12-19-2007, 06:48 PM
Akhai (or, if you prefer, adelphe mou)
If what you say about us requiring EO councils as an absolute requisite is true, that is sad. Based on talks with the monophysites, I imagine that confirmation of the faith of the 7 councils is what is at heart, which wouldn't neccesarily mean anything about persons. Again, there is a great variety with EO bishops and theologians and I suspect that the COE has experiance only with one group, perhaps one of the least ecumenical. Personally, I have always believed that if a union with the Oriental Orthodox is to be achieved then the Assyrian Church should also be in full comunion--you guys would be a safty against monophysitism. Personally, I believe we two--EO and COE--share much more similar beliefs on who Christ is than do the OO and the EO. Anyways, perhaps man's sin stands too strongly in the way. I still believe if a dialouge with the right people in the EO opened it could bear great fruit.
In the long run, I have always hoped for a reformation of the COE. By reformation, I don't mean it in the manner of Babai Soro. I mean that for at least 1700 years the COE has been a melet and that it has formed much of its epistimology understandings in light of this political reality. The whole nation=church=nation paradigm is one example. Another would be how the Church relates to other bodies confessing Christ, but that might have wrong beliefs and/or lack apostolic roots. For much of her history, the COE only had to deal with those outrightly anathematized and excommunicated--IE monophysites and the Unia.
When Orthodox theologians began teaching in Paris and New York after the Russian revolution, they began an unpacking of what we believe and why in order to apply it in a coherant manner to the current situation. After 321 until 1918 there had been either the Church in a Christian Empire (Byzantine and Russian) or a melet (Ottoman). Many understanding coming out of emigres were just wrong and unhelpful and a theological education seeking to systhesise and reexamine what we have in light of our tradition was needed. Such an unpacking would not mean any liturgical reforms or radical changes, but a renewed expression of what we believe, how we worship, and what we worship. I am speaking about a revolution in the teaching ministry of the Church as based in a mission to America. For the children of the COE are no longer Assyrians but Americans of Assyrian heritage. A Palestinian friend of mine once asked a convert Russian bishop, "is Orthodoxy loosing something of its value in Americanizing since it has always been a Greek, Arab, Syrian, Russian, etc thing". The Bishop responded: "do you eat watermelons in Winter? do you get splinters after using the restroom? NO!, so you're an American." Until the COE become the faith of America (American Church of the East?) how will it minister to its own children who are American. Obviously, it won't be soon when the president gets the patriarchs blessing before he is inaugurated, but the idea is what counts. We Orthodox have been blessed by great revolutionary minds such as Met Philip Saliba, Frs Alexander Schmemman, Thomas Hopko, and Bp Kallistos Ware to have the paperwork--the reflective writings--done as well as, in most parts, good leadership with a mind to mission to America. I can imagine a similar renewal in the COE where the ancient theology is unpacked, the liturgy is understood, and the priests are trained to be parish priest of their entire parish defined as their geographical and not ethnic community. For instance, all of the swadaya translations I have read have been either poor representations of the classical or overly classical to where most people didn't understand them. I believe that liturgy can be done properly in Classical Syriac if you want to not change, not even a language, or in English if you want to reach people. Almost every Assyrian who has spent ten years or so here has a command of English far surpassing their children. Most speak a pigon mixed with Farsi, kurdish, and arabic, anyways. Hamzim? please, mamel. Why not inspire priest to spend the money and energy used on teaching swadaya on local missions and outreach to the community? Isn't this intrinsic to the gospel?
Anyways, have a blessed feastday on the Nativity.
In Maran Eesho,
Ashur
If what you say about us requiring EO councils as an absolute requisite is true, that is sad. Based on talks with the monophysites, I imagine that confirmation of the faith of the 7 councils is what is at heart, which wouldn't neccesarily mean anything about persons. Again, there is a great variety with EO bishops and theologians and I suspect that the COE has experiance only with one group, perhaps one of the least ecumenical. Personally, I have always believed that if a union with the Oriental Orthodox is to be achieved then the Assyrian Church should also be in full comunion--you guys would be a safty against monophysitism. Personally, I believe we two--EO and COE--share much more similar beliefs on who Christ is than do the OO and the EO. Anyways, perhaps man's sin stands too strongly in the way. I still believe if a dialouge with the right people in the EO opened it could bear great fruit.
In the long run, I have always hoped for a reformation of the COE. By reformation, I don't mean it in the manner of Babai Soro. I mean that for at least 1700 years the COE has been a melet and that it has formed much of its epistimology understandings in light of this political reality. The whole nation=church=nation paradigm is one example. Another would be how the Church relates to other bodies confessing Christ, but that might have wrong beliefs and/or lack apostolic roots. For much of her history, the COE only had to deal with those outrightly anathematized and excommunicated--IE monophysites and the Unia.
When Orthodox theologians began teaching in Paris and New York after the Russian revolution, they began an unpacking of what we believe and why in order to apply it in a coherant manner to the current situation. After 321 until 1918 there had been either the Church in a Christian Empire (Byzantine and Russian) or a melet (Ottoman). Many understanding coming out of emigres were just wrong and unhelpful and a theological education seeking to systhesise and reexamine what we have in light of our tradition was needed. Such an unpacking would not mean any liturgical reforms or radical changes, but a renewed expression of what we believe, how we worship, and what we worship. I am speaking about a revolution in the teaching ministry of the Church as based in a mission to America. For the children of the COE are no longer Assyrians but Americans of Assyrian heritage. A Palestinian friend of mine once asked a convert Russian bishop, "is Orthodoxy loosing something of its value in Americanizing since it has always been a Greek, Arab, Syrian, Russian, etc thing". The Bishop responded: "do you eat watermelons in Winter? do you get splinters after using the restroom? NO!, so you're an American." Until the COE become the faith of America (American Church of the East?) how will it minister to its own children who are American. Obviously, it won't be soon when the president gets the patriarchs blessing before he is inaugurated, but the idea is what counts. We Orthodox have been blessed by great revolutionary minds such as Met Philip Saliba, Frs Alexander Schmemman, Thomas Hopko, and Bp Kallistos Ware to have the paperwork--the reflective writings--done as well as, in most parts, good leadership with a mind to mission to America. I can imagine a similar renewal in the COE where the ancient theology is unpacked, the liturgy is understood, and the priests are trained to be parish priest of their entire parish defined as their geographical and not ethnic community. For instance, all of the swadaya translations I have read have been either poor representations of the classical or overly classical to where most people didn't understand them. I believe that liturgy can be done properly in Classical Syriac if you want to not change, not even a language, or in English if you want to reach people. Almost every Assyrian who has spent ten years or so here has a command of English far surpassing their children. Most speak a pigon mixed with Farsi, kurdish, and arabic, anyways. Hamzim? please, mamel. Why not inspire priest to spend the money and energy used on teaching swadaya on local missions and outreach to the community? Isn't this intrinsic to the gospel?
Anyways, have a blessed feastday on the Nativity.
In Maran Eesho,
Ashur