A friendly discussion???

[Protoevangel]

I've been having what I considered a casual conversation with an old friend, when I responded to him making a claim that "the church" complicates Salvation. I didn't even think it was that much of a debate or anything until this last email where he ups the ante a bit. I honestly don't remember saying some of the things he is arguing against.

I did begin a reply, but I was just thinking that I'd like some fresh perspectives, so I don't fall into my normal pattern of polemic and argument. If anyone would like to take pieces of this and offer fresh responses, that'd be great. Otherwise, just in waiting another day before I actually reply will be a positive step. :cool:

I'm not including the beginning or ending paragraphs which aren't really pertinent to the ongoing discussion.
I understand that the Orthodox view of "the church" has to do with its lineage and organizational history. By virtue of its long tradition of faithfulness to God and its roots in the early church it claims an authority equal to or perhaps even greater than scripture. At least this is what I have understood from you - please correct me if I am wrong on this point.

My understanding of Christian leadership is servanthood: the willingness to put yourself in service to God and others. Nowhere do I see any reference in the scriptures to God endorsing any human authority on a global scale. The authority is always the Word, or the Holy Spirit. Oh, I know that scripture shares with us stories of the various struggles between church leaders after Christ's ascension which some take to endorse an authority structure, but I personally don't see the connection between a local church organization and a global organization.

I know that your definition of church is different than mine. I also know that you reject any definition that does not agree with yours. At this point you must disagree as a condition of your faith in the Orthodox church. Ironically, this discussion actually proves the point that I was making when I made the comment that started it; organized religion does complicate faith in Christ.

I think you and I both still agree that faith in Christ is essential to salvation. I would further hope that you and I agree that membership in the Orthodox faith is not a requirement for salvation. Ergo, any dissension between brothers in Christ due to disagreements about the form of organized religion is, by definition, a complication caused by organized religion, not by Christ, or the Word, or the Holy Spirit.

So how can we go forward in a discussion if the only acceptable resolution is agreement with you, and that agreement is not based on a clear reading of scripture, but rather a particular interpretation of scripture that only exists within the Orthodox faith? Do you see the circular logic here? You interpret the Bible to say these things that support the Orthodox position because you believe in the Orthodox position. I should accept your interpretation of the Bible's texts that you feel support the Orthodox view because you feel they support the Orthodox view. If I do not see the Orthodox view in scripture, then I am wrong. Period.

Not much room for discussion, is there?

I am very happy that you are in a church organization that meets your needs and enriches your life as a Christian. That is what church is all about. The only downside I see to this particular church is that it is so possessive about its claim to being the only "true" church. Any claims of that sort smack of legalism to me, and I am left thinking that in such a church the process of salvation has been shifted ever so slightly from total reliance on Christ to a partial reliance on what we do here on earth.

For example, if I belong to St. Matthew Lutheran church, I am not really going to "church" because it is not Orthodox. However, if I attend an Orthodox church then God will be more pleased with me because of what I do, regardless of how strong or weak my faith is. Isn't that the essence of legalism?

Perhaps you would argue that being Orthodox guarantees a superior kind of faith. I don't think you would really argue that, but if you did there is still no evidence for it. Orthodox Christians do not have special powers that I know of. Do you know of any? Do they have any claims to doing more of Christ's work on earth than anyone else? Personally, I would be very suspicious of such claims made by anyone.

I have made it clear from the very beginning of this discussion that my intent is not to "win," that is to persuade you of anything. I understand that to do so, to persuade you to change your view of what church means as an Orthodox to what my view of church would necessarily dilute your faith in the Orthodox church. How would that benefit me? It wouldn't! It can only hurt you and your faith which is not something I want to do. Unfortunately, because of your church's views, there are only three possible outcomes to our discussion:

1. I ultimately agree with you and join the Orthodox church which is something you have said you would like to see happen. I do not see this happening in the near future however without a major change in my understanding of scripture's view of what church is all about. As I am fairly conversant with scripture now, I do not anticipate that you will be able to show me anything radically new, and so far your arguments have been highly dependent upon scripture being interpreted through the lens of the Orthodox faith.

2. The second alternative is that you find that you agree with my views of church, and consequently discover that you are no longer in alignment with the Orthodox faith. This is not something I would like to see happen, as I have said many times.

3. We disagree. There are several scenarios here. My preferred scenario is that we continue to respect each other as brothers in Christ, and continue our friendship on that basis. Alternately we could continue to debate secondary points ad nauseam, but knowing that we disagree on the underlying definitions means that this would be a total exercise in futility and a probable waste of time. Personally, I am not inclined to pursue this course.

[Protoevangel]

I understand that the Orthodox view of "the church" has to do with its lineage and organizational history.I think this completely misses the point. The above comment seems to come from a humanistic point of view. The lineage and organizational history attests to the Church, as in empirical evidence for the same, but they are not, in any way, the essence of the Orthodox view of the Church. The Orthodox view of the Church has to do with God Himself. The Church is Incarnational; God with us. The unity of the Church follows necessarily from the unity of God. God is not just internally united, while being externally in schism, and therefore neither can the Church be so.


By virtue of its long tradition of faithfulness to God and its roots in the early church it claims an authority equal to or perhaps even greater than scripture. At least this is what I have understood from you - please correct me if I am wrong on this point. I would say that whole line of thinking is based on a misunderstanding of what Holy Scripture is, and who the Church is. It looks to me like you are suggesting (as the above line of thinking shows), that the Church is nothing but a group of people. The Holy Church of God and Holy Scripture cannot be put at odds, because they are not separate "things", but part of a unified whole.

If Pastor Tom said that you claim the Bible has equal authority to Christ, I hope you would see through his charade immediately. It is not so much that the statement is strictly incorrect (Holy Scripture's authority comes from Christ, and cannot be put at odds with Christ), but that it looks at the issue from a flawed perspective. It is the same here... Christ gave us the Church, and sent the Holy Spirit to guide the Church into "all truth" (John 16:13). It is the Church, that Paul calls the "pillar and ground of truth" (1 Timothy 3:15).

[nestoj]

[quote]
I would further hope that you and I agree that membership in the Orthodox faith is not a requirement for salvation.
[/qoute]

True

[quote]
Ergo, any dissension between brothers in Christ due to disagreements about the form of organized religion is, by definition, a complication caused by organized religion, not by Christ, or the Word, or the Holy Spirit.
[/qoute]

No.

1. Church is not "organized religion"
2. Complication doesn't come from by God established Church same way as it is not coming from the Father or Son or the Holy Spirit, it comes from human rebellious, self centric and sinfull state. Christ, trough Church, reestablishes man in his natural state.

nestoj
God helps

[nestoj]

not by Christ, or the Word, or the Holy Spirit.


Why does your friend writes "Christ" and "Word" one after another, like these are two different persons?

I mean: Christ = Logos = Word ????

Or, he means "scripture" when he writes "Word"? If this is a case, I would be worried. This "Word of God" thing is being pushed to far for my liking...

PS.
Try to humble your spirit when adressing him. Strong words from your side will not bring him any good and will bring damage to you.

PSS.
He seams like a good man. That is most important.

nestoj
God helps

[icxn]

My conviction that Orthodoxy is truly the One Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, doesn't rest on arguments but on the peace that surpasses all understanding, experienced by those who have been baptized and draw near [the initiated know] with fear, faith and love. We come up with arguments afterwards, to approach those whose mind is still limited by reasoned ideas and are not yet open to the divine experience that the Church offers because they still hold on to their misconceptions.

That is my [meta-]argument. :)

He is Jesus, the Author of life. * He has come to loose the condemnation of first-created Adam. * Being God, and thus not needing to be purified, * in the Jordan He purifies the one who had fallen. * He put to death the enmity, and therefore He grants the peace that surpasses all understanding. - Katavasias of Epiphany, Ode Five

[Protoevangel]

I would further hope that you and I agree that membership in the Orthodox faith is not a requirement for salvation.

True
Well, I do want to stress that the Church = Salvation, but I want to do it in such a way to also let him know that this does not others cannot "make it to Heaven" (which is all Salvation is to the protestant.

I was thinking about something like:

The Church IS Salvation, Jeff. It is only through the Holy, Catholic, Apostolic, and Orthodox Church that Salvation is possible. It is schism from Her that complicates Salvation. Of course, Divine Grace is certainly active among many non-Orthodox, and if they are sincere in their love of God, then we may rest assured that God will have mercy upon them; but it does not follow that they are members of the Church; members of Christ.

(Heavily borrowed from Bishop Kallistos Ware)


Ergo, any dissension between brothers in Christ due to disagreements about the form of organized religion is, by definition, a complication caused by organized religion, not by Christ, or the Word, or the Holy Spirit.


No.

1. Church is not "organized religion"
2. Complication doesn't come from by God established Church same way as it is not coming from the Father or Son or the Holy Spirit, it comes from human rebellious, self centric and sinfull state. Christ, trough Church, reestablishes man in his natural state.

nestoj
God helps
I like this a lot!

Why does your friend writes "Christ" and "Word" one after another, like these are two different persons?

I mean: Christ = Logos = Word ????

Or, he means "scripture" when he writes "Word"? If this is a case, I would be worried. This "Word of God" thing is being pushed to far for my liking...
Yes, he is referring to Holy Scripture as the Word. I have no problem with this, as even Christ Himself refers to Holy Scripture as the word of God. But you are correct that the Protestants take this way too far, ignoring that it is Christ Himself that is the true Word of God.

PS.
Try to humble your spirit when adressing him. Strong words from your side will not bring him any good and will bring damage to you.
This is why I am bringing this here. My first reaction was to go on the offensive. That is not what I want to do, though. That is not what I am going to do.

Thank you for all of your thoughts, my friend. They are helpful.

PSS.
He seams like a good man. That is most important.

nestoj
God helps
Yes, he is a good man, and a true friend.

[Mary of Bethany]

Well, I do want to stress that the Church = Salvation, but I want to do it in such a way to also let him know that this does not others cannot "make it to Heaven" (which is all Salvation is to the protestant.

I was thinking about something like:

The Church IS Salvation, Jeff. It is only through the Holy, Catholic, Apostolic, and Orthodox Church that Salvation is possible. It is schism from Her that complicates Salvation. Of course, Divine Grace is certainly active among many non-Orthodox, and if they are sincere in their love of God, then we may rest assured that God will have mercy upon them; but it does not follow that they are members of the Church; members of Christ.
<snip>

Proto,

I think the first 2 sentences there might be so foreign to his understanding of the church, that he won't take in the rest of your statement. I think I might start out differently.

Mary

[Protoevangel]

Try to humble your spirit when adressing him. Strong words from your side will not bring him any good and will bring damage to you.
Does this refer to what I have already written, in post #2? The first draft of that was much more blunt. I was hoping I had toned it down. If it still seems in the least harsh, arrogant, or anything, please do let me know.

[Protoevangel]

Well, I do want to stress that the Church = Salvation, but I want to do it in such a way to also let him know that this does not others cannot "make it to Heaven" (which is all Salvation is to the protestant.

I was thinking about something like:

The Church IS Salvation, Jeff. It is only through the Holy, Catholic, Apostolic, and Orthodox Church that Salvation is possible. It is schism from Her that complicates Salvation. Of course, Divine Grace is certainly active among many non-Orthodox, and if they are sincere in their love of God, then we may rest assured that God will have mercy upon them; but it does not follow that they are members of the Church; members of Christ.
Proto,

I think the first 2 sentences there might be so foreign to his understanding of the church, that he won't take in the rest of your statement. I think I might start out differently.

Mary
Thanks Mary.

Do you have any suggestion how I can still express the spirit of what I am trying to convey, but make it easier for a prot to understand?

Would something like this be better?:

Of course, Divine Grace is active among many non-Orthodox, and if they are sincere in their love of God, then we may rest assured that God will have mercy upon them. But it does not follow from this that they are members of the Church; members of Christ, not when they are in schism from the Church, the pillar and ground of th truth. In no way does this suggest that the Church does not play a necessary role in the Salvation of all, even those who are not properly members of her. In fact, it is schism from the Church, and the false human-invented doctrines which complicates Salvation.

I don't want to be completely tactless, but because of the minimalist way protestants define Salvation, I do want to be straightforward, and not have anything I say contribute to the Protestant delusion.

Unless y'all think it might be better to not even respond to the mischaracterizations. Perhaps I should just reply in fellowship, and let all this drop? I would hate to let a teaching opportunity pass by without at least trying, but I don't want to be too pushy either...

[nestoj]

Does this refer to what I have already written, in post #2? The first draft of that was much more blunt. I was hoping I had toned it down. If it still seems in the least harsh, arrogant, or anything, please do let me know.
Yes.


I think this completely misses the point. The above comment seems to come from a humanistic point of view.


Don’t tell a man where he is wrong (avoid finger pointing in ALL cases), show him why you are right.

nestoj
God helps

[Protoevangel]

Does this refer to what I have already written, in post #2? The first draft of that was much more blunt. I was hoping I had toned it down. If it still seems in the least harsh, arrogant, or anything, please do let me know.
Yes.
I think this completely misses the point. The above comment seems to come from a humanistic point of view.
Don’t tell a man where he is wrong (avoid finger pointing in ALL cases), show him why you are right.

nestoj
God helps
Thanks for helping!

But I seem to remember many good examples in the venerable and God-Bearing Fathers writings, where they would tell others where they were wrong. Sometimes, I believe it may be more beneficial to point to the pit than to the solid ground.

Thank you for your advice, I truly appreciate it. I think that you may very well be right in this case... It's just the "ALL cases" comment I'm not so sure about.

Thank you again, my friend.

[MariaRegina]

Dear Protoevangel

You are a brave soul to expose this your message to us for criticism. God grant you many years.

Could you compile and repost your message once you have made all the necessary corrections?

Thanks,
Elizabeth

[Mary of Bethany]

Thanks Mary.

Do you have any suggestion how I can still express the spirit of what I am trying to convey, but make it easier for a prot to understand?

Would something like this be better?:

Of course, Divine Grace is active among many non-Orthodox, and if they are sincere in their love of God, then we may rest assured that God will have mercy upon them. But it does not follow from this that they are members of the Church; members of Christ, not when they are in schism from the Church, the pillar and ground of th truth. In no way does this suggest that the Church does not play a necessary role in the Salvation of all, even those who are not properly members of her. In fact, it is schism from the Church, and the false human-invented doctrines which complicates Salvation.

I don't want to be completely tactless, but because of the minimalist way protestants define Salvation, I do want to be straightforward, and not have anything I say contribute to the Protestant delusion.

Unless y'all think it might be better to not even respond to the mischaracterizations. Perhaps I should just reply in fellowship, and let all this drop? I would hate to let a teaching opportunity pass by without at least trying, but I don't want to be too pushy either...

Yes, I think that's much better. You don't start out with an "exclusionary" statement that way, but you still get the same point across very well.

I think as long as you can keep anger and pride out of the communication (both sides) you'll be okay.

Mary

[nestoj]

Thanks for helping!

But I seem to remember many good examples in the venerable and God-Bearing Fathers writings, where they would tell others where they were wrong. Sometimes, I believe it may be more beneficial to point to the pit than to the solid ground.

Thank you for your advice, I truly appreciate it. I think that you may very well be right in this case... It's just the "ALL cases" comment I'm not so sure about.

Thank you again, my friend.

Thank you for kind words, brother.

Somehow I feel this is "that kind of man".
He demonstrated a lot of tact when he approached you, and he has every right to expect the same.
This is a gut feeling: I believe you will do better to show fruits of Orthodox Christianity even without breathtaking perfection of your theological knowledge, then to show him all his errors without a shadow of doubt (It would be best to show both, but if I had to choose, I would always choose first). But hey, I might be wrong (large possibility – I don’t know anything about Protestants).

Don’t accept anything I’ve said until we see what the rest of our brothers and sisters, with better understanding of the issue, have to say. Wander where are they???? :confused:

In Christ yours
nestoj

God helps

[nestoj]

Here they are. Havn't seen you guys till I made the post.

Sorry.

nestoj
God helps

[Protoevangel]

Elizabeth,

Thanks! :hug: Of course, I would be happy to post the final version.



Mary,

Thank you!

[Protoevangel]

Dear Protoevangel

You are a brave soul to expose this your message to us for criticism. God grant you many years.

Could you compile and repost your message once you have made all the necessary corrections?

Thanks,
Elizabeth
Hey Elizabeth,

It dosen't look like there will be a final version. Soon following on the heels of the email I posted excerpts from, another email followed. This email showed me that he and I are going to have to work on definitions and other lower-level issues, before we can really continue the discussion proper.

When (if) we get back to these issues, I'll continue posting, either here, on orthopraxis, or on my blog, for constructive and helpful criticism.

[MariaRegina]

Hey Elizabeth,

It dosen't look like there will be a final version. Soon following on the heels of the email I posted excerpts from, another email followed. This email showed me that he and I are going to have to work on definitions and other lower-level issues, before we can really continue the discussion proper.

When (if) we get back to these issues, I'll continue posting, either here, on orthopraxis, or on my blog, for constructive and helpful criticism.

Yes, definitions help.

One of the biggest problems is with words such as

Veneration
They - worship
We - honor

Mary
They - ordinary sinful woman
We - Theotokos

Christ
They - our brother and savior
We - Our Lord and God

Divine Liturgy
They - boring repetitious service
We - heavenly worship

Baptism
They - non necessary ordinance (gun powder?) :D
We - A life-giving Mystery where we put on Christ and become members of the Church, the Bride of Christ.

Yes, this is only a simple list of some of the verbal traps.

etc.

[Protoevangel]

That list is a good start.

A couple of the big ones for this conversation are (the first of which PostTribber seems to be foreshadowing):

Church
They - Sinful, imperfect, human (only) organizations. Alternately, invisible and undefined.
We - The pillar and ground of truth. Indwelt by the Holy Spirit. The Body of Christ, where He Himself is present and active in the world.

Unity
They - Schism. Thousands of mutually contradictory beliefs.
We - One Lord, one faith, one baptism.

Truth
They - Whatever you happen to believe at the moment. Alternately, unknowable.
We - Eternal and unchanging. Revealed by the Holy Spirit through Holy Scripture, the Holy Fathers, and the Holy Church. Christ Himself.

Holy Tradition
They - The teachings of man. Dead and dangerous.
We - The living essence of the Holy Spirit in the Church. Essential to understand Holy Scripture, the Church, and life, in the same light as the eternal Church.

Bible (authority/interpretation)
They - Self is the ultimate authority. Everyone else is wrong. Fell out of the sky in it's present form.
We - The Holy Scriptures of the Church. The same Holy Spirit who guided the writing of Holy Scripture also guides the Holy Church in their interpretation, therefore no interpretation outside of the consensus of the Church can be authoritative.