k2aggie07 said:
Lex Orandi Lex Credendi. I suppose it is necessary for people who have monergist theology to eradicate synergism even from the ancient liturgical rites.
Hello I am a member of SSPX
7,947 Views |
90 Replies |
Last: 5 yr ago by Seamaster
Calling my participation in the eucharist a sacrifice is similar to telling a starving homeless man at a free feast that his sacrifice is to eat the food laid out before him.
I applaud your willingness to engage k2 AND a Tridentine Catholic at the same time. You are brave!swimmerbabe11 said:
Calling my participation in the eucharist a sacrifice is similar to telling a starving homeless man at a free feast that his sacrifice is to eat the food laid out before him.
Ultimately I think there is a completely different view of what the Church is, what the Liturgy is, what the Eucharist is.
https://oca.org/orthodoxy/the-orthodox-faith/worship/the-divine-liturgy/the-divine-liturgyQuote:
The word liturgy means common work or common action. The Divine Liturgy is the common work of the Orthodox Church. It is the official action of the Church formally gathered together as the chosen People of God. The word church, as we remember, means a gathering or assembly of people specifically chosen and called apart to perform a particular task.
The Divine Liturgy is the common action of Orthodox Christians officially gathered to constitute the Orthodox Church. It is the action of the Church assembled by God in order to be together in one community to worship, to pray, to sing, to hear God's Word, to be instructed in God's commandments, to offer itself with thanksgiving in Christ to God the Father, and to have the living experience of God's eternal kingdom through communion with the same Christ Who is present in his people by the Holy Spirit.
...
Because the Divine Liturgy exists for no other reason than to be the official all-inclusive act of prayer, worship, teaching, and communion of the entire Church in heaven and on earth, it may not be considered merely as one devotion among many, not even the highest or the greatest. The Divine Liturgy is not an act of personal piety. It is not a prayer service. It is not merely one of the sacraments. The Divine Liturgy is the one common sacrament of the very being of the Church itself. It is the one sacramental manifestation of the essence of the Church as the Community of God in heaven and on earth. It is the one unique sacramental revelation of the Church as the mystical Body and Bride of Christ.
Shrug. I'm not arguing. The text says what it says. I haven't seen any Protestant come out and say "the words in the Divine Liturgy are theological errors". So either there's a misunderstanding or a bit of duck dive and dodge about the subject. Or, like I said, adherence to theology driving understanding of the liturgy instead of the other way around. I do grant it's a bit of nuance about the celebration and presentation of the sacrifice, but that's clearly said in the quotes I gave. The distinction is about the synergistic action of uniting ourselves to Christ's sacrifice. A monergist can't do it.
The reformers loved to say they had no novel teaching and they are right in line with the Fathers. Is St John wrong? How about St Basil? From his liturgy..
"Grant, therefore, O Lord that we may be accepted as servants of Your new Covenant and ministers of Your holy mysteries. Accept us as we draw near to Your holy altar, according to the multitude of Your mercy, that we may be worthy to offer You this spiritual sacrifice without the shedding of blood, for our sins and for the transgressions of Your people. Grant that, having accepted this sacrifice upon Your holy, heavenly, and spiritual altar as an offering of spiritual fragrance, You may in return send down upon us the grace of Your Holy Spirit. Look upon us, O God, and consider our worship; and accept it as You accepted the gifts of Abel, the sacrifices of Noah, the burnt offerings of Abraham, the priestly offices of Moses and Aaron, and the peace offerings of Samuel. As You accepted this true worship from Your holy apostles, accept also in Your goodness, O Lord, these gifts from the hands of us sinners, that being deemed worthy to serve at Your holy altar without blame, we may obtain the reward of the faithful stewards on the fearful day of Your just judgment."
There is no worship without sacrifice. St Basil says the Spirit is "the source of sanctification through whom every rational and spiritual creature is made capable of worshiping."
The priest prays later "we also, Your sinful and unworthy servants, whom You have made worthy to serve at Your holy altar, not because of our own righteousness (for we have not done anything good upon the earth), but because of Your mercy and compassion, which You have so richly poured upon us, we dare to approach Your holy altar..."
But our worship is told in the Bible by St Paul. We offer ourselves as living sacrifices, because this is the appropriate worship of rational beings. And as St Basil says, this comes through the grace of the spirit. But we still must come in obedience to offer, and receive.
The reformers loved to say they had no novel teaching and they are right in line with the Fathers. Is St John wrong? How about St Basil? From his liturgy..
"Grant, therefore, O Lord that we may be accepted as servants of Your new Covenant and ministers of Your holy mysteries. Accept us as we draw near to Your holy altar, according to the multitude of Your mercy, that we may be worthy to offer You this spiritual sacrifice without the shedding of blood, for our sins and for the transgressions of Your people. Grant that, having accepted this sacrifice upon Your holy, heavenly, and spiritual altar as an offering of spiritual fragrance, You may in return send down upon us the grace of Your Holy Spirit. Look upon us, O God, and consider our worship; and accept it as You accepted the gifts of Abel, the sacrifices of Noah, the burnt offerings of Abraham, the priestly offices of Moses and Aaron, and the peace offerings of Samuel. As You accepted this true worship from Your holy apostles, accept also in Your goodness, O Lord, these gifts from the hands of us sinners, that being deemed worthy to serve at Your holy altar without blame, we may obtain the reward of the faithful stewards on the fearful day of Your just judgment."
There is no worship without sacrifice. St Basil says the Spirit is "the source of sanctification through whom every rational and spiritual creature is made capable of worshiping."
The priest prays later "we also, Your sinful and unworthy servants, whom You have made worthy to serve at Your holy altar, not because of our own righteousness (for we have not done anything good upon the earth), but because of Your mercy and compassion, which You have so richly poured upon us, we dare to approach Your holy altar..."
But our worship is told in the Bible by St Paul. We offer ourselves as living sacrifices, because this is the appropriate worship of rational beings. And as St Basil says, this comes through the grace of the spirit. But we still must come in obedience to offer, and receive.
swimmerbabe11 said:
My pastor totally geeks out about minutae in the liturgy, the history of it, etc.
I once listed to him go into a lengthy rant on how high he raises the chalice during the invocation, lest anyone be confused that he is making an offering, versus receiving one...specifically because of the Catholic confusion that we are somehow doing anything useful during communion, besides receiving the gifts that we are completely and totally unworthy of (and couldn't earn if we wanted to)
He felt, that if he raised his hands past his chest with the chalice, it appeared as though he was doing the sacrifice/the offering. At the time, I thought it was a bit adiophora/nitpicking. Now, I am glad I heard him talk about it.
I've had a very similar conversation with my Pastor as well and he has expressed similar concerns about different aspects of the service.
He goes to great lengths as well to make sure it's clear to everyone that he is not forgiving the sins or doing anything to the bread and wine.
These elements only exist as a sacrament because they come from God.
Quote:
I applaudTridentine Catholic at the same time. You are brave!
Ultimately I think there is a completely different view of what the Church is, what the Liturgy is, what the Eucharist is.
At work, so my answer must be brief. K2 don't scare me even a little bit and the papacy holds no thrall over me, so why would a papist?
He is our High Priest, who offered the sacrifice that cleanses us. That we offer now also, which was then offered, which cannot be exhausted.
St John Chrysostom, homilies on Hebrews
This Sacrifice, no matter who offers it, be it Peter or Paul, is always the same as that which Christ gave His disciples and which priests now offer
St John Chrysostom, homilies on 2 Timothy.
'I have no pleasure in you, says the Lord; and I will not accept your sacrifices at your hands: for, from the rising of the sun unto the going down of the same, My name has been glorified among the Gentiles, and in every place incense is offered to My name, and a pure offering: for My name is great among the Gentiles, says the Lord: but you profane it.' (Malachi 1:10-12). He then speaks of those Gentiles, namely us, who in every place offer sacrifices to Him, i.e., the bread of the Eucharist, and also the cup of the Eucharist, affirming both that we glorify His name, and that you profane.
....and...
Accordingly, God, anticipating all the sacrifices which we offer through this name, and which Jesus the Christ enjoined us to offer, in the Eucharist of the bread and the cup, and which are presented by Christians in all places throughout the world, bears witness that they are well-pleasing to Him.
St Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho
Proclaiming the death, according to the flesh, of the only-begotten Son of God, that is Jesus Christ, confessing his resurrection from the dead, and his ascension into heaven, we offer the unbloody sacrifice in the churches, and so go on to the mystical thanksgivings, and are sanctified, having received his holy flesh and the precious blood of Christ the Savior of us all.
St Cyril, Letter to Nestorius
What have I to do with holocausts, which God does not stand in need of?--though indeed it does behove us to offer a bloodless sacrifice and reasonable service.
St Athenagoras' Plea
Therefore I exhort you, brothers, through the compassions of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy to God, well-pleasing, which is your rational worship.
St Paul
St John Chrysostom, homilies on Hebrews
This Sacrifice, no matter who offers it, be it Peter or Paul, is always the same as that which Christ gave His disciples and which priests now offer
St John Chrysostom, homilies on 2 Timothy.
'I have no pleasure in you, says the Lord; and I will not accept your sacrifices at your hands: for, from the rising of the sun unto the going down of the same, My name has been glorified among the Gentiles, and in every place incense is offered to My name, and a pure offering: for My name is great among the Gentiles, says the Lord: but you profane it.' (Malachi 1:10-12). He then speaks of those Gentiles, namely us, who in every place offer sacrifices to Him, i.e., the bread of the Eucharist, and also the cup of the Eucharist, affirming both that we glorify His name, and that you profane.
....and...
Accordingly, God, anticipating all the sacrifices which we offer through this name, and which Jesus the Christ enjoined us to offer, in the Eucharist of the bread and the cup, and which are presented by Christians in all places throughout the world, bears witness that they are well-pleasing to Him.
St Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho
Proclaiming the death, according to the flesh, of the only-begotten Son of God, that is Jesus Christ, confessing his resurrection from the dead, and his ascension into heaven, we offer the unbloody sacrifice in the churches, and so go on to the mystical thanksgivings, and are sanctified, having received his holy flesh and the precious blood of Christ the Savior of us all.
St Cyril, Letter to Nestorius
What have I to do with holocausts, which God does not stand in need of?--though indeed it does behove us to offer a bloodless sacrifice and reasonable service.
St Athenagoras' Plea
Therefore I exhort you, brothers, through the compassions of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy to God, well-pleasing, which is your rational worship.
St Paul
Anyway there's no need to make a dichotomy. It's both. Like the liturgy says. My favorite moment in all of the liturgy - nevertheless - is in this prayer which captures it perfectly.
No one who is bound with the desires and pleasures of flesh is worthy to approach or draw nigh or to serve minister thee, O King of glory: for to serve thee is great and terrible thing even to the Heavenly Powers. Nevertheless, through thine unspeakable and boundless love toward mankind thou didst become man, yet without change or alteration, and as Lord of all didst take the name of our High Priest, and deliver unto us the ministry of this liturgic and unbloody sacrifice. ...Wherefore I implore thee who alone art good and art ready to listen: Look down upon me, a sinner, and thine unprofitable servant, and cleanse my soul and my heart from an evil conscience, and by the power of the Holy Spirit enable me, who am endued with the grace of the priesthood, to stand before this thy Holy Table, and perform the sacred Mystery of thy Holy immaculate Body and precious Blood. For I draw near unto thee, and bowing my neck I pray thee: turn not thy face from me, neither cast me out from among thy children; but vouchsafe that these gifts may be offered unto thee by me, thy sinful and unworthy servant: for thou thyself are he that offers and is offered, that accepts and is distributed, O Christ our God.
And the prayer of prosthesis...
O Lord, God Almighty, Who alone art holy; who dost accept the sacrifice of praise from those who call upon thee with their whole heart: Accept also the prayer of us sinners, and bear it to thy holy Altar, and enable us to offer unto thee gifts and spiritual sacrifices for our sins and for the errors of the people; And make us worthy to find grace in thy sight, that our sacrifice may be acceptable unto thee; and that the good spirit of thy grace may dwell upon us and upon these gifts here offered, and upon all thy people.
No dichotomy needed.
As far as sacrifices, just before the epiclesis the priest says:
"...send down the Holy Spirit upon us and upon these Gifts here spread forth." We are consecrated with the gifts.
No one who is bound with the desires and pleasures of flesh is worthy to approach or draw nigh or to serve minister thee, O King of glory: for to serve thee is great and terrible thing even to the Heavenly Powers. Nevertheless, through thine unspeakable and boundless love toward mankind thou didst become man, yet without change or alteration, and as Lord of all didst take the name of our High Priest, and deliver unto us the ministry of this liturgic and unbloody sacrifice. ...Wherefore I implore thee who alone art good and art ready to listen: Look down upon me, a sinner, and thine unprofitable servant, and cleanse my soul and my heart from an evil conscience, and by the power of the Holy Spirit enable me, who am endued with the grace of the priesthood, to stand before this thy Holy Table, and perform the sacred Mystery of thy Holy immaculate Body and precious Blood. For I draw near unto thee, and bowing my neck I pray thee: turn not thy face from me, neither cast me out from among thy children; but vouchsafe that these gifts may be offered unto thee by me, thy sinful and unworthy servant: for thou thyself are he that offers and is offered, that accepts and is distributed, O Christ our God.
And the prayer of prosthesis...
O Lord, God Almighty, Who alone art holy; who dost accept the sacrifice of praise from those who call upon thee with their whole heart: Accept also the prayer of us sinners, and bear it to thy holy Altar, and enable us to offer unto thee gifts and spiritual sacrifices for our sins and for the errors of the people; And make us worthy to find grace in thy sight, that our sacrifice may be acceptable unto thee; and that the good spirit of thy grace may dwell upon us and upon these gifts here offered, and upon all thy people.
No dichotomy needed.
As far as sacrifices, just before the epiclesis the priest says:
"...send down the Holy Spirit upon us and upon these Gifts here spread forth." We are consecrated with the gifts.
What exactly do you think you are sacrificing when you take, drink, and eat during communion?
Christ's sacrifice replaces ours, covers ours, becomes ours...what can we add to that?
Christ's sacrifice replaces ours, covers ours, becomes ours...what can we add to that?
Many stars for your astute post!
Gig'em, Ole Army Class of '70
"Therefore I exhort you, brothers, through the compassions of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy to God, well-pleasing, which is your rational worship."
There is only one sacrifice, a once-for-all, a pure offering which is Christ.
We don't replace that or add to it when we take communion or offer a sacrifice of praise, as we say. St Paul is not commanding us to set up a sacrifice opposed to, or additional to, or along side of the sacrifice of Christ. He is commanding us to offer ourselves as sacrifice, so that "if we have died together with Him, we will also live together with Him." So the thing a Christian ought to be sacrificing at communion is their very life, themselves. A living sacrifice. Because, as St Paul says, this is the worship that is appropriate for rational beings.
It is a joining with. A communion. The word for communion is koinonia, which literally means a partnership, a sharing in. We partake, share in, commune with the Christ who is the Sacrifice. When we do that we become partakers, sharers, communicants of the divine nature, as St Peter teaches in 2 Peter 1:4.
There is only one sacrifice, a once-for-all, a pure offering which is Christ.
We don't replace that or add to it when we take communion or offer a sacrifice of praise, as we say. St Paul is not commanding us to set up a sacrifice opposed to, or additional to, or along side of the sacrifice of Christ. He is commanding us to offer ourselves as sacrifice, so that "if we have died together with Him, we will also live together with Him." So the thing a Christian ought to be sacrificing at communion is their very life, themselves. A living sacrifice. Because, as St Paul says, this is the worship that is appropriate for rational beings.
It is a joining with. A communion. The word for communion is koinonia, which literally means a partnership, a sharing in. We partake, share in, commune with the Christ who is the Sacrifice. When we do that we become partakers, sharers, communicants of the divine nature, as St Peter teaches in 2 Peter 1:4.
I'm not sure what version of Romans you are looking at?
When I look at the Orthodox Study Bible I see this (NKJV):
I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your reasonable service. 2 And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
When I read this version, I don't see your main arguments.
This seems rather clear that our living sacrifice is in response to the mercies of God.
Connecting verse 1 with 2, Paul reminds us of our own renewing and that our focus should be on God, not the world.
I don't see where our sacrifice is along side Christ, but that it is because of Christ that any of this matters.
When I look at the Orthodox Study Bible I see this (NKJV):
I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your reasonable service. 2 And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
When I read this version, I don't see your main arguments.
This seems rather clear that our living sacrifice is in response to the mercies of God.
Connecting verse 1 with 2, Paul reminds us of our own renewing and that our focus should be on God, not the world.
I don't see where our sacrifice is along side Christ, but that it is because of Christ that any of this matters.
It's not a great translation. "Reasonable service" is pretty useless by itself. "Reasonable" is logikos, i.e., rational, pertaining to reason - logos. It's also sometimes translated "spiritual" (look at 1 Peter 2:2 - same word). In St John Chrysostom's homily on this passage he uses reasonable / logikos as a contrast with material. This is the worship offered by the mind and heart, the worship of a rational being.
"Service" there isn't sufficiently clear by itself either. The word is latreia. This is worship. When we talk about "you shall worship the lord your God and serve Him only" the words for worship and serve are proskynesis (i.e., bow down before) and latreia. Latreia is not service in a general sense, but sacred service. For example, our English word idolatry is idol worship and comes from eidolon (an image) + latreaia (worship). It says to present your bodies as a living sacrifice (thysian) which is your rational worship (logiken latreaia). In other words, the worship that is appropriate to rational beings is to sacrifice their lives by dying to self and living to God.
There's plenty of OT support for this idea, incidentally. 1 Samuel 15:22, Psalm 50:7-15, Psalm 51:17, Hosea 6:6, Amost 5:21-24, Malachi 1:10-11. This is the worship of spirit and truth that Christ Jesus speaks of to St Photini at the well (John 4:4).
As for the next verse, the teaching is clear - first comes sacrifice, then comes transformation. First we sacrifice ourselves - all we have, all we are, in the scriptural sense our mind, heart, soul, strength - and having died to self, we live to Christ (Colossians 3:3, Gal 2:20, Gal 5:24, 1 Corinthians 15:31 etc). Everything that we have, our old self, sin and all, is put aside and put to death. This is clear in Ephesians 4:20-24 as well: first you lay aside your old self, and then through the renewal, you put on the new self. We sacrifice to Him everything we are, everything we have (Luke 14:33). Die with Him, live with Him (Romans 6:8, 2 Tim 2:11).
I don't know where y'all are getting this idea that Christians are not to sacrifice or make offerings to God. That is just not scriptural. St Paul speaks of himself as being poured out like a drink offering in 2 Timothy 4:6. In Philippians 2:7 he uses the same word to say he is being poured out like a drink offering on the sacrifice (thysian) and service (leitourgia - liturgy - common action) of their faith. Hebrews 13:15 says through Christ "let us continually offer to God a sacrifice (thysian) of praise, the fruit of lips that confess His name." Philippians 4:18 talks about the money they sent as an acceptable sacrifice (thysian) that is well pleasing to God. So our work is an offering, our faith and service is a sacrifice, our praise is a sacrifice, our money is a sacrifice.
Even further, the Gentiles collectively are an offering (prosphora) in Romans 15:16 - same word used in Hebrews 10:10 to describe the once-for-all sacrifice of Christ (though there its translated "sacrifice" more often than "offering"). So collectively the church is an offering to God.
Christ is the one who offers, the offering, and the one who receives. The bread is the body of Christ, right? And so are we, each of us. Our unity is found in the Eucharist - "because there is one loaf, we are one Body". So if He is the offering, and we are in partnership / sharing / communion with Him and each other through Him, then how do you object to us also being the offering? As St Irenaeus said, "Our doctrine conforms to the Eucharist and the Eucharist in turn confirms our doctrine."
"Service" there isn't sufficiently clear by itself either. The word is latreia. This is worship. When we talk about "you shall worship the lord your God and serve Him only" the words for worship and serve are proskynesis (i.e., bow down before) and latreia. Latreia is not service in a general sense, but sacred service. For example, our English word idolatry is idol worship and comes from eidolon (an image) + latreaia (worship). It says to present your bodies as a living sacrifice (thysian) which is your rational worship (logiken latreaia). In other words, the worship that is appropriate to rational beings is to sacrifice their lives by dying to self and living to God.
There's plenty of OT support for this idea, incidentally. 1 Samuel 15:22, Psalm 50:7-15, Psalm 51:17, Hosea 6:6, Amost 5:21-24, Malachi 1:10-11. This is the worship of spirit and truth that Christ Jesus speaks of to St Photini at the well (John 4:4).
As for the next verse, the teaching is clear - first comes sacrifice, then comes transformation. First we sacrifice ourselves - all we have, all we are, in the scriptural sense our mind, heart, soul, strength - and having died to self, we live to Christ (Colossians 3:3, Gal 2:20, Gal 5:24, 1 Corinthians 15:31 etc). Everything that we have, our old self, sin and all, is put aside and put to death. This is clear in Ephesians 4:20-24 as well: first you lay aside your old self, and then through the renewal, you put on the new self. We sacrifice to Him everything we are, everything we have (Luke 14:33). Die with Him, live with Him (Romans 6:8, 2 Tim 2:11).
I don't know where y'all are getting this idea that Christians are not to sacrifice or make offerings to God. That is just not scriptural. St Paul speaks of himself as being poured out like a drink offering in 2 Timothy 4:6. In Philippians 2:7 he uses the same word to say he is being poured out like a drink offering on the sacrifice (thysian) and service (leitourgia - liturgy - common action) of their faith. Hebrews 13:15 says through Christ "let us continually offer to God a sacrifice (thysian) of praise, the fruit of lips that confess His name." Philippians 4:18 talks about the money they sent as an acceptable sacrifice (thysian) that is well pleasing to God. So our work is an offering, our faith and service is a sacrifice, our praise is a sacrifice, our money is a sacrifice.
Even further, the Gentiles collectively are an offering (prosphora) in Romans 15:16 - same word used in Hebrews 10:10 to describe the once-for-all sacrifice of Christ (though there its translated "sacrifice" more often than "offering"). So collectively the church is an offering to God.
Christ is the one who offers, the offering, and the one who receives. The bread is the body of Christ, right? And so are we, each of us. Our unity is found in the Eucharist - "because there is one loaf, we are one Body". So if He is the offering, and we are in partnership / sharing / communion with Him and each other through Him, then how do you object to us also being the offering? As St Irenaeus said, "Our doctrine conforms to the Eucharist and the Eucharist in turn confirms our doctrine."
It's the translation that the Orthodox Study Bible uses. I was just trying to align your wording with what the various translations show.
I thought the ESV was more clear:
"I appeal to you therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship."
-------------------------------------------
"As for the next verse, the teaching is clear - first comes sacrifice, then comes transformation. "
I don't think anybody disagrees with you. However, in both verses, the sacrifice is the because of the "mercy of God."
The transformation is said to be "by the renewal of your mind" which again is not something we initiate or participate in.
----------------------------------------------
"I don't know where y'all are getting this idea that Christians are not to sacrifice or make offerings to God."
I'm not sure who has said that or why you get so accusatorial? I've certainly never said anything of that nature, and I won't speak for swimmer, but I haven't seen it from her either?
My exact words were "I don't see where our sacrifice is along side Christ, but that it is because of Christ that any of this matters."
-----------------------------------------------
"Christ is the one who offers, the offering, and the one who receives. The bread is the body of Christ, right? And so are we, each of us. Our unity is found in the Eucharist - "because there is one loaf, we are one Body". So if He is the offering, and we are in partnership / sharing / communion with Him and each other through Him, then how do you object to us also being the offering? As St Irenaeus said, "Our doctrine conforms to the Eucharist and the Eucharist in turn confirms our doctrine."
The response will be repetitive with above.
We are in communion because of Christ sacrifice, not because we offer anything.
Are you suggesting that we should change scripture to say that the the bread is "our body broken" and the wine is "our blood shed?" I don't think you are?
I thought the ESV was more clear:
"I appeal to you therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship."
-------------------------------------------
"As for the next verse, the teaching is clear - first comes sacrifice, then comes transformation. "
I don't think anybody disagrees with you. However, in both verses, the sacrifice is the because of the "mercy of God."
The transformation is said to be "by the renewal of your mind" which again is not something we initiate or participate in.
----------------------------------------------
"I don't know where y'all are getting this idea that Christians are not to sacrifice or make offerings to God."
I'm not sure who has said that or why you get so accusatorial? I've certainly never said anything of that nature, and I won't speak for swimmer, but I haven't seen it from her either?
My exact words were "I don't see where our sacrifice is along side Christ, but that it is because of Christ that any of this matters."
-----------------------------------------------
"Christ is the one who offers, the offering, and the one who receives. The bread is the body of Christ, right? And so are we, each of us. Our unity is found in the Eucharist - "because there is one loaf, we are one Body". So if He is the offering, and we are in partnership / sharing / communion with Him and each other through Him, then how do you object to us also being the offering? As St Irenaeus said, "Our doctrine conforms to the Eucharist and the Eucharist in turn confirms our doctrine."
The response will be repetitive with above.
We are in communion because of Christ sacrifice, not because we offer anything.
Are you suggesting that we should change scripture to say that the the bread is "our body broken" and the wine is "our blood shed?" I don't think you are?
I'm not sure if you're saying because of as response or as an enabling factor. Can you clarify? I don't think this is saying, "because of" as in, because God is compassionate, then you should offer yourself back in response. I think this is saying "because of" as in, you can do this because God is compassionate.Quote:
However, in both verses, the sacrifice is the because of the "mercy of God."
??? We don't participate in our spiritual renewal? Can't square that at all with so much of what St Paul says. He even goes as far as to say his suffering (and ours) fills up what is lacking in Christ's afflictions (Col 1:24)! That's participatory, as is "work out your salvation in fear in trembling". Cleansing our mind is our business (but its Him who works in us with power, right?). Go read St John's homily on this passage - I linked it earlier.Quote:
The transformation is said to be "by the renewal of your mind" which again is not something we initiate or participate in.
Shrug. Those two statements don't follow. Of course it is because of Christ that any of it matters. "Through the compassion of God present your bodies as a living sacrifice". So... what's the problem?Quote:
My exact words were "I don't see where our sacrifice is along side Christ, but that it is because of Christ that any of this matters."
We are in communion for two reasons. Because of His great and saving works, which were sufficient for our salvation. And because we choose to go up there and receive the body and blood. Our obedience is our sacrifice, both in this (do this in remembrance of me) and in all aspects of our life. If we do not offer our obedience to Him, we would not be able to partake without condemning ourselves. The scriptures say you can receive unworthily (1 Corinthians 11:27). How is that? Is His sacrifice insufficient for some folks? Or is there something on our end required?Quote:
We are in communion because of Christ sacrifice, not because we offer anything.
I mean, this is a silly question of course. But the answer is no; the relationship is not reciprocal. It is His body, His sacrifice, His offering, and He receives. But, we are joined to that body by His grace - again, with Romans 12:1, through His mercy. That's the only way we can even offer ourselves, is through or on account of His pity or compassion on mankind.Quote:
Are you suggesting that we should change scripture to say that the the bread is "our body broken" and the wine is "our blood shed?" I don't think you are?
That doesn't make His body our body, it makes our body His body, if that makes sense? The same way joining the Church doesn't make the body of Christ my body, but it does join me to the body of Christ.
Quote:
I'm not sure if you're saying because of as response or as an enabling factor. Can you clarify? I don't think this is saying, "because of" as in, because God is compassionate, then you should offer yourself back in response. I think this is saying "because of" as in, you can do this because God is compassionate.
I agree with you. Our sacrifice is because of God's mercy though the sacrifice of Christ.
So as Swimmer asked before...what are we bringing to the table? A body that is only acceptable because of God's mercy, not anything we've done.
Quote:
??? We don't participate in our spiritual renewal? Can't square that at all with so much of what St Paul says. He even goes as far as to say his suffering (and ours) fills up what is lacking in Christ's afflictions (Col 1:24)! That's participatory, as is "work out your salvation in fear in trembling". Cleansing our mind is our business (but its Him who works in us with power, right?). Go read St John's homily on this passage - I linked it earlier.
When Romans 2 says to "be transformed by the renewal of your mind," that is not something we played a role in. That is from God. Subsequent to that, yes we are called to "Love your God and neighbor."
From the Formula of Concord:
"but also that, when they have been born anew by the Spirit of God, converted to the Lord, and thus the veil of Moses has been lifted from them, they live and walk in the law."
Quote:
Shrug. Those two statements don't follow. Of course it is because of Christ that any of it matters. "Through the compassion of God present your bodies as a living sacrifice". So... what's the problem?
It's your opinion that they don't follow, yet you agree with the statement.
Quote:
We are in communion for two reasons. Because of His great and saving works, which were sufficient for our salvation. And because we choose to go up there and receive the body and blood. Our obedience is our sacrifice, both in this (do this in remembrance of me) and in all aspects of our life. If we do not offer our obedience to Him, we would not be able to partake without condemning ourselves. The scriptures say you can receive unworthily (1 Corinthians 11:27). How is that? Is His sacrifice insufficient for some folks? Or is there something on our end required?
Or more simply, it's Christ's death and resurrection and our faith in Him.
Obedience doesn't require faith. Paul proclaims he was obedient to the law, going so far as to call himself blameless. Yet he counted it all as a loss (Philippians 3).
Our whole lives are because of God. Our lives are because of our parents. And our obedience is because of a God. But we're not automatons and we have free will. So our obedience is our sacrifice. Because of God? Yes. Enabled by God? Absolutely. But product of our own free choice? Again, yes, absolutely. This is always the faith of the Church.
So the answer to - "what are we bringing to the table?" Is our obedience, even to death. But not a bloody death of self sacrifice but a death to self, a self-denial in the words of Christ. Our obedience is to deny ourself and take up our cross, and it encompasses our whole lives. To look at it like wel it's just because of God is to somehow make everything we do irrelevant. That's not what the scriptures say. What we do matters. Our obedience matters.
///
When I said they don't follow, I'm saying they're not logically interrelated. One doesn't disagree with the other, they're independent thoughts. Christ being the sole reason and author of salvation doesn't mean our sacrifice - commanded by the scriptures - are not necessary and proper.
///
I think you're mixing and matching here. Obedience to what, exactly? Don't Lutherans say an unregenerated person is incapable of obedience?
Anyway we're getting in the weeds.
There was an objection that the laity are involved in the Eucharistic sacrifice. I clarified that they are, by way of union to Christ's sacrifice. The liturgical language is very clear and makes reference to the offering and sacrifice of praise over and over, as well as explicitly saying Christ has commanded us to do this ministry, and He is the one who offers, the offering, and the one who receives.
So what's the actual problem here? I think monergism makes this language uncomfortable, but I think that discomfort is somewhat telling.
If monergism is incompatible with the language of the liturgy, the central common act in the life of the Church...the language that the Church has been using for as long as we have record (the Liturgy of St James has the same language as the other two I referenced) then monergism can't be the faith of those who preserved and practiced those words. Or, there's no incompatibility with monergism and this language...in which case, again, what's the problem?
So the answer to - "what are we bringing to the table?" Is our obedience, even to death. But not a bloody death of self sacrifice but a death to self, a self-denial in the words of Christ. Our obedience is to deny ourself and take up our cross, and it encompasses our whole lives. To look at it like wel it's just because of God is to somehow make everything we do irrelevant. That's not what the scriptures say. What we do matters. Our obedience matters.
says who? You? So who is St. Paul talking to then? If a person can't participate or intimate or have any role in this, why is he instructing people to do it? That doesn't make any sense. He says - don't do this, do that.Quote:
When Romans 2 says to "be transformed by the renewal of your mind," that is not something we played a role in.
///
When I said they don't follow, I'm saying they're not logically interrelated. One doesn't disagree with the other, they're independent thoughts. Christ being the sole reason and author of salvation doesn't mean our sacrifice - commanded by the scriptures - are not necessary and proper.
///
Quote:
Or more simply, it's Christ's death and resurrection and our faith in Him.
Obedience doesn't require faith. Paul proclaims he was obedient to the law, going so far as to call himself blameless. Yet he counted it all as a loss (Philippians 3).
I think you're mixing and matching here. Obedience to what, exactly? Don't Lutherans say an unregenerated person is incapable of obedience?
Anyway we're getting in the weeds.
There was an objection that the laity are involved in the Eucharistic sacrifice. I clarified that they are, by way of union to Christ's sacrifice. The liturgical language is very clear and makes reference to the offering and sacrifice of praise over and over, as well as explicitly saying Christ has commanded us to do this ministry, and He is the one who offers, the offering, and the one who receives.
So what's the actual problem here? I think monergism makes this language uncomfortable, but I think that discomfort is somewhat telling.
If monergism is incompatible with the language of the liturgy, the central common act in the life of the Church...the language that the Church has been using for as long as we have record (the Liturgy of St James has the same language as the other two I referenced) then monergism can't be the faith of those who preserved and practiced those words. Or, there's no incompatibility with monergism and this language...in which case, again, what's the problem?
Here's another question that will highlight a difference, maybe.
What are we communing with? What are we partaking, sharing, etc in during communion? A communion of what?
And I want to stress that I actually don't think there's an issue with Lutheranism and the idea of becoming joined with Christ's sacrifice mystically in communion. I just think it's something that isn't taught or emphasized, and I think that the heavy emphasis on monergism makes it, like I said, uncomfortable. Just like monergism makes theosis uncomfortable but not necessarily incompatible.
What are we communing with? What are we partaking, sharing, etc in during communion? A communion of what?
And I want to stress that I actually don't think there's an issue with Lutheranism and the idea of becoming joined with Christ's sacrifice mystically in communion. I just think it's something that isn't taught or emphasized, and I think that the heavy emphasis on monergism makes it, like I said, uncomfortable. Just like monergism makes theosis uncomfortable but not necessarily incompatible.
Lutherans don't have an issue with theosis..and honestly the concept should be the springboard of all ecumenical conversations because it is such a universal belief, even if called by a different name (sanctification, christification, theosis etc)
k2aggie07 said:
Here's another question that will highlight a difference, maybe.
What are we communing with? What are we partaking, sharing, etc in during communion? A communion of what?
And I want to stress that I actually don't think there's an issue with Lutheranism and the idea of becoming joined with Christ's sacrifice mystically in communion. I just think it's something that isn't taught or emphasized, and I think that the heavy emphasis on monergism makes it, like I said, uncomfortable. Just like monergism makes theosis uncomfortable but not necessarily incompatible.
View points are interesting. I don't think there's necessarily anything uncomfortable with Lutheranism.
However, mongerism within Lutheranism is not emphasized, and honestly, I wonder if most people in a congregation would have any clue what that word meant.
More simply we are saying that "Christ alone" is the cause of our salvation. His death and resurrection justify us.
When it comes to Theosis, while not in 100% agreement, we can certainly understand a progression in "holiness." We just don't relate it our our salvation/justification with God.
I checked with a few of my mentors. I think what I've been saying is simply matter of fact in the Church. We bring bread and wine to the altar as an offering representing our lives, our bodies, and we ask that the Holy Spirit be sent down on us and the gifts we bring. And in communion we become partakers and participants in Christ's sacrifice, the Holy Spirit comes down and unites us to His body and His blood and His once for all sacrifice. We come to offer sacrifices, but Christ is every sacrifice in the old covenant - the thank offering, the sin offering, the offering for blood guilt, etc. So we offer Him - "Thine own of thine own we offer unto thee, on behalf of all and for all" as it says in the liturgy. I hope I am not making this unclear or a trouble, but I think this is a pretty darn important point in understanding what we're doing at communion.
I am joy SSPX but I definitely get the appeal - and agree with almost everything.
The church needs the SSPX. That's obvious.
The church needs the SSPX. That's obvious.