeasing to the Father. We jeopardize our salvation when we put ourselves in a state of disobedience. God has given us the Spirit of His Son, crying in us; "Abba! Father!" As children of God, it behooves us to accept everything He has for us, with childlike trust and expectation. Remember that, "unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven" (Matthew18:3).


For more pastoral messages from Rev. Eusebius A. Stephanou,
Former subdean of Holy Cross Seminary

Just thought this would be of interest.

What is this a prophetic Warning?

"God isn't madd at us" remember?

So we simply protest outside of the church and somehow hope that what we do will somehow become the church?

:huh: :huh:

Ten years ago, I interviewed Rev. Stephanou (and several other priests active in the Charismatic Orthodox Renewal in the 1970's). They were old, sad men who had been "exiled' to distant parishes &, in Fr. Stephanou's case, to a "Renewal Center" which no one visited. His take was that the charismatic renewal in Orthodoxy was not killed by ethnic Orthodox "who received the word with gladness," but by American converts who insisted that "the riches of Orthodoxy" include only such bona fide/nostalgic elements as "the holy martyrs Tsar Nicholas and Tsarina Alexandra" and the cult surrounding their martyrdom, and other romantic "bits" of Orthodox history. Fr. Alexander Schmemann, in his memoires, observes this same phenomenon, that the Orthodox want an Orthodox culture which is only incidentally enlivened by the realities of the Orthodox Faith. The bishops shut down the charismatic renewal in the Orthodox churches because the converts wanted to avoid anything that reminded them of their own protestant/Pentecostal/charismatic heritage. It was a political move to placate converts by assuring them that Orthodoxy was "safe," i.e. "a museum of the Faith."

Cultural Roman Catholicism has similar characteristics. Not a "museum" mentality, but cultural baggage nonetheless. "Convert fever" can derail quite sincere people, into the most irrational positions, causing embarassment to those "born Catholic." And of course, there are now a host of people "more Catholic than the Pope," which is a pretty protestant position when one comes to think of it.

All in all, we each and every one have much to be humble about, much to repent of, much to beg God's mercy for --not for ourselves and our own churches alone-- but for our brothers and sisters in ALL the Church.

Kyrie eleison, kyrie eleison, kyrie eleison.

Black Watch

But please Blackwatch don't wake us up, we are too drunk with our romantic EO/RCC myopia (boy will I get a lashing for that). Besides, we are too busy laughing at sick jokes, don't bother us.

Can't you just post a joke?

So what, in all of that, dictates that one must worship standing versus sitting versus laying prostrate? And what dictates singing acapella versus singing with instruments? And what dictates singing solemn hymns versus joyful songs of celebration? And what dictates singing 3 hymns in 10 allocated minutes versus 10 songs in 1 hour of worship? And what dictates that one may prophesy during the songs versus not? Etc. Etc. Etc.

I agree that the Eucharistic liturgy is indeed worship in spirit and in truth, never said it wasn't. I simply said you don't have the right to judge what God views as shameful as if the worship of our charismatic, pentecostal, protestant brethen is shameful before God and unacceptable. That is the height of arrogance. I've experienced the power of God's manifest Presence in worshipping with such brethren. Seen thousands filled with the Spirit, hundreds healed miraculously in a single service and seen tens of thousands respond to the message of the Gospel in a single night. Who are you who judge their efforts and worship as requiring repentance!?! Be very careful when presuming to speak for God in judgement.

That's an invalid statement. It's not an either/or scenario. There's absolutely no reason we can't maintain the liturgy AND make room for more vibrant, passionate worship as well as allow the gifts of the Spirit to operate. Afterall, if the Spirit wishes to operate, which is the greater sin, to quench the Spirit or disrupt the liturgy?

First of all, I never "criticized" Orthodox worship. It's fine for those who prefer that style. And it is indeed IS the right question. Again, the Lord did not mandate anything apart from the liturgy of the Eucharist itself.

Case in point - some of the Orthodox don't have pews and others do, who's right and who's not honoring the 2,000 year old tradition? Hmmm? You can't have it both ways can you? That's the attitude you're projecting. Of course, it's a ridiculous argument because the Lord couldn't care less whether we decide to have pews or not, that is a choice we have liberty to make. And those choices extend to many areas and forms of worship, all of which are equally valid.

Second case in point - should our singing include instruments or just acapella? Some Orthodox say acapella only while others and Catholics say instruments are helpful to worship. Why are you making this a divisive issue? It shouldn't be. Either is fine for we have the liberty to make that choice!

And the accumulation of those choices that we are free to make represents "preference". Among the valid choices we are free to make is whether or not to spend 10 minutes singing three 500 year old hymns as our singing portion of worship or instead spend an hour singing six modern songs or even a mix of old hymns and modern songs. What is your preference? God is honored and pleased when we come before Him to worship!

And who are you to judge the Spirit is out of order if, in the midst of singing songs of worship, He leads the priest to pray for the sick or He prompts someone to speak of prophetic word? Our job is to yield to the Spirit and His sense of order, which thankfully is different than your or my sense of order. Jesus faced the same problem. He saw a man that needed to be healed and did so even though it was the Sabbath - His sense of order showed His priorities. You seem to be among those who would condemn Him as being out of order for operating in the Spirit outside of the liturgial boundaries.

A highly recommended read is Francis MacNutt's "The Nearly Perfect Crime". He discusses the results of his research into when, how and why the early church seemed to abandon the charismatic (particularly healing) so quickly.