The Gospel, Live on the Cosmic Stage

QUOTE:

The Nicene confession that all things were made through Christ teaches us that the cosmos are the stage upon which the Triune God enacts a great drama of communion by sharing the divine life of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit with persons who are not God.

At the heart of the divine act of creation is the divine desire to make room for created persons in the communion of the uncreated Persons of the Blessed Trinity through adoptive participation in Christ.

Through the eyes of divine faith, then, the likeness to divine nature that is enjoyed by spiritual creatures with intellect and will, turns out to be a likeness to the divine Trinity enjoyed by created persons, who, in grace, know the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, as well as one another in them. (Nicene Christianity, J Augustine Di Noia, 2002)

COMMENTARY:

Father Di Noia present us with three very basic foundations necessary for a proper Christian understanding of reality. The first principle is that the main goal of God the Trinity in the act of creation was to receive from that creation, an inter-relatedness to His creatures. In short, God wants to share himself with those whom He has created, and thus He has constructed all things to facilitate that end. This should help us conclude then that the whole cosmos exist with the stage for communion with God in mind.

The second principle shows us that the designed means of entry into this interrelationship for which the cosmos are designed is an adoption by one who is already in the Trinity, the Son, and our Lord Jesus Christ. The point being that while we all walk around on the stage we cal the cosmos, we never enter into the ongoing play as full participants until we become united to Christ by adoption. In other words, there are the stage hands and the actors.

The third and final principle is that the way to see that doorway that leads to adoption is using the eyes of faith. The eyes of faith are the opera glasses by which the play becomes visible. Without rightly adjusted glasses, the whole play will appear as a blur.

Thus, the stage where the play called “the inter-communion of the blessed Trinity” is occurring is the cosmos, the means by which mankind enters into participation in that play come to us by an adoption that we receive from Christ, and this reality only becomes visible through a new kind of understanding, which we know as the eyes of faith.

If the church’s gospel presentation always began this way, our reputation in the contemporary west might be completely different than it is today.

Are Most Christians Un- Christian?

QUOTE:

Kinnaman, president of the Barna Institute, was inspired to write the book “Un-Christian” when Lyons, of the Fermi Project, commissioned him to do extensive research on what young Americans think about Christianity. Lyons had a gut-level sense that something was desperately wrong, and three years of research paints exactly that picture. Mosaics and Busters (the generations that include late teens to early 30-somethings) believe Christians are judgmental, antihomosexual, hypocritical, too political and sheltered. Rather than simply try to do a PR face-lift, Kinnaman looks at ways in which churches' activities actually may have been unchristian and encourages a return to a more biblical Christianity, a faith that not only focuses on holiness but also loves, accepts and works to understand the world around it. (From Publishers Weekly,
2008)

See the videos below for more.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5m3Q2lDMRm0&feature=player_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mKfg2mrMP4&feature=related

COMMENTARY:

One need not even read the book to have the claims posted by the reviewer jump out and assault our self-consciousness. The fact is that as each day goes by, we who profess Christ to be our Lord & our savior are increasingly marginalized & thrown into the pile of irrelevancy. The question that must be asked is “why”? The above statements, especially the videos drive home the message that we western Christians have done it to ourselves. When the majority of our population (80 % +) perceives us to be:

1. judgmental,

2. anti-homosexual,

3. hypocritical,

4. too political

5. & sheltered

We need to listen to them, as well as re-listen to ourselves. The danger we face for the moment may be contempt, but the danger that is to follow is total irrelevancy. Last week I had the privilege of listening to Mr Kinnaman deliver a lecture on this topic, & I must admit that it struck a deep chord within me, mostly because it exposed the consequences of the legal gospel embraced by the west since the schism. It seems that the younger generation of evangelicals is all too aware that something is wrong with western Christendom, & is trying to heal it by an Incarnational approach to Christian living; this is great. However, it will prove difficult to accomplish with the extreme level of sectarianism that exists in western Christendom. The fact is that what this new generation needs is a recovery of the true in Trinity and His love for mankind, as well as, a recovery of the incarnation and its implications for mankind. This will require the very body of theology understood & practiced by the undivided church, for that alone is Christianity in its fullness. Perhaps we have finally arrived at that time when Christendom can begin to be healed so that it may begin to heal the world around it. Kyrie eleison!

Predestination????

QUOTE

What does Holy Scripture mean when it asserts that God “predestines”? The verb itself, proorizo, means “to arrange ahead of time.” In the biblical context, where this verb appears with “foreknow” (proginosko, “to know ahead of time”), the verb signifies the providential arrangements by which He brings people to the grace of the Gospel. That is to say, predestination embraces the mysterious influences that God brings to bear on history, so that all things work together for the good of those who love Him.

This is very clear in the story of Joseph in the Old Testament. God made use of the sins of Joseph’s brothers to predestine—to arrange for—the deliverance of Joseph’s family: “And God sent me before you to preserve a posterity for you in the earth, and to save your lives by a great deliverance. So now it was not you who sent me here, but God. . . . But as for you, you meant evil against me; but God meant it for good, in order to bring it about as it is this day, to save many people alive” (Genesis 45:7-8; 50:20).

“To predestine,” as understood in the Bible (where, in fact, the noun never appears) has no reference to any alleged divine decree whereby some people are consigned to heavenly life and others to everlasting damnation. On the contrary, God wills all men to be saved. Indeed, in the Bible, predestination does not refer to any divine decree at all. It is a description, rather, of God’s providential activity in history, working to bring good out of evil.

Nowhere, therefore, does Holy Scripture hint even faintly at a person’s “predestination to hell.” In fact, this repulsive idea does violence to the Bible, in which predestination is always a category of grace, never of punishment. Predestination pertains invariably to the divine call, not the rejection of that call. It is always a description of the divine favor, not disfavor. It certainly does not include God’s arrangements to have someone damned. (Daily Reflections, Fr. Patrick Reardon, 2-13-2009)

COMMENTARY

Many struggle with the concept of predestination. This is due to the fact that the voice that towers above all others regarding this subject in the Christian west is that of John Calvin and his theological offspring. Calvin pioneered a view that assembled a list of passages to tell the story of redemption with the decrees of God as the starting point for salvation. According to Calvin these decrees were made before the foundation of the world, wherein God created two people groups, the elect, and the reprobates. The elect were predestined by God unto eternal life, and the reprobates were predestined unto damnation. Hence, before the creation God had hell in mind for his creatures. This is an expansion of Augustine’s views, which were never taught or embraced as presented by Calvin prior to the reformation.

In the above quote we see quite another approach to the subject, we see a view which does not do damage to God’s character. In this view we are presented with a God who as the scriptures teach "desires all men to be saved." Moreover, we see that this predestination of God is what He does “to arrange events ahead of time” in order that what men who intend evil are actually thwarted and there actions actually turn out for good. Thus, the author points to the account of Joseph the patriarch to demonstrate his point.

What is undeniable is that the God of Calvin, and the God of the author is not the same God; one God is best known for creating justice for evil, & the other is best known for planning to create good out of evil. It is this second God that the church universally confessed when they spoke with one voice, the other is one man's innovation.

English Orthodoxy - The Ten Articles, #2

QUOTE:

Secondly, As touching the holy sacrament of baptism, we will that all bishops and preachers shall instruct and teach our people committed by us unto their spiritual charge, that they ought and must of necessity believe certainly all those things, which hath been always by the whole consent of the Church approved, received, and used in the sacrament of baptism; that is to say, that the sacrament of baptism was instituted and ordained in the New Testament by our Saviour Jesus Christ, as a thing necessary for the attaining of everlasting life, according to the saying of Christ, “No man can enter into the kingdom of heaven, except he be born again of water and the Holy Ghost.”

And finally, if they shall also have firm credence and trust in the promise of God adjoined to the said sacrament, that is to say, that in and by this said sacrament, which they shall receive, God the Father giveth unto them, for His son Jesus Christ's sake, remission of all their sins, and the grace of the Holy Ghost, whereby they be newly regenerated and made the very children of God, according to the saying of St John and the apostle St Peter, Do penance (repent) for your sins, and be each of you baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, and you shall obtain remission of your sins, and shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. And according also to the saying of St Paul, “God hath not saved us for the works of justice which we have done, but of His mercy by baptism, and renovation of the Holy Ghost, whom He hath poured out upon us most plentifully, for the love of Jesus Christ our Saviour, to the intent that we, being justified by His grace, should he made the inheritors of everlasting life, according to our hope.” (The Ten Articles, 1536, Thomas Cramer)

Commentary:

The second of the “Ten Articles” of dogma in the first English reformation, addresses certain points of commonality as well as difference between the more Ancient & Orthodox English view, & the relatively new & prevailing Roman view of the day. Cranmer identifies three points in this article.

He begins by asserting that baptism finds its authority in that which hath been always by the whole consent of the Church approved, received, and used in the sacrament of baptism. It is here that we find the historic catholic methodology for determining dogma in the first millennium catholic church. Cranmer for the 2^nd time in as many articles defers to the Vincentian canon. This is the canon which taught that catholic dogma is that which has been believed by all, everywhere, at all times. This position directly opposed Rome’s view which taught that the church was still receiving revelation from God, and thus what it decided by papal decree and concilliar action could be added to dogma, even if it was new or even if it opposed that which had been believed by all, everywhere, at all times.

Yet, at the same time we see that because it is that which the church had always been believed, the English church like Rome affirmed that Baptism is a thing necessary for the attaining of everlasting life, according to the saying of Christ. This stands in direct opposition to the reformation’s teachings in all other places.

In addition to that point of agreement, we also see that the English church like Rome affirmed the ancient view that baptism brought about spiritual regeneration: the Father giveth unto them, for His son Jesus Christ's sake, remission of all their sins, and the grace of the Holy Ghost, whereby they be newly regenerated and made the very children of God.

In short, there are a great many points of agreement between the English church and Rome, due to the fact that Rome still retained many ancient dogmas & practices that where believed by all, everywhere, at all times. Nevertheless, it is inevitable that there be disagreements due to the innovative freedom that Rome gave herself.

The cry out of Canterbury in 1536 was, “out with that new fangled Roman Catholicism, they're just too revisionist.”

English Orthodoxy - The Ten Articles, # 1

It is customary for each of the parties within the English Catholic church to argue that their party constitutes the group which truly embodies Anglicanism. I will not try to make such an argument, for it is undeniable that Anglicanism is made of many factions. Nevertheless, it seems that it would be valuable to consider the very first post-reformation doctrinal document put out by the Church of England.

QUOTE

Article 1] The principal articles concerning our Faith.

First, As touching the chief and principal articles of our faith, saith it is thus agreed as hereafter followeth by the whole clergy of this our realm, we will that all bishops and preachers shall instruct and teach our people, by us committed to their spiritual charge, that they ought and must most constantly believe and defend all those things to be true, which be comprehended in the whole body and canon of the Bible, and also in the three Creeds or symbols", whereof one was made by the apostles, and is the common creed, which every man useth; the second was made by the holy council of Nice, and is said daily in the mass; and the third was made by Athanasius, and is comprehended in the Psalm Quicunque eult: and that they ought and must take and interpret all the same things according to the selfsame sentence and interpretation, which the words of the selfsame creeds or symbols do purport, and the holy approved doctors of the Church do entreat and defend the same. (The Ten Articles, 1536, Thomas Cranmer).

COMMENTARY

The first of the ten article forms the basis for truth & authority in the Anglican Church, and commits that truth and authority to the clergy of the church for the purpose of instructing and teaching our people. Not only are the clergy to teach those things, but they are to ensure that it is taught in such a way that the people understand that they must most constantly be believed and defended to be true. In short, the opening lines of this article tells us that there exists a repository apostolic tradition, it is in the hands of the clergy, and they are to pass on that same storehouse to God’s people who along with them have the responsibility of retaining it and passing it on.

According to article one, this apostolic storehouse is found in the whole body and canon of the Bible, and also in the three Creeds or symbols, whereof one was made by the apostles, and is the common creed, which every man useth; the second was made by the holy council of Nice, and is said daily in the mass; and the third was made by Athanasius. Amazingly enough, this is not the sola scriptura doctrine of the new thinkers of the day, Luther, Zwingli, or Calvin. Rather, it is the ancient thinking of the British Isles. It is a view that sees the whole body of Holy Tradition as existing in the bible, the three creeds, and the four councils.

Furthermore, the reason all are to believe this is because the holy approved doctors of the Church do entreat and defend the same. In other words, because this is what the whole church has always believed.

What we find here is nothing more & nothing less than a form of Orthodoxy that existed in England in the first millennium. And while it may be argued that the Orthodox of their day (1530’s) held to more than this (7 councils), it could also be said that there is nothing stated here that they would disagree with. Article one is Evangelical, Catholic, & Orthodox, yet, not protestant, not Roman, & not eastern.

Change You Can Count On

QUOTE

Deification is something that involves the body. Since the human person is a unity of body and soul, and since the incarnate Christ has saved and redeemed the whole person, it follows that our body is deified at the same time as our soul. (The Orthodox Church, Ware, 1963)

COMMENTARY

The west has long ceased to speak of salvation in holistic manner. The prevailing opinion on this side of the Bosphorus is that we have offended a God of perfect character and perfect order by our willful imperfections, hence, God is offended with us and we stand in need of reconciliation with Him (does this sound familiar?).

While there are plenty of verses in scripture one can gather to support this view, the charge of the east asserts that this western view is a truncated and selective understanding of salvation. The east charges the west with focusing on justification, which is in their view only one aspect of the story of redemption. The problem that this creates for the west is that the whole emphasis of salvation is found on how man is to be reconciled with God legally. Thus, it’s all about getting into the kingdom, and getting a ticket that will efficaciously open the doors of heaven. It is due to this reason that most western Christians build their theology around the doctrine of justification.

This edifice built upon justification results in a very strange set of consequences; 1^st, it makes the relationship between God & man primarily legal, & 2^nd, it makes what happens after justification relatively inconsequential. Surely, the west views supports obeying the law of Christ, however, it does not see Christ-likeness as salvation itself.

In order to overcome these consequences the west needs to rediscover the doctrines of the Trinity and the incarnation, and then to make the connection between those truths and our salvation. Notice the quote above does not fall into this trap. Met. Ware writes, "since the incarnate Christ has saved and redeemed the whole person, it follows that our body is deified at the same time as our soul."

Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own, for you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body. 1 Cor 6: 19-20

A New Year Meditation

In light of our upcoming New Year celebrations, I have posted a portion of an article by Fr Patick Henry Reardon, a Senior Editor of Touchstone: A Journal of Mere Christianity.

Quote:

Whereas English has only one word for time, other European languages more carefully distinguish between time as instance ("How many times?") and time as sequence ("How much time?").

The ancient Greeks, who thought a great deal about time (among many subjects), also had two different words that we English-speakers are forced to translate with the single word "time." Since there is a very profound difference between those two words, and because time is an important theological subject in the New Testament (itself written in Greek), it is useful to examine this difference.

The first Greek term is chronos, meaning time on the move, time as before and after, time as the future passing through the present and so becoming the past. From this Greek word chronos we derive such English terms as chronic, chronicle, and chronology. Thus, we call an illness chronic if it lasts a long time. A chronicle is an account of events through a sequence of time. Chronology is the itemized, studied measurement of time.

Indeed, measurement is one of the distinguishing characteristics of chronos, which is a quantitative concept. Time that cannot be measured is not chronos. Time in this sense is dimensional, quantifiable; it can be "accounted for."

In addition to chronos, however, the Greeks also spoke of time as a moment, time as occasion, time as qualitative rather than quantitative, time as significant rather than dimensional. This second word for time is kairos.

Strictly speaking, we don't measure kairos. We don't ask someone, for example, "How much Christmas did you have?" We inquire, rather, "what sort of Christmas did you have?" With kairos we employ the category of qualis, not quantum.

The reason that time in the sense of kairos cannot be measured is because it is always a now. A now is obviously indivisible; an instant is, so to speak, too brief to account for. By the time you stop to measure a now, it is already gone. Now is punctuated by a swift, indecipherable passage from this to that. Furthermore, if now cannot be measured, it can also not be counted. It is futile, for example, and probably a threat to sanity, to ask how many nows there are in an hour. Unlike the past and the future, nonetheless, the now really exists. Indeed, now is the only time that does exist. In the strictest sense, "there's no time like now."

Kairos, because it is present, is an icon of eternal life. To experience the now, after all, one must be alive. The dead know nothing of now. Therefore, the now, the kairos, is an icon of the life of heaven. Indeed, eternal life is an everlasting now, in which there is no sequence, no before and after.

Eternity is not a long time. Strictly speaking, there is simply no length to it. Nothing elapses. The infinite is not measurable. Thus, "when we've been there ten thousand years/ bright shining as the sun/ we've no less days to sing God's praise/ than when we've first begun."

(The Rev. Fr. Patrick Henry Reardon, 2009; article found at http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles5/ReardonChronos.php,)