Forum Crestin Ortodox Crestin Ortodox
 
 


Du-te înapoi   Forum Crestin Ortodox > Biserica ortodoxa > Biserica Ortodoxa si Massmedia
Răspunde
 
Thread Tools Moduri de afișare
  #11  
Vechi 08.04.2008, 07:09:06
mirelat
Guest
 
Mesaje: n/a
Implicit

Citat:
În prealabil postat de C-tin
mintea cazuta in CONFUZIE nu mai deosebeste binele de rau si cade repede in plasa pacatului:(

Sa ne tinem cu tarie de Hristos si pildele sale de vietuire! Sfanta Cruce!


bine spunea parintele si bune sfaturi dai, C-tine.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Vechi 16.04.2008, 05:13:33
mirelat
Guest
 
Mesaje: n/a
Implicit

Citat:
În prealabil postat de cozia
"Caderea unui imperiu. Lectia Bizantina".... sa luam aminte!
intr-adevar de luat aminte si de invatat din greselile altora. m-am gandit sa redau aici cateva spicuiri din textul filmului:

It suffices to say that for a thousand years, all international trade was based upon the Byzantine gold coin.

But Byzantium could not solve the problem of its government’s loss of control over its own finances and the huge, ungovernable process of capital flow towards the West, to developing Europe, and this is what finally destroyed its economy. The government dropped all levers of trade and industry, and in the end gave all its trade and industrial resources over to foreign entrepreneurs.

It happened like this: An important financial resource in the country was not gas and oil, as it is now, but customs obtained from the enormous international trade in the Bosphorus and Dardenelles. The Byzantines, who earlier relied solely upon their own capability to govern the country’s economics, suddenly began heated discussions about, and finally decided upon, consigning the problems of international trade to their foreign friends, who were more resourceful, and ready to take responsibility for the expense of complex transport, armed guards along trade routes, the construction of new ports, and the intensification and development of commercial activities. Western specialists were called in from Venice and Genoa, towns which had grown large on several centuries of Byzantine trade. They were granted duty-free trade, and entrusted with the patrol of sea routes along the Empire’s territory. [...]

Another serious and incurable disease never before a problem in Byzantium also developed: the question of nationality.

The fact of the matter is that nationality problems in Byzantium really had not existed for many centuries. As the historical, lawful descendants of ancient Rome, which was destroyed by barbarians in the fifth century, the inhabitants of Byzantium called themselves Romans. In a vast empire divided into many nationalities there was one faith—Orthodox Christianity. The Byzantines literally fulfilled the Christian teaching of a new humanity living in a Divine spirit, where “there is neither Greek, nor Jew, nor Scythe,” as the Apostle Paul wrote. This hope preserved the country from the destructive storm of ethnic conflict. It was enough for any pagan or foreigner to accept the Orthodox Faith, and confirm it in deed, in order to become a full member of society. [...]

Byzantium was the only country in the world which stretched over a huge territory between Europe and Asia, and its geography was already a large contributing factor to its uniqueness. It is also a very important fact that Byzantium was a multi-national empire by nature, in which the people felt the state to be one of their highest personal treasures. This was entirely incomprehensible to the Western world, where individualism and personal self-will had already been raised to the status of sacred principle.

Byzantium’s soul, and its meaning of existence, was Orthodoxy—the unspoiled confession of Christianity, in which no dogmas had changed essentially for a thousand years. The West simply could not endure such demonstrative conservatism, called it undynamic, obtuse, and limited; it finally began with grim fanaticism to demand that Byzantium modernize her whole life in the Western image—first of all in the religious, spiritual spheres, and then in intellectual and material spheres. [...]

Of course, it is senseless to say that the West was to blame for Byzantium’s misfortunes and fall. The West was only pursuing its own interests, which is quite natural. Byzantium’s historical blows occurred when the Byzantines themselves betrayed their own principles upon which their empire was established. These great principles were simple, and known to every Byzantine from childhood: faithfulness to God, to His eternal laws preserved in the Orthodox Church, and fearless reliance upon their own internal traditions and strengths. [...]

The final and most devastating blow to Byzantium was the ecclesiastical union with Rome. Formally, this was the submission of the Orthodox Church to the Roman Pope for purely practically reasons. One after another aggressive attack from foreign nations forced the country to make the choice: either to rely on God and their own strengths, or to concede their age-long principles upon which their state was founded, and receive in return military and economic aide from the Latin West. And the choice was made. In 1274, Emperor Michael Paleologus decided upon a root concession to the West. For the first time in history, ambassadors from the Byzantine Emperor were sent to Lyon to accept the supremacy of the Pope of Rome. [...]

As it turned out, the advantages the Byzantines received in exchange for their ideological concession were negligible. The pro-Western party’s calculations not only were unjustified, they collapsed. The union with Rome did not continue for long. The Grecophile Pope Leo IV, who had drawn Byzantium into the Union out of better intentions, died soon after the Union was concluded, and his successor turned out to be of a completely different spirit: the interests of the Latin West were first on his list. He demanded that Byzantium change completely, that it re-make itself in the image and likeness of the West. When these changes did not happen, the Pope excommunicated his newly-baked spiritual son, Emperor Michael Paleologus, and called Europe to a new crusade against Byzantium. The Orthodox converts to Catholicism were pronounced bad Catholics. The Byzantines were supposed to get the point that the West needed only complete and unconditional religious and political submission. Not only the Pope was to be recognized as infallible, but the West itself as well. [...]

Another terrible loss from betrayal of the Faith was the loss of trust amongst the people in the government. The Byzantines were shocked by the betrayal of their highest value—Orthodoxy. They saw that it is possible for the government to play with the most important thing in life—the truths of the Faith. The meaning of the Byzantines’ existence was lost. This was the final and main blow which destroyed the country. And although by far not all accepted the Union, the people’s spirit was broken. In place of their former thirst for life and energetic resolve to action, there appeared a terrible general apathy and fatigue.

PS: daca este cineva interesat dar nu stie engleza, am sa si traduc, la cerere.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Vechi 18.04.2008, 06:29:43
mirelat
Guest
 
Mesaje: n/a
Implicit

:) chiar daca n-au fost cereri scrise, am sa incep totusi sa va traduc:

Este suficient sa spunem ca timp de o mie de ani tot comertul international a fost bazat pe moneda de aur bizantina.

Dar Bizant-ul nu a putut rezolva problema scaparii de sub controlul guvernului sau a finantelor proprii si a imensului, neguvernabilului proces de aflux de capital catre Vest, catre Europa in dezvoltare, asta fiind ceea ce in cele din urma i-a distrus economia. Guvernul a scapat din maini toate parghiile comertului si industriei, si in cele din urma a abandonat tot comertul si resursele industriale in mainile intreprinzatorilor straini.

S-a intamplat asa: O importanta resursa financiara a tarii era nu gazul si petrolul, ca acum, ci vama obtinuta din enormul comert international care se derula prin stramtorile Bosfor si Dardanele. Bizantinii, care mai inainte se bazau in exclusivitate pe propria lor capacitate de a-si guverna economia, au inceput dintr-o data discutii fierbinti, si in final au decis, asupra delegarii problemelor comertului international partenerilor lor straini, care erau mai descurcareti si gata sa preia responsabilitatea complexelor cheltuieli de transport, de paza armata de-a lungul rutelor comerciale, de construire a noi porturi si de intensificare si dezvoltare a activitatilor comerciale. Au fost chemati specialisti vestici din Venetia si Genova, orase care au inflorit in cateva secole de comert bizantin. Li s-a dat dreptul de a face comert scutit de taxe vamale si li s-a incredintat paza rutelor maritime de-a lungul teritoriului Imperiului.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Vechi 20.04.2008, 07:02:37
mirelat
Guest
 
Mesaje: n/a
Implicit

continuare...

O alta boala serioasa si incurabila, care nu a fost niciodata o problema in Bizant, dar care a aparut: chestiunea nationalitatii.

De fapt era o realitate ca problemele de nationalitate in Bizant nu existasera de secole. Ca descedenti istorici, legali ai Romei antice, care a fost distrusa de barbari in secolul al V-lea, locuitorii Bizantului isi spuneau romani. Intr-un imperiu vast, impartit in multe nationalitati, era o singura credinta: crestinismul ortodox. Bizantinii au implinit literal invatatura crestina o unei umanitati noi, traind in spirit divin, unde «nu este grec, nu este iudeu, sau scit», asa cum a scris Sf. Ap. Pavel. Aceasta speranta a tinut tara departe de furtuna conflictelor etnice. Era suficient ca orice pagan sau strain sa accepte credinta ortodoxa si sa o confirme prin fapte, pentru a deveni membru deplin al societatii.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Vechi 20.04.2008, 17:04:01
dorstor dorstor is offline
Senior Member
 
Data înregistrării: 08.12.2007
Mesaje: 357
Implicit

ce lectie este de in vatat.Bizantinii s-au manifestat ca romei si probleme nationaliste au existat.Tot nu inteleg ce sustineti: romei nu inseana roman ci grec romanizat.as dori sa expuneti mai clar.caderea bizantului a salvat o mare parte a ortodoxiei.Filmul insa are tente de sustunere a propagandei ruse .
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Vechi 20.04.2008, 23:37:35
cozia cozia is offline
Senior Member
 
Data înregistrării: 20.01.2007
Mesaje: 2.305
Implicit

Citat:
În prealabil postat de dorstor
Filmul insa are tente de sustunere a propagandei ruse .
Asa pare la prima vedere insa daca stai sa analizezi ce se spune in film reprezinta o problema globala
De ex:

SUA este pe cale sa vinda OPERATIUNILE VAMALE si sa le lase pe seama ARABIEI SAUDITE!!!! suna cunoscut cu ce spun rusii in film?...asta este ce au facut ei in Dardanele si Bosfor... si multe altele care au loc in Europa si SUA... asa ca cititi ce traduce Mirela cu atentie deoarece acest film a facut mare vilva in Rusia, s-au scris nenumarate articole si dicutii televizate... CA SA BAGE LUMEA LA CAP!!!...ca sa nu se repete istoria

Multumesc Mirela pentru traducere

Reply With Quote
  #17  
Vechi 20.04.2008, 23:38:51
cozia cozia is offline
Senior Member
 
Data înregistrării: 20.01.2007
Mesaje: 2.305
Implicit

cor:...ce au facut ei Bizantinii in Bosfor ... nu rusii
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Vechi 22.04.2008, 13:01:37
7th_Brigade_TzHL 7th_Brigade_TzHL is offline
Senior Member
 
Data înregistrării: 20.03.2008
Mesaje: 478
Implicit

Pamantul.... e important el, dar mai important e cerul.

Daca e adevarat ca mult pamant a fost pierdut de bizantini, tot atat de adevarat e sfintii din Bizant au castigat suprafete mult mai mari in cer.

Ar fi fost trist sa fie invers. :)
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Vechi 23.04.2008, 05:00:35
mirelat
Guest
 
Mesaje: n/a
Implicit

Citat:
În prealabil postat de cozia
Multumesc Mirela pentru traducere
:) cu placere, in continuare:

Bizant-ul era singura tara din lume care se intindea pe un teritoriu imens intre Europa si Asia, iar geografia sa era deja un factor cu o contributie insemnata la unicitatea sa. Este de asemenea foarte important faptul ca Bizant-ul era un imperiu multi-national prin natura sa, in care oamenii simteau ca statul este una din valorile personale cele mai inalte. Aceasta era cu totul de neinteles pentru lumea vestica, unde individualismul si vointa personala fusesera deja ridicate la rangul de principii sacre.

Sufletul Bizant-ului, si sensul existentei sale, era Ortodoxia – marturia nealterata a Crestinismului, in care nici o dogma nu fusese schimbata in mod esential timp de o mie de ani. Vestul pur si simplu nu a putut suporta un conservatorism atat de demonstrativ, pe care l-a numit nedinamic, obtuz si limitat; in cele din urma a inceput sa ceara cu un fanatism nemilos ca Bizantul sa-si modernizeze intreaga viata dupa imaginea vestica – mai intai in sferele religioase, spirituale si apoi in sferele intelectuale si materiale.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Vechi 23.04.2008, 05:18:44
mirelat
Guest
 
Mesaje: n/a
Implicit

Desigur, este lipsit de sens sa spunem ca Vestul a fost de vina pentru necazurile si caderea Bizant-ului. Vestul isi urmarea doar propriile interese, ceea ce este destul de firesc. Lovitura istorica pentru Bizant a fost cand bizantinii insisi si-au tradat propriile principii pe care isi bazasera imperiul. Aceste importante principii erau simple si erau cunoscute fiecarui bizantin inca din copilarie: credinta in Dumnezeu, in legile Lui eterne pastrate in Biserica Ortodoxa, si increderea nestramutata in fortele si traditiile proprii.
Reply With Quote
Răspunde

Thread Tools
Moduri de afișare


Subiecte asemănătoare
Subiect Subiect început de Forum Răspunsuri Ultimele Postari
Foarte important si foarte grav ... mc2009 Homosexualitatea 28 01.06.2011 19:28:25
Interesant?! laurschepsis Generalitati 0 08.02.2010 20:20:26
documentar interesant tigerAvalo9 Intamplari adevarate 0 12.07.2009 23:28:16