Talk:Orthodoxy in Hawaii

From OrthodoxWiki
(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Monasteries)
 
(3 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 21: Line 21:
 
:There is a small monastic skete on the Big Island of Hawaii, under the jurisdiction of the Greek Old-calendar Milan Synod. The priest in charge is Hieromonk Bartholomew.  -[[User:Nectarios|Nectarios]] 02:39, September 19, 2007 (PDT)
 
:There is a small monastic skete on the Big Island of Hawaii, under the jurisdiction of the Greek Old-calendar Milan Synod. The priest in charge is Hieromonk Bartholomew.  -[[User:Nectarios|Nectarios]] 02:39, September 19, 2007 (PDT)
 
::Thanks, Nectarios. What do you know about the canonical status of the Milan synod? Also, do they have more than one monk there, and are they friendly to non-Milan people? I know very little about the Milan synod. Thanks! — [[User:FrJohn|<b>FrJohn</b>]] ([http://www.orthodoxwiki.org/User_talk:FrJohn&action=edit&section=new talk])
 
::Thanks, Nectarios. What do you know about the canonical status of the Milan synod? Also, do they have more than one monk there, and are they friendly to non-Milan people? I know very little about the Milan synod. Thanks! — [[User:FrJohn|<b>FrJohn</b>]] ([http://www.orthodoxwiki.org/User_talk:FrJohn&action=edit&section=new talk])
 +
 +
:::The Milan Synod is an uncanonical Orthodox Christian jurisdiction.  They are the most moderate of all the Greek Old-calendarists jurisdictions.  They are very friendly to the OCA. But of course like all Old-calendarist parishes and monasteries, you may find some hostility.  Of course this happens in any Orthodox Church that has one distinctive ethnic identity. They are good people. -12:52, September 22, 2007 (PDT) {{unsigned|Poepoe77}}
  
 
:::I know something about the Milan Synod. It is from [[Old Calendarists | here]]. It is a Churches "in resistance", a Florinite church. It is not a good monastery :(    [[User:Arthasfleo|Arthasfleo]] 00:40, September 20, 2007 (PDT)
 
:::I know something about the Milan Synod. It is from [[Old Calendarists | here]]. It is a Churches "in resistance", a Florinite church. It is not a good monastery :(    [[User:Arthasfleo|Arthasfleo]] 00:40, September 20, 2007 (PDT)
Line 28: Line 30:
 
:::Not good from all of the points of view. Cannonical, salvation, and likeable for God. I love our church, not the schismatic one. :) [[User:Arthasfleo|Arthasfleo]] 03:18, September 21, 2007 (PDT)
 
:::Not good from all of the points of view. Cannonical, salvation, and likeable for God. I love our church, not the schismatic one. :) [[User:Arthasfleo|Arthasfleo]] 03:18, September 21, 2007 (PDT)
  
::::Such judgment is unbecomming any Orthodox Christian.  The old-Calendarists are a good and faithful people.  I don't agree with their politics, but they are very much Orthodox Christians. They are uncanonical, which means their canonical autonomy is not recognized because they do not commune with the Ecumenical Throne.  This does not mean they lack canonicity, which is something completely different.  Remember Russia, Serbia, Bulgaria, Georgia and many of the other autocephalous churches were out of communion with Constantinople at some time in their history and labelled "uncanonical".  Were they schismatics?  Were they not liked by God?  There are many Russian saints who were proclaimed during the schism between Russia and Constantinople after the Council of Florence.  Were they not saints?  Were they not Orthodox?  In the 90s the Moscow Patriarch broke off communion with the Constantinople Patriarch, was Pat Alexey II a schismatic?  Of course not! Before laying blanket judgment upon others, look to yourself!  Worry about your own salvation Arthasfleo.  -[[User:Nectarios|Nectarios]] 12:19, September 22, 2007 (PDT)
+
::::The old-Calendarists are a good and faithful people.  I don't agree with their politics, but they are very much Orthodox Christians. They are uncanonical, which means their canonical autonomy is not recognized because they do not commune with the Ecumenical Throne.  This does not mean they lack canonicity, which is something completely different.  Remember Russia, Serbia, Bulgaria, Georgia and many of the other autocephalous churches were out of communion with Constantinople at some time in their history and labelled "uncanonical".  Were they schismatics?  Were they not liked by God?  There are many Russian saints who were proclaimed during the schism between Russia and Constantinople after the Council of Florence.  Were they not saints?  Were they not Orthodox?  In the 90s the Moscow Patriarch broke off communion with the Constantinople Patriarch, was Pat Alexey II a schismatic?  Of course not! -[[User:Nectarios|Nectarios]] 12:19, September 22, 2007 (PDT)
 +
 
 +
::Friends, forgive me! I've edited some of the comments to try to take out the personal elements. The issue of the Old Calendarists can be difficult - there are real and remaining tensions. We should recognize the histories involved, while not making light of the profound significance of schism. — [[User:FrJohn|<b>FrJohn</b>]] ([http://www.orthodoxwiki.org/User_talk:FrJohn&action=edit&section=new talk]) 14:34, September 22, 2007 (PDT)
 +
 
 +
==Iveron Icon==
 +
Something should be written for our Holy Icon here in Hawaii.  I will ask permission from the Icon's Guardian to include something.  People should know about this.

Latest revision as of 12:03, February 10, 2012

very good article

very good article it is missing much information though; the name of ship and captain in 1792. i have it somewhere, i have to look for it. i will add it when i find it. very good article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by MshKlimek (talkcontribs) .

That sounds good - this is just how a wiki works - one person knows a detail, another adds other information, and the article improves gradually. — FrJohn (talk)

Very good article. I'll put more materials in. I have more research but I need to translate it into English from Hawaiian--Marcus

There is so much info on Orthodoxy in Hawaii. There is stuff in Hawaiian about St. Innocent's visit to the Islands. I'll try to locate it and put it up. Great job to whomever wrote this article! --Poepoe77 12:40, August 28, 2007 (PDT)
That sounds great! I look forward to seeing this -- even just citing the sources in Hawaiian would be very helpful as a start. — FrJohn (talk)

Monasteries

There are any monasteries in Hawaii? Arthasfleo 23:47, September 16, 2007 (PDT)

Not that I know of - it's not a bad idea though! — FrJohn (talk)
ok. thank you Arthasfleo 02:34, September 18, 2007 (PDT)
There is a small monastic skete on the Big Island of Hawaii, under the jurisdiction of the Greek Old-calendar Milan Synod. The priest in charge is Hieromonk Bartholomew. -Nectarios 02:39, September 19, 2007 (PDT)
Thanks, Nectarios. What do you know about the canonical status of the Milan synod? Also, do they have more than one monk there, and are they friendly to non-Milan people? I know very little about the Milan synod. Thanks! — FrJohn (talk)
The Milan Synod is an uncanonical Orthodox Christian jurisdiction. They are the most moderate of all the Greek Old-calendarists jurisdictions. They are very friendly to the OCA. But of course like all Old-calendarist parishes and monasteries, you may find some hostility. Of course this happens in any Orthodox Church that has one distinctive ethnic identity. They are good people. -12:52, September 22, 2007 (PDT) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Poepoe77 (talkcontribs) .
I know something about the Milan Synod. It is from here. It is a Churches "in resistance", a Florinite church. It is not a good monastery :( Arthasfleo 00:40, September 20, 2007 (PDT)
"Not good" here I assume just means non-canonical, outside the fold? — FrJohn (talk)
Not good from all of the points of view. Cannonical, salvation, and likeable for God. I love our church, not the schismatic one. :) Arthasfleo 03:18, September 21, 2007 (PDT)
The old-Calendarists are a good and faithful people. I don't agree with their politics, but they are very much Orthodox Christians. They are uncanonical, which means their canonical autonomy is not recognized because they do not commune with the Ecumenical Throne. This does not mean they lack canonicity, which is something completely different. Remember Russia, Serbia, Bulgaria, Georgia and many of the other autocephalous churches were out of communion with Constantinople at some time in their history and labelled "uncanonical". Were they schismatics? Were they not liked by God? There are many Russian saints who were proclaimed during the schism between Russia and Constantinople after the Council of Florence. Were they not saints? Were they not Orthodox? In the 90s the Moscow Patriarch broke off communion with the Constantinople Patriarch, was Pat Alexey II a schismatic? Of course not! -Nectarios 12:19, September 22, 2007 (PDT)
Friends, forgive me! I've edited some of the comments to try to take out the personal elements. The issue of the Old Calendarists can be difficult - there are real and remaining tensions. We should recognize the histories involved, while not making light of the profound significance of schism. — FrJohn (talk) 14:34, September 22, 2007 (PDT)

Iveron Icon

Something should be written for our Holy Icon here in Hawaii. I will ask permission from the Icon's Guardian to include something. People should know about this.

Personal tools
Namespaces
Variants
Actions
Navigation
interaction
Donate

Please consider supporting OrthodoxWiki. FAQs

Toolbox