A Conversation on Modernism

[Nektarios14]

[quote]

[Logos]

On the Sunday morning confession thing, My priest hears confessions after Vespers on Saturdays. I like it that way because it forces me to be even more prepared for the holy mysteries. It also forces me to work on being holy and not committing a sin during that time period.

[demetrios karaolanis]

also as it said on the website, these are just external matters and there are deep problems in the ecclesiology of modernism that go beyond just what it is like in the church. I can see what you meen though with many of these.

[Seraphim Reeves]

The problem is, whlie any one of these "issues" (chairs in the Church, clergy in non-Orthodox clerical garb, etc.) can be dismissed as superificial or not the "end of the world", cumulatively it is a problem.

It is very much a part of the western tradition to be theologically creative, and ask questions more in keeping with the pagan philosophical tradition; including questions of minimalism (i.e. "what is the least I can get away with doing, and keep everything still valid). While those questions are not totally useless, they tend to be more dangerous than they are useful. I think it explains, at least to some extent, just how debased the western Christian tradition has become.

OTOH, Orthodoxy has stayed clear of this way of thinking, and perhaps this explains (on a human level) why She has maintained the faith in it's integrity, often despite the Church's human participants. Orthodoxy is often described as "maximalistic"; for my money, "holistic" is perhaps a better way of looking at it - everything is part of a larger whole. When you widdle away at the particulars, you eventually affect the whole.

Thus, while it's true that a priest being clean shaven is not by itself the end of the world (though not the norm according to Orthodox tradition), or any one thing by itself is not the "end of the world", combined they are a problem - not to mention that individually, they are often symptomatic of deeper problems (perhaps in how the persons involved approach the totality of the Christian tradition.)

Often traditionally minded Orthodox get dumped on for being hung up on "Calendars" or "beards." To a certain extent, such criticisms can be valid - it is possible for people to become pharisaical over details, and make Orthodoxy nothing but pretty rituals. However, I think more often than not, accusations of "calendar worship" tend to come from people with nothing more substantial to say about "traditionalist" critiques of what passes for Orthodoxy in many places in the west.

It's a tough call though - when does "economy" simply become an excuse?

Seraphim

[Logos]

I think economy has been abused greatly by the church over here. It is used far too much. I think one has to understand that seeing those things in a church are not necessarily the end of the world. But it is often the case that these are the surface of deeper problems. I think the calendar issue needs to be addressed once and for all. This division has harmed Orthodoxy more than helping it.

[Nektarios14]

Thus, while it's true that a priest being clean shaven is not by itself the end of the world (though not the norm according to Orthodox tradition), or any one thing by itself is not the "end of the world", combined they are a problem - not to mention that individually, they are often symptomatic of deeper problems (perhaps in how the persons involved approach the totality of the Christian tradition.)

I agree with everything you have said in this post. I also think it is important not to be caught up in the superficial things of beards, pews, etc. and bypass the big issue behind them. The two big problems that abound in the GOA, OCA and Antiochians are secularism and ecumenism. They manifest themselves as a clean shaven priest or pews or over use of economy. At the same time there can be many traditionally minded people even in a GOA, OCA etc. Church (FWIW I am GOA

Often traditionally minded Orthodox get dumped on for being hung up on "Calendars" or "beards." To a certain extent, such criticisms can be valid - it is possible for people to become pharisaical over details, and make Orthodoxy nothing but pretty rituals. However, I think more often than not, accusations of "calendar worship" tend to come from people with nothing more substantial to say about "traditionalist" critiques of what passes for Orthodoxy in many places in the west.

The problem IMO opinion is when traditionalist make the calendar argument about 13 days and not about ecumenism and the illegitmate implimentation of it. The same goes with the other arguments on the traditionalist agenda.

It's a tough call though - when does "economy" simply become an excuse?

It is overused without a doutb. But it is important not to judge those who do (something some traditionalists do too much IMO). But a little balance isn't a bad thing. The "modernists" keep the traditionalists from becoming pharisees while the traditionalists keep the modernists from going too crazy.

[Seraphim Reeves]

The problem IMO opinion is when traditionalist make the calendar argument about 13 days and not about ecumenism and the illegitmate implimentation of it. The same goes with the other arguments on the traditionalist agenda.

This is fair. Equally fair, however, is to affirm that most traditionalists (particularly the luminaries of so called "Orthodox traditionalism" in our day) never reduce their position to a hang-up over "13 days." The basic problem with the New Calendar, from their view, is the following...

• Canonically it's a problem (given that the "old Calendar" was adopted Oecumenically, where as the decision of some synods to go with a "new calendar" was not oecumenical...thus, justifying at least in this wise the negative reaction of some parties within synods that accepted it... namely the "old calendarists" within larger new calendarist Churches.)

• It hinges (in letter) at the door of anathema, and in spirit walks right over the line of acceptability in light of the Church's past condemnation of the Gregorian Calendar (technically the "revised Julian Calendar" is not the "Gregorian Calendar"...however, I think it's obvious that for all practical purposes they are one in the same, thus violating the spirit of the oecumenical rejection of the Gregorian Calendar by the Orthodox Church in times past.)

• Connected to point #2, is a more spiritual/moral (and the most important factor) truth; the new calendar was implimented as part of a larger strategy to cause Orthodoxy to "warm up" to heterodox confessions; it goes hand in hand with a false ecumenism (which seeks reunion of all professing to be Christians not by their assimilation into the Orthodox Church, but by a comprimise; the creation of a "mushy middle" where supposedly Orthodoxy and heterodoxy can meet and "agree".)

In the end, "13 days" is neither here nor there - it is these other issues which make the calendar a sticking point. This is of course besides practical problems with the "revised Julian calendar" (such as how it can wreak havoc with fasts from year to year.)

Seraphim