homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   » Ship's Locker   » Limbo   » Purgatory: Is this unitarian or trinitarian? (Page 1)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Purgatory: Is this unitarian or trinitarian?
El Greco
Shipmate
# 9313

 - Posted      Profile for El Greco   Email El Greco   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The phrase "He too finds no love", when applied to God, it seems to me that it is unitarian, and not trinitarian. Not to mention that it goes against God's transcendence to assume that God seeks for love, or that God being Love there is another kind of love which God seeks...

I read a very beautiful poem by the late John Paul II, but this verse has been bugging me ever since. Of course, art doesn't need to be dogmatically sound for it to be good art!

This is the poem:

quote:
Girl Disappointed in Love

With mercury we measure pain
as we measure the heat of bodies and air;
but this is not how to discover our limits--
you think you are the center of things.
If you could only grasp that you are not:
the center is He,
and He, too, finds no love---
why don't you see?
The human heart--what is it for?
Cosmic temperature. Heart. Mercury.

My question is NOT about art, or about the poem as a whole, but about that particular verse. What do you think?

[ 06. July 2009, 14:47: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]

--------------------
Ξέρω εγώ κάτι που μπορούσε, Καίσαρ, να σας σώσει.

Posts: 11285 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
Esmeralda

Ship's token UK Mennonite
# 582

 - Posted      Profile for Esmeralda   Email Esmeralda   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I read that as meaning that God finds humanity not returning his love - as in 'When the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on earth?'. I don't think it's saying anything about the love within the Trinity.

--------------------
I can take the despair. It's the hope I can't stand.

http://reversedstandard.wordpress.com/

Posts: 17415 | From: A small island nobody pays any attention to | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Sober Preacher's Kid

Presbymethegationalist
# 12699

 - Posted      Profile for Sober Preacher's Kid   Email Sober Preacher's Kid   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It's intentionally ambiguous. He could be Christ, or God the Father, or the Holy Spirit (though in English the Holy Spirit is not usually addressed as He, but "the Spirit"), or He as a general reference to God without being specific.

References to the Divine don't necessary have to specify any of the Persons of the Trinity in particular.

--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.

Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274

 - Posted      Profile for Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras   Email Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
What both Esmeralda and SPK said. I don't think "finds no love" necessarily implies love-seeking -- rather, humans don't reciprocate God's love. Likewise, referring to God by the singular pronoun "He" doesn't imply unitarianism -- could be any person of the Trinity or all three together. I think it's a pretty conventional way of speaking, at least in the West.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged
El Greco
Shipmate
# 9313

 - Posted      Profile for El Greco   Email El Greco   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:
References to the Divine don't necessary have to specify any of the Persons of the Trinity in particular.

This is true. And in fact many religions do that, without discerning between the persons. With Christianity, however, a greater clarity came, as far as "the Divine" is concerned, because of God's self-revelation at a small part of the Eastern Mediterranean...

While I appreciate the poetry, and all references to the divine no matter where they come from, I can't but see a man approaching the divine in unitarian terms.

If it is God, then He is not alone. The Son and the Spirit are in communion with Him. The same applies for either the Son or the Spirit. And an ultra-personal Trinity-He is by definition unitarian.

I see that those already posted are in agreement with each other. I'd like to understand that better. All clarifications are most welcome!

--------------------
Ξέρω εγώ κάτι που μπορούσε, Καίσαρ, να σας σώσει.

Posts: 11285 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
Lyda*Rose

Ship's broken porthole
# 4544

 - Posted      Profile for Lyda*Rose   Email Lyda*Rose   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Look at the Song of Songs, it's all about seeking love both from the Bridegroom and the Bride. I don't see why God can't seek love from his creation. He just doesn't need it. And I don't see speaking of God as One on occasion makes a unitarian. It might be problematic if one doesn't see the Persons in God at all. This was not one of JPII's flaws.

--------------------
"Dear God, whose name I do not know - thank you for my life. I forgot how BIG... thank you. Thank you for my life." ~from Joe Vs the Volcano

Posts: 21377 | From: CA | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274

 - Posted      Profile for Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras   Email Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The Trinity as "He": in this He there be three divine persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

We don't refer to the Trinity as "They" typically, and for most of us that would probably imply tritheism rather than trinitarianism.

I really don't understand what the problem is here. Is it linguistic -- something different between Greek and other languages? Or is it finding some cause for worry when there really isn't any cause for worry?

Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged
Sober Preacher's Kid

Presbymethegationalist
# 12699

 - Posted      Profile for Sober Preacher's Kid   Email Sober Preacher's Kid   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
True. English does not refer to the Trinity as "They". I'd be surprised if John Paul II composed poetry in English. I think he'd go for Polish or Latin.

Please, let's not have another "Unitarianism" debate. [Help]

English refers to God, without further clarification, as He. If you wish to specify that you are referring to God the Father, then you would say that He referred to the Father in a passage's context. Similarly if this poem were meant to refer to Christ, then Christ would have to be mentioned explicitly.

If this is not the way that Greek addressed the Divinity, great. This poem raises no theological alarm bells in English, as expected from a Papal composition.

--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.

Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged
El Greco
Shipmate
# 9313

 - Posted      Profile for El Greco   Email El Greco   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:
This poem raises no theological alarm bells in English

Oh, but it does. Just not to you... It's not an issue of language, but of theology. Anyway, I don't think we can get further than that, so I'd like to thank you all for your contributions.

--------------------
Ξέρω εγώ κάτι που μπορούσε, Καίσαρ, να σας σώσει.

Posts: 11285 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460

 - Posted      Profile for ken     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
I really don't understand what the problem is here.

I rather think it is the Orthodox churches trying to persuade themselves that the other Christian churches really aren't Christian and never were.

--------------------
Ken

L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.

Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274

 - Posted      Profile for Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras   Email Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Or perhaps a particular Orthodox churchman trying to convince himself that Western Catholics and protestants are all deeply heretical.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged
moonlitdoor
Shipmate
# 11707

 - Posted      Profile for moonlitdoor   Email moonlitdoor   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Possibly a poem is not the best place to look for an explicit theology, as poems can often be understood in various ways.

A series of addresses by Pope John Paul II on the Trinity can be found Pope John Paul on the Trinity which gives his thoughts more fully.

--------------------
We've evolved to being strange monkeys, but in the next life he'll help us be something more worthwhile - Gwai

Posts: 2210 | From: london | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged
Lyda*Rose

Ship's broken porthole
# 4544

 - Posted      Profile for Lyda*Rose   Email Lyda*Rose   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Geez, Andreas, God is both One and Three. If the poet only had addressed Christ, would you complain about him dissing the Father and the Holy Spirit? Or would you opine that Jesus was treated as a separate deity like the Mormons consider him?

[Roll Eyes] It's one fricking poem. If you want theological depth either go to a four hour Orthodox liturgy, or read the Bible cover to cover and crack open several volumes of writings by the Church Fathers.

--------------------
"Dear God, whose name I do not know - thank you for my life. I forgot how BIG... thank you. Thank you for my life." ~from Joe Vs the Volcano

Posts: 21377 | From: CA | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Sober Preacher's Kid

Presbymethegationalist
# 12699

 - Posted      Profile for Sober Preacher's Kid   Email Sober Preacher's Kid   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by §Andrew:
quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:
This poem raises no theological alarm bells in English

Oh, but it does. Just not to you... It's not an issue of language, but of theology. Anyway, I don't think we can get further than that, so I'd like to thank you all for your contributions.
[Disappointed]

John Paul II is the last person I would ever suspect of heresy.

No, that poem is fine. The theology is fine.

And wut ken said.

--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.

Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged
cosmic dance
Shipmate
# 14025

 - Posted      Profile for cosmic dance   Email cosmic dance   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Indeed, one could even suspect you of being a wee bit tendentious, Squiggle Andrew

--------------------
"No method, no teacher, no guru..." Van Morrison.

Posts: 233 | From: godzone | Registered: Aug 2008  |  IP: Logged
cosmic dance
Shipmate
# 14025

 - Posted      Profile for cosmic dance   Email cosmic dance   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Indeed, one could even suspect you of being a wee bit tendentious, Squiggle Andrew

--------------------
"No method, no teacher, no guru..." Van Morrison.

Posts: 233 | From: godzone | Registered: Aug 2008  |  IP: Logged
Lyda*Rose

Ship's broken porthole
# 4544

 - Posted      Profile for Lyda*Rose   Email Lyda*Rose   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
No! [Eek!]

--------------------
"Dear God, whose name I do not know - thank you for my life. I forgot how BIG... thank you. Thank you for my life." ~from Joe Vs the Volcano

Posts: 21377 | From: CA | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
El Greco
Shipmate
# 9313

 - Posted      Profile for El Greco   Email El Greco   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Actually no, the theology is not fine. Speaking of the Trinity as one personal He is the definition of unitarianism.

I should have known better than ask a question about that here. Oh well.

--------------------
Ξέρω εγώ κάτι που μπορούσε, Καίσαρ, να σας σώσει.

Posts: 11285 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
dj_ordinaire
Host
# 4643

 - Posted      Profile for dj_ordinaire   Author's homepage   Email dj_ordinaire   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by §Andrew:
Actually no, the theology is not fine. Speaking of the Trinity as one personal He is the definition of unitarianism.

No, it isn't. The definition of Unitarianism - if such a thing could be attempted - would be closer to the belief that God the Father alone is Divine and that Christ is merely a prophet or a chosen one, perhaps amongst many. A person who believes in the Divinity of Christ is not a Unitarian, however often you may insist that they are.

And, whatever criticisms one might have of the late Holy Father, a failure to believe in our Lord's Divinity was certainly not one of them.

--------------------
Flinging wide the gates...

Posts: 10335 | From: Hanging in the balance of the reality of man | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
El Greco
Shipmate
# 9313

 - Posted      Profile for El Greco   Email El Greco   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
That would be Islam, or Bahai...

Not unitarianism. Unitarianism means there is one God-He, and that's what that verse said.

I don't think Protestants and Catholics are full blown Sabellians or Noetians... However, the more time I spend here, the more I get to realize that Protestant and Catholic theology are not as clearly trinitarian as Orthodox theology has been from the beginning.

There is always some sort of confusion between the persons, which is probably best demonstrated in talk of an ultra-personal God-He.

The very misunderstanding of the creed itself, expressed by a Catholic priest in these boards is most telling: I believe in one God doesn't refer to the Father, but to the entire Trinity...

This is confusion stemming from unitarian foundations.

--------------------
Ξέρω εγώ κάτι που μπορούσε, Καίσαρ, να σας σώσει.

Posts: 11285 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
Jengie jon

Semper Reformanda
# 273

 - Posted      Profile for Jengie jon   Author's homepage   Email Jengie jon   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Andrew

Your insistence on always having the Trinity as separate persons makes you sound to us as a Tri-Theist

Jengie

--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge

Back to my blog

Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
dj_ordinaire
Host
# 4643

 - Posted      Profile for dj_ordinaire   Author's homepage   Email dj_ordinaire   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by §Andrew:
That would be Islam, or Bahai...

No, that would be Unitarianism. As professed by those who call themselves Unitarians, and worship as such. Trust me on this - I've met them, visited their chapels, read their literature and their hymnals. These are Unitarians, and were I to suggest that the late Pope was of their number, I suspect they would be ... surprised, shall we say?

--------------------
Flinging wide the gates...

Posts: 10335 | From: Hanging in the balance of the reality of man | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
Marvin the Martian

Interplanetary
# 4360

 - Posted      Profile for Marvin the Martian     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by §Andrew:
Actually no, the theology is not fine. Speaking of the Trinity as one personal He is the definition of unitarianism.

Which english pronoun would you use?

"He" is the correct singular male pronoun. To use "they" would imply more than one God. How many Gods are there?

[ 19. November 2008, 11:32: Message edited by: Marvin the Martian ]

--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar

Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
El Greco
Shipmate
# 9313

 - Posted      Profile for El Greco   Email El Greco   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
JJ

Three persons, yes, but not divided with themselves, or separated from each other. I am not insisting on separation, I'm insisting on actual personhood for all three divine persons.

dj

unitarianism can have many meanings. If a liberal Protestant group today calls itself unitarian and thinks Jesus was a nice man that's besides the point.

Unitarianism in the theology of the ancient church (i.e. before liberal let's all shake hands and may the Force be with you) has to do with One God-He. The issue of Christ is irrelevant. Judaism is unitarian because it accepts one divine person alone, but so is sabellianism, even though they thought Christ was divine.

MtM

I don't mind the grammar... It's about more than grammar though, isn't it? To pray to one person and call that the Trinity that's just not Christian. The extent to which someone accepts the persons is also irrelevant (the sabellians for example accepted the distinctions, but as masks, as personas, and not actual persons...)

As for the charge of "three Gods"... As far as I can tell, it has been used with two meanings in mind, in Christendom:

First, it was brought as a charge against the Orthodox, by those who thought Christ is the first creature, by those who thought the Holy Spirit is created, and by those who didn't accept the Son and the Father are different persons.

From what I gather, this is the way you are using it today. Which sounds very odd if we assume you fully accept at least Nicea...

Second, it has been brought as a charged by the Orthodox against an obscure Monophysite group who thought the three divine persons have three different divine natures. But I doubt you had that in mind.

To sum up: we, as a church, had that discussion before, when all those ancient Saints, were accused of being tritheists.

Why do we need to repeat that now? Why hasn't the Orthodoxy of the ecumenical councils been internalized by big groups such as the Catholic or the Protestant churches?

[ 19. November 2008, 11:46: Message edited by: §Andrew ]

--------------------
Ξέρω εγώ κάτι που μπορούσε, Καίσαρ, να σας σώσει.

Posts: 11285 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
Jengie jon

Semper Reformanda
# 273

 - Posted      Profile for Jengie jon   Author's homepage   Email Jengie jon   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
but if you always address them as separate how does your language show the oneness?

Jengie

--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge

Back to my blog

Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
El Greco
Shipmate
# 9313

 - Posted      Profile for El Greco   Email El Greco   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Not separate! Different! Different persons does not mean separate persons.

Again, it's not an issue of grammar... By all means, use the grammar you prefer, the question is what you mean by the words you use, not the words themselves... they are not the issue.

--------------------
Ξέρω εγώ κάτι που μπορούσε, Καίσαρ, να σας σώσει.

Posts: 11285 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274

 - Posted      Profile for Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras   Email Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
There's a doxology in English which goes in part "to God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost be ascribed as is His most just due..." In other words, the Trinity is explicitly being wrapped into the pronoun He. Andrew, don't be so concrete for pity's sake! One could take you seriously if you argued that the use of a singular pronoun in referring to a triune God could create a danger of unitarian doctrine. That would be reasonably arguable. However, to infer that everyone else holds unitarian conceptions of God because they refer to the Trinity in the singular is showing a severe failure to appreciate that language can be used as a shorthand that still encapsulates a complex and multi-faceted meaning. You simply seem to most others here to have a need to prove to yourself that everyone outside the Orthodox Church holds a completely heretical theology.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged
Marvin the Martian

Interplanetary
# 4360

 - Posted      Profile for Marvin the Martian     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by §Andrew:
I don't mind the grammar... It's about more than grammar though, isn't it?

No, I don't think it is.

quote:
To pray to one person and call that the Trinity that's just not Christian.
I pray to one God. That God being the Trinity of Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The pronoun I use when referring to the one God is "He". There isn't another pronoun that does the job properly.

You still haven't said which word you use. If you're so convinced that "he" is wrong, tell us what's right!

quote:
As for the charge of "three Gods"... As far as I can tell, it has been used with two meanings in mind, in Christendom:

First, it was brought as a charge against the Orthodox, by those who thought Christ is the first creature, by those who thought the Holy Spirit is created, and by those who didn't accept the Son and the Father are different persons.

From what I gather, this is the way you are using it today. Which sounds very odd if we assume you fully accept at least Nicea...

Is Christianity monotheist or isn't it? If it is, then "He" is the correct english pronoun to use when referring to God (some also accept "She", but let's not get into that on this thread!).

All your talk of persons, creatures and createdness seems to me to be a huge fog of obfuscation. Let's cut to the chase. How.Many.Gods.Are.There?

[ 19. November 2008, 12:20: Message edited by: Marvin the Martian ]

--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar

Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
El Greco
Shipmate
# 9313

 - Posted      Profile for El Greco   Email El Greco   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
LSK

In Greek, the word trinity is a she. Does this mean we think of a female person or feminine characteristics? That would be silly.

So, I do not have problems with how you are using grammar. LSK look carefully in this thread, and you will see that there is a difference of theology rather than language.

You don't have to make an ad hominem attack. Anyway, communication is most difficult, and I think perhaps I should just leave it there.

By the way, and for the record, I didn't want to mention who the verse's author was, or what the poem said, but I thought it would be nice to give the credit where it is due, and share a beautiful poem with the Shipmates.

quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
I pray to one God. That God being the Trinity of Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

Why don't you accept the creed of the first and the second ecumenical council? Is that rejection of the creed widespread or is it just you?

[ 19. November 2008, 12:21: Message edited by: §Andrew ]

--------------------
Ξέρω εγώ κάτι που μπορούσε, Καίσαρ, να σας σώσει.

Posts: 11285 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
Leetle Masha

Cantankerous Anchoress
# 8209

 - Posted      Profile for Leetle Masha   Email Leetle Masha   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Lietuvos, those of us who have only the basic Orthodox catechism to rely on frequently avoid making any attempt to eff the ineffable. We just
believe, and consider the Most Holy Trinity to be a Mystery.

In every Divine Liturgy, we proclaim: "The Father, The Son, The Holy Spirit {excuse the use of the word "the" for each Person--English does not work well without it): The Trinity, One in Essence and Undivided." That's about as far as one can go in the English language, and if it's not clear, join the club. Of course it's not clear: it's a Mystery.

Demeaning a dead Pope is a practice that only brings scorn to the Orthodox, alas, but perhaps we deserve the training in humility that we receive when we bring scorn upon ourselves without understanding how easy it is to do that.

--------------------
eleison me, tin amartolin: have mercy on me, the sinner

Posts: 6351 | From: Hesychia, in Hyperdulia | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
El Greco
Shipmate
# 9313

 - Posted      Profile for El Greco   Email El Greco   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
LM

you don't have "only the basic Orthodox catechism". You have decades of non-Orthodox Christianity, and from the discussions we had in the past, the impression I get is that you still bring that with you.

As for the dead Pope, that's just silly. I don't demean anyone. As for his theology, I don't know about you, but I was never in communion with him, and for me this means much.

--------------------
Ξέρω εγώ κάτι που μπορούσε, Καίσαρ, να σας σώσει.

Posts: 11285 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274

 - Posted      Profile for Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras   Email Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Andrew, you've already made up your mind that Western Christians, whether Catholic or protestant (and now apparently even Western coverts to the OC)don't have a proper trinitarian theology. There can't be any productive discussion, because you won't budge from your pre-judgements. You look for obscure proofs in the ways that language is conventionally used and refuse to accept explanations that run contrary to your presuppositions. Clearly only you have the truth! What's the point of bothering with the opinions and insights of us heretics?
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged
Marvin the Martian

Interplanetary
# 4360

 - Posted      Profile for Marvin the Martian     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by §Andrew:
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
I pray to one God. That God being the Trinity of Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

Why don't you accept the creed of the first and the second ecumenical council? Is that rejection of the creed widespread or is it just you?
Huh? I don't reject the Nicene Creed at all. Does it not begin with the words "I believe in one God", and then go on to describe the Trinity?

--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar

Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
dj_ordinaire
Host
# 4643

 - Posted      Profile for dj_ordinaire   Author's homepage   Email dj_ordinaire   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Leetle Masha:
In every Divine Liturgy, we proclaim: "The Father, The Son, The Holy Spirit {excuse the use of the word "the" for each Person--English does not work well without it): The Trinity, One in Essence and Undivided." That's about as far as one can go in the English language, and if it's not clear, join the club. Of course it's not clear: it's a Mystery.

Quite true. Who would doubt that the late Pope would happily assent with those words? Or indeed try to read into his poetry the notion that he would not?

--------------------
Flinging wide the gates...

Posts: 10335 | From: Hanging in the balance of the reality of man | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
El Greco
Shipmate
# 9313

 - Posted      Profile for El Greco   Email El Greco   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
LSK, more attacks... That's a pity you know. I haven't made up my mind beforehand on anything. Discussing in these boards for thousands of posts however do form one's mind.

quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Huh? I don't reject the Nicene Creed at all. Does it not begin with the words "I believe in one God", and then go on to describe the Trinity?

No, it begins with the words "I believe in one God the Father" and then goes on to say "And in one Lord Jesus Christ" and "And in the Spirit the [i.e. that is] Holy". It's a very different thing. Which is why I thought you rejected the creed... Now you seem to accept its authority, but read it in a way different than what the original authors actually intended it to be read... Is that widespread? I remember ken saying that nobody reads it that way, but then I have seen at least one doing that in these boards...

[ 19. November 2008, 13:27: Message edited by: §Andrew ]

--------------------
Ξέρω εγώ κάτι που μπορούσε, Καίσαρ, να σας σώσει.

Posts: 11285 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
cor ad cor loquitur
Shipmate
# 11816

 - Posted      Profile for cor ad cor loquitur   Email cor ad cor loquitur   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by §Andrew:
What do you think?

quote:
I see that those already posted are in agreement with each other. I’d like to understand that better. All clarifications are most welcome!
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher’s Kid:
This poem raises no theological alarm bells in English

Oh, but it does. Just not to you... It’s not an issue of language, but of theology. Anyway, I don’t think we can get further than that, so I’d like to thank you all for your contributions.
quote:
I should have known better than ask a question about that here. Oh well.
quote:
You don't have to make an ad hominem attack. Anyway communication is most difficult, and I think perhaps I should just leave it there.
quote:
you [Leetle Masha] don’t have “only the basic Orthodox catechism”. You have decades of non-Orthodox Christianity, and from the discussions we had in the past, the impression I get is that you still bring that with you.
§Andrew, can you see that these threads are going to be unsatisfying both for you and for other posters if you (1) try to shut down a conversation after only a few posts in which people don’t agree with you; (2) persistently deny other posters’ ability even to participate in the conversation that you have invited them to; (3) interpret other posters’ comments, when they disagree with what you have said or how you have put it, as ‘ad hominem attacks’?

I am fairly sure that this isn’t your intent, but these threads consistently come across like the following snippet of dinner party conversation:
quote:
“I would really like to hear everyone’s views about Barack Obama’s transition plans. What do you think? Please share your insights. All perspectives welcome!”

“He seems to be assembling a strong team…”

“You just don’t get it, do you? I shouldn’t have expected you to understand. We should talk about something else.”

“But Rahm Emmanuel…”

“Of course you aren’t an American anyway, so what could you know? Why did I even start this discussion?”

As to the substance of how to read the Creed, I would welcome evidence (not simply another assertion that yours is the only correct reading) that your parsing of the creed is in fact what the original authors intended.

This issue has come up many times on the Ship, and various Orthodox posters -- you and Cyprian come to mind -- have asserted that there is only one way to read the Creed that is consistent with the original authors. Yet some learned people I have asked about this say that both readings are consistent with the grammar and with ancient sources.

Like Prince Charles, I am all ears. Please point to sources or authorities that can clear this up.

--------------------
Quam vos veritatem interpretationis, hanc eruditi κακοζηλίαν nuncupant … si ad verbum interpretor, absurde resonant. (St Jerome, Ep. 57 to Pammachius)

Posts: 1332 | From: London | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged
Leetle Masha

Cantankerous Anchoress
# 8209

 - Posted      Profile for Leetle Masha   Email Leetle Masha   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Dear Lietuvos,

quote:
What's the point of bothering with the opinions and insights of us heretics?
I keep on, since I believe in our hope that some day we may regain our voices in the face of these persistent onslaughts. We too are Orthodox Christians, even you, Lietuvos, in a very real sense, and we are all accused of things we are by no means guilty of.

Andrew, it is true that I have only the catechism. I have not the "ancestry", the paradosis (tradition, small t), nor the ability to quote at length from the Church Fathers and use their work as proof-texts on a par with the Scriptures, and I am glad of it. Indeed I have learnt, year by year, that to be able to regurgitate enough material to carry on these senseless nitpicking arguments, creating controversies and ambiguities over and over, parading all my expertise to the cyber-world, would only increase my own spiritual pride. That's my excuse. What's yours?

Your constant posts designed to teach me humility and to make me keep silence or else agree with your own erudition really are to no avail. They only drive others away from your influence, you know. One or two agree with your posts from time to time. The rest tend, more often than not, I think, to ignore them now, because no one else's views really matter, do they?

M

[ 19. November 2008, 13:46: Message edited by: Leetle Masha ]

--------------------
eleison me, tin amartolin: have mercy on me, the sinner

Posts: 6351 | From: Hesychia, in Hyperdulia | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
Marvin the Martian

Interplanetary
# 4360

 - Posted      Profile for Marvin the Martian     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by §Andrew:
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Huh? I don't reject the Nicene Creed at all. Does it not begin with the words "I believe in one God", and then go on to describe the Trinity?

No, it begins with the words "I believe in one God the Father" and then goes on to say "And in one Lord Jesus Christ" and "And in the Spirit the [i.e. that is] Holy". It's a very different thing. Which is why I thought you rejected the creed...
So does "One God" refer only to the Father in your view? Are Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit part of God, separate from God, distinct from God or what? when you affirm that there is only One God, what do you mean by that and where do the other two persons of the Trinity fit in?

quote:
Now you seem to accept its authority, but read it in a way different than what the original authors actually intended it to be read... Is that widespread?
I read it in a way which is consistent both with monotheism and the concept of the Trinity. I'd be interested to hear how your reading encompasses both, because I sure can't see it from your posts here.

And you still haven't said which pronoun you use to describe God yet.

--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar

Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
Leetle Masha

Cantankerous Anchoress
# 8209

 - Posted      Profile for Leetle Masha   Email Leetle Masha   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Like Prince Charles, I am all ears.
And like my martyred namesake, the Queen of Scots, my head has been chopped off all too often--but you, dear Cor, keep somehow grafting my head back on!

Thank you, I hope.

Mary
Jengie, your pm box is full, but I'll play you a favourite tune to show my appreciation for your posts: All people that on earth do dwell

--------------------
eleison me, tin amartolin: have mercy on me, the sinner

Posts: 6351 | From: Hesychia, in Hyperdulia | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
Lyda*Rose

Ship's broken porthole
# 4544

 - Posted      Profile for Lyda*Rose   Email Lyda*Rose   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Andreas, to many of us, your insistence that the Deity be referred to always and only in the guise of the Three persons smacks of disrespect of the One.

Actually, this might explain much in how Muslims feel about Christianity if in the East they are mostly talking to Christians with your emphasis. How could they not take away the belief that we are a bunch of polytheists?

This reminds of a comment made in a novel set in the fifth century that visits Constantinople in passing. It said that citizens of that great city will swear by either the Three or the One and they'll fight to the death over it.

--------------------
"Dear God, whose name I do not know - thank you for my life. I forgot how BIG... thank you. Thank you for my life." ~from Joe Vs the Volcano

Posts: 21377 | From: CA | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Leetle Masha

Cantankerous Anchoress
# 8209

 - Posted      Profile for Leetle Masha   Email Leetle Masha   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Lyda*Rose, no man has ever seen God. In heaven, we shall see God face to face, and we shall behold God's glory, full of grace and truth. Until that time, we shall beat each other's brains out. [Roll Eyes]

Mary

--------------------
eleison me, tin amartolin: have mercy on me, the sinner

Posts: 6351 | From: Hesychia, in Hyperdulia | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
Lyda*Rose

Ship's broken porthole
# 4544

 - Posted      Profile for Lyda*Rose   Email Lyda*Rose   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
So it seems. [brick wall]

--------------------
"Dear God, whose name I do not know - thank you for my life. I forgot how BIG... thank you. Thank you for my life." ~from Joe Vs the Volcano

Posts: 21377 | From: CA | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Leetle Masha

Cantankerous Anchoress
# 8209

 - Posted      Profile for Leetle Masha   Email Leetle Masha   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Oh well.... The song in my heart will go on.

I dedicate this one to Triple Tiara, with whom we all might, some day, be able to sing with both lungs:


Sing it and preach it, Leonard Cohen!

Mary

--------------------
eleison me, tin amartolin: have mercy on me, the sinner

Posts: 6351 | From: Hesychia, in Hyperdulia | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
FCB

Hillbilly Thomist
# 1495

 - Posted      Profile for FCB   Author's homepage   Email FCB   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I once heard about some guy who was telling people to baptize in the name (rather than "names") of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.

I suspect he was a unitarian too.

--------------------
Agent of the Inquisition since 1982.

Posts: 2928 | From: that city in "The Wire" | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
cor ad cor loquitur
Shipmate
# 11816

 - Posted      Profile for cor ad cor loquitur   Email cor ad cor loquitur   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Well, FCB, since we've been told that Judaism is unitarian, and since the guy I think you are referring to was Jewish ... he was obviously unitarian.

Or something like that.

--------------------
Quam vos veritatem interpretationis, hanc eruditi κακοζηλίαν nuncupant … si ad verbum interpretor, absurde resonant. (St Jerome, Ep. 57 to Pammachius)

Posts: 1332 | From: London | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged
El Greco
Shipmate
# 9313

 - Posted      Profile for El Greco   Email El Greco   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Cor ad cor loquitor

I'm not going to bring forth the documents of those who actually participated in the ecumenical councils to show what they meant. It's very clear for whoever reads them. This is not Florence, and I'm not going to try and convince you about anything. I'm interested in what you have to say about yourself, and I was under the impression that this was reciprocal, that you were also interested in what I believe, because you found some worth engaging with each other.

Mary

Time and time again you compare me with non-Orthodox, and you give credit to their version of Christianity, saying quite clearly that you don't agree with mine. Frankly, I don't see any point of agreement between the two of us; there is no communion.

And it's not an issue of elaborate studies. One doesn't have to be versed in anything; ordinary people can express their faith clearly. You are doing that, and I am doing that. The fact remains that we disagree in trinitarian theology, in the most basic thing that is the creed. And my evaluation of that disagreement has to do with your background. Perhaps I'm mistaken. So what? It's only a discussion in an online forum. If I'm being silly, forgive my silliness and move forward.

Marvin

It's not about my view... Many times we hear in these boards "we all accept the Creed". Well, I don't think we do. The history of the creed is very clear, as is the theology that comes with it. It begins with things like Paul's "there is one God the Father and one Lord Jesus Christ". This is where the Creed comes from. That's the faith of the first Christians as evident in all the proto-Christianic documents we have available, and as elaborated by the fathers of the ecumenical councils that affirmed the creed.

I thought, in my naiveté, that this is a very important issue, and that it would actually be of service if I brought that up.

I don't know how to respond to the tensions and the attacks and the talking past each other (I'm not referring to you personally).

As for what my view is, just read the Creed carefully, knowing that the first line refers to God the Father. I don't have a different view to what the Creed actually says. Think about the Creed, and let's discuss it.

Lyda*Rose

Muslims and Jews were not stupid. And the Christians they were familiar with were not ignorant either. Judaism has been rejected as unitarian, and its monotheism has been found lacking. The Christians really believed in three divine persons, and that was unacceptable by the Jews. It's very obvious that the view of "one divine person alone" is incompatible with the view of "three divine persons".

Again, the charge of tritheism is very old... This is what all those Orthodox Saints who spoke clearly about the Church's faith were accused of. It's no wonder the accusation comes again today. It's surprising though that it comes by people who say they revere and accept the faith of those ancient Saints though.

I blame it to the little study common people actually do of those ancient men and women. If we think we are Christians, then there is no need to learn from those before us, because we already know...

cor ad cor loquitor

Christ was not a Jew. Christ came to the Jews. Do the Kings receive taxes from their sons or from their people? You cannot make the son one of the people. If Christ was a Jew, then the Jews are right and you should become one too.

I don't know where this notion comes from. Perhaps it's collective guilt after all those centuries of Catholic abuse against the Jews. I don't know.

[ 19. November 2008, 17:34: Message edited by: §Andrew ]

--------------------
Ξέρω εγώ κάτι που μπορούσε, Καίσαρ, να σας σώσει.

Posts: 11285 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
Leetle Masha

Cantankerous Anchoress
# 8209

 - Posted      Profile for Leetle Masha   Email Leetle Masha   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Oh look. Is this an excommunication?

Heigh, ho....

Whatever,

--------------------
eleison me, tin amartolin: have mercy on me, the sinner

Posts: 6351 | From: Hesychia, in Hyperdulia | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274

 - Posted      Profile for Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras   Email Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Andrew, if everyone else here - Catholic, Protestant, and Orthodox - is telling you that they perceive this to be a manufactured or artificial controversy over words rather than essential understanding of doctrine, how is it that you alone are right?

Really, how dare you presume to make window's into men's souls and challenge their professed belief in the Symbol of Faith?

When you can declare yourself to be out of communion with one of your Orthodox sisters over some presumed - but unproven - obscure difference in understanding of the Oecumenical Creed, then that is a very fiddley sort of communion indeed.

Listen guy, none of us has a monopoly on truth. I, for one, tend to be more persuaded by consensus of reasonably informed views.

Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged
Leetle Masha

Cantankerous Anchoress
# 8209

 - Posted      Profile for Leetle Masha   Email Leetle Masha   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Oh, well, Lietuvos, I think I'll just the putative decretals be. It's not worth it. Archaeologists will have a laugh about it a thousand years from now.

Mary

[ 19. November 2008, 18:08: Message edited by: Leetle Masha ]

--------------------
eleison me, tin amartolin: have mercy on me, the sinner

Posts: 6351 | From: Hesychia, in Hyperdulia | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
Leetle Masha

Cantankerous Anchoress
# 8209

 - Posted      Profile for Leetle Masha   Email Leetle Masha   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Erm, I meant to type "let the putative decretals be"... trying to save time is not always the best thing to do, unfortunately. Sorry to have missed the edit window.

Back to your regularly scheduled....

M

--------------------
eleison me, tin amartolin: have mercy on me, the sinner

Posts: 6351 | From: Hesychia, in Hyperdulia | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools