A conversation about unity.

[Carl Emerson]

Saint Paul was not a successor to any of the twelve apostles, he was appointed by Jesus on the road to Damascus and confirmed in his appointment by Ananias in Damascus. Do you read these passages with filters over your eyes?

You confirm the very point I am making - have a great day.

 

[Carl Emerson]

Acts chapter one is post resurrection New Testament times, is it not? And why is it that you are so willing to correct the twelve apostles and the holy scriptures with your opinion on the legitimacy of casting lots after prayer for Divine guidance? Surely the apostles were competent to pray and receive from God the guidance for which they petitioned God?

No not really - it seems they preempted His choice.

Record of their understanding pre-Pentecost is hardly something to write home about...

As Jesus said...

“O foolish men and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken! 26 Was it not necessary for the Christ to suffer these things and to enter into His glory?” 27 Then beginning with Moses and with all the prophets, He explained to them the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures.

You asked "Surely the apostles were competent...

Clearly not.

 

[The Liturgist]

How? How can you tell if someone is in Christ or not?

We don’t claim to know if they are not in Christ - that is proving a negative, and like I said, we don’t know where the church isn’t, and indeed periodically have found Christians elsewhere who have entered into communion with us. We do know that the Orthodox are in Christ, and the Orthodox receive the Eucharist in a specific manner which varies depending on rite, but someone who was not Orthodox would not know the means by which we receive the Eucharist.

Also given that most Orthodox use a shared spoon, among other things, I feel confident anyone who does not believe in the real presence would be afraid to partake of our Eucharist.

Listen to you. What gives you the right to decide who is “authorized” to take communion? Who gives you the right to turn away the body of Christ outside of your church? Who gives you the right to decide who is a Christian and who is not?

1 Corinthians 11:27-34

But I could ask you the same question - what gives you the right to impose your views on other Christians? Why do you want our Eucharist, when you disagree with us on such important issues as the identity of the Blessed Virgin Mary as Theotokos, Transusbstantiation, Auricular Confession, the intercession of the saints, the veneration of icons, et cetera. Confessional Lutherans, Anglo-Catholics, Old Catholics, Assyrians, Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox have beliefs which are different from those of your church. We do not deny your status as Christians, or your potential salvation, but we do have different beliefs, including that that only those who are members of our churches and those churches in communion with us should partake (and we are not all in communion with each other, but the Assyrians and traditional Anglicans have the least restrictive rules, with the traditional Anglicans requiring agreement with the Nicene Creed and baptism as prerequisites, and the Assyrians also requiring belief in the Real Presence.

 

[The Liturgist]

Like Luther?

Martin Luther is not a Reformed Protestant. The Lutherans specifically reject Reformed theology (which includes Calvinism, Zwinglianism and a few related movements such as the Huguenots, as well as the Radical Reformation groups like the Puritans and Anabaptists).

 

[The Liturgist]

And if that stranger professes his/her faith for the Lord then neither your church nor mine are in any position to call them a liar by omission.

We don’t call anyone a liar, but we also do not believe the criteria you provide are sufficient for admission to the Eucharist. It requires more than professed faith - see 1 Corinthians 11:27-34 and also James, entire. We believe Baptism and correct worship are necessary prerequisites, as well as a belief in the Real Presence and also not partaking of the Eucharist without examining one’s conscience and preparing through spiritual or physical fasting and confession, and many other things, based on our interpretation of 1 Corinthians 11:27-34

If your church believes professing faith in Christ is sufficient to receive the Eucharist no Orthodox Christian will attempt to stop you, but conversely, your doctrine is not aligned with ours so we cannot say we are in communion with you - which does not mean we deny your Christianity, rather, we have disagreements that are sufficient to prevent us from partaking in the Eucharist with you.

Also your post omits the possibility someone could profess a sincere faith in the Lord but be in error on an essential point of faith, which is the case with Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses - they believe in Christ as much as anyone, but disagree with us on who He is.

What I don’t understand is why you want a church whose doctrines you reject to admit you to its Eucharist against its own beliefs?

 

[Carl Emerson]

Acts chapter one is post resurrection New Testament times, is it not? And why is it that you are so willing to correct the twelve apostles and the holy scriptures with your opinion on the legitimacy of casting lots after prayer for Divine guidance? Surely the apostles were competent to pray and receive from God the guidance for which they petitioned God?

The Apostles were fallible and even disagreed strongly at times - it was a learning curve for them. Post resurrection does not imply perfection among them. Jesus clearly corrected them post resurrection. This is clear from Acts 24:35ff

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

The Apostles were fallible and even disagreed strongly at times - it was a learning curve for them. Post resurrection does not imply perfection among them. Jesus clearly corrected them post resurrection. This is clear from Acts 24:35ff

If the apostles were fallible where does that put your opinions?