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 the Orthodox Church the One True Church? (Page 1)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4  5  6 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Purgatory: Is the Orthodox Church the One True Church?
Ham'n'Eggs

Ship's Pig
# 629

 - Posted      Profile for Ham'n'Eggs   Email Ham'n'Eggs   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
No, I'm serious. I would really like to know.

Is the Church variously represented by the terms Orthodox, Russian, Eastern, Greek, Serbian, etc. the One True Church? Does the answer to this question hinge entirely on the approach that one takes towards tradition?

If so, what are the implications of this for Christians who are members of this church, and for Christians who are not?

If not, then what attitude should Christians who are not members of this church adopt towards it?

[ 13. March 2003, 22:12: Message edited by: Alan Cresswell ]

--------------------
"...the heresies that men do leave / Are hated most of those they did deceive" - Will S


Posts: 3103 | From: Genghis Khan's sleep depot | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
babybear
Bear faced and cheeky with it
# 34

 - Posted      Profile for babybear   Email babybear   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
No it is not.

The One True Church is made up of all believers, through out time. It is the bride of Christ. It is the human agency that God works through to bring salvation to the world.

For any part of the Church to claim a monoploy is sheer arrogance.

bb

Posts: 13287 | From: Cottage of the 3 Bears (and The Gremlin) | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Ham'n'Eggs

Ship's Pig
# 629

 - Posted      Profile for Ham'n'Eggs   Email Ham'n'Eggs   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
bb - how would you support your assertions?

--------------------
"...the heresies that men do leave / Are hated most of those they did deceive" - Will S


Posts: 3103 | From: Genghis Khan's sleep depot | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
KenWritez
Shipmate
# 3238

 - Posted      Profile for KenWritez   Email KenWritez   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Horseshit.

No, H&E, not an attack on you at all. Just my opinion about any argument promoting the O. church (or any church or denomination, for that matter) as THE Church, and everyone not hanging a member within her hallowed halls is, at best, a steerage-class Christian or, at worst, apostate.

IMNSVHO the name on the outside is irrelevant as long as Jesus Christ as portrayed in the Nicene Creed is preached on the inside with love and honesty. Anything else is commentary. While I may feel more or less comfortable in any one church, more or less agree with that church's teaching, I can't deny or denigrate any believer's membership in the Body of Christ just because they don't attend the church I do, or don't agree with every point of doctrine I promulgate.

I believe in the one true catholic church, spread across eternity as the limbs of the Body of Christ in this fallen world, yet also the temporal bodies of believers meeting to celebrate the presence of Jesus.

I believe in the one true universal church, a single entity both in and out of Time and Space, in which membership is defined solely by one's relationship to Christ as (most importantly, among others) Savior and Redeemer.

--------------------
"The truth is you're the weak. And I'm the tyranny of evil men. But I'm tryin', Ringo. I'm tryin' real hard to be a shepherd." --Quentin Tarantino, Pulp Fiction

My blog: http://oxygenofgrace.blogspot.com

Posts: 11102 | From: Left coast of Wonderland, by the rabbit hole | Registered: Aug 2002  |  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 
If you are Orthodox then Yes.

If you are Roman Catholic then No the Holy Catholic Church which has the See of Peter in Rome as head is.

If you are open Protestant No it is only part.

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
Ham'n'Eggs

Ship's Pig
# 629

 - Posted      Profile for Ham'n'Eggs   Email Ham'n'Eggs   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Please would people supply reasoned arguments to support their positions.

--------------------
"...the heresies that men do leave / Are hated most of those they did deceive" - Will S


Posts: 3103 | From: Genghis Khan's sleep depot | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468

 - Posted      Profile for Golden Key   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
...at which question Jesus rolls his eyes, mutters "oy vey!", and says, "Dad, they're at it again!"

(Nothing personal, H&E--just the overall topic!)

--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")

Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001  |  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 
For the Orthodox stance if you want it Ham and Eggs I will pick up the quote when I am home where a leading Orthodox Ecumenic says it. It comes from a book on Ecclesiologies edited by Paul Avis.

The evidence I will cite for the Roman Catholic stance I would cite Cardinal Ratzinger referring to other churches as 'ecclesial bodies' or on the othe wing Kungs understanding as rings in which Roman Catholics place themselves centrally. You can also look at the claims made about term 'catholic' by our Roman Catholic friends.

The Protestant understanding is actually more complex but I stated it at best. We used to exclude other parts of the Church from the equation until they showed they were 'truly christian' in our understanding. We now largely take the other line where other parts of the Church are assumed part unless they are clearly shown not to be. Some are still exclusivists though.

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
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38

 - Posted      Profile for Honest Ron Bacardi   Email Honest Ron Bacardi   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Isn't there the old perennial misunderstanding underlying this question?

The Orthodox comments are concerning themselves and no-one else. The mental leap that everyone seems to be making here is that they are saying "...and no-one else is". They are not saying that. They don't know.

There is a counfounding factor also - that of the idea of "denominations", which is of western protestant origins. Orthodox do not see themselves as a denomination. If you impose this mindset on the problem you will be in danger of misinterpreting what is being said.

Source - (paraphrased by me) - "The Orthodox Church", by Timothy Ware, final chapter especially.

Ian

--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic

Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
ChristinaMarie
Shipmate
# 1013

 - Posted      Profile for ChristinaMarie         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Dear Ham 'n' Eggs,

During the first thousand years, AD, the Catholic Church fought various heresies, and formulated Creeds and Dogmas, to express orthodox teaching and keep heretics out of the Catholic Church.

These statements are to be found in the 7 Ecumenical Councils, where Bishops met, and thrashed out the issues. The Orthodox believe that these Bishops were guided by the Holy Spirt, to come to correct conclusions.

1 Tim 3:15, states that 'the Church (assembly) is the pillar and ground of the truth.' So, the Catholic Church came to the truth, in opposition to various heresies, in the 7 Ecumenical Councils.

Some churches split from the Catholic church, because they couldn't accept the Chalcedonian definition.

In AD 1054, the Church of Rome claimed universal jurisdiction over all other Churches, without an Ecumenical Council. They also inserted the Filioque Clause into the Nicene Creed. They added the words, 'and the Son,' to the statement that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father.

A schism occurred, as the other Churches would not accept dogma being dictated to them.

Since the schism, the Orthodox Church has stuck by the 7 Ecumenical Councils. What the undivided Catholic believed in, in 1000AD, the Orthodox do today. The Roman Catholic church, have made dogmas on their own. They have added to what the undivided Church believed. Protestants, have chosen which Ecumenical Councils to accept, and which to reject. They've taken away from what the undivided Catholic Church of 1000AD believed.

No Christian Church is totally devoid of truth, some have added to, some have taken away from what the undivided Church believed. All except the Orthodox. 'Orthodox' is not a denominational title, it means 'correct teaching.'

As the Filioque Clause is in dispute, let me argue as to why I believe the original Nicene Creed is right, and the Filioque Clause is wrong.

One emphasis in Orthodoxy, is that the truth is therapeutic. Please bear that in mind.

If we say that the Son is eternally begotten of the Father, and the Spirit eternally proceeds from the Father, where is the focus of Unity, in the Godhead? The Father! He is the eternal source of the Son and Spirit. Because the Father is the point of Unity, then we have a personal understanding of God.

If we say that the Spirit eternally proceeds from the Father AND THE SON, where is the focus of Unity in the Godhead? The Essence. The Filioque Clause depersonalised God's Unity, it makes God's Essence the focus of unity.

What are the results of this? For one, Anselm, Aquinas and others, started making arguments to prove the existence of God. The Orthodox response is, 'Why would one wish to prove the existence of one's Father and Friend?' You only try and argue for the existence of an object, not a friend. This is what the Filioque Clause has led to. What's come out of these arguments about God's existence, but atheism. No one can prove the existence of God by rational argument, one has to taste and see that the Lord is good.

To end, I'd like to gently state something about calling other people and churches, 'arrogant.' That is a value judgement, for one, and also it is an accusation of a terrible sin. Instead of non-Orthodox Christians calling the Orthodox 'arrogant', how about explaining the reasons as to why you disagree with Orthodoxy. When people call others arrogant, without showing that they've understood the position of those they are attacking, and giving reasons as to why they disagree, it makes me suspect that these people have not researched the position of their opponents. To call someone arrogant, when one does not know their their teaching, is not a good thing, in my opinion.

In Christ,
Christina

Posts: 2333 | From: Oldham | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Merseymike
Shipmate
# 3022

 - Posted      Profile for Merseymike   Email Merseymike   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
This question , no matter what denomination or grouping it is used about, always comes down to :
* one's interpretation of history
* the importance of doctrinal difference
* whether you believe in the 'one, true church' as a concept.

The Orthodox, using the arguments they do with regard to both doctrine and history, can create a scenario which points th their being the 'one , true church', as can the Roman Catholics. Some evangelical protestants create the same sort of picyure based not on an organisation, but those who hold a particular view of salvation and scripture against those who don't, hence dividing into 'true Christians' and others.

I don't agree with any of them, because I don't start from the place they start from. I think in such a diverse and pluralist world, it is unlikely that any organisation or doctrine will hold or be the absolute truth

--------------------
Christianity is not a problem to be solved, but a mystery to be experienced

Posts: 3360 | From: Walked the plank | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Xavierite
Shipmate
# 2575

 - Posted      Profile for Xavierite         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
How does diversity diminish the potential for the existence of absolute truth? There's no relationship there at all.
Posts: 2307 | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
ChristinaMarie
Shipmate
# 1013

 - Posted      Profile for ChristinaMarie         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Merseymike:
This question , no matter what denomination or grouping it is used about, always comes down to :
* one's interpretation of history
* the importance of doctrinal difference
* whether you believe in the 'one, true church' as a concept.

The Orthodox, using the arguments they do with regard to both doctrine and history, can create a scenario which points th their being the 'one , true church', as can the Roman Catholics. Some evangelical protestants create the same sort of picyure based not on an organisation, but those who hold a particular view of salvation and scripture against those who don't, hence dividing into 'true Christians' and others.

I don't agree with any of them, because I don't start from the place they start from. I think in such a diverse and pluralist world, it is unlikely that any organisation or doctrine will hold or be the absolute truth

Dear Merseymike,

I respect your right to believe what you do, but how does your view corresond with 1 Tim 3:15 where the church is described as the pillar and bulwark of the truth.' That hardly sounds diverse and pluralist, to me.

It is one thing, for ordinary Christians to have diverse views that do not accord with the Church's teaching, I'm okay with that. But, it's quite another if a Priest or Bishop teaches things that are against the Church's teaching, in my opinion.

In Christ,
Christina

Posts: 2333 | From: Oldham | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Father Gregory

Orthodoxy
# 310

 - Posted      Profile for Father Gregory   Author's homepage   Email Father Gregory   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Christina's response is by far the best answer to this question and I can ad nothing to it. I also like Ian's comments for a context. Perhaps a little gloss on that ... Orthodoxy does not think of Protestants / Catholicism as "bad/incomplete Orthodox." Let's try and have those for whom the cap fits here not thinking of the Orthodoxy as bad /incomplete Protestants / Catholicism. Each CHRISTIAN Church has indeed different criteria for judging where truth may be found. It's the CRITERIA we ought to discuss, not the claims.

--------------------
Yours in Christ
Fr. Gregory
Find Your Way Around the Plot
TheOrthodoxPlot™

Posts: 15099 | From: Manchester, UK | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Tubbs

Miss Congeniality
# 440

 - Posted      Profile for Tubbs   Author's homepage   Email Tubbs   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by golden_key:
...at which question Jesus rolls his eyes, mutters "oy vey!", and says, "Dad, they're at it again!"

(Nothing personal, H&E--just the overall topic!)

It's like the image of heaven - with lots of walled gardens full of people from particular groups. Each convinced that they're the only ones in there.

Tubbs

PS I've always thought of the church as the body of Christ - with each group having a specific role. And, because we live in a fallen world and look through a glass darkly, no one group has a full picture of the truth and no one group has it entirely right.

--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am

Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2

 - Posted      Profile for Erin   Author's homepage   Email Erin       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
So, ChristinaMarie, what you're basically arguing is that all revelation of God ended with the insertion of the filioque into the Nicene Creed.

--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.

Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001  |  IP: Logged
Father Gregory

Orthodoxy
# 310

 - Posted      Profile for Father Gregory   Author's homepage   Email Father Gregory   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Christina can speak for herself but she did not say that and using technical Orthodox theological terms Erin ... that's bullshit and for a theologically informed woman you know it!

--------------------
Yours in Christ
Fr. Gregory
Find Your Way Around the Plot
TheOrthodoxPlot™

Posts: 15099 | From: Manchester, UK | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
ChristinaMarie
Shipmate
# 1013

 - Posted      Profile for ChristinaMarie         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Erin:
So, ChristinaMarie, what you're basically arguing is that all revelation of God ended with the insertion of the filioque into the Nicene Creed.

No, not quite Erin,

Consider this. Which revelations of God since AD 1054 are actually from God. Calvinism or Arminianism? Infant Baptism or believer's baptism?
Episcopal, Presbyterian or Congregational Church government? Transubstantian, consubstantian or some other susbstantiation? Ooops! Nearly forgot, or the Zwinglian symbolic view? The Rapture? Pre-Millenianism, Post-Millenialism or Amillenianism?

Need I go on?

One can have revelations from God, without making them into dogmas.

Take Judgement. The Church teaches that Jesus will return to Judge the living and the dead.

Every single statement of faith in free churches I've beeen to, add to that. They state that unbelievers will be resurrected to eternal torment. They thus expel anyone who believes in annihilation or has a hope for Universal Reconcilation.

That Jesus is going to judge the living and the dead, we can all agree on. As to what His judgement will be, is up to Him. There is room for theological opinion regarding fate of the wicked.

Back to revelation, what about the Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, etc?

Erin, please tell me in your opinion, which church has had revelations from God, and can be described as 'the pillar and bulwark of the truth.'

Please folks, if I'm wrong about Orthodoxy, I'd like someone to show me. I know that the truth sets us free, I do not wish to be bound with error.

In Christ,
Christina

Posts: 2333 | From: Oldham | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2

 - Posted      Profile for Erin   Author's homepage   Email Erin       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
So tell me, Christina, what church was Timothy talking about? More importantly, what church existed at the time?

You have made claims for Orthodoxy, it's up to you to defend them. Pulling out a phrase from a scripture is not a defense.

--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.

Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001  |  IP: Logged
Xavierite
Shipmate
# 2575

 - Posted      Profile for Xavierite         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Christina,

Alternative conclusions drawn from Paul's famous phrase

Posts: 2307 | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
ChristinaMarie
Shipmate
# 1013

 - Posted      Profile for ChristinaMarie         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
JL,

I believe it was the Church of Rome that is guilty of Schism, not the Orthodox Churches. The Church of Rome, did not consult with the whole Catholic Church when it inserted the Filioque Clause, and made its other claims.

I believe also that the Roman Catholic Church relies on the mistranslation of the Greek word 'ekklesia' as 'church.' 'Church' means 'house of God', ekklesia means 'assembly.'

All Christians, I believe, belong to the invisible Assembly. This is found in Ephesians, where Paul tells us that we are seated together in the heavenly places in Christ. ie Assembled.

The visible Assemblies, have been promised that the Holy Spirit will keep them from error. It is the Assembly that Paul says is the 'pillar and ground of the truth.' NOT, as the RC claim, the Magisterium.

When the Bishops meet in Ecumenical Council to counter heresy, and formulations of orthodoxy, the process does not end when the Bishops have come to their conclusions.

The process ends, when the Assemblies, ie the laity, ALSO agree with what has been decided. The Assembly, NOT the Magisterium, is the pillar and ground of the truth.

Erin, I hope this answers your question. For the first thousand years, the Bishops of the Assemblies met at Ecumenical Councils, the laity accepted their decisions. To say that the Magisterium is the pillar and ground of the truth, can make sense with the loose word, 'church' but it doesn't fit into the word, ekklesia, which means Assembly.



In Christ,
Christina

Posts: 2333 | From: Oldham | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Xavierite
Shipmate
# 2575

 - Posted      Profile for Xavierite         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
What about non-Chalcedonian Christians who rejected the conclusions of Chalcedon? If a council is only validated when the entirety of the laity accept it, then has Chalcedon been validated?

Or is there some special percentage of the laity who have to approve a council for it to be valid?

Posts: 2307 | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320

 - Posted      Profile for PaulTH*   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I'm in full agreement with Christina and Fr Gregory on this one. Christina has advanced her case so well, that there's little to add, but both historically, and geographically, being closest to the cradle of Christianity, no other church can make the claims to authenticity which Orthodoxy does.

I agree with the Orthodox position on the filioque, and it's relevance to the Trinity which was very well explained by Christina. In addition I agree with their position on original sin and death and judgement. I think that we, in the west have much to learn from Orthodoxy.

--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul

Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Father Gregory

Orthodoxy
# 310

 - Posted      Profile for Father Gregory   Author's homepage   Email Father Gregory   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Dear Jesuitical Lad

Ratification by the laos has to be measured against other canons as well .... the God-bearing fathers and mothers of the Church, our elder brother in Rome, [that one needs some attention [Wink] ], wider sources of biblical interpretation. Monophysitism was and is a heresy. It was an heretical Alexandrian trend (by other names and semantics) BEFORE Chalcedon. We do not consult such sources where and when a vital part of the apostolic faith is distorted or denied.

--------------------
Yours in Christ
Fr. Gregory
Find Your Way Around the Plot
TheOrthodoxPlot™

Posts: 15099 | From: Manchester, UK | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2

 - Posted      Profile for Erin   Author's homepage   Email Erin       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Christina, it doesn't. If all Christians are part of the Assembly, then how on earth can the Orthodox lay claim to being THE church? I mean, there are far more non-Orthodox than there are Orthodox, so if acquiesence of the laity is necessary, then it's pretty clear that the Orthodox church is just another branch of Christianity.

--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.

Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001  |  IP: Logged
Father Gregory

Orthodoxy
# 310

 - Posted      Profile for Father Gregory   Author's homepage   Email Father Gregory   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Erin

The Assemblies that met in the Ecumenical Councils were all Orthodox and Catholic at the outset but contained certain trends and emphases that could, and indeed in some circumstances did become heretical. As soon as a bishop embraced heresy (a CHOICE against the whole) then ALL his coomunities, IF they stayed with him were no longer Orthodox and Catholic assemblies. If there was an Ecumenical Council (in Orthodox terms) today other Christians would be present as observers but they would not have voting rights. Heretics were not granted anything like this post factum. It seems that we have a new type of Christian now .... not Orthodox but not beyonfd the pale heretic either. New situations require new provisions .... oh, I'm sorry, we were supposed to have "stopped" at the filioque weren't we?

--------------------
Yours in Christ
Fr. Gregory
Find Your Way Around the Plot
TheOrthodoxPlot™

Posts: 15099 | From: Manchester, UK | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2

 - Posted      Profile for Erin   Author's homepage   Email Erin       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
That was Christina's argument, not mine.

quote:
Since the schism, the Orthodox Church has stuck by the 7 Ecumenical Councils. What the undivided Catholic believed in, in 1000AD, the Orthodox do today.
So either God HAS revealed stuff since then, and the Orthodox Church is stuck in a time warp, or he hasn't, and that's where it all ends.

--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.

Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001  |  IP: Logged
ChristinaMarie
Shipmate
# 1013

 - Posted      Profile for ChristinaMarie         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Erin,

If you read the context of 1 Timothy 3:15, Paul is telling Timothy how to behave in the assembly. The context tells us that Paul is writing of the local, visible Assembly, not the invisible Assembly in Ephesians.

Timothy Ware (Bishop Kallistos) states in his book 'The Orthodox Church', that he believes all Christians belong to the Orthodox Church, but in a way we don't understand.

Let me explain something else. I John 17 Jesus makes statements that the world will believe in Him, if His disciples are one. One of my prime motivations is evangelism. In the last 20 years, I have heard arguments from non-Christians about the divisiveness of Christianity, as a reason, not an excuse, for not turning to Christ.

The divisiveness started when Rome declared dogmas, without consulting the other Catholic Churches.

I do not believe that Protestants are guilty of schism though. You see, many Protestants would have become Orthodox, if the Orthodox Church wasn't suffering persecution under Islam.

Because I believe Orthodoxy, has not strayed from the truth, established by the undivided Catholic Church, it does not follow that I believe every Protestant and Roman Catholic and Anglo-Catholic, should be converted to Orthodoxy. That may sound strange, but you see, God may have a purpose for you (plural) where you are right now. God has sovereignly allowed the Orthodox Church to be persecuted, and hidden from view, as it were. As Orthodoxy establishes itself round the world, then God may call individuals, and whole churches, to join the Orthodox, as sister churches, not servant churches, as with Rome, IMO.

I look forward to the day, when the See of Canterbury becomes the Patriarchate of Canterbury. Might never happen, of course.

My main concern, is for those without Christ. John Wesley, Martin Luther, John Calvin, Wycliffe, Cranmer, etc, are still heroes of mine. They all had their faults, but so did John Chrysostom, etc.

We all should seek God's guidance, and follow our conscience, I believe.

In Christ,
Christina

Posts: 2333 | From: Oldham | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I hope nobody minds if I sit this one out.

Reader Alexis

--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...

Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001  |  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 
Only for completeness:

quote:
All Orthodox agree in saying that the Orthodox church is the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, confessing belief in the article on the Church in the Nicene-Constantinopolitan creed. However, there is no unanimous interpretation of the verb 'to be' in the statement. Very conservative even fanatical, Orthodox would simply understand the statement in an exclusive manner close to the well-known Roman-Catholic attitude still professed in the early twentieth centrury: 'No salvation outside the Church' - only in this case, not the Church of Rome but the Orthodox Church which is the only one in which all grace and all means of salvation are to be found.
At the other end of the spectrum, other Orthodox would interpret the same statement in a manner much closer to what we find in Vatican II Decree on Ecumenisim: the Una Sancta subsistit in (subsists in) the Roman Catholic Church, in this case the Orthodox Church , thus leaving open the difficult question of the determination of frontiers of the Church. Such people would refer to the gospel statement which they interpret to mean that the Holy Spirit 'bloweth where it listeth' (John 3.8) As a result they say:'We know where the Church is; but we do not know where it ends'

Nicolas Lossky, Chapter 1: The Orthodox Church, in The Christian Church: An Introduction to the Major Traditions edited by Paul Avis SPCK 2002

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
Father Gregory

Orthodoxy
# 310

 - Posted      Profile for Father Gregory   Author's homepage   Email Father Gregory   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Jengie's quote from Lossky does accurately reflect current ecumenical attitudes within Orthodoxy. What could resolve some of these impasses is to realise that all Orthodox would say that we know where the Church is but we do not know where she isn't. As to the latter we do not make judgements at all. We are happy to share with our fellow Christians (who may or may not be part of the Orthodox Church at the end of time) in the calling to be bearers of Christ.

It seems to me that there is a perverse desire here amongst one or two to try and distort Orthodoxy's true position on this and other issues. Is this ignorance or mischievousness? I don't know. Is a Church that recognises the value of paganism and hopes that all will be one day saved an ignorant, exclusivist, backwardward arrogrant sect? Go on Erin. Make my day. Say yes anyway then I won't be disappointed.

--------------------
Yours in Christ
Fr. Gregory
Find Your Way Around the Plot
TheOrthodoxPlot™

Posts: 15099 | From: Manchester, UK | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2

 - Posted      Profile for Erin   Author's homepage   Email Erin       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Is it backwards? No. Mistaken? Yes.

--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.

Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001  |  IP: Logged
Father Gregory

Orthodoxy
# 310

 - Posted      Profile for Father Gregory   Author's homepage   Email Father Gregory   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
.... on what grounds, (within the OP of course).

--------------------
Yours in Christ
Fr. Gregory
Find Your Way Around the Plot
TheOrthodoxPlot™

Posts: 15099 | From: Manchester, UK | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
ChristinaMarie
Shipmate
# 1013

 - Posted      Profile for ChristinaMarie         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Fr Gregory's point about the Orthodox hoping that one day, all will be saved, is so important. I've read testimonies of Christians who've had nervous breakdowns over hellfire and damnation preaching. I've read that when Jonathan Edwards did his 'Sinners in the hands of an angry God' sermon, some people committed suicide.

Here's an article, by an Orthodox person, about the Lake of Fire. He believes in eternal torment, and I disgree with his conclusions. However, it is a valuable article to read, for he explains well how a terrible picture of God, has been put forth by Western Christianity.

http://www.orthodoxpress.org/parish/river_of_fire.htm

In Christ,
Christina

Posts: 2333 | From: Oldham | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2

 - Posted      Profile for Erin   Author's homepage   Email Erin       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I still cannot get past the "we haven't changed the teachings of the church in a thousand years" bit. I mean, the previous history of time up until then was, in terms of the cosmic picture, constant revelation from God, in one form or another. To say that:

  • the Orthodox Church maintains the true faith handed down to the Apostles; and,
  • we haven't changed anything in a thousand years
simply doesn't square with the God I know and trust. One or the other has to be: either revelation ended with the filioque (something I can't believe), or the Orthodox Church has added or subtracted from the faith that was handed down by the Apostles.

[ 11. October 2002, 14:59: Message edited by: Erin ]

--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.

Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001  |  IP: Logged
Tubbs

Miss Congeniality
# 440

 - Posted      Profile for Tubbs   Author's homepage   Email Tubbs   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Adding to my lowly point ...

I've always thought of the church as the body of Christ - with each group having a specific role. And, because we live in a fallen world and look through a glass darkly, no one group has a full picture of the truth and no one group has it entirely right. And we can all learn something from each other.

I'll get me coat ... And open a book about how long it will take before this thread gets transferred to DH.

Tubbs

--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am

Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Father Gregory

Orthodoxy
# 310

 - Posted      Profile for Father Gregory   Author's homepage   Email Father Gregory   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Ah Erin ... now I understand the misunderstanding.

We haven't changed anything FROM not SINCE the FIRST thousand years. Change for us does not mean the reversal of something that was previously regarded as authoritative but rather the continuous unfolding of Tradition based on those foundational irreformable truths. That of course bega a big question on what is foundatiobal and what is derivative. Orthodox make two sets of distinctions:-

(1) In pastoralia between akriveia (strictness) and economia (allowance) the first priority being given to the former before circumstance warrants the latter. Second marriage after divorce and not baptising those validly baptised in other churches are good examples here.

(2) In doctrine between dogmatics (foundational) and theologumena (exploratory theology and Orthopraxy) which changes and develops if and until the conciliar authority of the Church becomes definitive.

--------------------
Yours in Christ
Fr. Gregory
Find Your Way Around the Plot
TheOrthodoxPlot™

Posts: 15099 | From: Manchester, UK | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Father Gregory

Orthodoxy
# 310

 - Posted      Profile for Father Gregory   Author's homepage   Email Father Gregory   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Dear Tubbs

nI baptism, we all belong to the body of Christ but the actual reality on the ground is that the body of Christ has been compromised by heresy and / or schism, (schism in the sense of a failure of Communion not necessarily an heretical fracture). Until the unity of the body of Christ is restored across all the churches and not just within them there are bound to be different understandings of the status of different traditions, teachings and practices between the churches. We can't just lump them altogether and say they are all the same and THAT'S therefore the Church. They are not and it isn't. Orthodox won't go further than this. We maintain a rigid agnosticism about the actual boundary of the Church beyond that which we can see.

--------------------
Yours in Christ
Fr. Gregory
Find Your Way Around the Plot
TheOrthodoxPlot™

Posts: 15099 | From: Manchester, UK | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
ChristinaMarie
Shipmate
# 1013

 - Posted      Profile for ChristinaMarie         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Dear Erin,

The teachings of St Gregory Palamas, about God's Essence and God's uncreated Energies, as an explanation of Transcendence and Immanence, may be regarded as a further revelation. Certainly, in Orthodoxy, the Church Fathers are not limited to those before 1054AD.

I think that Gregory Palamas' teaching would be held as dogma by hard-line Orthodox (the hawks, as Bishop Kallistos phrases it) , but not by the doves. The reason why the doves would be hesitant, would be because proclaiming dogma, would make re-uniting the Church as one, more difficult. As I stated before, one can have further revelation, but one doesn't have to make it a dogma, if doing so would make it more difficult for us to be one, as Jesus prayed for.

Fr Gregory will have to come in on this one, as that is as far as I can go. I'm not an Orthodox Christian yet, and I don't want to misrepresent Orthodoxy.

For anyone wishing to understand Orthodoxy better, 2 books in particular are usually recommended. 'The Orthodox Way', and 'The Orthodox Church' by Bishop Kallistos (Timothy Ware). The first is about Orthodox spirituality, the second deals with Church history, and teaching. They're both under £10.

I can state this, to close. Tradition, in Orthodoxy, means Living Tradition not dead traditions. The Holy Spirit is very much emphasised in Orthodoxy.

In Christ,
Christina

Posts: 2333 | From: Oldham | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
FatMac

Ship's Macintosh
# 2914

 - Posted      Profile for FatMac   Author's homepage   Email FatMac   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ChristinaMarie:
No Christian Church is totally devoid of truth, some have added to, some have taken away from what the undivided Church believed. All except the Orthodox.

I presume here that you mean that the Orthodox church has not added to or taken away from what the undivided Church believed creedally. Or are you claiming that no belief or practise of the Orthodox church postdates 1054?

quote:
As the Filioque Clause is in dispute, let me argue as to why I believe the original Nicene Creed is right, and the Filioque Clause is wrong.
ISTM that both versions of the creed are making theological points wrt the Trinity, but that they are making different though not conflicting points. That is, each version tells us something true about the Trinity.

quote:
To call someone arrogant, when one does not know their their teaching, is not a good thing, in my opinion.
Naturally it is a good thing to understand the point of view of the other with whom you are in discussion. But the accusation of arrogance surely relates to the attitude of that person, rather than the content of their belief?

--------------------
Do not beware the slippery slope - it is where faith resides.
Do not avoid the grey areas - they are where God works.

Posts: 1706 | From: Sydney | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Father Gregory

Orthodoxy
# 310

 - Posted      Profile for Father Gregory   Author's homepage   Email Father Gregory   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Christina I'm sure will answer your points Linzc so I will bit my lip.

Concerning Palamite theology .... all Orthodox accept it since his teachings and sanctity have been canonised by the Church. His formulation of the distinction and unity of transcendent ground and imminent action in and from God can be shown in essence to have permeated Christianity and Judaism and Christianity from the beginning. His particular formulation and language is not dogmatised though for reasons given by Christina.

--------------------
Yours in Christ
Fr. Gregory
Find Your Way Around the Plot
TheOrthodoxPlot™

Posts: 15099 | From: Manchester, UK | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2

 - Posted      Profile for Erin   Author's homepage   Email Erin       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I've read The Orthodox Way, though it was a couple of years ago, and I enjoyed it. I may reread it this RAINY AND WET @$^$& WEEKEND.

At any rate... I note the distinction between changing from (ie, reversing) and changing since. We've already covered the filioque clause in the Nicene Creed, but broadly, what other things do the Orthodox regard as changing from the original faith?

--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.

Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001  |  IP: Logged
Father Gregory

Orthodoxy
# 310

 - Posted      Profile for Father Gregory   Author's homepage   Email Father Gregory   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Oh dear ... prepositions!

"From" in the sense of developments out of and beyond the faith of the first 1000, second 1000 and third 1000 years, (actually ... add 2000 to those figures ... in Orthodoxy the Church starts with Adam ... cf. Islam). So "from" does not mean "X" then, but "not-X" now. It means X plus.

An example? Although Serge Bulgakov went too far in his sophiology, Russian Christian thought of the 19th and 20th century did much to re-engage Orthodox Christianity with the contemporary world via those theological developments. Not for nothing is the (formerly!) Great Church in Constantinople called Hagia Sophia.

--------------------
Yours in Christ
Fr. Gregory
Find Your Way Around the Plot
TheOrthodoxPlot™

Posts: 15099 | From: Manchester, UK | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Xavierite
Shipmate
# 2575

 - Posted      Profile for Xavierite         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Public revelation ended with the death of the last apostle, no? That's the Catholic understanding...
Posts: 2307 | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
ChristinaMarie
Shipmate
# 1013

 - Posted      Profile for ChristinaMarie         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Dear Linzc,

On the thread about Fr Gregory, that was closed, you made a snide comment about me having the arrogance of a young convert. I can agree that I was displaying the zealousness of a young convert, but to call me arrogant, is a moral value judgement, and as arrogance is a sin, you were calling me sinful.

You have stated in a thread you started, all the things you DON'T believe in. This includes the existence of angels and demons for one thing.

You put your own understanding, above Tradition and Scripture, do you not? Your liberal views are rejected by the Orthodox, Roman Catholic and Anglican Churches, are they not?

I ask you to consider, that you may be behaving arrogantly.

As for your questions, we do not have enough common ground for me to respect your theology, therefore, I will not bother. I'm only interested in trying to persuade those who have some respect for Scripture and Tradition. Unless, someone like yourself, can answer my question, 'where, apart from Orthodoxy, can one find a Church that can be considered the pillar and bulwark of the truth.'

Christina

Posts: 2333 | From: Oldham | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Og: Thread Killer
Ship's token CN Mennonite
# 3200

 - Posted      Profile for Og: Thread Killer     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ChristinaMarie:
Dear Linzc,


On the thread about Fr Gregory, that was closed, you made a snide comment about me having the arrogance of a young convert. I can agree that I was displaying the zealousness of a young convert, but to call me arrogant, is a moral value judgement, and as arrogance is a sin, you were calling me sinful.

You have stated in a thread you started, all the things you DON'T believe in. This includes the existence of angels and demons for one thing.

You put your own understanding, above Tradition and Scripture, do you not? Your liberal views are rejected by the Orthodox, Roman Catholic and Anglican Churches, are they not?

I ask you to consider, that you may be behaving arrogantly.

As for your questions, we do not have enough common ground for me to respect your theology, therefore, I will not bother. I'm only interested in trying to persuade those who have some respect for Scripture and Tradition. Unless, someone like yourself, can answer my question, 'where, apart from Orthodoxy, can one find a Church that can be considered the pillar and bulwark of the truth.'

Christina

[Disappointed] [Disappointed]

Ummm...so you will only respond to those who share a particular theological understanding? And..if they do not, you consider a dissenting opinion to possibly be arrogance because it is based on a theological framework you dismiss?

So, who the heck are you going to discuss theology with? Seems to be this ship is open to more then just people who's framework you consider worthy.

Oh, BTW, I consider the old ladies and men in my church who pray and search out the scriptures to be "pillars and bulwarks of the truth". But, as that theological position does not fit into your understanding of tradition or your understanding of the Timothy passage, I suppose I am not worth bothering about??!!

--------------------
I wish I was seeking justice loving mercy and walking humbly but... "Cease to lament for that thou canst not help, And study help for that which thou lament'st."

Posts: 5025 | From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Father Gregory

Orthodoxy
# 310

 - Posted      Profile for Father Gregory   Author's homepage   Email Father Gregory   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Dear OgtheDim

There IS a problem here though when minds don't meet. We might get further if we took a step back and laid out some basic premises behind our positions. Otherwise we risk shooting in different directions most of the time because we're on different targets. We may even be using different and incompatible equipment. If someone (for example only) doesn't believe that God intervenes in the natural order; it's no use arging Chalcedon with such a person.

--------------------
Yours in Christ
Fr. Gregory
Find Your Way Around the Plot
TheOrthodoxPlot™

Posts: 15099 | From: Manchester, UK | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
ChristinaMarie
Shipmate
# 1013

 - Posted      Profile for ChristinaMarie         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Ogthe Dim,

Here's the full quote from Lincz:

"Ok now, I don't believe in souls or spirits, I don't believe in miracles, I don't believe in a personal devil, I don't believe homosexuality is a sin, I don't believe in hell, I don't believe in the virgin birth, I don't believe in an interventionist God and I'm pretty sure I don't believe in a physical resurrection.

SO THEN WHAT THE FUCK DO I HAVE TO STOP BELIEVING IN SO THAT I'M NOT CALLED A BLOODY CONSERVATIVE!"

It's not just the fact that we don't have much common ground, it is the fact that he responded to my post in another thread, with a very snide comment. I do not trust him, to argue rationally. I don't want another Ad Hominem attack, thank you very much. It isn't pleasant being insulted. Once bitten, twice shy.

In Christ,
Christina

Posts: 2333 | From: Oldham | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
ChristinaMarie
Shipmate
# 1013

 - Posted      Profile for ChristinaMarie         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
OgtheDim wrote:

"Oh, BTW, I consider the old ladies and men in my church who pray and search out the scriptures to be "pillars and bulwarks of the truth". But, as that theological position does not fit into your understanding of tradition or your understanding of the Timothy passage, I suppose I am not worth bothering about??!!"

That's a very nice attitude, respecting the wisdom of elders, but Paul's words were, 'the assembly', not 'the elders of the assembly' or 'the leaders of the assembly'. The elders play their part, sure, but the whole assembly is involved, I believe.

Let the reader decide, is my viewpoint, NOT I am right and you are wrong.

In Christ,
Christina

Posts: 2333 | From: Oldham | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2

 - Posted      Profile for Erin   Author's homepage   Email Erin       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It's been forever since I studied councils and heresies, so I'm not much use on that front.

Also (and maybe this is my ignorance showing through, I don't know), I do find it puzzling to see Orthodox prooftexting. That's not something I ever experienced before in my life.

I do not want to discuss this subject's validity, but I think it would be illustrative of the way that Orthodox regard revelation. Would there ever be any way that the Orthodox would accept the ordination of women to the priesthood?

--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.

Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4  5  6 
 
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