|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: The Episcopal Church
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
What I'm saying is that what is held to be the faith now cannot contradict what is held to be the faith by our fathers.
So we have to agree with them, even if they were wrong? Bollocks.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
What I'm saying is that what is held to be the faith now cannot contradict what is held to be the faith by our fathers. Innovation is most certainly the root of all heresy. The only thing that grows is our understanding, yet that still must be in continuity with what we have received, it cannot contradict it.
Spoken like a true Pharisee.
You're being a dick. If you want to believe something different then fine, but don't kid yourself that it's the same faith. If the faith you hold to is not the same as the ancient faith then it is neither apostolic nor catholic and it is not the faith delivered once to the saints.
My faith doesn't revolve around being obnoxious to gay people and women,
Nevertheless you were cheering on the Russians when they passed laws that were obnoxious to gay people and encouraged people to be even more obnoxious to them, didn't you?
So it rather looks to me like whilst it may not revolve around being obnoxious to gay people, it seems to require you to be so anyway.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
So it rather looks to me like whilst it may not revolve around being obnoxious to gay people, it seems to require you to be so anyway.
I think you're confusing me with someone else.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
Do you also need to have "factual evidence" and "specific examples" explained?
Concerning spiritual death, you mean? Well, depends upon whether or not you've read the scriptures and believe what they say, doesn't it? If you don't then there is no "factual evidence" or "specific examples". If you do, however, then you will already no what I mean: the second death, in other words, eternal damnation. As I say, there is a way out: repentance.
Of course I've read the scriptures. But clearly you don't know what a specific example is. A specific example in this case would be a person who has died a spiritual death due to being gay. Factual evidence in this case would be the verifiable things that show that being gay (or engaging in gay sex -- your choice) was the cause of this death.
So try again. Give us a specific example and factual evidence to show that being gay (or gay sex) leads to spiritual death. Because without the real harm that you claim is done, the whole argument that homosexuality is sinful falls apart. You can't just claim that homosexuality is harmful -- you have to show that it is.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
So it rather looks to me like whilst it may not revolve around being obnoxious to gay people, it seems to require you to be so anyway.
I think you're confusing me with someone else.
Brain fart. Ignore.
--------------------
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 RuthW:
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
Do you also need to have "factual evidence" and "specific examples" explained?
Concerning spiritual death, you mean? Well, depends upon whether or not you've read the scriptures and believe what they say, doesn't it? If you don't then there is no "factual evidence" or "specific examples". If you do, however, then you will already no what I mean: the second death, in other words, eternal damnation. As I say, there is a way out: repentance.
Of course I've read the scriptures. But clearly you don't know what a specific example is. A specific example in this case would be a person who has died a spiritual death due to being gay. Factual evidence in this case would be the verifiable things that show that being gay (or engaging in gay sex -- your choice) was the cause of this death.
So try again. Give us a specific example and factual evidence to show that being gay (or gay sex) leads to spiritual death. Because without the real harm that you claim is done, the whole argument that homosexuality is sinful falls apart. You can't just claim that homosexuality is harmful -- you have to show that it is.
Eh? You do realise what you're doing here, don't you? How is one supposed to obtain the kind of evidence you seek, unless I was to have died and seen it with my own eyes? The evidence is there in the scriptures and the faith of the Church, and that you insist on materialistic evidence of a spiritual truth is proof that you neither believe the scriptures or have the faith of the Church. And no, people don't suffer such a death because they suffer temptation, be it homosexual or whatever. They suffer such a death because they give in to it, nay, rejoice in it and shun repentance.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
CL
Shipmate
# 16145
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by CL:
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
If by 'oppression' you mean saying "Don't do x because it will do you harm"
Only when the "because it will do you harm" bit is utter, total bullshit invented to give the oppressor something to say other than "because I don't like it/you".
I guess God is a big bad oppressor then.
If He lays down rules based only on what He likes or dislikes (as opposed to what's good or bad for us), then yes.
Who are you to judge God?
Posts: 647 | From: Ireland | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by CL:
Who are you to judge God?
It's not a case of judging God so much as the great conservative straw god.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by CL:
Who are you to judge God?
Judge God? No - I'm just judging other people's fucked up ideas of God.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
CL
Shipmate
# 16145
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
You silly old div! If your interpretation goes against the continuous faith of the Church then it is wrong. End of.
The Church can be wrong. The Church has been wrong about many things. The Church is wrong about many things. The Church will be wrong about many things in the future. The Church is made up of fallible, corrupt, shitty members of the human species, and always has been, and always will be. The Church leadership is made up of those human beings who were so incredibly good at being corrupt bastards that they managed to wangle their way to the top, and always has been, and always will be. And that includes every pope, every patriarch, every writer of scripture and every single person who attended one of your precious Councils.
Frankly, I'm amazed that the Holy Spirit has managed to get any Truth through the tangle of self-serving corrupt bastard religious leaders (and their fanboys) that makes up Church history. That He has done so at all is testament to the power of God. That He continues to try to do so is testament to the tenacity and patience of God. And that fuckwits like you continue to shun Him in favour of idolising a bunch of self-serving corrupt bastard Church leaders from two millenia ago is testament to how utterly fucked up beyond belief the human species continues to be.
Or in other words; "I've created a God in my own image and fuck anyone who tells me I'm wrong".
--------------------
"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
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by CL:
Or in other words; "I've created a God in my own image and fuck anyone who tells me I'm wrong".
Quite the reverse.
"The Church" has often created God in its own image and has historically fucked anyone who tells them they're wrong.
Thankfully that kind of attitude seems to have calmed down a bit.
Except for CL of course.
He still thinks he is first in the Kingdom of Heaven.
But our Lord and Saviour had much to say about those who thought they were first.
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by CL:
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
You silly old div! If your interpretation goes against the continuous faith of the Church then it is wrong. End of.
The Church can be wrong. The Church has been wrong about many things. The Church is wrong about many things. The Church will be wrong about many things in the future. The Church is made up of fallible, corrupt, shitty members of the human species, and always has been, and always will be. The Church leadership is made up of those human beings who were so incredibly good at being corrupt bastards that they managed to wangle their way to the top, and always has been, and always will be. And that includes every pope, every patriarch, every writer of scripture and every single person who attended one of your precious Councils.
Frankly, I'm amazed that the Holy Spirit has managed to get any Truth through the tangle of self-serving corrupt bastard religious leaders (and their fanboys) that makes up Church history. That He has done so at all is testament to the power of God. That He continues to try to do so is testament to the tenacity and patience of God. And that fuckwits like you continue to shun Him in favour of idolising a bunch of self-serving corrupt bastard Church leaders from two millenia ago is testament to how utterly fucked up beyond belief the human species continues to be.
Or in other words; "I've created a God in my own image and fuck anyone who tells me I'm wrong".
It's a pretty poor look-out for God if the one that Marvin creates in his image looks better than the one you and your ilk tell me is the real deal.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
quote:
But I didn't pick you for a liberal. Perhaps you are.
Yes. Maybe I am.
Good Lord.
Perhaps you may yet be redeemed.
So, the likelihood of my redemption is directly linked to the degree of liberality? I thought you said you took scripture seriously, Evensong. ![[Confused]](confused.gif)
The liberal scholar takes scripture far more seriously than others do because they attempt to ascertain what the scriptures meant in their time.
And that's the only way we can really attempt to understand what Jesus really meant.
Otherwise it's just eisegesis.
So if you want to take scripture seriously, you have to take the liberal approach. It's the best way to figure out what Jesus really meant.
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
The theory goes that our faith sanctifies us to perform good works. Right?
Quite besides the issue of wholeness (salvation), if there is no faith, good works are certainly better than nothing. I wouldn't go so far as to say good works without Christ are filthy rags. Not at all. In and of themselves they create a better society as a whole. I don't see that as filthy rags.
In the eternal scheme of things, they surely are since they elevate the performance of humankind alone (without God) to fool us into thinking we can be good independently of God ie: they remove (in our perception) our need for God.
I personally wouldn't say we can't do good things without God.
I wouldn't have much trouble saying Atheists do good things that God would approve of.
I do however think they are just hanging on Christianity's coattails. ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by CL:
Or in other words; "I've created a God in my own image and fuck anyone who tells me I'm wrong".
Yes, that has indeed been the attitude of the Church through the ages. But the Holy Spirit keeps trying to reach us nonetheless.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by CL:
Or in other words; "I've created a God in my own image and fuck anyone who tells me I'm wrong".
Yes, that has indeed been the attitude of the Church through the ages. But the Holy Spirit keeps trying to reach us nonetheless.
BOOOOYAH!!!
![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif)
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
rugasaw
Shipmate
# 7315
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
...What I'm saying is that what is held to be the faith now cannot contradict what is held to be the faith by our fathers. Innovation is most certainly the root of all heresy. The only thing that grows is our understanding, yet that still must be in continuity with what we have received, it cannot contradict it.
And here I thought avarice was the root of all evil. Unless heresy isn't evil? Or innovation is not caused by avarice? By the way a good many inventors died broke(see Tesla).
--------------------
Treat the earth well, It was not given to you by your parents. It was loaned to you by your children. -Unknown
Posts: 2716 | From: Houston | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
You do realise what you're doing here, don't you? How is one supposed to obtain the kind of evidence you seek, unless I was to have died and seen it with my own eyes? The evidence is there in the scriptures and the faith of the Church, and that you insist on materialistic evidence of a spiritual truth is proof that you neither believe the scriptures or have the faith of the Church.
The thing is, sin produces observable harm in this life. God doesn't just say, "Trust me, you don't want to do this -- you can't ever see it in your earthly life, but ultimately it's going to separate you from me." We can see the harmful effects of murder, lying, adultery etc etc right here, right now. But engaging in homosexual sex produces no observable harm.
Edit: And yes, I do know what I'm doing here -- I'm showing that you have no argument for your position, because there is none.
[ 25. July 2013, 15:25: Message edited by: RuthW ]
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Betts:
quote:
Originally posted by malik3000:
Reading this thread makes me glad to be a member of the Episcopal Church.
It makes me glad NOT to be a member of the Episcopal Church.
What a coincidence. It makes me glad you're not a member of the Episcopal Church, too.
Well, I'm glad that you're glad that he's not a member of the Episcopal Church as much as I'm also glad that Malik3000 is a member of the Episcopal Church too.
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
daronmedway: Well, I'm glad that you're glad that he's not a member of the Episcopal Church as much as I'm also glad that Malik3000 is a member of the Episcopal Church too.
I don't know half of you half as well as I should like, and I'm half as glad that less than half of you is a member of the Episcopal Church half as well as you deserve.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matt Black
Shipmate
# 2210
|
Posted
Bloody hell, it's Bilbo Fucking Baggins!
--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)
Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by CL:
Or in other words; "I've created a God in my own image and fuck anyone who tells me I'm wrong".
Yes, that has indeed been the attitude of the Church through the ages. But the Holy Spirit keeps trying to reach us nonetheless.
I don't think you really believe the second sentence yourself, Marvin.
While many shipmates appear to believe in a form of moralistic, therapeutic theism, your faith looks much more like a weird kind of amoralistic, spiritually injurious, deism.
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark Betts
Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Betts:
quote:
Originally posted by malik3000:
Reading this thread makes me glad to be a member of the Episcopal Church.
It makes me glad NOT to be a member of the Episcopal Church.
What a coincidence. It makes me glad you're not a member of the Episcopal Church, too.
Good. So everyone's happy, right?
--------------------
"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
|
|
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
quote:
But I didn't pick you for a liberal. Perhaps you are.
Yes. Maybe I am.
Good Lord.
Perhaps you may yet be redeemed.
So, the likelihood of my redemption is directly linked to the degree of liberality? I thought you said you took scripture seriously, Evensong.
The liberal scholar takes scripture far more seriously than others do because they attempt to ascertain what the scriptures meant in their time.
And that's the only way we can really attempt to understand what Jesus really meant.
Are you really suggesting that liberal theology is the only branch of theology that takes the original context and meaning seriously, Evensong? That's truly incredible.
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fr Weber
Shipmate
# 13472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
Bloody hell, it's Bilbo Fucking Baggins!
Oh, so that's his middle name.
--------------------
"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
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
Are you really suggesting that liberal theology is the only branch of theology that takes the original context and meaning seriously, Evensong? That's truly incredible.
Without wanting to speak for Evensong, it seems pretty clear that she is talking about a spectrum, not a binary state.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lyda*Rose
Ship's broken porthole
# 4544
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
quote:
daronmedway: Well, I'm glad that you're glad that he's not a member of the Episcopal Church as much as I'm also glad that Malik3000 is a member of the Episcopal Church too.
I don't know half of you half as well as I should like, and I'm half as glad that less than half of you is a member of the Episcopal Church half as well as you deserve.
I'm hoping I come out ahead with LeRoc on this one.
--------------------
"Dear God, whose name I do not know - thank you for my life. I forgot how BIG... thank you. Thank you for my life." ~from Joe Vs the Volcano
Posts: 21377 | From: CA | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
Bloody hell, it's Bilbo Fucking Baggins!
Poor Frodo. Still, no harm done.
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
St Deird
Shipmate
# 7631
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
Do those people also believe the Sun orbits the (motionless) Earth? I hope so, otherwise they're rejecting the Tradition of the Church and indeed rejecting God himself...
You'd have to prove that.
Well, it's correct because it's true.
...what? That's the kind of proof you like, right?
--------------------
They're not hobbies; they're a robust post-apocalyptic skill-set.
Posts: 319 | From: the other side of nowhere | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
Oh for fuck's sake. Anyone who thinks that God's official representatives never need correcting has just thrown out the entire need for prophesy. That's a massive chunk of the Bible denied right there.
I mean, who needs all those awkward, wild and sometimes literally woolly prophets turning up and making things difficult when The Establishment is perfect?
[ 26. July 2013, 05:09: Message edited by: orfeo ]
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
Oh for fuck's sake. Anyone who thinks that God's official representatives never need correcting has just thrown out the entire need for prophesy. That's a massive chunk of the Bible denied right there.
Much as I'm on your side of this argument, orfeo, I think you've misrepresented the other side slightly here. It's not that God's official representatives never need correcting, rather that everything coming out of the ancient Church councils and so on is fully reliable and inspired by God. Not my view at all, but I think it's closer to what Ad Orientem et al are arguing.
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
'and so on' is a rather large field.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Silent Acolyte
Shipmate
# 1158
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
'and so on' is a rather large field.
It's not something the Episcopal Church is very big on, not having a reliable seat of teaching authority, but this "and so on" is called Tradition. Scripture is part of this Tradition.
This thread is about the Episcopal Church. Amirite?
[ 27. July 2013, 14:46: Message edited by: The Silent Acolyte ]
Posts: 7462 | From: The New World | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by The Silent Acolyte:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
'and so on' is a rather large field.
It's not something the Episcopal Church is very big on, not having a reliable seat of teaching authority, but this "and so on" is called Tradition. Scripture is part of this Tradition.
This thread is about the Episcopal Church. Amirite?
In which case 'and so on' is a vague field with a circular definition. Want something to be a rule people can't argue against? Hey presto, it's Tradition. Want something to be overturned? Hey presto, it's not.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Silent Acolyte
Shipmate
# 1158
|
Posted
What you say is, of course, unkind and unflattering, but stripped to a cartoon, it is largely the case.
A more generous—and useful—way of dealing with things is to make a reasoned consideration of what is, and what is not, authentic Tradition. There is really not anything presto about it—except in the hands of certain posters on this thread.
The Orthodox speak of the Canon of the Church, which incorporates much of the Church's life, the Scriptures, the writings of the Fathers, the writings of synods and councils, the manner of celebrating the liturgy and office, and more.
But wait. We are here to bash the godless Episcopalians.
[ 27. July 2013, 16:36: Message edited by: The Silent Acolyte ]
Posts: 7462 | From: The New World | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Silent Acolyte
Shipmate
# 1158
|
Posted
Lewis J. Patsavos, ++Bart's North American go-to guy on canon law has written this useful tract, The Canonical Tradition of the Orthodox Church. Being a canon lawyer, he naturally focuses his canon more on Law than on custom. It was Alkiviadis Calivas from whom I heard the expansive sense of Canon to include the entire Church life.
Posts: 7462 | From: The New World | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by The Silent Acolyte:
What you say is, of course, unkind and unflattering, but stripped to a cartoon, it is largely the case.
A more generous—and useful—way of dealing with things is to make a reasoned consideration of what is, and what is not, authentic Tradition. There is really not anything presto about it—except in the hands of certain posters on this thread.
The Orthodox speak of the Canon of the Church, which incorporates much of the Church's life, the Scriptures, the writings of the Fathers, the writings of synods and councils, the manner of celebrating the liturgy and office, and more.
But wait. We are here to bash the godless Episcopalians.
I think I can safely agree that the way Ad Orientem throws Tradition around is not a method I would attribute to the Orthodox church generally.
I'm not here to bash anyone other than AO. I'm on vacation. Don't give me tasks.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
I think I can safely agree that the way Ad Orientem throws Tradition around is not a method I would attribute to the Orthodox church generally.
ditto
quote:
I'm not here to bash anyone other than AO.
double ditto
quote:
I'm on vacation. Don't give me tasks.
ditto^3
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by The Silent Acolyte:
What you say is, of course, unkind and unflattering, but stripped to a cartoon, it is largely the case.
A more generous—and useful—way of dealing with things is to make a reasoned consideration of what is, and what is not, authentic Tradition. There is really not anything presto about it—except in the hands of certain posters on this thread.
The Orthodox speak of the Canon of the Church, which incorporates much of the Church's life, the Scriptures, the writings of the Fathers, the writings of synods and councils, the manner of celebrating the liturgy and office, and more.
But wait. We are here to bash the godless Episcopalians.
I think I can safely agree that the way Ad Orientem throws Tradition around is not a method I would attribute to the Orthodox church generally.
I'm not here to bash anyone other than AO. I'm on vacation. Don't give me tasks.
It might help if we understood what each other means when we refer to tradition. I'm not entirely convinced that we're referring to the same thing. When I refer to it I do so in the context of the Apostolic faith and everything which it encompasses and I take a maximalist view, that is, I tend not to categorise things into non-essentials and essentials: either there is the whole faith or no faith.
"Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle." (2 Thess. 2:14)
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
I'm thinking Orfeo is trying to say that wielding Holy Tradition without charity or an awareness of what it's like to be a gay believer in 2013 is not Tradition.
Though it's usually pretty perilous when I try to read people's minds. ![[Snore]](graemlins/snore.gif)
--------------------
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
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I have a lot of sympathy with people who hold to a maximalist position. It makes a lot of sense. Except when it's taken to a binary extreme - 'either the whole faith or no faith.'
That's not maximalism, it's just being a maximum arsehole.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I have a lot of sympathy with people who hold to a maximalist position. It makes a lot of sense. Except when it's taken to a binary extreme - 'either the whole faith or no faith.'
That's not maximalism, it's just being a maximum arsehole.
Ok. I'm willing to admit that "no faith" goes a bit too far and am therefore willing to retract that part, but it's certainly not the same faith which is why, for instance, we insist that Filioque must go.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I have a lot of sympathy with people who hold to a maximalist position. It makes a lot of sense. Except when it's taken to a binary extreme - 'either the whole faith or no faith.'
That's not maximalism, it's just being a maximum arsehole.
Ok. I'm willing to admit that "no faith" goes a bit too far and am therefore willing to retract that part, but it's certainly not the same faith which is why, for instance, we insist that Filioque must go.
It's a bit of a DH but if you do insist thus do you do so from a position defined by scripture or one defined by tradition?
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574
|
Posted
Why make a distinction? I wouldn't. Tradition isn't something separate or parallel to the scriptures.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
You're doing it again, Ad Orientem.
I wish the filioque would go too. I wish that the Pope, Archbishop of Canterbury, all the various Free Church leaders and so on would suddenly decide to ditch it.
The fact that it exists, though, doesn't mean that the West as a whole believes in the double-processin of the Spirit or has a defective view of the Trinity. I agree that things could be clearer if that wretched clause we excised from the Western creeds. Bring it on.
It is capable of being misunderstood and it has been misunderstood and for whatever reason - pride, negligence, I dunno-what-else, none of us on the Western side of the Schism has yet revoked it. We should.
But that doesn't mean that we are practising a completely different faith. We are practising a variation on the Christian faith that we all share. We aren't practising an entirely different religion.
For goodness sake, man ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by The Silent Acolyte:
What you say is, of course, unkind and unflattering, but stripped to a cartoon, it is largely the case.
A more generous—and useful—way of dealing with things is to make a reasoned consideration of what is, and what is not, authentic Tradition. There is really not anything presto about it—except in the hands of certain posters on this thread.
The Orthodox speak of the Canon of the Church, which incorporates much of the Church's life, the Scriptures, the writings of the Fathers, the writings of synods and councils, the manner of celebrating the liturgy and office, and more.
But wait. We are here to bash the godless Episcopalians.
I think I can safely agree that the way Ad Orientem throws Tradition around is not a method I would attribute to the Orthodox church generally.
I'm not here to bash anyone other than AO. I'm on vacation. Don't give me tasks.
It might help if we understood what each other means when we refer to tradition. I'm not entirely convinced that we're referring to the same thing. When I refer to it I do so in the context of the Apostolic faith and everything which it encompasses and I take a maximalist view, that is, I tend not to categorise things into non-essentials and essentials: either there is the whole faith or no faith.
"Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle." (2 Thess. 2:14)
And yet you've already said, multiple times, that belief in the earth being the centre of the solar system is non-essential. I'm not clear where you stand on hate for women though.
(And don't expect me to believe that true Christians were heliocentric before the Romans went and created a geocentric heresy, right about the same time as they added that filioque, and that if only Galileo had been Greek he would have been fine. People used to believe the earth stood at the centre because they believed the Bible said so. )
[ 28. July 2013, 16:22: Message edited by: orfeo ]
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
RooK
1 of 6
# 1852
|
Posted
quote:
People used to believe the earth stood at the centre because they believed the Bible said so.
To be fair, people used to believe the earth stood at the centre because that is what it sort of looks like to a casual simian observation. The mention in the bible was probably just an assumed touchpoint, and likely was not intended to represent divine revelation.
The main point revealed is, obviously, is that religion is about making near-random assertions about reality and then fighting over them. All that stuff about benefitting humanity is pretty fucking marginal in comparison, objectively.
Posts: 15274 | From: Portland, Oregon, USA, Earth | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RooK:
quote:
People used to believe the earth stood at the centre because they believed the Bible said so.
To be fair, people used to believe the earth stood at the centre because that is what it sort of looks like to a casual simian observation. The mention in the bible was probably just an assumed touchpoint, and likely was not intended to represent divine revelation.
The main point revealed is, obviously, is that religion is about making near-random assertions about reality and then fighting over them. All that stuff about benefitting humanity is pretty fucking marginal in comparison, objectively.
I disagree, in that the earth being at the centre becomes an important theological basis for establishing that it's all about us and we're terribly important. It's used to underpin the idea that the universe is for our benefit, rather than having us be located near a very ordinary sun in the outer suburbs of its galaxy.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by The Silent Acolyte:
What you say is, of course, unkind and unflattering, but stripped to a cartoon, it is largely the case.
A more generous—and useful—way of dealing with things is to make a reasoned consideration of what is, and what is not, authentic Tradition. There is really not anything presto about it—except in the hands of certain posters on this thread.
The Orthodox speak of the Canon of the Church, which incorporates much of the Church's life, the Scriptures, the writings of the Fathers, the writings of synods and councils, the manner of celebrating the liturgy and office, and more.
But wait. We are here to bash the godless Episcopalians.
I think I can safely agree that the way Ad Orientem throws Tradition around is not a method I would attribute to the Orthodox church generally.
I'm not here to bash anyone other than AO. I'm on vacation. Don't give me tasks.
It might help if we understood what each other means when we refer to tradition. I'm not entirely convinced that we're referring to the same thing. When I refer to it I do so in the context of the Apostolic faith and everything which it encompasses and I take a maximalist view, that is, I tend not to categorise things into non-essentials and essentials: either there is the whole faith or no faith.
"Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle." (2 Thess. 2:14)
And yet you've already said, multiple times, that belief in the earth being the centre of the solar system is non-essential. I'm not clear where you stand on hate for women though.
(And don't expect me to believe that true Christians were heliocentric before the Romans went and created a geocentric heresy, right about the same time as they added that filioque, and that if only Galileo had been Greek he would have been fine. People used to believe the earth stood at the centre because they believed the Bible said so. )
Geocentricism was never held to be part of the faith. It was merely, as RooK rightly points out, and observation of the physical universe. I know that you will bring up Galileo, as everyone does, but as I said before, as an Eastern Christian it's completely irrelevant, a red herring.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
![[Devil]](graemlins/devil.gif)
