Are our churches failing at properly teaching Christology?

[dzheremi]

I don't know what you are talking about, but does it have anything to do with Jesus or is it just Coptic tradition?

I don't know what everyone else has in mind (well, except for ViaCrucis and Paidsike, since they've ably followed up on this post while I was out running errands), but what I meant in reminding people of the principle of the law of prayer and belief and their relation is quite literally that: that you quite literally could not be a member of this Church (by which I mean of course the Orthodox Church, but others would conceivably mean their own -- they are right that this is a very ancient, all-Christian principle) and teach against what we pray. And sometimes that really does need to be pointed out (because not everyone realizes when they've picked up something else from somewhere else), even in the most conservative of communions like mine.

The goal here in a utilitarian sense is that a person could come in off the street, knowing nothing of theology or Christology or controversies about the same or any of that, and they would know purely by observing what and how we pray what it is that we believe. (And we would know it too!) Having this kind of rock-solid theology that is embedded in the words of our fathers, as in the prayers of St. Basil's liturgy which were written in the 4th century which we still recite today (it is the most common of our liturgies), really does a lot to help set people straight on what it is we're doing and why.

And so if someone, God forbid, should come around later claiming "No, this thing I am preaching is instead what is right", we can sit him down and look at our liturgical texts and other prayers together, and he can hopefully see his error and come back to the faith. When everyone is accountable to the same rule, it is rare to see such bouts of open embracing of heresies among a large number of believers, because the people know their faith. They are properly catechized by the being attentive in the celebration of the liturgy, with whatever more explicit instruction that is given reinforcing that. This is why catechesis in the Christian East can be very informal: You show up, and then you show up, and then show up...repeat until baptism. Then repeat after baptism.

 

[redleghunter]

Many forms of evangelicalism and pentecostalism in the US are less driven by doctrine, and more by experience or community values, and are very much prone to falling back on the opinio legis as the core of Christian identity. If you're an Arian or Sabellian, that's less important than what your stance is on abortion, gay marriage, or Christian cultural symbols in the public square.

You almost got it right.

 

[redleghunter]

I see alot of Nestorianism, Eutychianism, and Kenoticism floating around as well.

I know some Church of Christ churches dabble in this. Only because a close friend and ThD who is Church of Christ member has been battling some of the above especially Kenosis for some years.

 

[Eloy Craft]

Actually following the Holy Spirit instead of the wisdom of man would be a great place to start.

The problem then is distinguishing the two authentically .

 

[redleghunter]

Given the recent spate of Christological threads which have challenged, and indeed outright attacked, the orthodox Christological teaching, it seems like it is worth asking if the reason for so much confusion is because people are being improperly catechized in our churches.

Or is this less of a failure of churches properly teaching the faith, and more representative of rogue theology?

Or both?

And how do we address these problems in our church communities?

-CryptoLutheran

A second thought on this.

First are some of the churches you refer to actually have seminary graduates as pastors and elders. If not that can be the root of the problem.

 

[FireDragon76]

Right I think it’s that ‘seeker friendly’ mentality not only being pandered by many congregations but is what many people are looking for. IRL when I ask them about their particular church they proclaim loud and proud it is a bible preaching church but when questioning them on Christian doctrines 101 their contributions to the conversation tends to run short and I typically see a glazed look in their eyes when I continue the subject.

Both liberal Protestants like Schleiermacher, and American-style Evangelicals, grew out of Pietism. Both are heavily driven by sentimentality and religious experience, but from very different responses to the modern world. And both have tended to polarize religion in America.

 

[ViaCrucis]

"Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey the creeds that your cultures will eventually develop." -Matthew 28:19-20.

I find it telling as to what kind of heresy people are worried about.

"Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand, and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you—unless you believed in vain.

For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve." - 1 Corinthians 15:1-5

That portion in bold, that's a creed. What would eventually become the Nicene Creed and the Apostles' Creed, has its beginning right here, in the very creed and confession of the Apostles themselves, which they preached, taught, and confessed and those who heard them believed, received, and confessed together.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[throughfiierytrial]

Given the recent spate of Christological threads which have challenged, and indeed outright attacked, the orthodox Christological teaching, it seems like it is worth asking if the reason for so much confusion is because people are being improperly catechized in our churches.

Or is this less of a failure of churches properly teaching the faith, and more representative of rogue theology?

Or both?

And how do we address these problems in our church communities?

-CryptoLutheran

In my view rogue theology is filling the void left by many inactive church members...also filling the void of many empty church pews.
Seems as though one can attend church to readily find its baptized and confirmed members are obviously not reading their Bibles...they are not so thrilled with their salvation nor so filled with the love of God that they are moved to read God's Love Letter to them. Of course I am seeing only a small segment of Church members so this is just my opinion or feeling, but there are so many fully engaged in the material world which competes with their faith. This one can witness first hand.
If the churches were stronger and more vibrant and really stood for Truth and sacredness as it should portray to the world, perhaps outsiders would not be so bold as to oppose God with made-up theology. ?

 

[PloverWing]

I will admit that I have found, in real life, that people are quite capable of allowing the prayers to wash over them week by week and not taking in the implications, so I suspect we are at the point where we need to explicitly teach the implications of what we pray, but the basic principle stands.

I think that's a problem, yes. I was just talking about this over the weekend with my 22-year-old daughter, who (because she's my daughter) grew up as a cradle Episcopalian. Our liturgy is rich with theological vocabulary, and is theologically precise; if you listen to the words of the Nicene Creed and the Eucharistic Prayers, there's the plan of salvation and the nature of Christ, all spelled out for you. But my daughter used almost exactly the same words you did -- a wave of words washes over you each week, and it's easy to not really pay attention to them. So I think the liturgy is wonderful, but, empirically, it's not enough.

I think I'd like to have a forum in church in which we go through the creed and the liturgy line by line, and talk about what each sentence means. I could imagine leading a forum like that. Or, of course, our (heavily-overloaded) priest could lead it. But I don't know what the setting would be. Sunday School? It's sparsely attended as it is. As you mentioned in your earlier post, time is an issue for many parishioners.

 

[AnticipateHisComing]

The Creeds say what they say, and to deny the Creeds is to preach heresy.

If only you determined every creed that had to be professed to post here. But then it wouldn't be Christian Forums but ViaCrucis' forums. Sorry, you don't get to expand beyond the SOF what is heresy here. For a Lutheran to rely on man's words to determine what is true, I just find against the whole concept of the Reformation. I guess sometimes it is easier than being able to defend your belief with scripture. It requires a lot more reading and understanding.

 

[dzheremi]

If only you determined every creed that had to be professed to post here. But then it wouldn't be Christian Forums but ViaCrucis' forums. Sorry, you don't get to expand beyond the SOF what is heresy here. For a Lutheran to rely on man's words to determine what is true, I just find against the whole concept of the Reformation. I guess sometimes it is easier than being able to defend your belief with scripture. It requires a lot more reading and understanding.

Point of order: The Nicene Creed is the statement of faith used by this multi-confessional website, so in a very real way, it is the Creed that needs to be professed in order to post here. (If you are going to post in the Christian areas using a Christian ID, that is.)

And that's not ViaCrucis' or anyone's doing. That's Christianity itself. This has been decided for 1,693 years for everyone who is not an Arian.

 

[FireDragon76]

I think that's a problem, yes. I was just talking about this over the weekend with my 22-year-old daughter, who (because she's my daughter) grew up as a cradle Episcopalian. Our liturgy is rich with theological vocabulary, and is theologically precise; if you listen to the words of the Nicene Creed and the Eucharistic Prayers, there's the plan of salvation and the nature of Christ, all spelled out for you.

There's plenty of good theology interspersed in Episcopalian liturgy.

So much Christianity in the US has very little theological content in worship. It's very much about your "walk" with Jesus/God and what that feels like.

 

[dzheremi]

I suspect that is why religious affiliation with Christianity is shrinking in the US among most age cohorts -- the thrill is either gone, or maybe it never happened to begin with. A shallow faith like that simply can't stand up against the harsh realities of everyday life.

There needs to be a kind of epistemological change in how people are Christian, and I don't think many want to put that much effort into it.

 

[AnticipateHisComing]

No, not slander. It would be claiming that certain threads espouse unorthodox Christology. "Slander" means something very different.

Slander is when you can't defend your views in a thread you disagree with and instead create a new thread to belittle and mischaracterize the beliefs and education of others and their threads and label it rogue theology not fitting for a Christian forum.

Given the recent spate of Christological threads which have challenged, and indeed outright attacked, the orthodox Christological teaching, ... people are being improperly catechized in our churches.
... representative of rogue theology?

By and large the "spate of threads" I mention have to do with denying the fundamental truth of the Incarnation and the Hypostatic Union--that God the Son, by His assuming of human nature, has become truly human.

 

[AnticipateHisComing]

I find it telling as to what kind of heresy people are worried about.

I find it telling when someone thinks their creeds deem another not suitable for posting in a Christian forum.

 

[AnticipateHisComing]

For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve." - 1 Corinthians 15:1-5

That portion in bold, that's a creed. What would eventually become the Nicene Creed and the Apostles' Creed, has its beginning right here, in the very creed and confession of the Apostles themselves, which they preached, taught, and confessed and those who heard them believed, received, and confessed together.

See how easy it is to quote scripture.
See how authoritative it is.

If every statement in every creed was a copy of scripture, then just use scripture to defend your position. The SOF follows one creed. To promote an idea that all creeds are professed by all Christians and required is not Christian and certainly not Biblical.

 

[FatalHeart]

I find it telling when someone thinks their creeds deem another not suitable for posting in a Christian forum.

I find it telling when people wear flannel.

 

[FatalHeart]

"Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand, and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you—unless you believed in vain.

For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve." - 1 Corinthians 15:1-5

That portion in bold, that's a creed. What would eventually become the Nicene Creed and the Apostles' Creed, has its beginning right here, in the very creed and confession of the Apostles themselves, which they preached, taught, and confessed and those who heard them believed, received, and confessed together.

-CryptoLutheran

That creed has my respect. What doesn't have my respect is tradition without scripture.

 

[FatalHeart]

The problem then is distinguishing the two authentically .

And it is the foundational problem. We don't need more leaders leading unto themselves. We need more people being lead by God. He said go and make disciples. Of who? God. But guess who has made themselves the forefront of the church.

 

[zippy2006]

Slander is when you can't defend your views in a thread you disagree with and instead create a new thread to belittle and mischaracterize the beliefs and education of others and their threads and label it rogue theology not fitting for a Christian forum.

No, that's not what slander is. And no, there is nothing problematic with orthodox Christians talking to each other about the problems besetting orthodoxy theology and doing so on this forum. If you can't handle that, leave the thread. All you've done so far is caused disruption.