Who really cares what the ECF's had to say?

[Montalban]

Let's draw a clear distinction about what's being said.
As a Reformed believer myself, we do believe that the Lord's Supper is "real" we simply don't believe it's of the flesh. We believe that those who partake in a right manner do really receive grace by the Holy Spirit, and do "spiritually" feed upon the Lord Jesus Christ.

I would hope that all would agree that being spiritual doesn't mean the same thing as being symbolic. This is clearly what's being taught by Jesus in Jn 6, if He was teaching about the Lord's Supper...
It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. (Joh 6:63)
But since the Lord's Supper wasn't instituted yet, the teaching can't be concluded as referring to it, as it would have been irrational to teach those with Christ what wasn't instituted yet.

You know that the early christian community were lampooned by pagans for being cannibals - because the pagans heard the Christians were eating the actual body of Jesus?

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Don't worry about being embarrassed by arguing in front of people who bomb & behead each other over exactly when Ramadan starts.

That may take the place of our 4th of July if this is any indication:

http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=48056862#post48056862

http://www.wsmv.com:80/news/17063986/detail.html

Workers at the Tyson Foods poultry processing plant in Shelbyville will no longer have a paid day off on Labor Day but will instead be granted the Muslim holiday Eid al-Fitr.

According to a news release from the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union, a new five-year contract at the plant included the change to accommodate Muslim workers at the plant

 

[Montalban]

or have not succumbed to the modernization of the term "symbol"

Indeed. Schaeffer makes an interesting case that the rationalism that besets us today - with modernist secularism is a direct result of the Protestants over-fascination with rationalisation - where they deemed things 'suspcious' because they were mysterious.

 

[Secundulus]

Hi,

As an altar boy of the CoE, I'll just correct the misconception about my church. The CoE and all Anglicans are governed by the 39 Articles. These were the articles that instituted the CoE and through the centuries nobody is allowed to change them.

The relevant parts of Article 28 states:

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Transubstantiation (or the change of the substance of Bread and Wine) in the Supper of the Lord, cannot be proved by Holy Writ; but is repugnant to the plain words of Scripture, overthroweth the nature of a Sacrament, and hath given occasion to many superstitions.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The Body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten, in the Supper, only after an heavenly and spiritual manner. And the mean whereby the Body of Christ is received and eaten in the Supper, is Faith.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The Sacrament of the Lord's Supper was not by Christ's ordinance reserved, carried about, lifted up, or worshipped.[/FONT]


We don't believe it's a mere symbol but the host is not in substance the body and the blood. We take the body of Christ "only after a heavenly and spiritual manner". And faith is the means by which His body is received.

For this reason, you can't "kidnap" the body of Christ in an Anglican church as some American student did recently in an RC church. It is only the body in a heavenly and spiritual manner and the means of receiving it is faith. The host does not BECOME the body and blood of Christ. It's still wafer and wine in essence.

Strangely, when I read Anglian's explanation of the meaning of the Eucharist in the Orthodox church, it sounds remarkably like the CoE stand.

I'm not particularly interested in substance and accidents. Read up on Platonian Philosophy to understand what those words meant in their original context. What I am interested in is the plain words of scripture where Christ said that this is my body and this is my blood. It's really not too complicated as Queen Elizabeth could attest.

On the matter of the Eucharist we find ourselves in the interesting situation where the Orthodox and Catholic Churches believe scripture and the Protestants follow the traditions of men, specifically Zwingli.

 

[beamishboy]

I'm not particularly interested in substance and accidents. Read up on Platonian Philosophy to understand what those words meant in their original context. What I am interested in is the plain words of scripture where Christ said that this is my body and this is my blood. It's really not too complicated as Queen Elizabeth could attest.

On the matter of the Eucharist we find ourselves in the interesting situation where the Orthodox and Catholic Churches believe scripture and the Protestants follow the traditions of men, specifically Zwingli.

Hi Secundulus,

I clicked on the link at your signature. I didn't know there was an Anglican church that's not connected to Canterbury. I thought all Anglicans were CoE but they didn't want to say CoE because of national pride if they aren't English.

The beamishboy learns new things all the time in this brave new world. Hehe.

 

[Secundulus]

Hi Secundulus,

I clicked on the link at your signature. I didn't know there was an Anglican church that's not connected to Canterbury. I thought all Anglicans were CoE but they didn't want to say CoE because of national pride if they aren't English.

The beamishboy learns new things all the time in this brave new world. Hehe.

We are the conservative ones. We even have a few Churches in England and Ireland.

 

[Philothei]

edit

 

[Rick Otto]

Discussion isn't debate.
Sharing isn't exhibiting.
Questioning is a reason why this forum exists.

Taste some of the "not-to-be-harsh wit" you dish.

 

[Philothei]

Discussion isn't debate.
Sharing isn't exhibiting.
Questioning is a reason why this forum exists.
Pucker up little lady.
Taste some of the "not-to-be-harsh wit" you dish.

"sharing" your email address is not all right with me ....in a thread of "discussion/debate"..by any stretch of imagination....

And I would appreciate you do not call me "little lady" it is disrespectful since my conversation was between me and BB.

None of your business really...

 

[bbbbbbb]

edit

 

[Anglian]

Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ,

Beamishboy raised interesting questions about how we conduct ourselves in a manner worthy of the name of Christian.

I wonder what would happen if we all started accepting each other's good faith? If, for example, I were a Catholic and read some of the things posted here, it would be easy to go away with the idea that there were some who thought I worshipped statues and a goddess; if I had then done my best to explain to them what it was my own Church taught on these matters, I should hope that others would accept that, even if they disagreed with the way my Church had developed some of its teaching; if I found that person still insisting I worshipped statues, because that is what he thought I did, it would be inevitable that I should conclude two things: that that person was not interested in my explanation because they thought they understood my Church better than I did; and that they enjoyed making insulting remarks about my Church. This would leave me with two choices: to walk away, leaving the insults to follow me; or to fight back with a repeat of what my Church holds, and receive a repeat of the response telling me I don't know my own Church, until I get cross.

The same would follow if I were from a reformed tradition Church and someone told me that my Church was not valid, not just in their eyes (beauty is in the eye of the beholder, as validity may well be), but even Christian.

Coming from an Oriental Orthodox Tradition I have the dubious advantage that almost no one here knows what on earth that is, although on another site I have been told I am a Monophysite heretic whose schismatical Church will ensure that I fry in hell; I tried hard to feel offended, but it didn't take.

I have put in a new signature from one of the Syriac Fathers, Jacob Bar-Hebraeus, because I think that little piece of wisdom from the Fathers was one I needed to remind myself of; and I hope others will also appreciate it as Beamishboy did.

We all come from different backgrounds, not just in our Christian tradition, but also our nationality; the Internet deprives us of the visual and verbal signs by which, in everyday life, we can tell whether people are being serious or hostile, or making a joke; wanting those things, it is easy for all of us to get into the kind of barrage of posts we had here back last Saturday, when many good points were made, but when we got so many of them and so many 'points' were scored that we ended up with some bad feeling in some quarters.

But we have pulled away from that potentially destructive form of dialogue, and actually, for once, managed to avoid having the Mods. close a thread of this sort; so maybe we are learning something from the ECFs - that as Christians we ought to be able to have a dialogue without sounding like Tertullian or Justin Martyr castigating a particularly ignorant pagan.

We start well, and end better if we remember the comment St. Irenaeus records the aged St. John making when asked what advice he would give to Christians: 'Little children, love one another.'

Peace,

Anglian

 

[katherine2001]

Well said, Anglian. None of us is qualified to say who is a Christian and who isn't (among those who call themselves Christians). God alone will decide that and who is saved and who isn't. He is the only one who can judge that. We need to remember that every one of us has the image of Christ in us, and that when we insult another person, we have insulted Christ Himself.

 

[Rick Otto]

"sharing" your email address is not all right with me ....in a thread of "discussion/debate"..by any stretch of imagination.... And I would appreciate you do not call me "little lady" it is disrespectful since my conversation was between me and BB.
None of your business really...

LOL, bizarre sense of boundaries for a public forum.
Ever heard of "private messaging"?
Adolescence can be hard to leave behind.

 

[Philothei]

Well said, Anglian. None of us is qualified to say who is a Christian and who isn't (among those who call themselves Christians). God alone will decide that and who is saved and who isn't. He is the only one who can judge that. We need to remember that every one of us has the image of Christ in us, and that when we insult another person, we have insulted Christ Himself.

?

 

[simonthezealot]

Well said, Anglian. None of us is qualified to say who is a Christian and who isn't (among those who call themselves Christians). God alone will decide that and who is saved and who isn't. He is the only one who can judge that. We need to remember that every one of us has the image of Christ in us, and that when we insult another person, we have insulted Christ Himself.

I am qualified to tell you that i AM a CHRISTian, and I AM SAVED...
Praise HIM!

Legally, the Holy Spirit assures those justified by grace through faith of their right to be called children of God’s moral and spiritual family

Joh 1:12;But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

Rom 8:16; The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:

Eph 1:13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Originally Posted by katherine2001 Well said, Anglian. None of us is qualified to say who is a Christian and who isn't (among those who call themselves Christians). God alone will decide that and who is saved and who isn't. He is the only one who can judge that. We need to remember that every one of us has the image of Christ in us, and that when we insult another person, we have insulted Christ Himself.

Greetings. Then why do some Protestants argue over which evangelists, ministers, preachers are teaching the True Gospel?

http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?t=4927913

Originally Posted by Trelawrence
Misguided as I may be, comparing Hagee and Olsteen reminds me of the different approaches of Peter and Paul...


or David & Goliath?

 

[Anglian]

Legally, the Holy Spirit assures those justified by grace through faith of their right to be called children of God’s moral and spiritual family

Dear Simon,

I was taken by your use of the word 'legally' and wondered about the sense in which you use it here? Legal analogies seem very much part of the Western tradition, both Catholic and non-Catholic. They are not much used in the Eastern Churches, where the analogy tends to be that of the Church as spiritual hospital in which we receive treatment for what ails us.

This is a development one can trace in the Fathers. Although all, at some point, make mention of judgement, St. Augustine (whose work had much less influence in the East) seems to have popularised the legal analogy. The Eastern Fathers, with their increasing emphasis on theosis come to deal more in a life-long process than a legal one; at least that is what strikes me comparing, say, St. Cyril of Alexandria with St. Augustine.

Peace,

Anglian

 

[Anglian]

Greetings. Then why do some Protestants argue over which evangelists, ministers, preachers are teaching the True Gospel?

Dear LLOJ

That, at last, may be one area in which the ECFs have less utility; it is certainly one in which our sister-in-Christ Philothei and I have zero utility, since I suspect she, like myself, knows very little about Protestant pastors. Certainly the two names you mention are news to me; should I follow them up, or take with them the view you do of the ECFs - so much Scripture to read, so little time left to read and benefit from it fully.

Peace,

Anglian

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Dear LLOJ

That, at last, may be one area in which the ECFs have less utility; it is certainly one in which our sister-in-Christ Philothei and I have zero utility, since I suspect she, like myself, knows very little about Protestant pastors. Certainly the two names you mention are news to me; should I follow them up, or take with them the view you do of the ECFs - so much Scripture to read, so little time left to read and benefit from it fully.
Peace,
Anglian

Greetings. Hagee, in my own humble view, is more of a radical zionist Dispensationalist and dwells more on the Endtimes more than he should I think. J.O. however preaches a more conservative type Message and though I may disagree with both of them in some areas, it was amazing how I was jumped on by 2 other Christians who practically call Hagee the greatest preacher that ever lived

http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?t=4927913&page=2

Originally Posted by LittleLambofJesus Greetings. Yes he is pretty controversial. I never read any of the "left behind" series of books either as it just appears the Lord led me away from them.
Here is an interesting site on Hagee and since he is a Christian, it is not up to me to judge him or his views just as I do not judge J.O. or other evangelicals/preachers/ministers/priests and their views of the Bible.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/0...73.html?page=3

Late last week, with no prior notification, lawyers for the controversial evangelist John Hagee had a series of videos concerning the pastor removed from YouTube. The clips spanned from the contentious to the mundane; some included footage lifted from sermons Hagee had already made public, others involved documentaries made by filmmakers inside Hagee's conventions. All told more than 120 videos were taken down in the abrupt sweep.

 

[Anglian]

Greetings. Hagee, in my own humble view, is more of a radical zionist Dispensationalist and dwells more on the Endtimes more than he should I think. J.O. however preaches a more conservative type Message and though I may disagree with both of them in some areas, .

Dear LLOJ,

Guess I'm sticking with the ECFs - radical Zionist dispensationalism sounds a little complex

Peace,

Anglian