Orthodox Church Locator Service needs your help!

[David1]

It is quite ironic that a thread began by Nik to solicit help in this project has turned into a seemingly empassioned discussion of various relating topics up to and not including the calendar.

As I was the primary gatherer of parish contact information for this upcoming project and as Bobby was justifiably banned for immature nonChristian behaivior, I feel I should say a few things about this project both in details and in a broad statement of what we're trying to accomplish.

Perhaps that is the best place to begin. What are we trying to accomplish? There are many internet sources for finding an Orthodox parish, as nearly every american parish maintains a listing. I will go into the reasons I think a compendium of parish information is necessary, but first I want to address how we feel we are serving Christ by this endeavor.

The average user of this forum and other Orthodox internet forums in general(OC.net, Monachos, Youth Board, Yahoo groups, etc) is both a: Orthodox(or far along the path to becoming such) and b: somewhat computer saavy. By spending months discussing various issues we know where are all the jurisdictional websites are to find parishes when visiting our Aunt Edna in Montana, or to suggest a parish to an inquirer. There are many casual internet users who do not have this resource and such a well maintained directory would be quite an asset.

Furthermore, I would like each person reading this if they were not born Orthodox to remember those first steps in finding The Church. For many of us, it was a long and arduous path that led to truth. Personally, I was very blessed in that the father of a secular friend was a priest and became my spiritual father at the point when I started taking religion seriously. Many struggle and are turned away by extremely ethnic and/or PseudoOrthodox parishes. By PseudoOrthodox, I am not referring to communions such as ROAC or Oriental Orthodox, but am referring to The Holy Order of MANS, some of the Evangelical Orthodox Churches, and various groups that were never Orthodox. Many of us have taken many missteps in our paths, and while sometimes these missteps are necessary to our development as Christians, I believe we shouldn't trip or even without support for an inquirer so that they learn the lessons of humility and faithfulness that many of us have found in a long path to Orthodoxy.

Now I'd like to mention a few specifics. First of all, if one is attempting to try to maintain any standards in listing parishes, a choice will have to be made on which jurisdictions to include and which not to include. At the time this project was in it's infancy at OC.net(currently the project is not OC.net content, but is not contradictory to any of the goals of the site, as I am a current moderator of that site and Anastasios, the primary admin, has already spoken in support of the project in this thread), the three admins(Anastasios, Mor Ephrem, Bobby) and the two Global Admins(Nicholas and myself) agreed on the following. The jurisdictions that would take precedence are SCOBA jursidictions and ROCOR. I personally am inclined to list both Tradionalist jurisdictions that are not part of the global communion and Oriental Orthodox jurisdictions, but I would preceed that by having a few articles explaining why certain tradionalist communions are struggling against movements in their national churches as well as the fact that while relations between most EO and OO jurisdictions are friendly, there is no standard of intercommunion, and the differences are not likely to be solved in the near future.

I maintain that for inquirers, the SCOBA+ROCOR roster is the most defensible position. The reasons behind which are free to be debated here and elsewhere, but that is not what I am here to do.

One thing that I haven't considered before now that I now feel is important is to contact all of the jurisdictions that we would like to list on this directory for their permission and their blessing. Perhaps the dialogue with those synods will result in precisely the type of "mission statement" that is needed to satisfy the concerns of the good members here who doubt the wisdom of such an endeavor.

I will be gone until this evening so I will not be able to make any speedy replies to criticisms or concerns, but I will do so publically in this thread or through PM or Email if anyone wishes to voice their opinion.

I will end by saying that it seems to me quite curious that while there is little to no criticism of sites that may seem to be considered marginal by many(Orthodox job listings, convert stories, humor) that there is such backlash over something as innocently intended as having a good resource for those who learn of the claims of truth the Church makes to experience it firsthand. I, along with Bobby(who as mentioned previously, is banned from this board, but I can forward info to him) do not want to make waves in the internet Orthodox community, and if many of you feel this is truly a bad idea, I will reconsider it at once, and ask your forgiveness. As it stands, my conviction is that while it is possible that such a site may cause a problem for a few souls, this is true of almost any attempt to spread the Gospel in which the recipiants do not have "ears to hear". We must exercise caution and care to not lead souls astray, but must also do what we can to make disciples of all nations, ours included.

Please do not take this as me being overcritical of anyone here, most of all Justin. Justin, you know I respect your opinions, and while I share your concerns, I do believe you are wrong on this conclusion. I hope I do not anger you, and as ever I ask for your forgiveness and your prayers. Actually, I'd like to ask all of you for your forgiveness and prayers. I have tried to remain charitable, but I know that I fail. Thank you for listening.

David Galloway

[OrthodoxyOrDeath]

Peter,

You said: “I find it hard to believe I still can't get an answer from some die-hard "extreme" Orthodox on why Arianism didn't cause a huge break in communion but the calendar does.”

You never asked my friend. I do not want to insult your intelligence but there is not an easy way to put this. You are gravely mistaken about the deep deep division that Arianism caused. If fact, St. Basil broke communion with his spiritual father, not because he was an Arian, but only because he signed a document he didn’t understand that was Arian. Please start a thread regarding this, I think you will be shocked at how improper your comment was.

You said: “Or why the EP's of old (and today) have to be approved by the local government, being in clear violation of canons but somehow didn't cause the schisms like the ones we have today.”

I have never stated any concern for uncanonical activity. This comment seems as merely a dressing for your strawman.

You said: “Many more examples can be given, on course, of severe ‘issues’ and heretical beliefs that didn't cause the types of "jurisdictions" we see today.”

Please cite the circumstances and issues so we might study it.

You said: “The fact is, the saints and ascetics of our time(St. Justin Popovish, Elder Piousios, St. John of San Francisco, Elder Ephraim, the monks of Mt. Athos, etc. etc.) have advised us to stay with "world Orthodoxy" or at least to not deny the Grace of the sacraments of "world Orthodox" jurisdictions.”

They have advised you? Ignoring anything Piousios or Ephrem may have said, this statement is a bit of a stretch. The entire weight of the Church is against any such notion. Why not have Nektarios ask Ephraim if he should bump into him by what precedent it is that he communes with such evil and vile men as Bartholomew? What Holy example is it that he should share the cup with such a corrupt man?

Furthermore, does this not remind one of the Gracelessness of the Iconoclasts, who, when they were received back into the Church, not one Orthodox recognized their “grace” or anything of them as being a part of the Church. Just like today, these heretics had their champion heretics, but their ranks were mostly filled with the indifferent. And their “excommunication” leveled against the Orthodox were by three hundred and forty Iconoclast “bishops” that met in an “Ecumenical Council” in AD 754! At that time, the Orthodox did not disobey a mere seventy bishops, as did the contemporary traditional Orthodox Christians, but three hundred and forty bishops gathered in an official “Ecumenical Council.” This Council also condemned the Orthodox then as fanatics, and said that they paid inordinate attention to insignificant matters, as icons supposedly were, and that they perpetuated schisms in the Church by not commemorating and communicating with the innovating bishops. At that time also, some of the erudite among them made proposals to the Orthodox: “Do you wish to venerate icons? We will not hinder you, as long as you hang them a little higher. One thing alone do we ask, that you commemorate the bishops of the Official Church, and then I too will put icons in the Church where I serve; because, even in my diocese, there are many who are nostalgic for this custom of having icons, which is so meaningful, but they certainly do not want to create schism in the Church.” How easily we forget history; or rather, we read it without making the effort to put ourselves in the place of those people which history writes about. So the Orthodox Christians have been excommunicated by the Ecumenists, who were so full of love that they did not wish to celebrate their feasts alone, but together with the heretical denominations of the West.

What joy and glory there is laid up for those new confessors of the Faith whom the Lord blesses: “Blessed are ye, when men shall hate you, and when they shall separate you from their company and shall reproach you, and cast out your name as evil, for the Son of man’s sake. Rejoice ye in that day, and leap for joy: for behold, your reward is great in the Heavens: for in like manner did their fathers unto the Prophets” (Luke 6:22-23).

Saint Photius the Great writes: “Of old the anathema was fearful and something to be avoided when it was imposed by the preachers of piety upon those who were guilty of impiety. But ever since the daring and insolent mindlessness of the pernicious, contrary to every divine and human law and contrary to every way of thinking, both Greek and barbarian, became so insanely arrogant as to turn the anathema, which they deserved, back on the proponents of Orthodoxy, and as they bickered, in their barbarian frenzy, to accomplish their ecclesiastical transgression, then that fearful and last extremity of all penalties became degraded into a myth and a joke, or rather it became even desirable to the pious. Certainly, it is not the utterly presumptuous opinion of the enemies of truth that makes penalties, especially ecclesiastical penalties, fearful, but rather the culpability of those who are condemned; for guiltlessness changes their punishments into a mockery, and turns their condemnations back upon them, and results in undefiled crowns and immortal glory, rather than condemnation, for him who is castigated by them. Therefore, all the pious and holy prefer to be reviled myriads of times by those who are alienated from Christ rather than, with splendid acclamations, to have communion with their Christ-hating and Godhating villainies.”

He continues in another place: “For a long span of time, every heretical council and every assembly of the Iconoclasts anathematized us (and not only us, but our father and our uncle also, men who were confessors of Christ and the lustre of the hierarchy); but by anathematizing us, they caused that we be raised, though unwilling, to the archiepiscopal throne. Therefore let those who, together with the former, have irrationally strayed from the Master’s commandments and have thrown wide open the gate of all iniquity, anathematize us even now so that they may raise us, though faltering, from earth to the Heavenly Kingdom”

And just like the Orthodox in the time of the Iconoclasts, we too will not accept their “Grace” if the day comes they wish to be reconciled to the Church.

[Nektarios14]

Why not have Nektarios ask Ephraim if he should bump into him by what precedent it is that he communes with such evil and vile men as Bartholomew? What Holy example is it that he should share the cup with such a corrupt man?

It's Elder or at the very least Father Ephraim. I would not ask Geronda this question as my Greek is WAY too poor. But next time I am down at the monastery I'll see what I can find out. Still you must admit that your tirades against New Calendar Orthodoxy are bit un-patristic themselves. Where do the fathers endorse every laymen to anathamatizing swinging around his copy of the Rudder like a protestant fundamentalist thumping his Bible? The Fathers for the most part were dispassionate bishops, not angry laymen with an ax to grind. It's nice though that you think you are Saints Photios, Mark of Ephesos, Basil the Great and who knows all who combined though. Just who an earth do you think you are to stand up to such greats as Sts. Justin Popovich, John of San Fransisco, Nikolai of Ohrid, Elder Cleopa of Romania, Elder Joseph, and Elder Porphyrios and call them graceless heretics!?

[bogoliubtsy]

Nektarios,

I see no point in continuing to debate with "Orthodoxyordeath" who sees no problem calling the Ecumenical Patriarch an "evil and vile man", or insulting the intelligence of a fellow poster(a fellow poster whom, incidentally, you know virtually nothing about), or declaring all outside of his sect to be without grace, or comparing his whimsical patristic proof-texting to the stand of Saint Maximos. Such audacious statements reveal a character nearly incapable of listening to reason.

Edit-
As for the question of Arianism - As we all know, Saint Constantine was baptised by a supporter of the Arian heresy, yet we consider his baptism and the sacraments he received to be valid, don't we? Yet in the estimation of OrthodoxyorDeath and his ilk, the sacraments of "World Orthodoxy"(what a funny term!) are devoid of any grace! If you extend that way of thinking, then the sacraments received by Saint Justin Popovich and Elder(Saint?)Piousios also lacked grace.

[Liudmilla]

It's interesting to note with what zealousness we can debate where GOD should place his grace and blessings and for that matter on whom.

[OrthodoxyOrDeath]

I understand Peter and Nektarios, those are some very insightful comments.

When Saint Hypatius understood what opinions Nestorius held, immediately, he erased his name from the diptychs, so that it should no longer be pronounced at the Oblation. (This was before Nestorius’ condemnation by the Third Ecumenical Council.)

When the most pious Bishop Eulalius learned of this, he was very anxious about the outcome of the affair. And seeing that news of the situation had been spread abroad, Nestorius also ordered him to reprimand Hypatius. For Nestorius was still powerful in the city. Bishop Eulalius spoke thus to Hypatius: “Why have you erased his name without understanding what the consequences would be?” Saint Hypatius replied: “From the time that I learned that he said unrighteous things about the Lord, I have no longer been in communion with him and I do not commemorate his name; for he is not a bishop.” Then the bishop, in anger, said: “Be off with you! Make amends for what you have done, for I shall take measures against you.” Saint Hypatius replied: “Do as you wish. As for me, I have decided to suffer anything, and it is with this in mind that I have done this.” - From the Life of Saint Hypatius

In 1971, the then Patriarch of Serbia, German, as one of the Presidents of the "World Council of Churches (W.C.C.)," co-signed the following "Message" of this ecumenical organization in Geneva:

And the powerful Breath of renewal will blow into the mighty arena of the Church, as well as into each of her communities; for these are not simple administrative units, but they all constitute a part of the one great Christian Church.

This is a clear formulation of the ecclesiological heresy known as the Branch Theory: that the one and great Christian Church is comprised of its constituent Christian communities.

The Church of Serbia entered the W.C.C. in 1965; thereafter, as Patriarch German began to participate actively in the ecumenical movement—in fact, immediately after his aforementioned declaration—, the ever-memorable dogmatist, Archimandrite Justin Popovich, ceased to consider him an Orthodox Hierarch and ceased his canonical commemoration, as well as all ecclesiastical relations with him.

It is hence noteworthy that the Patriarch did not attend the funeral of Father Justin (†March 25, 1979)

[Julianna]

I see no point in continuing to debate with "Orthodoxyordeath" who sees no problem calling the Ecumenical Patriarch an "evil and vile man", or insulting the intelligence of a fellow poster(a fellow poster whom, incidentally, you know virtually nothing about), or declaring all outside of his sect to be without grace, or comparing his whimsical patristic proof-texting to the stand of Saint Maximos. Such audacious statements reveal a character nearly incapable of listening to reason.

I've seen no personal insults from Orthodoxyordeath or anything justifying the evil actions of the Masonic POC