I think this is an excellent point. For me, it moves the question away from “what keeps you from becoming” something other than Lutheran, to “what must we all do to reach corporate unity”, under the grace of the Holy Spirit?
Jon
- Status
Jon
I
IgnatianPhilo
Guest
In your mind does the Orthodox church possess such things on the same level the Lutheran church does?
C
Cavaradossi
Guest
I think dispensing with the Wednesday/Friday fast is somewhat troublesome. That is of such ancient provenance that it is mentioned in the Didache.
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
I understand, but does the Church have real authority to bind or loose “whatever”? Especially, if that whatever is discipline and not doctrine?
C
Cavaradossi
Guest
I don’t believe that the power to bind and loose is that pervasive, because orthodoxy and orthopraxis form an organic unity. The canons in their full severity serve as a reminder of the standards to which all Christians should be held, and if we truly believe, as the fathers did, that the ability to theologise stems from first having the intellect healed by the combination of ascesis, prayer, and the grace of God (otherwise the intellect being darkened by our sins cannot have clear vision of God, so the fathers assert), then as a consequence, we should also believe that we cannot arbitrarily modify orthopraxis without accidentally modifying orthodoxy in the process. That is not to say that the church can never use the power to bind and loose to create new canons, but new canons should never contradict the spirit of the canons already passed.
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
This makes sense but would the reduction of fasting “contradict the spirit” of it? If so, how?
K
KjetilK
Guest
You mean such as the 3rd Canon of the First Council of Nicea?
“The great Council has stringently forbidden any bishop, priest, deacon, or any of the clergy, to have a woman living with him, except a mother, sister, aunt, or some such person who is beyond all suspicion.”
I guess this means that the Orthodox churches doesn’t have any married priests, or that everyone of these married priests either doesn’t live with their wives.
Or you could just simply admit that the faith does develop, and that this development is not neutral with regards to the surrounding cultures of the particular Churches.
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
**Priestly celibacy in patristics and in the history of the Church
Roman Cholij
Secretary of the Apostolic Exarch for Ukrainian Catholics in Great Britain**
vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cclergy/documents/rc_con_cclergy_doc_01011993_chisto_en.html
Roman Cholij
Secretary of the Apostolic Exarch for Ukrainian Catholics in Great Britain**
vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cclergy/documents/rc_con_cclergy_doc_01011993_chisto_en.html
W
wynd
Guest
I think you’re thinking of it the opposite of the way we do. Yes, the Church has authority to change these things, but is it always a good idea? Where you see a minimum that must be met on pain of sin, we see a maximum that we all fail to attain, but continually strive for.
Here’s a blog post I saw a long time ago that summarized the issue: karls.blogspot.com/2002/06/karls-law-of-church-governance-i-have.html
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
Okay. The Church does have the authority to change these things. That addresses my original point above.
Is it always a good idea? Wouldn’t the answer to that depend on whether you believe your bishops are being led by God or not?
Does it have to be either/or? Could it be that we see both the minimum to be done but how much more fully we could respond to God out of our desire to pursue holiness?
The Church sets a minimum standard that is objectively good. WE decide individually how much more we wish to do in our response to God and our pursuit of holiness.
Thanks.
W
wynd
Guest
I guess that depends on how you define “led by God.” Could the Church change the Mass so the priest walks out, says the words of institution, and walks back into the sacristy? Is this a valid Mass? (I’ve asked these questions of several Catholic priests and I’ve always gotten “yes” to both.)
Again, this may be just a difference of approach. For us, the minimum and maximum standard are the same and everyone is expected to do as much as they can to meet it. If you can’t, that’s something to discuss with your priest and he’ll figure out an appropriate way to reduce the requirements for you.
Approach 1: You must run at least one mile or else you’re in very big trouble. If you want to run more, that’s up to you.
Approach 2: You must run at least a marathon, but if you can’t, we’ll figure out how to get you there eventually.
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
Of course that is the answer. It happened in war zones, I’m pretty sure. The men needed to receive communion but bullets were flying.
Stop and think about this for a minute. I know you have your 2.5 hour liturgies and you love them, but what is the heart of the Divine Liturgy? The Eucharist. And precisely how does the bread and wine become the body and blood of Jesus? The priest says, “This is…”. (Well, that’s the Catholic version, anyway…not sure EXACTLY how your priests do it.)
But we both agree that is NOT what the Church will do, so it’s not a useful example.
Wynd, in the blog you referenced, Karl wrote: “If the minimum is allowed, the minimum becomes mandatory.”
But in these approaches you have given, all you have done is to illustrate that the mandatory Orthodox minimum is much bigger than the mandatory Catholic minimum. Okay. So what?
If people are seeking to fulfill the BIG Orthodox minimum, are they guaranteed to be doing so for the right reasons any more than the people who seek to fulfill a small Catholic minimum? :nope:
It just means that your phylacteries are wider and your tassels are longer, that’s all.
W
wynd
Guest
In that case why have a minimum at all?
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
Uh…because there are minimum standards that someone must meet in order to be saved?
Look, wynd, there are two completely different approaches to attaining eternal life in heaven.
One person says, “What do I have to do to get into heaven and avoid eternal damnation?” That person wants to know the minimum, and it’s a reasonable question. It’s not noble, but it is reasonable. What does God expect of me? Man has asked this question since time began, and the Church, Orthodox or Catholic, has tried to answer that question, I think.
Another person says, “How can I love God more?” For that person, minimum requirements don’t apply…they are focused on giving their all to God.
But the Church can’t force the first person to attempt the approach of the second any more than it can tell the second to slow down.
Now, don’t tell me that Orthodoxy is encouraging sanctity any more than Catholicism is…I’m simply not going to hear it. First, our saints are just as holy as yours, and the entire world knows who Mother Teresa and John Paul II are precisely because of their sanctity. But second, your sinners are just as bad as ours.
So, I’m not buying the idea that that Orthodoxy has somehow hit upon a formula of ascesis that achieves greater sanctity for the average person in the pew.
B
benjohnson
Guest
Certainly yes!
I
IgnatianPhilo
Guest
How many Lutherans would agree with you on this?
B
benjohnson
Guest
Pretty much every Lutheran - we’re a feisty lot and love to argue, but our definition of "The Church is the congregation of saints, in which the Gospel is rightly taught and the Sacraments are rightly administered. "
I
IgnatianPhilo
Guest
Do you think the gospel exists equally in the Roman Catholic communion as well?
C
Cavaradossi
Guest
That canon explicitly forbids the particular practice of some clergy living with a syneisaktos (or a subindoctrina in Latin), not just a woman in general. It does not prohibit clergy from cohabiting with their wives, as the wife would fall in the last category of one beyond suspicion.
Obviously we(Lutherans and Orthodox) don’t agree on everything, but I certainly agree with Ben about the Orthodox. I would further say so about The CC, and others.
Jon
- Status