You wrote:
“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.”
Love history? I have a PhD in history. I studied the Middle Ages in detail - and did a good amount of work on Huss, the Hussites, etc. And yes, 500 years is a VERY LONG TIME for an emotion or feeling that you have, thus far, utterly failed to document. If you would at least show SOME EVIDENCE, SOMETHING, ANYTHING that proved your point that might help. Can you?
“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.”
Again, so what? So far you have utterly failed to document what the feelings or perceptions of Moravians IN THE MIDDLE AGES were. You have also failed - utterly - to show that those perceptions and feelings OF “RESENTMENT” some how stayed frozen in time for 500 years or changed or even existed in the first place.
“I think that is the problem with many discussions. People perceive facts through their own filters.”
And you’re not? Unlike you (apparently) I studied this on a professional level. I am not saying that to rub it in, or even to bragg. I just can’t believe that you think you’re unbiased, or that only those who disagree with are biased. Again, you have utterly failed to make a case here. You have made baseless assertions. That’s it so far.
“I posted a link with statement from the Moravian Church’s webs site that confirms my statement @ http://www.moravian.org/history/";
Nonsense. 1) Your Moravian website does not confirm your statement in the least. This was your statement:
“This is laid the groundwork for the resentment that long simmered against the Latin church.”
1) Your website makes an unsubstantiated claim that in the 9th century “some of the Czech people protested.”
Note, that was UNSUBSTANTIATED. Do I even need to point out that the use of “Czechs” for the 9th century is anachronistic?
2) Even if there were “Czechs” who protested the loss of their vernacular rite in the 9th century, that in no way means that their feelings “laid the groundwork for the resentment that long simmered against the Latin church” or that that resentment EVER EVEN EXISTED before John Huss.
Again, you have presented NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER TO SUBSTANTIATE YOUR CLAIM:
“This is laid the groundwork for the resentment that long simmered against the Latin church.”
That is what you have to prove. Have you even attempted to do it yet?
“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.”
1) It doesn’t matter what the Moravians say now about events that happened 500 to 1000 years before they put up their website or even came into being as a sect.
2) Anachronism is your difficulty - not to mention that the source you are relying on still doesn’t say what you said. Remember, you said, “This is laid the groundwork for the resentment that long simmered against the Latin church.”
Are you ever going to offer evidence of that or not? The Moravian website only makes a claim - completely unsubstantiated - that “Czechs” protested something in the 9th century. It says nothing about “simmering” resentment against the Catholic Church.
“I am not interested in polemics but rather facts. Not liking facts and saying you ‘so what’ is not how I roll.”
What? You make a completely baseless, entirely unsubstantiated assertion and you’re surprised I say “So what?” to a completely irrelevant point that in no way substantiates your claim? And you say you’re interested in facts? What FACTS?
The point I made is irrefutable: “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.”
1) 500 years is a long time for a feeling - a feeling you’ve utterly failed to document.
2) Your point about Methodius and the loss of the vernacular liturgy after his death PROVES NOTHING ABOUT JOHN HUSS. Nothing at all.
3) When someone makes a completely irrelevant point as you made, then “So what?” is perfectly warranted.
“So to conclude, a question was raised about the Moravians and the Orthodox.”
No. There was no question. It was a statement - in post 28 - and I showed how it was flawed.
“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.”
1) Actually, the Moravians are simply mistaken because - as everyone already knows - Sts. Cyril and Methodius were Catholic. There was no Orthodox Church yet. The saints received the backing of the Catholic Church. Period.
2) Even if the people of Moravia were once Orthodox - and they were not since no such Church yet existed - then that still says EXACTLY NOTHING about laying “the groundwork for the resentment that long simmered against the Latin church.”
That was your assertion. Where’s your evidence? So far you’re presented NONE.
“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.”
1) Who cares? I can’t believe that I have to point this out, but what a sect thinks in 2009 in no way actually impacts the factuality of events more than 1000 years ago or 500 years ago.
2) Even what you cited from the Moravians DID NOT SAY, “This is laid the groundwork for the resentment that long simmered against the Latin church.”
3) The Moravians can say the moon is made out cheese. Is it? You can say, “This is laid the groundwork for the resentment that long simmered against the Latin church.” Well, where’s the EVIDENCE? Show me that the “Czechs” in the year 1100 were “simmering” with “resentment” against the Catholic Church. Can you? How about in 1200? How about 1250? Something? Anything? You haven’t been able to document this yet apparently. How about doing that? Care to try?
“It is a plausible scenario.”
Plausible scenario?
So you’ve moved away from baseless assertions: “This is laid the groundwork for the resentment that long simmered against the Latin church.”
to plausible scenarios? That’s it? Will it be “Wishful thinking” by next week? An “Old wives’ tale” by next month?
Please present some evidence for your claim. Do you have any at all?