Confessions of a Daily Christian is a collection of my musings (and occasionally those of my friends) on a variety of subjects as I pursue a simple pilgrimage–one of a devoted disciple of Jesus Christ. My faith in Jesus Christ as my Savior and Lord, my High Priest and Holy Bridegroom, informs all that I am–all that I think and do. I hope my blog will provide you with a pleasant diversion and perhaps some food for thought, and that you, in turn, will share your thoughts with me.

My Photo
Name:
Location: Wichita, Kansas, United States

I am chief among sinners, rescued from the despair of my former life by the grace of God through faith in Jesus Christ. It is not my desire to judge, but as a simple beggar, I wish to tell others where I found the Food that leads to Eternal Life, Jesus Christ, the Bread of Life and the True Vine.

Tuesday, January 25, 2005

The Bittersweet Journey

I have recently been reading The Orthodox Church, by Timothy Ware. As a Western "child of the Reformation", as it were, Orthodoxy has long seemed wholly other to me...as foreign as a glacier in the desert southwest. It symbology seemed arkane and its theology esoteric. Of course, this was largely due to cultural unfamiliarity, as I had not really bothered to read much concerning the theology of Orthodox Chritianity. And, I am forced to admit, there is a tendency for modern Evangelicals, in which I include myself, to be wary of any hint of "tradition" (aside from my own, of course), and to treat such things as the Westminster Confession, the Synod of Dort, the writings of the Puritan Divines, and a few recent articles by David Wells to be the final revelation of God to a fallen world.

I say these things humorously, but it is nevertheless a fact that Evangelicals, especially of the Reformed variety, have a "paradosis", or "tradition", that we treat as equally authoritative to any pronouncement of the ecumenical councils of church history, or the practice of the ancient church. We claim a purity of doctrine, a reliance upon scripture that borders on arrogance, yet we, in fact, lean greatly upon our own more recent "church fathers" as though their theological deductions were the ipsissimi verbi of God. Even the Puritan Divines, however, were more aware of Patristics and church history than are we. Certainly, they were more diligent in their study, and more familiar with the classic languages, Latin, Greek, and Hebrew. And they were certainly more aware of contemplative tradition.

The first section of Timothy Ware's book deals with a facet of church history rarely dealt with at length in our studies at Evangelical seminaries, because it deals with the trajectory of Eastern, or Orthodox Christianity. And we are so firmly ensconced in our Western tradition, in spite of our "seven degrees of separation" from Rome, that we scarcely recognize that church history occurred elsewhere. In reading this information, I was struck by the bittersweet legacy of church history. It was punctuated by great men of faith, whose theological erudition and sanctity of life were exemplary, yet in whose lives often existed the residual fallenness that contributed to the fragmentation of the church. Perhaps one of the most bittersweet moments was the Reformation itself. At this time of break with the authoritarian dogmatics of the Roman Catholic church, there was great opportunity for rapprochement with Orthodox Christianity, whose understandings of Biblical Truth were more similar to that of the Reformers. Alas, however, the contextual difference at the time was too great. Germany, the birthplace of the Reformation, had long been a Roman Catholic outpost of prosetylization into the Orthodox world, instigating a power-struggle between Rome and Orthodoxy. To the Orthodox, the Reformation conflict with Roman Catholicism was merely an intramural theological spat in the Western church. And the arrogance with which the Reformers reached out to Orthodoxy, as though, having dispatched the errors of Rome, they were now ready to "save" Orthodoxy, did little to help matters. In fact, it was questionable whether the Reformers were in fact truly familiar with the beliefs of Orthodoxy, perhaps viewing the Orthodox as simply a more culturally foreign form of Romanism. As a result, a moment of great promise passed fleetingly.

Such, in fact, is the history of Christianity. The years are laden with missed opportunities of unity, as we have, in seeking the mind of Christ, more often than not lost his heart. Do not mistake me to say that I favor an ill-conceived ecumenism that reduces all of Christianity to a "lowest common denominator" approach. We have seen the effects of that in fundamentalism, in which the desire for Evangelical Christians to meet modernism and liberal theology head-on with a unified front resulted in strange bedfellows and a casual approach to doctrine that exists up to this day. But I do believe that Jesus' prayer for love and unity within the church has been lost in a sea of theological scholasticism, and that we have been guilty of presumption in despising the accumulated tradition of the church as thought the community of understanding were unimportant when confronted with our own self-importance. Perhaps...just perhaps...we should look back, not in anger, but in regret that our own pride may have interfered with a community of faith that could have nourished our wounded souls and provided for us a bulwark against the modern enculturation our churches face. And maybe there is yet time to experience the fullness of unity and love to which Jesus called us.

3 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

GOD AND MAN

The development of the doctrines concerning the Trinity and the incarnation, as it took place during the first eight centuries of Christian history, was related to the concept of man's participation in divine life.

The Greek Fathers of the church always implied that the phrase found in the biblical story of the creation of man (Gen. 1:26), according to "the image and likeness of God," meant that man is not an autonomous being and that his ultimate nature is defined by his relation to God, his "prototype."

In paradise Adam and Eve were called to participate in God's life and to find in him the natural growth of their humanity "from glory to glory." To be "in God" is, therefore, the natural state of man.

This doctrine is particularly important in connection with the Fathers' view of human freedom. For theologians such as Gregory of Nyssa (4th century) and Maximus the Confessor (7th century) man is truly free only when he is in communion with God; otherwise he is only a slave to his body or to "the world," over which, originally and by God's command, he was destined to rule.

Thus, the concept of sin implies separation from God and the reduction of man to a separate and autonomous existence, in which he is deprived of both his natural glory and his freedom. He becomes an element subject to cosmic determinism, and the image of God is thus blurred within him.

Freedom in God, as enjoyed by Adam, implied the possibility of falling away from God. This is the unfortunate choice made by man, which led Adam to a subhuman and unnatural existence. The most unnatural aspect of his new state was death.

In this perspective, "original sin" is understood not so much as a state of guilt inherited from Adam but as an unnatural condition of human life that ends in death.

Mortality is what each man now inherits at his birth and this is what leads him to struggle for existence, to self-affirmation at the expense of others, and ultimately to subjection to the laws of animal life. The "prince of this world" (i.e., Satan), who is also the "murderer from the beginning," has dominion over man.

From this vicious circle of death and sin, man is understood to be liberated by the death and Resurrection of Christ, which is actualized in Baptism and the sacramental life in the church.

The general framework of this understanding of the God-man relationship is clearly different from the view that became dominant in the Christian West--i.e., the view that conceived of "nature" as distinct from "grace" and that understood original sin as an inherited guilt rather than as a deprivation of freedom.

In the East, man is regarded as fully man when he participates in God; in the West, man's nature is believed to be autonomous, sin is viewed as a punishable crime, and grace is understood to grant forgiveness. Hence, in the West, the aim of the Christian is justification, but in the East, it is rather communion with God and deification.

In the West, the church is viewed in terms of mediation (for the bestowing of grace) and authority (for guaranteeing security in doctrine); in the East, the church is regarded as a communion in which God and man meet once again and a personal experience of divine life becomes possible.

CHRIST

The Orthodox Church is formally committed to the Christology (doctrine of Christ) that was defined by the councils of the first eight centuries. Together with the Latin Church of the West, it has rejected Arianism (a belief in the subordination of the Son to the Father) at Nicaea (325), Nestorianism (a belief that stresses the independence of the divine and human natures of Christ) at Ephesus (431), and Monophysitism (a belief that Christ had only one divine nature) at Chalcedon (451).

The Eastern and Western churches still formally share the tradition of subsequent Christological developments, even though the famous formula of Chalcedon, "one person in two natures," is given different emphases in the East and West.

The stress on Christ's identity with the preexistent Son of God, the Logos (Word) of the Gospel According to John, characterizes Orthodox Christology. On Byzantine icons, around the face of Jesus, the Greek letters '' --the equivalent of the Jewish Tetragrammaton YHWH, the name of God in the Old Testament--are often depicted. Jesus is thus always seen in his divine identity. Similarly, the liturgy consistently addresses the Virgin Mary as Theotokos (the "one who gave birth to God"), and this term, formally admitted as a criterion of orthodoxy at Ephesus, is actually the only "Mariological" (doctrine of Mary) dogma accepted in the Orthodox Church. It reflects the doctrine of Christ's unique divine Person, and Mary is thus venerated only because she is his mother "according to the flesh."

This emphasis on the personal divine identity of Christ, based on the doctrine of St. Cyril of Alexandria (5th century), does not imply the denial of his humanity.

The anthropology (doctrine of man) of the Eastern Fathers does not view man as an autonomous being but rather implies that communion with God makes man fully human.

Thus the human nature of Jesus Christ, fully assumed by the divine Word, is indeed the "new Adam" in whom the whole of humanity receives again its original glory. Christ's humanity is fully "ours"; it possessed all the characteristics of the human being--"each nature (of Christ) acts according to its properties," Chalcedon proclaimed, following Pope Leo--without separating itself from the divine Word. Thus, in death itself--for Jesus' death was indeed a fully human death--the Son of God was the "subject" of the Passion. The theopaschite formula ("God suffered in the flesh") became, together with the Theotokos formula, a standard of orthodoxy in the Eastern Church, especially after the second Council of Constantinople (553). It implied that Christ's humanity was indeed real not only in itself but also for God, since it brought him to death on the cross, and that the salvation and redemption of humanity can be accomplished by God alone--hence the necessity for him to condescend to death, which held humanity captive.

This theology of redemption and salvation is best expressed in the Byzantine liturgical hymns of Holy Week and Easter: Christ is the one who "tramples down death by death," and, on the evening of Good Friday, the hymns already exalt his victory.

Salvation is conceived not in terms of satisfaction of divine justice, through paying the debt for the sin of Adam--as the medieval West understood it--but in terms of uniting the human and the divine with the divine overcoming human mortality and weakness and, finally, exalting man to divine life.

What Christ accomplished once and for all must be appropriated freely by those who are "in Christ"; their goal is "deification," which does not mean dehumanization but the exaltation of man to the dignity prepared for him at creation.

Such feasts as the Transfiguration or the Ascension are extremely popular in the East precisely because they celebrate humanity glorified in Christ--a glorification that anticipates the coming of the Kingdom of God, when God will be "all in all."

Participation in the already deified humanity of Christ is the true goal of Christian life, and it is accomplished through the Holy Spirit.

August 10, 2005 7:05 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Differences Between Orthodox Teaching on Salvation
And That of Protestants

by Paul Jacobson

Protestants and particularly evangelicals take a "minimalist" approach to salvation. They focus on salvation as justification, "I can go to heaven rather than hell." Plenty of people recognize that being a Christian is more than just a matter of "fire insurance," but it is easy to be fooled by one's own sales pitch--Just accept Jesus as your savior. Plenty of people think that is all there is to it.

Furthermore, the "saved by faith" emphasis is a strong filter on one's Bible reading. In Romans 10, St. Paul writes: if you will confess with your mouth, Jesus is Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved (v 9). My evangelical training led me automatically to think in terms of a "punctilious" confession. It is not good to argue whether this particular passage refers to a one-time action or a recurring one.

The Orthodox approach to salvation is "maximalist": "How can I be most saved?"

One gets a sense of this teaching from St. John Chrysostom's "Baptismal Instructions," Talking to the newly baptized, he says (3d Instruction):

"Let us say again: Blessed be God, who alone does wonderful things, who does all things and transforms them. Before yesterday you were captives, but now you are free and citizens of the Church; lately you lived in the shame of your sins, but now you live in freedom and justice. You are not only free, but also holy; not only holy, but also just; not only just, but also sons; not only sons, but also heirs; not only heirs, but also brothers of Christ; not only brothers of Christ, but also joint heirs; not only joint heirs, but also members; not only members, but also the temple; not only the temple, but also instruments of the Spirit.

Blessed be God, who alone does wonderful things!. You have seen how numerous are the gifts of baptism. Although many men think that the only gift it confers is the remission of sins, we have counted its honors to the number of ten. It is on this account that we baptize even infants, although they are sinless, that they may be given the further gifts of sanctification, justice, filial adoption, and inheritance, that they may be brothers and members of Christ, and become dwelling places for the Spirit."

St. John uses other descriptions of baptism: marriage, enrollment in the army, putting [on] a white robe (which they literally did). He goes on to urge his listeners to keep their robes spotless:

"Knowing, therefore, that after the grace of God everything depends on us and on our zeal, let us be grateful gifts which have already been given, so that we may make ourselves worthy of still greater gifts.

Therefore, I exhort you who have just deserved the divine gift to keep careful watch and to guard the spiritual garment bestowed on you, keeping it clean and spotless. Let those of us who received this gift in the past show a far-reaching change in our lives. It is possible, if we are willing, it is possible for us to return and go back to our former beauty and luster, if only we will do our fair share . . . . The soul which was once sullied and became disfigured and disgraced by the multitude of its sins can quickly return to its former beauty, if we give evidence of ample and exact repentance." (circa ad 390)

I think one can construct from the Church Fathers a "normal" Christian life: instruction, baptism, on-going participation in the life of the Church: repentance, confession, receiving the Eucharist. But it is rare that you will find them attempting to answer the question "What can I get by with and still be saved?" or "How far can one be from this 'norm' and still be saved?"

They did have to deal with the question of "how necessary is baptism?" during the persecutions. What of the catechumens who were martyred before baptism? It was in this context that the belief in 'martyrs being baptized with their own blood' arose.

At the other end of the Christian life, many saints (as recognized later by the Church) died with a profound sense of their own sinfulness and unworthiness before a Holy God.

I have found the Orthodox approach to Scriptures, especially on matters of salvation, to be very "integrative." Christ's incarnation, ministry, death, descent into hades, resurrection, ascension; our sinfulness, repentance, baptism, carrying our cross, 'doing to the least of these', running the race, confidence in God's love and mercy, fear of falling away, putting on the new nature . . .

There is no tendency to pick one aspect of salvation "to reinterpret everything else to fit."

The parable of the goats and the sheep is taken as seriously as Ephesians 2:8-9.

Orthodoxy often insists that the whole truth lies in holding on to two (or more) apparently contradictory concepts: God is both One God, and Three Persons; Christ is one person, two natures. The same applies to our salvation. On many points where a Protestant wants and either/or answer, an Orthodox will insist on both/and.

+ + +

"My most merciful and all-merciful God, O Lord Jesus Christ! In Thy great love, Thou didst come down and become flesh in order to save all. Again, I pray Thee, save me by Grace! If Thou shouldst save me because of my deeds, it would not be a gift, but merely a duty. Truly, Thou aboundest in graciousness and art inexpressibly merciful! Thou hast said, O my Christ: "He who believes in me shall live and never see death". If faith in Thee saves the desperate, behold: I believe! Save me, for Thou art my God and my Maker. May my faith replace my deeds, O my God, for Thou wilt find no deeds to justify me. May my faith be sufficient for all. May it answer for me; may it justify me; may it make me a partaker of Thine eternal glory; and may Satan not seize me, O Word, and boast that He has torn me from Thy hand and fold. O Christ my Savior: save me whether I want it or not! Come quickly, hurry, for I perish! Thou art my God from my mother's womb. Grant, O Lord, that I may now love Thee as once I loved sin, and that I may labor for Thee without laziness as once I labored for Satan the deceiver. Even more, I will labor for Thee, my Lord and God Jesus Christ, all the days of my life, now and ever and unto ages of ages. Amen."

Orthodox Prayer for the Morning

August 10, 2005 7:16 PM  
Blogger Soulfyre said...

I could wish that you had left a contact so that we could correspond. I greatly appreciate your comment and the study behind it. I am perhaps a non-union Orthodox, as I believe believe the primary tenets of the Orthodox faith. I fear that I stumble over some issues of Holy Tradition, however. Nevertheless, there is nothing you have written that I take issue with.

I hasten to add that I am not a member of the "emergent church" movement who confuses the terms "mysterious" and "mystery". I am a committed disciple of Jesus Christ, my Savior and Lord, my High-priest and Holy Bridegroom. I believe in the full inspiration and inerrancy of the Holy Scriptures in the original autographs, whose authority is found in God the Holy Spirit, who breathed them out incarnationally through His chosen authors, and revealed their Truth to the church. So my struggle is not simply one of emotion (this church does, or does not, make me "feel good" or "feel spiritual"), but one of faith and cognition.

I have not posted recently, as I have been redesigning my blogsite. But I hope I will hear from you again.

November 09, 2005 2:53 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home