Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

6549Re: [orthodox-synod] Naming names

Expand Messages
  • Kiril Bart
    Oct 3, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      I understand why you you didn't put his name on, just
      because behavior of the priest, who choose to become
      an example to his parisheners in eating chicken on
      Friday, despite presence of fish, or even I would
      assume vegetables, would be scandalous for Orthodox
      Sinful, subdeacon Kirill

      --- Hristofor <hristofor@...> wrote:
      > At 08:51 AM 10/3/2002, you wrote:
      > >Seeing as how the accusation of murder has
      > been made,
      > >I say that it is certainly binding on the
      > to check her facts
      > >and take this immediately to the hierarchical
      > authorities - not to
      > >a public list. As this took place "long
      > before there was a
      > >schism, what relevance does this have to the
      > current situation?
      > >Either this was proven at the time, (in which
      > why was no
      > >name provided in order to inform thise who
      are now
      > duped?),
      > >or it was not proven, or perhaps not even
      > to the hierarchy
      > >at the time - which is itself an issue the
      > can address.
      > For the most part, I personally have no idea who
      > these priests are. A
      > dilemma does exist in whether to "name
      names" when
      > you post to a list such
      > as this. For example, assuming it to be true,
      > is the possibility
      > that the abortion story was "public
      > either in the parish or in a
      > limited geographic area. And, there is also the
      > possibility that no
      > punishment was meted out to the individual.
      > assuming both the story
      > to be true and the circumstances I mentioned to
      > correct, I would feel
      > uncomfortable posting the name of the priest.
      > As a (much!) milder example, I recently posted a
      > message regarding
      > vespers-to-vespers fasting and what a priest
      > in public, at a St
      > Herman's Conference. Since time tends to fade
      > memories, I purposely did NOT
      > state his name, since I may not have had all the
      > facts correctly. I called
      > him up and related the recent thread to him and
      > post. He thanked me for
      > not mentioning his name (!), since that may have
      > been understood by some as
      > de facto acceptability. In fact, Friday evening
      > weddings, although allowed
      > by the Church, are something that will be open to
      > interpretation by local
      > practice, the priest, bishop, jurisdiction etc.
      > real issue is with the
      > reception itself, since as he pointed out, it
      > be next to impossible
      > to have a totally lenten reception, given the
      > expectations. For
      > example, fish could be easily served, but unless
      > was prepared by the
      > Sisterhood, but it be 100% lenten? What about a
      > lenten wedding cake? Would
      > music be played? Liquor served?
      > Oops, I see I have gone out on a tangent!Sorry! I
      > had better quit.
      > Hristofor

      Do you Yahoo!?
      New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo!
    • Show all 73 messages in this topic