[quote author=Andrew link=topic=10538.msg164711#msg164711 date=1369160207] As long as the liturgy remains uncompromised, I don't see why you need to leave. And I don't think it will better the situation.
Perhaps you may find peace, but if you feel that the position you hold is the truth, you will have robbed people of that truth to lead a more comfortable life. It is your duty in my opinion to stay where you are. Your departure will not only weaken your friends', it will also send a message that what you preached could not have been the truth, because truth prevails.
You may also need to reflect on your position and determine if you are being too rigid. You must pick your battles wisely. There is a difference between incorrect practices that are essential to the faith and those that are peripheral.
Someone asked Abba Anthony, “What must one do in order to please God?” The old man replied, “Pay attention to what I tell you: whoever you may be, always have God before your eyes, whatever you do, do it according to the testimony of the holy Scriptures; in whatever place you live, do not easily leave it. Keep these three precepts and you will be saved.”
(emphasis mine)
Excellent video Andrew.
I agree... there's no need to leave at all the Coptic Church. There is no such thing as protestant lyrics or catholic lyrics. People should not be leaving the church for songs being sung in prayer meetings.
I do think that I have unfortunately experienced some things that no one really wants to have in their church: praying in tongues. This is not orthodox.
A lot of ex-protestant people who are now Coptic Orthodox, come to our Church to "revive" this "charisma" - i.e. the charisma of talking jibberish.
That's right folks. This is where we are right now.
Playing guitars, drums, and even clapping in the Church - im now OK with. But this praying in tongues is beyond me.
I met this deacon that told me that thanks to the fact that he can pray in tongues, because he doesn't know the lyrics or hymns we have in Coptic (because he's an ex-protestant) - he can NOW pray with us at least because he has been given the gift of praying in tongues.
This is what is being promoted in our Church (at least where I go to).
"And on that cross, when Jesus died, The wrath of God was satisfied".
Would you class these lyrics as Protestant/Catholic? Because they sure ain't Orthodox!
That's medieval catholic lyrics that I do not subscribe to. The orthodox church does not subscribe to that.. but then, all this is contemplatory - the Orthodox church says that Christ's death on the Cross was towards the Divine Justice. The Divine Justice doesn't mean God's Wrath.
I agree... there's no need to leave at all the Coptic Church. There is no such thing as protestant lyrics or catholic lyrics.
Yes there is. This isn't even debatable. Lyrics can certainly articulate a particular theological perspective.
One time I went to an Oriental Orthodox youth gathering with a young lady who was a former Protestant but is now very firm in Orthodoxy. At this gathering, some of the Coptic youth leaders were leading their youth in a Protestant song. This young lady turned to me in shock and said, "Do they even realize what this song is about?!?" It was about exactly what you've described below...what Charismatics falsely call "the holy ghost"...but you had to be familiar with the terminology to catch it because it wasn't overt. I doubt most of the youth who were actually singing the song knew what they were confessing. I like to think the servants leading them didn't either.
I do think that I have unfortunately experienced some things that no one really wants to have in their church: praying in tongues. This is not orthodox.
A lot of ex-protestant people who are now Coptic Orthodox, come to our Church to "revive" this "charisma" - i.e. the charisma of talking jibberish.
That's right folks. This is where we are right now.
Playing guitars, drums, and even clapping in the Church - im now OK with. But this praying in tongues is beyond me.
I met this deacon that told me that thanks to the fact that he can pray in tongues, because he doesn't know the lyrics or hymns we have in Coptic (because he's an ex-protestant) - he can NOW pray with us at least because he has been given the gift of praying in tongues.
This is what is being promoted in our Church (at least where I go to).
My brother, the one thing is a logical outgrowth of the other. The guitars, the clapping, the Protestant songs are all part of a worldly, Protestant approach to worship. The fake "holy ghost/tongues" stuff is this approach to worship brought to its logical conclusion.
Here is an article on exactly what this so-called "tongues" stuff really is:
That considered, I wouldn't advocate anyone leaving the Orthodox Church but I would advocate their leaving any ecclesiastical body which allows itself to be Protestantized because said body would no longer be Orthodox and has itself left the Church (in a universal sense). Therefore, to leave that body would be to remain in the True Church.
In the phrase "Coptic Orthodox Church" the "Orthodox" part is infinitely more important that the "Coptic" part.
[quote author=dthoxsasiPhilanethrope link=topic=10538.msg164743#msg164743 date=1369214706] [quote author=Andrew link=topic=10538.msg164711#msg164711 date=1369160207] As long as the liturgy remains uncompromised, I don't see why you need to leave. And I don't think it will better the situation.
Perhaps you may find peace, but if you feel that the position you hold is the truth, you will have robbed people of that truth to lead a more comfortable life. It is your duty in my opinion to stay where you are. Your departure will not only weaken your friends', it will also send a message that what you preached could not have been the truth, because truth prevails.
You may also need to reflect on your position and determine if you are being too rigid. You must pick your battles wisely. There is a difference between incorrect practices that are essential to the faith and those that are peripheral.
Someone asked Abba Anthony, “What must one do in order to please God?” The old man replied, “Pay attention to what I tell you: whoever you may be, always have God before your eyes, whatever you do, do it according to the testimony of the holy Scriptures; in whatever place you live, do not easily leave it. Keep these three precepts and you will be saved.”
(emphasis mine)
Excellent video AndrewReturnOrthodoxy.
I agree... there's no need to leave at all the Coptic Church. There is no such thing as protestant lyrics or catholic lyrics. People should not be leaving the church for songs being sung in prayer meetings.
I do think that I have unfortunately experienced some things that no one really wants to have in their church: praying in tongues. This is not orthodox.
A lot of ex-protestant people who are now Coptic Orthodox, come to our Church to "revive" this "charisma" - i.e. the charisma of talking jibberish.
That's right folks. This is where we are right now.
Playing guitars, drums, and even clapping in the Church - im now OK with. But this praying in tongues is beyond me.
I met this deacon that told me that thanks to the fact that he can pray in tongues, because he doesn't know the lyrics or hymns we have in Coptic (because he's an ex-protestant) - he can NOW pray with us at least because he has been given the gift of praying in tongues.
This is what is being promoted in our Church (at least where I go to). (correction mine)
Christ's Servant's post is precisely on point. God will surely deliver His Church from this poison in time as He delivered it from Arianism, etc., and the solution is certainly genuine and full participation in the Divine Liturgy. This fluff can't endure. In 20 years, it will be one more worldly trend that has come and gone while the Orthodox Church and Faith will remain unchanged.
The question is, how many faithful will have been seduced and fallen away in the meantime?
[quote author=Andrew link=topic=10538.msg164767#msg164767 date=1369298115] I just have to put this out there...am I the only one who thinks that the antagonist in RO's video sounds like HG Bishop Youssef??
To me, he just sounds like every 30-40 something, Egyptian-born youth servant whose heart is in the right place but leads the youth astray because he's operating under the flawed assumptions that:
1.) Adapting to Western culture = becoming Protestantized.
2.) The youth need this stuff or they'll run away.
And then, unfortunately, there is another class of people who are genuinely attracted to Protestantism (watch Protestant preachers at home, etc.) and are bringing this stuff into the Church on purpose. :(
God will surely deliver His Church from this poison in time as He delivered it from Arianism, etc., and the solution is certainly genuine and full participation in the Divine Liturgy. This fluff can't endure. In 20 years, it will be one more worldly trend that has come and gone while the Orthodox Church and Faith will remain unchanged.
I am not sure where this confidence comes from. We are not immune to heresy.
Copts saved the world from heresy at multiple occasions, but this is remotely irrelevant to their descendents. It is not genetic, and Copts have developed an inferiority complex towards western spirituality that makes them repulsive to their rich heritage and theology.
Rome was orthodox at one point of time, and fell, and is continuing to fall.
Protestantism, style and dogma, is fully embraced by the vast majority of hierarchy and laymen. No question about it.
God will not unconditionally save the CC (coptic church) from heresy. There is a certain synergy that needs to exist like in any other aspect of orthodox life for the Grace of God to prevail.
Right now, there is a current against Orthodoxy in the CC. The few bishops and priests who have spoken against Protestant worship and dogma during the past 40 years, and did nothing to prevent it, have shut up since the general bishop of Behera assumed the Papacy.
They have all been elevated to positions of power that would enable them to take meaningful actions against heresy, and they just fell into perpetual indifference. Some of them even joined in the blasphemous visit to the Vatican.
If you want to live Orthodoxy without any traces of western or eastern heresy, where would you go? Name one priest or one bishop, just one, who is truly Orthodox.
Egyptian-born youth servant whose heart is in the right place but leads the youth astray because he's operating under the flawed assumptions that:
1.) Adapting to Western culture = becoming Protestantized.
2.) The youth need this stuff or they'll run away.
This is not the problem. What power does this average servant command? None.
The problem is that the church is run as a business, and the only revenue is from people. You have to satisfy their need. You are going down to their level to appease them, so they come, and pay for the church projects and other things.
No one gives a rat's leg about the youth, it is the parents who they are after. You cater to these parents and their liberal youth while still giving them the sense that they are OK because they attend fundraising dinners organized by the "shersh", which is absolutely, positively a mega spiritual event, and they go to adulterous trips in Cancun, Mexico.
[quote author=Andrew link=topic=10538.msg164767#msg164767 date=1369298115] I just have to put this out there...am I the only one who thinks that the antagonist in RO's video sounds like HG Bishop Youssef??
Loooool. Might be so but Sayedna is my personal spiritual guide. I love him like my own father. So if it sounds like him, it is arbitray, and not in any way related to him. I hope your not trying to imply anything by that, Andrew.
Whatever accent I did, people would have a problem. I love HG.And he disagrees with much of the "developments" of our church as well. So I'm not sure that HG would fit the antagonist role
We are all offcourse entitled to our opinions. This is definitely an important subject and needs to be addressed despite it’s sensitivity. I will urge us all to fear and love the Priests, Bishops and Pope assigned to us. Given we are not in an authorative position to judge, we should keep our judgement to ourselves. I am saying this in love and I wish it is accepted as such. Maybe I misunderstood, and I really hope I did, but calling our Pope and some Bishops blasphemous is, in my opinion, out of line. We can dislike some actions due to our lack of understanding, or even due to our excessive understanding, but the truth is, God has not put us in an authorative postion to make such claims as He did to the disciples, as He did to Saint Athanasius (who at the time was only a simply deacon), as He did with Saint Severus. Over the past year, the story of Moses and Korah has spoken to me loudly in this regard and I simply wanted to share the same warning I felt God was warning me with. Even if a person in authority does a mistake, I should not judge their authority. I may express my lack of understanding of an action, but not of their authority which God has chosen through fasts and prayers. Voice your opinion. Voice your opinion to those in authority when given the opportunity. Pray that the truth is acted on. But let’s try not to bring down those in authority.
Please forgive me, I do not wish to offend anyone, rather share what I have been thought due to my weakness.
[quote author=qawe link=topic=10538.msg164768#msg164768 date=1369303748] [quote author=Andrew link=topic=10538.msg164767#msg164767 date=1369298115] I just have to put this out there...am I the only one who thinks that the antagonist in RO's video sounds like HG Bishop Youssef??
I have been trying to understand what exactly is the problem here. It seems to me that this thread has become some sort of proverbial "Everything I don't like about the Coptic Church" relabelled as "Protestantism in the Coptic Church". This is the problem when people speak in generalizations. It looks like we've thrown in "old school" padegogical methods vs. contemporary methods into that bag. Ignoring Acts 23:5, we've thrown in our leaders and high priests into that bag. We've thrown in ecumenism into that bag. And I'm counting down the days for the "Everything in the Coptic Church is feminism" wagon to jump into that bag.
RO knows how much I respect his opinion. But I have to say that while everything he said in the video makes sense, it is flawed because it speaks in generalizations. He did say he was trying to voice his concern about "Hollywood" methods used to attract people into the church. I assume he has a particular incident in mind that has developed into a general condemnation of such methods to attract people into the Church. This, however, cannot become a general condemnation. It's one thing to use "Hollywood" methods during services (which the Orthodox Worship vs. Contemporary worship specifically addressed), it's another thing to say any type of "Hollywood" style theatrics is Protestant or heretic. If this were the case, then all the Coptic hagiographical movies of our saints would be Protestant. Obviously, they are not. Obviously, these movies were meant to raise the spirituality of people (and the youth) back to the fact that our Coptic Church is a purchased and strengthened by blood and martyrdom.
It's also another thing to say there is a trend to use Protestant and Catholic lyrics. Again, without mentioning specific songs and specific lyrics, we are condemning everything while in reality it is a more accurately a condemnation of lyrics or songs I personally don't like. If I were to argue that all songs in the Coptic Church must be specifically Coptic Orthodox, then we have narrowed the choices to songs with 2 criteria: 1. songs that are Coptic in origin (and really that claim is very hard to prove unless the song is in the Coptic language or melismatic) and 2. songs that specifically address a Orthodox theology. The second one is a little easier to show. However, there are two additional problems. First, most Catholic songs (not all) show an Orthodox theology. For example, "Here I am, O Lord" speaks of the missionary love of God to save all who call to him as Isaiah describes in chapter 6 of his book. The Catholic Church, as an Apostolic Church, does believe in the Trinity, the Incarnation, the veneration of St Mary and the saints, and many other Orthodox beliefs and their songs reflect that Orthodox theology. Secondly, some Coptic hymns are simply one word (for example, Alleluia for the midnight Kiahk Psalmody. No theology here.) Some Coptic hymns are simply a recitation of a Psalm or scripture passage as are some Protestant songs. It seems to me, it's not the content or the lyrics that is the issue, but the music and the performance of the song. Labelling everything that is not my accustomed practice as Protestant is intellecutal dishonesty.
Additionally, we must differentiate songs that are part of the liturgical services, songs that are used for fellowship gatherings, songs that are used for ecumenical services, and songs that are used for personal edification and spirituality.
The fact is not all people will experience Christ through melismatic Coptic songs. Not all people will experience Orthodoxy in the same way. I personally want all Copts in all ages to experience Coptic Orthodoxy with the super long melismatic diverse hymns (which are very Orthodox) instead of generalizing that all services are too long. But I cannot condemn a person to heresy if he enjoys a particular non-Coptic Christian rock band and finds Christ in it. It will become an issue if he tries to move that musical style from personal worship back into liturgical services.
We also can't place all the blame on others. If we want to find a way to combat rising Protestantism within the Coptic Church, maybe we should at least have a working foundation defining what is Coptic Orthodoxy first. We can't condemn something that isn't Coptic, if we can't agree what is Coptic. In the ecumenical threads a while back, I proposed a definition of the Orthodox Church that came from St Shenouda the Archimandrite: a litany of paradoxes. The Church is the church of the strong and the church of the weak, the healthy and the sick, the mother and the child, the father and the mother. It is not the Church for the strong only, the healthy only, the craddle Copt, etc. No one really agreed or disagreed with this definition. So until we can come up with a definition of Orthodoxy that is not "my way or the highway", we are all to blame for the rise of "Protestantism" within the Coptic Church.
This brings me to my final point. Since we are all to blame, and we do not have any authority as the clergy do, it is the utmost shame that people have the audacity to blame the bishops and priests, or "the general bishop of Behera [who] assumed the papacy" or the encourage dissension and mutiny, or congratulate those who are vocal for abdication from the Church. Is this the example we find in Christ? No. If my physical son or father did the most heinous crime or abomination, he is still my son or father. I neither have the right to disown my own family nor should I have the attitude that I can simply abdicate when I don't agree. By definition, this is Protestantism.
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164799#msg164799 date=1369508407] RO knows how much I respect his opinion. But I have to say that while everything he said in the video makes sense, it is flawed because it speaks in generalizations. He did say he was trying to voice his concern about "Hollywood" methods used to attract people into the church. I assume he has a particular incident in mind that has developed into a general condemnation of such methods to attract people into the Church. This, however, cannot become a general condemnation. It's one thing to use "Hollywood" methods during services (which the Orthodox Worship vs. Contemporary worship specifically addressed), it's another thing to say any type of "Hollywood" style theatrics is Protestant or heretic. If this were the case, then all the Coptic hagiographical movies of our saints would be Protestant. Obviously, they are not. Obviously, these movies were meant to raise the spirituality of people (and the youth) back to the fact that our Coptic Church is a purchased and strengthened by blood and martyrdom.
Good to have you back, George, but it seems that you also approach my video with an "aniti-aniti-coptic church" methodology. I never once mentioned the term protestant or heretic. I mentioned points regarding spiritual observances. A generalization is not always flawed. To say that professing Christians adhere to some Christian creed is a generalization, but a correct one. For me to say that using Hollywood (the symbol of self-centerdness) for the selfless Christian profession is logical and is not by any stretch of the imagination flawed. One cannot use the symbols of modern sin for God's purpose. Whether or not Hollywood contains Holy people, or whether or not it can be used for good is 100% irrelevant. It has become the absolute symbol of our flawed society.
You are clearly misrepresenting my point, setting up a straw man. There is a difference between using multimedia for saint movies and using Hollywood themes for youth who are engulfed in a rapidly secularizing (and eventually atheistic) society. If you cannot see this difference, then I cannot see how this discussion could be carried out in logic.
Regarding the St. Shenouda paradoxes, I must say that the paradox exists now in the polar opposite. Those who wish to progress spiritualy are left to do so on their own outside the church, because the church is to busy catering to the "converts."
While you may disagree as you please, I must disagree with you, and further assert that you are wrong.
or congratulate those who are vocal for abdication from the Church. Is this the example we find in Christ? No. If my physical son or father did the most heinous crime or abomination, he is still my son or father. I neither have the right to disown my own family nor should I have the attitude that I can simply abdicate when I don't agree. By definition, this is Protestantism.
Another thing. This is example is unbelievably flawed. It is a complete reversal of the true state of things. It is not the father which leaves the crazy son, but the son who leaves the abusive and neglectful father. This is more than permissible, and more than expected. So it is not the father who is rejected a misbehaving son, but a son running away from a neglectful and abusive father. But again, you are able to pull out some wonderful analogy and make it seem like those most hurt are those who hurt most. I can only hope you don't actually believe what you said above.
I will just ignore Remnkemi like I always do because he is a coward and cannot engage in a discussion like a man, and he writes unsubstaintiated opinions suitable for an ignorant man like himself. God help him if his impotence extends beyond his posts and ideas to other areas of his life.
RO,
Good job. You are a great young man with enormous potential.
Some of what you've said makes a lot of sense. On other points, I disagree.
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164799#msg164799 date=1369508407] I have been trying to understand what exactly is the problem here. It seems to me that this thread has become some sort of proverbial "Everything I don't like about the Coptic Church" relabelled as "Protestantism in the Coptic Church".
I agree. We should stay focused. That said, it seems that the common thread in everyone's complaints has to do with the acceptance of some form of heterodox theology or practice.
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164799#msg164799 date=1369508407] It's also another thing to say there is a trend to use Protestant and Catholic lyrics.
No, it is not just about lyrics. It is also about certain forms of worship which have no place in the life of the Church as defined here:
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164799#msg164799 date=1369508407] If I were to argue that all songs in the Coptic Church must be specifically Coptic Orthodox, then we have narrowed the choices to songs with 2 criteria: 1. songs that are Coptic in origin (and really that claim is very hard to prove unless the song is in the Coptic language or melismatic) and 2. songs that specifically address a Orthodox theology. The second one is a little easier to show. However, there are two additional problems. First, most Catholic songs (not all) show an Orthodox theology. For example, "Here I am, O Lord" speaks of the missionary love of God to save all who call to him as Isaiah describes in chapter 6 of his book. The Catholic Church, as an Apostolic Church, does believe in the Trinity, the Incarnation, the veneration of St Mary and the saints, and many other Orthodox beliefs and their songs reflect that Orthodox theology.
This isn't as complicated as you're making it out to be. H.H. Pope Tawadros has already given us the very simple solution:
“Let us not forget that Unorthodox worship can pollute our being, leading to forgetfulness. It can cause one's mind to drift quite far, rendering him unable to value the Traditional Orthodox melodies and style of Church Worship.[...] Orthodox worship is distinct in its constant reminder of the real presence of Christ and His saints in our lives. We must be careful to ensure that the worship songs we use are Orthodox in their origin, lyrics, melodies and in their spirit. Communion and unity with Christ ought to be embedded within their meaning.”
Notice that His Holiness the Pope emphasizes that the songs utilized in our corporate worship should be wholly Orthodox not only in lyrics, but also in melody, spirit and origin! That is to say, they should come from an Orthodox source and represent an Orthodox approach to worshipping God.
That's it. Point blank. So we don't have to tediously evaluate contemporary "praise & worship" songs on an individual basis. If they come from Charismatic or Evangelical churches, they represent an approach to worship that is not Apostolic and has no place in our Church.
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164799#msg164799 date=1369508407] Secondly, some Coptic hymns are simply one word (for example, Alleluia for the midnight Kiahk Psalmody. No theology here.)
Even the length of time the priest or chanter holds a note or syllable in our Coptic hymns is imbued with meaning.
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164799#msg164799 date=1369508407] It seems to me, it's not the content or the lyrics that is the issue, but the music and the performance of the song.
Yes, the medium is the message. The form of worship is itself a manifestation of theology, and some forms of worship are foreign to our phronima and ethos.
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164799#msg164799 date=1369508407] Labelling everything that is not my accustomed practice as Protestant is intellecutal dishonesty.
Not my accustomed practice is one thing. Greek or Ethiopian or Armenian is not my accustomed practice, but it is Orthodox. Labeling Protestant forms of worship as Protestant, and therefore unacceptable, however, is not only honest but necessary.
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164799#msg164799 date=1369508407] Additionally, we must differentiate songs that are part of the liturgical services, songs that are used for fellowship gatherings, songs that are used for ecumenical services, and songs that are used for personal edification and spirituality.
Maybe we can distinguish between the Divine Liturgy and other forms of liturgical (i.e. corporate, communal) worship.
If someone wants to listen to Protestant songs in their private life, that's none of my business. If they try to being it into the life of the Church in any way, into our corporate worship, then we have a big problem, whether that means fellowship gatherings, youth meetings, or whatever.
Just for clarification, what do you mean by "ecumenical services"?
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164799#msg164799 date=1369508407] The fact is not all people will experience Christ through melismatic Coptic songs. Not all people will experience Orthodoxy in the same way.
That is true. This is why we have Western Rite Orthodoxy, Ethiopian Orthodoxy, Armenian Orthodoxy, etc. But it would be disingenuous to suggest that Orthodoxy could be experienced through a Protestant approach to worship. Like this:
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164799#msg164799 date=1369508407] I personally want all Copts in all ages to experience Coptic Orthodoxy with the super long melismatic diverse hymns (which are very Orthodox) instead of generalizing that all services are too long.
Agreed!
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164799#msg164799 date=1369508407] But I cannot condemn a person to heresy if he enjoys a particular non-Coptic Christian rock band and finds Christ in it. It will become an issue if he tries to move that musical style from personal worship back into liturgical services.
As I said, what people do in their private lives is their business, but if they try to move that kind of stuff not only into the Divine Liturgy, but into the corporate life of the Church in any way, it will be a problem.
The Holy Synod agrees. Look at all of the measures they've taken to curtail Protestant influence:
• Forbid priests to accept invitations to appear at Protestant gatherings unless they had first received the express approval of the Patriarchate (June 1996) • Warned against unauthorized “house meetings” and the spread of Protestant books, cassettes, and CDs (June 1996, June 2001) • Authorized a committee for the revising of religious books to remove any Protestant influence or doctrine, warning that “the statement that we are all one in Jesus is deceiving” (June 1998) • Warned specifically against music as a means of spreading Protestant influence and theology [H.H. Pope Shenouda III] (June 1998) • Declared that “clergy should be careful about teachers in church and check whether they are influenced by Protestant thought or not” (June 1998) • Convened a conference on how to face Protestant activities and how to protect the Coptic Orthodox Church from the spread of Protestant influence from the inside out (October 1998) • Instructed Orthodox clergy not to write introductions for non-Orthodox books so as not to give Protestants the opportunity to deliver a non-Orthodox message to Orthodox believers (May 1999) • Warned Orthodox Christians against attending non-Orthodox retreats (May 1999) • Warned Orthodox youth not to join in activities held in joint cooperation with Protestants or Roman Catholics, including sports activities, conferences and lectures, “since these are used for proselytism”; The Synod is explicit that “these are very dangerous issues” (June 2000) • Convened a conference to warn the Coptic Orthodox faithful against the activities of the Seventh Day Adventists (October 2002) • Organized a number of seminars, sermons, spiritual days and conferences stressing Orthodox dogma, differences with the Protestants, and explaining why the Coptic Orthodox Church rejects false unity, declaring that, “God is not only Love but the Truth” (June-September 2003) • Warned specifically against the activities of the Southern Baptist Convention, which published materials stating explicitly that they were targeting the Coptic Orthodox Christians of Egypt for conversion (June 2006) • Prohibited Coptic clergy from appearing on Protestant satellite channels (2009) • Prohibited Coptic Orthodox bookstores from carrying a number of heterodox titles, materials and publications (1999, 2005, 2007, 2009, 2010)
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164799#msg164799 date=1369508407] We also can't place all the blame on others. If we want to find a way to combat rising Protestantism within the Coptic Church, maybe we should at least have a working foundation defining what is Coptic Orthodoxy first. We can't condemn something that isn't Coptic, if we can't agree what is Coptic.
Personally, I don't care quite so much about defining what is "Coptic". There are Coptic Catholics, Coptic Protestants, there were Coptic gnostics. This is like defining what is Greek or what is Japanese or any other culture or nationality.
It is much more important to define what is Orthodox, and we already have a working definition of that, to the exclusion of heterodox faith and practice.
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164799#msg164799 date=1369508407] In the ecumenical threads a while back, I proposed a definition of the Orthodox Church that came from St Shenouda the Archimandrite: a litany of paradoxes. The Church is the church of the strong and the church of the weak, the healthy and the sick, the mother and the child, the father and the mother. It is not the Church for the strong only, the healthy only, the craddle Copt, etc. No one really agreed or disagreed with this definition. So until we can come up with a definition of Orthodoxy that is not "my way or the highway", we are all to blame for the rise of "Protestantism" within the Coptic Church.
It is not up to us to define Orthodoxy. It has been defined for us by the Ecumenical councils and the Fathers of the Church. It's just our place to stick with it. It's not "my way or the highway". It's Orthodoxy or the highway.
Where are we getting the idea that we have to define or redefine the Faith delivered once and forever for all the saints?
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164799#msg164799 date=1369508407] This brings me to my final point. Since we are all to blame, and we do not have any authority as the clergy do, it is the utmost shame that people have the audacity to blame the bishops and priests, or "the general bishop of Behera [who] assumed the papacy" or the encourage dissension and mutiny,
I agree that it is shameful and disrespectful to attack our fathers the bishops and priests. Far be it from me to raise my hand against God's anointed. However, it is our duty to stand up for Orthodox Faith and practice even if a bishop or priest is the one violating it. Such a thing can be done respectfully. We, as laymen, don't have to sit back and watch Orthodoxy eroded. Pope Shenouda of blessed memory gives the answer here:
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164799#msg164799 date=1369508407] or congratulate those who are vocal for abdication from the Church. Is this the example we find in Christ? No. If my physical son or father did the most heinous crime or abomination, he is still my son or father. I neither have the right to disown my own family nor should I have the attitude that I can simply abdicate when I don't agree.
We have to stick to Orthodoxy and the one Church established by Christ. If a portion of the Church departs by lapsing into heresy or accepting heterodox practice, then by leaving that necrotic organ we are not leaving the Church. We're far from that stage, however. For now, it is our duty to fight against heterodox influence in our Coptic Orthodox Church
[quote author=ShareTheLord link=topic=10538.msg164777#msg164777 date=1369327061] Lord have mercy.
We are all offcourse entitled to our opinions. This is definitely an important subject and needs to be addressed despite it’s sensitivity. I will urge us all to fear and love the Priests, Bishops and Pope assigned to us. Given we are not in an authorative position to judge, we should keep our judgement to ourselves. I am saying this in love and I wish it is accepted as such. Maybe I misunderstood, and I really hope I did, but calling our Pope and some Bishops blasphemous is, in my opinion, out of line. We can dislike some actions due to our lack of understanding, or even due to our excessive understanding, but the truth is, God has not put us in an authorative postion to make such claims as He did to the disciples, as He did to Saint Athanasius (who at the time was only a simply deacon), as He did with Saint Severus. Over the past year, the story of Moses and Korah has spoken to me loudly in this regard and I simply wanted to share the same warning I felt God was warning me with. Even if a person in authority does a mistake, I should not judge their authority. I may express my lack of understanding of an action, but not of their authority which God has chosen through fasts and prayers. Voice your opinion. Voice your opinion to those in authority when given the opportunity. Pray that the truth is acted on. But let’s try not to bring down those in authority.
Please forgive me, I do not wish to offend anyone, rather share what I have been thought due to my weakness.
Your post is written in a spirit of wisdom and charity and deserves to be addressed.
Wrong practices in the church cannot be justified by a stamp of authority. There is no difference between a mistake committed by a bishop or priest or a layman. If it is wrong it is wrong and it is not up to the hierarchy to interpret the faith according to their interests.
It is not an option for educated laymen to sit back and let others with heretical tendencies destroy the church. The Apostles forbid us to be indifferent. Please refer to the teaching of the Apostles below:
"Hear, O ye of the laity, how God speaks: “I will judge between ram and ram, and between sheep and sheep.” And He says to the shepherds: “Ye shall be judged for your unskillfulness, and for destroying the sheep.” That is, I will judge between one bishop and another, and between one lay person and another, and between one ruler and another (for these sheep and these rams are not irrational, but rational creatures): lest at any time a lay person should say, I am a sheep and not a shepherd, and I am not concerned for myself; let the shepherd look to that, for he alone will be required to give an account for me. For as that sheep that will not follow its good shepherd is exposed to the wolves, to its destruction; so that which follows a bad shepherd is also exposed to unavoidable death, since his shepherd will devour him. Wherefore care must be had to avoid destructive shepherds. (2.3.19)".
One of the greatest fathers of the church warns his people and all the generations to come from false unity and involving the church in worldly affairs. Please read below:
St. Hilary of Poitiers (+ A.D. 368), On the Ears of the Laity:
"Specious indeed is the name of Peace, and beautiful is the idea of Unity; but who can doubt that the only Unity of the Church and of the Gospel is the Peace of Christ? This is the Peace which He left us when He was going to the Father (John 20:19); this is the Peace, most dearly beloved brethren, which we ought to seek when lost, and which, when disturbed, we ought to compose, and which, when found, we ought to hold fast. But now we have an Antichristian Unity forced upon us. Strenuous endeavours are made by some that Christ may be denied when He is supposed to be preached. Men labour to maintain the cause of Christ by courting the powers of the World. O ye Bishops, I ask you to consider what were the suffrages which the Apostles asked for the preaching of the Gospel? By what powers of the World were they enabled to preach Christ, and to win the Nations from idols to God? When they sang hymns to God in prison and inbonds, and after scourgings (Acts 16:25), did they invoke the aid of an officer from the Palace? Did Paul, who was a spectacle in the theatre, ever gather together a Church by means of an Imperial Edict? Did he ask for the patronage of a Nero, a Vespasian, or a Decius? And yet those holy men, who laboured with their hands, and met in secret chambers and upper rooms, and traversed towns, villages, and countries in spite of decrees of Senates, and edicts of Kings, had they not the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven? And did not God stretch forth His Hand to help them by ordering the things of this world in such wise that Christ was more fully preached in proportion as the preaching of Christ was more strictly forbidden? But now, alas! earthly suffrages impose divine faith, and Christ is convicted of weakness by the canvassing of earthly patronage in behalf of His Name. Now the Church scares men by exile and imprisonment, and forces them to believe her by dint of banishment and bonds. She who was consecrated by the menaces of her persecutors, now hangs a suppliant on the condescension of those who communicate with her. She who was propagated by the banishment of her priests, now banishes priests. She who cannot be Christ’s, except the World hate her, now boasts that the World loves her. Such is now the condition of the Church in comparison with the Church which was entrusted to our keeping, and which we are now in danger of losing by reason of the treachery of Bishops. But thank God the people in our Churches believe what they hear. They hear there that Christ is God, and they therefore deem Him to be God. They hear there that He is the Son of God, and they believe His Sonship to be real. They hear that He existed ‘before all worlds,’ and they think this to mean that He existed always. And so the ears of our people are holier than the hearts of our Priests. (Contra Auxentius)"
Moreover, silence is condemned by the fathers. Read below:
St. Meletius of Antioch (+ A.D. 381):
"Do not show obedience to bishops who exhort you to do and to say and to believe in things which are not to your benefit. What pious man would hold his tongue? Who would remain completely calm? In fact, silence equates to consent. This was clearly indicated by John the Baptist, and by the Maccabees through their legislation, who went as far as risking death, without overlooking the fact that the law is susceptible to changes."
We are not allow to even mingle with those clergy who are wolves. Read below:
St. John Chrysostom (+ A.D. 407):
“What then, you say, “when he [the priest] is wicked, should we obey?’’ Wicked? In what sense? If indeed in regard to faith, flee and avoid him. (Homily 34 on Hebrews)"
If our fathers followed your proposed approach with regards to the inaction of the clergy regarding heresy or their support for heresy, Nestorius and others would have had their way and we would be confessing Christ in two persons now.
St. Cyril of Alexandria (+ A.D. 444):
“For while himself [Nestorius] in the midst of the Church was using profane babblings, a certain man of those who were of great piety and yet among the laity, but who had gathered within himself no mean learning, was moved with fervent and devout zeal and with piercing cry said that the Word Himself Who is before the ages endured a second Generation also, viz., that after the flesh and forth of a woman; the people being disturbed hereat, and the more part and wiser having honoured him with no mean praises, as pious and most full of wisdom and not imparticipate in uprightness of doctrine, the rest being mad against him, he [Nestorius] interrupting, straightway approves those whom by teaching his own he had destroyed, and whets his tongue against him who could not endure his words, yea and against the holy fathers who have decreed for us the pious definition of the Faith which we have as an anchor of the soul both sure and steadfast, as it is written. (Ad. Nest. 1.5)"
It was a layman who stopped Nestorius. We are grateful that he did not respect Nestorius.
I hope it is clear that calling the clergy out on their errors regarding faith is a duty and not an option .
First I want to apologize for misrepresenting your video. I thought I was clear when I said your video makes sense. I was not attacking your video on its content itself but its apparent generalization to make your point. I did not mean to say your video or your thoughts claim anything with a Hollywood theme is Protestant. I only wanted to show that through generalizations without specifics, a claim that Hollywood theme tactics are always wrong needs qualification and clarification. The example of saint movies would go against such a claim that all Hollywood theme tactics are always wrong. I unintentionally extended your claim that any Hollywood tactics are Protestant or heretic. You didn't say that. Others did. I simply wanted to show that something that represents a sinful milieu can be used for the glory of God, like cinematography. My old church was known for creating professional Christian plays and theatrical shows in English and Arabic performed at an auditorium (not in church) concerning Orthodox themes. It was not meant to replace Orthodox preaching in sermons and liturgies. It was meant to give an Orthodox view through modern medium. It did have Orthodox meaning. Everyone who attended enjoyed a different artistic form of Orthodox expression. Another good example is the Holy Pimolh children movies. It uses contemporary cinematography and animation. And it is definitely very, very Coptic Orthodox.
You said, "One cannot use the symbols of modern sin for God's purpose. Whether or not Hollywood contains Holy people, or whether or not it can be used for good is 100% irrelevant. It has become the absolute symbol of our flawed society." Paganism was the absolute symbol of evil in early Christianity. But the Copts "baptized" Pharaonic songs like Eporo and Pekethronos (assuming one can prove they were actually Pharaonic but that's another discussion). Copts "baptized" cultural events like Sham al nasseem. And it is relevant that God can use stereotypical sinful acts and sinners for good. If not, then what does Genesis 50:20 mean? What does Christ's cross mean?
Again, let me clarify. I am not advocating using sin or paganism for God's glory. But things which seem symbolic of sin, even sin and death itself, were used for salvation.
You also said, "It is not the father which leaves the crazy son, but the son who leaves the abusive and neglectful father. This is more than permissible, and more than expected. So it is not the father who is rejected a misbehaving son, but a son running away from a neglectful and abusive father. But again, you are able to pull out some wonderful analogy and make it seem like those most hurt are those who hurt most." First I do not understand what you mean when you say "those most hurt are those who hurt the most".
I don't think Christianity makes a distinction between the abused and abuser. Humanity abused God with sinful acts. God has "not abandoned us to the end but always visited us through His holy prophets and at the last days...." God told Hosea to marry a prostitute who abandoned him and a second time Hosea went back to her. He didn't have the attitude that I am justified to disown my abusing wife. Look at what St Peter says in 1 Peter 2:18-21. "Servants, be submissive to your masters with all fear, not only to the good and gentle, but also to the harsh. For this is commendable, if because of conscience toward God one endures grief, suffering wrongfully. For what credit is it if, when you are beaten for your faults, you take it patiently? But when you do good and suffer, if you take it patiently, this is commendable before God. For to this you were called, because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that you should follow His steps" Basically, even if you are abused and you take it patiently, you are commended. You are not commended if you abandon your family or believe you are wholly justified to abandon your family.
AntoniosNikolas, you said "“Let us not forget that Unorthodox worship can pollute our being, leading to forgetfulness. It can cause one's mind to drift quite far, rendering him unable to value the Traditional Orthodox melodies and style of Church Worship.[...] Orthodox worship is distinct in its constant reminder of the real presence of Christ and His saints in our lives. We must be careful to ensure that the worship songs we use are Orthodox in their origin, lyrics, melodies and in their spirit. Communion and unity with Christ ought to be embedded within their meaning.”
Notice that His Holiness the Pope emphasizes that the songs utilized in our corporate worship should be wholly Orthodox not only in lyrics, but also in melody, spirit and origin! That is to say, they should come from an Orthodox source and represent an Orthodox approach to worshipping God." Up to here what you wrote is similar to what I wrote. I completely agree with you.
Then you wrote, "That's it. Point blank. So we don't have to tediously evaluate contemporary "praise & worship" songs on an individual basis. If they come from Charismatic or Evangelical churches, they represent an approach to worship that is not Apostolic and has no place in our Church." When it's obvious, I can't disagree with you. Evangelical contemporary worship is not Orthodox worship. But what do you do when you can't "ensure that the worship songs we use are Orthodox in their origin, lyrics, melodies and in their spirit"? One could say get rid of all of them (and I personally concede to that view). What do you do when they come from Catholic sources? What do you do when you have no idea where they come from?
You also wrote, "It is not up to us to define Orthodoxy. It has been defined for us by the Ecumenical councils and the Fathers of the Church. It's just our place to stick with it. It's not "my way or the highway". It's Orthodoxy or the highway.
Where are we getting the idea that we have to define or redefine the Faith delivered once and forever for all the saints?" Practically, one is faced with a problem if one uses this definition of Orthodoxy. At one point you said it doesn't matter if it is Coptic, Ethiopian, Armenian, Western rite, Eastern rite, as long as it is Orthodox. But the Eastern rite Orthodox believe in seven councils and some will not consider anyone who doesn't believe in seven ecumenical councils are not Orthodox. By that definition, we are not Orthodox. I am not saying we have to accept seven ecumenical councils to be Orthodox. I am saying there are legitimate reasons why we must define Orthodoxy. Our fathers of the Church did not use ecumenical councils to define Orthodoxy. I think if one were to do a comprehensive analysis of patristic references and definitions of the Church, one will not see a rigid exclusivity approach but a mixed exclusivity/inclusivity approach. I found at least one father who said this.
Finally AntoniousNikolas, you said, "However, it is our duty to stand up for Orthodox Faith and practice even if a bishop or priest is the one violating it. Such a thing can be done respectfully. We, as laymen, don't have to sit back and watch Orthodoxy eroded." You are correct that we don't have to sit back and watch Orthodoxy erode. We are, however, obligated to rely solely on God to stop the erosion. If he chooses to use a laymen, then His will be done. However, the devil uses good intended Christian zeal against Christians. As you showed earlier, you gave a list of actions and decision by the Holy Synod against Unorthodox practices. So how can we conclude that a bishop or a priest is the one violating and eroding Orthodoxy? The Holy Synod and the clergy have done something about Protestant influences. This illustrates the danger of generalizations. It illustrates how the devil can convince us that we must first use our limited means to revolt and abdicate against the Church instead of waiting and trusting on God first, who fights for those whom He loves.
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164806#msg164806 date=1369540986] AntoniosNikolas, you said "“Let us not forget that Unorthodox worship can pollute our being, leading to forgetfulness. It can cause one's mind to drift quite far, rendering him unable to value the Traditional Orthodox melodies and style of Church Worship.[...] Orthodox worship is distinct in its constant reminder of the real presence of Christ and His saints in our lives. We must be careful to ensure that the worship songs we use are Orthodox in their origin, lyrics, melodies and in their spirit. Communion and unity with Christ ought to be embedded within their meaning.”
Notice that His Holiness the Pope emphasizes that the songs utilized in our corporate worship should be wholly Orthodox not only in lyrics, but also in melody, spirit and origin! That is to say, they should come from an Orthodox source and represent an Orthodox approach to worshipping God." Up to here what you wrote is similar to what I wrote. I completely agree with you.
Then you wrote, "That's it. Point blank. So we don't have to tediously evaluate contemporary "praise & worship" songs on an individual basis. If they come from Charismatic or Evangelical churches, they represent an approach to worship that is not Apostolic and has no place in our Church." When it's obvious, I can't disagree with you. Evangelical contemporary worship is not Orthodox worship. But what do you do when you can't "ensure that the worship songs we use are Orthodox in their origin, lyrics, melodies and in their spirit"? One could say get rid of all of them (and I personally concede to that view). What do you do when they come from Catholic sources? What do you do when you have no idea where they come from?
Okay, so if I'm understanding you correctly, we agree that, as His Holiness and the Holy Synod have both declared, the Protestant stuff is definitely out of bounds. Is that correct?
I'm not sure I understand the rest of your post though. Are you suggesting that some of the songs we already use are Roman Catholic in origin and must be excised as well for the good of the Church?
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164806#msg164806 date=1369540986] You also wrote, "It is not up to us to define Orthodoxy. It has been defined for us by the Ecumenical councils and the Fathers of the Church. It's just our place to stick with it. It's not "my way or the highway". It's Orthodoxy or the highway.
Where are we getting the idea that we have to define or redefine the Faith delivered once and forever for all the saints?" Practically, one is faced with a problem if one uses this definition of Orthodoxy. At one point you said it doesn't matter if it is Coptic, Ethiopian, Armenian, Western rite, Eastern rite, as long as it is Orthodox. But the Eastern rite Orthodox believe in seven councils and some will not consider anyone who doesn't believe in seven ecumenical councils are not Orthodox. By that definition, we are not Orthodox. I am not saying we have to accept seven ecumenical councils to be Orthodox. I am saying there are legitimate reasons why we must define Orthodoxy. Our fathers of the Church did not use ecumenical councils to define Orthodoxy. I think if one were to do a comprehensive analysis of patristic references and definitions of the Church, one will not see a rigid exclusivity approach but a mixed exclusivity/inclusivity approach. I found at least one father who said this.
I don't think that the Father you quoted would endorse the inclusion of heterodox practice. Rather, he seems to be saying that the Church is for everyone, not that the Church is for all sorts of practices and belief systems.
In the case of the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox, the approach to worship is the same. Our differences with the Eastern Orthodox are minor when compared to our differences with the Protestants. Let's not muddy the waters by trying to conflate the two.
What are you trying to say here exactly? Are you trying to create wiggle room by which some Evangelical/Charismatic practices could be integrated into the life of the Church?
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164806#msg164806 date=1369540986] Finally AntoniousNikolas, you said, "However, it is our duty to stand up for Orthodox Faith and practice even if a bishop or priest is the one violating it. Such a thing can be done respectfully. We, as laymen, don't have to sit back and watch Orthodoxy eroded." You are correct that we don't have to sit back and watch Orthodoxy erode. We are, however, obligated to rely solely on God to stop the erosion. If he chooses to use a laymen, then His will be done. However, the devil uses good intended Christian zeal against Christians. As you showed earlier, you gave a list of actions and decision by the Holy Synod against Unorthodox practices. So how can we conclude that a bishop or a priest is the one violating and eroding Orthodoxy? The Holy Synod and the clergy have done something about Protestant influences. This illustrates the danger of generalizations. It illustrates how the devil can convince us that we must first use our limited means to revolt and abdicate against the Church instead of waiting and trusting on God first, who fights for those whom He loves.
Respectfully, you're accusing me and others of speaking in generalizations above, but here you're speaking in very simplistic terms as if the clergy cannot do any wrong at all and must be acting in the interests of Orthodoxy at all times. Clearly, this is not the case. Did you watch the Pope Shenouda III video above? Did you catch this part?
I love and applaud His Holiness for this courage. (May he plead for the Orthodoxy of our Coptic Church at the Throne of God.) Following His Holiness' example, I'm not going to accept Protestantism in our Church, whoever its advocate may be. If the Coptic Church compromises the Faith buy accepting Protestantism, it will no longer be Orthodox. I trust in God, He will not allow this to happen, but laymen or clergy we must, like St. Athanasius and His Holiness Pope Shenouda III, be diligent.
As I have indicated, I have the utmost respect for the clergy and never attack them or speak disrespectfully of them. However, we can't act as if every priest is in obedience to the Holy Synod on every issue (including this one). For example, the Coptic Orthodox Holy Synod declared in May of 2005 that “No Protestant chorals [singing] and no unorthodox prayers are allowed in Orthodox churches” and yet I've been to Coptic Orthodox Churches where the priest is acting in violation of this commandment. What do you suggest be done in a case like this?
How about this? I was asked to give a lecture about a specific chapter in the bible at church, I gave an explanation based on patrological interpretations and at the end, the leader of the group said "we just wanted to know how this chapter made you feel" not all these details.
Another time, I was asked to give a lecture about the Sunday Gospel, I did so using powerful references from Chrysostom, Athanasaius and Other Church/Coptic Fathers. Afterwards the priest said "next time just say something to make the people feel good."
i am sorry to hear that, and maybe it is 100% not your fault that the teaching session did not go well, but as someone who has done education outside the church and a little inside the church, maybe i could suggest so pointers for reflection, which might help you next time.
maybe you went over their heads a bit, not everyone is a theologian with a university degree. (so many people i know who love to discuss theology and who have a very high personal level of education seem to forget that!) keep up the good references, but make it accessible, eg read a 12 page article and make 3 points from it, about 5 lines each. then take one of the points and apply it to today's life (something your audience can relate to, like how to concentrate better when you are praying) - this explanation should last 3 minutes. then give at least 5 or 10 minutes for questions; in half of which are not you speaking, but rather listening to your audience.
it also helps a lot if you pray for all your audience in the week before the teaching session. as many as you know by name or face, pray for by name or while thinking of what they look like (this is especially important for sunday school, as children respond really well to love and home visits by the teachers. i think they are a bit easier to reach than adults). i am sure you know this, and maybe it goes without saying, but for the purposes of anyone reading this thread later, also be sure to go for Holy Communion in the week of the teaching session, confess, have a good personal prayer life etc. etc.
a good teacher researches the learning needs of the group, then makes the material accessible to them. Jesus mostly just told stories; he did not explain complicated doctines to the general crowds, but to his disciples. so if you are running a servants' class, you should certainly spread among them delight for the church fathers, but for general teaching in church, keep it simple.
not heretical, not fluffy, feel-good internet stories from buddhists, not avoiding important issues, but simple. short, simple, non judgmental (admit that you also sin) and loving. it may seem a bit like a compromise to keep it simple, but if the people can understand you and feel your love for them through your talk, then you are likely to be able to talk to them again, and gradually introduce the deeper teaching you love as they get used to the idea of hearing it.
i think it is really commendable that you (and many others in this thread) are concerned about this, and i hope you can make changes slowly and lovingly; this way the changes will last.
i was protestant for more than 20 years (am almost middle aged now!) and it took me 2 years to decide i agreed with orthodox doctrine (i was visiting the church about once a month over this time). the big, big thing that made all the difference is that people took their time with me, and gave me more love than i had ever seen in my life (seriously and without exaggeration).
being a good teacher is about so much more than how you talk when teaching in public, but with a bit of practice and a lot of prayer and fasting, you can make a big and beautiful difference in peoples' lives. i did not get there yet (am still very junior compared to the teachers in church) so please pray for me too, and with God's grace we will help others to be really enthusiastic about our lovely church's beautiful teachings.
[quote author=AntoniousNikolas link=topic=10538.msg164808#msg164808 date=1369571108] Okay, so if I'm understanding you correctly, we agree that, as His Holiness and the Holy Synod have both declared, the Protestant stuff is definitely out of bounds. Is that correct? Yes. Correct. Explicit Protestant rites are not allowed and are not Orthodox.
I'm not sure I understand the rest of your post though. Are you suggesting that some of the songs we already use are Roman Catholic in origin and must be excised as well for the good of the Church?
Not exactly. Roman Catholic songs that do not describe a specific anti-Orthodox dogma should not be put in the same class as Roman Catholic or Protestant songs that do. Roman Catholic songs that praise the Trinity without the Filioque for example is fair game. Roman Catholic songs that venerate the Virgin are fair game. These types of songs should have and have been given economy in Orthodox Church.
This doesn't mean we should abandon Coptic songs for Roman Catholic songs. But the truth is very traditional Roman Catholic songs are coming from Egypt, translated into English and used in services. Some are coming from Western countries. The fact that music is looked down upon in the Coptic culture, it is no wonder that contemporary Coptic songs are not to be found. Instead they are borrowed. The songs that are Orthodox in nature should not be condemned like Protestant songs that are intrinsically anti-Orthodox.
I don't think that the Father you quoted would endorse the inclusion of heterodox practice. Rather, he seems to be saying that the Church is for everyone, not that the Church is for all sorts of practices and belief systems.
No he would not endorse the inclusion of heterodox practices. In essence we are not disagreeing. However, it's the definition of heterodox practices that I am questioning. Obvious heterodox practices are forbidden. Borrowing songs with Orthodox theology - albeit foreign by definition - is not necessarily a heterodox practice. Imagine a spectrum of allowable practices within the church. At the one end is an all-inclusive viewpoint where everything that is Christian is allowed. On the other end is an exclusive viewpoint where nothing is allowed that wasn't exclusively allowed before. Each person will fall into different points on that spectrum. Some will be open-minded for actions and others see that same act as an abomination. Again, let me be clear. No one on this spectrum will condone or endorse heterodox practices. This is what St Shenouda was warning us in that reference: An all exclusive viewpoint is not edifying. He was more inclined towards a midway exclusive/inclusive point. But it seems some have tipped the scale to the exclusive end of the spectrum, condemning everything different as heterodox. This is the point I was trying to express.
In the case of the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox, the approach to worship is the same. Our differences with the Eastern Orthodox are minor when compared to our differences with the Protestants. Let's not muddy the waters by trying to conflate the two.
You are right our differences with the Eastern Orthodox are minor when compare to Protestants. However, what you consider minor differences regarding the approach to worship is an abomination to others. Remember that spectrum. In the past, I have been rebuked for wanting or saying additional Greek-only hymns in the Feasts of the Nativity and Resurrection, like Egennetis, Tin anastasin, and other hymns. I was told we don't need any Greek hymns. In fact, I was once told to say Pikhristos aftonf instead of Khristos aneste for this reason. I know others have been rebuked for singing Khristos aneste in the Greek short form instead of the longer Coptic tune. I have many other examples. One would think, as Pope Shenouda said in the video, Orthodoxy is Orthodoxy. Orthodox Greek hymns should be completely allowable and edifying in the Coptic Orthodox Church. But they are not. (I also have specific examples from the 19th century). This goes back to a lack of a solid definition of Coptic Orthodoxy in relation to Coptic practice.
What are you trying to say here exactly? Are you trying to create wiggle room by which some Evangelical/Charismatic practices could be integrated into the life of the Church?
No. Not Evangelical or Protestant, just practices that are (1) Orthodox in nature, (2) non-traditional (i.e, different than usual), (3) do not endorse or imply heresy and (4) brings people closer to God in an Orthodox manner. This doesn't mean we value such practices equal to traditional Coptic practices, but we shouldn't condemn them to absolute evil. I think we can safely call this definition economia.
Respectfully, you're accusing me and others of speaking in generalizations above, but here you're speaking in very simplistic terms as if the clergy cannot do any wrong at all and must be acting in the interests of Orthodoxy at all times. Clearly, this is not the case. Did you watch the Pope Shenouda III video above? Did you catch this part?
Quite the opposite. I'm sorry you thought I was accusing you of something. I was trying to show that because you avoided generalization and gave specific decisions of the Holy Synod, one cannot accuse the clergy of lethargy or being the cause of Protestantism into the Coptic Church. This doesn't mean the clergy are immune from fallibility. This doesn't mean we should not act in the interest of Orthodoxy. It simply means we should not accuse the clergy of something if there is contrary evidence.
I love and applaud His Holiness for this courage. (May he plead for the Orthodoxy of our Coptic Church at the Throne of God.) Following His Holiness' example, I'm not going to accept Protestantism in our Church, whoever its advocate may be. If the Coptic Church compromises the Faith buy accepting Protestantism, it will no longer be Orthodox. I trust in God, He will not allow this to happen, but laymen or clergy we must, like St. Athanasius and His Holiness Pope Shenouda III, be diligent.
We absolutely agree here. But I want to make an additional qualification. The Orthodox clergy are entrusted with authority to defend Orthodoxy much better than the average layperson. In an attempt to fight Protestantism, laymen have tried to usurp the authority of the clergy, claiming they know better. In essence, we are trying to fix the error of creeping Protestantism by inadvertently introducing the sin of rebellion. This doesn't mean the laity should sit back and do nothing. It simply means the laity should never forget the patriarchal ecclesiastical order of the Church that Jesus Christ Himself gave to the clergy.
As I have indicated, I have the utmost respect for the clergy and never attack them or speak disrespectfully of them. However, we can't act as if every priest is in obedience to the Holy Synod on every issue (including this one). For example, the Coptic Orthodox Holy Synod declared in May of 2005 that “No Protestant chorals [singing] and no unorthodox prayers are allowed in Orthodox churches” and yet I've been to Coptic Orthodox Churches where the priest is acting in violation of this commandment. What do you suggest be done in a case like this?
First of all, when one sees a priest committing such violations, we must examine ourselves and see if we have truly and heartily prayed to God and put our trust in God. Have we said, "Lord, if it is your will that such action is happening, give us the patience to endure since we cannot understand Your ways. If it is not, open the heart of this priest that the Holy Spirit may guide him to repentance"? This is Orthodoxy. Pray for those who persecute you and say (or do) evil against you. Then we move to practical solutions. First talk to the diocese bishop. If there is no diocese bishop, talk to other priests, talk to other bishops, talk to HH Pope Tawadros himself. But don't expect that you know better than all the clergy, or the clergy is covering up sinful actions, or the clergy do not have enough courage to do something about it, if you don't get the solution you want (i.e., public remand against this priest).
i didn't read all 26 pages (forgive me!) but i liked yr last post, remnkemi, especially the point about not heading into the sin of rebellion when protecting our church.
i think it's good that so many people are writing here so much about preserving our faith and faith tradition, and i pray we can do this well and without heading into rebellion (of course we may need to get into debate sometimes, this is not rebellion).
I'm glad we can speak together reasonably, motivated by sincere love for our Orthodox Church.
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164812#msg164812 date=1369597078] Yes. Correct. Explicit Protestant rites are not allowed and are not Orthodox.
I'm glad. Although I would qualify that for me the adjective "explicit" refers not only to lyrics but also to mode of worship. So-called "contemporary" "praise & worship" music originating in an Evangelical or Charismatic milieu is inherently un-Orthodox in form and approach, so regardless of what the lyrics might be, I would not support its inclusion in the life of our Church.
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164812#msg164812 date=1369597078] Not exactly. Roman Catholic songs that do not describe a specific anti-Orthodox dogma should not be put in the same class as Roman Catholic or Protestant songs that do. Roman Catholic songs that praise the Trinity without the Filioque for example is fair game. Roman Catholic songs that venerate the Virgin are fair game. These types of songs should have and have been given economy in Orthodox Church.
This doesn't mean we should abandon Coptic songs for Roman Catholic songs. But the truth is very traditional Roman Catholic songs are coming from Egypt, translated into English and used in services. Some are coming from Western countries. The fact that music is looked down upon in the Coptic culture, it is no wonder that contemporary Coptic songs are not to be found. Instead they are borrowed. The songs that are Orthodox in nature should not be condemned like Protestant songs that are intrinsically anti-Orthodox.
In my experience, music seems to play a huge role in the life of the Coptic Church and we seem to have an adequate array of songs for all functions and purposes. Are we, in your experience, that musically bankrupt that we need to borrow Eastern Orthodox or Roman Catholic songs?
Although my first instinct is to agree with H.H. Pope Tawadros' statement that any songs we use should be Orthodox in origin, I don't have a major problem with extending the principle of economia to songs from traditionalApostolic Churches that reflect a traditional, liturgical, reverential approach to worship. My two concerns are that:
1.) I'm not sure its necessary, when we already have such a rich tradition of hymnody in Oriental Orthodoxy
2.) The "slippery slope" effect. I would be cautious about leaving any room whatsoever for people to cast even further afield at a later date, especially those who are already attracted to the malignant growths of Evangelicalism and Charismatism.
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164812#msg164812 date=1369597078] No he would not endorse the inclusion of heterodox practices. In essence we are not disagreeing. However, it's the definition of heterodox practices that I am questioning. Obvious heterodox practices are forbidden. Borrowing songs with Orthodox theology - albeit foreign by definition - is not necessarily a heterodox practice.
Why would we need to go outside of Orthodoxy and drink from the well of ecclesiastical bodies that have excommunicated themselves from the Orthodox Church?
If we as a Coptic Church are so musically poor (of which I'm not sure I'm convinced) why do we look to the heterodox instead of our sister Churches? I've heard some truly beautiful Armenian and Syriac hymns (in English) that I'd be much more comfortable borrowing - because we're one Church. Or if we have such a craving for Western things, why not drink from the well of the British Orthodox or the Western Rite Antiochian Churches?
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164812#msg164812 date=1369597078] Imagine a spectrum of allowable practices within the church. At the one end is an all-inclusive viewpoint where everything that is Christian is allowed. On the other end is an exclusive viewpoint where nothing is allowed that wasn't exclusively allowed before. Each person will fall into different points on that spectrum. Some will be open-minded for actions and others see that same act as an abomination. Again, let me be clear. No one on this spectrum will condone or endorse heterodox practices.
This depends entirely upon whether or not we can agree on what constitutes "allowable practices" in the first place. For some people, things origination in Evangelical or Charismatic circles would be "allowable". For me, it absolutely would not.
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164812#msg164812 date=1369597078] This is what St Shenouda was warning us in that reference: An all exclusive viewpoint is not edifying. He was more inclined towards a midway exclusive/inclusive point. But it seems some have tipped the scale to the exclusive end of the spectrum, condemning everything different as heterodox. This is the point I was trying to express.
Our saintly Pope's point of view seemed quite conservative, especially in the linked youtube sermon, which is fitting since Orthodoxy is a conservative Church. If some have become "exclusivistic", it is perhaps a reaction to the "it's all good so long as it's 'Christian'" approach that seems to be so rampant lately. It's to the point that I can't condone advertising certain youth functions among the youth I serve because I know they resemble nothing so much as Evangelical functions.
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164812#msg164812 date=1369597078] You are right our differences with the Eastern Orthodox are minor when compare to Protestants. However, what you consider minor differences regarding the approach to worship is an abomination to others. Remember that spectrum. In the past, I have been rebuked for wanting or saying additional Greek-only hymns in the Feasts of the Nativity and Resurrection, like Egennetis, Tin anastasin, and other hymns. I was told we don't need any Greek hymns. In fact, I was once told to say Pikhristos aftonf instead of Khristos aneste for this reason. I know others have been rebuked for singing Khristos aneste in the Greek short form instead of the longer Coptic tune. I have many other examples. One would think, as Pope Shenouda said in the video, Orthodoxy is Orthodoxy. Orthodox Greek hymns should be completely allowable and edifying in the Coptic Orthodox Church. But they are not. (I also have specific examples from the 19th century). This goes back to a lack of a solid definition of Coptic Orthodoxy in relation to Coptic practice.
I agree with you here, especially in terms of distinguishing between things specific to Coptic practice and things that are Orthodox in a more general sense.
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164812#msg164812 date=1369597078] No. Not Evangelical or Protestant, just practices that are (1) Orthodox in nature, (2) non-traditional (i.e, different than usual), (3) do not endorse or imply heresy and (4) brings people closer to God in an Orthodox manner. This doesn't mean we value such practices equal to traditional Coptic practices, but we shouldn't condemn them to absolute evil. I think we can safely call this definition economia.
Agreed. Providing, again, that we have the same working definition of what is allowable in the first place.
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164812#msg164812 date=1369597078] Quite the opposite. I'm sorry you thought I was accusing you of something. I was trying to show that because you avoided generalization and gave specific decisions of the Holy Synod, one cannot accuse the clergy of lethargy or being the cause of Protestantism into the Coptic Church. This doesn't mean the clergy are immune from fallibility. This doesn't mean we should not act in the interest of Orthodoxy. It simply means we should not accuse the clergy of something if there is contrary evidence.
I don't think the one precludes the other. It seems to me (and I could be wrong) that the decisions of the Holy Synod regarding this issue are not being disseminated and enforced. It also seems to me that there are some servants - and unfortunately some clergy - who are:
1.) Frightened that the youth will leave the Church if we don't give them Evangelical style fluff
2.) Actually enamored of things Evangelical themselves
Folks in these categories are actively doing things contrary to the decisions of the Holy Synod posted above, and when you confront them about it (lovingly, of course) their reaction is almost precisely like that of the antagonist in RO's video.
The fact that a certain thing has been disallowed by the Holy Synod means nothing to them if it gets in the way of their "ministry". This represents more of a Protestant attitude than the idea of leaving a body that has become heterodox in theology or practice.
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164812#msg164812 date=1369597078] We absolutely agree here. But I want to make an additional qualification. The Orthodox clergy are entrusted with authority to defend Orthodoxy much better than the average layperson. In an attempt to fight Protestantism, laymen have tried to usurp the authority of the clergy, claiming they know better. In essence, we are trying to fix the error of creeping Protestantism by inadvertently introducing the sin of rebellion. This doesn't mean the laity should sit back and do nothing. It simply means the laity should never forget the patriarchal ecclesiastical order of the Church that Jesus Christ Himself gave to the clergy.
I agree to a point, but we must remember that Arius, Nestorius, and others were clergy (not comparing any of our present clergy to them). I’m always willing to give the clergy the benefit of the doubt, but if someone is acting in contradiction to Orthodoxy and to the decisions of the Holy Synod, I’m not going to shrug and say, “Abouna knows better”.
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164812#msg164812 date=1369597078] First of all, when one sees a priest committing such violations, we must examine ourselves and see if we have truly and heartily prayed to God and put our trust in God. Have we said, "Lord, if it is your will that such action is happening, give us the patience to endure since we cannot understand Your ways. If it is not, open the heart of this priest that the Holy Spirit may guide him to repentance"? This is Orthodoxy. Pray for those who persecute you and say (or do) evil against you. Then we move to practical solutions. First talk to the diocese bishop. If there is no diocese bishop, talk to other priests, talk to other bishops, talk to HH Pope Tawadros himself. But don't expect that you know better than all the clergy, or the clergy is covering up sinful actions, or the clergy do not have enough courage to do something about it, if you don't get the solution you want (i.e., public remand against this priest).
This seems like perfectly rational advice. However, I must stress that I for one am not looking for a personal reprimand against anyone. Fix the problem not the blame. I don’t want to see anyone reprimanded, but I do want the creeping influence of Protestantism in our Church completely halted and reversed.
As I’ve said before, a “Protestant-influenced Orthodox Church” is an oxymoronic monster. Such a thing cannot exist. It is as much an abominable joke as the pseudo-Orthodox “fusion” body in the previously linked article which declares that there is a time to be reverential and a time to “party with Jesus”. (God have mercy)
Thank God, I’m blessed to serve under a wonderful priest who would not entertain the idea of compromising Orthodox Faith or Orthodox practice one iota, but based on others complaints, and what I’ve seen at some of the youth gatherings, this is sadly not the case universally in our Coptic Church.
What if you were a Christian living in the Orthodox Church of Persia at the time when it lapsed into Nestorianism? Would you stay?
Again, I’m not suggesting that anyone bolt from our Coptic Church which is wholly Orthodox in her Lord. We need all hands on deck to strive against the creeping influence which prompted a conscientious youth named Abanoub to start this discussion in the first place. And I like a lot of what you’ve said in this last paragraph and what Mabsoota has added about debate without disobedience and always being respectful to our fathers. Please do note that I have never said anything disrespectful about any of them (may they pray for me, a wretched sinner).
I would like to add, however, that praying for your enemies and those who persecute you personally is one thing and that standing quiet and allowing practices which confuse the youth and lead them astray is another. Allowing the current state of affairs to fester is not an option. Let us promote, and beg the bishops to enforce, the standing decisions of the Holy Synod on this issue.
[quote author=baempi link=topic=10538.msg164809#msg164809 date=1369585003] How about this? I was asked to give a lecture about a specific chapter in the bible at church, I gave an explanation based on patrological interpretations and at the end, the leader of the group said "we just wanted to know how this chapter made you feel" not all these details.
Another time, I was asked to give a lecture about the Sunday Gospel, I did so using powerful references from Chrysostom, Athanasaius and Other Church/Coptic Fathers. Afterwards the priest said "next time just say something to make the people feel good."
This is odd and sad. Not knowing the specifics of the parish dynamic, I'm kind of at a loss here, but I think its kind of odd that you'd be asked (twice) to steer clear of the Fathers. Mabsoota's commentary is valuable, but I don't think that drawing on the Fathers means you're going over the people's heads. We can't let "brand x 'Christianity'" replace Orthodoxy in our Churches.
I just wanted to make sure that those of you interested in fighting the good fight against the spread of heterodox worship practices among our youth have all of the web-based resources available in one post. Here are a few I've found. If anyone else knows of any, please post them.
First, here are some books available as free pdf downloads:
Some Heresies of Evangelicalism & an Orthodox Response by Hierodeacon Gregory
• Forbid the singing of Protestant songs and Protestant prayers in Orthodox Churches (May 2005) Forbid priests to accept invitations to appear at Protestant gatherings unless they had first received the express approval of the Patriarchate (June 1996) • Warned against unauthorized “house meetings” and the spread of Protestant books, cassettes, and CDs (June 1996, June 2001) • Authorized a committee for the revising of religious books to remove any Protestant influence or doctrine, warning that “the statement that we are all one in Jesus is deceiving” (June 1998) • Warned specifically against music as a means of spreading Protestant influence and theology [H.H. Pope Shenouda III] (June 1998) • Declared that “clergy should be careful about teachers in church and check whether they are influenced by Protestant thought or not” (June 1998) • Convened a conference on how to face Protestant activities and how to protect the Coptic Orthodox Church from the spread of Protestant influence from the inside out (October 1998) • Instructed Orthodox clergy not to write introductions for non-Orthodox books so as not to give Protestants the opportunity to deliver a non-Orthodox message to Orthodox believers (May 1999) • Warned Orthodox Christians against attending non-Orthodox retreats (May 1999) • Warned Orthodox youth not to join in activities held in joint cooperation with Protestants or Roman Catholics, including sports activities, conferences and lectures, “since these are used for proselytism”; The Synod is explicit that “these are very dangerous issues” (June 2000) • Convened a conference to warn the Coptic Orthodox faithful against the activities of the Seventh Day Adventists (October 2002) • Organized a number of seminars, sermons, spiritual days and conferences stressing Orthodox dogma, differences with the Protestants, and explaining why the Coptic Orthodox Church rejects false unity, declaring that, “God is not only Love but the Truth” (June-September 2003) • Warned specifically against the activities of the Southern Baptist Convention, which published materials stating explicitly that they were targeting the Coptic Orthodox Christians of Egypt for conversion (June 2006) • Prohibited Coptic clergy from appearing on Protestant satellite channels (2009) • Prohibited Coptic Orthodox bookstores from carrying a number of heterodox titles, materials and publications (1999, 2005, 2007, 2009, 2010)
And the quote by H.H. Pope Tawadros II:
“Let us not forget that Unorthodox worship can pollute our being, leading to forgetfulness. It can cause one's mind to drift quite far, rendering him unable to value the Traditional Orthodox melodies and style of Church Worship.[...] Orthodox worship is distinct in its constant reminder of the real presence of Christ and His saints in our lives. We must be careful to ensure that the worship songs we use are Orthodox in their origin, lyrics, melodies and in their spirit. Communion and unity with Christ ought to be embedded within their meaning.”
By the way, has anyone seen this blog "Dissident Copts", which was apparently started a few years back about this issue?
I realize that the tone might be a little confrontational, but as the author (authors?) says "But know that we do this not out of hate for the Coptic Orthodox Church, but out of our deep, sincere love for Her, and our desire to expose things that we consider are worth examining and criticising."
Also, my own work is still in progress (actually, it's very near to being finished...just awaiting some scholarly review).
Please pray for me, and continue to fight the good fight for our Church and our youth.
Coming to the topic, this is an issue that is wreaking havoc in almost all Orthodox Churches special Oriental Orthodox. I wish one day there will be an ecumenical council to put this issue to rest once and for all. Until that time those who are like minded can form some kind of group that will do more than venting out.
[quote author=Theophilus 1 link=topic=10538.msg165330#msg165330 date=1372816401] Btw the following link is not working. I looked at the material in it a while a ago and I wish I can access it again.
Comments
As long as the liturgy remains uncompromised, I don't see why you need to leave. And I don't think it will better the situation.
Perhaps you may find peace, but if you feel that the position you hold is the truth, you will have robbed people of that truth to lead a more comfortable life. It is your duty in my opinion to stay where you are. Your departure will not only weaken your friends', it will also send a message that what you preached could not have been the truth, because truth prevails.
You may also need to reflect on your position and determine if you are being too rigid. You must pick your battles wisely. There is a difference between incorrect practices that are essential to the faith and those that are peripheral. (emphasis mine)
Excellent video Andrew.
I agree... there's no need to leave at all the Coptic Church. There is no such thing as protestant lyrics or catholic lyrics. People should not be leaving the church for songs being sung in prayer meetings.
I do think that I have unfortunately experienced some things that no one really wants to have in their church: praying in tongues. This is not orthodox.
A lot of ex-protestant people who are now Coptic Orthodox, come to our Church to "revive" this "charisma" - i.e. the charisma of talking jibberish.
That's right folks. This is where we are right now.
Playing guitars, drums, and even clapping in the Church - im now OK with. But this praying in tongues is beyond me.
I met this deacon that told me that thanks to the fact that he can pray in tongues, because he doesn't know the lyrics or hymns we have in Coptic (because he's an ex-protestant) - he can NOW pray with us at least because he has been given the gift of praying in tongues.
This is what is being promoted in our Church (at least where I go to).
"And on that cross, when Jesus died,
The wrath of God was satisfied".
Would you class these lyrics as Protestant/Catholic? Because they sure ain't Orthodox!
That's medieval catholic lyrics that I do not subscribe to.
The orthodox church does not subscribe to that.. but then, all this is contemplatory - the Orthodox church says that Christ's death on the Cross was towards the Divine Justice. The Divine Justice doesn't mean God's Wrath.
Excellent video Andrew.
I agree... there's no need to leave at all the Coptic Church. There is no such thing as protestant lyrics or catholic lyrics.
Yes there is. This isn't even debatable. Lyrics can certainly articulate a particular theological perspective.
One time I went to an Oriental Orthodox youth gathering with a young lady who was a former Protestant but is now very firm in Orthodoxy. At this gathering, some of the Coptic youth leaders were leading their youth in a Protestant song. This young lady turned to me in shock and said, "Do they even realize what this song is about?!?" It was about exactly what you've described below...what Charismatics falsely call "the holy ghost"...but you had to be familiar with the terminology to catch it because it wasn't overt. I doubt most of the youth who were actually singing the song knew what they were confessing. I like to think the servants leading them didn't either.
[quote author=dthoxsasiPhilanethrope link=topic=10538.msg164743#msg164743 date=1369214706]
I do think that I have unfortunately experienced some things that no one really wants to have in their church: praying in tongues. This is not orthodox.
A lot of ex-protestant people who are now Coptic Orthodox, come to our Church to "revive" this "charisma" - i.e. the charisma of talking jibberish.
That's right folks. This is where we are right now.
Playing guitars, drums, and even clapping in the Church - im now OK with. But this praying in tongues is beyond me.
I met this deacon that told me that thanks to the fact that he can pray in tongues, because he doesn't know the lyrics or hymns we have in Coptic (because he's an ex-protestant) - he can NOW pray with us at least because he has been given the gift of praying in tongues.
This is what is being promoted in our Church (at least where I go to).
My brother, the one thing is a logical outgrowth of the other. The guitars, the clapping, the Protestant songs are all part of a worldly, Protestant approach to worship. The fake "holy ghost/tongues" stuff is this approach to worship brought to its logical conclusion.
Here is an article on exactly what this so-called "tongues" stuff really is:
http://www.fatheralexander.org/booklets/english/charismatic_revival_s_rose_e.htm
That considered, I wouldn't advocate anyone leaving the Orthodox Church but I would advocate their leaving any ecclesiastical body which allows itself to be Protestantized because said body would no longer be Orthodox and has itself left the Church (in a universal sense). Therefore, to leave that body would be to remain in the True Church.
In the phrase "Coptic Orthodox Church" the "Orthodox" part is infinitely more important that the "Coptic" part.
May God preserve His Coptic Church in Orthodoxy.
[quote author=Andrew link=topic=10538.msg164711#msg164711 date=1369160207]
As long as the liturgy remains uncompromised, I don't see why you need to leave. And I don't think it will better the situation.
Perhaps you may find peace, but if you feel that the position you hold is the truth, you will have robbed people of that truth to lead a more comfortable life. It is your duty in my opinion to stay where you are. Your departure will not only weaken your friends', it will also send a message that what you preached could not have been the truth, because truth prevails.
You may also need to reflect on your position and determine if you are being too rigid. You must pick your battles wisely. There is a difference between incorrect practices that are essential to the faith and those that are peripheral. (emphasis mine)
Excellent video Andrew ReturnOrthodoxy.
I agree... there's no need to leave at all the Coptic Church. There is no such thing as protestant lyrics or catholic lyrics. People should not be leaving the church for songs being sung in prayer meetings.
I do think that I have unfortunately experienced some things that no one really wants to have in their church: praying in tongues. This is not orthodox.
A lot of ex-protestant people who are now Coptic Orthodox, come to our Church to "revive" this "charisma" - i.e. the charisma of talking jibberish.
That's right folks. This is where we are right now.
Playing guitars, drums, and even clapping in the Church - im now OK with. But this praying in tongues is beyond me.
I met this deacon that told me that thanks to the fact that he can pray in tongues, because he doesn't know the lyrics or hymns we have in Coptic (because he's an ex-protestant) - he can NOW pray with us at least because he has been given the gift of praying in tongues.
This is what is being promoted in our Church (at least where I go to).
(correction mine)
Canon LXV of the Holy Apostles:
"If any clergymen, or laymen, enter a synagogue of Jews, or of heretics, to pray, let him be both deposed and excommunicated."
The canon should be applied to the priest in the video.
Is it also applicable to the act of praying in the Vatican? Just wondering.
Extreme Opinions
The question is, how many faithful will have been seduced and fallen away in the meantime?
[quote author=Andrew link=topic=10538.msg164767#msg164767 date=1369298115]
I just have to put this out there...am I the only one who thinks that the antagonist in RO's video sounds like HG Bishop Youssef??
Extreme Opinions
To me, he just sounds like every 30-40 something, Egyptian-born youth servant whose heart is in the right place but leads the youth astray because he's operating under the flawed assumptions that:
1.) Adapting to Western culture = becoming Protestantized.
2.) The youth need this stuff or they'll run away.
And then, unfortunately, there is another class of people who are genuinely attracted to Protestantism (watch Protestant preachers at home, etc.) and are bringing this stuff into the Church on purpose. :(
Copts saved the world from heresy at multiple occasions, but this is remotely irrelevant to their descendents. It is not genetic, and Copts have developed an inferiority complex towards western spirituality that makes them repulsive to their rich heritage and theology.
Rome was orthodox at one point of time, and fell, and is continuing to fall.
Protestantism, style and dogma, is fully embraced by the vast majority of hierarchy and laymen. No question about it.
God will not unconditionally save the CC (coptic church) from heresy. There is a certain synergy that needs to exist like in any other aspect of orthodox life for the Grace of God to prevail.
Right now, there is a current against Orthodoxy in the CC. The few bishops and priests who have spoken against Protestant worship and dogma during the past 40 years, and did nothing to prevent it, have shut up since the general bishop of Behera assumed the Papacy.
They have all been elevated to positions of power that would enable them to take meaningful actions against heresy, and they just fell into perpetual indifference. Some of them even joined in the blasphemous visit to the Vatican.
If you want to live Orthodoxy without any traces of western or eastern heresy, where would you go? Name one priest or one bishop, just one, who is truly Orthodox. This is not the problem. What power does this average servant command? None.
The problem is that the church is run as a business, and the only revenue is from people. You have to satisfy their need. You are going down to their level to appease them, so they come, and pay for the church projects and other things.
No one gives a rat's leg about the youth, it is the parents who they are after. You cater to these parents and their liberal youth while still giving them the sense that they are OK because they attend fundraising dinners organized by the "shersh", which is absolutely, positively a mega spiritual event, and they go to adulterous trips in Cancun, Mexico.
I just have to put this out there...am I the only one who thinks that the antagonist in RO's video sounds like HG Bishop Youssef??
Extreme Opinions
Loooool. Might be so but Sayedna is my personal spiritual guide. I love him like my own father. So if it sounds like him, it is arbitray, and not in any way related to him. I hope your not trying to imply anything by that, Andrew.
Whatever accent I did, people would have a problem. I love HG.And he disagrees with much of the "developments" of our church as well. So I'm not sure that HG would fit the antagonist role
Ray
We are all offcourse entitled to our opinions. This is definitely an important subject and needs to be addressed despite it’s sensitivity. I will urge us all to fear and love the Priests, Bishops and Pope assigned to us. Given we are not in an authorative position to judge, we should keep our judgement to ourselves. I am saying this in love and I wish it is accepted as such. Maybe I misunderstood, and I really hope I did, but calling our Pope and some Bishops blasphemous is, in my opinion, out of line. We can dislike some actions due to our lack of understanding, or even due to our excessive understanding, but the truth is, God has not put us in an authorative postion to make such claims as He did to the disciples, as He did to Saint Athanasius (who at the time was only a simply deacon), as He did with Saint Severus. Over the past year, the story of Moses and Korah has spoken to me loudly in this regard and I simply wanted to share the same warning I felt God was warning me with. Even if a person in authority does a mistake, I should not judge their authority. I may express my lack of understanding of an action, but not of their authority which God has chosen through fasts and prayers. Voice your opinion. Voice your opinion to those in authority when given the opportunity. Pray that the truth is acted on. But let’s try not to bring down those in authority.
Please forgive me, I do not wish to offend anyone, rather share what I have been thought due to my weakness.
[quote author=Andrew link=topic=10538.msg164767#msg164767 date=1369298115]
I just have to put this out there...am I the only one who thinks that the antagonist in RO's video sounds like HG Bishop Youssef??
Extreme Opinions
Do you mean the accent?
Because the first time I read that, I thought you meant his position/attitude!
Let me be absolutely clear: I was ONLY referring to the accent.
RO knows how much I respect his opinion. But I have to say that while everything he said in the video makes sense, it is flawed because it speaks in generalizations. He did say he was trying to voice his concern about "Hollywood" methods used to attract people into the church. I assume he has a particular incident in mind that has developed into a general condemnation of such methods to attract people into the Church. This, however, cannot become a general condemnation. It's one thing to use "Hollywood" methods during services (which the Orthodox Worship vs. Contemporary worship specifically addressed), it's another thing to say any type of "Hollywood" style theatrics is Protestant or heretic. If this were the case, then all the Coptic hagiographical movies of our saints would be Protestant. Obviously, they are not. Obviously, these movies were meant to raise the spirituality of people (and the youth) back to the fact that our Coptic Church is a purchased and strengthened by blood and martyrdom.
It's also another thing to say there is a trend to use Protestant and Catholic lyrics. Again, without mentioning specific songs and specific lyrics, we are condemning everything while in reality it is a more accurately a condemnation of lyrics or songs I personally don't like. If I were to argue that all songs in the Coptic Church must be specifically Coptic Orthodox, then we have narrowed the choices to songs with 2 criteria: 1. songs that are Coptic in origin (and really that claim is very hard to prove unless the song is in the Coptic language or melismatic) and 2. songs that specifically address a Orthodox theology. The second one is a little easier to show. However, there are two additional problems. First, most Catholic songs (not all) show an Orthodox theology. For example, "Here I am, O Lord" speaks of the missionary love of God to save all who call to him as Isaiah describes in chapter 6 of his book. The Catholic Church, as an Apostolic Church, does believe in the Trinity, the Incarnation, the veneration of St Mary and the saints, and many other Orthodox beliefs and their songs reflect that Orthodox theology. Secondly, some Coptic hymns are simply one word (for example, Alleluia for the midnight Kiahk Psalmody. No theology here.) Some Coptic hymns are simply a recitation of a Psalm or scripture passage as are some Protestant songs. It seems to me, it's not the content or the lyrics that is the issue, but the music and the performance of the song. Labelling everything that is not my accustomed practice as Protestant is intellecutal dishonesty.
Additionally, we must differentiate songs that are part of the liturgical services, songs that are used for fellowship gatherings, songs that are used for ecumenical services, and songs that are used for personal edification and spirituality.
The fact is not all people will experience Christ through melismatic Coptic songs. Not all people will experience Orthodoxy in the same way. I personally want all Copts in all ages to experience Coptic Orthodoxy with the super long melismatic diverse hymns (which are very Orthodox) instead of generalizing that all services are too long. But I cannot condemn a person to heresy if he enjoys a particular non-Coptic Christian rock band and finds Christ in it. It will become an issue if he tries to move that musical style from personal worship back into liturgical services.
We also can't place all the blame on others. If we want to find a way to combat rising Protestantism within the Coptic Church, maybe we should at least have a working foundation defining what is Coptic Orthodoxy first. We can't condemn something that isn't Coptic, if we can't agree what is Coptic. In the ecumenical threads a while back, I proposed a definition of the Orthodox Church that came from St Shenouda the Archimandrite: a litany of paradoxes. The Church is the church of the strong and the church of the weak, the healthy and the sick, the mother and the child, the father and the mother. It is not the Church for the strong only, the healthy only, the craddle Copt, etc. No one really agreed or disagreed with this definition. So until we can come up with a definition of Orthodoxy that is not "my way or the highway", we are all to blame for the rise of "Protestantism" within the Coptic Church.
This brings me to my final point. Since we are all to blame, and we do not have any authority as the clergy do, it is the utmost shame that people have the audacity to blame the bishops and priests, or "the general bishop of Behera [who] assumed the papacy" or the encourage dissension and mutiny, or congratulate those who are vocal for abdication from the Church. Is this the example we find in Christ? No. If my physical son or father did the most heinous crime or abomination, he is still my son or father. I neither have the right to disown my own family nor should I have the attitude that I can simply abdicate when I don't agree. By definition, this is Protestantism.
RO knows how much I respect his opinion. But I have to say that while everything he said in the video makes sense, it is flawed because it speaks in generalizations. He did say he was trying to voice his concern about "Hollywood" methods used to attract people into the church. I assume he has a particular incident in mind that has developed into a general condemnation of such methods to attract people into the Church. This, however, cannot become a general condemnation. It's one thing to use "Hollywood" methods during services (which the Orthodox Worship vs. Contemporary worship specifically addressed), it's another thing to say any type of "Hollywood" style theatrics is Protestant or heretic. If this were the case, then all the Coptic hagiographical movies of our saints would be Protestant. Obviously, they are not. Obviously, these movies were meant to raise the spirituality of people (and the youth) back to the fact that our Coptic Church is a purchased and strengthened by blood and martyrdom.
Good to have you back, George, but it seems that you also approach my video with an "aniti-aniti-coptic church" methodology. I never once mentioned the term protestant or heretic. I mentioned points regarding spiritual observances. A generalization is not always flawed. To say that professing Christians adhere to some Christian creed is a generalization, but a correct one. For me to say that using Hollywood (the symbol of self-centerdness) for the selfless Christian profession is logical and is not by any stretch of the imagination flawed. One cannot use the symbols of modern sin for God's purpose. Whether or not Hollywood contains Holy people, or whether or not it can be used for good is 100% irrelevant. It has become the absolute symbol of our flawed society.
You are clearly misrepresenting my point, setting up a straw man. There is a difference between using multimedia for saint movies and using Hollywood themes for youth who are engulfed in a rapidly secularizing (and eventually atheistic) society. If you cannot see this difference, then I cannot see how this discussion could be carried out in logic.
Regarding the St. Shenouda paradoxes, I must say that the paradox exists now in the polar opposite. Those who wish to progress spiritualy are left to do so on their own outside the church, because the church is to busy catering to the "converts."
While you may disagree as you please, I must disagree with you, and further assert that you are wrong.
Ray
RO,
Good job. You are a great young man with enormous potential.
Some of what you've said makes a lot of sense. On other points, I disagree.
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164799#msg164799 date=1369508407]
I have been trying to understand what exactly is the problem here. It seems to me that this thread has become some sort of proverbial "Everything I don't like about the Coptic Church" relabelled as "Protestantism in the Coptic Church".
I agree. We should stay focused. That said, it seems that the common thread in everyone's complaints has to do with the acceptance of some form of heterodox theology or practice.
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164799#msg164799 date=1369508407]
It's also another thing to say there is a trend to use Protestant and Catholic lyrics.
No, it is not just about lyrics. It is also about certain forms of worship which have no place in the life of the Church as defined here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contemporary_worship
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164799#msg164799 date=1369508407]
If I were to argue that all songs in the Coptic Church must be specifically Coptic Orthodox, then we have narrowed the choices to songs with 2 criteria: 1. songs that are Coptic in origin (and really that claim is very hard to prove unless the song is in the Coptic language or melismatic) and 2. songs that specifically address a Orthodox theology. The second one is a little easier to show. However, there are two additional problems. First, most Catholic songs (not all) show an Orthodox theology. For example, "Here I am, O Lord" speaks of the missionary love of God to save all who call to him as Isaiah describes in chapter 6 of his book. The Catholic Church, as an Apostolic Church, does believe in the Trinity, the Incarnation, the veneration of St Mary and the saints, and many other Orthodox beliefs and their songs reflect that Orthodox theology.
This isn't as complicated as you're making it out to be. H.H. Pope Tawadros has already given us the very simple solution:
“Let us not forget that Unorthodox worship can pollute our being, leading to forgetfulness. It can cause one's mind to drift quite far, rendering him unable to value the Traditional Orthodox melodies and style of Church Worship.[...] Orthodox worship is distinct in its constant reminder of the real presence of Christ and His saints in our lives. We must be careful to ensure that the worship songs we use are Orthodox in their origin, lyrics, melodies and in their spirit. Communion and unity with Christ ought to be embedded within their meaning.”
Notice that His Holiness the Pope emphasizes that the songs utilized in our corporate worship should be wholly Orthodox not only in lyrics, but also in melody, spirit and origin! That is to say, they should come from an Orthodox source and represent an Orthodox approach to worshipping God.
That's it. Point blank. So we don't have to tediously evaluate contemporary "praise & worship" songs on an individual basis. If they come from Charismatic or Evangelical churches, they represent an approach to worship that is not Apostolic and has no place in our Church.
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164799#msg164799 date=1369508407]
Secondly, some Coptic hymns are simply one word (for example, Alleluia for the midnight Kiahk Psalmody. No theology here.)
Even the length of time the priest or chanter holds a note or syllable in our Coptic hymns is imbued with meaning.
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164799#msg164799 date=1369508407]
It seems to me, it's not the content or the lyrics that is the issue, but the music and the performance of the song.
Yes, the medium is the message. The form of worship is itself a manifestation of theology, and some forms of worship are foreign to our phronima and ethos.
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164799#msg164799 date=1369508407]
Labelling everything that is not my accustomed practice as Protestant is intellecutal dishonesty.
Not my accustomed practice is one thing. Greek or Ethiopian or Armenian is not my accustomed practice, but it is Orthodox. Labeling Protestant forms of worship as Protestant, and therefore unacceptable, however, is not only honest but necessary.
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164799#msg164799 date=1369508407]
Additionally, we must differentiate songs that are part of the liturgical services, songs that are used for fellowship gatherings, songs that are used for ecumenical services, and songs that are used for personal edification and spirituality.
Maybe we can distinguish between the Divine Liturgy and other forms of liturgical (i.e. corporate, communal) worship.
If someone wants to listen to Protestant songs in their private life, that's none of my business. If they try to being it into the life of the Church in any way, into our corporate worship, then we have a big problem, whether that means fellowship gatherings, youth meetings, or whatever.
Just for clarification, what do you mean by "ecumenical services"?
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164799#msg164799 date=1369508407]
The fact is not all people will experience Christ through melismatic Coptic songs. Not all people will experience Orthodoxy in the same way.
That is true. This is why we have Western Rite Orthodoxy, Ethiopian Orthodoxy, Armenian Orthodoxy, etc. But it would be disingenuous to suggest that Orthodoxy could be experienced through a Protestant approach to worship. Like this:
http://www.johnsanidopoulos.com/2010/02/fusing-orthodox-and-pentecostal-worship.html
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164799#msg164799 date=1369508407]
I personally want all Copts in all ages to experience Coptic Orthodoxy with the super long melismatic diverse hymns (which are very Orthodox) instead of generalizing that all services are too long.
Agreed!
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164799#msg164799 date=1369508407]
But I cannot condemn a person to heresy if he enjoys a particular non-Coptic Christian rock band and finds Christ in it. It will become an issue if he tries to move that musical style from personal worship back into liturgical services.
As I said, what people do in their private lives is their business, but if they try to move that kind of stuff not only into the Divine Liturgy, but into the corporate life of the Church in any way, it will be a problem.
The Holy Synod agrees. Look at all of the measures they've taken to curtail Protestant influence:
http://www.arabwestreport.info/year-2012/week-12/43-ecumenical-relations-coptic-orthodox-church-mentioned-decisions-holy-synod
• Forbid priests to accept invitations to appear at Protestant gatherings unless they had first received the express approval of the Patriarchate (June 1996)
• Warned against unauthorized “house meetings” and the spread of Protestant books, cassettes, and CDs (June 1996, June 2001)
• Authorized a committee for the revising of religious books to remove any Protestant influence or doctrine, warning that “the statement that we are all one in Jesus is deceiving” (June 1998)
• Warned specifically against music as a means of spreading Protestant influence and theology [H.H. Pope Shenouda III] (June 1998)
• Declared that “clergy should be careful about teachers in church and check whether they are influenced by Protestant thought or not” (June 1998)
• Convened a conference on how to face Protestant activities and how to protect the Coptic Orthodox Church from the spread of Protestant influence from the inside out (October 1998)
• Instructed Orthodox clergy not to write introductions for non-Orthodox books so as not to give Protestants the opportunity to deliver a non-Orthodox message to Orthodox believers (May 1999)
• Warned Orthodox Christians against attending non-Orthodox retreats (May 1999)
• Warned Orthodox youth not to join in activities held in joint cooperation with Protestants or Roman Catholics, including sports activities, conferences and lectures, “since these are used for proselytism”; The Synod is explicit that “these are very dangerous issues” (June 2000)
• Convened a conference to warn the Coptic Orthodox faithful against the activities of the Seventh Day Adventists (October 2002)
• Organized a number of seminars, sermons, spiritual days and conferences stressing Orthodox dogma, differences with the Protestants, and explaining why the Coptic Orthodox Church rejects false unity, declaring that, “God is not only Love but the Truth” (June-September 2003)
• Warned specifically against the activities of the Southern Baptist Convention, which published materials stating explicitly that they were targeting the Coptic Orthodox Christians of Egypt for conversion (June 2006)
• Prohibited Coptic clergy from appearing on Protestant satellite channels (2009)
• Prohibited Coptic Orthodox bookstores from carrying a number of heterodox titles, materials and publications (1999, 2005, 2007, 2009, 2010)
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164799#msg164799 date=1369508407]
We also can't place all the blame on others. If we want to find a way to combat rising Protestantism within the Coptic Church, maybe we should at least have a working foundation defining what is Coptic Orthodoxy first. We can't condemn something that isn't Coptic, if we can't agree what is Coptic.
Personally, I don't care quite so much about defining what is "Coptic". There are Coptic Catholics, Coptic Protestants, there were Coptic gnostics. This is like defining what is Greek or what is Japanese or any other culture or nationality.
It is much more important to define what is Orthodox, and we already have a working definition of that, to the exclusion of heterodox faith and practice.
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164799#msg164799 date=1369508407]
In the ecumenical threads a while back, I proposed a definition of the Orthodox Church that came from St Shenouda the Archimandrite: a litany of paradoxes. The Church is the church of the strong and the church of the weak, the healthy and the sick, the mother and the child, the father and the mother. It is not the Church for the strong only, the healthy only, the craddle Copt, etc. No one really agreed or disagreed with this definition. So until we can come up with a definition of Orthodoxy that is not "my way or the highway", we are all to blame for the rise of "Protestantism" within the Coptic Church.
It is not up to us to define Orthodoxy. It has been defined for us by the Ecumenical councils and the Fathers of the Church. It's just our place to stick with it. It's not "my way or the highway". It's Orthodoxy or the highway.
Where are we getting the idea that we have to define or redefine the Faith delivered once and forever for all the saints?
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164799#msg164799 date=1369508407]
This brings me to my final point. Since we are all to blame, and we do not have any authority as the clergy do, it is the utmost shame that people have the audacity to blame the bishops and priests, or "the general bishop of Behera [who] assumed the papacy" or the encourage dissension and mutiny,
I agree that it is shameful and disrespectful to attack our fathers the bishops and priests. Far be it from me to raise my hand against God's anointed. However, it is our duty to stand up for Orthodox Faith and practice even if a bishop or priest is the one violating it. Such a thing can be done respectfully. We, as laymen, don't have to sit back and watch Orthodoxy eroded. Pope Shenouda of blessed memory gives the answer here:
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164799#msg164799 date=1369508407]
or congratulate those who are vocal for abdication from the Church. Is this the example we find in Christ? No. If my physical son or father did the most heinous crime or abomination, he is still my son or father. I neither have the right to disown my own family nor should I have the attitude that I can simply abdicate when I don't agree.
We have to stick to Orthodoxy and the one Church established by Christ. If a portion of the Church departs by lapsing into heresy or accepting heterodox practice, then by leaving that necrotic organ we are not leaving the Church. We're far from that stage, however. For now, it is our duty to fight against heterodox influence in our Coptic Orthodox Church
Lord have mercy.
We are all offcourse entitled to our opinions. This is definitely an important subject and needs to be addressed despite it’s sensitivity. I will urge us all to fear and love the Priests, Bishops and Pope assigned to us. Given we are not in an authorative position to judge, we should keep our judgement to ourselves. I am saying this in love and I wish it is accepted as such. Maybe I misunderstood, and I really hope I did, but calling our Pope and some Bishops blasphemous is, in my opinion, out of line. We can dislike some actions due to our lack of understanding, or even due to our excessive understanding, but the truth is, God has not put us in an authorative postion to make such claims as He did to the disciples, as He did to Saint Athanasius (who at the time was only a simply deacon), as He did with Saint Severus. Over the past year, the story of Moses and Korah has spoken to me loudly in this regard and I simply wanted to share the same warning I felt God was warning me with. Even if a person in authority does a mistake, I should not judge their authority. I may express my lack of understanding of an action, but not of their authority which God has chosen through fasts and prayers. Voice your opinion. Voice your opinion to those in authority when given the opportunity. Pray that the truth is acted on. But let’s try not to bring down those in authority.
Please forgive me, I do not wish to offend anyone, rather share what I have been thought due to my weakness.
Your post is written in a spirit of wisdom and charity and deserves to be addressed.
Wrong practices in the church cannot be justified by a stamp of authority. There is no difference between a mistake committed by a bishop or priest or a layman. If it is wrong it is wrong and it is not up to the hierarchy to interpret the faith according to their interests.
It is not an option for educated laymen to sit back and let others with heretical tendencies destroy the church. The Apostles forbid us to be indifferent. Please refer to the teaching of the Apostles below:
"Hear, O ye of the laity, how God speaks: “I will judge between ram and ram, and between sheep and sheep.” And He says to the shepherds: “Ye shall be judged for your unskillfulness, and for destroying the sheep.” That is, I will judge between one bishop and another, and between one lay person and another, and between one ruler and another (for these sheep and these rams are not irrational, but rational creatures): lest at any time a lay person should say, I am a sheep and not a shepherd, and I am not concerned for myself; let the shepherd look to that, for he alone will be required to give an account for me. For as that sheep that will not follow its good shepherd is exposed to the wolves, to its destruction; so that which follows a bad shepherd is also exposed to unavoidable death, since his shepherd will devour him. Wherefore care must be had to avoid destructive shepherds. (2.3.19)".
One of the greatest fathers of the church warns his people and all the generations to come from false unity and involving the church in worldly affairs. Please read below:
St. Hilary of Poitiers (+ A.D. 368), On the Ears of the Laity:
"Specious indeed is the name of Peace, and beautiful is the idea of Unity; but who can doubt that the only Unity of the Church and of the Gospel is the Peace of Christ? This is the Peace which He left us when He was going to the Father (John 20:19); this is the Peace, most dearly beloved brethren, which we ought to seek when lost, and which, when disturbed, we ought to compose, and which, when found, we ought to hold fast. But now we have an Antichristian Unity forced upon us. Strenuous endeavours are made by some that Christ may be denied when He is supposed to be preached. Men labour to maintain the cause of Christ by courting the powers of the World. O ye Bishops, I ask you to consider what were the suffrages which the Apostles asked for the preaching of the Gospel? By what powers of the World were they enabled to preach Christ, and to win the Nations from idols to God? When they sang hymns to God in prison and inbonds, and after scourgings (Acts 16:25), did they invoke the aid of an officer from the Palace? Did Paul, who was a spectacle in the theatre, ever gather together a Church by means of an Imperial Edict? Did he ask for the patronage of a Nero, a Vespasian, or a Decius? And yet those holy men, who laboured with their hands, and met in secret chambers and upper rooms, and traversed towns, villages, and countries in spite of decrees of Senates, and edicts of Kings, had they not the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven? And did not God stretch forth His Hand to help them by ordering the things of this world in such wise that Christ was more fully preached in proportion as the preaching of Christ was more strictly forbidden? But now, alas! earthly suffrages impose divine faith, and Christ is convicted of weakness by the canvassing of earthly patronage in behalf of His Name. Now the Church scares men by exile and imprisonment, and forces them to believe her by dint of banishment and bonds. She who was consecrated by the menaces of her persecutors, now hangs a suppliant on the condescension of those who communicate with her. She who was propagated by the banishment of her priests, now banishes priests. She who cannot be Christ’s, except the World hate her, now boasts that the World loves her. Such is now the condition of the Church in comparison with the Church which was entrusted to our keeping, and which we are now in danger of losing by reason of the treachery of Bishops. But thank God the people in our Churches believe what they hear. They hear there that Christ is God, and they therefore deem Him to be God. They hear there that He is the Son of God, and they believe His Sonship to be real. They hear that He existed ‘before all worlds,’ and they think this to mean that He existed always. And so the ears of our people are holier than the hearts of our Priests. (Contra Auxentius)"
Moreover, silence is condemned by the fathers. Read below:
St. Meletius of Antioch (+ A.D. 381):
"Do not show obedience to bishops who exhort you to do and to say and to believe in things which are not to your benefit. What pious man would hold his tongue? Who would remain completely calm? In fact, silence equates to consent. This was clearly indicated by John the Baptist, and by the Maccabees through their legislation, who went as far as risking death, without overlooking the fact that the law is susceptible to changes."
We are not allow to even mingle with those clergy who are wolves. Read below:
St. John Chrysostom (+ A.D. 407):
“What then, you say, “when he [the priest] is wicked, should we obey?’’ Wicked? In what sense? If indeed in regard to faith, flee and avoid him. (Homily 34 on Hebrews)"
If our fathers followed your proposed approach with regards to the inaction of the clergy regarding heresy or their support for heresy, Nestorius and others would have had their way and we would be confessing Christ in two persons now.
St. Cyril of Alexandria (+ A.D. 444):
“For while himself [Nestorius] in the midst of the Church was using profane babblings, a certain man of those who were of great piety and yet among the laity, but who had gathered within himself no mean learning, was moved with fervent and devout zeal and with piercing cry said that the Word Himself Who is before the ages endured a second Generation also, viz., that after the flesh and forth of a woman; the people being disturbed hereat, and the more part and wiser having honoured him with no mean praises, as pious and most full of wisdom and not imparticipate in uprightness of doctrine, the rest being mad against him, he [Nestorius] interrupting, straightway approves those whom by teaching his own he had destroyed, and whets his tongue against him who could not endure his words, yea and against the holy fathers who have decreed for us the pious definition of the Faith which we have as an anchor of the soul both sure and steadfast, as it is written. (Ad. Nest. 1.5)"
It was a layman who stopped Nestorius. We are grateful that he did not respect Nestorius.
I hope it is clear that calling the clergy out on their errors regarding faith is a duty and not an option .
First I want to apologize for misrepresenting your video. I thought I was clear when I said your video makes sense. I was not attacking your video on its content itself but its apparent generalization to make your point. I did not mean to say your video or your thoughts claim anything with a Hollywood theme is Protestant. I only wanted to show that through generalizations without specifics, a claim that Hollywood theme tactics are always wrong needs qualification and clarification. The example of saint movies would go against such a claim that all Hollywood theme tactics are always wrong. I unintentionally extended your claim that any Hollywood tactics are Protestant or heretic. You didn't say that. Others did. I simply wanted to show that something that represents a sinful milieu can be used for the glory of God, like cinematography. My old church was known for creating professional Christian plays and theatrical shows in English and Arabic performed at an auditorium (not in church) concerning Orthodox themes. It was not meant to replace Orthodox preaching in sermons and liturgies. It was meant to give an Orthodox view through modern medium. It did have Orthodox meaning. Everyone who attended enjoyed a different artistic form of Orthodox expression. Another good example is the Holy Pimolh children movies. It uses contemporary cinematography and animation. And it is definitely very, very Coptic Orthodox.
You said, "One cannot use the symbols of modern sin for God's purpose. Whether or not Hollywood contains Holy people, or whether or not it can be used for good is 100% irrelevant. It has become the absolute symbol of our flawed society."
Paganism was the absolute symbol of evil in early Christianity. But the Copts "baptized" Pharaonic songs like Eporo and Pekethronos (assuming one can prove they were actually Pharaonic but that's another discussion). Copts "baptized" cultural events like Sham al nasseem. And it is relevant that God can use stereotypical sinful acts and sinners for good. If not, then what does Genesis 50:20 mean? What does Christ's cross mean?
Again, let me clarify. I am not advocating using sin or paganism for God's glory. But things which seem symbolic of sin, even sin and death itself, were used for salvation.
You also said, "It is not the father which leaves the crazy son, but the son who leaves the abusive and neglectful father. This is more than permissible, and more than expected. So it is not the father who is rejected a misbehaving son, but a son running away from a neglectful and abusive father. But again, you are able to pull out some wonderful analogy and make it seem like those most hurt are those who hurt most."
First I do not understand what you mean when you say "those most hurt are those who hurt the most".
I don't think Christianity makes a distinction between the abused and abuser. Humanity abused God with sinful acts. God has "not abandoned us to the end but always visited us through His holy prophets and at the last days...." God told Hosea to marry a prostitute who abandoned him and a second time Hosea went back to her. He didn't have the attitude that I am justified to disown my abusing wife. Look at what St Peter says in 1 Peter 2:18-21. "Servants, be submissive to your masters with all fear, not only to the good and gentle, but also to the harsh. For this is commendable, if because of conscience toward God one endures grief, suffering wrongfully. For what credit is it if, when you are beaten for your faults, you take it patiently? But when you do good and suffer, if you take it patiently, this is commendable before God. For to this you were called, because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that you should follow His steps" Basically, even if you are abused and you take it patiently, you are commended. You are not commended if you abandon your family or believe you are wholly justified to abandon your family.
AntoniosNikolas, you said
"“Let us not forget that Unorthodox worship can pollute our being, leading to forgetfulness. It can cause one's mind to drift quite far, rendering him unable to value the Traditional Orthodox melodies and style of Church Worship.[...] Orthodox worship is distinct in its constant reminder of the real presence of Christ and His saints in our lives. We must be careful to ensure that the worship songs we use are Orthodox in their origin, lyrics, melodies and in their spirit. Communion and unity with Christ ought to be embedded within their meaning.”
Notice that His Holiness the Pope emphasizes that the songs utilized in our corporate worship should be wholly Orthodox not only in lyrics, but also in melody, spirit and origin! That is to say, they should come from an Orthodox source and represent an Orthodox approach to worshipping God."
Up to here what you wrote is similar to what I wrote. I completely agree with you.
Then you wrote, "That's it. Point blank. So we don't have to tediously evaluate contemporary "praise & worship" songs on an individual basis. If they come from Charismatic or Evangelical churches, they represent an approach to worship that is not Apostolic and has no place in our Church."
When it's obvious, I can't disagree with you. Evangelical contemporary worship is not Orthodox worship. But what do you do when you can't "ensure that the worship songs we use are Orthodox in their origin, lyrics, melodies and in their spirit"? One could say get rid of all of them (and I personally concede to that view). What do you do when they come from Catholic sources? What do you do when you have no idea where they come from?
You also wrote, "It is not up to us to define Orthodoxy. It has been defined for us by the Ecumenical councils and the Fathers of the Church. It's just our place to stick with it. It's not "my way or the highway". It's Orthodoxy or the highway.
Where are we getting the idea that we have to define or redefine the Faith delivered once and forever for all the saints?"
Practically, one is faced with a problem if one uses this definition of Orthodoxy. At one point you said it doesn't matter if it is Coptic, Ethiopian, Armenian, Western rite, Eastern rite, as long as it is Orthodox. But the Eastern rite Orthodox believe in seven councils and some will not consider anyone who doesn't believe in seven ecumenical councils are not Orthodox. By that definition, we are not Orthodox. I am not saying we have to accept seven ecumenical councils to be Orthodox. I am saying there are legitimate reasons why we must define Orthodoxy. Our fathers of the Church did not use ecumenical councils to define Orthodoxy. I think if one were to do a comprehensive analysis of patristic references and definitions of the Church, one will not see a rigid exclusivity approach but a mixed exclusivity/inclusivity approach. I found at least one father who said this.
Finally AntoniousNikolas, you said, "However, it is our duty to stand up for Orthodox Faith and practice even if a bishop or priest is the one violating it. Such a thing can be done respectfully. We, as laymen, don't have to sit back and watch Orthodoxy eroded."
You are correct that we don't have to sit back and watch Orthodoxy erode. We are, however, obligated to rely solely on God to stop the erosion. If he chooses to use a laymen, then His will be done. However, the devil uses good intended Christian zeal against Christians. As you showed earlier, you gave a list of actions and decision by the Holy Synod against Unorthodox practices. So how can we conclude that a bishop or a priest is the one violating and eroding Orthodoxy? The Holy Synod and the clergy have done something about Protestant influences. This illustrates the danger of generalizations. It illustrates how the devil can convince us that we must first use our limited means to revolt and abdicate against the Church instead of waiting and trusting on God first, who fights for those whom He loves.
AntoniosNikolas, you said
"“Let us not forget that Unorthodox worship can pollute our being, leading to forgetfulness. It can cause one's mind to drift quite far, rendering him unable to value the Traditional Orthodox melodies and style of Church Worship.[...] Orthodox worship is distinct in its constant reminder of the real presence of Christ and His saints in our lives. We must be careful to ensure that the worship songs we use are Orthodox in their origin, lyrics, melodies and in their spirit. Communion and unity with Christ ought to be embedded within their meaning.”
Notice that His Holiness the Pope emphasizes that the songs utilized in our corporate worship should be wholly Orthodox not only in lyrics, but also in melody, spirit and origin! That is to say, they should come from an Orthodox source and represent an Orthodox approach to worshipping God."
Up to here what you wrote is similar to what I wrote. I completely agree with you.
Then you wrote, "That's it. Point blank. So we don't have to tediously evaluate contemporary "praise & worship" songs on an individual basis. If they come from Charismatic or Evangelical churches, they represent an approach to worship that is not Apostolic and has no place in our Church."
When it's obvious, I can't disagree with you. Evangelical contemporary worship is not Orthodox worship. But what do you do when you can't "ensure that the worship songs we use are Orthodox in their origin, lyrics, melodies and in their spirit"? One could say get rid of all of them (and I personally concede to that view). What do you do when they come from Catholic sources? What do you do when you have no idea where they come from?
Okay, so if I'm understanding you correctly, we agree that, as His Holiness and the Holy Synod have both declared, the Protestant stuff is definitely out of bounds. Is that correct?
I'm not sure I understand the rest of your post though. Are you suggesting that some of the songs we already use are Roman Catholic in origin and must be excised as well for the good of the Church?
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164806#msg164806 date=1369540986]
You also wrote, "It is not up to us to define Orthodoxy. It has been defined for us by the Ecumenical councils and the Fathers of the Church. It's just our place to stick with it. It's not "my way or the highway". It's Orthodoxy or the highway.
Where are we getting the idea that we have to define or redefine the Faith delivered once and forever for all the saints?"
Practically, one is faced with a problem if one uses this definition of Orthodoxy. At one point you said it doesn't matter if it is Coptic, Ethiopian, Armenian, Western rite, Eastern rite, as long as it is Orthodox. But the Eastern rite Orthodox believe in seven councils and some will not consider anyone who doesn't believe in seven ecumenical councils are not Orthodox. By that definition, we are not Orthodox. I am not saying we have to accept seven ecumenical councils to be Orthodox. I am saying there are legitimate reasons why we must define Orthodoxy. Our fathers of the Church did not use ecumenical councils to define Orthodoxy. I think if one were to do a comprehensive analysis of patristic references and definitions of the Church, one will not see a rigid exclusivity approach but a mixed exclusivity/inclusivity approach. I found at least one father who said this.
I don't think that the Father you quoted would endorse the inclusion of heterodox practice. Rather, he seems to be saying that the Church is for everyone, not that the Church is for all sorts of practices and belief systems.
In the case of the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox, the approach to worship is the same. Our differences with the Eastern Orthodox are minor when compared to our differences with the Protestants. Let's not muddy the waters by trying to conflate the two.
What are you trying to say here exactly? Are you trying to create wiggle room by which some Evangelical/Charismatic practices could be integrated into the life of the Church?
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164806#msg164806 date=1369540986]
Finally AntoniousNikolas, you said, "However, it is our duty to stand up for Orthodox Faith and practice even if a bishop or priest is the one violating it. Such a thing can be done respectfully. We, as laymen, don't have to sit back and watch Orthodoxy eroded."
You are correct that we don't have to sit back and watch Orthodoxy erode. We are, however, obligated to rely solely on God to stop the erosion. If he chooses to use a laymen, then His will be done. However, the devil uses good intended Christian zeal against Christians. As you showed earlier, you gave a list of actions and decision by the Holy Synod against Unorthodox practices. So how can we conclude that a bishop or a priest is the one violating and eroding Orthodoxy? The Holy Synod and the clergy have done something about Protestant influences. This illustrates the danger of generalizations. It illustrates how the devil can convince us that we must first use our limited means to revolt and abdicate against the Church instead of waiting and trusting on God first, who fights for those whom He loves.
Respectfully, you're accusing me and others of speaking in generalizations above, but here you're speaking in very simplistic terms as if the clergy cannot do any wrong at all and must be acting in the interests of Orthodoxy at all times. Clearly, this is not the case. Did you watch the Pope Shenouda III video above? Did you catch this part?
I love and applaud His Holiness for this courage. (May he plead for the Orthodoxy of our Coptic Church at the Throne of God.) Following His Holiness' example, I'm not going to accept Protestantism in our Church, whoever its advocate may be. If the Coptic Church compromises the Faith buy accepting Protestantism, it will no longer be Orthodox. I trust in God, He will not allow this to happen, but laymen or clergy we must, like St. Athanasius and His Holiness Pope Shenouda III, be diligent.
As I have indicated, I have the utmost respect for the clergy and never attack them or speak disrespectfully of them. However, we can't act as if every priest is in obedience to the Holy Synod on every issue (including this one). For example, the Coptic Orthodox Holy Synod declared in May of 2005 that “No Protestant chorals [singing] and no unorthodox prayers are allowed in Orthodox churches” and yet I've been to Coptic Orthodox Churches where the priest is acting in violation of this commandment. What do you suggest be done in a case like this?
Another time, I was asked to give a lecture about the Sunday Gospel, I did so using powerful references from Chrysostom, Athanasaius and Other Church/Coptic Fathers. Afterwards the priest said "next time just say something to make the people feel good."
maybe you went over their heads a bit, not everyone is a theologian with a university degree. (so many people i know who love to discuss theology and who have a very high personal level of education seem to forget that!)
keep up the good references, but make it accessible, eg read a 12 page article and make 3 points from it, about 5 lines each.
then take one of the points and apply it to today's life (something your audience can relate to, like how to concentrate better when you are praying) - this explanation should last 3 minutes.
then give at least 5 or 10 minutes for questions; in half of which are not you speaking, but rather listening to your audience.
it also helps a lot if you pray for all your audience in the week before the teaching session. as many as you know by name or face, pray for by name or while thinking of what they look like (this is especially important for sunday school, as children respond really well to love and home visits by the teachers. i think they are a bit easier to reach than adults).
i am sure you know this, and maybe it goes without saying, but for the purposes of anyone reading this thread later, also be sure to go for Holy Communion in the week of the teaching session, confess, have a good personal prayer life etc. etc.
a good teacher researches the learning needs of the group, then makes the material accessible to them.
Jesus mostly just told stories; he did not explain complicated doctines to the general crowds, but to his disciples.
so if you are running a servants' class, you should certainly spread among them delight for the church fathers,
but for general teaching in church, keep it simple.
not heretical, not fluffy, feel-good internet stories from buddhists, not avoiding important issues, but simple.
short, simple, non judgmental (admit that you also sin) and loving.
it may seem a bit like a compromise to keep it simple, but if the people can understand you and feel your love for them through your talk, then you are likely to be able to talk to them again, and gradually introduce the deeper teaching you love as they get used to the idea of hearing it.
i think it is really commendable that you (and many others in this thread) are concerned about this, and i hope you can make changes slowly and lovingly; this way the changes will last.
i was protestant for more than 20 years (am almost middle aged now!) and it took me 2 years to decide i agreed with orthodox doctrine (i was visiting the church about once a month over this time).
the big, big thing that made all the difference is that people took their time with me, and gave me more love than i had ever seen in my life (seriously and without exaggeration).
being a good teacher is about so much more than how you talk when teaching in public, but with a bit of practice and a lot of prayer and fasting, you can make a big and beautiful difference in peoples' lives.
i did not get there yet (am still very junior compared to the teachers in church) so please pray for me too, and with God's grace we will help others to be really enthusiastic about our lovely church's beautiful teachings.
Okay, so if I'm understanding you correctly, we agree that, as His Holiness and the Holy Synod have both declared, the Protestant stuff is definitely out of bounds. Is that correct?
Yes. Correct. Explicit Protestant rites are not allowed and are not Orthodox. Not exactly. Roman Catholic songs that do not describe a specific anti-Orthodox dogma should not be put in the same class as Roman Catholic or Protestant songs that do. Roman Catholic songs that praise the Trinity without the Filioque for example is fair game. Roman Catholic songs that venerate the Virgin are fair game. These types of songs should have and have been given economy in Orthodox Church.
This doesn't mean we should abandon Coptic songs for Roman Catholic songs. But the truth is very traditional Roman Catholic songs are coming from Egypt, translated into English and used in services. Some are coming from Western countries. The fact that music is looked down upon in the Coptic culture, it is no wonder that contemporary Coptic songs are not to be found. Instead they are borrowed. The songs that are Orthodox in nature should not be condemned like Protestant songs that are intrinsically anti-Orthodox. No he would not endorse the inclusion of heterodox practices. In essence we are not disagreeing. However, it's the definition of heterodox practices that I am questioning. Obvious heterodox practices are forbidden. Borrowing songs with Orthodox theology - albeit foreign by definition - is not necessarily a heterodox practice. Imagine a spectrum of allowable practices within the church. At the one end is an all-inclusive viewpoint where everything that is Christian is allowed. On the other end is an exclusive viewpoint where nothing is allowed that wasn't exclusively allowed before. Each person will fall into different points on that spectrum. Some will be open-minded for actions and others see that same act as an abomination. Again, let me be clear. No one on this spectrum will condone or endorse heterodox practices. This is what St Shenouda was warning us in that reference: An all exclusive viewpoint is not edifying. He was more inclined towards a midway exclusive/inclusive point. But it seems some have tipped the scale to the exclusive end of the spectrum, condemning everything different as heterodox. This is the point I was trying to express. You are right our differences with the Eastern Orthodox are minor when compare to Protestants. However, what you consider minor differences regarding the approach to worship is an abomination to others. Remember that spectrum. In the past, I have been rebuked for wanting or saying additional Greek-only hymns in the Feasts of the Nativity and Resurrection, like Egennetis, Tin anastasin, and other hymns. I was told we don't need any Greek hymns. In fact, I was once told to say Pikhristos aftonf instead of Khristos aneste for this reason. I know others have been rebuked for singing Khristos aneste in the Greek short form instead of the longer Coptic tune. I have many other examples. One would think, as Pope Shenouda said in the video, Orthodoxy is Orthodoxy. Orthodox Greek hymns should be completely allowable and edifying in the Coptic Orthodox Church. But they are not. (I also have specific examples from the 19th century). This goes back to a lack of a solid definition of Coptic Orthodoxy in relation to Coptic practice. No. Not Evangelical or Protestant, just practices that are (1) Orthodox in nature, (2) non-traditional (i.e, different than usual), (3) do not endorse or imply heresy and (4) brings people closer to God in an Orthodox manner. This doesn't mean we value such practices equal to traditional Coptic practices, but we shouldn't condemn them to absolute evil. I think we can safely call this definition economia. Quite the opposite. I'm sorry you thought I was accusing you of something. I was trying to show that because you avoided generalization and gave specific decisions of the Holy Synod, one cannot accuse the clergy of lethargy or being the cause of Protestantism into the Coptic Church. This doesn't mean the clergy are immune from fallibility. This doesn't mean we should not act in the interest of Orthodoxy. It simply means we should not accuse the clergy of something if there is contrary evidence. We absolutely agree here. But I want to make an additional qualification. The Orthodox clergy are entrusted with authority to defend Orthodoxy much better than the average layperson. In an attempt to fight Protestantism, laymen have tried to usurp the authority of the clergy, claiming they know better. In essence, we are trying to fix the error of creeping Protestantism by inadvertently introducing the sin of rebellion. This doesn't mean the laity should sit back and do nothing. It simply means the laity should never forget the patriarchal ecclesiastical order of the Church that Jesus Christ Himself gave to the clergy. First of all, when one sees a priest committing such violations, we must examine ourselves and see if we have truly and heartily prayed to God and put our trust in God. Have we said, "Lord, if it is your will that such action is happening, give us the patience to endure since we cannot understand Your ways. If it is not, open the heart of this priest that the Holy Spirit may guide him to repentance"? This is Orthodoxy. Pray for those who persecute you and say (or do) evil against you. Then we move to practical solutions. First talk to the diocese bishop. If there is no diocese bishop, talk to other priests, talk to other bishops, talk to HH Pope Tawadros himself. But don't expect that you know better than all the clergy, or the clergy is covering up sinful actions, or the clergy do not have enough courage to do something about it, if you don't get the solution you want (i.e., public remand against this priest).
i think it's good that so many people are writing here so much about preserving our faith and faith tradition, and i pray we can do this well and without heading into rebellion (of course we may need to get into debate sometimes, this is not rebellion).
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164812#msg164812 date=1369597078]
Yes. Correct. Explicit Protestant rites are not allowed and are not Orthodox.
I'm glad. Although I would qualify that for me the adjective "explicit" refers not only to lyrics but also to mode of worship. So-called "contemporary" "praise & worship" music originating in an Evangelical or Charismatic milieu is inherently un-Orthodox in form and approach, so regardless of what the lyrics might be, I would not support its inclusion in the life of our Church.
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164812#msg164812 date=1369597078]
Not exactly. Roman Catholic songs that do not describe a specific anti-Orthodox dogma should not be put in the same class as Roman Catholic or Protestant songs that do. Roman Catholic songs that praise the Trinity without the Filioque for example is fair game. Roman Catholic songs that venerate the Virgin are fair game. These types of songs should have and have been given economy in Orthodox Church.
This doesn't mean we should abandon Coptic songs for Roman Catholic songs. But the truth is very traditional Roman Catholic songs are coming from Egypt, translated into English and used in services. Some are coming from Western countries. The fact that music is looked down upon in the Coptic culture, it is no wonder that contemporary Coptic songs are not to be found. Instead they are borrowed. The songs that are Orthodox in nature should not be condemned like Protestant songs that are intrinsically anti-Orthodox.
In my experience, music seems to play a huge role in the life of the Coptic Church and we seem to have an adequate array of songs for all functions and purposes. Are we, in your experience, that musically bankrupt that we need to borrow Eastern Orthodox or Roman Catholic songs?
Although my first instinct is to agree with H.H. Pope Tawadros' statement that any songs we use should be Orthodox in origin, I don't have a major problem with extending the principle of economia to songs from traditional Apostolic Churches that reflect a traditional, liturgical, reverential approach to worship. My two concerns are that:
1.) I'm not sure its necessary, when we already have such a rich tradition of hymnody in Oriental Orthodoxy
2.) The "slippery slope" effect. I would be cautious about leaving any room whatsoever for people to cast even further afield at a later date, especially those who are already attracted to the malignant growths of Evangelicalism and Charismatism.
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164812#msg164812 date=1369597078]
No he would not endorse the inclusion of heterodox practices. In essence we are not disagreeing. However, it's the definition of heterodox practices that I am questioning. Obvious heterodox practices are forbidden. Borrowing songs with Orthodox theology - albeit foreign by definition - is not necessarily a heterodox practice.
Why would we need to go outside of Orthodoxy and drink from the well of ecclesiastical bodies that have excommunicated themselves from the Orthodox Church?
If we as a Coptic Church are so musically poor (of which I'm not sure I'm convinced) why do we look to the heterodox instead of our sister Churches? I've heard some truly beautiful Armenian and Syriac hymns (in English) that I'd be much more comfortable borrowing - because we're one Church. Or if we have such a craving for Western things, why not drink from the well of the British Orthodox or the Western Rite Antiochian Churches?
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164812#msg164812 date=1369597078]
Imagine a spectrum of allowable practices within the church. At the one end is an all-inclusive viewpoint where everything that is Christian is allowed. On the other end is an exclusive viewpoint where nothing is allowed that wasn't exclusively allowed before. Each person will fall into different points on that spectrum. Some will be open-minded for actions and others see that same act as an abomination. Again, let me be clear. No one on this spectrum will condone or endorse heterodox practices.
This depends entirely upon whether or not we can agree on what constitutes "allowable practices" in the first place. For some people, things origination in Evangelical or Charismatic circles would be "allowable". For me, it absolutely would not.
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164812#msg164812 date=1369597078]
This is what St Shenouda was warning us in that reference: An all exclusive viewpoint is not edifying. He was more inclined towards a midway exclusive/inclusive point. But it seems some have tipped the scale to the exclusive end of the spectrum, condemning everything different as heterodox. This is the point I was trying to express.
Our saintly Pope's point of view seemed quite conservative, especially in the linked youtube sermon, which is fitting since Orthodoxy is a conservative Church. If some have become "exclusivistic", it is perhaps a reaction to the "it's all good so long as it's 'Christian'" approach that seems to be so rampant lately. It's to the point that I can't condone advertising certain youth functions among the youth I serve because I know they resemble nothing so much as Evangelical functions.
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164812#msg164812 date=1369597078]
You are right our differences with the Eastern Orthodox are minor when compare to Protestants. However, what you consider minor differences regarding the approach to worship is an abomination to others. Remember that spectrum. In the past, I have been rebuked for wanting or saying additional Greek-only hymns in the Feasts of the Nativity and Resurrection, like Egennetis, Tin anastasin, and other hymns. I was told we don't need any Greek hymns. In fact, I was once told to say Pikhristos aftonf instead of Khristos aneste for this reason. I know others have been rebuked for singing Khristos aneste in the Greek short form instead of the longer Coptic tune. I have many other examples. One would think, as Pope Shenouda said in the video, Orthodoxy is Orthodoxy. Orthodox Greek hymns should be completely allowable and edifying in the Coptic Orthodox Church. But they are not. (I also have specific examples from the 19th century). This goes back to a lack of a solid definition of Coptic Orthodoxy in relation to Coptic practice.
I agree with you here, especially in terms of distinguishing between things specific to Coptic practice and things that are Orthodox in a more general sense.
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164812#msg164812 date=1369597078]
No. Not Evangelical or Protestant, just practices that are (1) Orthodox in nature, (2) non-traditional (i.e, different than usual), (3) do not endorse or imply heresy and (4) brings people closer to God in an Orthodox manner. This doesn't mean we value such practices equal to traditional Coptic practices, but we shouldn't condemn them to absolute evil. I think we can safely call this definition economia.
Agreed. Providing, again, that we have the same working definition of what is allowable in the first place.
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164812#msg164812 date=1369597078]
Quite the opposite. I'm sorry you thought I was accusing you of something. I was trying to show that because you avoided generalization and gave specific decisions of the Holy Synod, one cannot accuse the clergy of lethargy or being the cause of Protestantism into the Coptic Church. This doesn't mean the clergy are immune from fallibility. This doesn't mean we should not act in the interest of Orthodoxy. It simply means we should not accuse the clergy of something if there is contrary evidence.
I don't think the one precludes the other. It seems to me (and I could be wrong) that the decisions of the Holy Synod regarding this issue are not being disseminated and enforced. It also seems to me that there are some servants - and unfortunately some clergy - who are:
1.) Frightened that the youth will leave the Church if we don't give them Evangelical style fluff
2.) Actually enamored of things Evangelical themselves
Folks in these categories are actively doing things contrary to the decisions of the Holy Synod posted above, and when you confront them about it (lovingly, of course) their reaction is almost precisely like that of the antagonist in RO's video.
The fact that a certain thing has been disallowed by the Holy Synod means nothing to them if it gets in the way of their "ministry". This represents more of a Protestant attitude than the idea of leaving a body that has become heterodox in theology or practice.
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164812#msg164812 date=1369597078]
We absolutely agree here. But I want to make an additional qualification. The Orthodox clergy are entrusted with authority to defend Orthodoxy much better than the average layperson. In an attempt to fight Protestantism, laymen have tried to usurp the authority of the clergy, claiming they know better. In essence, we are trying to fix the error of creeping Protestantism by inadvertently introducing the sin of rebellion. This doesn't mean the laity should sit back and do nothing. It simply means the laity should never forget the patriarchal ecclesiastical order of the Church that Jesus Christ Himself gave to the clergy.
I agree to a point, but we must remember that Arius, Nestorius, and others were clergy (not comparing any of our present clergy to them). I’m always willing to give the clergy the benefit of the doubt, but if someone is acting in contradiction to Orthodoxy and to the decisions of the Holy Synod, I’m not going to shrug and say, “Abouna knows better”.
[quote author=Remnkemi link=topic=10538.msg164812#msg164812 date=1369597078]
First of all, when one sees a priest committing such violations, we must examine ourselves and see if we have truly and heartily prayed to God and put our trust in God. Have we said, "Lord, if it is your will that such action is happening, give us the patience to endure since we cannot understand Your ways. If it is not, open the heart of this priest that the Holy Spirit may guide him to repentance"? This is Orthodoxy. Pray for those who persecute you and say (or do) evil against you. Then we move to practical solutions. First talk to the diocese bishop. If there is no diocese bishop, talk to other priests, talk to other bishops, talk to HH Pope Tawadros himself. But don't expect that you know better than all the clergy, or the clergy is covering up sinful actions, or the clergy do not have enough courage to do something about it, if you don't get the solution you want (i.e., public remand against this priest).
This seems like perfectly rational advice. However, I must stress that I for one am not looking for a personal reprimand against anyone. Fix the problem not the blame. I don’t want to see anyone reprimanded, but I do want the creeping influence of Protestantism in our Church completely halted and reversed.
As I’ve said before, a “Protestant-influenced Orthodox Church” is an oxymoronic monster. Such a thing cannot exist. It is as much an abominable joke as the pseudo-Orthodox “fusion” body in the previously linked article which declares that there is a time to be reverential and a time to “party with Jesus”. (God have mercy)
Thank God, I’m blessed to serve under a wonderful priest who would not entertain the idea of compromising Orthodox Faith or Orthodox practice one iota, but based on others complaints, and what I’ve seen at some of the youth gatherings, this is sadly not the case universally in our Coptic Church.
What if you were a Christian living in the Orthodox Church of Persia at the time when it lapsed into Nestorianism? Would you stay?
Again, I’m not suggesting that anyone bolt from our Coptic Church which is wholly Orthodox in her Lord. We need all hands on deck to strive against the creeping influence which prompted a conscientious youth named Abanoub to start this discussion in the first place. And I like a lot of what you’ve said in this last paragraph and what Mabsoota has added about debate without disobedience and always being respectful to our fathers. Please do note that I have never said anything disrespectful about any of them (may they pray for me, a wretched sinner).
I would like to add, however, that praying for your enemies and those who persecute you personally is one thing and that standing quiet and allowing practices which confuse the youth and lead them astray is another. Allowing the current state of affairs to fester is not an option. Let us promote, and beg the bishops to enforce, the standing decisions of the Holy Synod on this issue.
[quote author=baempi link=topic=10538.msg164809#msg164809 date=1369585003]
How about this? I was asked to give a lecture about a specific chapter in the bible at church, I gave an explanation based on patrological interpretations and at the end, the leader of the group said "we just wanted to know how this chapter made you feel" not all these details.
Another time, I was asked to give a lecture about the Sunday Gospel, I did so using powerful references from Chrysostom, Athanasaius and Other Church/Coptic Fathers. Afterwards the priest said "next time just say something to make the people feel good."
This is odd and sad. Not knowing the specifics of the parish dynamic, I'm kind of at a loss here, but I think its kind of odd that you'd be asked (twice) to steer clear of the Fathers. Mabsoota's commentary is valuable, but I don't think that drawing on the Fathers means you're going over the people's heads. We can't let "brand x 'Christianity'" replace Orthodoxy in our Churches.
I just wanted to make sure that those of you interested in fighting the good fight against the spread of heterodox worship practices among our youth have all of the web-based resources available in one post. Here are a few I've found. If anyone else knows of any, please post them.
First, here are some books available as free pdf downloads:
Some Heresies of Evangelicalism & an Orthodox Response by Hierodeacon Gregory
http://www.ctosonline.org/sample/CTS.pdf
The Non-Orthodox by Patrick Barnes
http://orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/non-orthodox.pdf
Comparative Theology by H.H. Pope Shenouda III of Thrice Blessed Memory
http://www.copticchurch.net/topics/theology/comptheo.pdf
There are also some excellent books that are not available online as yet, but that are relatively inexpensive, such as:
Taught by God by Harry Boosalis: http://www.amazon.com/Taught-God-Harry-Boosalis/dp/1878997874/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1372770791&sr=1-1&keywords=harry+boosalis
Orthodoxy & Heterodoxy by Fr. Andrew Damick: http://www.amazon.com/Orthodoxy-Heterodoxy-Exploring-Systems-Christian/dp/1936270137/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1372770903&sr=1-1&keywords=orthodoxy+&+heterodoxy
Orthodox Worship by Williams & Anstall: http://www.amazon.com/Orthodox-Worship-Living-Continuity-Synagogue/dp/0937032727/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1372770836&sr=1-1&keywords=orthodox+worship
There are also some excellent articles online:
http://orthodoxyandheterodoxy.org/2013/02/26/god-is-much-bigger-than-your-style-of-worship-or-mine/
http://orthodoxyandheterodoxy.org/2012/09/10/orthodox-worship-versus-contemporary-worship/
http://orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/frseraphim_charismatics.aspx
http://orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/charmov.aspx
http://orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/ec_glossalalia.aspx
http://orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/toronto.aspx
http://orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/ec_secondcoming.aspx
http://orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/ec_thousandyearreign.aspx
http://orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/toronto.aspx
http://orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/inq_evangelicals.aspx
A Youtube vid of a talk given by H.H. Pope Shenouda III of Thrice Blessed Memory (w/ English subtitles)
(There are also tons of Ethiopian Orthodox youtube vids addressing this issue, but they are all in Amharic)
As noted before, there are also the standing decisions of the Holy Synod (which really need to be enforced):
http://www.arabwestreport.info/year-2012/week-12/43-ecumenical-relations-coptic-orthodox-church-mentioned-decisions-holy-synod
• Forbid the singing of Protestant songs and Protestant prayers in Orthodox Churches (May 2005)
Forbid priests to accept invitations to appear at Protestant gatherings unless they had first received the express approval of the Patriarchate (June 1996)
• Warned against unauthorized “house meetings” and the spread of Protestant books, cassettes, and CDs (June 1996, June 2001)
• Authorized a committee for the revising of religious books to remove any Protestant influence or doctrine, warning that “the statement that we are all one in Jesus is deceiving” (June 1998)
• Warned specifically against music as a means of spreading Protestant influence and theology [H.H. Pope Shenouda III] (June 1998)
• Declared that “clergy should be careful about teachers in church and check whether they are influenced by Protestant thought or not” (June 1998)
• Convened a conference on how to face Protestant activities and how to protect the Coptic Orthodox Church from the spread of Protestant influence from the inside out (October 1998)
• Instructed Orthodox clergy not to write introductions for non-Orthodox books so as not to give Protestants the opportunity to deliver a non-Orthodox message to Orthodox believers (May 1999)
• Warned Orthodox Christians against attending non-Orthodox retreats (May 1999)
• Warned Orthodox youth not to join in activities held in joint cooperation with Protestants or Roman Catholics, including sports activities, conferences and lectures, “since these are used for proselytism”; The Synod is explicit that “these are very dangerous issues” (June 2000)
• Convened a conference to warn the Coptic Orthodox faithful against the activities of the Seventh Day Adventists (October 2002)
• Organized a number of seminars, sermons, spiritual days and conferences stressing Orthodox dogma, differences with the Protestants, and explaining why the Coptic Orthodox Church rejects false unity, declaring that, “God is not only Love but the Truth” (June-September 2003)
• Warned specifically against the activities of the Southern Baptist Convention, which published materials stating explicitly that they were targeting the Coptic Orthodox Christians of Egypt for conversion (June 2006)
• Prohibited Coptic clergy from appearing on Protestant satellite channels (2009)
• Prohibited Coptic Orthodox bookstores from carrying a number of heterodox titles, materials and publications (1999, 2005, 2007, 2009, 2010)
And the quote by H.H. Pope Tawadros II:
“Let us not forget that Unorthodox worship can pollute our being, leading to forgetfulness. It can cause one's mind to drift quite far, rendering him unable to value the Traditional Orthodox melodies and style of Church Worship.[...] Orthodox worship is distinct in its constant reminder of the real presence of Christ and His saints in our lives. We must be careful to ensure that the worship songs we use are Orthodox in their origin, lyrics, melodies and in their spirit. Communion and unity with Christ ought to be embedded within their meaning.”
By the way, has anyone seen this blog "Dissident Copts", which was apparently started a few years back about this issue?
http://dissidentcopts.blogspot.com/2009/06/things-to-straighten-protestant-thought.html
I realize that the tone might be a little confrontational, but as the author (authors?) says "But know that we do this not out of hate for the Coptic Orthodox Church, but out of our deep, sincere love for Her, and our desire to expose things that we consider are worth examining and criticising."
Also, my own work is still in progress (actually, it's very near to being finished...just awaiting some scholarly review).
Please pray for me, and continue to fight the good fight for our Church and our youth.
A.N.
Hey this is your Eritrean friend. I got your email earlier and now I am reading your post - I am having an over dose of you lol.
I was compiling a summery of the 26 pages but you bit me to it, kalas!
Btw the following link is not working. I looked at the material in it a while a ago and I wish I can access it again.
http://www.arabwestreport.info/year-2012/week-12/43-ecumenical-relations-coptic-orthodox-church-mentioned-decisions-holy-synod
Coming to the topic, this is an issue that is wreaking havoc in almost all Orthodox Churches special Oriental Orthodox. I wish one day there will be an ecumenical council to put this issue to rest once and for all. Until that time those who are like minded can form some kind of group that will do more than venting out.
In Christ
Theophilus
Btw the following link is not working. I looked at the material in it a while a ago and I wish I can access it again.
http://www.arabwestreport.info/year-2012/week-12/43-ecumenical-relations-coptic-orthodox-church-mentioned-decisions-holy-synod
Theophilus,
You can access it at this link:
http://web.archive.org/web/20120410214749/http://www.arabwestreport.info/year-2012/week-12/43-ecumenical-relations-coptic-orthodox-church-mentioned-decisions-holy-synod