On Sunday, February 12, after Divine Liturgy, the parish hall in Canberra was full of melodious and enthusiastic singing of Christmas carols. We even had guests who had come from Melbourne and Geelong — the ensemble [...]]]> For the second year the parish community of St. Volodymyr, Canberra-Queanbeyan, held a joint Farewell to the Carols event.

On Sunday, February 12, after Divine Liturgy, the parish hall in Canberra was full of melodious and enthusiastic singing of Christmas carols.  We even had guests who had come from Melbourne and Geelong — the ensemble “Rodyna” had participated in Canberra’s Multicultural Festival on the day before and joined our celebration.  They presented a number of Christmas carols and folk songs which were well received by the audience.

Also, singing and playing guitar were Andrew Liszczynsky and Fr. Andriy Mykytyuk, who performed several Christmas carols – one of which was unique and not well known.

Finally, the parish choir of St. Volodymyr also entertained the audience and sang some wonderful Christmas carols.

After that, everyone present sang some carols and folksongs to the skilful accompaniment of Michael Lysewycz on the accordion.

The day was really wonderful.  This last opportunity to sing Christmas Carols this season gave us lots of joy and resolve to wait with God’s help until next Christmas to again sing carols to glorify the newly-born Christ.

to see photos from event please click here

source: http://volodymyrparish.ucoz.org

PHOTOS

By Dr. Andrew Thomas Kania

pt 1

In the early fifteenth century the German cardinal, mystic and mathematician, Nicholas of Cusa, had journeyed to Constantinople, learning first hand not only about the Christian tradition of the East, but also about Islam. For [...]]]> An Address to the Aquinas Institute, University of Oxford 4/12/09

By Dr. Andrew Thomas Kania

pt 1

In the early fifteenth century the German cardinal, mystic and mathematician, Nicholas of Cusa, had journeyed to Constantinople, learning first hand not only about the Christian tradition of the East, but also about Islam. For Cusa, The Fall of Constantinople would serve as a catalyst for the West to begin to perceive Islam, in a new light. Christianity and Islam had fought over the Holy Land, for centuries; and to Cusa all that could eventuate from such continued warfare, and mutual misunderstanding was the self-destruction of “The People of the Book”. Cusa was to articulate his vision of a new order of co-existence in his work, “The Peace of Faith”, a work significantly influenced by the 14^th Century Catalan mystic, Ramon Llull.

To Cusa the crux of the conflict between the three religions lay in a failure to understand that what seemed to be a disparity in religion, was in fact, a diversity of rite – for Judaism, Christianity and Islam, all swore a singular devotion to the same God – and all claimed descent from the same father of the Faith – Abraham. “The Peace of Faith” opens with Cusa explaining the rationale behind the writing of the tract: “After the brutal deeds recently committed by the Turkish ruler at Constantinople were reported to a certain man, who had once seen the sites of those regions, he was inflamed by a zeal for God; with many sighs he implored the Creator of all things that in his mercy he restrain the persecution, raging more than ever because of different religious rites. It happened that after several days–perhaps because of long continued meditation–a vision was revealed to this zealous man. From it he concluded that of a few wise men familiar from their own experience with all such differences which are observed in religions throughout the world, a single easy harmony could be found and through it a lasting peace established by appropriate and true means. And so in order for this vision eventually to come to the notice of those who have the decisive word in these great matters, he has written down his vision plainly below, as far as his memory recalled it.” (The Peace of Faith, 2000, trans. H. Lawrence Bond, Ch. I).

Moreover, Cusa, far from diluting the Truth of his own Christian Faith, would write that the inability of both the Jew and the Muslim to understand the sublime and salvific role of Christ, was not caused by recalcitrance, but by a failure to understand the language, and theology of the Gospels – and especially the theological teaching of the hypostatic union. To Cusa it is only through Christ that the Truth is fully revealed – but the Truth can also exist, at least in part, in other religious dimensions and traditions. Cusa’s analysis is radical for he is willing to conclude that it is out of love for the one true God that there is this passionate defence from each of the Peoples of the Book for their particular religion: “Therefore, come to our aid you who alone are able. For this rivalry exists for sake of you, whom alone they revere in everything that all seem to worship. For each one desires in all that he seems to desire only the good which you are; no one is seeking with all his intellectual searching for anything else than the truth which you are. For what does the living seek except to live? What does the existing seek except to exist? Therefore, it is you, the giver of life and being, who seem to be sought in the different rites by different ways and are named with different names, because as you are you remain unknown and ineffable to all. For you who are infinite power are none of those things which you have created, nor can a creature grasp the concept of your infinity since there is no proportion between the finite and the infinite. But you, almighty God, who are invisible to every mind, are able to show yourself as visible to whom you will and in the way in which you can be grasped. Therefore, do not hide yourself any longer, O Lord; be merciful and show your face, and all peoples will be saved who are no longer able to forsake the source of life and its sweetness when they have had even a little foretaste of them. For no one withdraws from you unless he does not know you.” (The Peace of Faith, 2000, trans. H. Lawrence Bond, Ch. I).

Striking to the modern reader is Cardinal Cusa’s ability to read The Qur’an with an understanding that the holiest writ in Islam: “contains fundamental truths of the gospel and that the teaching of Mohamed is implicitly trinitarian and christological”. (Biechler, 2004, p. 285). True, Cusa’s later work, “Sifting of the Qur’an” contains passages far less conciliatory than the “Peace of Faith”, however even when at his most critical – Cusa is of the belief that it is ignorance and not malice, that is at the heart of the failure of Islam to understand Christianity. (cf. Biechler, 2004, p. 286). Cusa’s “The Peace of Faith” serves as a prophetic voice – hearkening forth the Declaration, Nostra Aetate of the twentieth century, and Nostra Aetate’s call, that: “The Church regards with esteem also the Moslems. They adore the one God, living and subsisting in Himself; merciful and all- powerful, the Creator of heaven and earth, who has spoken to men; they take pains to submit wholeheartedly to even His inscrutable decrees, just as Abraham, with whom the faith of Islam takes pleasure in linking itself, submitted to God. Though they do not acknowledge Jesus as God, they revere Him as a prophet. They also honor Mary, His virgin Mother; at times they even call on her with devotion. In addition, they await the day of judgment when God will render their deserts to all those who have been raised up from the dead. Finally, they value the moral life and worship God especially through prayer, almsgiving and fasting. Since in the course of centuries not a few quarrels and hostilities have arisen between Christians and Moslems, this sacred synod urges all to forget the past and to work sincerely for mutual understanding and to preserve as well as to promote together for the benefit of all mankind social justice and moral welfare, as well as peace and freedom.” (Paul VI, 1965, par. 3).

I will convert to Catholicism and hope you could help me with my question that I am thinking much about: Is Gregory Palamas a Catholic saint? and is it ok for Catholics to read Philokalia?

Answer

Gregory Palamas was canonised in 1368 by the Patriarch of Constantinople. He was born in [...]]]> Ask the Priest

Question

I will convert to Catholicism and hope you could help me with my question
that I am thinking much about:
Is Gregory Palamas a Catholic saint? and is it ok for Catholics to read
Philokalia?

Answer

Gregory Palamas was canonised in 1368 by the Patriarch of Constantinople.
He was born in 1296 and died in 1359.  He is venerated as a saint in Eastern
Orthodox Churches.  Although he is not widely venerated in the Roman
Catholic Church he is widely recognised and liturgically commemorated by the
Eastern Catholic Churches of the Byzantine rite.
The second Sunday of the Great Lent is the day we recognise him.

The Philokalia is widely read by all, including Catholics.  I have the books
and they are very good but be warned these books are about asceticism.
Asceticism is not for beginners in contemplation.

I must confess that for all the publicity that the occupy revolution around the world has received, I still do not understand what they were all about. While there may be a few places in the world left where the tents are still up, the [...]]]> Published in Church and Life (1829) 19.1.2012 – 8.2.2012 No3

I must confess that for all the publicity that the occupy revolution around the world has received, I still do not understand what they were all about.  While there may be a few places in the world left where the tents are still up, the movement seems to have wound down slowly.  I have no doubt that there was a very valid reason for the movement. 

They were on to something and perhaps they did a lot of good.  They made me smile about some of the politics which were broadcast about life within the camps.  I do not know if it is a valid comparison, but they reminded me of the “hippie” movements of the late 60’s and 70’s.  Tragically drug use and abuse seems to be a major element of this protest.  Some people actually died of overdose.

The movement seemed to be about social justice and a fairer society.  It appears that society, as seen by its governments, does not distribute money evenly.

I was in Canada during the height of the movements in that country.  A few home truths about equality and fairness were experienced within the camps themselves.  In one case, while the owners of a tent were out protesting and spreading the word, a few homeless people came and occupied their tent.  When the owners returned they found that their tent was occupied by someone else.  Naturally a melee started and this reflected the injustice of the landlords throwing out people who could not pay rent.  Another group bought food for themselves and were invaded by a larger group of fellow travellers who proceeded to eat their food – another lesson for the protesters about the unfairness of rich people – society. In another case, it was disclosed by fellow campers that some of their number were actually going home to sleep during the cold nights only to come back in the morning when it was warmer. This poor example of the richer among them again reflected the basic argument of the movement itself, namely that everybody was equal.

All  these incidents only show that we can protest against injustice, but the answers to the world’s problems are indeed very complicated.  I do not  think that the occupy movement changed the world as yet. It’s not that easy to change the world. It takes a lot of unity, faith, determination and principles which I feel can only come from God himself. We should protest injustice because it is important to do so. But without the solid foundation of God’s will and plan, we will not get far. Our house in that case might fall down around us.

This raised a query.

I read your explanation with great interest, however I am now even more confused. Should it not have read “that until 1582 Christmas was celebrated on the 7th of Jan”??? as in the Julian calendar, before it was changed to the [...]]]> In December an article appeared “Why are there two Christmases”

This raised a query.

I read your explanation with great interest, however I am now even more
confused.
Should it not have read “that until 1582 Christmas was celebrated on the 7th
of Jan”??? as in the Julian calendar, before it was changed to the 25th of
Dec. as in the Gregorian calendar which the world uses now?
I thought that the orthodox world and eastern rite Ukrainian Catholics had
maintained tradition in the church and continue to use the Julian calendar
hence Christmas is on the 7th Jan according to the old Julian calendar?
This has been my understanding up until now. Have I been wrong all these
years

This is the answer to the query.

Why are there two Christmases?

The article is right. You, as many others, mistakenly think that Christmas was originally celebrated on January 7. It was in fact always celebrated on December 25 which was in ancient times one of the pagan days for worshiping the sun.

What Pope Gregory did in fact was to introduce a new calendar without a direct reference to Christmas. The old calendar was not accurate and, in order to catch up with the sun and the correct measuring of time, he decided to act. Please remember that back then the Pope was also a political leader.

The Pope actually changed the calendar for the world. He was not thinking of Christmas or any of the other religious holidays. The Pope by changing the calendar in effect he cut 10 days out of the calendar.

Caesar’s calendar (Julian), which consisted of eleven months of 30 or 31 days and a 28 day February (extended to 29 days every fourth year), was actually quite accurate: it erred from the real solar calendar by only 11 ½ minutes a year. After centuries, though, even a small inaccuracy like this adds up. By the sixteenth century, it had put the Julian calendar behind the solar one by 10 days.

In 1582, Pope Gregory XIII ordered the advancement of the calendar by 10 days. So December 25, 1581, turned into January 5, 1582. However, the Gregorian calendar is also not perfect. The Gregorian calendar year differs from the solar year by only 26 seconds-accurate enough for most mortals, since this only adds up to one day’s difference every 3,323 years. Let me repeat the Pope did not change the calendar for religious reasons. The date of Christmas was not in the discussion.

Despite the prudence of Pope Gregory’s correction, many Protestant countries, including England, ignored the papal bull. Germany and the Netherlands agreed to adopt the Gregorian calendar in 1698; Russia only accepted it after the revolution of 1918, and Greece waited until 1923 to follow suit. And currently many Eastern European countries still follow the Julian calendar, which now lags 13 days behind the Gregorian.

It is a bit complicated, but the reason I said that in 1582 Ukrainians were celebrating Christmas on January 5, yes January 5, was because the Pope’s calendar cut out 10 days out of the Julian calendar. The reason Christmas is celebrated on January 7 today is because every hundred or so years the Julian calendar continues to lose days. Christmas was subsequently celebrated on January 6, then on January 7. To confuse you even more, in the next few years from now, about 125 years since the last change of date, in order to be consistent with history and science, Christmas in the Julian (old) calendar should be celebrated on January 8. In many thousands of years from now, Christmas will be celebrated in April, and then in May, and so on.

You may now see why Pope Gregory and the rest of the world changed the calendar in 1582. They had to get the science right.

But as you may have figured, scientists now know that even the Gregorian calendar is not scientifically accurate. There are serious discussions going on suggesting that we need a new more accurate calendar.

Something similar happened in Samoa last year when the government changed time zones and the date line and the country lost one day out of its calendar.

The Pope was in other words acting scientifically, not religiously, and he was shocked when people opposed him on religious grounds.

The problem with the date of Christmas is that when we talk about it, emotions and sentiments take over and we forget the scientific reasons why Gregory changed the calendar.

__________________________________________

.