A conversation about unity.

[public hermit]

To my particular knowledge as an Orthodox Christian,, yes. I am particularly aware of what happens in Eastern and Oriental Orthodoxy, which I am referring to in the collective (someone less ecumenically minded would not do this).

Of course, this is not exclusive to Orthodoxy - I am aware in this case of our Roman Catholic brethren report some similar occurrences, albeit there are some stylistic differences between what the Roman Catholics reported that I was made aware of and what was reported in our case, but not being a Roman Catholic I can’t comment on the extent of the similarity, but a great many denominations do not report this occurring, so in those denomination where this phenomenon is not reported, it presumably does not exist or is else ignored.

Indeed I have been in some churches where I feel confident that if what was reported in the Orthodox Church was reported, I don’t think they would regard such a report with credulity or interpret it as a holy occurrence.

Thank you for clarifying. (Deleted...you were answering while I was writing this. Apologies!)

 

[public hermit]

On the one hand, by promoting the study of Patristics, iconography, sacramental theology, increased fasting and almsgiving, the veneration of the Blessed Virgin Mary, a belief in the Real Presence, and frequent partaking of the Eucharist and frequent sacramental confession.

On the other hand, by discouraging anti-Catholic prejudice, calling out those who disseminate anti-Catholic polemics such as the offensive tracts of Jack Chick, and other forms of anti-Catholic bigotry, which does not just lead to discrimination against Catholics but against Anglicans, Lutherans, Methodists, and Orthodox and anyone else who can be accused of what Thomas Jefferson called “priestcraft” and what others call “Popery.” In particular, it must be pointed out to anti-Catholics how their beliefs are predicated upon a false dichotomy, a logical fallacy, and they must be shown the real harm the propagation of anti-Catholic falsehoods is causing, for example, in the form of Islamic violence against Orthodox and Anglican Christians in Syria and Pakistan.

Thank you for answering. Do you really think the suggestion in the first paragraph will promote unity? What I mean is, if those are the things that make for unity, I don't see how that unity includes Protestants unless they become Orthodox (or some variation thereof).

I agree that anti-Catholic prejudice is not good or helpful. What do you think about anti-Protestant prejudice?

 

[Hentenza]

Incorrect. First, one does not have to accept the dogma of transubstantiation to hold a belief in the bread and wine being the real presence of Christ's very body and blood, given for us to eat and drink. Lutherans and Orthodox take the view that it is a mystery and can not be explained by employing human reason. It just is. Your definition is disregards the historic definition. Christ is omnipresent; but is physically present in the Eucharist.

Hi Mark. Haven’t talk to you in a while. Hope you are well.

My belief in real presence is spiritual not physical. But my argument against the Justin Martyr quote was debating transubstantiation not real presence. I don’t in any way apologize for my beliefs and will remain steadfast believing that close communion is not biblical and elitist because it divides the body of Christ.

 

[The Liturgist]

I don't see how that unity includes Protestants unless they become Orthodox (or some variation thereof).

This isn’t a problem for confessional Lutherans or high church Anglicans or for John Wesley or the early Moravians, who were actively searching for the doctrines of the Early Church. Unity must come at the expense of certain very recent doctrines and practices lacking a clear warrant in Scripture as interpreted by the Fathers.

This is because, as I said, the Orthodox won’t change, even if everyone else wants them to - the more demand is pushed upon the EO and OO churches to “modernize” or to moderate our faith, the more alienated we will become. I believe the same is true of Confessional Lutherans, traditional Catholics and increasingly, Continuing Anglicans and other traditional Christians who immerse themselves in the faith once delivered to the Apostles.

Thus complete unity is likely impossible and probably undesirable, since it would result in the destruction of the beauty of the faith of the martyrs which was endowed on the early church and which has been preserved by the liturgical churches to varying extents.

If anything I would like to see some liturgical rites which fell out of use due to the Merovingian and Carolignian ascendancy, the Fourth Crusade and the Turkish conquest of the Byzantine Empire and the genocide of the Assyrians in the 12th and 20th centuries restored - for example, the Cathedral Typikon of the Eastern Orthodox Church, certain effectively disused Coptic and Armenian liturgies, the ancient Gallican Rite used in France until Charlemagne, and its relatives, the Mozarabic Rite, which has sadly been reduced to one chapel in the Cathedral of Toledo, and a nearby monastery, with the seven surviving Mozarabic parishes in the 19th century having since switched to the Roman Rite (also there are Mozarabic traces in the Mexican wedding liturgy and the Anglicans in Mexico tried to revive parts of the Mozarabic liturgy and it has seen some attention from Western Rite Orthodox), and the Ambrosian Rite, which has thankfully survived in Ambrosia but was not spared the ill-advised reductionism of the Concilium (the group that implemented the Novus Ordo Missae which was a further revision that went far beyond the mandate of Sacrosanctum Concilium, which had been satisfied by the 1965 Missal and the 1967 Dominican breviary, among other liturgical material).

 

[public hermit]

Unfortunately, I'm beginning to see more clearly that because of the particular assumptions each denomination often unquestionably holds, my naive hope for a broader sense (expectation?) of Christian Unity is not forthcoming in the very near future.

Yeah, clearly you're right. Well, at least we know.

 

[childeye 2]

Thank you for answering. Do you really think the suggestion in the first paragraph will promote unity? What I mean is, if those are the things that make for unity, I don't see how that unity includes Protestants unless they become Orthodox (or some variation thereof).

I agree that anti-Catholic prejudice is not good or helpful. What do you think about anti-Protestant prejudice?

The unity of the Universal church is in the Holy Spirit. No congregation can claim Him as exclusively their possession.

At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes.

14 For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,

15 Of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named,

16 That he would grant you, according to the riches of his glory, to be strengthened with might by his Spirit in the inner man;

17 That Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith; that ye, being rooted and grounded in love,

18 May be able to comprehend with all saints what is the breadth, and length, and depth, and height;

19 And to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the fulness of God.

20 Now unto him that is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think, according to the power that worketh in us,

21 Unto him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, world without end. Amen.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Yeah, clearly you're right. Well, at least we know.

Lol! I'd so very much wish to be proven wrong in this case. But, it is what it is, and it is what it is for human reasons more or less, despite claims to the contrary.

 

[ozso]

Great, until we who are still in the flesh become triumphant, "We believe..."

"We believe" is a result of Mere Christianity being overcomplicated by human rules and traditions.

 

[Strong in Him]

Lol! I'd so very much wish to be proven wrong in this case. But, it is what it is, and it is what it is for human reasons more or less, despite claims to the contrary.

Practically speaking, you're probably right.

BUT, we all believe the same Gospel. And I've said it before, if Christians faced persecution for their beliefs; if there was a man standing over us with a gun saying, "are you a Christian, yes or no?", we'd have no time to argue baptism, ordination, communion, styles of worship etc. There'd also be no point at all in saying, "yes, and we are the true church and those over there aren't."
We in the West are not facing persecution - but the heart of the Gospel is "who do you say that I am?" Mark 8:29.
I am confident that pretty much everyone here would have the same answer.

Surely a belief in Jesus as Saviour and Lord has to be the bottom line for unity?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Practically speaking, you're probably right.

BUT, we all believe the same Gospel. And I've said it before, if Christians faced persecution for their beliefs; if there was a man standing over us with a gun saying, "are you a Christian, yes or no?", we'd have no time to argue baptism, ordination, communion, styles of worship etc. There'd also be no point at all in saying, "yes, and we are the true church and those over there aren't."
We in the West are not facing persecution - but the heart of the Gospel is "who do you say that I am?" Mark 8:29.
I am confident that pretty much everyone here would have the same answer.

I like what you're saying here and one would think that this would be the case. But certain events in the long history of the Christian faith show that having the same answer is often difficult to come by.

Surely a belief in Jesus as Saviour and Lord has to be the bottom line for unity?

One would hope that this would be the case, and personally I think it can be the case, but unfortunately, how the key terms in our respective theological traditions are differently defined and are then enrolled into other contexts and doctrines seems to shake up the notion about there being a solid bottom line we could all potentially point to and by which to say to one another with sincerity, "......... yeah, at least we all have the same Jesus Christ!"

 

[ozso]

On the one hand, by promoting the study of Patristics, iconography, sacramental theology, increased fasting and almsgiving, the veneration of the Blessed Virgin Mary, a belief in the Real Presence, and frequent partaking of the Eucharist and frequent sacramental confession.

On the other hand, by discouraging anti-Catholic prejudice, calling out those who disseminate anti-Catholic polemics such as the offensive tracts of Jack Chick, and other forms of anti-Catholic bigotry, which does not just lead to discrimination against Catholics but against Anglicans, Lutherans, Methodists, and Orthodox and anyone else who can be accused of what Thomas Jefferson called “priestcraft” and what others call “Popery.” In particular, it must be pointed out to anti-Catholics how their beliefs are predicated upon a false dichotomy, a logical fallacy, and they must be shown the real harm the propagation of anti-Catholic falsehoods is causing, for example, in the form of Islamic violence against Orthodox and Anglican Christians in Syria and Pakistan.

I've seen a whole lot of what could be called anti-Protestant prejudice being displayed according to the paradigm you're employing. Even prejudice within Protestantism as seen in Mainline vs Evangelical. Along with "popery" we have "fundie". And I seriously doubt Islamic extremists in Syria and Pakistan are reading Chick tracts or going by fundamentalist Protestant points of view. I think it has more to do with most of the Christians in those areas happening to be Orthodox and Anglican. Meaning Baptists and Pentecostals would fare no better.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

So, my takeaway from your discussion here is that the RCC view on Unity is contingent upon full comprehension and subscription to the RCC magisterial pronouncements.

Alright then. That was an interesting discussion.

Which explains why we are not in fellowship with them. We would gladly welcome them into fellowship if they accepted the unaltered 1580 edition of the Book of Concord.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Which explains why we are not in fellowship with them. We would gladly welcome them into fellowship if they accepted the unaltered 1580 edition of the Book of Concord.

Just what everyone needs---yet another "official" book of propriety and orthodoxy. Yay! .... Keep'em coming, folks! Keep'em coming!

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Jesus said: God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

I do believe there is judgment at the cup, and it hinges upon whether my worship of God's Spirit is pure and sincere in spirit. To that end, a sincere worship must be drawn out of me by the object of worship, through revelation, and therefore it's not at my discretion.

Subsequently, I have a testimony that it's the self-sacrificing Love incarnate that is the sacred thing being acknowledged and reverenced once the bread and wine has been consecrated. Moreover, this Love that I trust is the incorruptible Eternal Spirit of God, is marked by the horrific suffering the Christ endured in his flesh, and the shedding of his blood, for us.

So, I when I hear these sentiments ---> And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, this cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. ---> I remember his suffering death for me.

Hence His Incorruptible Love is the substantive Spirit and the substantive presence in the eucharistia (thanksgiving). Therefore, even though I see it as spiritual food which draws out true worship, I don't believe the universal church in unity through the Holy Spirit would ever count the suffering of Jesus and his subsequent death on the cross as merely symbolic.

You missed the point; sacrificial acts are what we do. The Sacraments, particularly Baptism, the Eucharist and Confession and Holy absolution are solely about what God does for us. We can never be good enough to receive His body and blood, it is only through faith driven by a Contrite heart that we can truly benefit from the "medicine of eternal life" that is given in the Sacraments.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Just what everyone needs---yet another "official" book of propriety and orthodoxy. Yay! .... Keep'em coming, folks! Keep'em coming!

Maybe the issue is you don't read books. LOL

 

[ozso]

Just what everyone needs---yet another "official" book of propriety and orthodoxy. Yay! .... Keep'em coming, folks! Keep'em coming!

Our man-made rules vs your man-made rules! Just as Jesus intended

 

[Carl Emerson]

Except that our Lord and the the Apostles caution us that eating and drinking His body and blood un an unworthy manner can be both spiritually and physically harmful. So this is why these Churches and the Confessional Lutherans attach so much importance to "gatekeeping" as you call it. We can not see inside the hearts of those who approach our altars, but we at least know those who have been instructed, and should have at least a basic understanding.

If you want to commune with us, we provide "free" instruction. If you find yourself in agreement with our teachings regarding this, and the other doctrines of the Church, you may be confirmed and join us in the fullness of the Bibles teaching. If you find you do not or can not agree with us, then, why would you want to commune with us?

The warning you refer to is to the consequence of not 'rightly dividing the body of Christ'.

'And so let him eat' after self examination is about realising that one is invited to participate despite ones failings because of the mercy of Jesus.

'Rightly dividing the Body of Christ' then is not only accepting ones self despite failures but seeing all of His body in the same way - in fact unity is impossible without this humbling revelation, and subsequently dividing rather than unifying others.

So to deny the invitation of Jesus to chosen few for any reason is a serious and sadly erroneous attitude with serious consequences.

This general attitude of inclusion rather than exclusion agrees with the sentiment of Jesus when He accepted the ministry of others in His Name who were not in the immediate fellowship.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Hi Mark. Haven’t talk to you in a while. Hope you are well.

My belief in real presence is spiritual not physical. But my argument against the Justin Martyr quote was debating transubstantiation not real presence. I don’t in any way apologize for my beliefs and will remain steadfast believing that close communion is not biblical and elitist because it divides the body of Christ.

Henry, good to see you and good to be here, don't worry, I won't be apologizing for mine either. As I get older, I have became more resolute in my faith and more steadfastly confessional Lutheran; the faith my ancestors suffered for in Europe and that which they built and maintained here in the new world. I have witnessed (physical and not just spiritual) healing through the eucharist, both personally and in others who had made their peace with God. I have also witnessed how the Eucharist affected one who was demonically possessed. My faith in Christ and the Holy Sacrament is unwavering.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

The warning you refer to is to the consequence of not 'rightly dividing the body of Christ'.

'And so let him eat' after self examination is about realising that one is invited to participate despite ones failings because of the mercy of Jesus.

'Rightly dividing the Body of Christ' then is not only accepting ones self despite failures but seeing all of His body in the same way - in fact unity is impossible without this humbling revelation, and subsequently dividing rather than unifying others.

So to deny the invitation of Jesus to chosen few for any reason is a serious and sadly erroneous attitude with serious consequences.

This general attitude of inclusion rather than exclusion agrees with the sentiment of Jesus when He accepted the ministry of others in His Name who were not in the immediate fellowship.

Sure. Right.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Our man-made rules vs your man-made rules! Just as Jesus intended

I doubt you believe in Divine Inspiration