You wrote:
“While, vladimir998 is correct to say that the Western and Eastern churches were technically still part of a unified Church there were already deep divisions.”
I can agree with that.
“One of which was that the Greek east allowed the translations of the Bible into the vernacular and allowed for local autonomy and the acceptance of local traditions.”
So did the West. 1) There NEVER was a rule against translating the Bible into the vernacular for all of the West and what local rules came out later came out in the 13th or 14th century. 2) There were plenty of local customs and liturgies that developed and florished in the West: Sarum, Mozarabic, Ambrosian, Gallic, Roman, the various Celtic Rites and several others I can’t even think of at the moment. Someone could easily make the case that the Westerners - at the time period we’re talking about - were much more diverse in liturgy than the Orthodox East ever was.
“The Latin church only allowed Latin - it did relent and allowed Sts. Cyril and Methodius to continue in the Slavic vernacular but then to appease the Germans who were the rulers there at the time, the Pope told St. Methodius he could no longer celebrate liturgy in the Slavic vernacular.”
1) Other than with Sts. C and M, who exactly WANTED a Mass in other than Latin? 2) Take the Irish Rite, for instance, it wasn’t abolished by the Irish bishops until the 12th century - more than 300 years after the time period we’re talking about.
“Methodius appealed to the Pope and to Rome’s credit and was again allowed to used the Slavic vernacular. But within twenty years after his death, And without the brothers to explain their position, use of the vernacular in liturgy was again banned by the Latins.”
So what? How does that mean that John Huss was doing what he did because of the loss of a vernacular liturgy he wouldn’t have necessarily understood anyway? 500 years is a long time.
“This is laid the groundwork for the resentment that long simmered against the Latin church.”
Complete nonsense. There was no such resentment nor can anyone apparently document said supposed resentment. Where was that “simmering” resentment for 500 years? You think someone would have written about it at least once wouldn’t you?
By the way, when I say...
“Take the Irish Rite, for instance, it wasn’t abolished by the Irish bishops until the 12th century - more than 300 years after the time period we’re talking about.”
That does not mean that I am saying that the Irish Rite was in the vernacular.
500 years is a long time? Maybe by the modern American MTV generation but 500 years is not a very long time and history shows that people maintain traditions for much longer. As someone who loves history as I do whenever I encounter such statements it makes me shake my head in wonderment.
Lastly, when you write "so what" is your opinion. What you perception of the truth is is not what the Moravians perception of the truth is. I think that is the problem with many discussions. People perceive facts through their own filters.
I posted a link with statement from the Moravian Church's webs site that confirms my statement @ http://www.moravian.org/history/
In the mid-ninth century these countries converted to Christianity chiefly through the influence of two Greek Orthodox missionaries, Cyril and Methodius. They translated the Bible into the common language and introduced a national church ritual. In the centuries that followed, Bohemia and Moravia gradually fell under the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of Rome, but some of the Czech people protested.
So clearly as the Moravians see it (lit it or not it is their view based on their understanding of events) for those 500 years where the Latin liturgy was imposed over that of the eastern Greek founded vernacular it created resentment over time.
I am not interested in polemics but rather facts. Not liking facts and saying you 'so what' is not how I roll.
So to conclude, a question was raised about the Moravians and the Orthodox. While the Moravians were not an offshoot of the Orthodox church the Moravians tell us (right or wrong - it is their opinion) that their ancestors were once under the guidance of the Greek east through the Sts. Cyril and Methodius who founded a Christian rite in the local Slavic vernacular. The Moravians feel that when the Latin church suppressed this it created long simmering resentment to Rome and thus gave fertile ground for discontent which saw the rise of their new church.
It is a plausible scenario.