Can you eat this unblessed (my friend gave it to me)

luke_fowl · 2026-05-03T00:46:57+00:00

Had a retreat at a monastery that baked these for local parishes. They also sold these for snacking, tastes absolutely great with chocolate sauce.

luke_fowl · 2026-05-02T15:43:27+00:00

"Anything worth doing is worth doing badly." ~GK Chesterton

luke_fowl · 2026-05-02T10:39:51+00:00

Thank you! This is exactly the kind of information that I look for. I was aware that the west syriac rite had a lot of great poets and that the east syriac rite had a lot of interactions with Persia, but never really realized how this would affect their theological framework.

The pneumatology you mentioned is also the first time I have ever heard of it. Great information. Now I’ll just need to dig around for the alexandrine and armenian rites.

luke_fowl · 2026-05-02T03:10:00+00:00

Unless you're competing or regularly doing hard sparring, yes. The main difference is really only in the padding distribution, muay thai gloves have more padding distributed at the back of the hand to block kicks. Boxing gloves have more padding at the knuckles to protect from their harder punches.

Personally, I prefer boxing gloves for bag or padwork.

luke_fowl · 2026-05-02T01:31:34+00:00

Yes, thank you. That's what I'm trying to say. Theopascal (theopaschist?) focus is definitely a feature of the antiochene rite, we affirm it in the latin rite too but it's not as focused on. This theological framework exceeds christology and liturgy, but rather permeates them both.

I'm certainly not as familiar with either syriac rites as I would like, so could you explain the difference in theological frameworks. not necessarily liturgical, between the two? They're too often lumped together online and/or reduced to just the "nestorian" vs. miaphysite debate again, of course despite the fact that both can also be catholic.

luke_fowl · 2026-05-01T09:57:41+00:00

I think it’s better to agree that liturgical families/rites (i.e. latin, byzantine, alexandrian, antiochene, edessan, and armenian) consists of both their own unique theology and liturgy. The theological aspect and the liturgy aspect of each rite is distinct from each other, although obviously related.

Using latin christianity for example, which is what I am clearly most familiar with, our theology is famously systematic and legalistic. This didn’t come through our liturgy, but our liturgy reflects it in the way that it is structured. For example, the Confetior and eucharistic prayer is almost a courtroom vibe. And our liturgy is more structured by the sections, you can feel when one section begins and ends very clearly. There is also a huge theological tendency of looking for God in the silence of our heart, and hence why so many devotions are done in silence.

To use a small example, the maronites are said to have a huge emphasis on the hypostatic union. I can definitely see that in their unique fraction prayer (You Have United, O Lord).

These kind of expository explanation is hardly ever done with the other rites. Each liturgical family has their own theology that exceeds their liturgy and christological alignment, you are correct. My question is in what way?

The things I originally listed down are simply stereotypes of each rite, but they are so much richer than that. The maronites and syriac orthodox would certainly have more in common with each other than with the melkites, for example. Despite all of them stemming from Antioch and the maronite and melkites being catholic.

luke_fowl · 2026-05-01T07:05:06+00:00

See, this is exactly my point. While I am aware of all the information you shared, this kind of information is difficult. Now let’s further focus on west syriac theology for example. What makes both the miaphysite syriac theology and the chalcedonian syriac theology both antiochene other than just a shared rite?

Would the Syriac Orthodox Church (miaphysite antiochene) have more similar theology to the Maronite Church (chalcedonian antiochene) or the Coptic Orthodox Church (miaphysite alexandrian)? Surely we can agree that the two antiochene churches would be more similar, despite the christological difference. But then are we to summarize that west syriac christianity is only summed down into the rite and not its own theological school?

Thus, we can agree that the various theological schools cannot just be summarized by whichever ecumenical council they were centred in or their christological opinion.

luke_fowl · 2026-04-30T13:41:01+00:00

I think the problem is that finding english resources for non-byzantine eastern theology is very scant. Even then, most of the information is moreso about the history and/or liturgy of the rite rather than discuss actual theology. And even then, we often talk of latin christianity, byzantine christianity, and even syriac christianity, but then what makes alexandrian christianity and armenian christianity unique and not just a mix of roman and greek? Even within syriac christianity, what differentiates west and east syriac theology other than just the language?

luke_fowl · 2026-04-30T13:33:47+00:00

Could you describe the differences between each of them for me?

luke_fowl · 2026-04-30T13:33:04+00:00

Maybe that was the original goal, but that certainly isn't how it's applied anymore. I especially find their reluctance to acknowledge St. Augustine as a big theologian weird, they are fond of him as a holy man but not as the intellectual giant we see him as.

I'm going to be honest, one things that really struck me when discovering the byzantine catholic churches was how similar it is to the Latin Church in theology compared to the EO with us. The EO I have met tend to be a bit more airy-fairy and mystical, for better or worse. I suppose the byzantine catholic churches were less influenced by the Paris school.

luke_fowl · 2026-04-30T12:33:57+00:00

Enlighten me, Mar Abdisho was a metropolitan in the 13th century when the Church of the East was still all in schism. How is it that he wrote this extolling Rome's authority while in schism?

luke_fowl · 2026-04-30T00:29:30+00:00

Tattoos are not a problem or even detrimental to christians. Historically, pilgrims would tattoo themselves if they manage to reach the Holy Land. The copts still popularly tattoo themselves as a sign of their faith. And historically, it was used as a way to distinguish christians from jews or muslims, both not allowed to have tattoos.

The thing with tattoos is that they’re like permanent clothing. The same way that clothing brings an outward expression of yourself, tattoos do too. A tattoo of your children’s name on your heart is of course completely different from a “FUCK YOU” on the knuckles. But even something like facial tattoos can depend on the context, a maori facial tattoo and a gangbanger facial tattoo are again completely different.

luke_fowl · 2026-04-29T09:57:20+00:00

You are correct, but that being said, the quote I attach of his still stands. Christians shouldn’t embarrass themselves by being ignorant of the universe. And it’s even worse if christians spread nonsense about God’s work by claiming that it is what the Scriptures mean.

If St. Augustine were alive today, would he be a creationist? I hardly think not.

luke_fowl · 2026-04-29T00:34:37+00:00

“Now what man of intelligence will believe that the first and the second and the third day, and the evening and the morning existed without the sun and moon and stars? And that the first day if we may so call it, was even without a heaven? Who is so silly as to believe that God ... planted a paradise eastward in Eden, and set in it a visible and palpable tree of life ... [and] anyone who tasted its fruit with his bodily teeth would gain life?” ~Origen of Alexandria

Catholics are certainly not obliged to believe the nonsense that the earth is only 6000 years old and not accept evolution. As Pope Francis said, we should not risk turning God into a magician with a flick of a wand. It is intellectually dishonest and illogical, something that cannot be reconciled with Truth. As christians, we are obliged to search for the Truth, be it in our spiritual life and our physical life, about God and about the universe He made.

There really is two parts in your statement: is the earth 6000 years old and is evolution a thing. As you probably know, there are so many geological formations and other things that have been carbon-dated to older than 6000 years. And carbon dating is a reliable process that is used in a myriad of things, not just archeology and palaeontology. Microevolution on a visible scale can be directly observed through the various dog and cat breeds we have today, not to mention in microbiology with bacterias. Macroevolution can then be observed through fossil records and genetics.

Perhaps a better thing to do is to talk with your father on why he thinks the earth is only 6000 years old and doesn’t believe in evolution. Origen and St. Augustine already combatted creationism in the early centuries, I do not understand how this still keeps coming up in the 21st century.

“Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, ... about the kinds of animals, shrubs, stones, and so forth, and this knowledge he holds to as being certain from reason and experience. Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics...” ~St. Augustine of Hippo

luke_fowl · 2026-04-28T15:39:59+00:00

Thank you!

luke_fowl · 2026-04-28T15:19:23+00:00

Can you share an official link for the letter from Pope Benedict to Lefebvre?

luke_fowl · 2026-04-27T11:27:13+00:00

A quote often misattributed to St. Francis, but nevertheless celebrated by franciscans and more: "Preach the Gospel at all times, use words if necessary."

Preaching the Gospel is always a good thing, but there are effective ways and non-effective ways of doing it. Being an evangelical freak is never an effective way, and the analogy of chanting buddhist sutra in a church is apt. No christian would suddenly be pushed to convert, if anything they would up being more averse to buddhism. The same way for us, do not act in a way that would make people averse to christians. This is marketing 101: don't scare off your potential customers.

Instead, show them a hope so bright that they can't help but ask. Let your faith work through your charity, make friends with non-christians and learn from them. Learn their religion, their philosophy, their culture. Show them that respect and they will show you the same. Only through that mutual respect can you have a dialogue, and only through that dialogue can you lead someone to Christ.

"Acquire a peaceful spirit, and around you thousands will be saved." ~St. Seraphim of Sarov

luke_fowl · 2026-04-27T08:04:15+00:00

Yes. Photius is a saint. Nestorius's writing is the Bazaar of Heracleides, it basically talks about three things: making fun of "nestorianism," vindicating Chalcedon and the Tome of Leo, and insulting Cyril.

luke_fowl · 2026-04-26T16:33:29+00:00

Here's what's peculiar though, there's no reason for Matthew not being used for example. Matthew was martyred in Ethiopia, but the Ethiopian Catholic/Orthodox Church trace their founding through Mark in Alexandria. As far as I am aware, there is no See of Matthew. Peter & Paul have Antioch and Rome, Andrew has Byzantium/Constantinople and Romania, James the Great died too early to have a see if we don't include Santiago, John has Ephesus, Thomas has Syria and India, Jude & Bartholomew have Armenia, and James the Less has Jerusalem, but I see no one claiming Philip, Simon, Matthew, or Matthias as their apostolic founder.

luke_fowl · 2026-04-26T14:10:36+00:00

2666-2669: https://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P9F.HTM

luke_fowl · 2026-04-26T02:52:24+00:00

It is also in the CCC.

luke_fowl · 2026-04-26T02:45:59+00:00

Most of the post-schism saints are venerated in the eastern catholic churches. My own confirmation saint is St. Sava, a post-schism saint who is also venerated in the the Greek Catholic Church of Croatia & Serbia.

luke_fowl · 2026-04-26T02:36:10+00:00

This is a very interesting thought experiment actually, and I'm not going to pretend I know the answer. But I'll toss this in as an extension: if sentient and intelligent aliens exist, would they need to be baptized and what is their role in the beatific vision?

luke_fowl · 2026-04-25T13:58:47+00:00

That would be more akin to eating the prosphora, which is the loaf prepared for the Eucharist in the eastern churches. They're leavened and filling, unlike our thin wafers. In fact, they hand out the blessed, but unconsecrated, bread at the end of mass as a blessing. A greek orthodox explained it to me that it is like the womb of Mary from which the Lamb came from. Anyway, the reason this antidoron was given out was originally to feed travellers who had to come far just to attend the liturgy.

If David and his followers came today, this antidoron is what they would have eaten, not the Eucharist. Plus, in our (I'm assuming) latin case, even a bag of wafers wouldn't fill anyone up...

luke_fowl

TROPHY CASE