From just Jesus alone, we have 50 examples of Jesus specifically saying, "Scripture says......" "It is written in Scirpture......" Etc. Typically, there is then a quote of such being uses normative.
On the first point, the Gospels record a selection of things that Christ
did. Some of these actions were verbal statements. But referencing scripture was not the only thing Christ
did.
It seems that sola scriptura selects one aspect of all the actions of Christ and posits it as the action of
primary importance to the exclusion of the others. This fails to recognize the fact and importance of the wholeness of the Godman Christ.
The praxis, then, of sola scriptura selects among the praxes of Christ and norms for only one. Wresting an aspect from the context distorts both the aspect and fails to respect (where persons are involved) the person. It also distorts one's relationship with and knowing of the person. It reifies text and discards person.
The danger becomes that the now reified text replaces the Person or is mistaken for the Person of Christ. This seems to be a possible explanation for the centrality of logoi over experiencing the Logos in modern western worship. In some practices, the homily has become central and in its newly emphasized role demotes (and not infrequently discards) Eucharist and prayer. In short, it undermines the spiritual dialogue between God and man and prefers the logoi of man. Man speaks to himself, stays on his own level instead of "looking upward", stiving toward God.
Can you give me one example where Jesus mentions Byzantine worship? Much less, uses such normatively?
Just one will do.
This seems familiar; the "proper noun demand" is used to weed out all Churches that are not called by an appellation mentioned in (iirc) the adress portion of several epistles.
As I described before, the scriptural references for the form, content, action, and specific words of the EO Liturgy are found throughout the Old and New Testaments. I provided a link to a selection. The "proper noun demand" seems to me to be a deliberate non-response.
But there is an additional failure of recognition perhaps due to a lack of exposure to the Liturgy, or a bias born of the praxis of centralizing and reifying text; Liturgy is
experienced.
Over 50 times, just Jesus used Scripture normatively. Can you give me one example where He notes that the liturgy of the EO is normative, one example where He used such as normatively. I'm not asking for ALL the examples where He said, "The Liturgy of the Eastern Orthodox Church says....." I'm not asking you to give 50 examples from Jesus, or 100 from Scripture - one is all I'm requesting.
The repetative nature of your questions is curious and worrying. As the praxis of sola scriptura seems to include the danger of replacing Person with reified text/scripture (as a 'stand-in' for Christ in His fullness; an "instead of Christ"), it is not unexpected that dialogue between human persons would also degrade. Thus, the failure to speak in more than repetitions, the failure to "dive in" and truly dialogue would be expected.
Just as the reified text replaces Person, so also then the text cannot be "plummed", and one is left with a shallow discursive. The text loses its potential depth and becomes a series of arabesques. Thus the text takes on, for the one who reifies it, a certain legalistic form. The utilization of the text becomes a matter of concretizations (statements regarded as 'rules') and leads to utilization of the spaces beside and between the concretized statements.
In short, one looks for legal oppurtunities (a method that, in part, the pharisees and scribes used). This sort of rationalising and loopholing allows and even encourages one to assign to or find what one wants (whatever that may be) in the text. Thus, concretized into a legalised entity, the reified text escapes the person of Christ and becomes "I make the Christ I prefer" from the concretizations, the spaces between and the spaces beside the concretizations. The Logos, replaced with the logoi becomes whatever I can make it say.
Can you share just one example where Jesus uses the rule/canon/norma normans of a particular EO chant, noting such?
You said He did. I'm not asking for ALL the cases of such, just one. Where He specifically is using some EO chant, notes such, and is using such normatively.
As film was not yet invented, and the "proper name demand" has become your legal requirement for the reified text, you have thus disallowed the actual doing of Christ with a game designed to find for yourself a victory
It does not require a musicologist to hear the similarity between EO and Jewish chant. One only needs to listen. As for the utilization of the Ode form in EO chant ( a form mentioned by Paul), for this you may want to consult a specialized source -- unless you are familiar with the Ode and can thus conduct the analysis yourself.
Please share at least one example where Jesus says, "Church architecture in the Greek Orthodox Church says/teaches......" and then uses such normatively. You said He did. I'd just like at leasst one example. Thanks.
Understood properly, scripture is Christocentric. Architecture, chant, worship, all the elements of Liturgy are both thematically and physically Christocentric. Thus, as we learn through our bodies (all the senses and the brain) as well as in our spirtual heart, the Liturgy points to Christ and teaches Christ to the whole of the human person.
The persistent utilization of the reified text, having skipped Person and persons, leaves one unaware of the Christocentric nature of Liturgy (and perhaps scripture). Thus text becomes the norm, not the person of Christ.
And human persons are treated as brains, not whole persons with bodies that can learn of Christ and seek embrace Him as
Person. Thus one is likely to fail to understand the experiential role and the Christocentrism of Liturgy. So, of course one would miss both the scriptural references and the interweaving of scriptura and Liturgy.
If this and other conversations on this board are any indication of the result of persistent use of the praxis of sola sola scriptura, its use can lead to shallowness, a failure - even inability - to
dive in and soar upwards to the Person of Christ. And an inability to dialogue with humans; those who are created in the image and toward the likeness of the Person of Christ. Who is the Logos, but not a text.
