[Tyncneiff]

Am reading this forum for a long time lot of people coming here .As you knew I am born and I living in country were 80 percent of people declare them self's as a orthodox .But of 6,4 mil of people who declare them self's as a Orthodox only 4% are attending church services .
We have a lot of temples but mostly they are empty .When someone sad that he or she is a Orthodox people see him/her like someone who is old-fashioned ,conservative or even worse .
Most of you people living in most progressive countries .Can you tell me do you see orthodox as a something old and retrograde?
How you explaining people what is your religion ?
I would like to "tray" American ,Australian,English Orthodoxy .
I am amazed wit oll of you .

[Machater]

I guess it is the difference of being born into royalty or being brought into royalty. The latter, maybe , appreciate it more

[dalnecymync]

Hello Mr Nebojsa, I am a recent convert to Romanian Orthodox so a close neighbor of yours although I now live in London. The Church I attend now is shared with an English Church in Fleet Street London but the Iconastis comes from a Church in Bucharest. The services are primarily Romanian with a little bit of English. When I have mentioned my conversion people are initially surprised but see it as a good thing and are not judgmental, however most of them are entirely unfamiliar with what it actually means. Interestingly because of their unfamiliarity (with the exception of the Greek and other Orthodox immigrant communities) it appears not to be considered something old and retrograde but more foreign and exotic and all of the Christian Orthodox I have met so far have been born into it rather than converted. Conversion may be more common in the USA than in the UK but I cannot comment on that but this may be because of the Orthodox Church of America and the primacy of English over the immigrant languages and less so in England because of the historical evolution of the Church in England. I was more likely to experience the old fashioned view with the younger generation (sub 18 years old) when I was in Romania and I found that view more common in the city than in the country where the Churches are well attended and many new ones still being built.

[realnilkless]

I can, of course, speak only for myself. I have been through periods of my life where I have been called liberal (of the European style) or conservative, both socially and politically. Coming from an evangelical protestant background and being more educated than some (with 3 post graduate degrees) I was searching for "the original church that Jesus had founded." What I found was something timeless, not retrograde although in one meaning of the word, certainly old.

I think it was when I realized that I didn't really want or need to know about God but to know Him. This necessitated being able to accept what was coming from my heart to as being 'real'. Then I started an ongoing and still continuing process of realizing that much of what I found coming from my mind was not true and often not 'real'. (As an aside because I live in the world, and the western world in particular, much of my interaction with people is on the level of rational thoughts and not on what I hold to be spiritual true. Yes this makes me a candidate for being called schizophrenic.)

You ask how do I explain Orthodoxy to people. I don't really try to explain it, I can give some history to those who want it but it is sharing what I stated in the preceding has interested some people in Orthodoxy, or at least in my experience of Orthodoxy.

I hope that this is somewhat responsive to your post.

[Qnnoshxj]

It is sad to see empty churches and the one I frequent seems to have dwindled in attendance. But in UK there has been more people tonsured into the clergy roles within the Russian, Greek and Romanian jurisdictions.
I don't think Orthodox people see their church as old and retrograde, well not the practising ones because they know why the church is "old" and stick to Holy Tradition and Teachings handled down for nearly 2000 years.

If I was to explain the church, I would say that we are the Original church that hasn't changed much since it was handed down by the Apostles through Our Lord.
But people appreciate it if you admit you do not know some things because they know you are not lying and trying to make things up to fill their enquiries.

[ZXRamon]

Thank you all ,from my point of view ,and from my life experience ,the Orthodoxy is religion of differences.
For example in my home country the lot of people going to temple every Sunday,and on great holidays .
But only few know way they need to stand up ,or way they need to take flash and blood of Christ .
Mostly the is a lot of superstition here ,on other hand some people are 100% Orthodox wit life and knowledge .
And little bit commercial break the best Christmas in my life I had in monastery of Hopovo it is 15 miles from my home .
Every one is welcome ,who like I can provide bedroom,and meals so it will be quite amassing to see this

[MgpojuWy]

Mr. Nebojsa,

I don't wish to dispense with your personal observations and questions, but the fact is that the entirety of mankind has been in the same boat now for about 500 years, with traditional religious beliefs being consigned to the realm of superstition that holds people back from making true progress, and a great faith is placed in economics and politics and industrialization and commercialization, and psychiatry, and scientific development, etc. to save man from what ails him. Until these false hopes in peoples' minds are finally dashed by the weight of reality, and people begin to seriously consider spiritual reality as supreme, and seriously begin searching for spiritual truth, and not in a narcissistic manner, then the fact is that sincere believers must continue in the daily prayers, worship, almsgiving and simplicity, not just as a path toward personal salvation, but to keep the lamp of true faith alive until others are ready. Eventually there will be a spiritual revival that is real, and not just a burst of religiosity. And you will see not just average people flocking to the altar, but people who now are writing nihilistic plays, producing nihilistic music and movies, writing pointless theses in sociology, who have recognized that is all straw, flocking to the altar as well.

[WaicurtaitfuT]

Hi Mr. Nebojsa,

Welcome to Monachos.

As you have said:

. . . Orthodoxy is religion of differences.

If you could take a wider poll here in the United States of America, I think you would see quickly that Orthodoxy in America is a religion of differences.

And, I can hear some firing up the cliche machines now as I continue to type; but, once we leave the land of brochures and get to where the rubber meets the road . . . in order to be honest we would have to say that there are different schools of thought to be found about what the Orthodox Way is in America. Anyone who disagrees with this statement is either a very new convert or has a fine collection of rose colored glasses.

If you remain here as a member on Monachos for a longer period, this will become apparent to you as some folks will state what they believe to be the Orthodox Way and then do everything in their power to defend and prove their view when it is challenged by another who was taught something different.

And, why is this? Both you and OJ have pointed to a prevalent superstition. And, Owen has written:


. . . with traditional religious beliefs being consigned to the realm of superstition that holds people back . . .
I have to wonder if their is a kind of link here? Do you see what I mean? Who is it that is responsible for 'teaching'/promoting traditional religious beliefs? Who is it that is responsible for this religion of differences?

[SodeSceriobia]

Theres ebbs and flows in all religions. Certain generations are lazy, yet the next generation may get a spark and revive attendance and learning. Certain decades may see a small spike up or down. Sometimes a living saint can motivate the people and interest them to learn. Sometimes an empty temple gets a new dynamic priest and fills up, other times a bnot so good priest and attendance drops. All in all attendance is always less than 10% of the whole. Here in the United States i hear numbers of 35% of the entire population regularly attend church. This is utter nonsense. If 35% attended church sunday mornings their would be traffic jams in the streets and churches would be the size of football stadiums. Ihear 23% of the greek Orthodox attend church regularly in America, but during the holidays attendance goes up tenfold not fourfold.

[bahrains27]

NOTE: It is not my intent to open a hornets' nest.

I often wonder about the future or Orthodoxy in the US and Canada. Although more churches use English in services, I find that the organization of overlapping jurisdictions based upon ethnicity if is not right. I don't think language is necessarily the problem.

The United States is a melting pot. It is a land of assimilation, at least when it comes to language. We should be one, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic church in the Americas headed by a newly created Patriarch of the Americas. Having grown up in a small town with a surprisingly large immigrant and Orthodox population, we watched our church slowly sink. The first generation Americans would usually take the religion of their spouses or would not come to church.

I do not advocate "modernizing" the liturgy. We all saw what that did to attendance in Church of Rome. Although I do not agree with everything His Holiness, Benedict XVI may advocate, I do believe he has help rejuvenate it by officially adopting the so-called Tridentine Mass as the Extraordinary Rite of the Liturgy that may be used any time and any where without a Bishop's permission. (I was shocked at how similar the Tridentine Mass is the Liturgy. (There was a renaissance when a new American-born priest, Fr. David B.) became our priest. He introduced more English into the Liturgy, but most important was his dedication to Sunday School classes.)


I did not mind the use of Greek in church. I learned to read and chant in it, and would take off toward the end of Holy Week to be the cantor for the Church while the regular cantor worked.

Many of us who were not in the plurality felt left out as the plurality spoke Greek, while the rest of us, i.e., Serbs, Lebanese, Romanians, Macedonians (NO ETHNIC REMARKS PLEASE, include "self-styled" or similar insulting language referring to Slavic Macedonians), spoke English..always. My mother would scold me for speaking to her in Macedonian because she thought it was rude.

The immigrant population is dying off. A unified church seems to me to be one solution. I know I will likely get flack over this, but it is a forum for debate. (I wonder if the census has released religious affiliation date. However, I'm not sure whether that the question was asked.)

Let the church have pews and kneelers if the churches so choose. Let them have organs. There are Orthodox Churches that don't just have elecctric organs, but real organs (i.e., pipe organs). (I prefer a Serbian or Russian Choir any day over an organ, and I do love organ music

There's strength in numbers, and a combination of all of the jurisdictions would get the Church noticed. We may lose followers, but in week, But in the long term, I know that our churches will go together

If I have offended, I as for forgiveness.

Just my opinion.

Jimmy

[Kiliunjubl]

You are right, it is a hornets' nest.

Orthodox unity could happen tomorrow if everyone, regardless of background, went to Church at their nearest Orthodox Parish. Parishes would be "forced" to use more English for pastoral reasons and dioceses would soon arise to reflect this new reality. The fact is, however, certainly in this country, that "Greeks" prefer Greek churches, "Russians" Russian etc.

There isn't a great call from the people for unity to happen: they maybe would want it on an interlectual level but not emotionally; the great majority are happy with the status quo and until that changes, jurisdictional unity will likely be a long way off.

Wishing you a joyful fast
In Xp

Alex

[santorio]

At least we have Pan Orthodox talks in this country now. Deciding on joint publications and policies. This is a step in the right direction.

[Machater]

A unified church seems to me to be one solution. I know I will likely get flack over this, but it is a forum for debate.

This is a debate that has raged on for years, even before the internet, and will continue to do so no doubt until the second coming. At this point I want to make a point of reminding would be posters that this forum is not for debate, but rather it is for the discussion of Orthodox Christianity in its patristic, liturgical and monastic expressions. Other debate - including that which focuses on Church politics - is outside the scope of this forum. There are plenty of other venues on the internet and beyond for this debate to occur. Thus whatever comments you wish to make on this topic, please note that they must be rooted in and based on pastristics, liturgical practice or monasticism.

Fr David Moser

[KirillAristov]

Orthodox unity could happen tomorrow if everyone, regardless of background, went to Church at their nearest Orthodox Parish. Parishes would be "forced" to use more English for pastoral reasons and dioceses would soon arise to reflect this new reality.
Alex

I heard a talk that Met. Jonah did once where someone asked the question about this. He said that canonically, we should all be going to the closest parish, regardless of ethnic backgrounds, but instead we have people that will drive an hour, passing 2 or 3 churches sometimes to get to the one they are used to.

Sbdn. Anthony

[mirzaterak]

I heard a talk that Met. Jonah did once where someone asked the question about this. He said that canonically, we should all be going to the closest parish, regardless of ethnic backgrounds,

In a situation where there was only one administrative structure, this would be true - each parish has its own geographical territory and it is forbidden in the canons for one priest to intrude on the "territory" of another parish. Thus the people who live in the geographical territory of that parish belong to that parish. But, that isn't even the way it works in Orthodox cultures let alone in a heterogeneous culture like that of the US. People can and do cross the geographical borders of the parish at will. And in the US each jurisdiction has different "geographical territories" for its parishes that are established with no regard for the parishes of the other jurisdictions. This will probably never change. Metropolitan Jonah is a man of ideals - and that is what makes him so appealing. But not all ideals are compatible with or doable in the "real world". Doesn't mean we shouldn't strive for ideals, but it also doesn't mean that all ideals will be realized.

Fr David

[Verriasana]

First, I am not sure that only 4% of Serbian people attend Church.

Second, a very prominent Orthodox figure's (in this country) article was published some days ago in a very well known newspaper of this country. And that newspaper linked it to a social network for readers' feedback. It was a pity to see how people responded and ridiculed us because of that article. I do not blame them because they know nothing about Orthodoxy and that was their first taste. And I can not imagine a worse way to be introduced to Orthodoxy.

The article mentioned how he was a convert and some sentences later this prominent Orthodox mentioned how he wanted the Orthodox Church to be like the RC and Protestant Church in certain aspects. Hello? I thought you converted! Why would you want to take *my* Orthodoxy and make it like the Churches you left for a reason, or more? Why would you want to take my Orthodoxy about which my ancestors shed blood and make it like the things you left behind?

I am very upset with this article because it scandalized many non Orthodox people as I saw from the feedback and that was the first and maybe only introduction they had with Orthodoxy! He wanted to make us more "evangelical" (I do not see why we are thought of as non-evangelical) and look how well the non-Orthodox responded to that article. Also please do not equal having money to the success of a Church! A Church is successful not by the amount of money it has but by the Saints it produces.

[arerrurrY]

Is there a reason you are withholding the name of the paper and author? I think I read the same article as you, and, if so, have a response, but I don't want to post something completely off topic.

[Poohoppesmase]

Rod Dreher, a columnist who goes by the nom de plume of "The Crunchy Conservative", wrote an article that appeared in the Washington Post What's so appealing about Orthodoxy. I enjoyed it very much, but there are those who choose to take offense. Some people resent anyone who is not Greek or Russian speaking about Orthodoxy.

The comments were exactly what I expected. Some Catholics opined him leaving the "real" Church or telling him he could have it all by joining the Byzantine Catholics, Protestants complaining about all that "meaningless ritual", and the really embarrassing responses from certain Orthodox as described above.

Or so it seems to this bear of little brain

Herman the neither Jew nor Greek Pooh

[RerRoktoido]

Rod Dreher, a columnist who goes by the nom de plume of "The Crunchy Conservative", wrote an article that appeared in the Washington Post What's so appealing about Orthodoxy. I enjoyed it very much, but there are those who choose to take offense. Some people resent anyone who is not Greek or Russian speaking about Orthodoxy.

The comments were exactly what I expected. Some Catholics opined him leaving the "real" Church or telling him he could have it all by joining the Byzantine Catholics, Protestants complaining about all that "meaningless ritual", and the really embarrassing responses from certain Orthodox as described above.

Or so it seems to this bear of little brain

Herman the neither Jew nor Greek Pooh

No, dear Herman. I did not read and speak about that article here. And I do not see you "liking" that newspaper on that social network so there is no way you are speaking here about the same comments I read (and there were not upset RC or Protestants in the place I am talking about form the comments I read). Please do not assume, and please do not assume I do not like non-Greeks, or non-Russians speaking about Orthodoxy. Thanks.

[XYTommy]

Something that helped me get used to things, a little, in my own parish, was the service book, which has two languages in it. (Also, meeting people helps, of course, but that took place over time.) In my former church, I was used to bringing the daily missal, or using a booklet if the local church subscribed to it. In my current parish, being able to read the two things on facing pages helped me a lot. The church bulletin has the hymns, and uses transliteration- which helped me be able to chip in on the singing. I was thinking of making my own booklet for a couple extra things (like the shorter services) that aren't in the book. In any event, that was one way I made the language barrier more 'workable' for myself.