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   »   » Oblivion   » What is the heart of the Christian Faith? (Page 1)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: What is the heart of the Christian Faith?
Robert Armin

All licens'd fool
# 182

 - Posted      Profile for Robert Armin     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
On the Priestly Genetalia thread Ad Orientam said:
quote:
we [speaking for the Orthodox] have no intention of welcoming Anglicans, or RC's or whatever in unity as they are because our starting point is always, confess the orthodox faith first, then we can talk about unity.
Given that Anglicans, and RCs, happily assent to the Creeds I am left wondering what the Creeds leave out that is so important that we can be said not to possess "the orthodox faith".

In the same way parts of the Anglican Communion are threatening to leave because of the gay issue. Again, is this something that should have been added into the Creeds to make it quite clear to everyone?

How can we distinguish between "real" Christians and those who are just pretending? If not in the Creeds, where can we find the heart of the Christian faith?

--------------------
Keeping fit was an obsession with Fr Moity .... He did chin ups in the vestry, calisthenics in the pulpit, and had developed a series of Tai-Chi exercises to correspond with ritual movements of the Mass. The Antipope Robert Rankin

Posts: 8927 | From: In the pack | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574

 - Posted      Profile for Ad Orientem     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The Creed (we only use the one) was never meant as a complete summary of the faith but as a defence against a certain heresy. So, where do we find the orthodox faith? Certainly in the scriptures, the ancient liturgies, the council, the fathers and the lives of the saints.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76

 - Posted      Profile for Karl: Liberal Backslider   Author's homepage   Email Karl: Liberal Backslider   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
The Creed (we only use the one) was never meant as a complete summary of the faith but as a defence against a certain heresy. So, where do we find the orthodox faith? Certainly in the scriptures, the ancient liturgies, the council, the fathers and the lives of the saints.

Maybe you should see into the heart of the church, not its head.

--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.

Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574

 - Posted      Profile for Ad Orientem     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
The Creed (we only use the one) was never meant as a complete summary of the faith but as a defence against a certain heresy. So, where do we find the orthodox faith? Certainly in the scriptures, the ancient liturgies, the council, the fathers and the lives of the saints.

Maybe you should see into the heart of the church, not its head.
It's not either or but both. That's why I became an Orthodox Christian.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238

 - Posted      Profile for Crœsos     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
How can we distinguish between "real" Christians and those who are just pretending? If not in the Creeds, where can we find the heart of the Christian faith?

"Real" Christians are the ones who agree with you. Everyone else is just faking it. This is a very flexible method of determination, useful for all sides in any given intra-Christian dispute.

--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto

Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
St Deird
Shipmate
# 7631

 - Posted      Profile for St Deird   Author's homepage   Email St Deird   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
An ichthus tends to do it.

If someone believes that Jesus is the Christ, and the Son of God, and professes their faith in him, then I consider them to be my brother (or sister) in Christ.

Whether they're a good Christian is a whole other question. But I'm sure they'd be able to pick on my faith as much as I could pick on theirs, so I don't see that as reason to declare them outside the tribe.*

(* With a couple of exceptions. Such as, for instance, Fred Phelps. Who I'm pretty sure is worshipping a Jesus of his own imaginings, rather than anything to do with the real thing.)

--------------------
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
St Deird
Shipmate
# 7631

 - Posted      Profile for St Deird   Author's homepage   Email St Deird   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by St Deird:
An ichthus tends to do it.

If someone believes that Jesus is the Christ, and the Son of God, and the Saviour of mankind, and professes their faith in him, then I consider them to be my brother (or sister) in Christ.

Whether they're a good Christian is a whole other question. But I'm sure they'd be able to pick on my faith as much as I could pick on theirs, so I don't see that as reason to declare them outside the tribe.*

(* With a couple of exceptions. Such as, for instance, Fred Phelps. Who I'm pretty sure is worshipping a Jesus of his own imaginings, rather than anything to do with the real thing.)



--------------------
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
St Deird
Shipmate
# 7631

 - Posted      Profile for St Deird   Author's homepage   Email St Deird   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
...grr. Silly edit window keeps enabling flood protection on me, and then stuffing up my post formatting on the eventual result.

--------------------
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
LeRoc

Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216

 - Posted      Profile for LeRoc     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The terms 'the Christ', 'the Son of God' and 'the Saviour of Mankind' can mean different things. People interpret them in different ways. Do you allow for some leeway in this?

--------------------
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
St Deird
Shipmate
# 7631

 - Posted      Profile for St Deird   Author's homepage   Email St Deird   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
The terms 'the Christ', 'the Son of God' and 'the Saviour of Mankind' can mean different things. People interpret them in different ways. Do you allow for some leeway in this?

Some, yes, but not an inexhaustible supply. Mormons, for instance, mean something so radically different by "Son" and "God" that I wouldn't classify them as agreeing with me on the subject whatsoever.

--------------------
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
Robert Armin

All licens'd fool
# 182

 - Posted      Profile for Robert Armin     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
The Creed (we only use the one) was never meant as a complete summary of the faith but as a defence against a certain heresy. So, where do we find the orthodox faith? Certainly in the scriptures, the ancient liturgies, the council, the fathers and the lives of the saints.

AO, I agree that all those entities embody the orthodox faith. But what does that faith contain that is not in the Creed? What would I, as an Anglican, have to believe in order to share in the orthodox faith?

--------------------
Keeping fit was an obsession with Fr Moity .... He did chin ups in the vestry, calisthenics in the pulpit, and had developed a series of Tai-Chi exercises to correspond with ritual movements of the Mass. The Antipope Robert Rankin

Posts: 8927 | From: In the pack | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
no prophet's flag is set so...

Proceed to see sea
# 15560

 - Posted      Profile for no prophet's flag is set so...   Author's homepage   Email no prophet's flag is set so...   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
@OP

quote:
The view as articulated thus:
we [speaking for the Orthodox] have no intention of welcoming Anglicans, or RC's or whatever in unity as they are because our starting point is always, confess the orthodox faith first, then we can talk about unity.

is digusting and awful.

I take it some might be more welcoming than this to others who call themselves Christian and attempt to follow Jesus. It makes me remember offensive things said in my youth about people who wore odd clothes and spoke in funny ways and went to church in buildings where they sometimes spoke foreign languages.

Re the question in the thread's title, is not the heart of Christianity simply following Jesus and trying to be the least bit kind to one another. Charity, or to update the word, love. Explaining love as acting lovingly. I see nothing Jesusly in the quote that prompted this topic. Nil.

Perhaps the defence for the quote in the OP is about context, but it is still terrible. I take it as an outdated and sinful Old World way, the sort of terrible that has allowed people to pretend to follow Christ while killing each other, most recently in Europe I think in the former Yugoslav territories.

Thankfully, we have here various joint ministries among Anglican, Roman Catholics, United Church (means Methodist, Presbyterian, and Congregationalists), Lutherans and Mennonites. There aren't enough Orthodox to bother with here - and I almost want to say, thankfully, but I suspect the quote does not articulate the reality about Orthodox except in some unique intolerant sense, hopefully answered by the context of the original debate. Please reassure that this is so.

If there were any Orthodox locally, I would hope to have them do what comes normally to us if there were more: join in. The separation articulated in the OP is a symptom, and coming together with Christ and in Christ is the cure. [Help]

--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/

Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010  |  IP: Logged
ChastMastr
Shipmate
# 716

 - Posted      Profile for ChastMastr   Author's homepage   Email ChastMastr   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Surely, Ad Orientem, you mainly mean formal unity (communion and such as well) would require that level of doctrinal and eccesiastical agreement, not loving each other and acting together as fellow Christians for various things?

--------------------
My essays on comics continuity: http://chastmastr.tumblr.com/tagged/continuity

Posts: 14068 | From: Clearwater, Florida | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574

 - Posted      Profile for Ad Orientem     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
@OP

quote:
The view as articulated thus:
we [speaking for the Orthodox] have no intention of welcoming Anglicans, or RC's or whatever in unity as they are because our starting point is always, confess the orthodox faith first, then we can talk about unity.

is digusting and awful.

I take it some might be more welcoming than this to others who call themselves Christian and attempt to follow Jesus. It makes me remember offensive things said in my youth about people who wore odd clothes and spoke in funny ways and went to church in buildings where they sometimes spoke foreign languages.

Re the question in the thread's title, is not the heart of Christianity simply following Jesus and trying to be the least bit kind to one another. Charity, or to update the word, love. Explaining love as acting lovingly. I see nothing Jesusly in the quote that prompted this topic. Nil.

Perhaps the defence for the quote in the OP is about context, but it is still terrible. I take it as an outdated and sinful Old World way, the sort of terrible that has allowed people to pretend to follow Christ while killing each other, most recently in Europe I think in the former Yugoslav territories.

Thankfully, we have here various joint ministries among Anglican, Roman Catholics, United Church (means Methodist, Presbyterian, and Congregationalists), Lutherans and Mennonites. There aren't enough Orthodox to bother with here - and I almost want to say, thankfully, but I suspect the quote does not articulate the reality about Orthodox except in some unique intolerant sense, hopefully answered by the context of the original debate. Please reassure that this is so.

If there were any Orthodox locally, I would hope to have them do what comes normally to us if there were more: join in. The separation articulated in the OP is a symptom, and coming together with Christ and in Christ is the cure. [Help]

But how can we be one if we d not share the same faith? That's what I don't understand and never will. Unity is more than holding hands and saying "Isn't it lovely that we all get along". If you can make a case for excluding the Arians, Montanists, Donatists or JW's then it's just a matter of degree.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574

 - Posted      Profile for Ad Orientem     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ChastMastr:
Surely, Ad Orientem, you mainly mean formal unity (communion and such as well) would require that level of doctrinal and eccesiastical agreement, not loving each other and acting together as fellow Christians for various things?

Isn't the former what we're talking about? Oh, but I do believe we can be civil to each other and in a very limited sense even do things together. I'm not a fan of ecumenical services though and think they should be avoided. Ecumrnical discussions are for the most part pointless and sometimes even harmful.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574

 - Posted      Profile for Ad Orientem     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
The Creed (we only use the one) was never meant as a complete summary of the faith but as a defence against a certain heresy. So, where do we find the orthodox faith? Certainly in the scriptures, the ancient liturgies, the council, the fathers and the lives of the saints.

AO, I agree that all those entities embody the orthodox faith. But what does that faith contain that is not in the Creed? What would I, as an Anglican, have to believe in order to share in the orthodox faith?
That's not such an easy question. What orthodoxy is not, is just saying yes to the right things. Orthodoxy demands that we think with the Church, breath with the Church, participate in the life of the Church. Heart AND mind. Of course, some things we assent to expicitly, such as the Creed, and other things implicitly. And that's what thinking with the Church is really all about, that we understand the faith through the Church. Did you want a list? That could be very long indeed. Really what Orthodoxy expects from the West is repentence, then the rest will flow from that.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
ChastMastr
Shipmate
# 716

 - Posted      Profile for ChastMastr   Author's homepage   Email ChastMastr   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Ah, I think that may be the key then. If we're still able to acknowledge one another as practicing, despite our disagreements, the Christian faith, with mutual charity, then I think that matters more than some kind of formal ecclesiastical unity. [Smile]

--------------------
My essays on comics continuity: http://chastmastr.tumblr.com/tagged/continuity

Posts: 14068 | From: Clearwater, Florida | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130

 - Posted      Profile for South Coast Kevin   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
But how can we be one if we d not share the same faith? That's what I don't understand and never will. Unity is more than holding hands and saying "Isn't it lovely that we all get along". If you can make a case for excluding the Arians, Montanists, Donatists or JW's then it's just a matter of degree.

I repeat my question from a couple of days ago (on a different thread, I think) - precisely to what extent must our faith be the same in order for there to be unity? ISTM what you want is for people to subscribe to your denomination's statements of faith and practice; that's enough unity for you.

Also, what do you think about defining unity as gathering around Christ? We reveal Christ to the world by loving one another and doing what he did (and more, Jesus said his followers would do!) while he was on earth. I think having ecumenical missions and social projects is far more important than ecumenical services; as long as we see ourselves as part of the church in our city / area, then personally I think gathering separately is not a huge problem. I think the main thing is recognising, supporting and praying for each other's work.

AO, you just seem to have a far stricter and broader than necessary view of what constitutes the essentials of the Christian faith...

--------------------
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
St Deird
Shipmate
# 7631

 - Posted      Profile for St Deird   Author's homepage   Email St Deird   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
Really what Orthodoxy expects from the West is repentence, then the rest will flow from that.

Repentance from what?

From my manifold sins? Have already done that - and will continue to do so for as long as I keep committing them.

From not being Orthodox? No-one has yet demonstrated anything repentable about that.

--------------------
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
ChastMastr
Shipmate
# 716

 - Posted      Profile for ChastMastr   Author's homepage   Email ChastMastr   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Well, if AE is talking about unity in the sense of two denominations fusing into one, then of course that's going to get into a lot of issues regarding the different doctrines both groups hold.

But that's not at all necessary for the kind of unity we can all have as fellow Christians, praying together, loving one another, and working together on various things.

--------------------
My essays on comics continuity: http://chastmastr.tumblr.com/tagged/continuity

Posts: 14068 | From: Clearwater, Florida | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130

 - Posted      Profile for South Coast Kevin   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ChastMastr:
But that's not at all necessary for the kind of unity we can all have as fellow Christians, praying together, loving one another, and working together on various things.

Yes, and from my limited experience it seems that when we do this, the doctrinal / worship practice differences seem to become, well, less important. I was working on a social project a couple of months back and got talking to a Roman Catholic wife and husband. Their vibrant love of God and evident enthusiasm for being open and upfront about their faith rocked a few of my preconceptions...

--------------------
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
iamchristianhearmeroar
Shipmate
# 15483

 - Posted      Profile for iamchristianhearmeroar   Author's homepage   Email iamchristianhearmeroar   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
To be honest, I don't think any of this is about faith or what we believe: it's about authority.

To what source to do we look for authority to direct our belief and practice? I think as Christians we would (I hope) all answer "Jesus Christ" to that question. But as to how we receive that authority now, there is huge variability - Bible (which one?), (Holy) Tradition (which one?), Church (which one?), the influence today of the Holy Spirit (discerned by whom?), our own powers of Reason (alone or collectively?) - one of these to the exclusion of all others, or a blend of various ones? That is where fundamentally our differences lie.

To the statement Ad Orientem made:

quote:
Orthodoxy demands that we think with the Church, breath with the Church, participate in the life of the Church. Heart AND mind.
the question immediately arises which "Church"? *The* Church by whose definition? Is it enough to consider yourself part of the Church Universal in your own mind, or must you be part of the Church Universal by someone else's definition? And if so, whose?

--------------------
My blog: http://alastairnewman.wordpress.com/

Posts: 642 | From: London, UK | Registered: Feb 2010  |  IP: Logged
no prophet's flag is set so...

Proceed to see sea
# 15560

 - Posted      Profile for no prophet's flag is set so...   Author's homepage   Email no prophet's flag is set so...   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
But how can we be one if we d not share the same faith? That's what I don't understand and never will. Unity is more than holding hands and saying "Isn't it lovely that we all get along". If you can make a case for excluding the Arians, Montanists, Donatists or JW's then it's just a matter of degree.

Wow. Just wow. It is so much worse than I ever imagined.

Your argument of course is taking things to an illogical extreme, and I suspect anyone would see that. I have always viewed some things as rather interesting on the social level. Are people willing to "and also with you" when someone says "God/The lord be with you", and, the willingness to say "peace be with you" with the response "and also with you". Rather, no, there will not peace and God will not be with me from you.

You further mistake unity with working together.

--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/

Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010  |  IP: Logged
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574

 - Posted      Profile for Ad Orientem     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by iamchristianhearmeroar:
To be honest, I don't think any of this is about faith or what we believe: it's about authority.

To what source to do we look for authority to direct our belief and practice? I think as Christians we would (I hope) all answer "Jesus Christ" to that question. But as to how we receive that authority now, there is huge variability - Bible (which one?), (Holy) Tradition (which one?), Church (which one?), the influence today of the Holy Spirit (discerned by whom?), our own powers of Reason (alone or collectively?) - one of these to the exclusion of all others, or a blend of various ones? That is where fundamentally our differences lie.

To the statement Ad Orientem made:

quote:
Orthodoxy demands that we think with the Church, breath with the Church, participate in the life of the Church. Heart AND mind.
the question immediately arises which "Church"? *The* Church by whose definition? Is it enough to consider yourself part of the Church Universal in your own mind, or must you be part of the Church Universal by someone else's definition? And if so, whose?
You must know how I would answer that. The Church is visible and we must be visibly in communion with it. Yes, we (Orthodoxy) believe that we are THE Church.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
Robert Armin

All licens'd fool
# 182

 - Posted      Profile for Robert Armin     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Really what Orthodoxy expects from the West is repentence, then the rest will flow from that.
It's already been asked, but I too would ask, repent of what? It's hard to repent when you don't know what sin you may have committed.

--------------------
Keeping fit was an obsession with Fr Moity .... He did chin ups in the vestry, calisthenics in the pulpit, and had developed a series of Tai-Chi exercises to correspond with ritual movements of the Mass. The Antipope Robert Rankin

Posts: 8927 | From: In the pack | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574

 - Posted      Profile for Ad Orientem     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
quote:
Really what Orthodoxy expects from the West is repentence, then the rest will flow from that.
It's already been asked, but I too would ask, repent of what? It's hard to repent when you don't know what sin you may have committed.
Repent of its errors, beginning with its addition to the Creed.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
IngoB

Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700

 - Posted      Profile for IngoB   Email IngoB   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
AO, I agree that all those entities embody the orthodox faith. But what does that faith contain that is not in the Creed? What would I, as an Anglican, have to believe in order to share in the orthodox faith? ...

It's already been asked, but I too would ask, repent of what? It's hard to repent when you don't know what sin you may have committed.

Robert, forget it. You are asking in a Western mode. There is no Orthodox "Summa Theologiae". There is not even an Orthodox "Catechism". Nobody can give you a real answer to what you are asking there. At least certainly not a definitive answer that all Orthodox would agree with. That's just not out there.

If I want to be nasty, then I could say that Orthodoxy has intellectually flat-lined for the last thousand years. If I want to be nice, then I could say that for the last thousand years the Orthodox focus has been on something else than expanding and harmonising the doctrinal apparatus in agreement across their communion.

Anyway, what Orthodoxy really is about is belonging. What you have to believe in is that you must become Orthodox. What you must repent of is that you have not been Orthodox. That's pretty much it. The rest is detail, you will pick it up. Though not much of it will be doctrinal detail. You will probably be able to chant an entire liturgy in Old Slavic before you can give an account of the Orthodox faith at the level of the Penny Catechism. That's just not how they roll, best I can tell.

--------------------
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
ChastMastr
Shipmate
# 716

 - Posted      Profile for ChastMastr   Author's homepage   Email ChastMastr   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
You must know how I would answer that. The Church is visible and we must be visibly in communion with it. Yes, we (Orthodoxy) believe that we are THE Church.

So what do you believe other Christians (Anglican, Baptist, Lutheran, Methodist, RC, etc.) are?

I would also, since this has been coming up in various ways (I just asked him about a reference to John 6 on another thread), ask IngoB the same question: What do you believe other Christians (Anglican, Baptist, Lutheran, Methodist, Orthodox, etc.) are?

--------------------
My essays on comics continuity: http://chastmastr.tumblr.com/tagged/continuity

Posts: 14068 | From: Clearwater, Florida | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574

 - Posted      Profile for Ad Orientem     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ChastMastr:
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
You must know how I would answer that. The Church is visible and we must be visibly in communion with it. Yes, we (Orthodoxy) believe that we are THE Church.

So what do you believe other Christians (Anglican, Baptist, Lutheran, Methodist, RC, etc.) are?

I would also, since this has been coming up in various ways (I just asked him about a reference to John 6 on another thread), ask IngoB the same question: What do you believe other Christians (Anglican, Baptist, Lutheran, Methodist, Orthodox, etc.) are?

Christians not in communion with the Church. In otherwords, outside the Church. As for what non-Orthodox think of the Orthodox, that is their own business.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
Mark Betts

Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074

 - Posted      Profile for Mark Betts   Email Mark Betts   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by St Deird:
...(* With a couple of exceptions. Such as, for instance, Fred Phelps. Who I'm pretty sure is worshipping a Jesus of his own imaginings, rather than anything to do with the real thing.)

Not any more he isn't - he died in March.

--------------------
"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
ChastMastr
Shipmate
# 716

 - Posted      Profile for ChastMastr   Author's homepage   Email ChastMastr   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
Christians not in communion with the Church. In otherwords, outside the Church. As for what non-Orthodox think of the Orthodox, that is their own business.

But do you mean "outside the Church" in the sense of "not real Christians," or "not really part of God's family," or what? (What I suppose the Baptists would call "unsaved.")

--------------------
My essays on comics continuity: http://chastmastr.tumblr.com/tagged/continuity

Posts: 14068 | From: Clearwater, Florida | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574

 - Posted      Profile for Ad Orientem     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I'm willing to accept that Christian is a rather broad term, at the very least Trinitarian. As for who is "saved", I would say that we know how one CAN be saved, that is, through the Church. Those outside we don't know for sure but there is the danger that they aren't. That's not to say that being inside is a guarantee either, just that it is the only way we know for sure one can be.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
ChastMastr
Shipmate
# 716

 - Posted      Profile for ChastMastr   Author's homepage   Email ChastMastr   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Not sure how to ask what I'm trying to ask here... :/ I mean, let's say you were with a group of Christians of various churches on a desert island. Would you pray together? Would you see them as brothers and sisters in Christ?

--------------------
My essays on comics continuity: http://chastmastr.tumblr.com/tagged/continuity

Posts: 14068 | From: Clearwater, Florida | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574

 - Posted      Profile for Ad Orientem     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Certainly not if what was being prayed for conflicted with the orthodox faith. Certainly I would try to love them as I would any other human being, for we are all made in the image of God.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
IngoB

Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700

 - Posted      Profile for IngoB   Email IngoB   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ChastMastr:
I would also, since this has been coming up in various ways (I just asked him about a reference to John 6 on another thread), ask IngoB the same question: What do you believe other Christians (Anglican, Baptist, Lutheran, Methodist, Orthodox, etc.) are?

Heretic and/or schismatic Christians. In terms of the "Body of Christ" analogy, something like a diseased organ, a severed hand, the atrophied legs of a quadriplegic. Part of the body, but with impaired function by and in itself, and not integrated into the body's systems properly so as to follow the will of the Head as a healthy whole. Our friend Ad Orientem of course has recently moved over from the healthy to the collapsed lung. [Biased]

--------------------
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
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130

 - Posted      Profile for South Coast Kevin   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
I'm willing to accept that Christian is a rather broad term, at the very least Trinitarian. As for who is "saved", I would say that we know how one CAN be saved, that is, through the Church. Those outside we don't know for sure but there is the danger that they aren't. That's not to say that being inside is a guarantee either, just that it is the only way we know for sure one can be.

Woah, steady on. Isn't being saved rather more to do with Jesus than with the 'Church' (in quotes because you and I mean different things by the word). Even if you want to say that true faith in Jesus will inevitably lead to being in the 'Church', then it's still Jesus doing the saving, IMO.

--------------------
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
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574

 - Posted      Profile for Ad Orientem     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
quote:
Originally posted by ChastMastr:
I would also, since this has been coming up in various ways (I just asked him about a reference to John 6 on another thread), ask IngoB the same question: What do you believe other Christians (Anglican, Baptist, Lutheran, Methodist, Orthodox, etc.) are?

Heretic and/or schismatic Christians. In terms of the "Body of Christ" analogy, something like a diseased organ, a severed hand, the atrophied legs of a quadriplegic. Part of the body, but with impaired function by and in itself, and not integrated into the body's systems properly so as to follow the will of the Head as a healthy whole. Our friend Ad Orientem of course has recently moved over from the healthy to the collapsed lung. [Biased]
If you want to use the collapsed lung anology then fine,but you then beling to an impaired body, you yourself are only functioning with one lung. I say, bollocks. The body is not impaired. They body is still fully functioning. Schismatics and heretics are simply not part of the body.

[ 18. July 2014, 21:49: Message edited by: Ad Orientem ]

Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574

 - Posted      Profile for Ad Orientem     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
I'm willing to accept that Christian is a rather broad term, at the very least Trinitarian. As for who is "saved", I would say that we know how one CAN be saved, that is, through the Church. Those outside we don't know for sure but there is the danger that they aren't. That's not to say that being inside is a guarantee either, just that it is the only way we know for sure one can be.

Woah, steady on. Isn't being saved rather more to do with Jesus than with the 'Church' (in quotes because you and I mean different things by the word). Even if you want to say that true faith in Jesus will inevitably lead to being in the 'Church', then it's still Jesus doing the saving, IMO.
But I wouldn't nake such a distinction. To be saved through the Church is to be saved through Christ. The Church, after all, is his body.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
ChastMastr
Shipmate
# 716

 - Posted      Profile for ChastMastr   Author's homepage   Email ChastMastr   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
But I wouldn't nake such a distinction. To be saved through the Church is to be saved through Christ. The Church, after all, is his body.

So then if someone who isn't in the Orthodox Church (earthly sense, I mean, going to an Orthodox church, getting baptized by Orthodox clergy, taking Orthodox Communion, etc.) trusts in Jesus to be saved, then they are being saved through the Orthodox Church as well, even if they don't know it?

--------------------
My essays on comics continuity: http://chastmastr.tumblr.com/tagged/continuity

Posts: 14068 | From: Clearwater, Florida | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130

 - Posted      Profile for South Coast Kevin   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
To be saved through the Church is to be saved through Christ. The Church, after all, is his body.

Sorry, but IMO this is stretching words beyond what they can bear. Christ and the Church are not the same thing, so being saved by one is not equivalent to being saved by the other. You have to justify the link between the two, in terms of their role in salvation, I think.

--------------------
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
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Wow. No wonder Jesus actually delays coming back. There's no sign of us wanting Him, wanting to be like Him, be His arms E or W is there? We won't let Him back.

The heart of the Christian faith E & W is a hard vacuum.

And nature surely abhors it.

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
Anyway, what Orthodoxy really is about is belonging. What you have to believe in is that you must become Orthodox. What you must repent of is that you have not been Orthodox. That's pretty much it. The rest is detail, you will pick it up. Though not much of it will be doctrinal detail. You will probably be able to chant an entire liturgy in Old Slavic before you can give an account of the Orthodox faith at the level of the Penny Catechism. That's just not how they roll, best I can tell.

Golly, this is actually pretty good. Not perfect, but pretty good. Except if you want to know what we believe, we have this thing called the Creed. We have church services. We have typika.

It's true we don't have the kind of groupthink that the Roman Catholic Church and the U.S. Republican Party have. We don't have an Official Catechism with numbered points like Wittgenstein's Tractatus.

If you want to be nasty, you could say we have intellectually flat-lined for 1000 years, but only if you ignore Gregory Palamas, or you are missing four fingers. The very most you could say would be 600 years. In which we haven't been reinventing Christianity or fabricating new dogmas, what the hell is wrong with us?

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

Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621

 - Posted      Profile for Jamat   Author's homepage   Email Jamat   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:


How can we distinguish between "real" Christians and those who are just pretending? If not in the Creeds, where can we find the heart of the Christian faith?

You could begin by defining real. Is real a faith assertion or something empirical? Or maybe something experiential. After that try defining Christian heart. Is such a thing to do with action based charity? In NZ we sometimes have hitch hikers. I generally drive past but for once I didn't. The guy had left his wife and 8 week baby in a broken down car and was hitching to where he had another vehicle so he could go back for them. I wonder how many of those I have driven past. And of course it is winter here.

--------------------
Jamat ..in utmost longditude, where Heaven
with Earth and ocean meets, the setting sun slowly descended, and with right aspect
Against the eastern gate of Paradise. (Milton Paradise Lost Bk iv)

Posts: 3228 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged
ChastMastr
Shipmate
# 716

 - Posted      Profile for ChastMastr   Author's homepage   Email ChastMastr   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
How can we distinguish between "real" Christians and those who are just pretending?

I'm tempted to say that the obsession with this has perhaps caused more damage to the earthly church over the centuries than... well, a whole lot of things. Particularly when earthly power (law, punishment, hot pokers, etc.) has been involved. Even though we were told that the tares will grow along with the wheat and get sifted out at the end by those who know much more than we do...

--------------------
My essays on comics continuity: http://chastmastr.tumblr.com/tagged/continuity

Posts: 14068 | From: Clearwater, Florida | 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 
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
How can we distinguish between "real" Christians and those who are just pretending?

Why do we need to? Our Founder told at last one parable about letting the wheat and tares grow up together, and let the harvester -- that's not us -- sort 'em out later. I have always understood that to be about the Church and authentic and inauthentic Christians.

My job is to do what *I* can to be a real, authentic Christian, not to decide who else gets to claim that title.

That said, I think the use of the word "Christian" has become problematic, inasmuch as everybody wants to call themselves that regardless of whether or not they believe the Creed. I tend to think of Christianity as a trinitarian belief that is delineated by the Nicene Creed as a "sine qua non." Clearly others do not. That's not my problem.

I daresay, unless one is a priest or other kind of spiritual advisor, it's not one's problem at all how or what someone else believes. Is that guy over there an authentic Christian?, I might be tempted to ask. When I'm at my best I will tell myself, MYOFB and pray for your own salvation.

Unless it's politicians, then it all goes out the window and I loudly decry the incongruity between their actions and their supposed faith. I'm not perfect.

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

Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574

 - Posted      Profile for Ad Orientem     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
To be saved through the Church is to be saved through Christ. The Church, after all, is his body.

Sorry, but IMO this is stretching words beyond what they can bear. Christ and the Church are not the same thing, so being saved by one is not equivalent to being saved by the other. You have to justify the link between the two, in terms of their role in salvation, I think.
Have you read the scriptures? It's no stretch. Christ founded the Church, a visible Church, so that we might know where to go to be saved, and the Church is his body.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
ChastMastr
Shipmate
# 716

 - Posted      Profile for ChastMastr   Author's homepage   Email ChastMastr   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Just to ask AO again since it kind of got lost above:

quote:
Originally posted by ChastMastr:
So then if someone who isn't in the Orthodox Church (earthly sense, I mean, going to an Orthodox church, getting baptized by Orthodox clergy, taking Orthodox Communion, etc.) trusts in Jesus to be saved, then they are being saved through the Orthodox Church as well, even if they don't know it?



--------------------
My essays on comics continuity: http://chastmastr.tumblr.com/tagged/continuity

Posts: 14068 | From: Clearwater, Florida | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574

 - Posted      Profile for Ad Orientem     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ChastMastr:
Just to ask AO again since it kind of got lost above:

quote:
Originally posted by ChastMastr:
So then if someone who isn't in the Orthodox Church (earthly sense, I mean, going to an Orthodox church, getting baptized by Orthodox clergy, taking Orthodox Communion, etc.) trusts in Jesus to be saved, then they are being saved through the Orthodox Church as well, even if they don't know it?


IF such are saved, then the short answer is yes.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130

 - Posted      Profile for South Coast Kevin   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
Have you read the scriptures? It's no stretch. Christ founded the Church, a visible Church, so that we might know where to go to be saved, and the Church is his body.

Yes, I've read the Scriptures - there's no need to be patronising [Smile]

You say we go to the visible church to be saved - I suppose I think of the 'visible church' as any community of people that gathers around Christ (I know that's a wooly phrase), and in any case where does the idea come from that we must go to the church to be saved? Aren't we saved by going to Christ, by following and believing in him?

--------------------
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
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574

 - Posted      Profile for Ad Orientem     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
Have you read the scriptures? It's no stretch. Christ founded the Church, a visible Church, so that we might know where to go to be saved, and the Church is his body.

Yes, I've read the Scriptures - there's no need to be patronising [Smile]

You say we go to the visible church to be saved - I suppose I think of the 'visible church' as any community of people that gathers around Christ (I know that's a wooly phrase), and in any case where does the idea come from that we must go to the church to be saved? Aren't we saved by going to Christ, by following and believing in him?

Looking at the scriptures, the Gospels where Christ gounds his Church, and the Acts of the Apostles, and the various epistles, it's quite clear that it's within the context of the Church that we are saved. And we see also the Apostle temporarily, at least, giving one of the Corinthians up to the devil when he excommunicates him, showing that outside the context of the Church we are in danger.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2 
 
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