Which comes first, orthodoxy or orthopraxy?

[Alizarin]

Both equally. Cop out I know.

It’s not a cop out if that’s your honest opinion. And that’s what I was looking for

 

[JerryZ]

Can you perform a deliberate right action without a right belief?

Is not the action driven by thought first?

Actually had the JudeoChristian Religion been arrived at through human reason we could assert that belief came before action.
BUT that is NOT the case.
GOD manifested Himself to humans and asked to act in a certain way.

What was the predominant belief system then? Polytheism.
He commanded that a certain tribe stop DOING that.
He continued to manifest Himself to this chosen people always showing more of himself and demanding changes in the way we ACTED.

Orthodoxy is the practice of what has been taught to us. It could NOT have come first.

 

[Alizarin]

Actually had the JudeoChristian Religion been arrived at through human reason we could assert that belief came before action.
BUT that is NOT the case.
GOD manifested Himself to humans and asked to act in a certain way.

What was the predominant belief system then? Polytheism.
He commanded that a certain tribe stop DOING that.
He continued to manifest Himself to this chosen people always showing more of himself and demanding changes in the way we ACTED.

Orthodoxy is the practice of what has been taught to us. It could NOT have come first.

Very interesting angle. Hadn’t seen that one before.

My one question regarding it would be: Didn’t Abraham — via belief/faith – have to accept that the voice he heard was that of the one true God, before he was motivated to obey it?

 

[Isaiah45_9]

Actually had the JudeoChristian Religion been arrived at through human reason we could assert that belief came before action.
BUT that is NOT the case.
GOD manifested Himself to humans and asked to act in a certain way.

What was the predominant belief system then? Polytheism.
He commanded that a certain tribe stop DOING that.
He continued to manifest Himself to this chosen people always showing more of himself and demanding changes in the way we ACTED.

Orthodoxy is the practice of what has been taught to us. It could NOT have come first.

How can we be polytheists without first believing that there is more than one God?

Unlike animals, we are rational beings.

Again, what drives our actions?

Why then has God given us Faith? Why Jesus says “Believe”?

Why is James so stern when he says that Faith without works is dead?
If not because we claim to believe something but our actions don’t back it up?

After God made man, He tells man to not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. What is God doing here? Protecting man’s thought process, knowing we don’t fully understand these things on our own.

Yes action is part of our lives, and the first things we do when we are born is cry. But what happens when we talk to our newborn child? The child becomes calm because it recognizes our voice. Don’t you think there is already a thought process here?

I understand the difficulty at time to separate both and that they might take turn in which one goes first at times. But we are not robots (And still the need to be programmed - the thought process is put in them first!) and we are not irrational animals (although we can act as if we were at times).

 

[JerryZ]

Very interesting angle. Hadn’t seen that one before.

My one question regarding it would be: Didn’t Abraham — via belief/faith – have to accept that the voice he heard was that of the one true God, before he was motivated to obey it?

Oh yeah, absolutely Abraham accepted and believed, but we have an action. He chose!

He could have just as well have dismissed it as some allucination due to the wine been bad or something he hate giving him the bends.
Instead he acted and decided he would accept what the voice told him which started the ball rolling.
By the way, we believe, that God gives us through grace faith. It is one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit.
It is up to us to act accordingly.

 

[JerryZ]

How can we be polytheists without first believing that there is more than one God?

Unlike animals, we are rational beings.

Again, what drives our actions?

Why then has God given us Faith? Why Jesus says “Believe”?

Why is James so stern when he says that Faith without works is dead?
If not because we claim to believe something but our actions don’t back it up?

After God made man, He tells man to not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. What is God doing here? Protecting man’s thought process, knowing we don’t fully understand these things on our own.

Yes action is part of our lives, and the first things we do when we are born is cry. But what happens when we talk to our newborn child? The child becomes calm because it recognizes our voice. Don’t you think there is already a thought process here?

I understand the difficulty at time to separate both and that they might take turn in which one goes first at times. But we are not robots (And still the need to be programmed - the thought process is put in them first!) and we are not irrational animals (although we can act as if we were at times).

Ok I will try to explain.

Man wakes up (his intelect, NOT in the morning after a night sleep) and starts seeing the forces of nature at work.

The sun warms and gives him light during the day.
The moon gives him some light at night. The lighting in the sky comes with rain and sometimes gives him fire.
He ponders and decides that these forces are gods.
He further decides that he will start giving honor and worship to these forces.
He has started orthopraxy
After other people will modify the deities, change the understanding of who they are etc.
The orthodoxy will be developed from the practices.

Also it’s a perfect example of polytheism, man assigned to each “force” of nature to a god. Also this belief system was developed solely based on human experience and hence the use of reason alone.

Christianity on the other hand is NOT a belief system that was “deduced” from human reason. It is we believe God’s revelation to humanity of Himself.

If we find an island where some humans live who never heard the gospel, we go there and “evangelize” them. They would come to believe first and then put those beliefs in practice.
Orthodoxy (which is handed down to them) first and orthopraxy (which is also handed down to them) later.
However in the strict sense, those people in order to believe need to engage their will, which is an ACT. They choose to accept what they are being told by the evangelizers.

But that was not Abraham case, there was no Orthodoxy for him.
He was told to act in a certain way, he accepted it and from that moment onward Orthodoxy started evolving.
But without him acting (Praxy) there would not have been orthodoxy.

Orthopraxy is a term derived from modern Greek ὀρθοπραξία (orthopraxia) meaning “correct action/activity” or an emphasis on conduct. Typically, traditional or folk religions (paganism, animism) are more concerned with orthopraxy than orthodoxy

quote from “Ritualism”. Princeton University. Retrieved September 10, 2008. “(1) the study of religious or magical rites and ceremonies; (2) exaggerated emphasis on the importance of rites or ritualistic forms in worship”[dead link]

 

[Isaiah45_9]

Christianity on the other hand is NOT a belief system that was “deduced” from human reason. It is we believe God’s revelation to humanity of Himself.

But that was not Abraham case, there was no Orthodoxy for him.
He was told to act in a certain way, he accepted it and from that moment onward Orthodoxy started evolving.
But without him acting (Praxy) there would not have been orthodoxy.

Faith without reason is credulity. God has given us reasons to believe. When Abram was walking with Isaac to do what God had asked him to do, God had already made possible for Abram to have a child at his (and Sarah) old age. There was already a reason for Abram to believe God. In fact, Abram’s belief was so strong that he did not question God, but instead obeyed.

In contrast, Adam and Eve questioned God and reasoned on the side of the devil.

Here’s Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI on Faith and Reason:

catholic.org/homily/yearoffaith/story.php?id=48623

And Augustine’s Confessions and the harmony of faith and reason.

catholic.com/magazine/articles/augustine%E2%80%99s-confessions-and-the-harmony-of-faith-and-reason.

Christianity is a belief system in as it is a system revealed by God to us. Otherwise, there would be no point in the New Testament emphasis on keeping the right teachings and doctrines and no point in the Old Testament for the Law, to reveal what it is to sin.

 

[JerryZ]

Faith without reason is credulity. God has given us reasons to believe. When Abram was walking with Isaac to do what God had asked him to do, God had already made possible for Abram to have a child at his (and Sarah) old age. There was already a reason for Abram to believe God. In fact, Abram’s belief was so strong that he did not question God, but instead obeyed.

In contrast, Adam and Eve questioned God and reasoned on the side of the devil.

Here’s Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI on Faith and Reason:

catholic.org/homily/yearoffaith/story.php?id=48623

And Augustine’s Confessions and the harmony of faith and reason.

catholic.com/magazine/articles/augustine%E2%80%99s-confessions-and-the-harmony-of-faith-and-reason.

Christianity is a belief system in as it is a system revealed by God to us. Otherwise, there would be no point in the New Testament emphasis on keeping the right teachings and doctrines and no point in the Old Testament for the Law, to reveal what it is to sin.

First of all that bolded part about Abraham is not correct, God made His covenant with Abraham a very long time before he had his son Isaac.
Abraham obbeyed God and left the land where he lived following God’s direction to the promised land. Along the way HE was teaching Abraham how he should behave.
Isaac came in Abraham’s old age.

But faith or reason has nothing to do with what the OP queries.

The question is: Did Orthodoxy develop first or was it Orthopraxy.

From the meaning of these words

Orthodoxy (from Greek orthos (“right”, “true”, “straight”) + doxa (“opinion” or “belief”, related to dokein, “to think”),[1]) is adherence to accepted norms, more specifically to creeds, especially in religion.[2] In the narrow Christian sense the term means “conforming to the Christian faith as represented in the creeds of the early Church”.[1]

Orthopraxy is a term derived from modern Greek ὀρθοπραξία (orthopraxia) meaning “correct action/activity” or an emphasis on conduct, both ethical and liturgical, as opposed to faith or grace etc.[1][2][3] This contrasts with orthodoxy, which emphasizes correct belief, and ritualism, the use of rituals.[4]

It is obvious that the second developed first.

 

[NovusAugustus]

This question, if I may be excused for saying so, seems rather pointless. Whether one comes before the other is not important. What is important is believing and doing the right thing as often as possible. Sometimes we do the right thing first and then correct our beliefs, sometimes we correct our beliefs and then do the right thing. I believe the Catholic Church teaches that they are intricately related–“Faith without works is dead…”

 

[Alizarin]

This question, if I may be excused for saying so, seems rather pointless.

Well, when I asked it, I wasn’t looking to have a point made, or to make one myself, rather I was just looking to bounce ideas around about this particular subject, and see what came up. And it’s been a good discussion…

 

[Isaiah45_9]

First of all that bolded part about Abraham is not correct, God made His covenant with Abraham a very long time before he had his son Isaac.
Abraham obbeyed God and left the land where he lived following God’s direction to the promised land. Along the way HE was teaching Abraham how he should behave.
Isaac came in Abraham’s old age.

It was meant to be within the interaction of Abraham’s action’s with Isaac, not a chronological account.

But faith or reason has nothing to do with what the OP queries.

The question is: Did Orthodoxy develop first or was it Orthopraxy.

From the meaning of these words.

It is obvious that the second developed first.

If it is so obvious, then how do you know that the action was correct?

 

[JerryZ]

It was meant to be within the interaction of Abraham’s action’s with Isaac, not a chronological account.

If it is so obvious, then how do you know that the action was correct?

Because when we are born we have neither. Yet our parents teach us or should that acting in a certain way is not ok. Sometimes (hopefully NOT often) we are in need of correction.

So we start by acting in a certain way and as we grow we are given more revelation, who is GOD, what HE did and do for us. We are taught to pray to him.
By actions our intellect is formed. Then we choose to either believe or not.
If we choose the first, through God’s Grace, then we learn the tenets, the creeds etc.
That is the Orthodoxy part.
When you see it from the starting point of a child I hope you can understand it.

Also Abraham was just like a child but was chosen by God to be HIS starting point of our faith. There was no previous faith for him. Since GOD revealed HIMSELF to Abraham.
Why GOD chose Abraham is also another way to see this.

Did GOD choose Abram (Abraham’s name before the covenant) because he believed in GOD or instead because Abram had always acted in a righteous way by following his conscience?

See, the Church teaches that anyone can be saved. Even a native on a remote island, that has never heard about God or Jesus. If he follows his conscience fully, on what God has revealed to us in our hearts (the natural law), he CAN be saved.
So orthodoxy for this guy is NOT required.

That is NOT the same as saying that (Orthodoxy) is completely unnecessary.
Remember Jesus word about knowing. By the gift of the Church and it’s faith we are given a clearer path to Heaven.
While for that man in the island it is akin to a person trying to find his way in a dark alley.
He’s at a disadvantage precise because he MISSES (does not have) Orthodoxy.

 

[Alizarin]

Because when we are born we have neither. Yet our parents teach us or should that acting in a certain way is not ok. Sometimes (hopefully NOT often) we are in need of correction.

So we start by acting in a certain way and as we grow we are given more revelation, who is GOD, what HE did and do for us. We are taught to pray to him.
By actions our intellect is formed. Then we choose to either believe or not.
If we choose the first, through God’s Grace, then we learn the tenets, the creeds etc.
That is the Orthodoxy part.
When you see it from the starting point of a child I hope you can understand it.

Also Abraham was just like a child but was chosen by God to be HIS starting point of our faith. There was no previous faith for him. Since GOD revealed HIMSELF to Abraham.
Why GOD chose Abraham is also another way to see this.

Did GOD choose Abram (Abraham’s name before the covenant) because he believed in GOD or instead because Abram had always acted in a righteous way by following his conscience?

See, the Church teaches that anyone can be saved. Even a native on a remote island, that has never heard about God or Jesus. If he follows his conscience fully, on what God has revealed to us in our hearts (the natural law), he CAN be saved.
So orthodoxy for this guy is NOT required.

That is NOT the same as saying that (Orthodoxy) is completely unnecessary.
Remember Jesus word about knowing. By the gift of the Church and it’s faith we are given a clearer path to Heaven.
While for that man in the island it is akin to a person trying to find his way in a dark alley.
He’s at a disadvantage precise because he MISSES (does not have) Orthodoxy.

Interesting points.

One thing, though – speaking as the OP – let’s not let this discussion go down the road of another contentious debate on what it takes to be saved (not that you were contentious yourself; just putting it out there for future posters).

I want to forget about the endgame for a moment, and just focus on the opening.

 

[Isaiah45_9]

Because when we are born we have neither. Yet our parents teach us or should that acting in a certain way is not ok. Sometimes (hopefully NOT often) we are in need of correction.

I think we are presuming much on what we have when we are born. We do not know how the life breath enters the bones in the womb of the mother (As it says in Ecclesiastes 11:5). In like manner, we do not know what thought process comes with a new born. They know when they are hungry, uncomfortable, and when their parents are with them. And they know the right course of action to fulfill them. Only the spirit gives life, the flesh avails nothing. Where does this spirit come from? What does it know?

Do you remember the first time you lied or did something wrong as a child? Do you remember how your whole body went into shock? (Hopefully ).

Action does not initiate in and of itself. There is a trigger to it, a thought - a belief that justifies the action.

So we start by acting in a certain way and as we grow we are given more revelation, who is GOD, what HE did and do for us. We are taught to pray to him.
By actions our intellect is formed. Then we choose to either believe or not.
If we choose the first, through God’s Grace, then we learn the tenets, the creeds etc.
That is the Orthodoxy part.
When you see it from the starting point of a child I hope you can understand it.

I see the exact opposite of what you are saying. We are taught the correct actions because there is an understanding that they are correct.

Why did Christ said to the Pharisees to find the meaning of:

“I desire mercy, not sacrifice”?

Because the actions (sacrifices) were meaningless without the right reason (belief, thought).

At this point I can probably just agree to disagree with you. Because there is no way I can see a correct action that is not driven by a correct belief to justify and initiate that action.