UOC-MP blesses Miss Universe model's dress, participation!

尼古拉前执事 · Post by **尼古拉前执事** » Mon 26 June 2006 8:57 pm

26 June 2006, 12:12
Ukrainian Orthodox Church first hierarch blesses a fashion model for participation in Miss Universe beauty contest

Kiev, June 26, Interfax - Metropolitan Vladimir of Kiev and All Ukraine gave his blessing at the Kiev Monastery of the Caves to Inna Tsymbalyuk for participation in the 2006 Miss Universe beauty contest due on July 23 in Los Angeles.

His Eminence also blessed her dress and head attire made for the traditional folk dress defile. The attire consists of a red beaded corset with Madonna and Child embroidered on it, a long asymmetrical skirt made of red chiffon and a head attire in the form of the Cathedral of the Dormition, the Ukrainian issue of Kommersant daily writes on Monday.

Archpriest Oleg Sknar of the church of the Protecting Veil, who accompanied the girl, said the Church did not see anything awful in the Miss Universe contest.

‘The contest makes strong demands on the contestants, such as knowledge of foreign languages, higher education and absence of revealing photo sessions in magazines for men. We believe Inna will be able to show not only the external beauty of Ukrainian women but also their spiritual richness’, the priest noted.

scwaterfowl · Post by **scwaterfowl** » Tue 27 June 2006 3:14 am

Cool!!!!

jacqueline · Post by **jacqueline** » Tue 27 June 2006 9:14 pm

A contest that compares beauty encourages vanity.... How can he think that is good?

Justin Kissel · Post by **Justin Kissel** » Thu 29 June 2006 6:23 am

A contest that compares beauty encourages vanity.... How can he think that is good?

Yes? And someone could make a better case, if they wanted, that coming to an online discussion board encourages strife and useless debate, something explicitly condemned by Paul and many Fathers, so maybe you should delete the bookmark to this and some other sites? How could you possibly think that they are good? What you are doing is the prototypical traditionalist error though: find someone else's potential or actual sin, pontificate from on high about how awful it is, or make sweeping judgments about how evil it is, and then finish off with something that makes what you are saying sound like the only logical conclusion. It's the same methodology applied to a hundred other subjects (e.g., ROCOR might do this, did you hear what the MP did, yada yada).

PS. She's not bad looking...

ioannis · Post by **ioannis** » Thu 29 June 2006 11:42 am

I think St. Paul and the Holy Fathers said that strife was guaranteed, and seeking the truth was necessary. If discussion turns into a "useless debate" for you Justin, this doesn’t mean that it has for everyone else.

What you are doing is the prototypical traditionalist error though: find someone else's potential or actual sin, pontificate from on high about how awful it is, or make sweeping judgments about how evil it is, and then finish off with something that makes what you are saying sound like the only logical conclusion.

"Traditionalists" must be on the right track then because modernists also accuse the Holy Fathers of this very same thing. But that does not disturb you.

The faith and practice of bishops and those pretending to be bishops is every bit the business of every Orthodox Christian. Discerning the faith is something we are supposed to do. Judging the spiritual state of another person is not.

Now if you have nothing to counter with, no doubt you will fall into the prototypical error of the modernists: create a strawman that I am pontificating and making "sweeping judgments", and beat it down with great satisfaction.

In another thread you asked if there was a "one-dollar pee test" you can buy to tell if you were under demonic influence. You don't have to buy anything Justin, your whole life is the test. The more you fall under demonic influence the more hate and rebellion you will see until the fabric of your whole life begins to unravel. You may deny or even fail to see why, but the result will be general despair.

jacqueline · Post by **jacqueline** » Thu 29 June 2006 1:19 pm

Justin Kissel wrote:
A contest that compares beauty encourages vanity.... How can he think that is good?

Yes? And someone could make a better case, if they wanted, that coming to an online discussion board encourages strife and useless debate, something explicitly condemned by Paul and many Fathers, so maybe you should delete the bookmark to this and some other sites? How could you possibly think that they are good? What you are doing is the prototypical traditionalist error though: find someone else's potential or actual sin, pontificate from on high about how awful it is, or make sweeping judgments about how evil it is, and then finish off with something that makes what you are saying sound like the only logical conclusion. It's the same methodology applied to a hundred other subjects (e.g., ROCOR might do this, did you hear what the MP did, yada yada).

PS. She's not bad looking...

Oh please, don't try to turn this into a discussion about me! This is not a discussion about me or my internet bookmarks. LOL. Also, I am hardly in a position to pontificate, I just asked a question about someone in authority who advocates and advertises something that I don't understand.

Sean · Post by **Sean** » Thu 29 June 2006 5:17 pm

Justin Kissel wrote:
PS. She's not bad looking...

No offense, brother, but this is the only part of your statement that I would wholeheartedly endorse. $/\$