User talk:Fr Lev

From OrthodoxWiki
(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Wikipedia article: new section)
 
(19 intermediate revisions by 8 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
Fr Lev., bless. I am from Romanian Orthodox Church, and I've been part of all these events with ECOF. I've all documents, and met all protagonists. All informations are true: you want more details ?
+
== [[Talk:Liturgy of St. Tikhon of Moscow]] ==
In France, you can ask every canonical jurisdiction about this. More, you can obtain informations from the Romanian Mitropolia.
+
Gilles Bertrand Hardy was married with Constance (Nathalie) de Castelbajac in 1995. Still live with her. Have you seen the divorce judgement ? NO.It doesn't exist.
+
Romanian documents (1993 and 2001)states that Germain is deposed, and reduced to laity state. You can check. Every Church follow these decision, by refusing communion with him and his clergy.
+
You probably know there are even worst things to say...
+
You must allow me to write Romanian Church considers Germain deposed, and in France ECOF is non-canonical. We can write that ECOF is not ok with that, considers itself as an autocephal orthodox church, but facts are here.
+
I join comments from french quality websites like orthodoxie.com.
+
Please to meet you, from wich Church are you ?
+
Forgive me and pray for me
+
  
:[[User:Gilkerie]] writes "You must allow me to write Romanian Church considers Germain deposed, and in France ECOF is non-canonical. We can write that ECOF is not ok with that, considers itself as an autocephal orthodox church, but facts are here." -- Without being familiar with this history at all, this makes sense to me and does not sound unfair. We should strive for the best documentation on this possible. — [[User:FrJohn|<b>FrJohn</b>]] ([http://www.orthodoxwiki.org/User_talk:FrJohn&action=edit&section=new talk]) 00:12, June 1, 2007 (PDT)
+
I've rolled the Talk page back, as per your request.  &mdash;[[User:ASDamick|<font size="3.5" color="green" face="Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman">Fr. Andrew</font>]] <sup>[[User_talk:ASDamick|<font color="red">talk</font>]]</sup> <small>[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|<font color="black">contribs</font>]] <font face="Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman">('''[[User:ASDamick/Wiki-philosophy|THINK!]]''')</font></small> 01:56, August 6, 2008 (UTC)
  
'''Texte gras'''SITUATION IN FRANCE'''Texte gras'''
+
Many thanks! --[[User:Fr Lev|Fr Lev]] 02:04, August 6, 2008 (UTC)
I think it is quite important to inform readers about the situation as it is. And, in France, all the canonical Orthodoxy considers ECOF being non-canonical, and bishop Germain deposed. You can ask every diocese, the A.E.O.F, St Serge Institute...
+
When a laity come to join a canonical diocese, what happens ? If he was a member of ECOF after 1993, he receive anointment of Myrron, the sacrament of Confirmation  or "Chrismation" as in baptisma. And then only he can receive holy gifts.
+
If it is a member of ECOF clergy after 1993, he is examinated by a canonical commission, and if there is no problems, is ordained by a canonical bishop.
+
That clearly means that for Orthodox Church in France (canonical one), ECOF is non-canonical and its sacraments after 1993 have no value.
+
  
It does not mean that situation is fair, that Germain and ECOF were wrong, but that's the situation, as it is.
 
  
Most, to say the truth, nearly all french orthodoxs were formed and instructed by ECOF, french traductions were done by ECOF, and still of a very high quality. Contribution of ECOF to French Orthodoxy is enormous and well known. There are ex-members of ECOF in all dioceses of canonical churches established in France, most french priests come from ECOF. French orthodoxs still grateful to ECOF, its foundators like bishop Jean, Maxime Kovalevsky (his litugical chant is still used for instance in Romanian Deanery)and all the work done.
+
== Edits to Great Schism ==
Bishop Marc (Alric), vicar of Metropolitan Joseph, was a member of ECOF!
+
 
So, every body knows the true story of ECOF, and the subject stills touchy and painful to many french orthodoxs.
+
Fr.
That 's why we cannot, to my opinion, let false or incomplete informations about its canonical status written.
+
 
People who want to join ECOF must know the truth, and choose to embrase the situation of canonical isolation, the western rite, difficulties about M.Germain must be accepted and so on. They can choose to fight this situation, by considering like fr Lev ECOF is right.
+
With all due respect, the form of date 1054 A.D. is correct english. I don't understand the edit.
 +
 
 +
Jaye (Jacifus)
 +
 
 +
: Following Latin, the more traditional syntax is to place ''AD'' before the number (e.g., AD 1054), though the reverse is now becoming more common. &mdash;[[User:ASDamick|<font size="3.5" color="green" face="Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman">Fr. Andrew</font>]] <sup>[[User_talk:ASDamick|<font color="red">talk</font>]]</sup> <small>[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|<font color="black">contribs</font>]] <font face="Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman">('''[[User:ASDamick/Wiki-philosophy|THINK!]]''')</font></small> 22:38, December 4, 2008 (UTC)
 +
 
 +
The ''Chicago Manual of Style'' indicates that AD should be used without periods and should precede the year. ''Anno Domini'' means "in the year of our Lord," so it would look odd to write "1054 in the year of our Lord." Personally, I would prefer using "CE" instead of "AD." As scholars agree that Christ was born in or around 4 BCE, it seems very odd to have to say that Christ was born "four years Before Christ." --[[User:Fr Lev|Fr Lev]] 01:34, December 5, 2008 (UTC)
 +
 
 +
==Talk:Sarum Use==
 +
Hello Fr,
 +
I was trying to add some comments to this page, and when i tried to save it removed all existing comments. Tried to undo the revision, and the undo did not save. Not able to restore,,can you please help?? Thanks,
 +
[[User:Angellight 888|Angellight 888]] 20:51, August 26, 2008 (UTC)
 +
 
 +
==Help on [[misotheism]] article==
 +
Hello Father I was hoping for some help on the misotheism article.  
 +
[[User:LoveMonkey|LoveMonkey]] 17:08, August 30, 2008 (UTC)
 +
 
 +
== Wikipedia article ==
 +
 
 +
Hi.  Thanks so much for contributing yesterday on the Wikipedia talk page for "Catholic–Eastern Orthodox theological differences".  I hope we could convince you (and others) to join in further over there, especially in the "discussion" (?) that has been going on regarding the nature of the physical human body.  There are really only two editors "working (?) on this article right now, and they're mostly locked in an edit war over the writings of Vladimir Lossky and whether his view (essentially, as I understand it, that our material bodies didn't exist before the fall and won't exist after the resurrection) represents mainstream Orthodox belief or not. I've got a nagging suspicion that this may be a "creative" interpretation of what the Apostle Paul meant when he talked about the resurrection in I Corinthians 15 — but I fear there isn't much hope for a solution on Wikipedia unless we can get more knowledgeable Orthodox (or at least Orthodoxy-knowledgeable) people involved on the article — something that just doesn't seem to be happening so far. [[User:Richwales|Richwales]] 03:55, August 31, 2010 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 20:55, August 30, 2010

Contents

Talk:Liturgy of St. Tikhon of Moscow

I've rolled the Talk page back, as per your request. —Fr. Andrew talk contribs (THINK!) 01:56, August 6, 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks! --Fr Lev 02:04, August 6, 2008 (UTC)


Edits to Great Schism

Fr.

With all due respect, the form of date 1054 A.D. is correct english. I don't understand the edit.

Jaye (Jacifus)

Following Latin, the more traditional syntax is to place AD before the number (e.g., AD 1054), though the reverse is now becoming more common. —Fr. Andrew talk contribs (THINK!) 22:38, December 4, 2008 (UTC)

The Chicago Manual of Style indicates that AD should be used without periods and should precede the year. Anno Domini means "in the year of our Lord," so it would look odd to write "1054 in the year of our Lord." Personally, I would prefer using "CE" instead of "AD." As scholars agree that Christ was born in or around 4 BCE, it seems very odd to have to say that Christ was born "four years Before Christ." --Fr Lev 01:34, December 5, 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Sarum Use

Hello Fr, I was trying to add some comments to this page, and when i tried to save it removed all existing comments. Tried to undo the revision, and the undo did not save. Not able to restore,,can you please help?? Thanks, Angellight 888 20:51, August 26, 2008 (UTC)

Help on misotheism article

Hello Father I was hoping for some help on the misotheism article. LoveMonkey 17:08, August 30, 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia article

Hi. Thanks so much for contributing yesterday on the Wikipedia talk page for "Catholic–Eastern Orthodox theological differences". I hope we could convince you (and others) to join in further over there, especially in the "discussion" (?) that has been going on regarding the nature of the physical human body. There are really only two editors "working (?) on this article right now, and they're mostly locked in an edit war over the writings of Vladimir Lossky and whether his view (essentially, as I understand it, that our material bodies didn't exist before the fall and won't exist after the resurrection) represents mainstream Orthodox belief or not. I've got a nagging suspicion that this may be a "creative" interpretation of what the Apostle Paul meant when he talked about the resurrection in I Corinthians 15 — but I fear there isn't much hope for a solution on Wikipedia unless we can get more knowledgeable Orthodox (or at least Orthodoxy-knowledgeable) people involved on the article — something that just doesn't seem to be happening so far. Richwales 03:55, August 31, 2010 (UTC)

Personal tools
Namespaces
Variants
Actions
Navigation
interaction
Donate

Please consider supporting OrthodoxWiki. FAQs

Toolbox