Replies

Regarding Sts. Cyril and Methodious - I also stated that you were correct that Sts. Cyril and Methodious were evangelists of a united universal (Catholic is Greek for universal) church.

But they were emissaries of the emperor at Constantinople - of eastern Rome.

And the rite they imparted on the Moravians was not the Latin one. I also posted that at first Rome went along with that but within a generation of the deaths of the saints the Latin Church suppressed the Moravian Greek rite inspired rite.

Here is the part which you lied about (or to be fair to you you think this is the case and are in error) in your claim that the Orthodox Czech church made up:

That the Moravian Protestants are the end result of a long process originating from the Greek eastern church tradition.

I produced the Moravians own source indicating that they make this claim themselves and which I re-worded (where you are being a pettifog about) “This is laid the groundwork for the resentment that long simmered against the Latin church.”

And then I posted an Anglican statement which also states that the Moravians fought to return to the 'eastern Greek rite'.

You know as well as I do that orthodox and catholic apply to the church in the west and east until the Great Schism and what is meant is the Greek tradition/rite vs the Latin tradition/rite.

The rest is pettifoggery and obfuscation on your part.

I repeat, the Moravians THEMSELVES hold the view their origins like in the Greek Eastern Christianity not in the Latin Western Christianity. The Moravians themselves say that the Latin forced out this eastern tradition and this created resentments.

It is their claim - Protestants that they are - that their movement had their foundations in the resistance to Latin Rite Christianity and the restoration of Eastern rite Christianity which over time became the foundation of their church.

You placed a false charge against the Czech Orthodox Church and I called you out on it.

You wrote:

“Regarding Sts. Cyril and Methodious - I also stated that you were correct that Sts. Cyril and Methodious were evangelists of a united universal (Catholic is Greek for universal) church.”

If you believe they were Catholic, then don’t claim they were Orthodox. And none of that changes the fact that you incorrectly stated in post 51: “This is laid the groundwork for the resentment that long simmered against the Latin church.”

“But they were emissaries of the emperor at Constantinople - of eastern Rome.”

And of the pope. And none of that changes the fact that you incorrectly stated in post 51: “This is laid the groundwork for the resentment that long simmered against the Latin church.”

“And the rite they imparted on the Moravians was not the Latin one. I also posted that at first Rome went along with that but within a generation of the deaths of the saints the Latin Church suppressed the Moravian Greek rite inspired rite.”

And none of that changes the fact that you incorrectly stated in post 51: “This is laid the groundwork for the resentment that long simmered against the Latin church.”

“Here is the part which you lied about (or to be fair to you you think this is the case and are in error) in your claim that the Orthodox Czech church made up: That the Moravian Protestants are the end result of a long process originating from the Greek eastern church tradition.”

Wait. First, you earlier accused me of lying about something else and then failed to show at all how I could possibly have lied. Now you’re claiming I lied about something else. Second, you are talking about the “Orthodox Czech church” which I have never mentioned in my life as far as I can remember. I mentioned the Czech Orthodox Church. To you that might seem like a small difference, but there might be two different churches with very similar names. Get it right. Third, I never said that any Orthodox Church claims the “Moravian Protestants are are the end result of a long process originating from the Greek eastern church tradition.” Fourth. what I claimed was this, in post #39, “I was referring to the ahistorical revisionist idea that Jerome of Prague, John Huss, and other Hussites were really Eastern Orthodox. I first encountered this idea about 8 years ago among some Eastern Orthodox. If I recall correctly, it was actively promoted by the Czech Orthodox Church which is actually less than a century old. I may be confusing the COC with some other church, however. I could find none of the old websites that used to promote the Hussite-became-Orthodox idea.” That is EXTREMELY different than what you are claiming I said.

I never once, ever, claimed that any Orthodox Church says the Moravian Protestants are the “end result of a long process originating from the Greek eastern church tradition.”

You, not surprisingly, are confusing two different issues. To say that the Orthodox claim a false Eastern Orthodoxy for Huss is entirely different than saying the Moravians claim ANYTHING. The Orthodox, Czech or not, are no Moravians, who are Protestants nor vice-versa. You are in way over your head and clearly cannot distinguish between the most simple of things.

“I produced the Moravians own source indicating that they make this claim themselves and which I re-worded (where you are being a pettifog about) “This is laid the groundwork for the resentment that long simmered against the Latin church.” “

No. You posted a source that said exactly NOTHING even remotely like you supposed rewording which you even denied making. Only later did you then claim you were rewording something which is a fable nonetheless, because no such rewording is possible since the source says NOTHING of the kind!

“And then I posted an Anglican statement which also states that the Moravians fought to return to the ‘eastern Greek rite’.”

That is not what your Anglican source said. Here, I’ll prove it to you. Here are your four highlighted quotes:

1) “Christianity came to the Czechs from the East, from Constantinople, and from Christian Greece. Two young men, consecrated missionaries, came out from Salonica with their learning and their zeal for Christ, and went up the Danube River past many a Slavic tribe and beyond the knowledge of man, until they found the pleasant and fertile valleys of Moravia. These were Cyril and Methodius, ambassadors of Christ to the Czechs. They brought the story of the Cross to these people in their own tongue, and Cyril wrote out the Gospel for them that they might read it for themselves. Because they had no alphabet, Cyril made one for them, and invented [3/4] quaint letters which helped out the Greek alphabet to express Slavic sounds. Today the Cyrillic alphabet is universal in Eastern Europe, and is familiar to most of us in Russian print. This conversion of the Czechs occurred in the year 860.”

Now, no where in there does it say “the Moravians fought to return to the ‘eastern Greek rite’.”

2) “So in Bohemia and Moravia were established Greek rather than Roman rites and doctrines. The gift of the Roman mind is law and the duty of submission to authority, while the Greek mind offers to the world the freedom of the human soul; this is true even in the Christian Church. So the gift of the Church of Rome through German missionaries, the Czechs flung back, and turned with joy to spiritual liberty and living faith which the Eastern Church brought them.”

And, again, no where in there does it say, “the Moravians fought to return to the ‘eastern Greek rite’.”

3) “The people sang themselves into religious fervor, and transformed the ancient Greek Church custom of singing Easter hymns, [5/6] into singing hymns the year round.”

And nothing at all in there says anything remotely about the “Moravians fought to return to the ‘eastern Greek rite’.”

4) “Not a Roman priest was to be found in Bohemia or Moravia, and only the capture of Constantinople by the Turks in 1453 prevented reunion with the Greek Church.”

And nothing in there at all says anything about the “Moravians fought to return to the ‘eastern Greek rite’.”

Now, I think the word, “Greek” is used six times in the passages you posted from your Anglican source and no where does the phrase or idea of “Moravians fought to return to the ‘eastern Greek rite’” appear.

You’re apparently making it up because your own cited source doesn’t back you up in the least.

“You know as well as I do that orthodox and catholic apply to the church in the west and east until the Great Schism and what is meant is the Greek tradition/rite vs the Latin tradition/rite.”

What I know is that nothing you have ever cited in anyway proves this: “This is laid the groundwork for the resentment that long simmered against the Latin church.”

Nor can you seem to find anything that proves this either: “Moravians fought to return to the ‘eastern Greek rite’”

“The rest is pettifoggery and obfuscation on your part.”

Again, you have made claims and are apparently unable to back them up. Just post the evidence if you have it. If you really believe in what you claim, then find some evidence for it. If you can’t find any, then why do you believe it?

“I repeat, the Moravians THEMSELVES hold the view their origins like in the Greek Eastern Christianity not in the Latin Western Christianity.”

Even if they believed that, that neither proves that claim to be true nor have you posted evidence of it being true.

“The Moravians themselves say that the Latin forced out this eastern tradition and this created resentments.”

And again, even if they believed that, that neither proves that claim to be true nor have you posted evidence of it being true. Also, you have never yet posted a single scrap of evidence to back up this claim: “This is laid the groundwork for the resentment that long simmered against the Latin church.”

“It is their claim - Protestants that they are - that their movement had their foundations in the resistance to Latin Rite Christianity and the restoration of Eastern rite Christianity which over time became the foundation of their church.”

Nope. That is not what they claim nor have you posted evidence of it. You are actually claiming that PROTESTANTS became PROTESTANTS because they wanted to become EASTERN ORTHODOX. Why didn’t they just BECOME Eastern Orthodox rather than Protestants? Also, you’re forgetting (apparently) that the Moravians - that is the Protestant Moravian sect - we’re talking about didn’t exist until the 18th century. If they didn’t exist until then, and they didn’t, and we know they came out of previous Protestant groups, and we do know that, then they can’t even technically be said to have left the Catholic faith. Their immediate ancestors were Protestants and they lived in a time and place where they probably could have become Eastern Orthodox if they had a mind to. They didn’t. They were not apparently interested.

“You placed a false charge against the Czech Orthodox Church and I called you out on it.”

No you didn’t. 1) I said nothing that was false. 2) You couldn’t even get the name right. Earlier you said “Orthodox Czech Church”. When you can get the name consistenly right all you will have done is learned their name.

Maybe you can answer this for me, I claimed - CORRECTLY - that the Czech Orthodox Church FALSELY claims that John Huss and Jerome of Prague were Eastern Orthodox. You deny that they do so. Well, then explain to me why COC celebrates them as martyrs on July 6th each year. Can you do that for me?