|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Anglicanism and the new Pope
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
I've never thought of the Holy Spirit as "Some vague spiritual sensibility," but that's me.
Your original phrase was "what we feel in our hearts". The Holy Spirit speaks to our hearts. Ergo I'd say the two are - or at least can be - the same.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
IngoB
Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
Thinking about the three legged stool, it's just a metaphor. All Christians of whatever persuasion use tradition, scripture however you see it incorporated in or guarded by tradition) and reason in making sense of our faith. The only real differences are the various balances we give to the three factors. Using the metaphor, I think that in all our communities, and maybe for all of us, the legs are of different lengths.
I'm sorry, but I don't think that that is the key difference at all. Within Roman Catholicism, you will find pretty much any combination of lengths of those legs, on the individual level and on the institutional level. In many cases it is enough to mention a name to evoke certain expectations concerning that: Dominicans, Jesuits, Franciscans, Carmelites, Carthusians, Benedictines, Charismatics, Thomists, Molinists, ... One can engineer stools that work as stools with all manner of weird legs. The fundamental question for RCs is where you place your stool: on quicksand or rock. That will determine what happens when you sit down. That you do not look at the ground, but go on about the stool, is already the Protestant move. Because it already places the basis of evaluation in the human mind, and hence in the individual (perhaps individuals of like mind, but still). Roman Catholicism primarily rests on the sacrament of episcopal ordination. Divine power flows through human hand from person to person in history. All the rest, even the question of what tradition may say about this or that, rests on first establishing the Church in and through a group of people: the apostles and their successors. Tradition, like all history, is a story about the past told by the living. It never is what was. Scripture, like all written text, is open to interpretation. It never speaks unequivocally. Reason, like all human powers, is fallible and finite. It can never go all the way to God. The Church cannot rest on your stool, unless that stool rests on something else. It is Protestant to have forgotten the one basis that Christ gave to us. (It is Orthodox to do the more or less right thing by force of habit...)
--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear
Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
Ad Orientem
It may be that a part of your difficulty in engaging with conversation here is that you think folks do not understand the bases of Orthodoxy. Many of the regular contributors do, but we just dissent from some of them. Which makes us un-Orthodox.
I guess you have to decide for yourself whether engagement with the un-Orthodox is worth your while. But it may help you to know that you're not in general correcting ignorance here, just criticising the bases for our Protesting and dissent.
Well, I can only go on past experience and it is my experience that most people know little or nothing about Orthodoxy. In the mind of the West the Christian East is but a long lost memory to the point that it is often ignored altogether. There is an example in this thread where someone has replied to me and made constant reference to the RCC as if I spoke for it, even though I have mentioned many times that I speak from an Orthodox perspective. Nevermind, I should be used to it. It happens all the time. If people on this forum are better informed, however, that is a good thing, of course.
It's some and some of course. But a bit of the history of this place can help. A few years ago we used to refer to the "Orthodox Plot™ ", which was a nod in the direction of mousethief, Josephine, Father Gregory and others for their vigorous contributions to discussions here.
I was pretty ignorant about Orthodoxy when I joined. I knew more about Catholicism, but not nearly as much as I thought I did. Shipmates like Trisagion and Triple Tiara helped a lot with that.
So far as Orthodoxy goes, I read and got much out of Timothy Ware's "The Orthodox Way" and listened to some online homilies which were very good. I've looked at the liturgies, read quite a lot of St John Chrysostom on line, and discovered a new personal hero, Fr Alexander Men. That plus the vigorous discussions here has given me a better appreciation of some of the richness to be found in Orthodoxy. I could paint a similar picture over Catholicism and have similar gratitudes.
There's a lot to be said for exploring and informing yourself. I'm a better informed and less polarised nonconformist as a result. More peaceful in my stroppiness, I think.
[ 22. March 2013, 09:25: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
Roman Catholicism primarily rests on the sacrament of episcopal ordination. Divine power flows through human hand from person to person in history. All the rest, even the question of what tradition may say about this or that, rests on first establishing the Church in and through a group of people: the apostles and their successors. Tradition, like all history, is a story about the past told by the living. It never is what was. Scripture, like all written text, is open to interpretation. It never speaks unequivocally. Reason, like all human powers, is fallible and finite. It can never go all the way to God. The Church cannot rest on your stool, unless that stool rests on something else. It is Protestant to have forgotten the one basis that Christ gave to us. (It is Orthodox to do the more or less right thing by force of habit...)
It's not my stool, is it? It's just a modest attempt to picture a complicated metaphor.
Actually, I accept all of the above. I'm just less sure than you are about which hands have been legitimised by God to hand down the Truth once given.
It's a fundamental difference between us of course. But the legitimation of the human hand is a central part of Holy Tradition within Catholicism. As I said, in the extreme, in the last resort, it trumps everything else. It's why you think I'm wrong.
But you'd be quite wrong to assume that, as a result, I don't accept the fallibility of reason, or the equivocal nature of both Tradition and Scripture. These mark out the ground where God wrestles with us, and we do with Him.
Part of my wrestling is that I do not accept Catholicism as the sole Christian authority over faith and morals. The basis of my dissent is not just the direction in which my fallible reason points. in all conscience, I think some of the dogmatic positions are unjustified and have bad effects.
That may make me "without the Law, or the fold" from your perspective. But I'm not a law unto myself. I just have different accountabilities and it doesn't bother me that Catholicism declares them to be unauthorised. I've learned to trust them. I don't have the same trust for all the teachings of catholicism, though I 'nods me head' without difficulty to many of them.
Such choices are of course more important than life and death. But here I stand. I can do no other, I'm afraid. Actually, I'm not afraid.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ronald Binge
Shipmate
# 9002
|
Posted
Interesting to compare the messages given to ++Justin Welby by both Pope Francis and Pope Benedict. Do ignore the bitchy tone of the comments underneath - I've neither the time or the inclination to tackle that particular nest of vipers.
Pope Francis and Pope Benedict on new ABC
It's not the substance of their points, which are made well, but the tone is different. Dare I suggest that the lamenting the secular world ignoring the lament of the Pope Emeritus may not actually capture the hearts of the hitherto lukewarm or indifferent?
[ 22. March 2013, 11:26: Message edited by: Ronald Binge ]
--------------------
Older, bearded (but no wiser)
Posts: 477 | From: Brexit's frontline | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
Some Christians seem to almost demonize the secular world. This seems absurd to me. OK, there are aspects of it that can be criticized, but to say that it is bad because it is secular seems short-sighted to me. Do I want a theocratic state? - as much as I want boils on my arse.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574
|
Posted
But the secular world and Christianity are more at odds than ever and that continue to grow even more in the future. I always got the feeling that most just didn't "get" Pope Benedict. Much of what he had to say concerning the secular world can be summarised thus: we are leaving the Constantinian era and are entering into a similar situation the Church was in during the first three centuries; let's confirm our orthodoxy by getting in touch with Tradition and be a light in the darkness.
[ 22. March 2013, 13:32: Message edited by: Ad Orientem ]
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
It is possibly quite different in Scandinavia, but certainly with regards to the English-speaking world Christianity is still very dominant, at least culturally. Secularism (in these countries at least) has given Christians more religious freedom, not less - albeit we do not have the right to impinge on others' religious freedom, as is quite right. Worldwide, Christians are being martyred in theocracies and dictatorships, not secular Western democracies.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
I don't buy this "secular world and Christianity more at odds with each other" stuff, to be honest. Many of the societal moves over the last few decades - equal ops, increasing marginalisation of racist attitudes, seem to me to be very positive. There are many, many ways that I prefer the society of the 2010s to that of say the 70s or even 80s. As for the Victorian period...
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
In fact, secularism can protect religion, and stop one religion imposing on others or the non-religious, or vice versa.
I'm a secularist, and I think many Christians are today. A theocratic state - no thanks.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574
|
Posted
Western secular society is not only at odds with Christianity, it is openly hostile to it. Better not to have anything to do with it and instead be a light in the darkness.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
Western secular society is not only at odds with Christianity, it is openly hostile to it.
No it isn't.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
Western secular society is not only at odds with Christianity, it is openly hostile to it.
No it isn't.
Yes it is.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
Western secular society is not only at odds with Christianity, it is openly hostile to it.
No it isn't.
Yes it is.
Tell you what - your assertion was the first, so why don't you back yours up. Then I'll back up mine.
Or we can imitate a pantomime. Your choice
It's behiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiind you!
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
GreyFace
Shipmate
# 4682
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
Secularism (in these countries at least) has given Christians more religious freedom, not less - albeit we do not have the right to impinge on others' religious freedom, as is quite right.
I think there's a distinction to be made between secularism as political compromise designed to remove unnecessary religious discrimination to the good of all affected, and secularism as a goal of eradicating religion.
The term seems to be used in both senses and there's obviously going to be some overlap but anybody with even a passing knowledge of history should agree that the first version of secularism is a good. It's the second version that gets some of us worried, once again in the light of history, and probably tars the first with the same brush.
Posts: 5748 | From: North East England | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
Western secular society is not only at odds with Christianity, it is openly hostile to it. Better not to have anything to do with it and instead be a light in the darkness.
Unless one becomes a hermit, it is impossible to not have anything to do with Western secular society if you live in Western secular countries. Could you please give some evidence as to how Western secularism is openly hostile to Christianity? It's hostile to Christian theocracy which is not the same thing at all, and since Jesus didn't exactly encourage theocracy either I'm quite OK with that.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
I've never thought of the Holy Spirit as "Some vague spiritual sensibility," but that's me.
Your original phrase was "what we feel in our hearts". The Holy Spirit speaks to our hearts. Ergo I'd say the two are - or at least can be - the same.
You can't work out "Jesus Christ is risen from the dead" in your heart any more than you can work out "the first moon landing by a human was in 1969." You have to be told about it, and you have to believe the person telling you.
Whatever you want to make of what you feel in your heart, it's not enough for the Christian message.
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
Western secular society is not only at odds with Christianity, it is openly hostile to it.
No it isn't.
Yes it is.
Tell you what - your assertion was the first, so why don't you back yours up. Then I'll back up mine.
Or we can imitate a pantomime. Your choice
It's behiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiind you!
I'd point you to Pope Benedict as he spoke about this many times, but as I said, most people just didn't get him. Western secular society actively seeks to exclude Christianity from the public sphere and impose its dictatorship of relativism on society.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
Western secular society is not only at odds with Christianity, it is openly hostile to it.
No it isn't.
Yes it is.
Tell you what - your assertion was the first, so why don't you back yours up. Then I'll back up mine.
Or we can imitate a pantomime. Your choice
It's behiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiind you!
I'd point you to Pope Benedict as he spoke about this many times, but as I said, most people just didn't get him. Western secular society actively seeks to exclude Christianity from the public sphere and impose its dictatorship of relativism on society.
You mean it won't give you special treatment as of right? Good. I don't want society giving special privileges to any religious group - that's what you get in Saudi Arabia and Iran.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
Western secular society is not only at odds with Christianity, it is openly hostile to it.
No it isn't.
Yes it is.
Tell you what - your assertion was the first, so why don't you back yours up. Then I'll back up mine.
Or we can imitate a pantomime. Your choice
It's behiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiind you!
I'd point you to Pope Benedict as he spoke about this many times, but as I said, most people just didn't get him. Western secular society actively seeks to exclude Christianity from the public sphere and impose its dictatorship of relativism on society.
You mean it won't give you special treatment as of right? Good. I don't want society giving special privileges to any religious group - that's what you get in Saudi Arabia and Iran.
No, that's not what I meant at all. GreyFace in his last post seems to understand. Check it out.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
GreyFace
Shipmate
# 4682
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
If you really want to know what I believe then it is this. I believe that the Orthodox Church is the Church which Christ founded. This is, if you like, a federation of local Churches in communion with one another because they all confess the same faith under an orthodox bishop. There are no Holy Mysteries outside the Church. The Church, however, is not limited by jurisdiction but is defined first and foremost by the Holy Spirit. Does the Holy Spirit act outside the bounds of jurisdiction though? Certainly, but where is difficult to say.
Don't you see then that if the action of the Holy Spirit outside the visible jurisdiction of the Church is salvific and there is no salvation outside the Church, then the bounds of the Church can't be the same as the jurisdictional boundaries of the visible Orthodox Church? You then have to say, it seems to me, that you believe you know where the Church is but you don't know where it is not and you have some concept of the invisible Church.
But the thread's moved on and as you said it's not a particularly helpful tangent, so I apologise for kicking it off.
Posts: 5748 | From: North East England | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
Ah right. I'll check back when I find any evidence that "secular society" is trying to eradicate religion. Last time I checked we still had bishops in the House of Lords and an institutional church, so I think that time's some way off yet.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by GreyFace:
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
Secularism (in these countries at least) has given Christians more religious freedom, not less - albeit we do not have the right to impinge on others' religious freedom, as is quite right.
I think there's a distinction to be made between secularism as political compromise designed to remove unnecessary religious discrimination to the good of all affected, and secularism as a goal of eradicating religion.
The term seems to be used in both senses and there's obviously going to be some overlap but anybody with even a passing knowledge of history should agree that the first version of secularism is a good. It's the second version that gets some of us worried, once again in the light of history, and probably tars the first with the same brush.
But where in the West is the second version happening? The UK government seems in no hurry to get the CoE disestablished and is happy for faith schools to exist, and the US is clearly very religious and has a Christian President and Vice President. The installation of the Pope and Archbishop of Canterbury have both been shown live on BBC1 and have both gained a lot of interest even from non-religious people. The only place I can think of that is secular in the second sense in the West is France, which to be honest is more Islamophobic than anything else.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
CL
Shipmate
# 16145
|
Posted
Satan isn't known as Rex Mundi for nothing.
--------------------
"Even if Catholics faithful to Tradition are reduced to a handful, they are the ones who are the true Church of Jesus Christ." - Athanasius of Alexandria
Posts: 647 | From: Ireland | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by GreyFace:
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
If you really want to know what I believe then it is this. I believe that the Orthodox Church is the Church which Christ founded. This is, if you like, a federation of local Churches in communion with one another because they all confess the same faith under an orthodox bishop. There are no Holy Mysteries outside the Church. The Church, however, is not limited by jurisdiction but is defined first and foremost by the Holy Spirit. Does the Holy Spirit act outside the bounds of jurisdiction though? Certainly, but where is difficult to say.
Don't you see then that if the action of the Holy Spirit outside the visible jurisdiction of the Church is salvific and there is no salvation outside the Church, then the bounds of the Church can't be the same as the jurisdictional boundaries of the visible Orthodox Church? You then have to say, it seems to me, that you believe you know where the Church is but you don't know where it is not and you have some concept of the invisible Church.
But the thread's moved on and as you said it's not a particularly helpful tangent, so I apologise for kicking it off.
Know where it is (Orthodoxy) and not know where it isn't? Yeah, that sounds about right. That's why I said that the Church is defined first and foremost by the Holy Spirit not jurisdiction. I would say though that if a person has such knowledge, to remain outside of visible communion is risky.
[ 22. March 2013, 14:38: Message edited by: Ad Orientem ]
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
CL
Shipmate
# 16145
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by GreyFace:
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
If you really want to know what I believe then it is this. I believe that the Orthodox Church is the Church which Christ founded. This is, if you like, a federation of local Churches in communion with one another because they all confess the same faith under an orthodox bishop. There are no Holy Mysteries outside the Church. The Church, however, is not limited by jurisdiction but is defined first and foremost by the Holy Spirit. Does the Holy Spirit act outside the bounds of jurisdiction though? Certainly, but where is difficult to say.
Don't you see then that if the action of the Holy Spirit outside the visible jurisdiction of the Church is salvific and there is no salvation outside the Church, then the bounds of the Church can't be the same as the jurisdictional boundaries of the visible Orthodox Church? You then have to say, it seems to me, that you believe you know where the Church is but you don't know where it is not and you have some concept of the invisible Church.
But the thread's moved on and as you said it's not a particularly helpful tangent, so I apologise for kicking it off.
Have you never heard the expression "we know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
--------------------
"Even if Catholics faithful to Tradition are reduced to a handful, they are the ones who are the true Church of Jesus Christ." - Athanasius of Alexandria
Posts: 647 | From: Ireland | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
The only place I can think of that is secular in the second sense in the West is France, which to be honest is more Islamophobic than anything else.
No no, as e.g. Eutychus will tell you, it goes much deeper than that.
--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by CL:
quote:
Originally posted by GreyFace:
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
If you really want to know what I believe then it is this. I believe that the Orthodox Church is the Church which Christ founded. This is, if you like, a federation of local Churches in communion with one another because they all confess the same faith under an orthodox bishop. There are no Holy Mysteries outside the Church. The Church, however, is not limited by jurisdiction but is defined first and foremost by the Holy Spirit. Does the Holy Spirit act outside the bounds of jurisdiction though? Certainly, but where is difficult to say.
Don't you see then that if the action of the Holy Spirit outside the visible jurisdiction of the Church is salvific and there is no salvation outside the Church, then the bounds of the Church can't be the same as the jurisdictional boundaries of the visible Orthodox Church? You then have to say, it seems to me, that you believe you know where the Church is but you don't know where it is not and you have some concept of the invisible Church.
But the thread's moved on and as you said it's not a particularly helpful tangent, so I apologise for kicking it off.
Have you never heard the expression "we know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
Yeah - could you and Ab Orientem get together and decide the answer to the first question, then we can all get with the programme?
Thanks.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
GreyFace
Shipmate
# 4682
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
But where in the West is the second version happening?
Only, I think, in the general mind of the non- or weakly-religious majority. If I had to put money on it, I'd say the mind of the British public was that religion's acceptable as long as it doesn't actually get in the way of anything in the real world. Now, this isn't the second form of secularism (though it might end up that way) but it's not the first either.
I don't think this spirit's gained much of a foothold at the level of politics precisely because most if not all of our politicians understand that western democracies are not generally pleasant places to be as a consequence of them being democracies (people elect corrupt leaders, or theocratic governments etc) but rather because there's a general commitment to tolerance - backed up by the baseball bat of free elections, of course.
So no, I don't see an atheist plot to end Christianity hiding behind every bush. I think it's important that we remind people what secularism really should be about though, about freedom, and tolerance, getting on with people with different views. It's not about suppressing religion, or reducing religious influence as the so-called National Secular Society aims, it's about enabling freedom for people of all religions and none.
That's my take, anyway.
Posts: 5748 | From: North East England | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark Betts
Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by GreyFace:
Don't you see then that if the action of the Holy Spirit outside the visible jurisdiction of the Church is salvific and there is no salvation outside the Church, then the bounds of the Church can't be the same as the jurisdictional boundaries of the visible Orthodox Church? You then have to say, it seems to me, that you believe you know where the Church is but you don't know where it is not and you have some concept of the invisible Church.
But the thread's moved on and as you said it's not a particularly helpful tangent, so I apologise for kicking it off.
Don't apologise, because that's exactly what some Orthodox DO say - certainly Metropolitan Kallistos (Timothy Ware) has said this almost exactly to your words.
--------------------
"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."
Posts: 2080 | From: Leicester | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
GreyFace
Shipmate
# 4682
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Betts:
Don't apologise, because that's exactly what some Orthodox DO say - certainly Metropolitan Kallistos (Timothy Ware) has said this almost exactly to your words.
Well spotted - I'd not deliberately quoted him without attribution but I have a couple of his books on the shelf behind me and I don't doubt he was the source of my words.
Posts: 5748 | From: North East England | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark Betts
Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
..But where in the West is the second version happening?
Unfortunately, because the second type often masquerades as the first type, we have no way of knowing until it manifests itself.
--------------------
"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."
Posts: 2080 | From: Leicester | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
GreyFace
Shipmate
# 4682
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Yeah - could you and Ab Orientem get together and decide the answer to the first question, then we can all get with the programme?
Are you saying a Council of two random Shipmates is infallible? Great, can I have a second for anathema on sermons longer than ten minutes?
Posts: 5748 | From: North East England | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by GreyFace:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Yeah - could you and Ab Orientem get together and decide the answer to the first question, then we can all get with the programme?
Are you saying a Council of two random Shipmates is infallible? Great, can I have a second for anathema on sermons longer than ten minutes?
No, but I was hoping to establish which of the Catholic and Orthodox churches was the One True Church. It'd be so useful to know.
They weren't chosen randomly ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
[ 22. March 2013, 15:29: Message edited by: Karl: Liberal Backslider ]
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark Betts
Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
...No, but I was hoping to establish which of the Catholic and Orthodox churches was the One True Church. It'd be so useful to know.
They weren't chosen randomly
OK Karl, I'm not usually so candid, but I'll let you in on it - it's the Eastern Orthodox Church.
--------------------
"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."
Posts: 2080 | From: Leicester | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fr Weber
Shipmate
# 13472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
No, but I was hoping to establish which of the Catholic and Orthodox churches was the One True Church. It'd be so useful to know.
My friend Fr Hart likes to refer to them as the Two One True Churches.
--------------------
"The Eucharist is not a play, and you're not Jesus."
--Sr Theresa Koernke, IHM
Posts: 2512 | From: Oakland, CA | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
We all know there is no salvation outside of the Reformed Church of the Netherlands. Duh.
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Silent Acolyte
Shipmate
# 1158
|
Posted
This thread is Exhibit A for why Anglicanism is a Good Thing.
Oh. And, wasn't it J2P2 who had something to say about the Two Lungs of the Church.
Posts: 7462 | From: The New World | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Adeodatus
Shipmate
# 4992
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by GreyFace:
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Betts:
Don't apologise, because that's exactly what some Orthodox DO say - certainly Metropolitan Kallistos (Timothy Ware) has said this almost exactly to your words.
Well spotted - I'd not deliberately quoted him without attribution but I have a couple of his books on the shelf behind me and I don't doubt he was the source of my words.
Kallistos takes the tag extra ecclesiam nulla salus (outside the Church there is no salvation) and counters it with ubi salus, ibi ecclesia - where salvation is, there is the Church.
He's not unequivocal about it, but he does consider it a possibility.
--------------------
"What is broken, repair with gold."
Posts: 9779 | From: Manchester | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
I'm afraid that my tiny sect in Cirencester has proved itself to be the one true manifestation, or, as we say in these parts, we have well and truly smacked the pig's bottom. I won't bore you with scriptural and hermeneutic proofs; but rest assured that when the world is ready for them, they will emerge, as sure as the pig's farts.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ronald Binge:
Interesting to compare the messages given to ++Justin Welby by both Pope Francis and Pope Benedict. [..]
Pope Francis and Pope Benedict on new ABC
Thanks for posting this. Benedict XVI and Francis are different men, with different personal styles, and it's not surprising that their messages reflect this.
Each message makes veiled references to the well-known fact that there are differences between Rome and Canterbury (and not only on Dead Horse subjects), yet rejoices in the fact that we share much, and can work together on that basis, whilst accepting that the road to working out those last differences will not be an easy one.
Neither message indicates any kind of shift in the recent Catholic position with respect to the Church of England or the wider Anglican communion, and I don't think anyone would expect them to.
I do find it interesting that Benedict XVI, a serious theologian and a careful, precise man, used the word "apostolate" in reference to the calling of the Archbishop of Canterbury, but I think that over-thinking his use of this one word would be a mistake.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by The Silent Acolyte:
This thread is Exhibit A for why Anglicanism is a Good Thing.
Oh. And, wasn't it J2P2 who had something to say about the Two Lungs of the Church.
Yeah, and it just goes to show how mixed up his ecclesiology is. If an RC say something like that I would answer "Leave me alone, I'm not your missing lung."
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark Betts
Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
We all know there is no salvation outside of the Reformed Church of the Netherlands. Duh.
Is that really so? Darn! ![[Waterworks]](graemlins/bawling.gif)
--------------------
"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."
Posts: 2080 | From: Leicester | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Betts:
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
We all know there is no salvation outside of the Reformed Church of the Netherlands. Duh.
Is that really so? Darn!
Be comforted my brother. Only the Lord himself knows who truly is and is not a member of the Reformed Church of the Netherlands!
And he has known it since before the creation of the world!
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
malik3000
Shipmate
# 11437
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
quote:
(but - thanks too, Matt Black - the official position pre-1965 was that all non-Catholics are damned?)
While that belief was more popularly believed in the past (its popularity actually began declining long before 1965), it was never the dogmatically defined position of the RC Church.
Indeed. Back in the 1950s and 1960s my very devout Catholic mother and ultra-devout Irish Catholic grandmother communicated quite the opposite to me. And the nuns in the Catholic schools i went to never communicated that to me, either. (Of course, the fact that it was 3rd and 4th grade elementary school, the nuns may have thought that the subject was too deep for us wee kiddies. Although i seem to recall a nun one time talking about an Anglo-Catholic church in the area, and informing us that it was not a real Catholic Church even though it looked like one.)
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
Even so, people base their opinion mostly on not having read Lumen Gentium, which does contain statements like "Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved."
That statement is saying is that if one truly believes that the Catholic Church is what it claims to be, and yet, in the light of their belief, deliberately goes against it, one is sinning. Just like the case where one who believes in their heart that murder or stealing or coveting are sins and yet murders or steals or covets. ISTM that the Lumen Gentium statement would not apply to sincere people of other religious bodies since they sincerely wouldn't believe that the Catholic Church is what it claims to be.
--------------------
God = love.
Otherwise, things are not just black or white.
Posts: 3149 | From: North America | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
I noted apostolate as well. It means the office, duties and/or mission of an apostle, I think.
But I doubt there has been any real change over the question of what makes an office holder fully legitimate. Less-than-fully legitimate installing and occupation do not rule out a rich harvest, but there's a lot of room for different views about what constitutes a rich harvest as well.
Clever man, the Pope Emeritus.
[ 22. March 2013, 20:15: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Triple Tiara
Ship's Papabile
# 9556
|
Posted
I wouldn't put too much emphasis on the word apostolate - and that's not simply to pour cold water on high hopes here.
In Catholic parlance "apostolate" simply means "ministry". So, for example, Apostolicam Actuositatem, is the Second Vatican Couincil's decree on "the apostolate of the laity".
--------------------
I'm a Roman. You may call me Caligula.
Posts: 5905 | From: London, England | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
Triple T is right: I have a nice letter from the Nuncio blessing my apostolate, but it doesn't mean I'm a bishop.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
You learn something new every day.
At the risk of being accused of nitpicking, I think I'll give it another spin though. My curiosity is aroused.
Triple Tiara, it strikes me as quite odd to use it for a ministry outside the Catholic fold. Given normal Catholic verbal precision (something I admire BTW), I can understand how the term apostolate came to mean any ministry within Catholicism, since they are all apostolically authorised i.e. legitimate by means of the authority to given to the Catholic church and faithfully "handed down".
But that doesn't apply to Archbishop Welby, does it? Or any other ministry outside the fold. So why not just call his vocation a ministry? Not like the Pope Emeritus (of all men) to be inexact. So far as Archbishop Welby is concerned, ministry would have been a perfectly acceptable term.
Happy to be put right. It's a nice verbal courtesy of course, and perhaps it slides over a difficulty or two, but it does look a bit odd.
[ 23. March 2013, 01:55: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
