Patriarch Sviatoslav Shevchuk of the UGCC

4,995 Views | 60 Replies | Last: 7 yr ago by Zobel
BustUpAChiffarobe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
beautiful words today about the Catholicity of the Body of Christ

quote:


The Ukrainian Greco-Catholic Church, the largest of the Eastern Catholic Churches is not in any way opposed to the Orthodox Churches. We are an Orthodox Church, with Orthodox theology, liturgy, spirituality and canonical tradition that chooses to manifest this Orthodoxy in the spirit of the first Christian millennium, in communion with Rome. We are witnesses to the fact that Christian East and West not only have an obligation to seek some vague rapprochement, but are called by our Savior Himself to actually live the unity of one Body of Christ, not in the subjugation of one to another, but in the loving union of the Three Divine Persons who live not three lives parallel to each other, but one life: a life of self-emptying love, that gives life rather than take it. It is our mission, as a Church that experienced great persecution and martyrdom in the twentieth century, to stand up for those who experience such persecution today: our brothers and sisters the Copts of Egypt, the Melkites, Chaldeans, Syrian Orthodox, Assyrians, and others in the Middle East. It is our duty to help them tell their stories in this, one of the most respected forums of the world


Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Lots of political currents involved here. Semi-rhetorical question: why was he asked if he was opposed to Orthodox churches?
BustUpAChiffarobe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
k2aggie07 said:

Lots of political currents involved here. Semi-rhetorical question: why was he asked if he was opposed to Orthodox churches?
He has a very stormy relationship with the Russian Orthodox Church; most notably due to the events happening in the Crimea.
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I'm familiar, which is why it's semi rhetorical.
FTACo88-FDT24dad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
As a Roman Catholic who struggles with some of what i consider the political weaknesses of the RCC, I am interested in learning more about this. Is there a resource I can access?
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Google his name and Patriarch Kirill.

Long story short Ukraine is a pawn in geopolitical chess and unfortunately the churches within the country have become involved. And for whatever reason, Rome too via Francis.
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
(semi)related. Got this email today, a shared letter between a bishop and a correspondent...




Quote:

Your Eminence, Bless,

I think, with rare historical exceptions, the corruption of the Church intensifies as its intimacy with the state increases.

As the political and economic situation continues to deteriorate in Greece, and the disestablishment of the ecumenists as the "state" Church becomes more likely, I wonder how the "traditionalists" within the state Church will react. Despite the turmoil to individual Greeks and the nation as a whole, perhaps some will be released from their bondage to the state Church and return to the traditional faith as preserved in the GOC.

Kissing Your Right Hand, [name removed]

Dear (name removed),

God bless you.

The mantra of the monks throughout Byzantine history was obedience and order with regard to the state, but never to the point of compromising the Faith. As His Eminence, Metropolitan Chrysostomos once wrote: "This is a bedrock of Byzantine theocracy." This helped me more than anything else to understand, to some extent, the enigma of modern Orthodox nationalism (what the holy Bishop Nikolai (Velimirovich) of Serbia called "tribalism"), as well as the distortion of Orthodox monarchy by the western idea of "absolute monarchy," which became very evident in post-Byzantine times. In our day, as Bishop Photiy in Bulgaria says, we do not even understand the spiritual nature of government and lack both rulers and citizens who have the virtue to rule and to followand especially with regard to the establishment of genuine Orthodox monarchies. I agree totally.

As for the Greek traditionalists in the State Church, they can be accused of some cowardice for not having moved more definitively and sooner, but that is a human trait that many of us show from time to time. The important witness of these people is that they serve as a chastisement to the traditionalist extremists who, with all of their lip service to the Faith, forget the overarching service of the heart to Christ. Their arrogant and firm condemnations of the New Calendarists do nothing to invite and enlighten them. If the modernists suffer from cowardice, what spiritual bravery do we show our errant brothers, some of whom have been brought to the brink of apostasy by their spiritual leaders, in happily and almost casually calling them schismatics, heretics, outside the Church, without Grace, and so on? I hope to God that we have gotten far past that Protestant backwater fundamentalism and can enter into the realm of love and of the heart. That way, when those in error come to us, we can repent with them, if not more than they. They sin in falsehood; we sin in Truth, and with pride of a spiritually sick kind: condemning others, speaking against them, ruining their reputations, and so on, and often even with our own circles, too!

I am, in writing this, following what His Eminence, Metropolitan Chrysostomos has preached and taught for years (instructed, as he and many were, by the example of his spiritual Father, Metropolitan Cyprian). If his words sound familiar, it is not because I am mouthing them. It is because they are true and I believe them, and especially because they are taught without those who express them declaring them indisputable "dogma" or with horrible words of condemnation for those who may disagree with them. We must, as all of them and as I also say, be sensitive to the Faith yet wholly loving to the people. His Eminence told me a story about St. Dorotheos of Gaza, if I am remembering correctly. I have heard him repeat it frequently. When the Abba would enter the cell of a monk and find it dirty and cluttered, he would say: "This Father must love spiritual things, for he is undistracted by worldly cares." And when he entered the cell of a monk who was meticulous and had everything in its place, he would say: "This Father must be spiritually virtuous, for the exterior condition of his cell shows the interior condition of his soul."

How far we all are from that Abba in our hateful condemnation, in the name of the Faith of the Lord of love, of the New Calendarists, of anyone who differs from us in our pet beliefs and views, and of those who lack the courage to do what they well may feel in their hearts. Rather than approach everyone where he is, looking for virtue, we condemn, hate, and gleefully take arrogant and sinful pride in the fact that others are going to Hell and we are going to be saved. And I apply this not just to the extremist traditionalists. It applies especially to the extremist New Calendarists, ecumenists, and "official," Orthodox, who have used their influence and association with governments (often at the cost of violating their Faith) to humiliate, quiet, and try to disgrace us as renegades, schismatics, outside the Church, gutter trash, illiterates, and peasantsand this, ad nauseam, in the name of their liberal ecumenism and religious toleration! What surprises await us at death. Even a sensitive agnostic would have a better chance at salvation than we do when, called to to be loving Christians, we preach hatred, whatever side, right or wrong, we may be on when divisions occurs.

I have wandered off on tangents in responding to your question. I just hope that I have still offered spiritual terra firma on which you may stand.
...
Let us pray for one another and commend all of our life to Christ our God!

Your humble servant, Bp. Auxentios of Etna and Portland
BustUpAChiffarobe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
k2aggie07 said:

Google his name and Patriarch Kirill.

Long story short Ukraine is a pawn in geopolitical chess and unfortunately the churches within the country have become involved. And for whatever reason, Rome too via Francis.


I think Pope Francis is a little out of his element and is being outfoxed by people far more cunning than he with regards to the overtures being made by the ROC. I believe he is such a loving and merciful guy, hes just tickled to talk to anyone especially the Orthodox with whom I believe he desperately desires Communion. In his overtures to them, it seems like he is taking their side an alienating Major Abp Shevchuk, which is certainly not his intention, he just wants to be nice to everyone.
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
He's been involved in politics for too long for me to believe that. I mean... He's an adult, for one, and has been involved in high level administration for a very long time. Give him some credit.
UTExan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Funny how all those Orthodox Christians seemed to want to flee to Protestant America back in the day when they lived in such beatific environments. Can you explain why, BustUp?
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Uh... Communism and war?
swimmerbabe11
How long do you want to ignore this user?
And it is really cold.
UTExan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
k2aggie07 said:

Uh... Communism and war?
But how could Communism even come to fruition in the earthly paradises created by Orthodoxy and Catholicism?
swimmerbabe11
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mostly cause it's cold. I mentioned the part where it is cold, right?
Sq16Aggie2006
How long do you want to ignore this user?
UTExan said:

k2aggie07 said:

Uh... Communism and war?
But how could Communism even come to fruition in the earthly paradises created by Orthodoxy and Catholicism?
Wait till you find out what happened to the birthplace of Protestantism in the 30's and 40's. Seriously, I don't know where you're going with this, I hesitate to answer your questions as it seems so basic I can't but imagine you're throwing up strawmen for some debauched purpose.
FTACo88-FDT24dad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Wasnt the communist manifesto primarily a criticism of the conditions of 1840s Protestant, virulently anti-catholic England? Wasn't it also inspired by a group of radical workers called the "Communist League" that met in London and commissioned Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, who had recently become members, to write a manifesto on their behalf? Wasn't the Communist Manifesto originally published in London in 1848.

And isn't this document written as a critique of England and published in London the most widely read and the most influential of all of the founding documents on socialism? Isn't it the systematic statement of the philosophy that has come to be known as Marxism?
UTExan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sq16Aggie2006 said:

UTExan said:

k2aggie07 said:

Uh... Communism and war?
But how could Communism even come to fruition in the earthly paradises created by Orthodoxy and Catholicism?
Wait till you find out what happened to the birthplace of Protestantism in the 30's and 40's. Seriously, I don't know where you're going with this, I hesitate to answer your questions as it seems so basic I can't but imagine you're throwing up strawmen for some debauched purpose.
That's the point: while the US was experiencing vibrant spiritual growth through the 1st and 2nd Great Awakenings, the Pentecostal movement and the Azusa Street revival, Germany had basically surrendered to a theology of replacing Luther's Aha! moment in reading Romans with a human rationalist approach to theology---the "Higher Criticism" movement or as some called it then, "German Rationalism". The strength of the Protestant confessional church had been subsumed by the nationalist movement of Germany first under Bismarck, then the Kaiser and then the Nazi movement. Orthodoxy and Catholicism have have never been shy about suppressing pietist and revivalist churches whether in Europe, Latin America or Asia. America flourished because neither Orthodoxy nor Catholicism were sufficiently strong to control the various state and federal governments. Protestant attempts to limit Catholic influence were rightly deemed unconstitutional.
Sq16Aggie2006
How long do you want to ignore this user?
UTExan said:

Sq16Aggie2006 said:

UTExan said:

k2aggie07 said:

Uh... Communism and war?
But how could Communism even come to fruition in the earthly paradises created by Orthodoxy and Catholicism?
Wait till you find out what happened to the birthplace of Protestantism in the 30's and 40's. Seriously, I don't know where you're going with this, I hesitate to answer your questions as it seems so basic I can't but imagine you're throwing up strawmen for some debauched purpose.
That's the point: while the US was experiencing vibrant spiritual growth through the 1st and 2nd Great Awakenings, the Pentecostal movement and the Azusa Street revival, Germany had basically surrendered to a theology of replacing Luther's Aha! moment in reading Romans with a human rationalist approach to theology---the "Higher Criticism" movement or as some called it then, "German Rationalism". The strength of the Protestant confessional church had been subsumed by the nationalist movement of Germany first under Bismarck, then the Kaiser and then the Nazi movement. Orthodoxy and Catholicism have have never been shy about suppressing pietist and revivalist churches whether in Europe, Latin America or Asia. America flourished because neither Orthodoxy nor Catholicism were sufficiently strong to control the various state and federal governments. Protestant attempts to limit Catholic influence were rightly deemed unconstitutional.
I think your timeline is a little skewed, America was still a colony at the time of the 1st Great Awakening and the Benny Hinn-esque episode that was the Asuza street movement didn't occur until the 2nd decade of the 20th century. The 2nd Great Awakening is awesome, however as it ended up being a major force behind the Great Protestant Battle of the 1860's, pitting Northern Protestant Abolitionists vs Southern Slave-Owning Protestants in the Civil War.

What does all this prove? Namely, that "**** happens" and there are a host of reasons why people fled to America, and why America is such an awesome country; the least of which are their religious demographics.

Take the Potato Famine for instance, which led to many Irish Catholics fleeing the Emerald Isle. This is a natural disaster exacerbated by the Anti-Catholic laws put in place by Protestant England that caused 1,000,000 to flee, many to the U.S.A; where they could be free from Despotic Protestant Great Britain.
UTExan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sq16Aggie2006 said:

UTExan said:

Sq16Aggie2006 said:

UTExan said:

k2aggie07 said:

Uh... Communism and war?
But how could Communism even come to fruition in the earthly paradises created by Orthodoxy and Catholicism?
Wait till you find out what happened to the birthplace of Protestantism in the 30's and 40's. Seriously, I don't know where you're going with this, I hesitate to answer your questions as it seems so basic I can't but imagine you're throwing up strawmen for some debauched purpose.
That's the point: while the US was experiencing vibrant spiritual growth through the 1st and 2nd Great Awakenings, the Pentecostal movement and the Azusa Street revival, Germany had basically surrendered to a theology of replacing Luther's Aha! moment in reading Romans with a human rationalist approach to theology---the "Higher Criticism" movement or as some called it then, "German Rationalism". The strength of the Protestant confessional church had been subsumed by the nationalist movement of Germany first under Bismarck, then the Kaiser and then the Nazi movement. Orthodoxy and Catholicism have have never been shy about suppressing pietist and revivalist churches whether in Europe, Latin America or Asia. America flourished because neither Orthodoxy nor Catholicism were sufficiently strong to control the various state and federal governments. Protestant attempts to limit Catholic influence were rightly deemed unconstitutional.
I think your timeline is a little skewed, America was still a colony at the time of the 1st Great Awakening and the Benny Hinn-esque episode that was the Asuza street movement didn't occur until the 2nd decade of the 20th century. The 2nd Great Awakening is awesome, however as it ended up being a major force behind the Great Protestant Battle of the 1860's, pitting Northern Protestant Abolitionists vs Southern Slave-Owning Protestants in the Civil War.

What does all this prove? Namely, that "**** happens" and there are a host of reasons why people fled to America, and why America is such an awesome country; the least of which are their religious demographics.

Take the Potato Famine for instance, which led to many Irish Catholics fleeing the Emerald Isle. This is a natural disaster exacerbated by the Anti-Catholic laws put in place by Protestant England that caused 1,000,000 to flee, many to the U.S.A; where they could be free from Despotic Protestant Great Britain.
Not off at all. The First Great Awakening was a prelude to independence and the Second a prelude to civil war. Both helped solidify a fideistic national identity as a (pietist Protestant) Christian country. De Tocqueville noted as much:

Quote:

Upon my arrival in the United States the religious aspect of the country was the first thing that struck my attention; and the longer I stayed there, the more I perceived the great political consequences resulting from this new state of things. In France I had almost always seen the spirit of religion and the spirit of freedom marching in opposite directions. But in America I found they were intimately united and that they reigned in common over the same country.Alexis De Tocqueville: "Democracy in America"

Religion in America ... must be regarded as the foremost of the political institutions of that country; for if it does not impart a taste for freedom, it facilitates the use of it. Indeed, it is in this same point of view that the inhabitants of the United States themselves look upon religious belief. I do not know whether all Americans have a sincere faith in their religion-for who can search the human heart?-But I am certain that they hold it to be indispensable to the maintenance of republican institutions. This opinion is not peculiar to a class of citizens or a party, but it belongs to the whole nation and to every rank of society.Alexis De Tocqueville: "Democracy in America"

The sects that exist in the United States are innumerable. They all differ in respect to the worship which is due to the Creator; but they all agree in respect to the duties which are due from man to man. Each sect adores the Deity in its own peculiar manner, but all sects preach the same moral law in the name of God....
Moreover, all the sects of the United States are comprised within the great unity of Christianity, and Christian morality is everywhere the same.

Not until I went into the churches of America and heard her pulpits flame with righteousness did I understand the secret of her genius and power. America is great because America is good, and if America ever ceases to be good, America will cease to be great.
Alexis De Tocqueville: "Democracy in America"

http://www.ministers-best-friend.com/Alexis-de-Tocqueville-Quotes-on-Christian-America.html

Calling Anglicanism as Protestant may be correct in the letter, but not in the spirit of the trajectory of reformed Christianity (and I believe repristinationist Christianity). Your characterization of the pentecostal movement is interesting, but lacks credibility since the Catholic Church has been losing so many members to those pentecostals in Latin America.
Sq16Aggie2006
How long do you want to ignore this user?
UTExan said:





Calling Anglicanism as Protestant may be correct in the letter, but not in the spirit of the trajectory of reformed Christianity (and I believe repristinationist Christianity). Your characterization of the pentecostal movement is interesting, but lacks credibility since the Catholic Church has been losing so many members to those pentecostals in Latin America.
The same Latin Americans who have embraced Santeria, Vodoo, and other syncretisms of Christianity and local flavor? I have no clue as to why they'd find speaking in tongues and faith healing attractive.
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I will always caution a tying of a national identity to a religion. Not only is it dangerous (as we see with modern American folk religion tracking with the cultural zeitgeist rather than traditional Christian values) it is also heretical (ethnophyletism).
UTExan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sq16Aggie2006 said:

UTExan said:





Calling Anglicanism as Protestant may be correct in the letter, but not in the spirit of the trajectory of reformed Christianity (and I believe repristinationist Christianity). Your characterization of the pentecostal movement is interesting, but lacks credibility since the Catholic Church has been losing so many members to those pentecostals in Latin America.
The same Latin Americans who have embraced Santeria, Vodoo, and other syncretisms of Christianity and local flavor? I have no clue as to why they'd find speaking in tongues and faith healing attractive.
Perhaps it is the Catholic Church's history of enforced slavery of indigenous populations in the region, support for repressive governments, etc? Political scientists have written a lot on the Catholic roots of authoritarianism in southern Europe and Latin America since the 1950's.
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
You do understand that the orthodox folks who you initially were talking about aren't Roman Catholic right?
UTExan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Not since 1054. Both Catholic and Orthodox have extensively been corrupted by political associations---the Romanovs being a prime example of using the Orthodox Church (or installing their allies as patriarchs, or banishing nobility to be nuns) for completely political ends. Simon Sebag Montefiore's Romanovs 1613-1918 gives a very compelling account of the corrupting and morally sickening intimacy between the Romanovs and the Russian Orthodox Church.
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
And Protestants of all stripes are far removed from political association and corruption, right?
Sq16Aggie2006
How long do you want to ignore this user?
UTExan said:

Sq16Aggie2006 said:

UTExan said:





Calling Anglicanism as Protestant may be correct in the letter, but not in the spirit of the trajectory of reformed Christianity (and I believe repristinationist Christianity). Your characterization of the pentecostal movement is interesting, but lacks credibility since the Catholic Church has been losing so many members to those pentecostals in Latin America.
The same Latin Americans who have embraced Santeria, Vodoo, and other syncretisms of Christianity and local flavor? I have no clue as to why they'd find speaking in tongues and faith healing attractive.
Perhaps it is the Catholic Church's history of enforced slavery of indigenous populations in the region, support for repressive governments, etc? Political scientists have written a lot on the Catholic roots of authoritarianism in southern Europe and Latin America since the 1950's.


You can blame Catholics for a lot individually, but the Church was one of the first organizations to actually speak out against slavery, namely in Sicut Dudum, a papal bull from the early 1400s


We ... exhort, through the sprinkling of the Blood of Jesus Christ shed for their sins, one and all, temporal princes, lords, captains, armed men, barons, soldiers, nobles, communities and all others of every kind among the Christian faithful of whatever state, grade or condition, that they themselves desist from the aforementioned deeds, cause those subject to them to desist from them, and restrain them rigorously. And no less do We order and command all and each of the faithful of each sex that, within the space of fifteen days of the publication of these letters in the place where they live, that they restore to their pristine liberty all and each person of either sex who were once residents of said Canary Islands ... who have been made subject to slavery (<servituti subicere>). These people are to be totally and perpetually free and are to be let go without the exaction or reception of any money."


In the 20th century, the Catholic Church was at the forefront of illegaly marrying mixed race couples, when our Protestant brothers were declaring it unnatural. Heres a great article from Christianity Todat entitled "opposition to interracial marriage lingers among evangelicals" http://www.christianitytoday.com/gleanings/2011/june/opposition-to-interracial-marriage-lingers-among.html

I get that youre upset that youre the third wheel in the "going to heaven race". We've been around a hell of a lot longer than you have, and actually being of some import, have had a crosshair on us for a lot longer. Yes we have skeletons in our closet. If and when you get to heaven, feel free to critique Jesus for the choice he made to shepherd his Earthly church.
7thGenTexan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Aren't there lots of Catholics who believe in the charismatic gifts?
UTExan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
k2aggie07 said:

And Protestants of all stripes are far removed from political association and corruption, right?
Far from it. There is just a decentralized ecclesiastical structure so that the Medici popes could not be institutionally perpetuated, nor would the "church" be powerful enough to suppress dissident groups as the RCC did, even to extent of eventually killing reformers such as Savonarola.
UTExan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sq16Aggie2006 said:

UTExan said:

Sq16Aggie2006 said:

UTExan said:





Calling Anglicanism as Protestant may be correct in the letter, but not in the spirit of the trajectory of reformed Christianity (and I believe repristinationist Christianity). Your characterization of the pentecostal movement is interesting, but lacks credibility since the Catholic Church has been losing so many members to those pentecostals in Latin America.
The same Latin Americans who have embraced Santeria, Vodoo, and other syncretisms of Christianity and local flavor? I have no clue as to why they'd find speaking in tongues and faith healing attractive.
Perhaps it is the Catholic Church's history of enforced slavery of indigenous populations in the region, support for repressive governments, etc? Political scientists have written a lot on the Catholic roots of authoritarianism in southern Europe and Latin America since the 1950's.


You can blame Catholics for a lot individually, but the Church was one of the first organizations to actually speak out against slavery, namely in Sicut Dudum, a papal bull from the early 1400s


We ... exhort, through the sprinkling of the Blood of Jesus Christ shed for their sins, one and all, temporal princes, lords, captains, armed men, barons, soldiers, nobles, communities and all others of every kind among the Christian faithful of whatever state, grade or condition, that they themselves desist from the aforementioned deeds, cause those subject to them to desist from them, and restrain them rigorously. And no less do We order and command all and each of the faithful of each sex that, within the space of fifteen days of the publication of these letters in the place where they live, that they restore to their pristine liberty all and each person of either sex who were once residents of said Canary Islands ... who have been made subject to slavery (<servituti subicere>). These people are to be totally and perpetually free and are to be let go without the exaction or reception of any money."


In the 20th century, the Catholic Church was at the forefront of illegaly marrying mixed race couples, when our Protestant brothers were declaring it unnatural. Heres a great article from Christianity Todat entitled "opposition to interracial marriage lingers among evangelicals" http://www.christianitytoday.com/gleanings/2011/june/opposition-to-interracial-marriage-lingers-among.html

I get that youre upset that youre the third wheel in the "going to heaven race". We've been around a hell of a lot longer than you have, and actually being of some import, have had a crosshair on us for a lot longer. Yes we have skeletons in our closet. If and when you get to heaven, feel free to critique Jesus for the choice he made to shepherd his Earthly church.
I could care less about your "third wheel" thesis (whatever that means). Martin Luther, John Wesley, John Calvin and the great spiritual leaders of our western world seem to have believed similarly. I admire individual mystics, such as Fenelon and Madame Guyon, but of course, they too were persecuted by the established RCC.
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The Protestant reformation in Europe wasn't just bloody between the Roman church and the Protestants. Various Protestant sects fought each other gladly.

And that centralized church structure is also not antithetical to Protestants - Zwingli enacted his own little theocracy in Zurich and prosecuted dissenters with every bit of zeal he could muster.

I'm not sure what your agenda is but fallible human nature is not exclusive to any denomination, nation, or people group. Humans divide, the Holy Spirit unites. Unity is not found between men, but in union with God. Only in God can people become united with each other. By becoming members of one body, Christ's body - which is the Church - we become united to Him and each other.
UTExan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

By becoming members of one body, Christ's body - which is the Church - we become united to Him and each other.

No, it is by faith alone that we are reconciled to God....no works, no liturgy and no grandfathering.
Ephesians 2:
Quote:

8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faithand this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God 9 not by works, so that no one can boast.
The obscenity of a man pretending to anathemitize others and condemn them for earthly actions trespasses on the sovereignty of God. Frankly, my only "agenda" is to encourage others into a personal, direct relationship with God through faith based upon reconciliation through Jesus Christ's shed blood.
Sq16Aggie2006
How long do you want to ignore this user?
UTExan said:

Quote:

By becoming members of one body, Christ's body - which is the Church - we become united to Him and each other.

No, it is by faith alone that we are reconciled to God....no works, no liturgy and no grandfathering.
Ephesians 2:
Quote:

8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faithand this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God 9 not by works, so that no one can boast.
The obscenity of a man pretending to anathemitize others and condemn them for earthly actions trespasses on the sovereignty of God.
I believe the only time the words "faith alone" are used in the Bible, they're used in a negative sense. It created such a problem for luther he called the entire book of James an "epistle of straw" and tried to add the word "alone" in on his own authority.

These aren't new arguments, they're the old heresies battled by the Church fathers that were reignited by the Reformation when they thought they'd reinvented the wheel, and subsequently tried to remove everything that they disagreed with.

Earthly actions are pretty important, you'll note that Christ came to Earth and died on a Cross for us; he didn't just come down and say "Believe in Me". When he asked the apostles who he was, and got "Elijah", and "John the Baptist" in return, he called on Peter who had received divine inspiration and correctly named him the Messiah; he didn't say "that's good enough" or "you're all right" to the incorrect apostles, he gave them the correct answer.

Furthermore, he specifically entrusted the care of his sheep to Peter and the Church, specifically giving Peter the keys to the kingdom, and the authority to bind and loose. That's real authority, that's Regency. What trespasses on the sovereignty of God is to cleave yourself from his appointed regent.

If you've got a King, who puts someone in charge, and you willfully refuse to abide by that regent, you're trespassing on his sovereignty.
UTExan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sq16Aggie2006 said:

UTExan said:

Quote:

By becoming members of one body, Christ's body - which is the Church - we become united to Him and each other.

No, it is by faith alone that we are reconciled to God....no works, no liturgy and no grandfathering.
Ephesians 2:
Quote:

8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faithand this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God 9 not by works, so that no one can boast.
The obscenity of a man pretending to anathemitize others and condemn them for earthly actions trespasses on the sovereignty of God.
I believe the only time the words "faith alone" are used in the Bible, they're used in a negative sense. It created such a problem for luther he called the entire book of James an "epistle of straw" and tried to add the word "alone" in on his own authority.

These aren't new arguments, they're the old heresies battled by the Church fathers that were reignited by the Reformation when they thought they'd reinvented the wheel, and subsequently tried to remove everything that they disagreed with.

Earthly actions are pretty important, you'll note that Christ came to Earth and died on a Cross for us; he didn't just come down and say "Believe in Me". When he asked the apostles who he was, and got "Elijah", and "John the Baptist" in return, he called on Peter who had received divine inspiration and correctly named him the Messiah; he didn't say "that's good enough" or "you're all right" to the incorrect apostles, he gave them the correct answer.

Furthermore, he specifically entrusted the care of his sheep to Peter and the Church, specifically giving Peter the keys to the kingdom, and the authority to bind and loose. That's real authority, that's Regency. What trespasses on the sovereignty of God is to cleave yourself from his appointed regent.

If you've got a King, who puts someone in charge, and you willfully refuse to abide by that regent, you're trespassing on his sovereignty.
This is my problem with your interpretation:
Quote:

If you've got a King, who puts someone in charge, and you willfully refuse to abide by that regent, you're trespassing on his sovereignty.
Which person in charge? Paul? Demas? Peter? James?
That was the problem in the New Testament with churches. Utimately, they were overseen by the apostles, who wrote the epistles as letters of instruction and correction. Nonetheless, there was local autonomy in the churches operating within the parameters established by scripture. Thus scripture was sufficient for instruction, as Wesley pointed out. Works are something done from appreciation for what God has done for me, not an obligation imposed by the church. Papal infallibility, RCC dogma regarding the RCC as the final authority on earthly matters is for me abandonment of personal responsibility before God. What must I do on earth? Repent and believe on the sufficiency of Jesus Christ to atone for my sins.
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Protestant reductionism.

Being saved isn't a one and done. It's a transformation, not a transaction.
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
UTExan said:

Quote:

By becoming members of one body, Christ's body - which is the Church - we become united to Him and each other.

No, it is by faith alone that we are reconciled to God....no works, no liturgy and no grandfathering.
Ephesians 2:
Quote:

8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faithand this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God 9 not by works, so that no one can boast.
The obscenity of a man pretending to anathemitize others and condemn them for earthly actions trespasses on the sovereignty of God. Frankly, my only "agenda" is to encourage others into a personal, direct relationship with God through faith based upon reconciliation through Jesus Christ's shed blood.
I just came back to this when I had a little more time.

Your point doesn't address what I said. I didn't say the mechanism of how, merely the what. Unity is not a word used often in the NT, but it is always spoken of as unity to God, not to men.

St Paul uses henotes in Ephesians 4, but is unity of the spirit, and unity in the faith. He also uses teleiotes in Colossians 3;14, a completion, that unity is the combination of all of the truth that supports future consummation to our end (telos). Unity is participation in Christ (put on love which is the bond of perfect unity). If I can paraphrase, this could be said to that love is the bond of the cumulative completion and future fulfillment of our end state. This is union to God, again, not to each other directly.

Our Lord prays for us to be "perfected in one" - through Him ("I in them and you in me").

True union only comes through God, and union to God is to become members of His Body.


St Paul, says:
Quote:


Keep the unity of the Spirit...there is one body and one Spirit..one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all...

So Christ Himself gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers, to equip his people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ.

Then we will no longer be infants, tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of people in their deceitful scheming. Instead, speaking the truth in love, we will grow to become in every respect the mature body of him who is the head, that is, Christ. From Him the whole body, joined and held together by every supporting ligament, grows and builds itself up in love, as each part does its work.
So not only is unity to Christ and to each other, but we are only bound to each other by love binding us as members of one body. And this union is gained by works of service, we grow and are built up into that unity. Again, process, not point; transformation, not transaction.

And how do we become members of the one body?
Quote:

For even as the body is one and yet has many members, and all the members of the body, though they are many, are one body, so also is Christ. For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body...Now you are Christ's body, and individually members of it.
St Paul is clear - we are baptized into the body. This is why the baptismal hymn quotes his words in Galatians 3:27 "...as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ!"

Union is a simple chain, scripturally:

Baptism into the body of Christ enables -> union with Christ -> enables unity with other members of the Body.
Page 1 of 2
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.