for theo: questions about Orthodoxy

[Metacrock]

to me the edge that the Charismatic style of Christianity has over the others is the spontenous and off the cuff access to divine power and presence in the here and now. God speaks to you and guides right now in real life with ever step you take. God still works miracles now. you can experince the power of God in exrovertive ejaculative worship. None of that waiting around to mediate and Jesus prayers and stuff. it's all up front and miraculous.

Is that compatible with Orhtodoxy?

[Theognosis]

to me the edge that the Charismatic style of Christianity has over the others is the spontenous and off the cuff access to divine power and presence in the here and now. God speaks to you and guides right now in real life with ever step you take. God still works miracles now. you can experince the power of God in exrovertive ejaculative worship. None of that waiting around to mediate and Jesus prayers and stuff. it's all up front and miraculous.

Is that compatible with Orhtodoxy?

We truly believe that the Holy Spirit is active in the Church, but not in a manner that makes people jump, shout and run about like crazy. The works of the Spirit could not be as shallow, carnal, theatrical and short-lived. One only has to look at the 2,000 years of Orthodoxy to be able to understand a more meaningful and lasting role that the Holy Spirit has played within the church.

One example is the Scripture itself. With the guidance of the Holy Spirit and by the Grace of God, the Orthodox Church produced the New Testament, established its canon through various councils, preserved and protected it in the face of hardship and adversity, and spread the good news with its correct interpretation to all nations. This is simply a miracle of epic proportions that even the reformers could not deny.

Here's a nice account of an ex-Protestant discovering the role of the Orthodox Church in the composition and preservation of Scripture.

http://www.protomartyr.org/first.html
Could I now accept the fact that God spoke authoritatively, not only through the Bible, but through His Church as well-the very Church which had produced, protected, and actively preserved the Scriptures I held so dear?

Another miracle is how the Orthodox Church was able to survive in the 20th century. With the help of the Holy Spirit, she has managed to preserve the ancient faith in the face of Communism, Islam and even Catholicism. It is estimated that as much as 66 million of the faithful were martyred in the last century alone. The genocides in Armenia, Russia, Serbia, Constantinople, etc. are unprecedented in the history of Christendom. Yet despite of it all, the Orthodox Church is alive and kicking (but not in an "ejaculative" sense... hehe) for we know that God is with us.

We also believe that the Holy Trinity is active in the Sacraments and in the Eucharist. Miracles happen everyday. As a matter of fact in Orthodoxy, miracles are quite common especially in the monasteries. However, we don't publish them in newspapers to grab attention lest we become self-righteous bastards.

[Metacrock]

to me the edge that the Charismatic style of Christianity has over the others is the spontenous and off the cuff access to divine power and presence in the here and now. God speaks to you and guides right now in real life with ever step you take. God still works miracles now. you can experince the power of God in exrovertive ejaculative worship. None of that waiting around to mediate and Jesus prayers and stuff. it's all up front and miraculous.

Is that compatible with Orhtodoxy?

We truly believe that the Holy Spirit is active in the Church, but not in a manner that makes people jump, shout and run about like crazy. The works of the Spirit could not be as shallow, carnal, theatrical and short-lived. One only has to look at the 2,000 years of Orthodoxy to be able to understand a more meaningful and lasting role that the Holy Spirit has played within the church.

One example is the Scripture itself. With the guidance of the Holy Spirit and by the Grace of God, the Orthodox Church produced the New Testament, established its canon through various councils, preserved and protected it in the face of hardship and adversity, and spread the good news with its correct interpretation to all nations. This is simply a miracle of epic proportions that even the reformers could not deny.

Here's a nice account of an ex-Protestant discovering the role of the Orthodox Church in the composition and preservation of Scripture.

http://www.protomartyr.org/first.html
Could I now accept the fact that God spoke authoritatively, not only through the Bible, but through His Church as well-the very Church which had produced, protected, and actively preserved the Scriptures I held so dear?

Another miracle is how the Orthodox Church was able to survive in the 20th century. With the help of the Holy Spirit, she has managed to preserve the ancient faith in the face of Communism, Islam and even Catholicism. It is estimated that as much as 66 million of the faithful were martyred in the last century alone. The genocides in Armenia, Russia, Serbia, Constantinople, etc. are unprecedented in the history of Christendom. Yet despite of it all, the Orthodox Church is alive and kicking (but not in an "ejaculative" sense... hehe) for we know that God is with us.

We also believe that the Holy Trinity is active in the Sacraments and in the Eucharist. Miracles happen everyday. As a matter of fact in Orthodoxy, miracles are quite common especially in the monasteries. However, we don't publish them in newspapers to grab attention lest we become self-righteous bastards.

I agree with you that the Orthodox exhibit the mature end of the spectrum, that is those who are in walking the spirit. there are many who are not even born again. for example the "Christian filange" of Beroute. But the Ortho church itself, think of John the New Theologian for examle, or the Hysseicats, those guys are at the mature end. the charismatics are at the immature end. I do not agree with your distaste for them. I think the charismatic gifts are true. I've seen them work, they are there. jump up and down is fun. it's life giving at times, but can become a dead form that fakes being alive. the slient mediative form is not necessarily dead. It can be more mature. that's where my sister, the ultimate Jesus freak, is wrong. she think anything not jumping up and down is dead. I disagree with that.

[KR Wordgazer]

I agree with you, Metacrock, that the charismatic gifts are real, but I think that what is immature sometimes is the person so gifted, not the gift itself. I think there's a tendency on the part of Christian believers to think that there's only one "true" expression of the power of God, and that's the expression they themselves have experienced. For the rest, it's understandable that Charismatic churches tend to be less mature than Eastern Orthodox churches, Charismatic churches being around for so much less time. But are you characterizing the expression of the Spirit as "mature" or "immature" based on what the expression looks like, or based on the Christ-likeness and character of the person so gifted? I think the former would be a mistake.

I left the Charismatics, not because I disagreed with their use of the gifts, or even with their "jumping up and down" which I found to be in general a refreshing expression of enthusiasm (btw, for those unfamiliar-- most Charismatics do not claim to jump up and down because of action of the Holy Spirit, but simply out of personal joy-- "jumping up and down" not being one of the gifts of the Spirit detailed in 1 Corinthians. And they consider it not "jumping up and down" but dancing, as David danced before the Lord in 1 Samuel). But I left the Charismatics partly because of the attitude you mention, Metacrock-- that you have to "jump up and down" to prove you really love God; that somehow just standing there and singing isn't as good. This attitude is immature, yes.

However, it bothers me a bit, Theo, that you appear to be ready to just write off any possibility of the Spirit being active in other churches than your own-- especially since you are misunderstanding the Charismatics in just the way I stated above, in saying that they claim it's the "activity of the Spirit" that makes them "run around like crazy." I have never been in a Charismatic church where they "ran around like crazy," nor where they claimed they were dancing because the Spirit was somehow making them do so.

[Theognosis]

However, it bothers me a bit, Theo, that you appear to be ready to just write off any possibility of the Spirit being active in other churches than your own

I agree with your response to Meta that the Charismatic movement is relatively young, and for this very reason, I cannot tell for certain if what they are experiencing is Holy. What I can assure you is that I would be the last person on this board to reject the notion that God reveals Himself to all men regardless of religion. Here are some articles that illustrate my point:

The Logos and the Tao
http://bonovox.squarespace.com/journal/ ... e-tao.html

Through The Eastern Gate
http://www.sfaturiortodoxe.ro/orthodox/ ... s_yoga.htm

Anyway, I thought I had made this position clear in the Omnipotence of God thread.

-- especially since you are misunderstanding the Charismatics in just the way I stated above, in saying that they claim it's the "activity of the Spirit" that makes them "run around like crazy." I have never been in a Charismatic church where they "ran around like crazy,"

It has been said that the true character of an individual shines forth during times of persecution. More importantly, the Bible tells us to test the Spirits at all times. Hence, it is of little consequence if the charismatics are experiencing the presence of the Holy Spirit within them for an hour or they are merely hallucinating at certain moments of ecstasy; what matters is what they do afterwards in the long term and how they are able to survive mass persecution. I will let history decide their fate and place in Christianity.

nor where they claimed they were dancing because the Spirit was somehow making them do so.

To the Orthodox, the proper response would be to keep silent and kneel down with humility. We should ask for mercy, not glorify ourselves; be spiritual, not emotional.

[KR Wordgazer]

Theo, I read your links with great interest, being especially moved by the personal testimony one. I have some familiarity with Taoism and have believed for a long time that its teachings are quite compatible with Christianity.

To the Orthodox, the proper response would be to keep silent and kneel down with humility. We should ask for mercy, not glorify ourselves; be spiritual, not emotional.

Charismatics also have times where they kneel down in silent humility. They just also believe that the encouragements of the Psalms are also to be practiced in worship today: "Shout to the Lord all the earth" and "Praise Him with timbrel and dancing." Charismatics do ask for mercy-- but they also express joy when they believe they have received it.

I believe we are to glorify God with our whole being: spiritually, physically and emotionally. Do the Orthodox ever feel moved to weep in God's Presence? If so, why is one expression of emotion more acceptable than another?

I do agree that when the expression of emotion becomes self-glorifying (when the person is "showing off" rather than actually praising God), that it ceases to be spiritual or pleasing to God. I have known some Charismatics to show off in this way-- but not all of them, and not all the time.

I believe the Orthodox and the Charismatics have much that they could share and learn from one another.

[Theognosis]

Theo, I read your links with great interest, being especially moved by the personal testimony one. I have some familiarity with Taoism and have believed for a long time that its teachings are quite compatible with Christianity.

Charismatics also have times where they kneel down in silent humility. They just also believe that the encouragements of the Psalms are also to be practiced in worship today: "Shout to the Lord all the earth" and "Praise Him with timbrel and dancing."

Did David, the Psalmist himself, dance inside the temple?

Charismatics do ask for mercy-- but they also express joy when they believe they have received it.

We express our joy as well, although in a different manner. It's in a form of hymn in the last part of the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom.

http://www.ocf.org/OrthodoxPage/liturgy/liturgy.html
We have seen the true light;
we have received the heavenly Spirit;
we have found the true faith,
worshiping the undivided Trinity,
for the Trinity has saved us.

I believe we are to glorify God with our whole being: spiritually, physically and emotionally.

Spiritually and physically, yes. After all, faith without works is dead.

But emotionally, no.

We consider emotions as carnal. They blind and mislead us if left unchecked. Thus, we can't be emotional and spiritual at the same time, especially inside the Church where we worship God in truth and spirit.

Do the Orthodox ever feel moved to weep in God's Presence? If so, why is one expression of emotion more acceptable than another?

Weeping is okay for those new to the faith. Once we're over this stage of romanticism, we should burry our flesh together with its emotions and desires, and then carry the cross for the rest of our lives.

It's like a baby crying at birth. If he keeps on crying for the rest of his life, something is wrong with him spiritually, physically and emotionally.

I believe the Orthodox and the Charismatics have much that they could share and learn from one another.

On a person-to-person basis--since we're all sinners--I agree. But that's about it.

[KR Wordgazer]

Did David, the Psalmist himself, dance inside the temple?

The New Testament teaches that no building is the temple. Rather, several different metaphors state that our bodies are the temple of the Holy Spirit, or that we are each individual bricks being built into the spiritual House of God. So if we are the Temple, does that mean are we never to deal with earthly matters? Can we not cook and eat dinner, dig a ditch, clean a bathroom? Clearly that is not God's intention.

So if I can clean a bathroom while being the Temple, surely I can also dance or shout to praise God according to the Psalms, while being the Temple. Not that I do that so much any more, not being a Charismatic-- but I see nothing wrong with it.

Charismatics do ask for mercy-- but they also express joy when they believe they have received it.

We express our joy as well, although in a different manner. It's in a form of hymn in the last part of the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom.

http://www.ocf.org/OrthodoxPage/liturgy/liturgy.html
We have seen the true light;
we have received the heavenly Spirit;
we have found the true faith,
worshiping the undivided Trinity,
for the Trinity has saved us.

That's very nice.

I believe we are to glorify God with our whole being: spiritually, physically and emotionally.

Spiritually and physically, yes. After all, faith without works is dead.

But emotionally, no.

We consider emotions as carnal. They blind and mislead us if left unchecked. Thus, we can't be emotional and spiritual at the same time, especially inside the Church where we worship God in truth and spirit.

I think there's a difference between "physical" and "carnal." Our bodies are physical. God made the physical world and said it was "good." "Carnal" can be defined as using the physical for selfishness, pride, lust, etc.

We can employ our bodies for spiritual purposes, or for carnal purposes. Our emotions are similar-- we can let them control us, we can be carnal with them-- or we can allow the Spirit to fill them. The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Most of these have an element of emotion involved; if they didn't they would be cold, hard duty, not true kindness, not true joy. "If you walk in the Spirit, you do not fulfill the lusts of the flesh."

Do the Orthodox ever feel moved to weep in God's Presence? If so, why is one expression of emotion more acceptable than another?

Weeping is okay for those new to the faith. Once we're over this stage of romanticism, we should burry our flesh together with its emotions and desires, and then carry the cross for the rest of our lives.

It's like a baby crying at birth. If he keeps on crying for the rest of his life, something is wrong with him spiritually, physically and emotionally.

I don't think I could possibly disagree more. The fact that I can still cry at the age of 44 is not a sign of emotional weakness, but a sign I can still be moved by suffering or touched by love. Of course I don't still bawl like a baby, just to get my needs met. But lack of emotion is not a sign of maturity. Jesus Himself wept.

If I can be moved to weeping by things of this earth, how much more, then, for things of Heaven? When I contemplate the Cross, am I to feel nothing?

I believe the Orthodox and the Charismatics have much that they could share and learn from one another.

On a person-to-person basis--since we're all sinners--I agree. But that's about it.

I find that very sad.

[Theognosis]

The New Testament teaches that no building is the temple.

That has nothing to do with dancing inside a chapel, church, cathedral or place or worship. My point is that David, the one who wrote the Psalms (or most if it), danced on the street and never inside the Temple.

Rather, several different metaphors state that our bodies are the temple of the Holy Spirit, or that we are each individual bricks being built into the spiritual House of God. So if we are the Temple, does that mean are we never to deal with earthly matters?

That argument leads to the importance of apostolic succession. Don't ask me how and why.

Can we not cook and eat dinner, dig a ditch, clean a bathroom? Clearly that is not God's intention.

With the exception of eating the Body of Christ, you don't do those things inside the church/chapel/cathedral.

So if I can clean a bathroom while being the Temple, surely I can also dance or shout to praise God according to the Psalms, while being the Temple. Not that I do that so much any more, not being a Charismatic-- but I see nothing wrong with it.

This discussion is limited to the activities inside the church.

I think there's a difference between "physical" and "carnal."

I never said that they were one and the same.

Our bodies are physical. God made the physical world and said it was "good."

That was before The Fall.

"Carnal" can be defined as using the physical for selfishness, pride, lust, etc.

We use the writings of the Church Fathers, not Webster's.

We can employ our bodies for spiritual purposes, or for carnal purposes. Our emotions are similar-- we can let them control us, we can be carnal with them-- or we can allow the Spirit to fill them. The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control.

The last word is interesting.

Most of these have an element of emotion involved; if they didn't they would be cold, hard duty, not true kindness, not true joy. "If you walk in the Spirit, you do not fulfill the lusts of the flesh."

Self-control is the key. Never let your emotions control you, especially in worship.

I don't think I could possibly disagree more. The fact that I can still cry at the age of 44 is not a sign of emotional weakness, but a sign I can still be moved by suffering or touched by love. Of course I don't still bawl like a baby, just to get my needs met. But lack of emotion is not a sign of maturity. Jesus Himself wept.

Again, this discussion is limited to activities inside the church, or where people gather together to pray.

If I can be moved to weeping by things of this earth, how much more, then, for things of Heaven? When I contemplate the Cross, am I to feel nothing?

I don't think it's possible to TRULY contemplate and cry at the same time. I will definitely lose concentration if I let my emotions control my body.

I find that very sad.

Orthodoxy and heresy are incompatible.

[KR Wordgazer]

Can we not cook and eat dinner, dig a ditch, clean a bathroom? Clearly that is not God's intention.

With the exception of eating the Body of Christ, you don't do those things inside the church/chapel/cathedral.

So if I can clean a bathroom while being the Temple, surely I can also dance or shout to praise God according to the Psalms, while being the Temple. Not that I do that so much any more, not being a Charismatic-- but I see nothing wrong with it.

This discussion is limited to the activities inside the church.

Well, assuming you mean the sanctuary (since the church buildings I am familiar with do contain bathrooms and kitchens that need to be cleaned from time to time), I'll just say once again we must agree to disagree about what constitutes holy worship and what does not.

I think there's a difference between "physical" and "carnal."

I never said that they were one and the same.

Our bodies are physical. God made the physical world and said it was "good."

That was before The Fall.

The Fall corrupted, but did not nullify, the goodness of Creation.

"Carnal" can be defined as using the physical for selfishness, pride, lust, etc.

We use the writings of the Church Fathers, not Webster's.

Heh. What can I say to that? That wasn't even Webster's, but my own, off-the-cuff statement of what I understood the word to mean.

What do the Fathers say "carnal" means?

We can employ our bodies for spiritual purposes, or for carnal purposes. Our emotions are similar-- we can let them control us, we can be carnal with them-- or we can allow the Spirit to fill them. The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control.

The last word is interesting.

Again, we differ as to what "self-control" looks like. I don't advocate a Christian actually losing control of themselves in worship.

Most of these have an element of emotion involved; if they didn't they would be cold, hard duty, not true kindness, not true joy. "If you walk in the Spirit, you do not fulfill the lusts of the flesh."

Self-control is the key. Never let your emotions control you, especially in worship.

We differ on what is appropriate expression of emotion in worship.

I don't think it's possible to TRULY contemplate and cry at the same time. I will definitely lose concentration if I let my emotions control my body.

I'm simply not that compartmentalized. This is partly a male-female difference, I believe. What I contemplate affects my emotions. And if thinking of the Cross during worship in church moves me to tears, I'm not going to sit there fighting them back. To me, that would be dishonest-- like putting on a facade.

I find that very sad.

Orthodoxy and heresy are incompatible.

Ok, I guess I'm a heretic. Which leads me to ask, what is your view on heresy? Can heretics go to heaven? I know you said you believe God can reveal Himself to all peoples. But I wonder-- does one have to convert to Eastern Orthodoxy to be saved? Or will God save all who trust Jesus and turn from their sins to follow Him, regardless of whatever other kinds of "heresy" they commit? I hold to this view. (To me, nothing is "heresy" but not believing in the fundamental, definitive basics, like the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Atonement, etc.) If you don't hold this view, then in your mind I am lost unless I convert to your religion. As I am not going to do that, it makes me sad that you feel that way, when I regard you as a brother in Christ. (Even if kissing the feet of statues does seem a little weird to me. )