A Common Assumption Among Catholicism & Protestants

[bbbbbbb]

Indeed. I think @bbbbbbb that Christ created the means for them to be saved if they later developed faith, for example, in light of the Resurrection, and I have no doubt that many who were calling for the crucifixion of our Lord, and later were celebrating in sadistic revelry while he was dying on the cross, could still have repented, and pêw, and joined the early Church. It is kind of a myth that the early church was not successful among the Jews; if we look at the ethnic compositon of the various Eastern churches, particularly those in Syria, India, Israel, Jordan, Palestine, Iraq, Egypt, Cyprus, the displaced Christians of the former Ottoman Empire and the 20th century genocides and ethnic cleansing during the Great War and afterwards under the population exchange agreement, etc. and Ethiopia (the Syriac Orthodox, Assyrians, Antiochian Orthodox, Alexandrian Greek Orthodox, Jerusalem Orthodox, Melkite Greek Catholics, the Maronites, the St. Thomas Christians of India, who are descended from converts from both the Malankaran Indians and the Kochin Jews, who were present in Kerala from at least 200 AD, a handful still living in India to this day (and others having made aliyah to Israel or having moved to the UK or elsewhere, such as the noted 20th century hairstylist Vidal Sassoon). If we look at these churches we find many people of partial Jewish ancestry, we find many with significant Jewish ancestry, in the case of Ethiopian Orthodoxy, via the Solomonic dynasty we have basically a nation that mostly converted from Judaism to Christianity.

There is a pernicious modern myth that the Jews rejected Christ wholesale, and this in turn has led to a series of unpleasant eschatological concepts, the worst of which we see integrated into the premillenial dispensationalism of John Nelson Darby, leading to the very unpleasant eschatological model we see in such diverse sources as the writings of Hal Lindsay, the otherwise very respectable King James Version Study Bible, and the dreadful Left Behind series. It is also of course entirely false, the result of the tragic widespread lack of education in Western countries, especially in the secular education system, on history, philosophy, theology, classical studies, and the liberal arts, where severe budget cuts have made, which has intensified the already problematic widespread ignorance of Eastern Christianity, and which has led to a certain sense of an incredulity among some Christians I encounter regarding the Eastern churches and the very brutal sacrifices they continually have to endure in the face of Islamic aggression, persecution and terrorism. So it is extremely important that we dispense with any kind of dichotomy between Jewish converts and gentile converts to Christianity, as St. Paul himself stresses in Galatians 3:28 .

Finally, conversions from Judaism to Christianity never ceased. One of the most important Eastern Christian bishops at the dawn of the Renaissance was a convert to Syriac Orthodoxy from Judaism: the legendary 13th century Syriac Orthodox archbishop Mar Gregorios bar Hebreaus, who was a great philosopher, scholar of divinity and devout monastic, who was beloved even by the Assyrians, whom the Syriac Orthodox on occasion have had tensions with; I have recounted this anecdote before, but I think it is a good anecdote, that when he reposed, he died in an Assyrian village on his way back to the Monastery of St. Matthew in the hills above Mosul, accompanied only by his small staff; the Assyrian Catholicos-Patriarch of the East, who greatly admired Mar Gregorios bar Hebraeus, promptly arrived with 4,000 Assyrian laity to mourn the passing of his friend, colleague and counterpart.

Indeed I think this incident was a seminal moment leading towards the dawn of ecumenical reconciliation between the apostolic churches, where indeed, 800 years later, there are now good relations between the Syriac Orthodox Church, and the Assyrian Church of the East, which have, together with the Antiochian Ortehodox Church, the Ancient Church of the East, and the Syriac and Chaldean Catholic churche, who endured the most extreme persecution during the barbaric reign of the Islamic State.

All very true. Also, there are still followers of John the Baptist descended from his Jewish adherents. They were displaced to Iran centuries ago and many are now living in the United States, primarily near Chicago. They are completely opposed to proselytization and one can only be a member by birth. One can leave the group by choice, usually be marriage to a non-member, but, having left, they can never return.

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

Awesome! What are they called?

All very true. Also, there are still followers of John the Baptist descended from his Jewish adherents. They were displaced to Iran centuries ago and many are now living in the United States, primarily near Chicago. They are completely opposed to proselytization and one can only be a member by birth. One can leave the group by choice, usually be marriage to a non-member, but, having left, they can never return.

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

Question.

I had a friend who is a world traveler. She converted to Coptic Christianity. She loves to 'haze Jews' (her words) online. Her hazing would probably be regarded as goading or even flaming here at CForums. Two examples that come to mind are when she mocked the menstruation huts used by Orthodox Jews and going into a chat every morning with a prominent Orthodox Jew and posting an emoji sticker of herself riding a chicken (mocking the tradition of waving chickens above one's head).

My question to you is, is dislike for Jews on account of one's love for Christ or Mary, typical of Coptic Christianity or is my friend just.... unique?

Indeed. I think @bbbbbbb that Christ created the means for them to be saved if they later developed faith, for example, in light of the Resurrection, and I have no doubt that many who were calling for the crucifixion of our Lord, and later were celebrating in sadistic revelry while he was dying on the cross, could still have repented, and pêw, and joined the early Church. It is kind of a myth that the early church was not successful among the Jews; if we look at the ethnic compositon of the various Eastern churches, particularly those in Syria, India, Israel, Jordan, Palestine, Iraq, Egypt, Cyprus, the displaced Christians of the former Ottoman Empire and the 20th century genocides and ethnic cleansing during the Great War and afterwards under the population exchange agreement, etc. and Ethiopia (the Syriac Orthodox, Assyrians, Antiochian Orthodox, Alexandrian Greek Orthodox, Jerusalem Orthodox, Melkite Greek Catholics, the Maronites, the St. Thomas Christians of India, who are descended from converts from both the Malankaran Indians and the Kochin Jews, who were present in Kerala from at least 200 AD, a handful still living in India to this day (and others having made aliyah to Israel or having moved to the UK or elsewhere, such as the noted 20th century hairstylist Vidal Sassoon). If we look at these churches we find many people of partial Jewish ancestry, we find many with significant Jewish ancestry, in the case of Ethiopian Orthodoxy, via the Solomonic dynasty we have basically a nation that mostly converted from Judaism to Christianity.

There is a pernicious modern myth that the Jews rejected Christ wholesale, and this in turn has led to a series of unpleasant eschatological concepts, the worst of which we see integrated into the premillenial dispensationalism of John Nelson Darby, leading to the very unpleasant eschatological model we see in such diverse sources as the writings of Hal Lindsay, the otherwise very respectable King James Version Study Bible, and the dreadful Left Behind series. It is also of course entirely false, the result of the tragic widespread lack of education in Western countries, especially in the secular education system, on history, philosophy, theology, classical studies, and the liberal arts, where severe budget cuts have made, which has intensified the already problematic widespread ignorance of Eastern Christianity, and which has led to a certain sense of an incredulity among some Christians I encounter regarding the Eastern churches and the very brutal sacrifices they continually have to endure in the face of Islamic aggression, persecution and terrorism. So it is extremely important that we dispense with any kind of dichotomy between Jewish converts and gentile converts to Christianity, as St. Paul himself stresses in Galatians 3:28 .

Finally, conversions from Judaism to Christianity never ceased. One of the most important Eastern Christian bishops at the dawn of the Renaissance was a convert to Syriac Orthodoxy from Judaism: the legendary 13th century Syriac Orthodox archbishop Mar Gregorios bar Hebreaus, who was a great philosopher, scholar of divinity and devout monastic, who was beloved even by the Assyrians, whom the Syriac Orthodox on occasion have had tensions with; I have recounted this anecdote before, but I think it is a good anecdote, that when he reposed, he died in an Assyrian village on his way back to the Monastery of St. Matthew in the hills above Mosul, accompanied only by his small staff; the Assyrian Catholicos-Patriarch of the East, who greatly admired Mar Gregorios bar Hebraeus, promptly arrived with 4,000 Assyrian laity to mourn the passing of his friend, colleague and counterpart.

Indeed I think this incident was a seminal moment leading towards the dawn of ecumenical reconciliation between the apostolic churches, where indeed, 800 years later, there are now good relations between the Syriac Orthodox Church, and the Assyrian Church of the East, which have, together with the Antiochian Ortehodox Church, the Ancient Church of the East, and the Syriac and Chaldean Catholic churche, who endured the most extreme persecution during the barbaric reign of the Islamic State.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Awesome! What are they called?

They are known as Mandeans, although they do not refer to themselves by that name. Here is a Wikipedia article about them - Mandaeans - Wikipedia

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

https://www.reddit.com/r/AcademicBi...what_do_the_beliefs_of_the_mandaeans_tell_us/

They are known as Mandeans, although they do not refer to themselves by that name. Here is a Wikipedia article about them - Mandaeans - Wikipedia

 

[The Liturgist]

All very true. Also, there are still followers of John the Baptist descended from his Jewish adherents. They were displaced to Iran centuries ago and many are now living in the United States, primarily near Chicago. They are completely opposed to proselytization and one can only be a member by birth. One can leave the group by choice, usually be marriage to a non-member, but, having left, they can never return.

You are of course referring to the Mandaeans, who actually settled in Iraq, not Iran, although there may be a few in Iran, and there are similiarities between some aspects of Mandaean and Zoroastrian liturgy (specifically, I have read accounts of Mandaean clergy repairing the sacred seam of Zoroastrian soldiers from Persia during World War I - at the time, due to the large Shia population, much of Iraq was in the Persian sphere of influence, including the delta region of the Euphrates which is the historical homeland of the Mandaean people).

Now regarding the ethnicity of the Mandaeans, if you read their religious texts as I have it becomes very clear they are not Jewish nor directly descended from St. John’s Jewish adherents, except perhaps to a very slight extent. They are basically Mesopotamians who came under the influence of Gnosticism and specifically a variant of it in which John the Baptist took on the central role (there is also a variant of Gnosticism in which Cain is the main prophet, and arguably, in Yazidism, the Peacock Angel, Taus Melek, who the Muslims believe is the devil, but this is based on their own peculiar Islamic understanding of Shaitan, has Christ-like attributes, and there is some reason to assert Yazidis are crypto-Christian Gnostics (this is also the case I think with the Alevis and Yarsanis).

Moving back to Mandaeism, there is an element of anti-Semitism in some of the Mandaean texts, although also an element of redemption of the Jews through union with the superior Mesopotamian people and ... other things. One Mandaean scripture tries to criticize our Lord Jesus Christ, but even in charicaturing Him, he still comes across in the text as more compelling, humane and interesting than the Mandaean interpretation of St. John the Baptist and Forerunner, who is really the main person who gets slandered by the Mandaean texts.

However, lest we make the mistake of inappropriately loathing Mandaeans, it should be stressed that for various reasons, in recent decades their hierarchy has sought to adopt a more “ecumenical” relationship with Christians. They have declared that Jesus Christ is not a false Messiah, and that this was a misunderstanding because the word for “false” and “book” are the same in the Mandaic dialogue of Aramaic, and that He is more correctly understood as a “book Messiah,” which makes my head hurt. But Mandaeans are known for not hurting Christians, and on the contrary, seeking out shelter in churches, even when abroad, particularly Orthodox and Assyrian churches, as they are familiar with these from Iraq.

I can provide more information on this interesting religion to anyone who is interested. There are also some really good discussions of it on CF.com by an Aramaic scholar who joined the Episcopal church after spending a few years as proselyte in Karaite Judaism (non-Talmudic, sola scriptura Judaism, which has now become an endangered religious minority itself; the Karaites insofar as they reject Rabinnical Judaism are kind of like the Sadducees, however, they have their own interpretation of the Tanakh, and believe in the Resurrection as far as I am aware, whereas the Sadducees did not believe in it. The Karaites interestingly do not believe in the existence of the devil; they interpret the Serpent in the Garden of Eden as being a particularly clever snake, which I find amusing. I do like them a lot, and many of them had to flee persecutions to Israel (until the mid 20th century, the main population centers, not counting the Khazars, which are a separate non-Jewish ethnic minority from Crimea, which for a time practiced Karaite Judaism but have since moved on, were in Alexandria, Syria and Constantinople; now, the largest community of Karaites outside of Israel is in Daly City, California.

 

[The Liturgist]

Question.

I had a friend who is a world traveler. She converted to Coptic Christianity. She loves to 'haze Jews' (her words) online. Her hazing would probably be regarded as goading or even flaming here at CForums. Two examples that come to mind are when she mocked the menstruation huts used by Orthodox Jews and going into a chat every morning with a prominent Orthodox Jew and posting an emoji sticker of herself riding a chicken (mocking the tradition of waving chickens above one's head).

My question to you is, is dislike for Jews on account of one's love for Christ or Mary, typical of Coptic Christianity or is my friend just.... unique?

Your friend is engaging in unacceptable anti-Semitic behavior, which I have never seen any Copts engage in. If her priest knew what she was doing, he might well ask her to stop. Copts are basically the same as other Oriental Orthodox and Eastern Orthodox Christians - very loving people who have endured severe persecution.

Now, a number of Middle Eastern Christians do have a negative political opinion of Israel for various reasons, and I would expect this to be the prevailing view among Egyptians in general owing to the historical military conflicts with Israel and an identification with the Palestinians, as there are a number of Palestinian Christians (some of whom are fully ethnically Arab, unlike the Copts, who are largely descended from the ancient Egyptians).

That being said, historically, the Ethiopian Tewahedo Orthodox Church lived in harmony with the Beta Israel, the minority of Ethiopians who did not convert to Christianity from Judaism. There are striking similarities in liturgy and even the contents of the Old Testament canon, the Ge’ez bible which includes books like 1 Enoch and Jubilees. The Ethiopian Tewahedo Orthodox Church was an autonomous, but not autocephalous, church, loosely watched over by the Pope and the Holy Synod of the Coptic Orthodox Church, who had the responsibility of appointing bishops to the Ethiopian church, until Emperor Haile Selassie persuaded the Coptic church to grant the Ethiopian church a Tomos of Autocephaly in the mid 20th century. Because of this historical connection, some people call the Ethiopian Orthodox “Coptic,” however, the Ethiopian church, while sharing a common Oriental Orthodox faith with the Coptic Orthodox, Syriac Orthodox and Armenian Apostolic churches (and with some Oriental Orthodox churches that fell victim to genocide, for example, the Numidian Orthodox Church), has a distinct liturgical tradition that is textually closer to Syriac Orthodoxy vs. Coptic Orthodoxy, and which in other respects such as music, vestments and so on, is colorful and quite distinctive.

It was the Derg Communists who attempted to initiate a large scale pogrom against the Beta Israel, after they strangled Emperor Haile Selassie, which prompted the emergency evacuation of most of the Beta Israel to Israel, although a few thousand still live in Ethiopia even today, I am told.

 

[The Liturgist]

Question.

I had a friend who is a world traveler. She converted to Coptic Christianity. She loves to 'haze Jews' (her words) online. Her hazing would probably be regarded as goading or even flaming here at CForums. Two examples that come to mind are when she mocked the menstruation huts used by Orthodox Jews and going into a chat every morning with a prominent Orthodox Jew and posting an emoji sticker of herself riding a chicken (mocking the tradition of waving chickens above one's head).

My question to you is, is dislike for Jews on account of one's love for Christ or Mary, typical of Coptic Christianity or is my friend just.... unique?

So yeah, in summary, anti-Semitism is not an aspect of Coptic Christianity any more than it is a facet of any other form of mainstream Christianity. Lutherans, for example, are not anti-Semitic, even though Martin Luther objectively was extremely anti-Semitic, unfortunately (this is the one thing I dislike about him which precludes me from being able to regard him as venerable, in contrast to Dietrich Bonhoeffer, who I regard as a glorious hieromartyr, that is to say, as a presbyter-martyr, who died for his opposition to Nazism, including the Holocaust and all the other evils of the Nazi state, which of course I prefer to believe that Martin Luther would also have opposed had he seen the horror of it, but I don’t know for sure, and the illustrated anti-Semitic polemic he created with Lucas Cranach the Elder was really horrible and disgusting; I used to enjoy the paintings of Lucas Cranach the Elder, but after seeing that, I just don’t want to even look at them.

But of course, the vast majority of Lutherans don’t know that Luther did that, it is possible Luther and Cranach had become ill, perhaps with lead poisoning, or other environmental health risks, which did afflict many in that era, particularly painters. But to be clear, I still regard Luther in a positive way, because no one except Christ our Lord is perfect, and I particularly admire his resolute stance in favor of the Eucharist, where he carved “Hoc est corpus meum” into a table during a dispute with various Reformed Christians.

By the way, you know we have some excellent Coptic Orthodox members on CF.com including my friends @Pavel Mosko and @dzheremi who I love conversing with. And we are also blessed with some wonderful Lutheran members, my friends @MarkRohfrietsch and @ViaCrucis .

 

[dzheremi]

Question.

I had a friend who is a world traveler. She converted to Coptic Christianity. She loves to 'haze Jews' (her words) online. Her hazing would probably be regarded as goading or even flaming here at CForums. Two examples that come to mind are when she mocked the menstruation huts used by Orthodox Jews and going into a chat every morning with a prominent Orthodox Jew and posting an emoji sticker of herself riding a chicken (mocking the tradition of waving chickens above one's head).

My question to you is, is dislike for Jews on account of one's love for Christ or Mary, typical of Coptic Christianity or is my friend just.... unique?

Your friend sounds pretty 'unique', to use your word. I've only met a handful of converts in my time in the Church (10 years), and none of them have been like that, and I've never gotten any message from any priest, monk, bishop, etc. that I've met that anything like that would be okay.

I don't know why she'd mock the menstruation huts in particular. We don't exactly have the same thing, but we do practice the ancient custom of 'churching', which is based on what I imagine to a similar idea of ritualized purification (in this case, after the birth of a baby). So is it just that she finds huts silly, or does she also have a problem with ritualized purification as a thing? The priest also ritually purifies himself in every liturgy, and in a metaphorical way we can likewise say that we are ritually purified by the rites as well, whether they are liturgical or not (e.g., the Agpeya prayers).

And if huts are the problem, maybe show her a traditional Ethiopian Orthodox Church. They're often round and 'hut-like' in that way, at least in certain regions of that country.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Question.

I had a friend who is a world traveler. She converted to Coptic Christianity. She loves to 'haze Jews' (her words) online. Her hazing would probably be regarded as goading or even flaming here at CForums. Two examples that come to mind are when she mocked the menstruation huts used by Orthodox Jews and going into a chat every morning with a prominent Orthodox Jew and posting an emoji sticker of herself riding a chicken (mocking the tradition of waving chickens above one's head).

My question to you is, is dislike for Jews on account of one's love for Christ or Mary, typical of Coptic Christianity or is my friend just.... unique?

This is unacceptable behavior in any church that is made worse because of the blatant anti-Semitism. It's bad enough to go out of one's way to harass anyone; it's made worse when it sinks even lower into anti-Semitism, racism, or some other form of bigotry.

I can't conceive of a single mainstream Christian tradition or denomination that would condone this behavior under any circumstances. And any church that would condone this behavior is the sort of thing to flee from (*cough*WestboroBaptistChurch*cough*).

-CryptoLutheran

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

This thread is really exceptionally interesting and I regret I was extremely ill for the past two weeks and unable to participate fully.

You were conspicuous by your absence. Glad you are back!!

 

[bbbbbbb]

You are of course referring to the Mandaeans, who actually settled in Iraq, not Iran, although there may be a few in Iran, and there are similiarities between some aspects of Mandaean and Zoroastrian liturgy (specifically, I have read accounts of Mandaean clergy repairing the sacred seam of Zoroastrian soldiers from Persia during World War I - at the time, due to the large Shia population, much of Iraq was in the Persian sphere of influence, including the delta region of the Euphrates which is the historical homeland of the Mandaean people).

Now regarding the ethnicity of the Mandaeans, if you read their religious texts as I have it becomes very clear they are not Jewish nor directly descended from St. John’s Jewish adherents, except perhaps to a very slight extent. They are basically Mesopotamians who came under the influence of Gnosticism and specifically a variant of it in which John the Baptist took on the central role (there is also a variant of Gnosticism in which Cain is the main prophet, and arguably, in Yazidism, the Peacock Angel, Taus Melek, who the Muslims believe is the devil, but this is based on their own peculiar Islamic understanding of Shaitan, has Christ-like attributes, and there is some reason to assert Yazidis are crypto-Christian Gnostics (this is also the case I think with the Alevis and Yarsanis).

Moving back to Mandaeism, there is an element of anti-Semitism in some of the Mandaean texts, although also an element of redemption of the Jews through union with the superior Mesopotamian people and ... other things. One Mandaean scripture tries to criticize our Lord Jesus Christ, but even in charicaturing Him, he still comes across in the text as more compelling, humane and interesting than the Mandaean interpretation of St. John the Baptist and Forerunner, who is really the main person who gets slandered by the Mandaean texts.

However, lest we make the mistake of inappropriately loathing Mandaeans, it should be stressed that for various reasons, in recent decades their hierarchy has sought to adopt a more “ecumenical” relationship with Christians. They have declared that Jesus Christ is not a false Messiah, and that this was a misunderstanding because the word for “false” and “book” are the same in the Mandaic dialogue of Aramaic, and that He is more correctly understood as a “book Messiah,” which makes my head hurt. But Mandaeans are known for not hurting Christians, and on the contrary, seeking out shelter in churches, even when abroad, particularly Orthodox and Assyrian churches, as they are familiar with these from Iraq.

I can provide more information on this interesting religion to anyone who is interested. There are also some really good discussions of it on CF.com by an Aramaic scholar who joined the Episcopal church after spending a few years as proselyte in Karaite Judaism (non-Talmudic, sola scriptura Judaism, which has now become an endangered religious minority itself; the Karaites insofar as they reject Rabinnical Judaism are kind of like the Sadducees, however, they have their own interpretation of the Tanakh, and believe in the Resurrection as far as I am aware, whereas the Sadducees did not believe in it. The Karaites interestingly do not believe in the existence of the devil; they interpret the Serpent in the Garden of Eden as being a particularly clever snake, which I find amusing. I do like them a lot, and many of them had to flee persecutions to Israel (until the mid 20th century, the main population centers, not counting the Khazars, which are a separate non-Jewish ethnic minority from Crimea, which for a time practiced Karaite Judaism but have since moved on, were in Alexandria, Syria and Constantinople; now, the largest community of Karaites outside of Israel is in Daly City, California.

Thank you. I had a relatively brief discussion with a couple of brothers on a flight to Doha. They were returning to Iran to visit family members. They were both Mandean and gave me a thumbnail sketch of their religion. You have assuredly filled out my understanding.

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

Your friend sounds pretty 'unique', to use your word. I've only met a handful of converts in my time in the Church (10 years), and none of them have been like that, and I've never gotten any message from any priest, monk, bishop, etc. that I've met that anything like that would be okay.

I don't know why she'd mock the menstruation huts in particular. We don't exactly have the same thing, but we do practice the ancient custom of 'churching', which is based on what I imagine to a similar idea of ritualized purification (in this case, after the birth of a baby). So is it just that she finds huts silly, or does she also have a problem with ritualized purification as a thing? The priest also ritually purifies himself in every liturgy, and in a metaphorical way we can likewise say that we are ritually purified by the rites as well, whether they are liturgical or not (e.g., the Agpeya prayers).

And if huts are the problem, maybe show her a traditional Ethiopian Orthodox Church. They're often round and 'hut-like' in that way, at least in certain regions of that country.

I don't remember what she said about the huts in particular.
She has a problem with the OT laws and traditions applying to today's Christian. Her and I broke up partly because of this. I was advising another friend to refrain from sex while his wife is menstruating (This was a hypothetical, since he isn't married). I didn't think anything about it at the time. Firstly, because of the churching tradition, Secondly, because this is the way I was brought up. For example an aunt of my mine didn't consumate her marriage on the first night because she was menstruating. Thirdly, because I had read an article online by a Catholic priest who equated menstruation blood with death. My friend ended up coming back at me by saying that such blood taboos are no longer relevant since Christ healed the woman with the blood issue. She also (and rightfully) had a problem with the fact that I was discussing this with a male friend, who was a virgin. Ok. Well, I am a virgin too, so I don't know about that part. She treated me like a "p". Mocked, laughed and called me a 'Jew' as a form of derision.

I'm glad that the Copts don't believe this. She was my only exposure to Coptic Christianity. So I wasn't sure. Although, she has a Western outlook (She follows EM Jones, which is why I asked about his material on the RC forum). She honestly believes that she is fighting for Christ. Maybe she is in her own way.

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

This is unacceptable behavior in any church that is made worse because of the blatant anti-Semitism. It's bad enough to go out of one's way to harass anyone; it's made worse when it sinks even lower into anti-Semitism, racism, or some other form of bigotry.

I can't conceive of a single mainstream Christian tradition or denomination that would condone this behavior under any circumstances. And any church that would condone this behavior is the sort of thing to flee from (*cough*WestboroBaptistChurch*cough*).

-CryptoLutheran

Thank you. I realize that I may be mistaken about where I was coming from, but her position didn't seem right either.

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

Lutherans are some of the most gracious people I have ever met, in a lot of ways, but particularly in regard to Jews. It was a Lutheran pastor who corrected my assertion that the Temple was destroyed as a punishment. And I often hear Lutheran pastors correct the idea that Jews brought a curse down upon themselves when they said, 'Let his blood be on us and on our children'. As my current Pastor has stated, 'May we all utter the same'.

So yeah, in summary, anti-Semitism is not an aspect of Coptic Christianity any more than it is a facet of any other form of mainstream Christianity. Lutherans, for example, are not anti-Semitic, even though Martin Luther objectively was extremely anti-Semitic, unfortunately (this is the one thing I dislike about him which precludes me from being able to regard him as venerable, in contrast to Dietrich Bonhoeffer, who I regard as a glorious hieromartyr, that is to say, as a presbyter-martyr, who died for his opposition to Nazism, including the Holocaust and all the other evils of the Nazi state, which of course I prefer to believe that Martin Luther would also have opposed had he seen the horror of it, but I don’t know for sure, and the illustrated anti-Semitic polemic he created with Lucas Cranach the Elder was really horrible and disgusting; I used to enjoy the paintings of Lucas Cranach the Elder, but after seeing that, I just don’t want to even look at them.

But of course, the vast majority of Lutherans don’t know that Luther did that, it is possible Luther and Cranach had become ill, perhaps with lead poisoning, or other environmental health risks, which did afflict many in that era, particularly painters. But to be clear, I still regard Luther in a positive way, because no one except Christ our Lord is perfect, and I particularly admire his resolute stance in favor of the Eucharist, where he carved “Hoc est corpus meum” into a table during a dispute with various Reformed Christians.

By the way, you know we have some excellent Coptic Orthodox members on CF.com including my friends @Pavel Mosko and @dzheremi who I love conversing with. And we are also blessed with some wonderful Lutheran members, my friends @MarkRohfrietsch and @ViaCrucis .

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

Perhaps it's because of Martin Luther or their ties to Germany, or maybe it's just how the Gospel reveals itself in them. Lutherans aren't your typical religious crusader.

Lutherans are some of the most gracious people I have ever met, in a lot of ways, but particularly in regard to Jews. It was a Lutheran pastor who corrected my assertion that the Temple was destroyed as a punishment. And I often hear Lutheran pastors correct the idea that Jews brought a curse down upon themselves when they said, 'Let his blood be on us and on our children'. As my current Pastor has stated, 'May we all utter the same'.

 

[The Liturgist]

I don't remember what she said about the huts in particular.
She has a problem with the OT laws and traditions applying to today's Christian. Her and I broke up partly because of this. I was advising another friend to refrain from sex while his wife is menstruating (This was a hypothetical, since he isn't married). I didn't think anything about it at the time. Firstly, because of the churching tradition, Secondly, because this is the way I was brought up. For example an aunt of my mine didn't consumate her marriage on the first night because she was menstruating. Thirdly, because I had read an article online by a Catholic priest who equated menstruation blood with death. My friend ended up coming back at me by saying that such blood taboos are no longer relevant since Christ healed the woman with the blood issue. She also (and rightfully) had a problem with the fact that I was discussing this with a male friend, who was a virgin. Ok. Well, I am a virgin too, so I don't know about that part. She treated me like a "p". Mocked, laughed and called me a 'Jew' as a form of derision.

I'm glad that the Copts don't believe this. She was my only exposure to Coptic Christianity. So I wasn't sure. Although, she has a Western outlook (She follows EM Jones, which is why I asked about his material on the RC forum). She honestly believes that she is fighting for Christ. Maybe she is in her own way.

EM Jones is not an authentic Coptic voice by any stretch of the imagination. So regarding that, my understanding, and I think @dzheremi can provide a more rounded explanation, is that there was a problem with books like A Purpose Driven Life, which is theologically foreign to a Patristic conception of Christianity, being sold in Coptic bookstores in the Patriarchal parishes in the US, and clergy in these parishes, and also a few impoverished dioceses even in Egypt, for example, the Diocese of Muqattam, which is a community of pig farmers who raise pigs for sustenance, who eat in the vast landfills of Cairo which surround the town of Muqattam. In churches like the Patriarchal parishes and the cathedral in Muqattam, which does not look like a Coptic church but rather a bland late 1990s megachurch, the clergy had come under the influence of various non-denominational popular speaker/writer type preachers, even Prosperity Gospel types, and this had become a serious issue, so fortunately His Holiness Pope Tawadros (Theodore) II of Alexandria, not to be confused with His Beatitude Pope Theodore (Tawadros) II of Alexandria, his Greek Orthodox counterpart*, and the Holy Synod, promoted several general bishops who lacked a specific diocese, and who did not have the power to visit parishes in the Patriarchal sees and mandate corrections (only the Pope could do that in his dioceses, and HH Tawadros II, realizing the general bishops were ineffective and that he could not do what his predecessor Pope Shenouda, memory eternal, had been able to do in terms of monitoring these parishes due to substantial population growth both in Egypt and abroae), so the Holy Synod, as I mentioned before, promoted general bishops to diocesan bishops, elevated growing dioceses like Los Angeles to Metropolitan dioceses, and ordained new bishops from the ranks of the hegumens (abbots) of the major monasteries, and since that time there has been marked improvement.

Specifically, non-denominational evangelical type books like A Purpose Driven Life are becoming far less ubiquitous, praise and worship music is in the process of being eradicated (the Coptic Orthodox Church was the only Orthodox church where Nashville started to get a foothold, but this ironically served as a rallying cry for those members of the Coptic church who cared about traditional Christianity, to band together to defend the beautiful musical traditions of Egyptian Christianity).

Additionally much more stress is being placed on selling books of Orthodox and Patristic theology, the parishes are stressing educating the youth in singing hymns and praying in the Coptic language, the dream being to fully revitalize it, and in places like the Diocese of Muqattam, the extremely impressive new bishop, Abanoub, is stressing a return to traditional Orthodox faith, morals and praxis, and this makes me extremely happy. There is a website which was chronicling the process of restoring Orthodoxy which is now hosted on Facebook: Log into Facebook

Now if only we could get some traction along similiar lines in the traditional Protestant churches and among traditional members of the UMC and Moravian churches to do things like stop the UMC schism, which amouns in my opinion to an unnecessary capitulation by the traditional and African Methodists, who still have a majority in the general council, and if in doctrinally stalwart denominations such as the LCMS, if a similar resolve could be found to abolish praise and worship music and mandate the use of traditional Lutheran music.

*I find it delightful that the two successors of Saints Mark, Alexander, Athanasius and Cyril the Great on the apostolic throne of Alexandria are both named Theodore II, and it bodes well for the eventual reunification of the Coptic and Greek Orthodox churches of Alexandria, which fell out of communion post-Chalcedon, but later drew close once more, even attempting to unite into a single church in the 19th century, only for this to be vetoed by the Khedive (the hereditary ethnically Albanian Muslim rulers of Egypt prior to Anwar Sadat) fearing the power of a unified Christian population.

 

[jamiec]

I (Mary) can no longer hold back the arm of my Son --RC

I (Christ) alone am holding back my Father's arm, even my own arm, I am restraining. --Protestants

This is the essential difference I see between the two Faiths. Looking at it from a psychological pov, what child wants to be told that his dad won't hit him because of what his mother or big brother has done? Or that his brother is taking the blows on his behalf and that this somehow demonstrates their common father's love.

I think that distorts Protestant theology.

That paraphrase from St Alphonsus Liguori’s “Glories of Mary” is not a statement of Catholic doctrine. It is a statement of a particular type of 18th-century Italian piety, and needs to be understood again its background. If it were a statement of doctrine, it would be expressed rather differently.

Since this particular book is written for preachers, the author, a missionary, pastor, and preacher, writes in a mainly devotional strain, rather than as an academic theologian.

Catholic theology for a long time separated theology from devotion so that the same author typically wrote about the two things in different books. This particular book is not a theology text, therefore it lacks the precision which is a mark of theology texts.

If one knows where to look, one can always find things in the works of other Christians that look dodgy - even if they aren’t. Such things, however alien to some Christians, can - like this - usually be explained without being explained away.

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

I think that distorts Protestant theology.

That paraphrase from St Alphonsus Liguori’s “Glories of Mary” is not a statement of Catholic doctrine. It is a statement of a particular type of 18th-century Italian piety, and needs to be understood again its background. If it were a statement of doctrine, it would be expressed rather differently.

How would it be expressed?

Since this particular book is written for preachers, the author, a missionary, pastor, and preacher, writes in a mainly devotional strain, rather than as an academic theologian.

Catholic theology for a long time separated theology from devotion so that the same author typically wrote about the two things in different books. This particular book is not a theology text, therefore it lacks the precision which is a mark of theology texts.

If one knows where to look, one can always find things in the works of other Christians that look dodgy - even if they aren’t. Such things, however alien to some Christians, can - like this - usually be explained without being explained away.

 

[ViaCrucis]

I think that distorts Protestant theology.

That paraphrase from St Alphonsus Liguori’s “Glories of Mary” is not a statement of Catholic doctrine. It is a statement of a particular type of 18th-century Italian piety, and needs to be understood again its background. If it were a statement of doctrine, it would be expressed rather differently.

Since this particular book is written for preachers, the author, a missionary, pastor, and preacher, writes in a mainly devotional strain, rather than as an academic theologian.

Catholic theology for a long time separated theology from devotion so that the same author typically wrote about the two things in different books. This particular book is not a theology text, therefore it lacks the precision which is a mark of theology texts.

If one knows where to look, one can always find things in the works of other Christians that look dodgy - even if they aren’t. Such things, however alien to some Christians, can - like this - usually be explained without being explained away.

While I agree with you that the Protestant idea isn't consistent with more historically oriented Protestant theologies. However I can attest that this language does exist within the larger Protestant world.

Indeed, back in my Evangelical days I attended a Bible study where the take away was that Jesus is actively holding back God the Father from smiting us. That is, the Father wants to smash us all to pieces, but Jesus is holding Him back. And I don't mean that this was given hyperbolically, I mean it was given literally--in those exact words. And this wasn't said in a dreadful way, but as a "Look at how much Jesus loves us, that He stops His own Father from destroying us".

The Gospel gets turned into a way of talking about Jesus protecting us from God, as though God is the real enemy that we needed to be saved from; not sin, death, and the devil as the Scriptures teach and the Church has always confessed.

This is stuff that gets taught in real churches. It's a view of God that gets taught, presented, and filters itself down into the pews. The message that lots of Christians are getting, in pulpits around the world, is that God is very, very, very angry; but God's anger passes over us because of Jesus, and thus Jesus is there protecting us from a God who wants to send us to hell. And so the spiritual struggles of many Christians in those sorts of churches is a struggle of constant guilt and fear, that salvation is only assured if we are really, really, really sure we have the right religion and believe the right things about Jesus; whether the church teaches that one can throw away their salvation, or one that says "once saved always saved", the outcome is more-or-less the same: Salvation is about our positive response to God, because God has given an opportunity to sinners whom God is going to toss into eternal hell a chance to avoid that fate--if they sign on the dotted line and join the right religion and have the right religious doctrines.

In other words, there are a lot of churches out there where people simply aren't hearing the Gospel, and worse, are completely confused about what the Gospel even is. Their views of God, of Jesus, and of the Gospel are so misshapen and distorted that all they can see is an angry God of wrath, and Jesus as their personal body guard to protect them from it.

Consequently, it shouldn't be surprising then that many non-Christians, having almost only experienced Christianity in that misshapen form, think that's what Christianity is. Should it be entirely shocking, then, when many, who through despair or simply being unable to conform to the kind of toxic religiosity of their church, end up walking away, and throwing away their faith altogether?

When the Gospel is being preached, then people are hearing and believing and trusting in Christ. The Gospel breeds joy, hope, faith, and love. Not fear, not despair, not dread.

/rant

-CryptoLutheran