9 Marks’ Deeply Disturbing Remarks Aimed at Roman Catholics and InterVarsity

The Catholic Church is like a thick steak, a glass of red wine, and a good cigar.” ― G.K. Chesterton link

http://www.publicdomainpictures.net/view-image.php?image=52261&picture=true-friendshipTrue Friendship

(Quick note: A comment was made at TGC under a 9 Marks post by a "dee." That was not me. I only rarely comment at other websites since I have a pretty good bully pulpit here.)

Once again, we have a reader to thank for drawing our attention to an article posted on 9 Marks. When I first read the comment, I removed it from our site, thinking that the reader must be making up such a derogatory statement. In other words, I couldn't believe that even 9 Marks would say such a thing.

Well, he was telling the truth. I then found another 9 Marks article that  seems to indicate that there is a concerning lack of respect for both our Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox friends. Just so you understand my bias, my father was Russian Orthodox. Although he was not a devout man until the very last weeks of his life, I grew up attending the festivals and celebrations. I knew some deeply committed Christians in that setting.  I also have been privileged to know a number of Catholic priests. Fr Bryan Ochs has commented on this blog. Frankly, some of them have struck me as more godly than some of the megachurch stars and their fanboys.

I guess this might sum up my position on this subject. I believe that there are devout Christians present in the Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox and  9 Marks churches, SBC  churches, PCA churches and also among those who do not attend church. I also believe that there are nonbelievers in all of these entities. (Dee hits the ground, incoming……….)

Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox are "bad" people. Calvinistas are "good" and not like them Catholics.

This first post was published in 2009 in the 9 Marks Journal. The purpose of Putting Contextualization in its Place is to discuss how to share the gospel in a culturally sensitive manner without taking away from the message. The author's name is not mentioned. The first part of this post is interesting and relatively noninflammatory. The author discusses four areas for Christians to consider in a cross cultural setting.

1. Give Up Your Rights

 As a free American, I have a "right" to do a lot of things that would be offensive in my new cultural context: wear my shoes indoors, eat or touch someone with my left hand, put up   a fence around my own yard without my local community leader's permission, or even leave a Central Asian birthday party before the rice is served!

2. Become a Servant of Non-Believers

So Paul not only chose not to make use of his rights, he went farther and chose to make himself the servant of those whom he is trying to reach with the gospel.

3. Adapt to Others' Lifestyle as Much as Possible Without Sinning

(Paul) He became all things to all people that by all means he might save some. He identified with the people he was trying to reach. He adapted his lifestyle to theirs in anything that might block them from hearing the gospel. He valued the gospel more than his own rights,

4. Stay Within the Bounds of Scripture

The same must apply to us. Every human culture reflects common grace, but every culture also reflects the fall. We must not adapt to that which contradicts Scripture.

The author then turns his attention to the Muslim culture and suggests ways to engage them with the gospel. Apparently, the Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox people are quite "bad" and our "good," 9 Marks boy does not want to be associated with them.

In this context, the word "Christian" can be particularly problematic. To much of the Muslim world, America, Europe, and Russia are "Christian" societies, and whatever is true for those countries is true of Christianity. Thus, when a Central Asian Muslim asks me if I am a Christian, what they mean by "Christian" is an alcohol-drinking, pornography-watching, sexually promiscuous, picture-worshipping Eastern Orthodox or Roman Catholic person who is part of the culture that has attempted to conquer and oppress them for centuries. Therefore, I never simply say yes. However, since Christian is a biblical word, neither do I say no. I define who I am in biblical terms apart from their historical experience.

How do I give this guy the benefit of the doubt? Perhaps he is naive and has forgotten about 9/11. The United States, founded by the Puritans and dominated in the South by Southern Baptists, has been the object of particular scorn by some Muslim groups. Does the term "The Great Satan" ring a bell?

As for the "good" Protestants, well, 9 Marks, along with all of their buddies in The Gospel Coalition, have written post after post on the pornography problem in their churches; the issues surrounding sexual promiscuity amongst their young; and those who have difficulties with substance abuse. As for worshipping images, well, I guess Protestants do it a bit differently. We just have conferences in which the celebrity pastors are held up for particular praise. Then, there is the stained glass window at SWBTS with a picture of Dorothy and Paige Patterson. Then, there are the mobs, trying to get their Bible autographed by John Piper and other super Christians. Nah-we don't look any different and to say so is arrogant and deceptive.

9 Marks trashes InterVarsity over their acceptance of Catholics in student leadership.

Then, I began to wonder, is this an isolated post with the author having a bad day or is there more?  Unfortunately, I found another disconcerting 9 Marks post. It appears that 9 Marks doesn't want Catholics to be in any leadership position in InterVarsity because they don't get the gospel.™

In 2010, the 9 Marks Journal published What's Happening to InterVarsity? This was written by J Mac Stiles and you need to know who he is.

J. Mack Stiles is a former InterVarsity staff worker. Mack and his family currently reside in Dubai where he serves as an elder in the Redeemer Church of Dubai. 

There are two 9 Marks churches in Dubai, a very rich city. Remember that. These guys are not slogging in the slums of India. They are tending to the well off people who are sent by their companies to work in Dubai. The UCCD 9 Marks church is the one which gave Todd Wilhelm the left boot of fellowship. Stiles is the head pastor of Redeemer and is very close to John Folmar of UCCD who is a close friend of Mark Dever. Mac Stiles truly represents 9 Marks.

Now, think back to the first post. It dealt with cross cultural contextualization in a Muslim country. Dubai is the most populous city and emirate in the United Arab Emirates according to Wikipedia. It is in a Muslim country but allows Christians to worship in churches within Dubai.

My guess is that Stiles agrees with the first post in its representation of Roman Catholics. In fact, he believes in the marginalization of Roman Catholics, particularly in any group that he joins. He used to work for InterVarsity but now he is with a real gospel™ group instead. So, he gives us a negative look at his previous employer. 

It appears that those "alcohol-drinking, pornography-watching, sexually promiscuous, picture-worshipping Roman Catholic" students want to be involved in the leadership of InterVarsity. Gasp!! This is a  parachurch organization which is not affiliated with any particular denomination. As some of you may know, parachurch groups are the latest target of the Calvinistas. They believe that they should be "under the authority" of the local church which really means any 5 point Calvinist church that is a member of their club. However, that defeats the purpose of such groups.

Here is what Stiles had to say about his old group.

But lately InterVarsity seems adrift.

A recent Christianity Today article chronicles the pressure a group of InterVarsity students felt to include practicing Roman Catholics on their leadership team. When the students discovered that IV's new doctrinal statement allowed for Roman Catholics in good standing to sign on, they decided to separate from IV. The national president of IV wrote a response, but seemed defensive and never answered the question, "How many Catholics are on staff with IV?"  Sadly, this was a double personal blow as one of the students on the leadership team was my son, who had looked forward for much of his life to being a part of IV on campus, but was disillusioned by the shape of doctrine in IV.

The very Gospel™ is at stake according to Stiles. He claims that thoughtful™ Catholics agree with him but gives no evidence of such.

What's happening to InterVarsity? Has the fellowship become so thoughtless about its theology that it now rejects the solas of the Reformation? I understand that Catholics can be born again. I am happy to partner with Catholics on moral issues in the political arena such as religious liberty. But to partner with Roman Catholics in gospel outreach is a confusion of the gospel. Thoughtful Catholics agree. So, why is IV confused? I worry that it is because IV is muddled about the gospel.

What's at stake is confusion over the Gospel.

One of the amusing comments in this post is the following.

An egalitarian stand on women in ministry is so sacrosanct that complementarians are unwelcome in IV.

Pastor Stiles, let's get something straight. The Gospel Coalition, the Council of Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, and just about every conference out there, all para-church, do not allow an egalitarian point of view. In fact, in one Southern region, a few pastors and seminarians got together and told some students not to attend InterVarsity because they allow women in leadership. So cut the rhetoric. If you don't want a woman leading your Bible study, stay home and read a CJ Mahaney book on humility. You guys seem to like his style.

It appears that he is upset that some groups do not worship at the altar of John Piper and actually like NT Wright instead! Batten the hatches!

. Not only that, but InterVarsity seems more and more willing to partner with churches that do not hold to the gospel, from liberal protestant churches to the Roman Catholic church. At the same time, IV is breaking fellowship with people who are solidly evangelical: John Piper, for example, is a persona non grata because of his view of women in ministry. Yet N.T. Wright, who's book Justification opens the door for a quasi-Catholic view of justification, speaks regularly at IV conferences.

Here is a little 9 Marks hypocrisy for you. It appears Stiles was disturbed that Bono was allowed to speak at the InterVarsity Missions Conference in Urbana.

It's disturbing, for example, that Bono had a live video feed into the last Urbana Missions Conference, drumming up support for work with AIDS victims. I don't have anything against Bono or those who work with people stricken by AIDS, but I could come up with a hundred people, rather than Bono, who should speak about why we should work with AIDS victims as an implication of gospel.

Wheaton College also had Bono speak in 2002. The school has long been warm towards Neo-Reformed theology and so he gets to overlook that. (PS Dee likes Bono and would have loved to hear him. He is most convicting). So, unless the speaker is on Stile's definitive list of 100 speakers (all of whom will be ardent complementarians, by the way) it will not be the true gospel.™

What is his solution? Well, turn to the real Christians who are NeoReformed. Let's throw the bums out of IV leadership and get some real leaders that preach strict complementarianism and have John Piper and Al Mohler speak at all conferences. Them's the real gospel™.

There is still time for IV to turn things around. I'm hopeful. It's been done before. Just look at what the leadership of Al Mohler did for the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. But if IV continues to be forgetful of its mission, confused about the gospel, fearful of the world, and pragmatic about ministry, there is little hope for IV to ever become again what it once was: a force for truly evangelical gospel ministry.

To our Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox friends out there, I apologize that you had to read this nonsense. You are always welcome on this blog. We know many, many evangelicals who would disagree with this perspective. I wish that 9 Marks had a heart as expressed by Pope Francis in this video.

To 9 Marks, listen to Pope Francis in this video. Do you know how to express love as he does? You can do better than these two posts.

To our readers, this is a beautiful expression of unity from Pope Francis. At a meeting I attended a year ago, Luis Palau, a well known evangelical, told us that Pope Francis asked him to lay hands on him and pray when Francis was elevated to cardinal. I wish some of our leaders would be so humble.

Pope Francis' Message on Christian Unity to Pentecostal Conference

Lydia's Corner: Amos 4:1-6:14 Revelation 2:18-3:6 Psalm 130:1-8 Proverbs 29:21-22

Comments

9 Marks’ Deeply Disturbing Remarks Aimed at Roman Catholics and InterVarsity — 351 Comments

  1. Also, if I were asked if Christians are “alcohol-drinking, pornography-watching, sexually promiscuous,” I’d say yes they are, and more, just like everyone else in this world. I’d also add the good news in the face of those sins and others: “Here is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners.” Why is 9 Marks afraid of the gospel message?

  2. Ok, with that silliness out of the way, time for a serious comment. : ). It seems to me that conservatives struggle to embrace unity within the larger Kingdom of God. Rather than having a robust unity which is built on the singularity of Jesus Chris, our Lord and Savior, the oft traveled way is to diminish unity into uniformity where only agreement is valued. Sad, but that has been my observation.

  3. Oh this is tragic. The young man Pope Francis talked about, Tony Palmer, was killed yesterday (July 20) in a motorcycle accident in the UK. I went to look for more information about him and found this. 🙁

  4. Sigh. As a sometime Anglican (in a church that ordains women) and most recently a participant in the Church of Christ, I am saddened yet not surprised by this. I think it’s difficult for many in TGC to imagine God’s spirit can be alive and active in a church where women lead. Yet He is.

  5. Moderator of comments — feel free to delete my ‘first’ comment. Obviously, I was not first, although none displayed at the time. But in afterthought, that is something others may want to do, but I would rather just make an occasional comment. Thanks.

    MOD: I’ll let it stand. You WERE second. GBTC.

  6. Sara wrote:

    Sigh. As a sometime Anglican (in a church that ordains women) and most recently a participant in the Church of Christ, I am saddened yet not surprised by this. I think it’s difficult for many in TGC to imagine God’s spirit can be alive and active in a church where women lead. Yet He is.

    Apparently, some evangelicals (think they) have God on a short leash. He can really only function within the parameters of their ideals. I’m thinking that God is probably not amused, but I don’t claim to speak for Him either.

  7. Man I get so tired of hearing the neo-fundies condemn everyone but their own. Their circle of what beliefs are acceptable as “Christian” gets smaller and smaller every year. In the meantime, their neo-fundy brethern are exempt from criticism for ignoring sexual abuse in their own houses of worship and making themselves rich off funds donated for God’s work.

  8. Dee, I think that in many Muslim countries (especially those that were part of the former Soviet Union + Eastern Bloc countries, and former French, Belgian, Spanish and Portuguese colonies in both Africa and South and Easdt Asia), xtians *are* seen as either RC or Orthodox because the countries that invaded and ruled them *were* RC or Orthodox. With church and state often being pretty much the same thing.

    It’s fact, though it might rankle. Conversely, England had an established church, yet Methodism became a fact of life relatively early in the history of English colonization, and I don’t think that the priority was on mass conversions of enslaved Africans and native peoples – pretty much the opposite of the policy followed by Russia and European Catholic countries when they conquered and colonized others.

  9. so how does contextualization work when witnessing to native americans? If you say christian, does that mean protestants that thought they had a divine right to take any land they liked, kill off native food sources, commit genocide, and then put people on reservations? How about african slaves? That is such a cheap shot….disagree about theology if you’d like, but the argument put up about conquering and oppressing is self defeating in so many ways, not least of which is the fact that protestants have some pretty dirty laundry as well. Of course, the defense is usually “but they weren’t REALLY saved when they were committing those acts…”

  10. John McArthur-clone churches are fiercely anti-Catholic too. The pastors at my home church went out of their way to bash Catholics every time we took communion.

  11. I have some very dear Catholic friends. I know some very devout Catholic people, and disagree with the notion that Catholics are not believers. However, until Vatican II WE were the lost, according to Catholics. Also, one of my dear friends from grad school days is Orthodox.

    But when I read these comments about Catholics, I don’t react the same way.

    I read the writer as saying that much of the Muslim world may be exposed to a cultural hegemony that flies under the Catholic or Orthodox banners.

    I had this happen to me as a senior in high school. At the time lots of educated Iranians had fled Iran and landed in the U.S. One was in school with me.

    I had the chance to witness to this student. I had no training in sharing my faith with Muslims, but the first thing I shared with him is that there was a difference between those who were church members and were part of a cultural Christian tradition and those who had been born again. In my own life, I had been raised in a church, but did not become a Christian until may later teen years. I told him that most of the students in high school would self identify as “Christian” but that for many that may just be a cultural thing. And I told him that behavior was one thing to watch for.

    The young man visited my church on a couple of occasions. When I was a Junior or Senior in college, he called me to say that he was at Oklahoma State, and that he had met some “real Christians” there, and that he had become a “real Christian.” I have not kept up with him since.

    That’s they way I read the original article.

    On Intervarsity, I agree with the concerns. The Reformation was/is a big deal. What is even a bigger deal now is the universalism in Catholic thinking. John Paul II, whom I really admired, wrote that he believed persons of no faith or of other faiths would inherit eternal life if they lived sincere lives in accordance with their faith.

    I would not “ban” Catholics or the Orthodox from serving at Intervarsity. I don’t know enough about its inner-workings, but assuming this is possible, I would require any leadership to sign off on theological confessions that are thoroughly biblical and reflect the solas of the Reformation. If a student does that, and he remains a Catholic, I would let him/her serve. If he/she believes those things, he/she will eventually find tension in remaining a Catholic.

    What concerns me about Intervarsity is my belief that they are becoming soft in the area of theological truth. Seems like we had another dust up in that organization not too long ago.

    Intervarsity has a great tradition, and I would hate to see it decline.

  12. THE ONLY REASON THESE GUYS HAVE A “GOSPEL” AND “SCRIPTURE” TO DUCKSPEAK IS THE BISHOPS OF THE CATHOLIC AND ORTHODOX CHURCH (they were one back then) PREVENTED THE SHIRLEY MAC LAINES OF THE TIME FROM REWRITING IT IN THEIR OWN IMAGE BACK WHEN YEARS A.D. WERE IN THE LOW THREE DIGITS!

  13. JeffT wrote:

    Man I get so tired of hearing the neo-fundies condemn everyone but their own. Their circle of what beliefs are acceptable as “Christian” gets smaller and smaller every year.

    You do know the ultimate theoretical end state of Protestantism, don’t you?

    MILLIONS of One True Churches, each with only ONE member, each denouncing all the others as Heretics and Apostates and Not Really Christian.

  14. Janey wrote:

    John McArthur-clone churches are fiercely anti-Catholic too. The pastors at my home church went out of their way to bash Catholics every time we took communion.

    What shtick did they spout? Mary Worship? Satanic Death Cookie? Apostate Whore of Babylon? The whole Nimrod/Semiramis/Tammuz crap? With Bible-verse zip codes for everything? “IT IS WRITTEN! IT IS WRITTEN! IT IS WRITTEN!”?

    A lot of these One True Churches have the same version of Church History as the Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses: The Original New Testament Church was just like us, but it went off the rails sometime between Pentecost and Constantine and turned into Apostate Satanic Romish Popery until Our Founding Apostle was picked by God to Revive the REAL New Testament Church — Us Four, No More, Amen.

  15. I am not one to bash Catholics at all. I grew up in the Catholic church and came to a vibrant relationship with the Lord in that church. I know many people who are devout Christians who are Catholic, both laity and clergy. That said, I thought that their doctrine promotes salvation by faith and works, which is something I don’t support. I wouldn’t come to blows over it, though.

  16. Bridget wrote:

    Apparently, some evangelicals (think they) have God on a short leash. He can really only function within the parameters of their ideals.

    The difference between religion and Magick (Crowley spelling deliberate) is that in Magick the mortal sorcerer has the supernatural beings/forces on a short leash dancing to his tune. The sorcerer is the one giving the orders, and the supernatural force/being obeys.

  17. I don’t care if IV allows leaders that come from RC and Orthodox, but only if they can abide by the governance such as egalitarianism established in IV. If IV ever changes to complementarianis, I will weep a very long time.

  18. I find this article very topical for me. As I was leaving my old church which recently affiliated with 9 Marks I was honest about me considering a jump to Rome. It was like holding a crucifix to a vampire and I got all kinds of attention to convince me not to go there. Those schmucks also view mainline churches as not real churches either. At the end of the day they want the same power Rome or the East has. I lovingly call TGC the reformed Vatican.

  19. Perhaps I am reading it wrong….but…I don’t read the comment about the “Asian Muslim’s” conflating a bunch of “American” behaviors as being synonymous with Christianity as being an specific attack on Catholicism. My reading is not that he is saying that RC’s ARE that, but that for many middle eastern Muslim’s their perception is that the term Christian implies all of those things. I did not read it in any way as an underhanded slight against RC’s specifically.

    Regarding the IV comments…..There are significant theological and doctrinal differences between Catholic and Protestant. That isn’t the same as arguing that RC are not Christian at all. To think of it another way, knowing how many feel about the TGC/Calvinist/9Marks crowd, how would you feel if a devout follower of one of those groups was selected to be in a significant leadership position within your church or parachurch ministry. While you wouldn’t claim that the person who has those theological doctrinal convictions is not a Christian, you would be right to say, “The positions they hold are incongruous with the positions our group holds, it is illogical to give them a leadership position”

  20. It’s interesting to see how if you quiz more than a few evangelical Protestants with a blowtorch, they will say the most anti-Catholic garbage you can imagine. As a young person, I was influenced by that nonsense–in between the Chick tracts and the anti-Catholic articles put out by Keith Green and his Last Days Ministries back around 1980ish that were being passed around the Christians in the dorms. I’ve heartily repented of that attitude because, well, I realized I didn’t have it so much together myself and I would like to extend to others the same charity they’d hopefully extend to me.

    That said, I don’t cut the Catholic church (or *any* church, for that matter) *any* slack when it comes to child sexual abuse. I am appalled at some of the hidden laws which appear to govern the way the Catholic church handles it. I’m appalled that over a decade after the dam burst, stuff is STILL being dragged out from prelates kicking and screaming. And I agree with (I believe) Boz Tchividjian who has said that the Protestant churches probably have an even *worse* problem.

    N.B. My longtime boyfriend is Catholic, so no doubt that’s an influence but he knows how I feel about the hierarchy and the child abuse and a few other things so there is that.

  21. And then I made the mistake of looking for Keith Green’s Catholic bashing and came upon the conspiracy theory that the CIA killed Green. Not the fact that Green’s plane had been well overloaded when it crashed.

  22. To GuyBehindTheCurtain: There is a error popping up on the top of the page. It doesn’t prevent viewing or loading any pages (that I’ve noticed), but….

    Warning: array_slice() expects parameter 1 to be array, boolean given in /home/content/52/4871152/html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/my-twitter-widget/widget.php on line 164

    Warning: key() [function.key]: Passed variable is not an array or object in /home/content/52/4871152/html/tww2/wp-content/plugins/my-twitter-widget/widget.php on line 164

  23. Yes, I agree with Adam. He is talking about the perception among Muslims, historically derived. This is much ado about nothing. I am sure that genuine anti-Catholicism (which would need to be carefully defined) exists among TGC folks, but this ain’t it.

  24. As to the video of Pope Francis….I grew up AofG, and in the earlier years, I remember hearing that RCC’s weren’t really Christians, blah, blah, blah. But in my teen years, the various churches in town would get together every year for an interfaith Thanksgiving service. All were invited and it rotated from church to church as the host. Not many Catholics participated, but I remember the last year I was there, the host church was the First Baptist Church….and between having a couple of nuns in his church and having our ‘Pentecostal’ choir perform a calypso, the poor Baptist preacher was visibly uncomfortable.

    I appreciate what Pope Francis said – especially to a group of Pentecostals….there has been no love lost there, historically, and I am glad to see that changing. Because truly, even among the Calvinistas, if they believe that Jesus is God’s son and trust in him, they are my brothers and sisters. As it was put to me once, I do not have to like them, but I am instructed to love them. And I do not expect them to like me, but I hope that love is there, as well.

  25. I am not at all happy to see what IV said/is doing, and I think 9 Marks is set on the same path.

    That said, I do *not* believe the first quoted article above was intended to be either anti-Orthodox or anti-Catholic. But it *might* have been worded better, to reflect what’s been said above (by others, and by me) regarding historical realities and European conquests.

  26. I was part of IV when I was in college. It was an integral part in building my faith. My chapter is now struggling to stay on campus as they are in danger of losing that access unless they allow non-Christians to be in leadership. They are so theologically wishy-washy when they insist that only Christians should be allowed in the leadership of a Christian club…

    (And when I was in college – the 90s – I knew plenty of fellow IVers who read Piper.)

    It is nice that Mr. Stiles make several accusations about things but doesn’t link to any evidence. And several of the things he mentioned – like Deeds not Creeds – could be interpreted as theologically valuable. (such as putting your faith into action instead of just relying on being theologically correct in your doctrine…)

  27. @ Jeannette Altes: back east, a lot of AoG folks were very involved in the early days of the charismatic movement in the RCC. There was much visiting back and forth, and much learning. I once visited a small prayer group where everyone (all Catholic laywomen over 55) prayed like they’d been raised Pentecostal. Those ladies were really something!

  28. @ mirele: the Keith Green material rubbed me the wrong way when I first saw it, back in the late 70s. It seemed strident and crazy, although I don’t recall any anti-Catholic stuff – which might be one of the things that put me off. (I came to “know Jesus” via friends who were part of a Catholic charismatic prayer group, and spent several years in Catholic charismatic circles, where I was made welcome in no uncertain terms. So, no Catholic-bashing for me.)

  29. acg116 wrote:

    so how does contextualization work when witnessing to native americans? If you say christian, does that mean protestants that thought they had a divine right to take any land they liked, kill off native food sources, commit genocide, and then put people on reservations?

    Native Americans are no more monolithic in their politics and belief paradigms than is any other ethnic group in the U.S. So from that standpoint let me say that any attempt at ‘contextualization’ is in my opinion, a fool’s errand.

  30. @ numo: err, what I *meant* to say is that the back and forth in IV troubles me – they needed to get a grip and, imo, welcome all xtians, not just Protestants of a certain stripe. Some of us high church types would probably be viewed as pseudo-Catholics by those who come from an anti-Catholic POV. Not that I care what they think about me personally (I’m way too old for IV), but I hope that they’re wiling to make people from liturgical churches welcome, period.

  31. @ singleman: you’d need to learn to use your right hand when in public or private gatherings. Also true in much of Africa, and likely many other places as well? The right hand is for handling food at the table, but the left is used for cleaning after using the toilet. That’s what is actually being alluded to in the article.

  32. What’s happening to InterVarsity?

    I lost touch with what was happening at IV after an old college friend left IV’s staff in the early 1990’s. But I’ll have to say they were very influential in my spiritual growth as a young Christian in the late 1970’s and early 1980’s. And yes, women were involved in leadership in that IV group.

    By the way, I knew a Roman Catholic who lived in a Christian women’s house during my college days. I’ve got no doubt she was born again and walking with the Lord during that time, and she still was when I last saw her a few years ago.

  33. Where and when I was in Jr. and Sr. High (late ’50s, early ’60s), Catholic bashing was in vogue in SBC churches. Also almost every liturgical church. I grew up in a community that was easily 70% RC, and my public school homeroom teacher led prayers to the saint of the day, Mary, and for the pope and bishop in our area. And we had statues of Mary and other saints around the room as she was the art teacher and that was her art.

    However, in the early ’80s, I was approached by two people in my department at work at a time when we were going through shrinkage due to mismanagement of the department. One was Catholic, one Episcopal. We prayed together every morning when two or more of us were in town. The Catholic was in a charismatic group and talked about the day he became turned on to Jesus (obviously a conversion experience) and the Episcopal talked about the day Jesus became real in his life (ditto). And I could talk about meeting Jesus at 9 yo and then anew at 30, and what that meant to me. Two of the best Christians I have ever known personally.

  34. @ numo:
    Interesting. I’d never thought of that. Of course, I’ve never traveled to a foreign country.

    My late father was originally left-handed but was forced to switch as a child. That was in the 1930’s; I’m glad my parents didn’t make me do the same.

  35. About ten years ago, a friend of mine asked me to make a sub-forum on a board where Christians could talk to Muslims. (I was a moderator at the board.)

    I said okay. Then, the friend asked me to help him talk to two or three Muslims that showed up who he had invited to the forum. I had no interest in doing so, but my friend kept begging me, so I give it a try.

    All I can tell you is that to some Muslims, the ones I encountered,

    Christian = Roman Catholic

    Talking to those Muslims was extremely frustrating. I was having to respond to point after point of their posts, which were complaints against every atrocity committed by the Roman Catholic Church ever.

    I told them I am not even a RC, nor do I agree with the Roman Catholic Church, and that Christianity was not limited to RC. They wouldn’t hear of it.

    They wanted to keep criticizing Christianity via Roman Catholicism until the cows came home. I finally got worn out with it and bowed out. I sent my buddy a private message and told him I had enough.

    There really are some Muslims who think that “Christianity = Roman Catholicism.”

  36. P.S. A small detail about the Muslims who came to the sub forum I mentioned above.

    If I remember correctly, they were not Americans. I think at least one may have been from Egypt, and I don’t recall where the others were from, somewhere in the Middle East, but I don’t remember the exact nations.

  37. @ singleman: I didn’t encounter it in western Europe, though Muslim immigrants to those countries would, I think, follow the custom – as they do here in time US. Asaik, it is not the same idea we used to have about left-handedness being somehow wrong or bad, more that the right hand is used for many things, while the left hand is never meant to touch food (and many other things) due to its being reserved for one particular chore. Of course, people do use both hands for many things, but when eating, the left hand isn’t used. I think this is partly to do w/the way food is often taken from a common dish w/various kinds of flat breads. You just cannot use your left hand for that.

  38. As someone who escaped out of the Neo-Reformed world (SGM) shortly after college, and then converted to the Roman Catholic Church a few years later, I find the posts… well, hurtful but not surprising.

    I grew up hearing a lot of virulent anti-Catholicism in my parents’ Calvary Chapel, and got plenty more of it in the Reformed world. Then I grew up and read about what the RCC actually teaches, and wouldn’t you know it, 99% of what I was told about the Church was wrong. Like any bigotry or prejudice, anti-Catholicism is a lot of passionate emotion mixed with a lot of falsehoods. 9Marks is no different.

  39. well here is what I think of 9 marks, you can tell a person by who their BFF’s are. 9 Marks promotes literature and articles on their site, including Mark Driscolls, but I am still speechless that they are selling and promoting these two books (which should be banned in Muslim countries everywhere lest those muslims get the idea that ‘Christians’ have wives who serve them but are pedophiles or pedophile harborers).

    http://www.9marks.org/journal/9marks-marriage-book-comparison-chart

    Mahaney, C.J. Sex, Romance, and the Glory of God: What Every Christian Husband Needs to Know, rev’d edition.Crossway, 2004.
    The accent of C.J. Mahaney’s ministry is a passion to promote a gospel-centered orientation of one’s life. No matter what he writes or speaks about, the gospel is sure to be the integrating focus. This emphasis is obvious throughout Sex, Romance, and the Glory of God.

    Mahaney, Carolyn. Feminine Appeal: Seven Virtues of a Godly Wife and Mother, revised edition. Crossway, 2004.
    Carolyn’s own words summarize this volume:

    Consider the loveliness of a woman who passionately adores her husband, who tenderly cherishes her children, who creates a warm and peaceful home, who exemplifies purity, self-control, and kindness in her character and who gladly submits to her husband’s leadership—for all the days God grants her. I dare say that there are few things that display the gospel jewel with greater elegance (21).

    The book’s strength is its simplicity. But that does not make it an easier pill to swallow. This is not a book for women who simply want to feel better about being feminine. It takes on the most serious and controversial dimensions of biblical femininity without blinking. For example, the subjects of submission to husbands and working at home are stripped of their cultural caricatures and presented to women as gracious gifts from a gracious God. Moreover, Carolyn handles the issues of sexual purity and marital intimacy with amazing clarity in an economy of space.

    Cheap shot? naw, I just read the first half of the amended charges against those guys that mahaney was the lead pastor of…

    mahaney also hates catholics apparently, its actually part of the tenants of faith in his organization
    “http://www.alliancenet.org/partner/Article_Display_Page/0,,PTID307086_CHID798774_CIID1411364,00.html

    We also earnestly call back erring professing evangelicals who have deviated from God’s Word in the matters discussed in this Declaration. This includes those who declare that there is hope of eternal life apart from explicit faith in Jesus Christ, who claim that those who reject Christ in this life will be annihilated rather than endure the just judgment of God through eternal suffering, or who claim that evangelicals and Roman Catholics are one in Jesus Christ even where the biblical doctrine of justification is not believed.”

    Its that its in the confession of faith statement. Mormons aren’t in there, JW’s aren’t in there, heck even muslims aren’t in there, but those catholics!!!

    I always wondered if these guys had a bit of mysogony going on, ya know, hate yer mother and anything associated with her and thus ya gotta keep yer wife under yer thumb lest she jump out and abuse you.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C._J._Mahaney

    Early life and career[edit]

    Mahaney was born in Maryland into a Roman Catholic household,

  40. Edit!!! I want to straighten this sentence out:
    which should be banned in Muslim countries everywhere lest those muslims get the idea that ‘Christians’ even though they have wives who serve them, may be ____’s or pedophile harborers).

  41. sam h wrote:

    I always wondered if these guys had a bit of mysogony going on, ya know, hate yer mother and anything associated with her and thus ya gotta keep yer wife under yer thumb lest she jump out and abuse you.

    Exactly. And you know, I’ve often thought that an awful lot of the misogynistic tendencies in the Reformed world could be cured by a healthy devotion to the Virgin Mary, who is both the mother of Christ and the mother of Christians (John 19:26-27)… there’s not much that can’t be cured by a good mother’s love 🙂

  42. soo some other things about that 9marks page on how to evangelize that bothered me is the way he is telling people to evangelize. he says not to jump in saying that Jesus is the Son of God.(#6) First they must teach the Old Testament so those Muslims can get an idea of the bible. (#7) (those Muslims know the bible better than 9 marks, I think) If I take the evangelize advice I would probably have to spend about a year on the old testament what with all that Leviticus Deuteronomy stuff and then after that fish thing, I could broach the subject of Jesus! all the while, of course, engaging their culture (#2) and being sure not to offend them by eating with unwashened hands like Jesus did. and when we are writing books or speaking in the U.S. we are to never engage the culture and we are to offend everyone every chance we get, because well, maybe because americans pee with their right hand and eat with their left hand so they can keep using the mouse to scroll down our facebook pages to keep up with our families, which also is discouraged for those serving overseas for 9 marks.(#2)
    we should never, as Todd Wilhelm described the other day, hide for fear because of our faith, (#1)
    we should never have the crucifix with Jesus on it on our walls in our apartments while ministering. (#3)
    we shouldn’t mention that Jesus is Jewish (#4)
    we should explain our identity in ways that point to Jesus and not to the unfortunate legacy of cultural Christianity. this comes before the part about those drunken catholics, so I am wondering if we aren’t supposed to talk about the death of all those apostles and those women thrown to the lions as part of the unfortunate legacy of cultural Christianity.(#4) yeah I know, I might be reaching with that one.
    (#5) blogowner extroadinaire nailed that one already with all the worshiping of live saints as opposed to dead saints.
    while we shouldn’t use ‘Son of God’ so much, we can feel free to call Him ‘allah’. (#8)
    and finally and most importantly!! (#10) we don’t gotta support financially any of em that might convert to 9marks.
    from: http://www.9marks.org/journal/putting-contextualization-its-place

    reminds me of what happens when them rich white ‘evangelists’ come to my predominantly poor catholic hispanic neighborhood to save them…. LOCOS! LOCOS! que están locos, corren!

  43. if 9marks wants to evangelize Dubai perhaps they should follow the lead of Jesus who sent a young sister named Teresa to India. That would mean working in the streets though, instead of the offices of finance.
    Mack Stiles is CEO of Gulf Digital Solutions and general secretary for the Fellowship of Christian UAE Students (FOCUS) in the United Arab Emirates.http://www.ivpress.com/cgi-ivpress/author.pl/author_id=323#ixzz38Ao7SsON
    DSI-Gulf is dedicated to providing our clients with the expert advice and technology required to solve complex financial institution IT and telecommunication challenges…http://www.redeemerdubai.com/preacher/u/1/mack-stiles

    If the gospel coalition and 9marks wanted to really do something about abortion they might think of reversing American laws and financing catholic abbeys. the number of abortions was very little when the Catholics took in all those unwed mothers. but then they would have to care for the least of these. I wonder what happened if a young girl @SGM got pregnant?

    Actually if not for the sex abuse of all those kids in such horrific ways and the great lengths gone to cover it up, I would be more apt to pray for the men at 9marks and TGC. they might have been abused by a wayward priest when they were young, or had a nun that had a ruler instead of a personal relationship with Jesus, they may have psychological problems from their homelife, I hope they come to the realization that seeking professional counseling is much less ‘sinful’ than the thing they are doing now in Jesus sight.

  44. gospel gospel GOSPEL

    This J Mac Stiles uses the word so many times… but what does he mean by it??

    it’s like one of those words with a nebulous-enough meaning that it is now a tool for creating something you want, and a weapon for deconstructing something you don’t want.

    I would love to see a post where people chime in on what the gospel/gospel means.

    This is what I have ALWAYS understood it to mean: God in the human form of Jesus bridged the gap between human beings and himself for the pleasure of relationship.

    There are all kinds of life-giving things triggered by this event, but “the good news” is that we can know each other without religious rigamarole.

    is this not the gospel? the good news? what could catholics or eastern orthodox or egalitarians or feminists or charismatics or whoever possibly do to interfere with this truth?? why all the crazy paranoia?

    makes me think their meaning of “the gospel” is tied to their livelihood and share of power they have come to enjoy.

  45. Daisy wrote:

    All I can tell you is that to some Muslims, the ones I encountered,
    Christian = Roman Catholic
    Talking to those Muslims was extremely frustrating. I was having to respond to point after point of their posts, which were complaints against every atrocity committed by the Roman Catholic Church ever. I told them I am not even a RC, nor do I agree with the Roman Catholic Church, and that Christianity was not limited to RC. They wouldn’t hear of it. They wanted to keep criticizing Christianity via Roman Catholicism until the cows came home…
    There really are some Muslims who think that “Christianity = Roman Catholicism.”

    I’m not sure whether this is nitpicking or not, but on the evidence you’ve presented, Daisy, the individuals you encountered had few honest beliefs about Christianity; they just wanted a fight and a lazy stick to use therein. The clue is in the phrase They wouldn’t hear of it.

    I’m sure we all understand here that “Muslim” does not equal terrorist, jihadist or ISIS. But there are certainly people who don’t understand that. A western professing Christian who insisted that Muslims are all demented killers, and continued to insist on it even after encountering a Muslim who was none of those things, would eventually prove himself merely a bigot. People like that fly under every religious/ideological banner that exists.

    Whether the ones you met were bigots, or whether they had real questions that somehow never quite surfaced in all the arguments, I don’t know.

  46. When I read this post I was reminded of this hymn by William A. Dunkerley (and you should hear Mavis Staples sing it!)

    In Christ there is no East or West,
    In Him no South or North;
    But one great fellowship of love
    Throughout the whole wide earth.

    In Him shall true hearts everywhere
    Their high communion find;
    His service is the golden cord,
    Close binding humankind.

    Join hands, then, members of the faith,
    Whatever your race may be!
    Who serves my Father as His child
    Is surely kin to me.

    In Christ now meet both East and West,
    In Him meet North and South;
    All Christly souls are one in Him
    Throughout the whole wide earth

  47. Adam Borsay wrote:

    To think of it another way, knowing how many feel about the TGC/Calvinist/9Marks crowd, how would you feel if a devout follower of one of those groups was selected to be in a significant leadership position within your church or parachurch ministry.

    As you say, some Roman Catholics are wonderful Christians, but others are like the TGC/Calvinist/9Marks crowd. So yes, I agree that the problem is doctrinal but IMO it divides differently than you do here.

    If I remember correctly, the IV confessional position is broad enough to include those in the RC who believe in the loving/just God. I don’t remember if their position stands against an angry/authoritarian god, but I hope it does — I think that would be the correct place to draw the line.

  48. Anonymous wrote:

    What concerns me about Intervarsity is my belief that they are becoming soft in the area of theological truth

    I also know two extremely committed, well known IV leaders who could teach us all a think or two about the faith. Frankly, I think this is all about Reformed theology. If one is not Reformed, then one is “barely a Christian” in the eyes of RC Sproul. It is also about Reformed control of these parachurch organizations. The code word “under the authority of the local church” means under one of “our” churches.

    Secondly, it is obvious that complementariansim plays into this. Make no mistake about it. If one does not drink from the comp trough and spout Piper, et al on gender roles, one is “soft.” I know of a situation in which some pastors and seminarians told a large group of college students not to attend IV because they allow women in leadership.

  49. @ dee:
    Maybe hyper-Cal, fundy-Cal, neo-Puritan? Sproul is in the most conservative rigid corner of the Calvinist tradition. Many Calvinists are egalitarian, such as those at Calvin and Hope College, and I think you’d enjoy them.

  50. Anonymous wrote:

    had the chance to witness to this student. I had no training in sharing my faith with Muslims, but the first thing I shared with him is that there was a difference between those who were church members and were part of a cultural Christian tradition and those who had been born again

    If the author had said what you said, there would be no problem. However, the author specifically pointed out RC and EO folks as being “alcohol-drinking, pornography-watching, sexually promiscuous, picture-worshipping.” etc. In fact, the Muslim world now views the United States in the same light.

    This is akin to my saying “Hey-you want me to be a Christian. Well, I live in the South and Southern Baptists believe in segregation.They are racist. Many were members of the Ku Klux Klan. They supported lynchings.”

    Would you respond by saying “Well, I am not associated with racist, KKK Southern Baptists. I’m a 9Marks Christian?” Or would you try to explain that everyone, including Muslims fall short of their ideals and we hurt one another. Jesus warned us about that and we, all Christians, screw up and need forgiveness.”

  51. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    MILLIONS of One True Churches, each with only ONE member, each denouncing all the others as Heretics and Apostates and Not Really Christian.

    We eat each other until the biggest baddest boy is standing!

  52. Former CLC’er wrote:

    I thought that their doctrine promotes salvation by faith and works,

    I used to think it as well. However, according to some Catholic priests with whom I have spoken, it seems it is the same argument we have in evangelicalism. If someone claims they are a Christian and have nothing to show for it, zero, then have they truly received the faith? If one reads the current crop of Calvinistas, they are into obedience and claim that we should be obedient and have the power to be obedient. How is that different?

  53. Adam Borsay wrote:

    To think of it another way, knowing how many feel about the TGC/Calvinist/9Marks crowd, how would you feel if a devout follower of one of those groups was selected to be in a significant leadership position within your church or parachurch ministry. While you wouldn’t claim that the person who has those theological doctrinal convictions is not a Christian, you would be right to say, “The positions they hold are incongruous with the positions our group holds, it is illogical to give them a leadership position”

    That precise thing happened to me. I resigned because i knew I couldn’t listen to the weekly extolling of John Piper, Mark Driscoll, Mark Dever, etc. Where I worship is very different than a parachurch group.

    I am involved in a well known one that welcomes Catholics and Orthodox. We do not spend our time debating the finer points of TULIP, sanctification, or the role of priests. Instead, we pray together and serve in our sphere of influence. It works wonderfully and I love being in contact of Christians from a broad spectrum of faith. I have come to respect (a word missing in certain groups) the dedication and faith of those who worship differently than I do within the broad Christian world.

  54. SeanR wrote:

    I lovingly call TGC the reformed Vatican.

    Didn’t you know that you were “never a Christian” if you jumped outside of their narrow definition. This applies to any church that is not totally NeoReformed which involves just about everyone except their little group.

  55. mirele wrote:

    I don’t cut the Catholic church (or *any* church, for that matter) *any* slack when it comes to child sexual abuse

    You have touched on something very important here. There seems to be an elitism present in certain circles which revolves around “having the correct doctrine.” This doctrine involves being a 4-5 point Calvinist. If you don’t have this, then surely you are apostate.

    However, when one looks at the results of said doctrine, they find they are no less involved in the covering up of child sex abuse than those groups, such as Catholics, who they condemn for doing so.

    In fact, some of these doctrinal superstars have spread the rumor that Catholic priests molest because they are not allowed to marry. That is why some of the au courant leaders in the evangelical world must do everything in their power to cover up the appalling problem of child sex abuse in evangelicalism. It just doesn’t jive with their “explanation.”

  56. mirele wrote:

    And then I made the mistake of looking for Keith Green’s Catholic bashing and came upon the conspiracy theory that the CIA killed Green.

    I so love conspiracy theories. One day I hope to find a real one.

  57. srs wrote:

    And several of the things he mentioned – like Deeds not Creeds – could be interpreted as theologically valuable. (such as putting your faith into action instead of just relying on being theologically correct in your doctrine…)

    I wanted to discuss that but the post was getting rather long. IV is not saying that theology doesn’t matter. Instead it is saying we need to get off our duffs and care about others. Wade Burleson says “Don;t let you theology trump love.”

  58. numo wrote:

    But it *might* have been worded better, to reflect what’s been said above (by others, and by me) regarding historical realities and European conquests.

    And the fact that it conveniently left out any Protestant involvement.

  59. @ Muff Potter:
    Good point. In fact, the leader of the Navajo tribe a few years ago was an evangelical and attended a Christian Reformed church (not Neo, btw).

    The Navajo tribe had a deep sense of the spiritual and seemed to have the ability to separate the horrible treatment of Native Americans from the truly faithful. Frankly, their graciousness always amazed me.

  60. singleman wrote:

    Yikes! This southpaw would be in serious trouble.

    I escorted a patient back to Germany and spent two days as the guest of his physician. I was eating lunch and the physician said to me “Why do you always put the hand you are not using on your lap?” She them explained to me that Germans put both hand on the table. I had no idea!

  61. An Attorney wrote:

    One was Catholic, one Episcopal. We prayed together every morning when two or more of us were in town. The Catholic was in a charismatic group and talked about the day he became turned on to Jesus (obviously a conversion experience) and the Episcopal talked about the day Jesus became real in his life (ditto).

    Love it!

  62. sam h wrote:

    Consider the loveliness of a woman who passionately adores her husband, who tenderly cherishes her children, who creates a warm and peaceful home, who exemplifies purity, self-control, and kindness in her character and who gladly submits to her husband’s leadership—for all the days God grants her. I dare say that there are few things that display the gospel jewel with greater elegance (21).

    Elegance is hardly the word one uses to describe the atmosphere engendered by the Mahaneys at SGM

  63. dee wrote:

    Former CLC’er wrote:

    I thought that their doctrine promotes salvation by faith and works,

    I used to think it as well. However, according to some Catholic priests with whom I have spoken, it seems it is the same argument we have in evangelicalism. If someone claims they are a Christian and have nothing to show for it, zero, then have they truly received the faith? If one reads the current crop of Calvinistas, they are into obedience and claim that we should be obedient and have the power to be obedient. How is that different?

    It helps to know that the terminology that we both use has different understandings and definitions. That means that when both parties, one Catholic and one Protestant, start talking to each other, their understanding of what the other is saying may be misunderstood. I’ve found that out the hard way given that I’m a Catholic in the heart and head even though I haven’t been formally received into the RCC (still attending that Methodist congregation for my wife’s sake).

  64. sam h wrote:

    The members of our churches are being assaulted daily by a feminist worldview and culture.

    Dang women. They care too much about protecting children.

  65. elastigirl wrote:

    makes me think their meaning of “the gospel” is tied to their livelihood and share of power they have come to enjoy.

    The word “gospel” has been demoted to mean whatever their view of theology is at the moment.

  66. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    Whether the ones you met were bigots, or whether they had real questions that somehow never quite surfaced in all the arguments, I don’t know.

    Well said.

  67. Patrice wrote:

    Many Calvinists are egalitarian, such as those at Calvin and Hope College, and I think you’d enjoy them.

    I need to get back to using the word “calvinista” again. i know there is a difference. i attend a Christian Reformed church on the Navajo Reservation and loved it. The entire time I was there, i didn’t hear Calvin quoted once.

  68. Brandon F wrote:

    That means that when both parties, one Catholic and one Protestant, start talking to each other, their understanding of what the other is saying may be misunderstood.

    You are so right. When speaking with others, it is helpful to ask “What do you mean by “x?” I was teaching a class on the Reformation and realized that I didn’t understand a number of things about Catholic beliefs. So, i contacted a Catholic priest at a well known Catholic school and he helped me to understand a number of issues. I am probably the only person who have met who has read a great deal of the New Catholic Encyclopedia.

  69. Ryan M. wrote:

    Exactly. And you know, I’ve often thought that an awful lot of the misogynistic tendencies in the Reformed world could be cured by a healthy devotion to the Virgin Mary, who is both the mother of Christ and the mother of Christians (John 19:26-27)…

    But “Christian hateth Mary whom God kissed in Galilee…”

  70. dee wrote:

    You have touched on something very important here. There seems to be an elitism present in certain circles which revolves around “having the correct doctrine.” This doctrine involves being a 4-5 point Calvinist. If you don’t have this, then surely you are apostate.

    Purity of Ideology, Comrade.

  71. dee wrote:

    Secondly, it is obvious that complementariansim plays into this. Make no mistake about it. If one does not drink from the comp trough and spout Piper, et al on gender roles, one is “soft.”

    doubleplusduckspeak doubleplusgoodthink.

  72. Ryan M. wrote:

    I grew up hearing a lot of virulent anti-Catholicism in my parents’ Calvary Chapel, and got plenty more of it in the Reformed world.

    Second that re Calvary Chapel (which dominated the Christianese AM airwaves in my area). Especially Pastor Raul Rees of Calvary Chapel West Covina (all one word) whose rabid anti-Catholicism was literally impossible to exaggerate. Just like Papa Chuck Smith could never pass up a chance to bash Star Wars, so Raul Rees went out of his way to create chances to bash Romish Popery. Even quoting chapter-and-verse from Hislop’s Two Babylons, a Victorian-era classic of anti-Catholic hate literature. (Every time you hear the code words “Babylon Mystery Religion” or “Nimrod, Semiramis, and Tammuz”, they’re quoting Hislop.)

  73. In context of the first part of your post…

    Does 9 Marks encourage American Christians to be different from the culture and to not be of this world? If that is the case, then their recommendations for ministering cross-culturally does not make sense. They encourage people to embrace the culture and “fit in.” Why is it alright to embrace culture outside of the U.S. but not within the U.S.?

  74. Kathi wrote:

    In context of the first part of your post…
    Does 9 Marks encourage American Christians to be different from the culture and to not be of this world? If that is the case, then their recommendations for ministering cross-culturally does not make sense. They encourage people to embrace the culture and “fit in.” Why is it alright to embrace culture outside of the U.S. but not within the U.S.?

    Culturally superiority complex vis a vis non-Western culture. See, they assume that non-Western culture could not actually be attractive (unlike that sinful modern American society!) so they have no problem telling missionaries to (rather condescendingly) fit in. Not like they’d actually go native. It’s very Kipling.

  75. My family was terrified of the RC church. My uncle had married a Catholic lady when he was attending RX school in Chicago, absolutely shattering my grandmother et al.We were a fundamentalist family, Methodist Holiness. For some reason it never bothered me, I have always been an inclusive type person. Still. I had my suspicions, I.e., Catholics were “bad.”
    While teaching in Seattle I got a letter from my Mom begging me to write my uncle who was about to join the RC church (finally their fears coming true as this had been a constant conversational topic for years). I was attending Univ. Presbyterian Church, and decided to to talk one of our pastors, Earl Palmer. He said right away, “What is the problem about that?”, or several words to that effect. It was a lightbulb moment for me. This probably sounds trivial, but my way of thinking began to change then. It is very hard to break through one’s thinking if our feet are set in stone from past teachings.

  76. Brandon F wrote:

    dee wrote:
    Former CLC’er wrote:
    I thought that their doctrine promotes salvation by faith and works,
    I used to think it as well. However, according to some Catholic priests with whom I have spoken, it seems it is the same argument we have in evangelicalism. If someone claims they are a Christian and have nothing to show for it, zero, then have they truly received the faith? If one reads the current crop of Calvinistas, they are into obedience and claim that we should be obedient and have the power to be obedient. How is that different?
    It helps to know that the terminology that we both use has different understandings and definitions. That means that when both parties, one Catholic and one Protestant, start talking to each other, their understanding of what the other is saying may be misunderstood. I’ve found that out the hard way given that I’m a Catholic in the heart and head even though I haven’t been formally received into the RCC (still attending that Methodist congregation for my wife’s sake).

    I grew up in Protestant churches, including evangelicalism, attended Catholic schools and converted as an adult. I have long said that half the misunderstanding is based on the two groups speaking an entirely different language about faith. A simple example is when a friend told me that even the most devout Catholics he knows do not read the Bible and said this: “they talk about daily prayers but never reading scripture”. I explained that most Catholics use the word “prayers” when talking about a daily practice in the same way that Protestants use the word “devotions” and prayer disciplines such as the liturgy of the hours include reading scripture. Different language entirely.

  77. Mirele:

    Enjoyed your references to Keith Green. Loved his music, and his concerts were great. I also loved SOME OF the Chic Tracts. But the anti-Catholism and other stuff that was being peddaled in those days was very unhealthy.

    Keith Green is a great example of what happens in American Christianity too often.

    Someone becomes a star because they have a particular talent (singing, writing, modeling, playing a sport) and they are devout.

    Next thing you know, these people have a following, and they start wading into doctrinal teaching.

    This almost always ends badly.

    I met Melody (or is it Melanie) Green a few years after Keith’s death. We spent some time together. She is very sweet and kind. I was able to thank her for Keith’s and her ministry. It was great to have that opportunity.

    I guess you also heard the one about the Eagles praying to Satan before they recorded their albums.

    Where do they get this stuff?

  78. “Thus, when a Central Asian Muslim asks me if I am a Christian, what they mean by “Christian” is an alcohol-drinking, pornography-watching, sexually promiscuous, picture-worshipping Eastern Orthodox or Roman Catholic person who is part of the culture that has attempted to conquer and oppress them for centuries.”

    For all we know, these Muslims he refers to could have been just repeating things they’d heard their whole lives from their imams, parents, etc.

    Dee said,

    “This is a parachurch organization which is not affiliated with any particular denomination. As some of you may know, parachurch groups are the latest target of the Calvinistas. They believe that they should be “under the authority” of the local church which really means any 5 point Calvinist church that is a member of their club. However, that defeats the purpose of such groups.”

    and…

    “The Gospel Coalition, the Council of Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, and just about every conference out there, all para-church, do not allow an egalitarian point of view.”

    In other words, parachurch organizations are just fine as long as they’re part of the YRR, neocalvinist movement. Otherwise, they’re unbiblical, nonGospel entities.

  79. ar wrote:

    I explained that most Catholics use the word “prayers” when talking about a daily practice in the same way that Protestants use the word “devotions” and prayer disciplines such as the liturgy of the hours include reading scripture. Different language entirely.

    Thank you for this explanation.

  80. NJ wrote:

    In other words, parachurch organizations are just fine as long as they’re part of the YRR, neocalvinist movement. Otherwise, they’re unbiblical, nonGospel entities.

    Darn straight.

  81. Hanni wrote:

    . I was attending Univ. Presbyterian Church, and decided to to talk one of our pastors, Earl Palmer. He said right away, “What is the problem about that?”, or several words to that effect. It was a lightbulb moment for me

    There are far too many evangelicals who have attended churches which promote the thinking that Roman Catholics are the AntiChrist, heretics, etc. Sometimes we sound like a bunch of idiots.

  82. @ NJ: regarding your first point: yes. The same kinds of misconceptions about Islam and Muslims abound in these parts, after all.

  83. ar wrote:

    Different language entirely.

    Yep and yep. I came from a mixed catholic and protestant extended family (pre-Vatican II), was raised baptist, spent several years in catholic institutions in residency programs, spent one year on the faculty of a Jesuit university, and then spent the better part of three years (post Vatican II) in RCIA (that would be every Monday night in catechesis for potential adult conversion to catholicism.)

    On the basis of that I advance my personal opinion that there are similarities and there are differences between protestant and catholic, and basically protestants tend to be pretty clueless about catholicism and the catholic catechists I met in RCIA were basically clueless about protestantism, by their own admission. That degree of lack of understanding of what the other group actually believes, or for that matter what they are even talking about, can be a serious problem.

    There are differences in language (as you said) as well as differences in religious culture. When catholics differentiate between “cradle catholics” and converts, I understand that.

    In cases like the IVF situation both sides have grounds for argument. We can and should co-operate on issues of joint concern. What kind of decent person would not do that? I believe that the sede vacante people are wrong to criticize the pope for his attempts at ecumenism, as one web site I found did regarding the video and the protestant bishop. At the same time there are doctrinal and dogmatic deal breakers which will not change since they are either/or positions, and it is unreasonable to ask either catholics or protestants to violate their beliefs in certain matters.

    We can, however, be exactly what the catholic terminology coming out of the Vatican II era called us, “separated brethren.” Both. Separated (when necessary) and brethren (by definition,)

  84. dee wrote:

    Sometimes we sound like a bunch of idiots.

    You are too nice. I have just tried to make the point that sometimes we actually are idiots (as in terminally ignorant).

  85. @ numo: Followers of Islam are about as varied as Christians. Islam is 600 years younger than Christianity. Think about where Christianity was in the early 1500s, and you get an idea of how diversity has developed and how violent some sects can be, Christianity had sects as murderous as any Muslim sect. So we should not be in the business of pointing fingers, but rather seeking peaceful interaction. Where I live, the imam and the rabbi interact well together and have written joint comments in the newspaper regarding issues such as the children seeking asylum on the southern border.

  86. elastigirl wrote:

    I would love to see a post where people chime in on what the gospel/gospel means.

    I would too elastigirl. Let’s really get some views up for discussion.

  87. @ An Attorney:
    Yes. I have been studying the history of Islam, and that of a number of predominantly Muslim countries (with a focus on the arts and culture) for many years now. I used to be an ESL tutor working w/Arab Muslim women and girls (Egyptian and Saudi), back when I lived in the D.C. area. I have never traveled to a Muslim country, but my ‘hood in northern Virginia had many Muslim residents, mostly from the Middle East. Nearby, there were many Iranians, and Somali and Sudanese immigrants (many of them refugees, though not all).

    I cannot speak or read Arabic, nor any other Middle Eastern or W. African languages, but am captivated by the rich cultures of these regions, the music especially. I only wish that I had regular contact w/folks from the ME and Africa now – people tend to be quite a few degrees warmer and more welcoming than most of us Anglos, and I miss being an honorary “auntie” to some of the children I knew. (all grown up now!)

  88. @ numo: should read “mostly from the *Arab* Middle East” just above.

    There are a fair number of Turks in the D.C. area (Jewish and Muslim), and a very large Iranian community as well.

  89. @ dee: I understand your point, but I don’t think it is relevant to, say, Central Asia, where the writer lived for a while.

    While I do agree very much w/your points about anti-Catholic and anti-Orthodox sentiments in 9Marks, I think the passage you cited isn’t the best example of that, since he isn’t talking about places where Protestant counties were conquerors/colonizers. That’s where we differ on this one. I know it probably seems like a minor point (and maybe it is, given the overall subject of your post), but I honestly believe that the quote in question has been ever so slightly misread.

    By no means am I saying you’re wrong, only that there are other things going on there, one of them being that the writer is repeating things that have been said to him. I don’t think he agrees, but is passing along info. I have heard and read much the same from some Muslims myself.

  90. @ An Attorney:
    Imo, we still have murderous sects w/in Christianity.

    I think we all have a tendency to want to use religion as an excuse for prejudice, though some are much further along that route than others. Nevertheless, the temptation remains – for people of all faiths, and folks who don’t subscribe to any. Humanity can be so good, and so horrible, all at the same time, no?

  91. Let me start off by saying that the Roman Catholic Church doesn’t even care what this group says. Seriously. They’ve fought off heretical groups for 2,000 years and these remarks are just par for the course. I do think it is interesting to note that when Muslims think of Christianity they think of Catholic and Orthodox. My guess is many don’t really consider Protestant churches on the same level. The historic Church is Catholic and Johnny Arnold’s home Bible study group turned 501c3 doesn’t exactly have the same historicity. Remember, the crusades were a short-run defensive war resulting from the aggression of Muslims. Church and State were very different back then.

    As The Happy Catholic, it doesn’t surprise me that there’s so much Anti-Catholicism still rampant. Muslims beat the Protestants by several hundred years to be Anti-Catholic. I experience this very often now with my own family and friends who are Protestant. It is certainly a lesson in patience and humility so not to fling the vitriol the other way.

    I am excited to be a catechist in RCIA starting this year to help adults who are coming into the Catholic Church. I will be talking about the creeds as well as the topic “Catholic and Christian.”

  92. dee wrote:

    She them explained to me that Germans put both hand on the table. I had no idea!

    This was the norm across Europe, and in most of Asia it was required that both hands be visible while eating. Why? Easy – it meant you weren’t drawing a blade.

  93. dee wrote:

    Elegance is hardly the word one uses to describe the atmosphere engendered by the Mahaneys at SGM

    The elegance of “servicing” your husband before elegantly ralphing into the porcelain bowl…
    Of course, as I have said in the past, this bastardized adjectivilization of “gospel” is maddening and frankly ridiculous. How a wife behaves has nothing to do with the gospel.

  94. THC “The Happy Catholic”

    I am glad that the RC does not take offesne or care about what 9 Marks thinks.  I am Protestant and I do care what they think. Your Pope was kind to reach out to the Pentecostals so he is trying to build a bridge. I can only hope that one day some of us will build a bridge as well. Thank you for your comment.

     

  95. srs wrote:

    I was part of IV when I was in college. It was an integral part in building my faith. My chapter is now struggling to stay on campus as they are in danger of losing that access unless they allow non-Christians to be in leadership.

    Is it losing access completely, or losing access to space in the student center, monies collected from student fees, ability to post flyers on student bulletin boards, that sort of thing?My point is that you don’t need these things to have a group with students from the local college or university. It just makes it much, much easier to do it. And if you take something from Caesar, you got to play by Caesar’s rules and Caesar is going to want something in return. Think of this as a test of how entangled you’d like your student groups to be with the state.

    Here’s a funny story from my college years, over three decades ago. Two of my friends were part of the atheist group and I tagged along with them to the meeting because we were going to the movies afterwards. (They were champion moviegoers, movies were a buck on campus and they showed all sorts of foreign flicks.) Even though I was not a member of the atheist group and was just there, I was invited to be in the group picture. I declined, nicely.

  96. dee wrote:

    I escorted a patient back to Germany and spent two days as the guest of his physician. I was eating lunch and the physician said to me “Why do you always put the hand you are not using on your lap?” She them explained to me that Germans put both hand on the table. I had no idea!

    Oh my! I do the same thing. It’s something my mother taught me, which is, for the most part you’re supposed to eat with your right hand only. Exceptions: Fried chicken, corn on the cob, using a knife to cut. It was really crazy trying to get peas onto the spoon.

  97. I joined and enjoyed IV as a college student because it seemed like a much more relaxed fellowship than the impression I got of other groups (such as CRU) on campus. There wasn’t a super specific doctrinal box you had to fit into, beyond the bare essentials of Christian doctrine, and generally people weren’t at each other’s throats about doctrinal stuff. I have been a bit concerned about calvinista-type influences growing in the local chapter. But when it came to bible study meetings and interactions with people one on one, and the feel of the group as a whole, there was a lot of diversity of belief, opinion and personality type, and a lot of genuine friendship to go around. I really hope that the group stays that way and doesn’t fall into the sort of disheartening nonsense that 9Marks seems to encourage. It has been a major encouragement for me over the years and a place of genuine friendship.

  98. mirele wrote:

    And if you take something from Caesar, you got to play by Caesar’s rules and Caesar is going to want something in return.

    Also translated as: Who takes the king’s shilling gets the king’s bailiff.

  99. THC wrote:

    The historic Church is Catholic and Johnny Arnold’s home Bible study group turned 501c3 doesn’t exactly have the same historicity.

    Ok, that made me laugh!

  100. @ mirele:
    I am not exactly sure the extent of what “losing access” means. They would likely not be able to meet on campus (goodbye dorm bible studies and weekly large group meetings). IV has a short bit on the CSU situation here. Apparently they were given a reprieve for the 13-14 year but the year is almost up.

  101. @ Bt:
    whats the name of this song? I am so glad you posted, I heard bebe and cece years ago singing ‘i’ll take you there’ with some woman named mavis mentioned in the song, ‘take it mavis..’ and ever since I have been searching for mavis with that wonderful voice!! im on utube searchin…

  102. Hanni wrote:

    My family was terrified of the RC church. My uncle had married a Catholic lady when he was attending RX school in Chicago, absolutely shattering my grandmother et al.We were a fundamentalist family, Methodist Holiness. For some reason it never bothered me, I have always been an inclusive type person. Still. I had my suspicions, I.e., Catholics were “bad.”
    While teaching in Seattle I got a letter from my Mom begging me to write my uncle who was about to join the RC church (finally their fears coming true as this had been a constant conversational topic for years). I was attending Univ. Presbyterian Church, and decided to to talk one of our pastors, Earl Palmer. He said right away, “What is the problem about that?”, or several words to that effect. It was a lightbulb moment for me. This probably sounds trivial, but my way of thinking began to change then. It is very hard to break through one’s thinking if our feet are set in stone from past teachings.

    good post

  103. I have to thank Dee and Deb for bringing this to their attention; I was the anonymous reader, and when I first discovered that blog post on the 9Marks website last fall, I was so sickened as to be unsure as to what to do about it. Ultimately the ethnic cleansing of Christians from Mosul convinced me to bring this to the attention of Deb and Dee, as I had amicable discussions with them in the past. I know a great many Christians from the middle East; some ethnically Assyrian, some Coptic, some Arabic, some Armenian, some Iranian, some Maronite-Phoenician, from a variety of denominations ranging from the Seventh Day Adventists to the Syriac Orthodox Church to the Chaldean Catholic Patriarchate of Babylon. In general, across the entire denominational spectrum, these people are among the best Christians you’ll find anywhere, in terms of living under persecution, abstaining from the world and its temptations (there is a general lack of drunkenness, and a certain horror at vices such as pornography), and practicing generosity and compassion. If you’re feeling down, just seek out the nearest Coptic parish and prepare to feel the love; at my first visit to one I was given a massive lunch and a beautiful hardbound euchologion (the liturgical book containing the ornate Holy Communion services, written side by side in English, Coptic and Arabic). This is experience is highly typical of that which one will have with Christians from that region.

    Now that is not to say that Christians in the middle East aren’t sinners, like the rest of us, or less in need of the salvation offered through Jesus Christ. However, they don’t deserve to be driven from their homes, slaughtered, and treated like second class citizens, and they certainly don’t deserve some pompous, holier-than-thou evangelist on 9Marks smearing them with such purely disdainful calumny. It really seems like the author in question is more comfortable with the idea of fellowship with Islamic fundamentalist than with his fellow Christians, and I just find that nauseating.

  104. @ sam h:
    You’re thinking of Mavis Staples, who sang lead on the original release of I’ll Take You There (by the Staple Singers). Mavis is a treasure, and one of my favorite singers.

  105. @ William G.: err, I appreciate your understanding of some of the many xtian denominations in the ME and N. Africa. But I wonder if you’re splitting hairs a bit re. ethnicity in Arab countries? I know that many Copts believe they are direct descendants of the pharoahs, and that Assyrians and other folks who are part of old, old groups of xtians (considered a bit heterodox due to their understanding of Jesus’ dual nature) are, I’m thinking, mostly Arab, along with the Lebanese Maronites and Melchites and the many Byzantine Catholics in the region.

    I do understand that the region has been a meeting place for various peoples from ancient times (due to both trade and conquest), which really makes me wonder how “pure” anyone’s origins could possibly be, given the mixing of peoples since well prior to Islam.

  106. @ William G.:
    Having stated my thoughts further upthread, I hesitate to repeat them, and yet… I don’t believe the 9Marks writer as referring to xtians from the ME. I think it is more about conquest/colonization as well as many common misperceptions. Current persecution notwithstanding, most countries in the ME were *far* more tolerant of minority religious groups 40-50 years ago than is currently the case. But political alignments are part of the equation as well. One of my Iraqi Muslim (nominal) friends has plenty to say on how badly xtians in Iraq have been treated since the fall of Saddam Hussein. By no means is he sympathetic toward that regime, but to the best of my understanding, he is correct in saying that they had protected status under his rule. (Which defects very badly on shortsightedness and lack of social cultural understanding on our part before, during and after the US invasion, but that’s a discussion for another time and place.)

  107. @ THC:
    somewhat I see what your saying about others thinking ‘Christian’ means catholic instead of billy bob’s 501c3, but in reality I read on the voice of the martyrs page that it is a non discriminatory execution of Christians in the terrorist extremist world. it has to do with renouncing Jesus and joining the local religion to spare your life, the offense is in Jesus and the cross. by the theory of ministry of 9marks they will probably live longer, they think that its ok to call God allah after all. otherwise I see catholics, protestants, those saved by Jesus in groups with no church affiliation all being persecuted for refusing to deny Jesus. the problem I see more now is that when a church here is in outright sin or covers for sinners in their leadership, and big recognized churches or orginazations like billy graham, or the southern Baptists, or the catholic church doesn’t condemn those leaders but hides their sins, it makes the people against Christ have more reason to doubt that becoming a Christian is a good thing at all. I think since most of the world has a cell phone now, that people are searching out ‘christians’ online to see what its all about, not researching the crusades of old, but researching the city “Crusades” put on by big name evangelists and churches. if they see America as drunken horrible television watching people, what do they think when they see rev billy bob saying “God loves you, if you want to be the apple of His eye though, send $19.95 a month to my ministry and then you will get faith to be healed and be blessed! those that can send a thousand will be really blesssed” or they see the news on tv and see another church allowing another pedophile to rape little children and get away with it because of a time limit on reporting….and no one condemning it publicly, lots of pastors excusing sin. excusing their sin in their churches and going to other countries and telling those that they will die by the hand of GOD ALMIGHTY if they don’t repent. if that’s what they see, why would they want to switch Gods?

  108. @ Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist:
    ‘how a wife behaves has nothing to do with the gospel’

    I think how a husband treats a woman has very much to do with the gospel.
    it shows in how Isaac loved Rebecca, and in this meeting between Jacob and esau, esau wants to ride off fast and hard with his brother when they reconcile but Jacob says to esau: And he said, Let us take our journey, and let us go, and I will go before thee. 13 And he said unto him, My lord knoweth that the children are tender, and the flocks and herds with young are with me: and if men should overdrive them one day, all the flock will die. 14 Let my lord, I pray thee, pass over before his servant: and I will lead on softly, according as the cattle that goeth before me and the children be able to endure, until I come unto my lord unto Seir. Gen 33:12-14 (KJV)
    the same thread of mighty men used by God who are tender and compassionate and not lording it over their wives is shown throughout the bible. david said:
    Thou hast also given me the shield of thy salvation: and thy right hand hath holden me up, and thy gentleness hath made me great. Psalms 18:35 (KJV)
    the proverb woman had servants and her husband gave her money to buy that field and called her blessed, not subservient.
    the greatest example however is that Jesus who walks on water and calms storms and casts out demons, and is Lord of All, He who has disciples who He gives the same authority to, He teaches them to be strong in the power of the Spirit, is more known worldwide for his treatment of women and children.
    that is why I think that comp effects the gospel alright, but it effects it negatively. they don’t treat women with the same care that Jesus does, while they boast of their awesome power and authority.
    thanks for letting me tag onto your post

  109. @ William G.:
    William said:
    “Now that is not to say that Christians in the middle East aren’t sinners, like the rest of us, or less in need of the salvation offered through Jesus Christ. However, they don’t deserve to be driven from their homes, slaughtered, and treated like second class citizens, and they certainly don’t deserve some pompous, holier-than-thou evangelist on 9Marks smearing them with such purely disdainful calumny. It really seems like the author in question is more comfortable with the idea of fellowship with Islamic fundamentalist than with his fellow Christians, and I just find that nauseating.”

    This bothers me also, giving fuel to a fire that is already kindled and pointing out that it should be aimed at Christians that 9marks doesn’t like, ends in the slaughter of those Christians. some hanged, some crucified, some with rifles, some with knives, and with the word from 9marks saying they are reprobate anyway so aim at them. that puts blood on 9 marks authors hand just as much as their is blood on the hands of American ‘pastors’ for their work in Uganda(?) in ‘helping’ them eradicate anyone homosexual by making the death penalty the punishment, saying it is God’s will.

  110. Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:

    This was the norm across Europe, and in most of Asia it was required that both hands be visible while eating. Why? Easy – it meant you weren’t drawing a blade.

    [Tangent alert]

    I suspect this is why – across a wide variety of different human cultures – gestures with the palm of the hand, such as a wave, are considered friendly, whereas gestures with the back of the hand, with or without raised fingers, are not. An outstretched, open hand is not holding a weapon.

    By contrast, in many parts (so to speak) of the animal kingdom, to raise a forelimb with the “palm” outwards is a threatening gesture, because it shows claws. And among baboons, smiling is also an act of aggression (because it displays teeth). This is not the case among humans because humans (apart from Luis Suarez) don’t attack with their teeth.

    [/Tangent alert]

  111. @ numo:
    numo wrote:

    err, I appreciate your understanding of some of the many xtian denominations in the ME and N. Africa. But I wonder if you’re splitting hairs a bit re. ethnicity in Arab countries? I know that many Copts believe they are direct descendants of the pharoahs, and that Assyrians and other folks who are part of old, old groups of xtians (considered a bit heterodox due to their understanding of Jesus’ dual nature) are, I’m thinking, mostly Arab, along with the Lebanese Maronites and Melchites and the many Byzantine Catholics in the region.

    The Copts and Assyrians are most definitely distinctive ethno-linguistic-religious groups, but everyone has heavily intermarried, as in all populations. Thus the nonsensical and inherently poisonous concept of racial purity does not apply. In the Christian populations from this region you might find DNA of Arabic, ancient Egyptian, Jewish, Assyrian, Babylonian, Persian, Turkish, Ethiopian, Circassian, Kurdish, Numidian and Greek origin, in varying levels, depending on the region and its demographics. What matters is therefore the concept of ethnic or national self-identification, and differentiation on linguistic and religious grounds.

    The Coptic people speak Arabic in the vernacular, but the Coptic language, which survives liturgically (similar to the use of Latin in the Roman Catholic church) is the last surviving descendant of the language of Ancient Egyptian. In like manner, the members of the Syriac Orthodox Church, the Syriac Catholic Church, the Assyrian Church of the East, the Chaldean Catholic Church, and the Maronite Church speak Syriac, ranging from minimal liturgical use in the Maronite church through to full vernacular use among the Assyrian-Chaldean population, wherein there exists a strong movement for Assyrian nationalism (to which some Syriac Orthodox have historically given their support). The Maronites tend not to identify with this ethnic group, and regard themselves either as Phoenician or Arab; whether or not they are actually the descendants of the ancient Phoenicians is difficult to say, in light of the geographic migration of their populace from Syria during a dispute with the Syriac Patriarch of Antioch in the 9th century, but it really doesn’t matter. Interestingly, there is also a large population of Indians who use the Syriac language liturgically, the St. Thomas Christians of Kerala, who were historically evangelized by Syriac-speaking Christians and nowadays are mostly Catholic or Syriac Orthodox (in fact, there are more Syriac Orthodox Christians in India by a considerable margin than in the Middle East; those in the Middle East identify ethnically as “Suroyo”, meaning “Syrian”). The Greco-Arabic ethnic groups in Syria, Lebanon, Israel-Palestine, Jordan and Egypt are also massive; there are Greek Orthodox Bedouins in Jordan who live a nomadic lifestyle and even own camels. From a purely ethnic standpoint, it seems logical to assume that all Middle Eastern Christians are to a great extent the biological descendants of the earliest Christians.

    Each of these ethnic groups is precious and has unique and beautiful traditions. In the liturgy of these churches one finds a connection to the earliest practices of Christian worship: full prostrations (later adopted by Islam), the use of the Syriac language, and in the Assyrian church, the use of a hybrid Judeo-Christian lectionary with two Old Testament and two New Testament lessons for each Sunday; the Old Testament lessons tend to correspond with the weekly Torah / Haftarah lessons from the Jewish lectionaries. The Syriac language itself is very closely related to the Aramaic dialect spoken by Jesus Christ, i.e. “Il, Il, lemòno shebákthone.” The Syriac Bible known as the Peshitta is one of the oldest translations of the Bible from Koine Greek (itself still used liturgically by some of the Greek Orthodox in the region), and is tremendously useful for purposes of Biblical scholarship.

  112. sam h wrote:

    @ William G.:
    William said:
    “Now that is not to say that Christians in the middle East aren’t sinners, like the rest of us, or less in need of the salvation offered through Jesus Christ. However, they don’t deserve to be driven from their homes, slaughtered, and treated like second class citizens, and they certainly don’t deserve some pompous, holier-than-thou evangelist on 9Marks smearing them with such purely disdainful calumny. It really seems like the author in question is more comfortable with the idea of fellowship with Islamic fundamentalist than with his fellow Christians, and I just find that nauseating.”
    This bothers me also, giving fuel to a fire that is already kindled and pointing out that it should be aimed at Christians that 9marks doesn’t like, ends in the slaughter of those Christians. some hanged, some crucified, some with rifles, some with knives, and with the word from 9marks saying they are reprobate anyway so aim at them. that puts blood on 9 marks authors hand just as much as their is blood on the hands of American ‘pastors’ for their work in Uganda(?) in ‘helping’ them eradicate anyone homosexual by making the death penalty the punishment, saying it is God’s will.

    Indeed, we have to be very sensitive as to the impact of our teachings here on the safety of Christians elsewhere in the world. For example, around 200 Anglicans were recently murdered in Nigeria by their Islamic neighbors, for fear their presence would turn the Muslims into homosexuals. It is extremely important for pastors on either side of the gay marriage divide to avoid provocative actions or insensitive remarks that could lead to bloodshed. I myself, being Orthodox, am of a denomination that adheres to a traditional view on human sexuality, but does not define itself by homophobia, and which views churches like the Westboro Baptist Church as heretics (the feeling, if ever you have the misfortune to encounter their “God Hates the World” website, is rather mutual it would seem), and I am weary of the battles occurring around this within Protestantism, which within Africa and the Middle East, are literally leading to bloodshed.

    Our inability to act in a Christian manner towards each other and to seek to “be perfect, even as your father is perfect”, while “loving your neighbor as yourself,” is leading souls to destruction. The Gates of Hell will not prevail against the Christian faith, but how many people must die, and how many lives must be ruined, on account of intemperate pastors? One cannot imagine the dignified, irenic clergy that prevailed 60 years ago engaging in this sort of behavior.

  113. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    THE ONLY REASON THESE GUYS HAVE A “GOSPEL” AND “SCRIPTURE” TO DUCKSPEAK IS THE BISHOPS OF THE CATHOLIC AND ORTHODOX CHURCH (they were one back then) PREVENTED THE SHIRLEY MAC LAINES OF THE TIME FROM REWRITING IT IN THEIR OWN IMAGE BACK WHEN YEARS A.D. WERE IN THE LOW THREE DIGITS!

    Spot on, Headless Unicorn Guy! Spot on! Protestants, whether they like it or not, stand on the shoulders of the Catholics.

    Anonymous, as for the “universalism” of JPII that you reference, please read the Cathechism of the RCC on that. We are not universalists.

  114. THC wrote:

    Let me start off by saying that the Roman Catholic Church doesn’t even care what this group says. Seriously. They’ve fought off heretical groups for 2,000 years and these remarks are just par for the course. I do think it is interesting to note that when Muslims think of Christianity they think of Catholic and Orthodox. My guess is many don’t really consider Protestant churches on the same level. The historic Church is Catholic and Johnny Arnold’s home Bible study group turned 501c3 doesn’t exactly have the same historicity. Remember, the crusades were a short-run defensive war resulting from the aggression of Muslims. Church and State were very different back then.

    Bravo, THC! Bravo.

    Signed,
    Another Happy Catholic
    As The Happy Catholic, it doesn’t surprise me that there’s so much Anti-Catholicism still rampant. Muslims beat the Protestants by several hundred years to be Anti-Catholic. I experience this very often now with my own family and friends who are Protestant. It is certainly a lesson in patience and humility so not to fling the vitriol the other way.
    I am excited to be a catechist in RCIA starting this year to help adults who are coming into the Catholic Church. I will be talking about the creeds as well as the topic “Catholic and Christian.”

  115. @ Eagle:

    OK mass marketed burritos, but little hole in the wall places in TX have been dishing up burritos for decades that are better put together and at least as nutritious (if you count calories as being nutritious).

  116. @ srs:

    The rules that these institutions have are designed to prevent discrimination. So an organization cannot have an organic document that restricts leadership to a certain class of people, except possibly someone who has been in membership of the org for a year. Nothing that says “you aren’t a Christian, so you can’t be in leadership” or “you are Jewish, so you can’t be in leadership”, etc. But there is no requirement that those people actually get elected, so the group gets to decide who the leaders are. So it is the unwillingness to delete the written restriction on who can be a leader of the group or a member of the group. IV should not have a problem, particularly since they call themselves InterVarsity Christian Fellowship, which implies something about who they are.

    BTW, when in law school, I was the vice pres of the Christian Legal Society chapter and president of the ACLU chapter, and we co-sponsored speakers and sessions on the First Amendment and other church/state issues.

  117. @ sam h: The Arabic word for “God” is “Allah”. The English translation of “Allah” is “God”. Muslims generally do not translate the word “Allah”. If you were with a Muslim reading an Arabic OT, it would say, in Genesis 1, In beginning, Allah created the world. Keep in mind that Islam is an Abrahamic religion.

  118. dee wrote:

    mirele wrote:

    I don’t cut the Catholic church (or *any* church, for that matter) *any* slack when it comes to child sexual abuse

    You have touched on something very important here. There seems to be an elitism present in certain circles which revolves around “having the correct doctrine.” This doctrine involves being a 4-5 point Calvinist. If you don’t have this, then surely you are apostate.

    However, when one looks at the results of said doctrine, they find they are no less involved in the covering up of child sex abuse than those groups, such as Catholics, who they condemn for doing so.

    In fact, some of these doctrinal superstars have spread the rumor that Catholic priests molest because they are not allowed to marry. That is why some of the au courant leaders in the evangelical world must do everything in their power to cover up the appalling problem of child sex abuse in evangelicalism. It just doesn’t jive with their “explanation.”

    This is so true……I can hear a couple of acquaintances of mine now, going on & on about “those Catholic priests”, & then, just a few months later, loudly denouncing the “liberal media” for daring to report when the pastor of a nearby [evangelical denomination] church was defrocked after repeated young people came forward & denounced him for molesting them as children. (It “can’t be true”, I was told, “because I know that [denomination] churches preach the gospel”).

    (Note: never bang your head against the wall, no matter how much you feel like it; it takes a small fortune in ibuprofen to get rid of the resulting pain).

  119. ar wrote:

    I have long said that half the misunderstanding is based on the two groups speaking an entirely different language about faith. A simple example is when a friend told me that even the most devout Catholics he knows do not read the Bible and said this: “they talk about daily prayers but never reading scripture”. I explained that most Catholics use the word “prayers” when talking about a daily practice in the same way that Protestants use the word “devotions” and prayer disciplines such as the liturgy of the hours include reading scripture. Different language entirely.

    Indeed, this is so true! I have, at times, acted as a kind of “translator” between Catholics & Protestants, & both sides are forever saying, “But I never knew that, I always assumed”.
    Yes. Well. We all know, I feel certain, what “assume” really means…..

  120. Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:

    dee wrote:

    She them explained to me that Germans put both hand on the table. I had no idea!

    This was the norm across Europe, and in most of Asia it was required that both hands be visible while eating. Why? Easy – it meant you weren’t drawing a blade.

    (See Zooey nodding her head, here).
    I learned my table manners from my Dutch (1st generation American) grandmother & her mother (emigrated from the Netherlands). It’s not just the both hands thing with me; I also was taught how to cut & eat meat without all the American switching of implements between hands. In school, I was constantly laughed at, as in “Zooey doesn’t know how to eat right”, & “You eat funny, what’s wrong with you?” (I still think that its the other people who “eat funny”).

  121. @ An Attorney:

    I read recently where somewhere (Indonesia?) passed a law against christians using the word “Allah” except is certain specific limited usage. The christians were being deceptive and trying to trick the muslims by use of the word was the allegation, and also seems to be the truth based on some ideas put forth for baptist missionaries to indeed use the word in evangelizing muslims. There was a book? if I remember recommending this practice. I have not checked this out and I have no link to link, but some of you who are interested in these ideas might want to do so.

  122. zooey111 wrote:

    Yes. Well. We all know, I feel certain, what “assume” really means…..

    I do not think that one can assume what “assume” means. But one thing for sure that it does mean, for catholics and protestants alike, is “I assumed we were all talking the same language, and I thought I knew what you meant when you said what you said.” And “I assume you understood what I said when I said it.”

  123. dee wrote:

    ar wrote:

    I explained that most Catholics use the word “prayers” when talking about a daily practice in the same way that Protestants use the word “devotions” and prayer disciplines such as the liturgy of the hours include reading scripture. Different language entirely.

    Thank you for this explanation.

    Not to mention that if the typical Protestant (not talking confessional Protestants who still maintain the historic liturgy) were to go into a Mass/Divine Service in a Roman Catholic/Eastern Catholic/Eastern Orthodox church and actually sit down and follow through what was said by the priest and congregation, they would actually realise that the majority of what is said is either Scripture itself or a really close paraphrase of Scripture.

  124. Nancy wrote:

    @ An Attorney:

    I read recently where somewhere (Indonesia?) passed a law against christians using the word “Allah” except is certain specific limited usage. The christians were being deceptive and trying to trick the muslims by use of the word was the allegation, and also seems to be the truth based on some ideas put forth for baptist missionaries to indeed use the word in evangelizing muslims. There was a book? if I remember recommending this practice. I have not checked this out and I have no link to link, but some of you who are interested in these ideas might want to do so.

    I think it was Malaysia. I kept hearing about this from family members back home in Malaysia and a lot of Malaysian ex-pats here in Australia. The word “Allah” was not to be used in any publications that were not Muslim in Malaysia. Instead, the generic word for God (“tuhan” in Malay) was to be used instead. Notwithstanding that in the rest of the Arabic world where there are Christians, Allah is the term that is used to refer to the Christian God (though obviously, the Christian definition of who and what Allah is is vastly different to how a Muslim would define who and what Allah is). At one point in time, Bibles that were published in Indonesia and brought into Malaysia had to be destroyed because of this. Notwithstanding that in Indonesia, these very same Bibles are allowable and uncontroversial. A recent USAToday article that I’m going to link to below gives some context to this:

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/06/23/malaysias-top-court-allah-for-muslims-only/11256503/

  125. Brandon F wrote:

    sit down and follow through what was said by the priest and congregation, they would actually realise that the majority of what is said is either Scripture itself or a really close paraphrase of Scripture.

    I have done that and agree. In fact, I believe that the reason the Catholic church is seeing a surge in attendance by disaffected evangelicals is due to this very reason. Thank you for your helpful comments.

  126. We also need to keep in mind that Muslims believe that the Allah they worship is the one worshiped by Abraham. To some extent, Islam represents an effort by the prophet Mohammed, responding to a spiritual event in his life, to correct the “Christian heresy” and return people to the worship of the one true God, the God of Abraham. This is also the reason why, for centuries, Jews were tolerated in Muslim countries, because they were believed to worship the one true God. Note also the similarities between Muslim dietary practices and kosher laws in the Bible.

    BTW, he apparently believed that the trinity referred to by Christians was God, Mary and Jesus.

  127. An Attorney wrote:

    Muslims believe that the Allah they worship is the one worshiped by Abraham.

    And they see Allah as worshipped by Jesus who is seen as a prophet of Allah, if I am not mistaken. They also give some recognition to “his mother” but I am not sure what.

    At some place do we have to talk about the god El? I read some of that and deliberately laid it aside.

  128. @ Nancy:

    I think Zooey was referring to the old chestnut “to assume is to make an a** of u and me” – ass-u-me. At least that’s what I assume she meant 😉

  129. elizabetta carrera wrote:

    Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
    THE ONLY REASON THESE GUYS HAVE A “GOSPEL” AND “SCRIPTURE” TO DUCKSPEAK IS THE BISHOPS OF THE CATHOLIC AND ORTHODOX CHURCH (they were one back then) PREVENTED THE SHIRLEY MAC LAINES OF THE TIME FROM REWRITING IT IN THEIR OWN IMAGE BACK WHEN YEARS A.D. WERE IN THE LOW THREE DIGITS!
    Spot on, Headless Unicorn Guy! Spot on! Protestants, whether they like it or not, stand on the shoulders of the Catholics.
    Anonymous, as for the “universalism” of JPII that you reference, please read the Cathechism of the RCC on that. We are not universalists.

    Protestants also stand to equal measures on the shoulders of those who are now Orthodox, for example, it was the Patriarch of Alexandria, St. Athanasius, who first implemented the present 27-book canon of the New Testament. Previously, churches widely read either fewer books (the Pauline epistles, but not those called “Pastoral”, but not Hebrews, the Catholic epistles or what Luther considered apocryphal or “Antilegomena”), or more books (spurious texts like 3 Corinthians, Laodiceans and 1 Barnabas, and Patristic writings not of Apostolic origin, but nonetheless praiseworthy, but not as important as that which is in the New Testament, such as the Shepherd of Hermas, and 1 Clement; some even used The Gospel of Peter, although by the time of Athanasius it had been correctly identified suppressed as a Docetic forgery; nonetheless, the canon was implemented to suppress the routine accidental reading of Gnostic gospels and other heretical works rejected by the Orthodox). As was pointed out, there was no schism between the Orthodox and Catholics prior to 1054, aside from brief disruptions, unless one counts the schisms of the fifth century that separated the Oriental Orthodox and the Assyrians.

    The Orthodox church takes a somewhat inclusivist view of salavation; while it is wrong to say that all must be saved, it is legitimate to hope that all may be saved, in light of a loving God who promised us “ask, and ye shall receive;” we can only offer promises as to the efficacy of sacraments delivered in our church, but cannot honestly answer as to how anyone aside from the Saints, whose glorification has become obvious, will fare on the dread day of judgement.

    Among Protestants, in terms of our theology we are closest to the Methodists; John Wesley was heavily influenced by Eastern Orthodoxy, to the extent of being secretly ordained a bishop by the Greek Orthodox Bishop Erasmus of Arcadia in 1763 (although this ordination would not, strictly speaking, be canonical on Orthodox terms, as Erasmus acted alone, whereas the consecration of a new bishop should ordinarily involve the laying on of hands by at least three ordaining bishops of canonical standing), and Wesley’s doctrine and praxis (salvation through divine cooperation, or synergy, as opposed to Calvinist monergy, holiness, entire sanctification, known in Orthodoxy as “Theosis”, and fasting on Wednesdays and Fridays, among others) was essentially Orthodox. Alas much of his teaching was later ignored by the Methodists;

    I am a former Methodist who joined the Orthodox in part due to the UMC being taken over by abusive pastors of the 9Marks variety, although perhaps not quite as bad, on the right, and by extreme liberals, who are in many cases equally abusive, on the left; it was a very easy transition, as prior to my conversion I had fairly extensive contact with High Church Anglicanism which left me with a somewhat strong preference for a highly liturgical, ceremonial approach to worship.

  130. @ Nancy:

    This is correct; the Muslims do regard Jesus as a prophet; they believe that Judas died on the cross however, having been given the appearance of Jesus, that the holy prophet of Allah would not have to suffer crucifixion.

    The Bektasi and Alevi Muslims of Turkey are a Shi’a/Sufi sect (or sects, the boundary between the two is rather blurry) that are at present horribly persecuted by the Erdogan regime; they embrace a very Christian worldview focused on loving one’s neighbors, have their own liturgical worship outside of the Mosques, and worship a trinity consisting of Allah, Mohammed and Ali.

    The Bahai also ostensibly believe in the Trinity, albeit in a more complex manner; outside of the realm of Abrahmic religions one will find in Hinduism a great many who worship a trinity of Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva, although this trinity appears to be constructed on modalist rather than tripersonal terms, similar to the faith of Oneness Pentecostals. In practice, there are many more manifestations of Gods, including standalone entities such as Ganesha (with the elephant trunk), and avatars such as Krishna (of Vishnu) and Kali (of Shiva). This ultimately is extended to everything in the pantheistic theology developed by the Brahmins in the early first millenium as a refinement of the earlier polytheistic Hinduism from which Jainism and Buddhism separated.

  131. @ ar:

    It should be stressed that the majority of Protestant denominations have always had some form of Divine Office, and many forms of Protestant Bible reading do resemble to some extent lectio divina (which is not used in the Orthodox church). Within Anglicanism, if you pray the Daily Office, with Morning and Evening Prayer, according to the traditional Book of Common Prayer, you’ll get two Old Testament and two New Testament lessons per day, covering the entire Old Testament in two years, and the New Testament in one year, with the Psalms said over the course of a month. The Epistles and Gospel lessons from the Ante-Communion service further speed things up, so that the entire Bible is covered at a brisk clip compared to the modern three year Revised Common Lectionary, derived from the current Roman Catholic lectionary.

    The Eastern Orthodox lectionary reads the entire New Testament except the Book of Revelations liturgically in the course of a year, however, one must attend all of the Divine Liturgies (not neccessarily served outside of monasteries), or say the Typika in their place (which one can easily do at home) to get there. If one prays the Divine Office, one will also get Old Testament lessons at Vespers, and the Matins Gospel cycle, in which the post-resurrection appearances of Christ are read and re-read continually. If the entire Divine Office is prayed, one will recite the Psalter in one week, versus one month in Anglicanism and contemporary Roman Catholic practice (in the old Roman liturgy, the Psalter was recited weekly; Coptic monks tend to recite it daily; imagine saying the entire Book of Psalms in one day. I believe it takes about six to eight hours, and Coptic monks have been observed with their lips moving in a manner indicating they are continuing to recite the Psalms even when comatose).

  132. An Attorney wrote:

    BTW, he apparently believed that the trinity referred to by Christians was God, Mary and Jesus.

    In this he agrees with the anti-Catholic Hislop. Except Hislop claimed that the Romish “God, Mary, and Jesus” was actually Satan under the pseudonyms Nimrod, Semiramis, and Tammuz.

  133. William G. wrote:

    @ ar:
    It should be stressed that the majority of Protestant denominations have always had some form of Divine Office, and many forms of Protestant Bible reading do resemble to some extent lectio divina (which is not used in the Orthodox church). Within Anglicanism, if you pray the Daily Office, with Morning and Evening Prayer, according to the traditional Book of Common Prayer, you’ll get two Old Testament and two New Testament lessons per day, covering the entire Old Testament in two years, and the New Testament in one year, with the Psalms said over the course of a month. The Epistles and Gospel lessons from the Ante-Communion service further speed things up, so that the entire Bible is covered at a brisk clip compared to the modern three year Revised Common Lectionary, derived from the current Roman Catholic lectionary.
    The Eastern Orthodox lectionary reads the entire New Testament except the Book of Revelations liturgically in the course of a year, however, one must attend all of the Divine Liturgies (not neccessarily served outside of monasteries), or say the Typika in their place (which one can easily do at home) to get there. If one prays the Divine Office, one will also get Old Testament lessons at Vespers, and the Matins Gospel cycle, in which the post-resurrection appearances of Christ are read and re-read continually. If the entire Divine Office is prayed, one will recite the Psalter in one week, versus one month in Anglicanism and contemporary Roman Catholic practice (in the old Roman liturgy, the Psalter was recited weekly; Coptic monks tend to recite it daily; imagine saying the entire Book of Psalms in one day. I believe it takes about six to eight hours, and Coptic monks have been observed with their lips moving in a manner indicating they are continuing to recite the Psalms even when comatose).

    Well, I had this conversation with someone who was a lifelong evangelical and had absolutely no familiarity with any of those disciplines and barely understood the existence of the lectionary.

  134. Brandon F wrote:

    I kept hearing about this from family members back home in Malaysia and a lot of Malaysian ex-pats here in Australia. The word “Allah” was not to be used in any publications that were not Muslim in Malaysia. Instead, the generic word for God (“tuhan” in Malay) was to be used instead. Notwithstanding that in the rest of the Arabic world where there are Christians, Allah is the term that is used to refer to the Christian God

    Because “Al’lah” is Arabic for “The God” and can refer to any monotheism. Malaysia ruled that instead of a generic for a monotheism, it is specific to Islamic tribal identity.

  135. An Attorney wrote:

    but little hole in the wall places in TX have been dishing up burritos for decades that are better put together

    When in a new area I’m almost always the only one in the car who’s willing to pull into a place to eat that’s not a national chain if it has a full parking lot a meal times.

    Now you do have to watch out for places that are likely to be serving up more than good food and drink. Evidence of that tend to be a full parking lot at other than meal times. 🙂

  136. Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:

    dee wrote:

    Elegance is hardly the word one uses to describe the atmosphere engendered by the Mahaneys at SGM

    The elegance of “servicing” your husband before elegantly ralphing into the porcelain bowl…

    (chuckle chuckle…)

    But then in Porn the woman exists only to service the man whenever and however the man wants it. ME WANNA!

  137. @ William G.:

    I’m also a Methodist with a real bent toward liturgical worship (our church is jokingly referred to as the Catholic Methodists).

    I had it explained to me this way: we like to focus each worship service on the Trinity. The beginning is all about God the Father, Creator and Supreme Authority. Then we shift into reading Scripture and teaching, God the Son, whose life on Earth gave us a model for what humans are supposed to do with the knowledge that God the Father exists. And then we end with prayer, both silent and together, focusing on God the Holy Spirit and how He works and moves through us today. Everything in the order of worship is carefully chosen to point us toward the Three in One.

    On the one hand, I don’t like how some Protestants treat the Bible like a puzzle to pull apart and figure out. They pick the whole thing to pieces and never stop to consider its literary truth or emotional relevance. On the other hand, a pure liturgy seems… rote to me. Just like the Bible isn’t an answer book, it isn’t magic. Recitation quickly becomes unthinking. I’d rather treat the discipline somewhere in the middle. Allow the Scriptures to stand on their own feet, but also seek what I need now, not what the calender or clock says it’s time to read.

    But, this is why we HAVE different denominations, and why I’m okay with that. I would chaff under either extreme. I can be happier in the middle.

    Now I have to go listen to a lot of organ music to select pieces for the wedding. It will be a very High Church kind of day, I can tell.

  138. @ William G.: thanks for your thoughtful and very informative reply.

    Fwiw, I do not believe in “racial purity”; it is a poisonous concept.

    That there is great diversity in Lebanon and Syria (and in other non-Arab ME countries) is without doubt true. But I do wonder; many have no problem with saying they are Arab, while others fervently deny it. It strikes me that the deniers are often wanting to dissociate themselves from both pan-Arabismmand Islam. I personally do not get the insistence that Arab is synonymous with Islam – and conquest – but I do realize that the region has an incredibly long history, and that military conquests are part of that history.

    You make good points about language; similar things apply to the use of Ge’ez by the Ethiopian orthodox. I also wonder about language re. some of the branches of the church that were established very early in South India…

  139. For once I’m speechless.

    How do Catholics not understand the gospel? Did the Catholic church stop believing in Jesus and I just missed the memo on that?

    Good grief. And I love how N.T. Wright’s entire theology is suspect because some of it happens to be similar to Catholic thought….as if Catholic vs. non-Catholic thought is the be-all and end-all of how Christians are supposed to be guided, rather than, oh I don’t know, responsible hermeneutics? Scriptural application? Loving thy neighbor? NOPE. It all boils down to whether you think like a Catholic.

  140. @ numo:

    Some Christians in the Middle East do consider themselves ethnically Arabic, for example, a substantial chunk of the Antiochian Orthodox Church, which uses Arabic exclusively as its liturgical language. Other members of that denomination prefer to refer to themselves as “Rum” meaning “Roman,” which means “Byzantine Orthodox Christian” (in the same sense that “Greek” meant Pagan and “Frank” meant Catholic).

    Regarding the St. Thomas Christians of South India, historically, they used Syriac as their liturgical language, and to a large extent, still do. However, the use of the vernacular tongue Malayalam, which is influenced by Syriac in several respects, in the liturgy, is increasing, particularly in the “Indian Orthodox Church,” which broke away from the Syriac Orthodox Church over a dispute regarding the location of the martyrdom of St. Thomas. For the Nazranis, as the St. Thomas Christians are known, Syriac is a liturgical language like Ge’ez, Coptic, Church Slavonic, or Latin, whereas Malayalam is the vernacular tongue.

    The Syriac-speaking Church of the East once stretched as far as Tibet and Mongolia; in the 13th century, a massive genocide conducted by the Muslim warlord Timur the Lame, also known as Tamerlane, resulted in most of them being killed, aside from those living in Mesopotamia, Syria, Turkey and India. This tragedy repeated itself with the genocide in 1915 and is in the process of repeating itself again with the recent desolation of Mosul, the atrocities against Christians in Syria, and so on.

  141. @ Caitlin:

    Hey there, sounds like you have an exciting day ahead of you. It should be noted the UMC, and in all probability your parish, are using the Revised Common Lectionary. John Wesley provided the initial Methodist Episcopal Church of North America with a Sunday Service Book, a simplified version of the Book of Common Prayer, featuring the Anglican lectionary, although in the 19th century many Methodist preachers stopped using it, and instead read in accordance with personal preference.

    My own view is that private reading ought to be done however you feel it should be done, and this is fully sanctioned in the Orthodox church; many people benefit from a reading plan but it is certainly not required. I move around my Bibles as I research different subjects. However, for public worship, I think it is imperative that a rule be followed, at a minimum, lectio continua, but preferably, the use of a traditional lectionary. The lectionary system ensures that the Gospel is heard every Sunday, a major disadvantage with the Lectio Continua approach of some “Calvinistas”, where in reading the Bible cover to cover, they zero in on portions of the Old Testament and neglect to actually proclaim the Gospel. Its much better to have a structured system of Old and New Testament lessons according to a fixed, continually repeating timetable, for the main worship services at least. Group Bible study is of course a different animal. What you really don’t want however is a system where the pastor unilaterally and arbitrarily selects the scripture lesson based on his own criteria; this opens the door to a distorted view of scripture.

    As it is, the Revised Common Lectionary is disfavored by many, myself included, for its highly selective set of lessons compared to the old Anglican and Orthodox lectionaries, which cover the entire New Testament in one third of the time (vs 64% with the RCL). Among the missing bits that seem rather important to me are Paul’s warnings on the danger of taking communion inappropriately, in 1 Corinthians 11, 27-34 IIRC, after the conclusion of the Institution Narrative.

  142. @ numo: about Syriac in India: my bad; I somehow didn’t register that part of your comment, William.

    That many churches in the ME have been in continuous existence since the very early days of xtianity is something I would not dispute. What troubles me is internecine strife w/in countries (like Lebanon, but that’s only one example).

    I think that all of us in the US tend to view other societies as uniform, due to the fact that we simply don’t study geography and history (including the history of religion) in much depth. I know that the geography and history texts that were used when I was young were pretty superficial, and things seem to have deteriorated since then.

    I think one of the biggest shocks I’ve ever encountered was seeing that the vast majority of the church universal is neither Western nor “white.” It was something I knew on an intellectual level, but a few years ago, I spent a lot of time watching Ethiopian and Eritrean Orthodox videos (music, primarily) on YouTube. Stirring, beautiful, contemplative and very different in some respects from my own tradition (Lutheran), while very much akin in others.

  143. @ William G.: thanks, and I have done some reading on the Church of the East in recent years, so I am familiar w/much that you’ve just mentioned.

    Am wondering how you came to meet so many xtians from the ME? I bet that is a very interesting story in itself!

  144. roebuck wrote:

    @ Nancy:

    I think Zooey was referring to the old chestnut “to assume is to make an a** of u and me” – ass-u-me. At least that’s what I assume she meant

    Yup. 😉

  145. @ Nancy:

    It historically was not as big a problem as it is now; Luther, Calvin and Wesley all affirmed the perpetual virginity of Mary and encouraged a balanced understanding of her, acknowledging her as Theotokos, and as pointing the way to Christ. I think what created the current controversy was a not entirely unjustified reaction on the part of Protestants to the obsession within Catholicism surrounding Marian apparitions in recent decades, and the continuing flow of new Marian dogmas (the immaculate conception, the assumption, and the very heavy pressure for Mary to be designated co-redepemptrix). That being said, the majority of Catholics do focus primarily on Jesus, but this is a problem that the Roman Church has to very delicately address. Here, Orthodoxy and Anglicanism can help, as both churches have managed to have a particularly balanced devotion to Mary, venerating her without worshiping her or deifying her. I think the trick when it comes to Marian devotion is to not say anything about, or do anything in regards to, the dear Lady, that would make her, in her great humility, blush.

    The powerful, self-effacing and rather intimidating personality of the Marian apparitions reported by Ida Peerdeman and at Medjugorgje, neither of which have been officially sanctioned by Rome, comes across in such a context as suggestive of demonic manipulation. One can’t imagine Mary, who gave birth to our Lord, making a threatening gesture with her fist, which is most likely why the Roman church rejected these apparitions as inauthentic, yet nonetheless, a substantial number of Catholics, including disobedient clergy, continue to promote these apparitions. In Ireland, one rogue priest and a certain woman who claims to routinely see Mary have set up somewhat of a cult, that exerts a level of financial control and manipulation evocative of Scientology. All of this of course only exacerbates the hostility between Protestants and Catholics over this issue, on which historically there was no disagreement, the personal holiness of Mary being universally accepted as an axiom of the Gospel.

  146. William G. wrote:

    I think what created the current controversy was a not entirely unjustified reaction on the part of Protestants to the obsession within Catholicism surrounding Marian apparitions in recent decades…

    I would like to point out that “Mary Channelling” is THE characteristic Catholic way to flake out. Like End Time Prophecy or Culture War is to Evangelicals.

  147. Former CLC’er wrote:

    That said, I thought that their doctrine promotes salvation by faith and works, which is something I don’t support. I wouldn’t come to blows over it, though.

    Short answer: The Catholic Church believes in salvation by Grace, through Faith, made living in Works.

  148. @ William G.:

    I think there’s another habit that is quite worrisome with some non-lectionary following churches- the habit of the issue sermon.

    I hear a lot of people on this site (and elsewhere) complaining, for example, that singles are not welcome in their church because they always hear sermons about marriage. Not sermons expounding on the symbolism of the Bridegroom, but sermons about human husbands and human wives. Sermons about childrearing.

    Now don’t get me wrong, these are important issues and our faith can give us some insight there. But the sermon? The scripture reading and everything the pastor says. Solely directed toward one issue, one group of people?

    That is less of a problem when readings are directed. (My church actually does not always follow the Lectionary, but usually does). I’ve never heard a sermon that could not be applicable to every person in the congregation. I’m baffled, to be honest, that such a thing happens elsewhere, but I understand it to be rather common in some Protestant churches.

    (I’m thinking Crown Imperial instead of Wagner or Mendelssohn.)

  149. Really fascinating discussion, thank you all. I know that there are traditions/denominations in Christianity as old as or older then the RC or Greek/Eastern Orthodox, like the Coptic church and others, but really don’t know much about them so this is a great learning opportunity. 🙂

  150. Caitlin wrote:

    @ William G.:
    I think there’s another habit that is quite worrisome with some non-lectionary following churches- the habit of the issue sermon.
    I hear a lot of people on this site (and elsewhere) complaining, for example, that singles are not welcome in their church because they always hear sermons about marriage. Not sermons expounding on the symbolism of the Bridegroom, but sermons about human husbands and human wives. Sermons about childrearing.
    Now don’t get me wrong, these are important issues and our faith can give us some insight there. But the sermon? The scripture reading and everything the pastor says. Solely directed toward one issue, one group of people?
    That is less of a problem when readings are directed. (My church actually does not always follow the Lectionary, but usually does). I’ve never heard a sermon that could not be applicable to every person in the congregation. I’m baffled, to be honest, that such a thing happens elsewhere, but I understand it to be rather common in some Protestant churches.
    (I’m thinking Crown Imperial instead of Wagner or Mendelssohn.)

    Back in my evangelical days, I once sat through 12 weeks of sermons on marriage followed by 8 weeks of sermons on parenting. I was a single college student. Have no fear, we were all informed that if it didn’t apply to us now, it would later and we should take and keep notes. Sounded okay to a 21 year old college girl, but even then, I wondered how that sat with the 35+ singles or the elderly widows or widowers I knew in that congregation.

  151. zooey111 wrote:

    I also was taught how to cut & eat meat without all the American switching of implements between hands. In school, I was constantly laughed at, as in “Zooey doesn’t know how to eat right”, & “You eat funny, what’s wrong with you?” (I still think that its the other people who “eat funny”).

    It’s all part of ‘American exceptionalism’. Didn’t you know? But then again we Americans can also be a contradictory lot. Take for instance how we butcher German names and pronunciation. Even academics who should know better do it with impunity it seems. Mispronounce a Spanish name or phrase? Watch the poo-poo hit the fan.

  152. @ William G.:

    And there is also the thought in some protestant circles that over the centuries there has been way too much cultural adaptation and that pre-christian ideas infiltrated the church way too much. The idea of baptizing the idols is seen as a really bad idea. Some of the protestant thinking around some of the marian dogmas and some of the hagiography is impacted by this concept. Some of the emphasis on let’s do it like the early church did it (before the bulk of the alleged compromises) is also fueled by this concept. Of course “this concept” occurs on a continuum like everything, but as a general principle I think it is pretty pervasive in evangelicalism.

  153. Muff Potter wrote:

    Mispronounce a Spanish name or phrase? Watch the poo-poo hit the fan.

    And watch the Race Card get played off the bottom of the deck.

  154. Nancy wrote:

    Some of the protestant thinking around some of the marian dogmas and some of the hagiography is impacted by this concept. Some of the emphasis on let’s do it like the early church did it (before the bulk of the alleged compromises) is also fueled by this concept.

    You also find “this concept” in Islam, in the forms of the Wahabi and Salafi movements trying to return Islam to its original Pure form “as it was in the Day of the Prophet”. These movements often result in the most Extreme and Rigid forms of Islam, the ones which make the news.

  155. @ NC Now:

    We also like to drive the old US and state hwys and stop at little restaurants on the town square, esp. county seat courthouse squares. If near lunch, look for the place that is full or nearly so. Always good food, usually not expensive. And pie.

  156. @ Headless Unicorn Guy:

    I think I see some of the more extreme forms of anti-catholicism in “this concept” believers. Also I see anti-catholicism in some former catholics who now frequent the more conservative aspects of evangelicalism, not that there are exactly hoards of these people, but I have run into some.

  157. Kaz wrote:

    Short answer: The Catholic Church believes in salvation by Grace, through Faith, made living in Works.

    Welcome to TWW and thank you for weighing in. That is what some priests have explained to me as well.

  158. dee wrote:

    Kaz wrote:

    Short answer: The Catholic Church believes in salvation by Grace, through Faith, made living in Works.

    Welcome to TWW and thank you for weighing in. That is what some priests have explained to me as well.

    Striking a dynamic balance between Grace, Faith, and Works.

    Three legs of a tripod; when one leg grows too long or one or two legs gets cut off, you have trouble. It’a-all-under-the-blood Easy Grace, Sit-on-your-butt-and-do-nothing Faith Faith Faith, or busyness with Works for Works’ sake.

  159. An Attorney wrote:

    @ NC Now:

    We also like to drive the old US and state hwys and stop at little restaurants on the town square, esp. county seat courthouse squares. If near lunch, look for the place that is full or nearly so. Always good food, usually not expensive. And pie.

    Same here. I like local eateries when travelling. As I put it, “If I wanted to drive freeways and eat at McDonalds, I can stay in L.A. and do that!”

  160. Kaz wrote:

    Short answer: The Catholic Church believes in salvation by Grace, through Faith, made living in Works.

    That is an excellent short answer. And that is precisely where the difference lies between catholicism and calvinism. As I understand it, Calvinism’s solas make no room for works at all, in any context and for any reason when related to salvation. Even expounding on “dead works.” It is a really basic issue with some folks. The accusation that some protestants make against catholicism that it teaches that one can be saved exclusively by works apart from faith is nonsense, but it is the whole issue of “what about works” that is at issue.

    The methodists say (or at least my methodist church says) that one is saved BY grace THROUGH faith UNTO good works. This is protestant in that works are not related to salvation, but it makes room for works within a protestant understanding of discipleship. There are probably lots more protestant ideas out there, I just mention this one.

  161. Kaz wrote:

    Short answer: The Catholic Church believes in salvation by Grace, through Faith, made living in Works.

    Does the Catholic church still teach purgatory and offering up prayers for those in purgatory? Just wondering.

  162. @ Nancy:
    Yep. The book “Pagan Christianity” has furthered these notions over the past few years. I haven’t read the whole thing, but the chapters that I did read were poorly researched and contained many errors (some of them major). I got the sense that they were essentially recasting older anti-Catholic/Orthodox/high church Protestant tracts in contemporary language. Don’t think they actually went to primary sources much, except as selectively parsed and quoted by previous authors who had an Axe to grind.

    I found it pretty disturbing, and it is SO easy to find accurate accounts of church history and ancient/early medieval history (general) that just knock the props right out from under their arguments. As someone who grew up in a liturgical Protestant denomination, I was absolutely floored by a lot of what they wrote, though really, it is just the same old same old under a slightly different guise.

  163. @ Nancy:
    Doesn’t Paul say the same thing (about salvation and living in a manner in which we ate consciously doing good) in Ephesians? Your church nis onto something, I think. 😉

    I have never gotten Calvinism in general, nor do I care to. Reformed folks, that’s not intended as a slam, only a comment on limited atonement, election and irresistible get ace. I think *good* Reformed theology keeps these things more or less in balance, but other groups w/in the Calvinist camp tend to veer off very quickly, and rather alarmingly.

    Fwiw, I cannot square so-called limited atonement with anything in the NT (apart from proof texts). It is a very alien idea for many of us who are part of non-Calvinst, non-Arminian churches, believe me!

  164. @ Muff Potter: I think the mispronunciation thing has a lot to do w/what part of the country you’re in. And hey, we PA Dutch do horrible things re. mispronunciation of German, including our own last names! (I suspect that comes partly from pronunciation in the German and Swiss German dialects that some still speak, but that’s another topic altogether.)

  165. @ sam h:
    Nancy wrote:

    An Attorney wrote:

    Muslims believe that the Allah they worship is the one worshiped by Abraham.

    And they see Allah as worshipped by Jesus who is seen as a prophet of Allah, if I am not mistaken. They also give some recognition to “his mother” but I am not sure what.

    At some place do we have to talk about the god El? I read some of that and deliberately laid it aside.

  166. @ Headless Unicorn Guy:
    One great discovery is Lasyone’s Meat Pie Restaurant in Natchitoches (pronounced nakitash!), Louisiana. Not far off US 84. BTW it is a really nice, historic town, lots of “French Quarter” style buildings, a great river front, etc. And, in addition to the meat pies, great Cajun style quisine.

  167. referring to the comments by attorney and nancy, which I didn’t respond to in that box post above because I always get it posting wrong lol.

    so its my opinion that if we refer to God as God instead of allah, we cut through some confusion and at least people know which context of God I am referring to. then I can straighten out who I am talking about, and I do acknowledge that Abraham had two sons, and that in Christ Jesus both brothers (islam and Christian) are reconciled to God by the cross. if I am not clear and try to go at the conversation with their prophets or mary, it takes away from the Lord who died for all and ends up in an unceasing discussion of religions. hope I am making sense of why I don’t think its right to talk about God as Allah. I am especially still unhappy with the 9marks whole approach to the gospel.

  168. @ sam h: Allah = God in Arabic, and it is *not* specific to Muslims only. In English, Jews, xtians and Muslims all speak of God, because we have one single word for the supreme being. it’s the same in Arabic.

    What is different is the Muslim *understanding* of Allah and who he is. Ditto for Judaism and Christianity.

  169. On a sad note, Tony Palmer, the Anglican Bishop who recorded on his phone that video above of the pope, died on Sunday from a motorcycle accident.

  170. An Attorney wrote:

    @ NC Now:

    We also like to drive the old US and state hwys and stop at little restaurants on the town square, esp. county seat courthouse squares. If near lunch, look for the place that is full or nearly so. Always good food, usually not expensive. And pie.

    and pie!!!!!!!! yeah I love pie. I had a short stint as a reporter covering the ‘religion’ section and interviewed a lot of different churches and their distincttions, I got invited to a lot of potlucks, really miss that job. there is nothing like a church potluck and pie!!!!!!

  171. Albuquerque Blue wrote:

    Really fascinating discussion, thank you all. I know that there are traditions/denominations in Christianity as old as or older then the RC or Greek/Eastern Orthodox, like the Coptic church and others, but really don’t know much about them so this is a great learning opportunity

    Can only echo these sentiments, I am grateful for those who share their knowledge, point towards resources, etc. This is what I love about TWW. I do wish it could be more readily found instead of one post though, instead of over four years of blog posts ! But that would make me lazy. Anyhoo, I wonder if there could be a post and review of ‘Pagan Christianity’ with numo’s strong input?

  172. Engaging with people who come from different theological backgrounds and working together to live in unity is much preferred than just alienating them right off the bat. These articles serve no other purpose then to say “our way is right, your’s is wrong, so we can’t mingle.” Obviously there is a problem when two people cannot come to agreement on the basics such as salvation, the trinity, etc. The issue is that the secondary items are becoming so primary that the waters are muddied and the evangelical world is running around like a chicken with its head cut off. There is no unity, no order, only distrust, hatred, and chaos.

    How do those of us struggling in the faith continue when the state of the Church is like this?

  173. An Attorney wrote:

    We also like to drive the old US and state hwys and stop at little restaurants on the town square

    Two Sunday back I drove down from Pittsburgh to NC via I79 and highway 19. Back roads in WV would have turned the 8 hour drive into maybe 20? Anyway, 19 is beautiful. My wife remarked several times how pretty the country was. I had to tell here the towns, not so much.

  174. @ NC Now:

    There are a few beautiful interstate highways. I40 in western NC and eastern TN; I59 in NE Alabama to Chattanooga; I77 from I70 south through WVA, VA, and NC; I64 from western VA to central KY; I81 almost anywhere; those are some I have traveled. And I am sure some in the Rockies. And I love the hwys in NM, inc. old Route 66. But we recently drove the Blue Ridge Pkwy from Asheville to Cherokee, then on the U.S. hwy to Cleveland TN, which is a beautiful drive not recommended in winter.

  175. @ An Attorney:

    We once drove from Asheville NC to Columbus OH on US 23, 30+ years ago, with a stop at Breaks Interstate Park for a couple of nights.

  176. @ An Attorney

    Two weeks ago we drove from our place in NC to Myrtle Beach SC, did some family business, and drove back in a 36 hour period, the home trip catching us in one those rainstorms where the while lines of the road disappear and you pray there is not an 18 wheeler behind you. It should have been about 5 hours each way (don’t believe what they tell you about less time) but it was longer what with getting lost on the way down and the storm on the way back. I may never want to see a highway again.

  177. An Attorney wrote:

    And I am sure some in the Rockies.

    I have to admit to being a bit biased, being a Colorado native, but there are many beautiful scenic byways in Western Colorado….US40 from Steamboat to Walcott, C92 & C133 from Delta to Carbondale over McClure Pass (Over the Grand Mesa) – not open in the winter, C62 & C145 from Ridgeway over Lizard Head Pass to Cortez (passable, but dicey in winter), and, of course, I70 from Grand Junction over Vail Pass to Denver….just to name a few, 🙂

    Many of the scenic roads in Colorado are not open on Winter, but in the summer and fall….bias or no, it is some very beautiful country.

  178. @ Jeannette Altes:
    It’s actually C131 from Steamboat to Walcott. US 40 is pretty, too. Gorgeous, in fact – running from Steamboat to I70 just a ways west of Idaho Springs. It runs over the top of the Continnental Divide, through Kremmling and Granby and over Berthoud Pass. Flatlanders beware. 🙂 When I was very small (and we lived in Steamboat), we took this route to get to Denver to visit my grandparents. Those not used to mountains should take it in the summer. 🙂

  179. @ Haitch:

    The thing there about Allah is predominantly politics based IMHO given that there is a significant Islamic party that has made inroads into the ruling Barisan Nasional coalition. Putting that judgment out there not only gives PAS a good feeling but the more strident and at times xenophobic wing of UMNO (the main Malay party that forms the heart of Barisan Nasional) also uses it as a metaphorical club against Christians in Malaysia (not to mention that the minority Chinese & Indian populations also get short shrift at times as well).

  180. No More Perfect wrote:

    Engaging with people who come from different theological backgrounds and working together to live in unity is much preferred than just alienating them right off the bat. These articles serve no other purpose then to say “our way is right, your’s is wrong, so we can’t mingle.” Obviously there is a problem when two people cannot come to agreement on the basics such as salvation, the trinity, etc. The issue is that the secondary items are becoming so primary that the waters are muddied and the evangelical world is running around like a chicken with its head cut off. There is no unity, no order, only distrust, hatred, and chaos.

    How do those of us struggling in the faith continue when the state of the Church is like this?

    I agree argh. I think the solution is for people that say they believe in the Father, Son and Holy Spirit to start living the sermon on the mount, start loving the Lord with all our hearts and loving our neighbors as ourselves, even those Samaritans that Jesus kept holding up as an example to those disciples and followers. then the focus will be back on the primary thing, the precious Son of God that died on the cross and the secondary things will fade away. I have found that when I am talking with people of other denominations or faiths, if I keep Jesus as the topic, the divisions fade away. The real Jesus, who is just like the bible says, not the “gospel jesus(tm)” who is presented as divisive controlling and angry.
    when I fellowship with catholics and we talk about Jesus, we are great friends in agreement, when I talk with UMC people, same thing, we talk about Jesus and the cross and there is no division. when I talk with people from other countries that live here and serve other gods, or gang-bangers, or that guy that tagged my apartment a few days ago, we talk about Jesus and God’s love and none of them have tried to hang me yet! Jesus is the common bond, Jesus as He really is.
    pray please for the tagger, he is a awesome artist! I would like to get a mural thing going in town so these guys can do something that is using their skills for good. they should be at the college taking art classes, some of them could probably teach the classes!
    glad you posted, by the way

  181. @ numo:

    I myself grew up with some of my best friends being Persian Armenian Christians, and my mother for her part grew up with close friends in the Coptic church; when I was 15 I was exposed to Syriac Christianity for the first time and fell in love with it. I presently am in the process of discernment as to whether my vocation is with Syriacs or within the tiny remnant of the Russian Orthodox that are not in communion with Moscow or the present regime.

    The extraordinary thing to consider about the Ethiopian church is that it is in full communion with the Armenian church; the Oriental Orthodox form a striking liturgical continuum, with the very nearly Western liturgy of the Armenians in the North, through to the Indians in the East and the Ethiopians in the South. Its quite a bit more diverse than the Byzantine Rite, but with rather poor documentation, especially in English. For highly ornate and complex bits like the variable portions of Matins you are largely reliant on ancient manuscripts and oral tradition.

    Even the Byzantine Rite is somewhat dependent on oral tradition, or rather, local tradition, in that its basically too complex to be celebrated in its entirety outside of a large monastery, and thus individual parishes have distinct cultural customs on how to actually do it. All Night Vigils has not been celebrated in its entirety outside of the otherworldly environment of Mount Athos since 1911, and literally took all night, with the service starting at 6 PM and ending at 2 AM, reportedly producing, by the end, extreme euphoria amongst the congregation, while reducing the celebrants to a psychotic state that persisted for a few days. Thus it might actually be relatively dangerous to even try to serve the entire liturgy outside of a monastery of well-trained monks. So thus, there is some interesting stuff there.

  182. @ ar:
    ar wrote:

    Back in my evangelical days, I once sat through 12 weeks of sermons on marriage followed by 8 weeks of sermons on parenting. I was a single college student. Have no fear, we were all informed that if it didn’t apply to us now, it would later and we should take and keep notes. Sounded okay to a 21 year old college girl, but even then, I wondered how that sat with the 35+ singles or the elderly widows or widowers I knew in that congregation.

    This is why the Church Fathers gave us lectionaries, along with a Biblical canon. The canon was not purely about which books should or should not be read, rather, it was primarily about which books should be read in church. The lectionaries in turn arranged these books according to how they should be read. This is in accordance with the ancient Jewish practice of pairing a Haftarah (reading of the books of the Old Testament other than the Pentateuch) with the weekly Torah portion; in the Christian lectionary system, the Epistle supercedes the Haftarah, and the Gospel, the Torah, although in the cycle of Old Testament lessons that exist, for example, in the Assyrian church, a Torah/Haftarah pattern is retained in the two Old Testament lessons read during the divine liturgy, that frequently matches the praxis of the various branches of Judaism. The website bombaxo.com contains a wealth of lectionaries, ancient and modern, and its fascinating to compare these with one another, and with the Jewish lectionary system (see the Wikipedia articles on Torah reading, the Weekly Torah Portion, and the Haftarah).

    Even Lectio Continua in the Calvinist manner, however, is preferable to the kind of lectio selecta that you mention. I find the idea of liturgically reading the Bible straight through rather than thematically on the basis of fulfilled prophecy, and suppressing all feasts and other exciting parts of the liturgy, in the manner of John Calvin, to be cold and rationalistic, not to mention producing services that are boring beyond belief, but I can respect it, because at least its following a rule. This blog would not exist were it not for pastors placing themselves above rules, even rules of their own making, and acting purely on personal whims; this capricious behavior, which in your experience manifested itself in the selection of scripture lessons, is evidence that the pastor has ultimately no control over his or her passions, and is thus profoundly unsuited for ministry in the Church.

    The only situation where in my mind deviating from the lectionary or a pre-established rule regarding scripture lessons might be warranted would be in dealing with some form of highly unusual pastoral crises affecting the parish, such as an attempted schism. Even here it is undesirable; I feel the lectionary system, once adopted, should be considered an integral part of the rule of faith of the parish, a strict rule, and not a guideline.

  183. @ Albuquerque Blue:
    Nancy wrote:

    And there is also the thought in some protestant circles that over the centuries there has been way too much cultural adaptation and that pre-christian ideas infiltrated the church way too much. The idea of baptizing the idols is seen as a really bad idea. Some of the protestant thinking around some of the marian dogmas and some of the hagiography is impacted by this concept. Some of the emphasis on let’s do it like the early church did it (before the bulk of the alleged compromises) is also fueled by this concept. Of course “this concept” occurs on a continuum like everything, but as a general principle I think it is pretty pervasive in evangelicalism.

    Nancy, I’m a little bit baffled by this; who in Christendom has ever baffled idols? The consumption of meat offered to idols, or any contact with them, was viewed in a rather dim light by the apostolic church. If you’re referring to icons, they are not baptized (although when commissioned, they are annointed with oil, however, they are not viewed as being alive, and it is forbidden according to the canons of the 7th Ecumenical Council to worship them).

    Prior to the 7th Ecumenical Council, the Second Council of Nicaea, you historically had iconography in the church, and indeed even in synagogues (such as that excavated at Dura Europos), until in response to the advance of Islam, which was opposed to all imagery, the Byzantine Emperors attempted to suppress iconography in an attempt to avoid provoking Islamic wrath. This heresy of iconoclasm produced a counter-heresy of iconodulism, or icon-worshipping; the iconodules would take a chip of paint off the icons and mix it into the Eucharist. Both extremes were prohibited at the second Nicene council; iconoclasm on the grounds that it denies the reality of the incarnation (since God became man, it is possible to depict Christ in his humanity; historically, images of God the Father remained forbidden, and did not begin to appear until the Renaissance, when we began to see this Zeus-like figure surface in the works of Michaelangelo; there is a replica of an 18th icon of an old man, which could be an aged Jesus, or more probably, God the Father at the Cathedral of Christ the Savior in Moscow, in the dome, which is probably the most controversial icon in the entire Orthodox faith, on the theological grounds that God the Father has always been regarded as invisible).

    Needless to say the Second Commandment and the bulk of the Biblical message prohibit idolatry; the chief difference between an idol (or Eidol in the Greek) and an icon (or Eikon) is that the former is worshipped, whereas the latter is not.

    Of course not everyone accepts that the veneration of icons is appropriate, however, I was rather surprised to see the iconography of recent Baptist leaders linked to in this article. Thus, in general, I urge tolerance on this point; the best position is the via media between iconoclasm and idolatry outlined by the Seventh Ecumenical Council; we can depict Christ and the saints because they were visible, and tradition tells us what they looked like; we should exercise some restraint regarding depicting God the Father because that person of the trinity was historically always hidden from view or represented symbolically in the Bible (i.e. the burning bush, the pillar of fire), and under no circumstances should the images themselves be worshipped or thought to have any holiness apart from their subject matter. Within the Eastern churches, the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox use icons extensively, whereas the Assyrians, without prohibiting iconography, prefer symbolic imagery, such as the cross; historically they used a replica of the Image of Edessa on their altars, but this fell out of use due to repeated desecration by hostile Islamic powers.

  184. numo wrote:

    Fwiw, I cannot square so-called limited atonement with anything in the NT (apart from proof texts).

    That’s where I stand, as well. And when I was growing up, I was taught that the three rules of Bible interpretation are;
    1.Context.
    2.Context. And, of course:
    3.Context. 😉

    Mrs M told us that in the Junior class, in fact. (“Junior” meaning approximately middle school age).

  185. @ William G.:

    Not baffled, baptized. It is a word which was used in catholic RCIA for the concept of taking some pre-christian or non-christian idea and adapting it (changing it) to something compatible with christianity. It was the first priest we had in RCIA who used the term and explained the concept. Father T, who had been a baptist prior to conversion, and who went out of his way to explain catholic things to protestants in a way were he thought the questions might be, said that the catholic church did do that and that “baptizing the idols” was a catholic term, not an accusation. He did say that the understanding of this by protestants was distorted. Perhaps this would be considered under the current idea of “contextualization” I suppose.

    One of the take-aways from that for protestants who would object would be the idea that some of the marian devotions might be seen as attractive (way back in the day) for people who came from a culture were there were goddesses. The idea being that no, you can’t have your goddess, but yes you can have hyperdoulia for Mary. In that way maintaining the idea of “the feminine” as close to deity (but not actually deity.) Father T did not relate the concept to catholic devotion to Mary, per se, but he did say that this idea in principle was a problem for protestants in thinking of converting to catholicism.

    This has nothing to do with paintings or carvings or icons or such. It has to do with ideas. Along the same line of thinking, some current protestants are concerned (vehement) that some of the holidays (Christmas and Easter for example) are “baptized” residuals of pagan beliefs and practices (the solstice and fertility, respectively).

    HUG had made a comment about how some of the representations and ideas concerning the accusations against the concept of God, Mary, Jesus as a trinity (a false accusation BTW but one hurled against catholicism sometimes) being linked to resemblance of other gods.

    OK, I have found it. 10:14 AM on wednesday from HUG:

    An Attorney wrote:
    BTW, he apparently believed that the trinity referred to by Christians was God, Mary and Jesus.

    HUG replied
    In this he agrees with the anti-Catholic Hislop. Except Hislop claimed that the Romish “God, Mary, and Jesus” was actually Satan under the pseudonyms Nimrod, Semiramis, and Tammuz.

    Anyhow, that comment by HUG set off my comment(s) about the whole concept of what to do with existing ideas in a culture at the time of christian evangelization of that culture. The catholic church, some protestants say, went too far in adaptation to some festivals, ideas and pre-christian beliefs.

    BTW, William, protestants in the US, by and large, probably know very little about Orthodoxy. My “feeling” when I went to the presentation of “how we do” at the local Greek Orthodox church, at the time of the annual Greek festival, was that it all seemed so “Greek” and I could not get a feel for what was Greek and what was Orthodox. It was so far from anything I had ever seen, that I had nothing in my thinking to which to link it. It is also very beautiful and impressive, but very different. There is also a difference of “feel” between icons and catholic statues. Iconography is so obviously symbolic and representative that an uninformed person (me) could think that the icon is actually a visual sermon (or concept) in paint. However, the statue of Mary in the side yard of a local catholic church, before which one of their traditional (lace head covering and long skirt) parishioners is wont to kneel, can look like something entirely different to a protestant. It is not about the statue, per se, it is about the kneeling at its feet.

    Somebody referenced a book “Pagan Christianity.” I have never read the book, but there is a lot of that kind of thinking out there. I am of the opinion that we need a lot of cross-cultural understanding between catholics and evangelicals, and avoiding the issues and questions may not be the best way to go.

    And we sure need to know about Orthodoxy. This is a very neglected thing in our culture. I especially like, or example, doing something the Orthodox are said to do which is including in one’s thinking about the atonement the ideas of “christus victor.” The calvinists are making penal substitutionary atonement another sola, I am thinking. And I am thinking that there is more to it than just that. We have a lot to learn from the Orthodox.

  186. Haitch wrote:

    @ Brandon F:
    Terima kasih, more thoughtful analysis (Haitch taps her chopsticks on the edge of her laksa lemak bowl).

    Haitch, sama sama. Laksa lemak, haven’t had that in ages. The same with a proper nasi lemak. Or roti canai. Or rojak. Or cendol. Or ais kacang. Or murtabak. Or ang ku. Dammit, so many foods from back home that I miss. :p

  187. William G. wrote:

    @ ar:
    ar wrote:
    Back in my evangelical days, I once sat through 12 weeks of sermons on marriage followed by 8 weeks of sermons on parenting. I was a single college student. Have no fear, we were all informed that if it didn’t apply to us now, it would later and we should take and keep notes. Sounded okay to a 21 year old college girl, but even then, I wondered how that sat with the 35+ singles or the elderly widows or widowers I knew in that congregation.
    This is why the Church Fathers gave us lectionaries, along with a Biblical canon. The canon was not purely about which books should or should not be read, rather, it was primarily about which books should be read in church. The lectionaries in turn arranged these books according to how they should be read. This is in accordance with the ancient Jewish practice of pairing a Haftarah (reading of the books of the Old Testament other than the Pentateuch) with the weekly Torah portion; in the Christian lectionary system, the Epistle supercedes the Haftarah, and the Gospel, the Torah, although in the cycle of Old Testament lessons that exist, for example, in the Assyrian church, a Torah/Haftarah pattern is retained in the two Old Testament lessons read during the divine liturgy, that frequently matches the praxis of the various branches of Judaism. The website bombaxo.com contains a wealth of lectionaries, ancient and modern, and its fascinating to compare these with one another, and with the Jewish lectionary system (see the Wikipedia articles on Torah reading, the Weekly Torah Portion, and the Haftarah).
    Even Lectio Continua in the Calvinist manner, however, is preferable to the kind of lectio selecta that you mention. I find the idea of liturgically reading the Bible straight through rather than thematically on the basis of fulfilled prophecy, and suppressing all feasts and other exciting parts of the liturgy, in the manner of John Calvin, to be cold and rationalistic, not to mention producing services that are boring beyond belief, but I can respect it, because at least its following a rule. This blog would not exist were it not for pastors placing themselves above rules, even rules of their own making, and acting purely on personal whims; this capricious behavior, which in your experience manifested itself in the selection of scripture lessons, is evidence that the pastor has ultimately no control over his or her passions, and is thus profoundly unsuited for ministry in the Church.
    The only situation where in my mind deviating from the lectionary or a pre-established rule regarding scripture lessons might be warranted would be in dealing with some form of highly unusual pastoral crises affecting the parish, such as an attempted schism. Even here it is undesirable; I feel the lectionary system, once adopted, should be considered an integral part of the rule of faith of the parish, a strict rule, and not a guideline.

    You assume I know nothing about this? Why are you explaining it to me? My post responded to someone else’s point about the value of the lectionary with a personal anecdote. It did not indicate my personal ignorance.

  188. My church is not officially 9 Marks (I think — it might have become one while I wasn’t looking!) but our pastor has spent the past few years, ever since he arrived, bashing Catholics so hard and so consistently that I’m seriously thinking about leaving. And I’ve been at that church nearly three decades.

    This habit is spreading rapidly among evangelical Protestants, from what I can see, and it’s disturbing and scary. It’s not just doctrinal differences. It is theology straight out of a Chick Tract.

  189.  __

    “Zero Sum Religion: Mark Or Shark?”

    hmmm…

    …to the extent these ‘various’ ‘christian’ religious ‘systems’ have failed The Great Commission Christ gave, is the extent in which they have invariably missed the mark. They can either serve Christ Jesus, or they can serve themselves; but don’t be alarmed whenJeaus says: “Sorry, I don’t know you…”

    (sadface)

    Sopy

  190. Reader wrote:

    It is theology straight out of a Chick Tract.

    I had heard the term “chick tracts” but did not know anything about them actually. But since you wrote that I found a long article on line. The man is worse than a nut case, he seems to have lost touch with reality. I cannot imagine anybody takes that stuff seriously. I believe what you say, it is just that it is difficult to process that such stuff is spreading. I have seen sci-fi that was more credible. Talk about conspiracy theories. What a mess of misinformation and rabble rousing. It is going to take a while for me to get over this.

  191. @ Brandon F:

    “Or roti canai. Or rojak. Or cendol. Or ais kacang. Or murtabak.”
    ++++++++++

    yes, these are all delicious. But that ais kacang…. in my memory, shaved ice + rose flavored syrup + corn + kidney beans + French cut green beans drizzled with evaporated milk and black gelatin specks….. how in the world…?

  192. “Thus, when a Central Asian Muslim asks me if I am a Christian, what they mean by “Christian” is an alcohol-drinking, pornography-watching, sexually promiscuous, picture-worshipping Eastern Orthodox or Roman Catholic person who is part of the culture that has attempted to conquer and oppress them for centuries. Therefore, I never simply say yes. However, since Christian is a biblical word, neither do I say no. I define who I am in biblical terms apart from their historical experience.”

    I didn’t read this as the way the writer sees Eastern Orthodox or Catholics, but as his perception of the way Central Asian Muslims see Christians. I wouldn’t infer this as dissing Orthodox or RC’s, but then again, I’m not one of them, so would not feel a personal insult, as perhaps an Orthodox or RC person might.

    The part of this post that was huge to me — and I mean HUGE — was the reference to the stained glass windows depicting the Pattersons. “…Then, there is the stained glass window at SWBTS with a picture of Dorothy and Paige Patterson…” I clicked on the link and didn’t know whether to laugh or to lose my appetite.

    Can you imagine a Christian couple actually consenting to having their likenesses sanitized, skinnified, and etched into stained glass? (I had to laugh — they put ol’ Dottie up there without her signature hat — her symbol of being under the authority of the guy she pompously referred to as ‘Doctor Patterson’.) Now, the Baptists in my history have never been exactly etiquette experts, but this has to be one of the tackiest things I’ve ever seen in Christendom, even without the theological implications. Hang a portrait in the narthex, but please, spare us the stained glass.

    Seeing this made me underrstand anew why some churches/colleges, etc., have rules prohibiting naming a building after a living person. And I appreciate that a granddad turned down the honor of having a building named after him, & specified in his will that the Baptist university for which he was Dean could never name a building after him posthumously. He was embarrassed enough by a portrait.

    There’s a lovely stained-glass window in a Baptist church I often attend; a depiction of Jesus. I’ve been told that the artist used the likeness of face/eyes of a beloved deceased pastor in the face, but nowhere is there a reference to this man or any other mere mortal. That, I can handle.

    But the larger-than-life stained glass windows of the Pattersons remind me of the massive photos of Mao & Stalin, the adoration of the Fuhrer by the Hitler Youth, and the recent videos of kindergarten students singing the praises of Barack Obama in a school program.

    Makes my skin crawl.

  193. Nickname wrote:

    (I had to laugh — they put ol’ Dottie up there without her signature hat — her symbol of being under the authority of the guy she pompously referred to as ‘Doctor Patterson’.)

    Oops — I mistook another couple for the Pattersons. They’re not up there yet. Their depiction had not been done when this article was written. So maybe she will have the hat…

    Technically, I’m a member of a Southern Baptist church. How do I find out who funded this piece of idolatry?

  194. Dear TWW, You are very kind to comment on the unkindness of our brothers in Christ at 9 Marks. However, this is nothing new at all for the Catholic Church. For at least 2000 years, we have been the brunt of criticism and persecution. A few comments from this group isn’t really an issue.

    Honestly.

    God bless you all!

  195. @ William G.: William, thanks so much for your reply. I can understand your affinity for Orthodox who are not in communion with the Moscow patriarchate, though if I were ever to convert to some form of Orthodoxy, I’d be more inclined to go Armenian or Arabic or some other church w/Syriac liturgy.

    I find the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church’s music fascinating (liturgy and spiritual songs), especially given the fact that there is a large Ethiopian and Eritrean community in the Virginia and MD suburbs of D.C. It has fanned out from there; I’ve found some great YouTube vids of a singer who lives in the Richmond area (a woman) as well as of a teenager who is training with her. I find it striking that women seem to have established their own role (as singers and drummers, at least) in the EOT Church, and I like that. The fact that women cannot even think about being ordained in the O. Churches (of whatever affiliation) is a hard thing for me (coming as I do from a Lutheran background and moderate feminist standpoint), so the way women *are* accepted as being able to sing spiritual songs and participate in the liturgy in many EOT churches is very heartening to me.

    I really love a lot of Persian classical music and Arabic classical, folkloric and popular music, and think the Armenians can’t be beat at certain styles of music and at small-group singing. There’s an Armenian Apostolic church right outside of D.C. that has a great festival with wonderful performers – many of them relatively recent immigrants to the US as well 2nd and 3d generation children/grandchildren. I think they helped breathe life into the AA churches in that part of the East Coast (there are also Armenian immigrant communities in and around Richmond, VA).

    I am a percussionist, though I don’t really play Western instruments (I started out on darbouka back in the late 80s), so you can maybe see how/why my interest in the cultures and countries of the Middle East and Central Asia and the Caucasus came about. This has expanded to Mali and Guinea, as I have studied percussion instruments from those countries. I have a real fondness for the sacred music of the various O. churches, though it is awfully hard to come by recordings of liturgy and music from the churches that are not aligned with either Greece or Russia. (Just as it’s awfully difficult to come by information about them in English.) I also like a wide variety of Muslim devotional music and am in awe of the skills of those who practice Qur’anic recitation.

    If you have any info. or links (or anything else) that might be of help to me in finding more info. and music (and maybe people), please feel free to contact me off-list. I will ask Dee to send you my email addy, though I’m not sure she will be able to get to that anytime soon, what with her upcoming trip to D.C.

  196. @ William G.: About All Night Vigils: were the members of the congregation fasting? Because going w/out food and/or water for long periods of time can certainly do things to a person, especially if they have medical conditions that would be exacerbated by the physical changes caused by prolonged fasting.

  197. elizabetta carrera wrote:

    A few comments from this group isn’t really an issue.

    @ elizabetta carrera:

    I have to disagree. Persecution from unbelievers is to be expected; Jesus told us all it would happen. Catholics, Orthodox, Protestants, Whoever, when it comes to “the world” it will happen. That would be genuine persecution, not just using the word for dramatic effect. It has happened historically, certainly. And I am thinking about the Christians in Mosul right now.

    Criticism can be a mixed bag. It can have a part in keeping people checking on themselves to see if it is warranted. Health care providers are now encouraging criticism, even some furnishing forms to fill out for that purpose.

    But ridicule or lies or exaggerations from one christian group against another hurts everybody, and somebody needs to call people out when they do that. I think open discussion and disagreement done well can be helpful, but unjust accusations are quite another thing. Personally I think that Bill Donohue and the Catholic League have the best approach-confront and clarify. It is put up or shut up time, and I think that is good. And as a side effect, it clearly shows not only who did what but also who was not involved and therefore not to blame.

    But if catholic bashing, or any kind of bashing, is going to get riled up again, like Reader at 1:18 today said it is time now to “nip it in the bud.” For everybody’s sake.

  198. @ Nancy: Bill Donohue and the catholic League do not speak for all Catholics, American or otherwise.

    I take issue with many of his pronouncements, but that’s a subject for another place and time.

  199. NJ wrote:

    “The Gospel Coalition, the Council of Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, and just about every conference out there, all para-church, do not allow an egalitarian point of view.”
    In other words, parachurch organizations are just fine as long as they’re part of the YRR, neocalvinist movement. Otherwise, they’re unbiblical, nonGospel entities.

    Plus, the Calvinistas, via the PCA, have their OWN college parachurch organization: Reformed University Fellowship (RUF). Ergo, those students who get involved in IVF will not have time for the pure Gospel (TM) of RUF.

  200. @ Mike Stidham:

    The opposition to para-church organizations pre-dates the comp/ egal controversy by decades. Way back when I was in college the various denominations had their own campus organizations (BSU for baptists, Newman Club I think for catholics, etc.) The only other thing we were aware of at the time was Youth for Christ, which was in town but not on campus, and that had opposition from denomination minded groups on campus and also from some pastors. One difference worth mentioning is that YforC was more about evangelistic revival style meetings, and not about being a social organization, but even so (or especially so) it met with significant opposition partly for the very fact that it was para-church.

  201. @ ar:
    Hey Ar, sorry for any misunderstanding; the didactic nature of my post did not assume a lack of knowledge on your part, rather, I was responding to the same person you were, and was attempting to preserve the integrity of the thread for ease of reference. From the sound of it you probably know as much, if not more, about lectionaries than I do; even now there are aspects of liturgical programming I find completely baffling.

  202. @ Nancy:
    Indeed, the lack of awareness of Orthodoxy is regrettable, and its due to a remarkable failure on the part of the Orthodox churches; Metropolitan Philip Saliba of blessed memory chided his flock by lamenting that the Orthodox church was the best kept secret in America. Most people who are aware of it regard it as a quaint, ethnic affair, and some parishes further this view by being somewhat, shall we say, hostile, to those who do not share their ethnic markup. Of course, you see this in the Roman church and even in some ethnic Protestant churches, but it is a major problem in the Orthodox church, particularly in some of the Greek parishes (which are also the ones experiencing the fastest attrition among members).

    On your other point, I find your Catholic RCIA instructor using the phrase “baptizing the idols” to be rather troubling; my contact with the Roman church is largely limited to those in the traditional Latin mass community, who most definitely would not be comfortable with such language; one does not find such a phrase on the pages of the CDF website either, one might add. However, it is typical of post-Vatican II theology. From an Orthodox perspective, we would also somewhat wince at the sight of a Catholic parishioner kneeling before a statue; three dimensional images are actually prohibited in Orthodox iconography, and there are restrictions on the maximum extent of bas-relief sculpture, to avoid the appearance of idols. This is also why Orthodox icons are highly stylized (especially those in the Syriac tradition, which depict human subjects in an almost diagrammatical fashion, exceeding significantly the highly stylized form you see in Byzantine or Coptic icons).

    Lastly, I should say that even Calvin admitted the legitimacy of the feast of Easter. The fact that Polycarp, a disciple of John the Beloved Disciple, had a conference with the Roman bishops about this in the mid 2nd century, should be enough to convince anyone of the apostolic origins of Pascha, as it is known in the East (the word is taken from Passover). The Easter feast is directly derived from the Jewish passover, and historically many Christians, the quartodecimians, celebrated it at the same time as the Jewish feast, on the fourteenth of Nissan (a practice prohibited at the 1st council of Nicea). The word “Easter” does have pagan origins, but is a peculiarity of the English language; most people refer to the great feast using words such as Pascha, Passen, et cetera. “Christ our Paschal lamb is sacrificed!”

    Ultimately, when it comes to most of the inherited practices of the church, such as the various feasts, if one accepts the 27-book Athanasian canon, one should accept those practices, because Athanasius did. You have to have faith in the early church as much as faith in Bible, because the early church handed the holy scriptures down to us, and their practices beyond the Bible are thus axiomatically as legitimate as the Bible itself. If one rejects the authority of the early church, one might as well affiliate oneself with the Gnostics, or the Marcionites, or the Ebionites, or others whom the early church rejected as heretics, and indeed in the past century many have.

  203. numo wrote:

    @ William G.: About All Night Vigils: were the members of the congregation fasting? Because going w/out food and/or water for long periods of time can certainly do things to a person, especially if they have medical conditions that would be exacerbated by the physical changes caused by prolonged fasting.

    I would expect so; one does not usually see people munching on snacks during church services, the Eucharist and antidoron aside. Now that said, the Orthodox fast from the night before receiving the Eucharist, maintain a strict fast from Good Friday until midnight on Easter Sunday, and in general spend more than half of the year in various states of fasting, so going without food for a mere ten hours would come naturally. The Oriental Orthodox and the Assyrians maintain a three day strict fast called the Rogation of the Ninevites, in which they drink only water, and only sparingly. There can be no doubt that these fasts produce altered states of consciousness, which is probably why the church, in imitation of Christ himself, always used them; one might go so far as to say the altered state of mind produced through fasting is a clear part of God’s design for the human body. I should state however that dispensations in the case of ill fast are always granted; in the Byzantine churches, failure to observe a fast is not regarded as a sin, and one is only permitted to fast with the correct disposition.

  204. numo wrote:

    @ William G.: William, thanks so much for your reply. I can understand your affinity for Orthodox who are not in communion with the Moscow patriarchate, though if I were ever to convert to some form of Orthodoxy, I’d be more inclined to go Armenian or Arabic or some other church w/Syriac liturgy.
    I find the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church’s music fascinating (liturgy and spiritual songs), especially given the fact that there is a large Ethiopian and Eritrean community in the Virginia and MD suburbs of D.C. It has fanned out from there; I’ve found some great YouTube vids of a singer who lives in the Richmond area (a woman) as well as of a teenager who is training with her. I find it striking that women seem to have established their own role (as singers and drummers, at least) in the EOT Church, and I like that. The fact that women cannot even think about being ordained in the O. Churches (of whatever affiliation) is a hard thing for me (coming as I do from a Lutheran background and moderate feminist standpoint), so the way women *are* accepted as being able to sing spiritual songs and participate in the liturgy in many EOT churches is very heartening to me.
    I really love a lot of Persian classical music and Arabic classical, folkloric and popular music, and think the Armenians can’t be beat at certain styles of music and at small-group singing. There’s an Armenian Apostolic church right outside of D.C. that has a great festival with wonderful performers – many of them relatively recent immigrants to the US as well 2nd and 3d generation children/grandchildren. I think they helped breathe life into the AA churches in that part of the East Coast (there are also Armenian immigrant communities in and around Richmond, VA).
    I am a percussionist, though I don’t really play Western instruments (I started out on darbouka back in the late 80s), so you can maybe see how/why my interest in the cultures and countries of the Middle East and Central Asia and the Caucasus came about. This has expanded to Mali and Guinea, as I have studied percussion instruments from those countries. I have a real fondness for the sacred music of the various O. churches, though it is awfully hard to come by recordings of liturgy and music from the churches that are not aligned with either Greece or Russia. (Just as it’s awfully difficult to come by information about them in English.) I also like a wide variety of Muslim devotional music and am in awe of the skills of those who practice Qur’anic recitation.
    If you have any info. or links (or anything else) that might be of help to me in finding more info. and music (and maybe people), please feel free to contact me off-list. I will ask Dee to send you my email addy, though I’m not sure she will be able to get to that anytime soon, what with her upcoming trip to D.C.

    I’d be more than happy to send you some information; you’ll find extensive use of percussion music in the Coptic and Chaldean Catholic churches, in addition to the Ethiopian church. I have assembled a collection of videos of Oriental liturgy on Youtube, which you may enjoy, here: http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL9fWQV-4LZFdMlD-EbNIRAHRqx-HinEO9

  205. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    I’m sure we all understand here that “Muslim” does not equal terrorist, jihadist or ISIS.

    The expression, “Not all Muslims are terrorists, but many terrorists are Muslims” does fit.

    I do not like Islam. I do regard many of its adherents as being violent and misogynistic, and their religious books and teachings undergird such views and encourage them to believe this way and behave this way.

    I’m sure someone on here can tell me she is close personal friends with Hank the Muslim, and that Hank is a loving soul who gives food to the poor and rescues sick puppies from sewer grates, which is great, but my view is that Hank is an anomaly.

    Hank being a nice guy who attends a Mosque doesn’t change the fact that there are many Muslims who do indeed commit violent acts against those who won’t convert, treat women as second class citizens, and then there are the silent once who are complicit in that they sit back and do not protest this stuff.

  206. @ William G.:

    I really enjoy reading what you are writing. I gather, though, from your last paragraph of the cited comment that you may not be overly familiar with some of the more radical ideas within some aspects of protestantism. In the tradition into which I was born (baptist) and in which I grew up there was a mix of ideas, some rather mild influence by calvinism (compared to today’s neo-puritans) and some quite radical ideas from pre-reformation and radical reformation influence. For example, there were some who took pride in the fact that, indeed, from the get go there were those who did not conform to the “big church” and who were “persecuted” and called heretics by the “big church.” Some folks even felt that elements of the then baptist thought (which always varied from person to person and church to church) stood in the proud tradition of those of old who were the outsiders. To suggest to them that they ought to believe something because some early church council said so would not fly. In fact, some baptists refused to call themselves protestants, saying that they were not protesting anything ( catholic church ) because they came from a long tradition of there being dissenters of various kinds who had never been part of the big church. That is quite different from the calvinists of the conservative resurgence at this time.

    Let me give you an example. I was reading that the RCC opinion of St. Augustine of Hippo and the Orthodox opinion of him are somewhat different, with the RCC having the higher opinion. Well, the people that I am talking about would think that maybe St. A might have had something good to say, or not, but that the whole idea of sainthood as understood by the RCC was itself in error, and that one would certainly have to be careful reading StA lest one be led astray by contaminated thinking. So, you link that with some council and with Athanasius and you can just forget it. They think that by then the big church had already made too much peace with Rome and had veered from the simplicity of the faith of the apostles. They might listen to something from before Constantine but they would discredit anything from subsequent to that as potentially compromised by church/ state issues.

    I am not saying I think this, I am saying that there is this out there in some radical lines of thinking. Part of this terminology of “back to the bible” is linked with this thinking. If I knew of a website or book to mention, I would. This is not so much a definable system of beliefs as it is an attitude. It was taught to me in my home, but at the time I believe it may have been more common among the IFB than the SBC which we were. It was passed down as part of the culture, but nobody ever memorized any bible verses about this one way or the other that I know of. I was so thankful for Father T because he understood this and had been exposed to it before he converted, but the lay catechists apparently had no idea at the time that such a thing was out there.

    OK, one more way to try to explain it. At the Greek festival, if you check out the religious books and tour the church, they are sure to tell yo that they are the original church as that the RCC is schismatic and in error. Conversely, one hears comments certainly from lay catholics, that they are the original church with a 2000 year history and the orthodox are schismatic. Even so, the people who claim to lie in the tradition of those who refused to participate from the get go believe that both the catholic and orthodox traditions have wandered off based on political and cultural pressures and that only those who refused to participate all along were on the right track. This does not mean that they condone every religious thought of every “heretical” group that ever was. It does mean that they admire non-cooperation and believe that what they see as the early faith should not be added to by later developments.

    I am sure that somebody will read this and not understand what I have said. I am talking about ideas and attitudes and sub-cultures, not something which has a specific name that I know of.

  207. Nancy–you are so right about the culture and subcultures.

    And some forget some early Baptists came pretty close to modalism, if were not outright modalists. And some yet today are both Baptist and universalist.

    It is hard for some to understand, but being called heretic for not holding to something from the councils usually called ecumenical councils is a mark of pride to some, not shame.

    Our town has a handful of varieties of Oneness Pentecostal and they are roundly chided at the Baptist church for being heretics. Thing is, I’ve heard their pastors and our pastors (SBC) use the exact same explanations or illustrations of the Godhead.

    I’ve reached the point I ignore the labels and fellowship with all who love and strive to obey Jesus Christ as Lord and God.

  208. linda wrote:

    some early Baptists came pretty close to modalism, if were not outright modalists.

    I never actually heard that exactly, but God was talked about as Father and Son with no mention at all, except is some hymns, of the Holy Spirit. So it was not a rigorous trinitarianism that was actually practiced, that is for sure, though I never actually heard the trinity denied. I just now remembered that one pastor wanted to add the doxology to the order of worship and some people objected in that they thought it was “too catholic.” I never figured that out, but now that you mention modalism it might have been too trinitarian for some people–interesting thought to consider.

  209. @ William G.: I understand re. the various fasts; still, it is one thing to be doing that when able to sit or lie down, and quite another for hours on end while standing in the same place. I know how I feel when I’m sleepy and food-deprived – it can lead to lightheadedness and even a sense of elation.

    Also, I was trying to make a distinction between people with serious medical conditions (I did know that the aren’t required to fast) and those who have mild/moderate physical problems that could be exacerbated by a 10+ hour fast. People might not even be aware that they have such problems until something happens that makes them aware, and I’m thinking this could be the case with laypeople who only attend truly long services a few times a year. Monastics (of any stripe, but in some Western orders in particular) are accustomed to vigils, keeping the divine hours and more. I think it has a great deal to do w/what one is used to. A 10- hour service seems extremely demanding for those w/out a run-up to it, so to speak.

  210. @ Daisy:
    With respect, I think learning more about the religion and its history might be extremely helpful to you. Your blanket statement is very troubling – you do realize that people in other parts of the world who know little about xtianity are sometimes prone to saying the exact same thing, right? And people *everywhere* who know nothing about Judaism say the same… xtians more than anyone, historically.

    Islam is as complex and diverse as xtianitu. Please do not judge Muslims or Islam by reductive Western depictions of extremists. That there are extremists is a sad fact: still, the vast majority of the world’s Muslims do *not* fit that description.

  211. @ Daisy: let me add that many who claim to be xtians are KKK members, in Aryan Nation and “Christian Identity.” So should people of other faiths assume that all xtians are bigots and terrorists?

  212. numo wrote:

    Islam is as complex and diverse as xtianitu. Please do not judge Muslims or Islam by reductive Western depictions of extremists. That there are extremists is a sad fact: still, the vast majority of the world’s Muslims do *not* fit that description.

    Problem is, in a lot of places the Extremists are the ones in control. ISIS is only the latest bunch to seize political power and start building their Perfect Islamic Society by force. It’s an Islamic version of Culture War, taking back the Caliphate and forcing it into a Truly Godly Truly Islamic Perfect State (sound familiar?).

  213. @ Nancy: I’ll admit to getting tired of the way in which the terms “heterodox” and “heretics” are SO frequently used by many xtians.

    And it sure would be nice if many of our low church kin wouldn’t write off the first 1500 years of church history. You’d think everything began during 15th and 16th centuries, to hear them tell it.

  214. Daisy wrote:

    I do not like Islam. I do regard many of its adherents as being violent and misogynistic, and their religious books and teachings undergird such views and encourage them to believe this way and behave this way.

    Their religious books and teachings came out of Arab tribal society and are optimized for Arab tribal society, reflecting Arab Tribal Society — the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly — formed in the violent Zero-Sum Game of the Arabian deserts. Then came 400 years of the Curse of Runaway Early Success and a Cultural Imperialism as extreme as the later Europeans.

    And when the Islamic Winning Streak came to an end (with the Mongols to hammer the point home), Islamic Civilization never completely recovered. The Curse of Early Success led to the idea that to Succeed Again, We Have To Get Back To The Way It Was In The Beginning. Add a nostalgia for those early glory days and their own iconoclasts destroying their own faith’s solid historical trace and you have Islam always looking for that semi-mythic Glorious Past.

  215. Mike Stidham wrote:

    Plus, the Calvinistas, via the PCA, have their OWN college parachurch organization: Reformed University Fellowship (RUF). Ergo, those students who get involved in IVF will not have time for the pure Gospel (TM) of RUF.

    RUF = CalvinJugend?

  216. @ Headless Unicorn Guy: yeah, it sounds like the various Inquisitions. And by NO means is ISIS welcomed or agreed with by most of the world’s Muslims.

    Who would have thought that the US arming Afghan tribes during the Russian occupation of their country would do a great deal to help w/the formation of Al Qaeda and the Taliban? We went in there blindly, and we helped to sow the whirlwind.

    Fwiw, I don’t think these groups are true adherents is Islam, any more that I think the Klan etc has *anything* to do w/Christ. But religion is such a convenient cloak for intolerance. Eric Hotter had much to say about this – remember him from the 60s?

  217. Nancy wrote:

    One of the take-aways from that for protestants who would object would be the idea that some of the marian devotions might be seen as attractive (way back in the day) for people who came from a culture were there were goddesses. The idea being that no, you can’t have your goddess, but yes you can have hyperdoulia for Mary. In that way maintaining the idea of “the feminine” as close to deity (but not actually deity.)

    Thesis:

    In a time and society where Men Ruled and Women Submitted, Marian devotions and adorations kept the role of Woman as important, more than “domestic animal/breeding stock with benefits”. St Mary and her hyperdoulia acted as a damper rod against the worst excesses of Traditional Patriarchal Systems.

    But the Protestant Reformation (and Truly Reformed, and Truly Truly Reformed) killed respect for St Mary as Romish Paganism. Should we be surprised to see Comp/Patrio strong and rising among the Truly Reformed once they threw St Mary under the bus but kept the Whore of Babylon and Jezebel as the Other/Enemy?

    P.S. A friend with an interest in obscuro history referred me to a history book (can’t remember the title) which claimed that the role and status of women steadily climbed during the Late Medieval times but took a nosedive during the Protestant Reformation and Renaissance. The Reformation took out St Mary/the above-mentioned damper rod and the Renaissance emphasis on recovering/reviving Everything Greco-Roman also revived such pre-Christian Greco-Roman practices as Male Supremacy (the Greeks did it), Absolute-Monarchy World Empires (the Romans did it), rampant Slavery (both Greeks and Romans), and rampant judicial torture (the Romans did it).

  218. @ Headless Unicorn Guy:
    I would really like to know the title/author of that book, if only because I’d need to see it and check it against other sources. It sounds like it might be a title from an academic press.

  219. numo wrote:

    @ Headless Unicorn Guy: err, ancient Near Eastern cultures were very patriarchal. Don’t put it on the Greeks; it was common everywhere.

    At which point you can factor in “SOLA SCRIPTURA!” for further rejection of Romish Popery in favor of OT Semitic tribal culture as well as Greco-Roman. Add a little Verbal Plenary Inspiration to Leviticus(SCRIPTURE!) and ANE patriarchy becomes “IT IS WRITTEN!”

    P.S. Both Koran and Tanakh both came from Semitic tribal cultures. And reflect their Semitic tribal cultures of origin.

  220. Daisy wrote:

    …doesn’t change the fact that there are many Muslims who do indeed commit violent acts against those who won’t convert, treat women as second class citizens, and then there are the silent ones who are complicit in that they sit back and do not protest this stuff.

    Sounds like the history of another religion I know…

  221. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    At which point you can factor in “SOLA SCRIPTURA!” for further rejection of Romish Popery in favor of OT Semitic tribal culture as well as Greco-Roman. Add a little Verbal Plenary Inspiration to Leviticus(SCRIPTURE!) and ANE patriarchy becomes “IT IS WRITTEN!”
    P.S. Both Koran and Tanakh both came from Semitic tribal cultures. And reflect their Semitic tribal cultures of origin.

    It does look that way.

    I do notice that there is interest in “semitic” peoples and ideas now. In theology both the Jesus Seminar and the New Perspective on Paul have looked at the Jewishness of both Jesus and Paul. There is the whole issue of Israel, and some people who used to think that God had abandoned the Jews (and some did think that) are saying, “oops, maybe not,” There is interest in what the messianic Jews are saying. And then there is what we saw in the past century of anti-semitism on steroids, causing reaction against that as well as another look at anti-semitism through the centuries. And then there is the push of evangelization of Muslims which is really big in some denominations (with no names mentioned for safety reasons). Not to forget the real threat of potential huge warfare in the middle east with threats (and some terrorism) against the west. So, yes, the “semites” are center stage right now.

    As for “it is written” that is also center stage in evangelicalism, but it has been as far back as I can remember even before the current upsurge in interest in all things semitic. Those who seek to evangelize among Muslims see this as a huge advantage, so some say that I have read. (That missiology book I previously talked about.) Noting the opposition to some bible translators during the greater reformation era I would say that “it is written” is a big issue pro and con for a lot of people, but I am not any historical authority here. In this emphasis on “it is written”, I think, some protestants are similar to the semites in their attitude to written scriptures.

    So I am saying that what you reference is correct I think and these things show no signs of going away, but rather both aspects of your observation are increasing in importance in recent times.

  222. @ Nancy: somehow I think that people who lived in both Egypt and Babylon – both noted as being crossroads of trade and culture – were without any cultural sophistication themselves. I think the repeated use of the word “tribal” here deflects inquiry into a more complex reality.

    Even w/Paul, it is the case – he was a Roman citizen, from a Hellenistic city and a Hellenized background. Yes, he was very religious, but also seems to have been conversant w/Grrek literature. His home town was a port city, and port cities are still places where people from many different countries and cultures mix. That all promotes adoption and adaptation of the ideas and cuisine and music and (fill in blank) of others.

  223. @ numo: the Psalms and the “wisdom” books are pretty darned sophisticated, and clearly show that ancient Israel was part of the overall social and cultural milieu of the ancient Near East, not entirely sert apart from it.

  224. @ numo:

    I did not use the word “tribal” nor did I discuss Greek or Roman or Egyptian or Babylonian anything. In fact, I referenced only current inquiry and emphasis and theological discussion. Nor did I insinuate that anybody past or present was or was not sophisticated or that any culture was superior to another.

    Unless you are responding to what HUG said, then we have some confusion of communication here.

  225. Nancy wrote:

    The idea being that no, you can’t have your goddess, but yes you can have hyperdoulia for Mary. In that way maintaining the idea of “the feminine” as close to deity (but not actually deity.) Father T did not relate the concept to catholic devotion to Mary, per se, but he did say that this idea in principle was a problem for protestants in thinking of converting to catholicism.

    Isn’t it the dogma of the RCC that Mary was born without original sin; the Immaculate Conception? So did Mary ever sin – if “yes” then Mary had a sin nature, but that seems to contradict the Immaculate Conception; if “no” then Mary was perfect and didn’t need a savior which makes her a deity. Did Father T ever explain this paradox?

  226. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Problem is, in a lot of places the Extremists are the ones in control. ISIS is only the latest bunch to seize political power and start building their Perfect Islamic Society by force. It’s an Islamic version of Culture War, taking back the Caliphate and forcing it into a Truly Godly Truly Islamic Perfect State (sound familiar?).

    I have a question about this. With the advent of social media we see many Christian oriented discerment blogs discussing the horrible problems with groups that call themselves Christians.

    Are there many Muslim blogs/websites doing the same concerning the horrible problems in Islam? I have tried and tried to find them but there is not much out there. I wonder why that is? Fear, perhaps?

  227. @ Joe2:

    I don’t know if it was Father T or not, but somewhere I heard one answer. But since I am not a catholic and do not speak for catholics, much less the catholic church, and since there are capable catholics here who can answer it I defer to them. My branch of protestantism does not have any marian dogmas so for me there is nothing to discuss in that area, one way or the other. I do not mind setting forth and even defending my own beliefs, but the marian dogmas belong to them and are really none of my business.

  228. @ Nancy: I know you didn’t, but it is in the post by HUG that you quoted.

    Sorry for not being clear that I as addressing him in part of my reply.

    Man, text-only communication is a bear sometimes! 🙂

  229. An egalitarian stand on women in ministry is so sacrosanct that complementarians are unwelcome in IV.

    Does Stiles realize that this cannot logically be true if Catholics are allowed in IV? The Catholic church doesn’t ordain women (i.e., they can’t be priests), which makes them basically comp. Or is “complementarian” now restricted to Protestant churches (even though that wasn’t part of the original definition)?

  230. @ Lydia: do yo read Arabic, or Farsi, or Malay, or Urdu, or…??? Because the likelihood of criticism being in English is low. French, yes (for parts of the Middle East and North and West Africa, also in Spanish re. the Spanish Sahara, parts of Morocco, etc.)

    Please keep in mind that many regimes ruthlessly censor content that originates in their countries. There is plenty of material in English (even a book) by and about Iranian bloggers who have been subverting the restrictions – and criticizing the social, political and religious problems in Iran – that’s available in English. Am sure that folks in the Iranian emigre community here and elsewhere have been assisting them. It is the only free press from w/in Iran. Fwiw, there are some good English I language papers and magazines (also available online) that address these issues, as well as the arts and culture and life in the exile communities in the US and Canada.

    France hard had a large Arab and Berber (N. African) population since after WWII, w/many Lebanese (of all religions) who came as refugees during the civil wars there, beginning in the 1970s. And so many Senegalese Muslims live there, along with more recent emigres (again, many of them refugees) from Mali and Guinea. Sometimes they write in French, but also in their native languages – also true for the many Sudanese and Somalis in the US and elsewhere, though I’m guessing that Arabic is one of the main languages for publishing in that case.

    Pakistanis are likely to write in English or Urdu; Bangladeshis in English or Bengal.

    The list could go on. And many people use Twitter and text as well. Again, keep in mind that things get censored, servers and cell phone networks get knocked out (etc) by the governments of most Middle Eastern countries, which are all authoritarian regimes.

  231. @ numo: point I forgot above: writing material that’s critical of politics and religion is very risky for many, both here and abroad, due to reprisals against famiky members, imprisonment and torture and… I cannot fathom how hard it must be for so many, including emigres who have family back home.

  232. @ Hester:

    I don’t think that limiting the priesthood to men qualifies in and of itself to call people comp. SBC does not ordain women, and those folks are split on comp. Comp basically has to do with marriage.

  233. Nancy wrote:

    @ William G.:
    I really enjoy reading what you are writing. I gather, though, from your last paragraph of the cited comment that you may not be overly familiar with some of the more radical ideas within some aspects of protestantism. In the tradition into which I was born (baptist) and in which I grew up there was a mix of ideas, some rather mild influence by calvinism (compared to today’s neo-puritans) and some quite radical ideas from pre-reformation and radical reformation influence. For example, there were some who took pride in the fact that, indeed, from the get go there were those who did not conform to the “big church” and who were “persecuted” and called heretics by the “big church.” Some folks even felt that elements of the then baptist thought (which always varied from person to person and church to church) stood in the proud tradition of those of old who were the outsiders. To suggest to them that they ought to believe something because some early church council said so would not fly. In fact, some baptists refused to call themselves protestants, saying that they were not protesting anything ( catholic church ) because they came from a long tradition of there being dissenters of various kinds who had never been part of the big church. That is quite different from the calvinists of the conservative resurgence at this time.
    Let me give you an example. I was reading that the RCC opinion of St. Augustine of Hippo and the Orthodox opinion of him are somewhat different, with the RCC having the higher opinion. Well, the people that I am talking about would think that maybe St. A might have had something good to say, or not, but that the whole idea of sainthood as understood by the RCC was itself in error, and that one would certainly have to be careful reading StA lest one be led astray by contaminated thinking. So, you link that with some council and with Athanasius and you can just forget it. They think that by then the big church had already made too much peace with Rome and had veered from the simplicity of the faith of the apostles. They might listen to something from before Constantine but they would discredit anything from subsequent to that as potentially compromised by church/ state issues.
    I am not saying I think this, I am saying that there is this out there in some radical lines of thinking. Part of this terminology of “back to the bible” is linked with this thinking. If I knew of a website or book to mention, I would. This is not so much a definable system of beliefs as it is an attitude. It was taught to me in my home, but at the time I believe it may have been more common among the IFB than the SBC which we were. It was passed down as part of the culture, but nobody ever memorized any bible verses about this one way or the other that I know of. I was so thankful for Father T because he understood this and had been exposed to it before he converted, but the lay catechists apparently had no idea at the time that such a thing was out there.
    OK, one more way to try to explain it. At the Greek festival, if you check out the religious books and tour the church, they are sure to tell yo that they are the original church as that the RCC is schismatic and in error. Conversely, one hears comments certainly from lay catholics, that they are the original church with a 2000 year history and the orthodox are schismatic. Even so, the people who claim to lie in the tradition of those who refused to participate from the get go believe that both the catholic and orthodox traditions have wandered off based on political and cultural pressures and that only those who refused to participate all along were on the right track. This does not mean that they condone every religious thought of every “heretical” group that ever was. It does mean that they admire non-cooperation and believe that what they see as the early faith should not be added to by later developments.
    I am sure that somebody will read this and not understand what I have said. I am talking about ideas and attitudes and sub-cultures, not something which has a specific name that I know of.

    Believe me, I’m aware of this radical faction within Baptism; I myself find it to be a fascinating attempt to avoid the theological implications of The Great Apostasy that many other hardline protestants believe in (which implies that, contrary to Christ’s assurances, the gates of Hell did in fact prevail against the church). Within the 19th century for example, you had the amusing spectacle of Baptists claiming descent from the early Gnostic Christians. This occurred at roughly the same time that the last Christian Gnostics, the Paulicians of Armenia, converted to Orthodoxy (there is still one sect of non-Christian Gnostics, the Mandaeans (who worship John the Baptist; other Gnostics worshipped Mani, or Seth, or Cain, and Gnosticism as a faith it is generally believed predated Christianity), as well as several other religions, such as Yazidism and the Druze faith, heavily influenced by Gnostic and neo-Platonic theology).

    Within the 20th century, the discovery of the Nag Hammadi library has removed any doubts however about what the Gnostics actually believe. Thus, the idea that Protestantism emerged from a continuation of Gnosticism, spreading from the Paulicians to the Bogomils to the Cathari to the Waldensians, has been somewhat deflated; although it is possible the early Waldensians were influenced by Gnostic theology, their ideas had no influence on later Protestantism, and in fact, they essentially adopted Calvin wholesale. Anabaptism is entirely the theological product of the Radical Reformation.

    Of course, I suppose there are still some uneducated Landmark Baptist pastors out there who claim a descent from rebel factions in the early church; in that case, being the good “Back to the Bible, Sola Scriptura” guys that they actually are, I would encourage them to read the Gospel of Thomas, which contains gems like “Any female who makes herself male will inherit the Kingdom of God,” or the Gospel of Philip, which in a text full of lacunae, says that Christ used to kiss [Mary Magdalene] often on her [ and then there is another lacuna, in the most suggestive of places ], then still say whether or not the early Church, the pre-schism Orthodox-Catholic church, got it wrong.

    Now if in fact one did want to seriously put together a theology of dissent from the mainstream of Christianity, ones best bet would be to pursue a path connecting one to the Assyrians, during their Nestorian phase. Nestorius vehemently denied that Mary was the Theotokos, or Bearer of God, insisting instead she was the bearer of Christ. Nestorius’s theology regarding the clear separation between Christ’s humanity and divinity parallels and in fact naturally flows into Calvinist and Baptist theology. One can also see in the Assyrians a persecuted church outside the bounds of Imperial Byzantine influence, although one can frankly find the same thing in the Oriental Orthodox.

    Of course, the modern Assyrians desire unity with their Christian brethren, and not separation, aside from a very small breakaway faction called the Ancient Church of the East.

    Now I should stress by the way that I have nothing but love for all these people; the Baptists who have, as a result of a not unwarranted allergic reaction to the corruption of the Roman Catholic church in the Renaissance, adopted an extremely anti-Catholic theology, I sympathize with and feel sorry for. I myself had much contact with that tradition in my youth, but was always a Methodist and chose to move in the direction of the early church to the fullest extent possible, by embracing those communities with the oldest traditions of unaltered worship.

  234. numo wrote:

    @ William G.: I understand re. the various fasts; still, it is one thing to be doing that when able to sit or lie down, and quite another for hours on end while standing in the same place. I know how I feel when I’m sleepy and food-deprived – it can lead to lightheadedness and even a sense of elation.
    Also, I was trying to make a distinction between people with serious medical conditions (I did know that the aren’t required to fast) and those who have mild/moderate physical problems that could be exacerbated by a 10+ hour fast. People might not even be aware that they have such problems until something happens that makes them aware, and I’m thinking this could be the case with laypeople who only attend truly long services a few times a year. Monastics (of any stripe, but in some Western orders in particular) are accustomed to vigils, keeping the divine hours and more. I think it has a great deal to do w/what one is used to. A 10- hour service seems extremely demanding for those w/out a run-up to it, so to speak.

    The ability of Russians, especially the Old Believers, to stand in church for extraordinary lengths of time is widely documented, a visiting Arab Orthodox bishop in the 17th century described the pure agony he felt in trying to keep up with them on Holy Week, so that by Easter Sunday, he and his companions were in profound agony. “As for the Muscovites, their feet and legs must surely be made of iron,” he wrote. From personal experience I can attest to the veracity of this statement. However, during the all night vigil, a lot of time would also be spent on the floor, prostrating, and most of those present, aside from the Bishop, were relatively young and healthy seminarians and choristers.

  235. @ William G.: btw, I hear you about the people involved being relatively young and healthy. I am not as young as I was (in my late 50s), so the idea of *anything* lasting even half that long – fasting and w/out a break – is extremely daunting. (I couldn’t fast, due to medical conditions, but I can imagine how it might feel…)

  236. numo wrote:

    I would really like to know the title/author of that book, if only because I’d need to see it and check it against other sources. It sounds like it might be a title from an academic press.

    Got the title & author from my source:
    Women in the Age of the Cathedrals
    by Regine Pernoud

    My source says it’s out-of-print; he got a copy through inter-library loan.

  237. @ Headless Unicorn Guy: many thanks, HUG!

    A preliminary thought: women of high rank did have a fair amount of freedom in some countries, but if you didn’t have a title and wealth and attending status, well…

  238. @ William G.:

    OK, William, this is my last try at this. I am about to doubt my own sanity with trying to explain what I mean.

    What I am talking about is not some people thinking their spiritual ancestors used to be gnostics. I don’t doubt your historical research, but I never ran into anything like that, nor knew that it existed. Are you familiar with the doctrine of soul competency? Within that framework people are wont to hold a variety of beliefs some of which may have been rejected in the past and clearly which were not part of the intricate theological system of catholicism or any other group. This is what I am saying. All I can do is furnish an example. In the home I grew up in, my father (who was a lay bible teacher of the men’s bible class in a relatively large SBC church- and was proficient in both Greek and somewhat so in Hebrew just because he was like that) held some ideas that were more consistent with Jewish thinking but not particularly mainstream baptist thought, though not in the realm of actual heresy or so. He did this within the framework of the doctrine of soul competency and within the long tradition of the fact that the religious establishments had never been able to completely stamp out individual thought and scholarship and belief, no matter how much various ideas might be labeled heretical or what. This had nothing to do with tracing descent from some particular prior group or theology. It had everything to do with thinking for oneself, just like the dissenters of old. That is the link, the tradition. I believe some would call it freedom. There have always been some who stood for freedom from religious coercion. Forget the gnostics. Think Galileo. Think Wycliffe. For that matter go back to the early christological debates–carefully. That is the sort of thing I am talking about. And christianity has 2000 years more or less of dealing with people who do this. Refuse to turn over their conscience to any entity except God, is how they see it.

    I can’t explain it any better than that. This sort of thinking is still there in baptist thought, but the neo-Puritans seem to be trying to stamp it out and control what people believe. Had I known about the gnostic stuff you are talking about I would have explained myself better in the first place.

    Now I am not talking about this any more.

  239. Daisy, very few people in the SBC ever protested, spoke out against, or publicly rejected the KKK, discrimination against black people, lynching, etc. A few pastors did, and were fired from their churches. Almost no one in the time, protested against the Inquisition, which targeted Jews and Moslems (as they were then called). Calvin murdered people and no one protested against Calvin, and many honor him today. Baptist Christians in the 1600s were thrown in the river with weights to drown, men and women, by other Protestants, who were the early founders of many Protestant denominations, now revered by those in those denominations. And Christians believed in manifest destiny, that God authorized them killing out the native Americans. Etc., etc., etc. When you point fingers, remember that more point at you than at others.

    The radical fringe with guns and other weapons, with five percent of the population, can take over and cause people to cringe in fear of speaking out.

    Check out the McCarthy era witch hunt for alleged communists, people who had friends at a time when the Soviet Union was an ally and not an enemy. Innocent people lost their jobs, etc., and almost no one spoke out against the purges that were taking place by employers and neighborhoods, until a very brave newsman took him on.

    The discrimination against the Irish immigrants to this country was so severe that people actually starved to death in the United States. And we locked up people, stealing their homes and businesses, who were citizens of this country, and who were born in this country, and whose family members were volunteers to fight in our military, because they had Japanese ancestors. Did your church or denomination speak out against those atrocities, or were your church and denomination going along to get along, or were they advocating the internment?

  240. @ William G.:
    Fascinating, thank you very much for the history lesson. I had never heard of the Yazidi. The evolution and cross pollination of various religions and their paths through history fascinate me, it tells such an interesting story about humanity.

  241. @ numo:
    Well said. That is something I focus on watching out for in my own biases. It’s so easy for really awful people to cloak themselves in religion (I’d include all beliefs in this: atheist, theist or deist). It’s a weakness I think of any system of beliefs or moral codes that has redemption as a possibility. Just something awful humans can easily exploit I guess.

    @ An Attorney:

    Thank you, I appreciate your truly equal application of rights to all people, regardless.

  242. @ Headless Unicorn Guy:
    I’ve never thought of it that way. I have discussed with some others that Islam definitely needs a “Reformation” style moment. The Protestant Reformation can easily be said to have changed the course of history, and I would say helped along the way the concept and sometime enforcement of human rights, both basic and civil.

    However if they are locked in a long fruitless search for a past that was half myth, that sort of funk could be really difficult for them to move on from. Ugh. Excellent comment, thank you.

  243. @ An Attorney:

    Daisy’s comments were a bit too wide sweeping, but you seem to be saying that when people did these things while calling themselves christians it was wrong, and therefore when people do these things while calling themselves muslims it is somehow less wrong? That does not make a lot of sense. These things are either right or wrong, regardless of who does it.

  244. The point I was making was that small numbers of people with some sort of influence can take over an area or a religious movement and take control, and turn it to evil. The membership of the KKK was not large, but it was very influential, as were the law enforcement people who enforced Jim Crow laws, and a great deal of evil was done, much in the name of Christianity (the SBC and the Presbys of the the South justified slavery as “biblical”). Similarly with many of the other things I mentioned.

    The worst of the atrocities in the Middle East and other Muslim majority countries come from two sources: long-time cultural practices that predate Islam, but have been conflated with Islam (see note below); and radical religious “conservatives” who have chosen certain (mis)interpretations of the Koran on which to build a movement. And the one seems to tolerate and cooperate with the other.

    In Christianity, we have the extreme comps who have taken ancient ideas about gender and roles and mixed them a bit with some proof-texted verses from the Bible to create an abusive set of norms for women. Western emphasis on individual human rights has shoved that off to one side for most people in the U.S., western Europe and majority caucasian former colonies, but not all. That shift has not happened in Islam, but that does not mean that all Muslims believe the misogynistic and violent garbage any more than all Christians believe the extreme comp trash. It does not take many activists with weapons and a bent to kill to control a large population of people who are trying to protect their families from violence. There has always been a educated elite among Moslems that cherish peace, learning, education, preservation of historic sites etc. But to stand up to the fringe is to sign one’s death warrant.

    I lost a friend in the 1964 freedom summer, killed for helping people register to vote. I do not condemn all Southerners for that atrocity; btw, the events of that summer were a wake up call for those white Christians in the South who applied their love of Jesus to the social situation around them and rose up against the violence of the KKK. Some had their homes burned, many were threatened, and some were beaten. But with the help of the federal government, headed by a Southerner, they overcame. Now it is going back the other way to an extent.

    Today there are efforts underway to turn religious conservatives away from following the model of Christ and his disciples regarding the least in society toward dominionism, compism, and racism.

    The intent of my remarks is to point out that many of us do want to be tarred with the worst of the things that some have taught and done while claiming them to be justified by their alleged Christianity.

    Do unto the Muslim what you would have done to you in this regard.

  245. @ numo:

    There is free speech for Muslims in America. Are you familiar with any Islamic discernment blogs/websites here or perhaps in Britian?

  246. Albuquerque Blue wrote:

    @ William G.:

    Fascinating, thank you very much for the history lesson. I had never heard of the Yazidi. The evolution and cross pollination of various religions and their paths through history fascinate me, it tells such an interesting story about humanity.

    Indeed, its exciting stuff. All of these minority religions are critically endangered however; the Yazidi live just a few miles from Mosul, and like the Assyrian Christians in that region, are critically endangered. The Yazidi have historically been allies of the Christian community; they helped protect Armenians due to the genocide, and are the largest minority religion in Armenia.

  247. Nancy wrote:

    @ William G.:
    OK, William, this is my last try at this. I am about to doubt my own sanity with trying to explain what I mean.
    What I am talking about is not some people thinking their spiritual ancestors used to be gnostics. I don’t doubt your historical research, but I never ran into anything like that, nor knew that it existed. Are you familiar with the doctrine of soul competency? Within that framework people are wont to hold a variety of beliefs some of which may have been rejected in the past and clearly which were not part of the intricate theological system of catholicism or any other group. This is what I am saying. All I can do is furnish an example. In the home I grew up in, my father (who was a lay bible teacher of the men’s bible class in a relatively large SBC church- and was proficient in both Greek and somewhat so in Hebrew just because he was like that) held some ideas that were more consistent with Jewish thinking but not particularly mainstream baptist thought, though not in the realm of actual heresy or so. He did this within the framework of the doctrine of soul competency and within the long tradition of the fact that the religious establishments had never been able to completely stamp out individual thought and scholarship and belief, no matter how much various ideas might be labeled heretical or what. This had nothing to do with tracing descent from some particular prior group or theology. It had everything to do with thinking for oneself, just like the dissenters of old. That is the link, the tradition. I believe some would call it freedom. There have always been some who stood for freedom from religious coercion. Forget the gnostics. Think Galileo. Think Wycliffe. For that matter go back to the early christological debates–carefully. That is the sort of thing I am talking about. And christianity has 2000 years more or less of dealing with people who do this. Refuse to turn over their conscience to any entity except God, is how they see it.
    I can’t explain it any better than that. This sort of thinking is still there in baptist thought, but the neo-Puritans seem to be trying to stamp it out and control what people believe. Had I known about the gnostic stuff you are talking about I would have explained myself better in the first place.
    Now I am not talking about this any more.

    I do beg your pardon Nancy; I did not wish for you to be frustrated. I am entirely aware of the mentality you describe and its influence within Protestantism. My view is that it is misguided and ahistorical, but I respect the right of people to believe it; however, its a view that seems to be fading from prominence in light of increased education about the actual work of the Apostolic church, and how people like Ss. Ignatius, Irenaeus and Athanasius defined what it means to be Christian. It is impossible for the serious scholar of church history to accept the view that a persecuted minority of individual, self-enlightened Christians operating in defiance of the established hierarchy and priesthood has existed in unity with the ideals of the primitive church, throughout history. The early church had a hierarchy from the start, and those who dissented from that hierarchy are condemned in the New Testament, and were condemned by the successors of the Apostles. The extremist view of soul competency you’ve outlined just doesn’t fly; its not a Biblical doctrine, as the New Testament clearly describes, at a minimum, the twofold hierarchy you see in Baptist and Congregational churches, if not the threefold Episcopal hierarchy that later took hold. The successors of the Apostles, who compiled the New Testament, were themselves hierarchs who emphatically rejected the individualist approach you’ve outlined; Mark was the first bishop of Alexandria, according to tradition, and Athanasius, whose 27 book canon is almost universally accepted, was the Patriarch of Alexandria, and in addition to compiling the canon and defending the doctrine of the Trinity against Arianism, Athanasius also is known for having, without violence or coercion, suppressed the ministry of a self-appointed priest who lacked a valid episcopal ordination.

    A prevailing anti-intellectualism among some quarters of the Evangelical movement will doubtless keep this poisonous theology alive, but in a reduced form, as its an inherently poisonous ideology that is in a sense profoundly elitist; people who believe this are basically implying that the majority of those who self-identify as Christians throughout history have in fact been deluded pagans, and will be damned for, in effect, blindly trusting in the appointed authorities rather than the stirring of their own soul; much of the writings of the early church, such as the Philokalia, warn of the dangers of trusting in oneself to that extent.

    Note that I do not in any way dispute anyone’s view to believe this theology, as much as I detest it, and if people who hold this view are being abused, as opposed to being lovingly taught the correct doctrine, by authoritarian Baptist pastors, in order to boost the personal authority and political influence of the pastor, rather than for reasons of correct moral edification, then that is an egregious sin on the part of the pastors in question, a violation of their sacred duty, for which they will have to answer on the dread day of judgment.

  248. William G. wrote:

    people who believe this are basically implying that the majority of those who self-identify as Christians throughout history have in fact been deluded pagans, and will be damned for, in effect, blindly trusting in the appointed authorities rather than the stirring of their own soul; much of the writings of the early church, such as the Philokalia, warn of the dangers of trusting in oneself to that extent.

    Now you have brought up another issue all together. Since I have already made it clear that I went to RCIA, and since you have hurled an inaccurate accusation, I will over-ride my own rule and reply to specifically that.

    Actually, I do not think that “the majority of those who self-identify as Christians” have in fact been “blindly trusting the the appointed authorities” as much as some of the authorities had hoped they would. The church/ state liaisons have historically helped to enforce outward compliance when needed.

    In my experience in RCIA I did not at all see modern post-Vatican II catholicism as oppressive, nor did I see catholics as some sort of mindless automatons. Quite the contrary, I was impressed with the level of emphasis on Jesus (not just the church) and with their willingness to explain their beliefs rather than just say “the church says.” Nor do I see that having a set of beliefs as somehow opposed to “stirring up their own soul” whatever that means (it is not part of baptist terminology that I know of) as mutually contradictory ideas.

    Thing is, I am now Methodist, and they/we are far more varied and mixed in opinions about a number of things than the baptists who resort to “the bible says” in increasingly restrictive ways. And my children are episcopalians, and the episcopalians are now “all over the place” on certain issues apparently. The idea of disagreeing with the church, whatever church, does not at all seem to be dying out in what I have seen. And if you want to see disagreement just check some traditionalist catholic web sites. More than that, check out the pentecostals if you want to see the individual relating to God as an individual. Of note, the recent outreach by the current Pope to pentecostals. These concepts of a basic established belief system and latitude for individual thinking and individual relationship to God are not as mutually contradictory as you seem to be saying, as far as I can see. And, it seems to me, that the differences in these stances has become less apparent now as when I was a child.

    So, no, I do not see hierarchy or its absence as the sole determining factor in this issue either way. I do see politics and church/ state entanglements as problematic however.

  249. @ Nancy:

    But comp isn’t limited to marriage at all. In fact most people I encounter, when they’re talking about comp vs. egal, think first of the ordination of women and not roles in marriage, or at least think of the two simultaneously. They’re usually lumped into the same term in my experience (which I think is a bad idea but that’s beside the point). Basically, if you don’t believe in ordaining women, I’ve never encountered anybody who would not call you comp. Ergo, the original comment about ordination of women being sacrosanct, still stands as self-contradictory because Catholics don’t ordain women.

  250. Addendum @ Nick:

    Unfortunately when I got home yesterday I found out that the family cockatiel died Thursday morning while I was away. 🙁 Nobody told me to avoid ruining my trip. Personally, I’m glad I was away and missed it.

  251. @ Hester:

    You know, that is not the smartest thing in the world, depending on which side of the fence one is on, of course. Because there are right many folks who do not believe in the ordination of women but who live in marriages which Russell Moore has described as egalitarian (while he objected to it, of course.) If you go with all who do not believe in ordination of women as comp, then that significantly swells the ranks of comp people. And, it gives some more legitimacy to the comp position, than if it merely means a strict patriarchal marriage. Everybody can agree that there should not be domestic abuse, but the idea of women in the pulpit has a smaller following.

    Now if believing in the ordination of women were automatically a women’s lib position, yes I can see that designation. But comp? Wow. I had no idea people thought like that, used that designation I mean.

    So, let me be sure about this. Are you saying that “egal” is an all or nothing classification? For example if she does the housework and he does the yard work instead of 50/50 each, is that comp? I am not trying to be obnoxious because I read a women’s lib article in which this was mentioned. So has that thinking now extended to religious comp-ism, is that what you are saying?

    Things change too fast for me to keep up with.

  252. @ Nancy:

    OK, so now I have accessed a non-religious site for a discussion of complementarianism. Don’t know why I never did that before but just listened to people talk and thought I knew what they were talking about. Obviously not. Probably I just did not care that much one way or the other I guess.

    So, I am comp on some issues and egal on some issues. So based on the all or nothing thing, I get to be called egal by the comps and comp by the egals and that means I get to be counted twice. Probably a lot of people do, and no telling what that does to the statistics. Once you get in excess of 100% of the people what then?

  253. @ Nancy:

    Actually, I am both comp and egal on the same issues sometimes. I think the catholic church has the right to make up its own mind and if they restrict the priesthood to men, how is that any of my business. Similarly, if the church of england is now going to have female bishops, that is their business and not mine because they have the right to make their own decisions in the matter. So, apparently were I a catholic I would be comp and were I an anglican I would be egal. But since I am neither actually I can be of both opinions at the same time.

    I bet with some time and some thought this could get right interesting.

    Who woulda thunk?

  254. There is a definitional issue regarding comp vs. egal. True Comps believe that the Bible sets out certain roles for men and other roles for women, and that these are fixed and set and one should never cross over and do the other role — that would be contrary to the Bible and therefore, not Christian (TM). Egals believe that the passages that some believe to set unchangeable roles based on gender are mistranslated and misunderstood, and have more to do with accommodating culture in the communities to which those particular passages were addressed. Also that there are Bible verses and the general trend of freedom in Christ that contradict strong comp limits based on gender.

    There are people who believe that gender based limits are applicable to all of life, including the church (e.g., CBMW). Others that the gender based limits apply only within the church. And some who work it the other way and all of the variations in between.

  255. @ Nancy:

    What I’m saying is that, in a broad public terminology sense, no ordination of women = complementarian. I think in the strict sense the term originally encompassed (i.e., the Danvers Statement), it probably meant no ordination of women + traditional man-as-head marriage structure. Now obviously in practical terms, someone could be against the ordination of women but have a functionally egalitarian marriage (and most do, I think). Someone could also be okay with the ordination of women, but their house runs in a “traditional” way in which the man makes the important decisions, for practical reasons or whatever.

    Actually the lines between comp and egal get extremely blurry in the middle of the spectrum. I’ve seen “soft” and “squishy” comps in comments sections be baffled by hardline comps’ statements and say that it doesn’t reflect their thinking at all, specifically the comments by Moore that functional egalitarianism was a bad thing. I’ve also seen egalitarians who think feminism has outgrown its usefulness and should be ditched. So the lines aren’t always as stark as they seem here at TWW (mostly because TWW exists to critique hardline comps and thus focuses on that part of the spectrum).

    Part of the problem is that the hardline comps are the public voice of comp, and I’m not sure all of them are aware that many of their own followers don’t actually consistently practice their recommendations. When they do become aware of it, you get statements like Moore’s, in which he seems genuinely surprised that reality and practicality are trumping neat theoretical cookie-cutter roles. Obviously, ignoring reality and having a love affair with the word “patriarchy” (which is basically what Moore proposes), is not the solution.

    I do, however, have trouble seeing how a person who is okay with the ordination of women, could simultaneously hold to the hardline comp belief that a man has some kind of special spiritual authority over his wife, complete with trump card rights. It conflicts with too many of the basic assumptions behind ordaining women.

  256. @ Lydia: you could start here – http://www.ted.com/talks/karima_bennoune_the_side_of_terrorism_that_doesn_t_make_headlines

    I think this is something that has not been given time or space in American media, at least, not mainstream media. And there are so very many blogs out there – it is such a huge topic, and just not something that can be adequately covered in a blog comment. But I’m sure you can find some of the resources you’re looking for… Start w/the book on Iranian bloggers (the publisher is Soft Skull Press) and Marina Bennoune’s book, Your Fatwa Does Not Apply Here.

    The vast majority of the world doesn’t have thee kind of internet access we do, which is where cell phones come into play. The press and radio are still among the primary media in the world. It is important to keep that in mind when talking about this subject, even when referring to English I speaking peoples. (Cf. Pakistan, India and major parts of Africa, for example.)

  257. @ An Attorney:
    @ Hester:

    Thanks, folks. No wonder I got so confused–it is confusing. With my limited self I think I will stick to other issues–like personal freedom maybe. Thanks again.

  258. Nancy wrote:

    William G. wrote:
    people who believe this are basically implying that the majority of those who self-identify as Christians throughout history have in fact been deluded pagans, and will be damned for, in effect, blindly trusting in the appointed authorities rather than the stirring of their own soul; much of the writings of the early church, such as the Philokalia, warn of the dangers of trusting in oneself to that extent.
    Now you have brought up another issue all together. Since I have already made it clear that I went to RCIA, and since you have hurled an inaccurate accusation, I will over-ride my own rule and reply to specifically that.
    Actually, I do not think that “the majority of those who self-identify as Christians” have in fact been “blindly trusting the the appointed authorities” as much as some of the authorities had hoped they would. The church/ state liaisons have historically helped to enforce outward compliance when needed.
    In my experience in RCIA I did not at all see modern post-Vatican II catholicism as oppressive, nor did I see catholics as some sort of mindless automatons. Quite the contrary, I was impressed with the level of emphasis on Jesus (not just the church) and with their willingness to explain their beliefs rather than just say “the church says.” Nor do I see that having a set of beliefs as somehow opposed to “stirring up their own soul” whatever that means (it is not part of baptist terminology that I know of) as mutually contradictory ideas.
    Thing is, I am now Methodist, and they/we are far more varied and mixed in opinions about a number of things than the baptists who resort to “the bible says” in increasingly restrictive ways. And my children are episcopalians, and the episcopalians are now “all over the place” on certain issues apparently. The idea of disagreeing with the church, whatever church, does not at all seem to be dying out in what I have seen. And if you want to see disagreement just check some traditionalist catholic web sites. More than that, check out the pentecostals if you want to see the individual relating to God as an individual. Of note, the recent outreach by the current Pope to pentecostals. These concepts of a basic established belief system and latitude for individual thinking and individual relationship to God are not as mutually contradictory as you seem to be saying, as far as I can see. And, it seems to me, that the differences in these stances has become less apparent now as when I was a child.
    So, no, I do not see hierarchy or its absence as the sole determining factor in this issue either way. I do see politics and church/ state entanglements as problematic however.

    Hey Nancy,

    I myself was formerly Methodist but was alienated from that denomination by the fact that the local Methodist churches either became extremely liberal, or extremely conservative, but also abusive, and in either case, the traditional Methodist liturgy was discarded. Going in search of the origins of Methodist theology, I found out about Wesley’s substantial contact with the Eastern churches, the theological parallels between theosis and Wesleyan holiness theology, Wesley’s ordination as a bishop in secret by Erasmus of Arcadia, and so forth, so joined the Orthodox Church as the obvious course of action.

    Most of my family that remains devout however is Methodist; my great uncle is a retired Methodist missionary from Africa, and I have a great love for what Methodism once was; at its peak, the Methodist church together with the high church Anglicans effectively taught Orthodox Christianity, although in very different styles (the low churchmanship of Methodists, vs the high churchmanship of the Anglo Catholics, although Wesley himself, in his call for weekly communion, prefigured the Oxford Movement; I wonder what he thought of his contemporaries the non-Jurors). I’ve always had an intense love for high church Anglicanism and its offshoots, which include the Western Rite Orthodox parishes in ROCOR and the Antiochian Patriarch; regrettably, Metropolitan Hilarion wants to shut down the western rite of ROCOR, which is the latest example of ROCOR’s decline into the kind of authoritarian heresy that Wartburg Watch focuses on since it subordinated itself to the Moscow Patriarchate, and thus to the Putin administration, in 2007.

    As an amusing aside, if I ever wanted to be Catholic, since I’m a member of the Orthodox church, I can be received directly by confession, without going through the RCIA process, because the Roman church regards all of our sacraments as being valid. However, I would be received into the Russian Catholic church, and not the Latin Rite, although it is possible to then convert Rites, but only with permission of the Pope; there is a formal process for writing a letter to the Vatican to request a rite-conversion. As it is, I am allowed by the Catholics to receive communion from their priests, in a situation where accessing my own priest was impossible; however, the Orthodox churches do not generally allow their members to avail themselves of this hospitality from the Catholics, and my own jurisdiction, which is rather opposed to ecumenism, would be particularly vexed at me were I to do that, I suspect.

    However, this is all academic; I am not a Catholic, and I don’t think I ever will be one, as their more traditional theology of purgatory and so on does not appear to have any historical basis in the beliefs of the early church, and on the other hand, the collapse of internal discipline within the Roman church and in particular the ruination of the historic Latin liturgy, which was beloved by Orthodox saints such as the 20th century bishop St. John Maximovitch of Shanghai and San Francisco, is also somewhat of a bummer. Then we have the unpleasantness of traditionalists like those in the SSPX, who campaign against religious liberty. So in general, I’m not a Roman Catholic, and it pains me to say I don’t think I can be a Roman Catholic any time soon, although I did love Popes John Paul II and especially Benedict, and I am guardedly optimistic about Francis; his recent work in saving the life of that poor Sudanese confessor of the Ethiopian Orthodox church touched my heart.

    Thus, for the moment, I regard the Roman Catholic church perhaps not with the same deep personal love that characterizes my affection for historic Methodism, but with a deep sense of Christian solidarity and brotherhood; the Roman church is definitely Christian in every sense of the word. Neither my Roman Catholic brethren, nor my own Orthodox confession, deserved the smearing we received at the hands of 9Marks; for that matter, I don’t see much Methodist involvement in 9Marks, and I rather suspect that given the Arminian theology of Methodism it is, at the very least, suspect to the likes of Mark Dever; 9Marks seems to favor Calvinism, as befits its highly authoritarian nature.

    It does please me immensely though to hear that you are Methodist; if there were still workable Methodist churches in my area, I might still be a Methodist, and if the UMC continues to degenerate, I have thought of seeking to launch an Orthodox mission among the Methodists, that would use traditional Methodist liturgy, in a manner similar to the Western Rite of the Orthodox church.

    Regrettably, John Wesley will probably never qualify for sainthood in the Orthodox church, as his episcopal ordination by Erasmus was done in an irregular and uncanonical manner, and as a result his status as an Orthodox Christian cannot be proclaimed without equivocation, however, I do feel that he did do more than anyone else in the 18th century to restore the doctrine sof the early Church to Protestantism. As a token of my love for the Methodists I am presently working on a book of traditional Methodist liturgies, compiled from John Wesley’s Sunday Service Book of the Methodists in North America, the Anglican Book of Common Prayer, and other 19th and 20th century prayer books that were used in Methodism, in the hopes that the remaining conservative Methodist pastors might use it and thus attain a deeper connection with Wesleyan theology.

    Some really sad things happened to Methodism after Wesley died; by 1810, his prayer book had been abandoned by the Methodist Episcopal Church; soon thereafter, his Bible commentary was supplanted, his Trinitarian theology, de-emphasized, and ultimately, by the 20th century, even the best Methodist preachers I’ve worked with have only had contact with Wesley’s holiness theology, which admittedly was his greatest contribution, as well as the most excellent hymnody of his brother Charles. It is almost unbearably sad however to the extent that the Methodist church created by John Wesley vanished in the following decades; the world would be a sweeter place if we still had 18th century Methodism in the manner of the Societies, with all of the intense piety and self-discipline. However, I’m just thankful that, when Methodism in my district basically collapsed into heresy around 1999, that I was able to escape, intact, with the blessings of my parents, into Orthodoxy, and I’m also thankful that in other parts of the country, there remain some Methodist conferences and districts that are truer to the faith of Wesley than those in my region. Especially in Africa will one find “real Methodists;” the persecution my uncle endured at hte hands of the Portuguese Salazar dictatorship in Angola was not by any means in vain, for in that country, and others like it, one can find in Methodist churches a living Christianity which has the potential to be reconciled with the ancient apostolic faith.

    Regarding your children in the Episcopal Church, as much as I love Anglo Catholicism, I suggest you pray for their safety, as I have a lot of Episcopal friends, and I will say there is a great deal of darkness within the ECUSA. One of my best friends is a conservative Episcopal priest who is about to hit mandatory retirement; the sensation at his parish, which is in a liberal diocese, is that the Sword of Damocles hovers over it. Once, in the distant past, before my full embrace of Orthodoxy, I was nearly poisoned by taking the Eucharist in an episcopal parish; I attribute this to the toxic affect of communicating with some of the evil hierarchs who seem bent on using their power to alienate the traditionalists from that jurisdiction, and then basically sell off the property and make a killing, like what is now happening with the immensely valuable parklands surrounding the Cathedral of St. John the Divine in New York City. These are slowly being sold off for development, and thus the ECUSA, on the basis of its priceless real estate, seems to want to transition itself into a real estate investment trust that dabbles in occult spirituality on the side. Its very sad because in the process of this, many pious Episcopalians have been evicted from their parish churches, and those that remain, who have not embraced the new theology or a sort of indifferitism, exist in a sort of siege mentality, in my experience. Not a happy situation.

  259. Lastly, on the issue of complementarianism vs. egalitarianism, i should observe the amusing curiosity that I am in a denomination which has no female clergy, yet my local parish is directed by women, and lacking a full time priest, most of our worship services (though we don’t usually have a priest, we can still do a lot of beautiful services, including All Night Vigils, the Typika, which is like the Divine Liturgy but without the Eucharist, the Akathists, the Hours, basically, everything except the actual Sacraments themselves), are led by women. Women hold the parish together and provide essential leadership.

    Thus, I would say that the traditional model of Christian ordination that limits the sacramental priesthood to men does not require the subjugation of women, and I look with a certain nausea on those churches, discussed on this blog, in which women are commanded to at all times remain silent, and prohibited from exercising any leadership role. The Orthodox Churches are so dependent on the leadership of our women that, even though all our priests and bishops are men, and will remain so, we would collapse without our female lay leadership. As an outside observer looking in, it does not seem to me to be the case to this extent in the Roman Catholic church, and one cannot imagine a priestless Roman parish church having the kind of robust, women-led worship that our parish has. What is more, the women who lead our parish are themselves scientists and engineers. Yet I’m pretty sure they would be the first to organize a protest if anyone in our denomination dared to try to ordain them to the priesthood or episcopate; indeed, I expect they would go to their deaths as martyrs for the Orthodox faith rather than allow themselves to be ordained.

    So it just seems to me that if one is really functioning properly as a church, the whole comp/egal debate should seem entirely alien and unnatural. The Orthodox church, with an all-male priesthood, venerates Mary above all the other saints, has parishes managed and operated by women, and venerates figures such as St. Mary Magdalene as “Equal to the Apostles.” The abuse of St. Paul to subjugate women thus, in this light, ought to seem like something one would read of in Islamic fundamentalism.

    I think my next major blog post, once I complete my present series refuting some liturgical proposals advocated by the monks at New Skete, with whom I rather disagree, ought to be an exploration of Fundamentalism vs. Orthodoxy.

  260. @ numo: P.S.: I’d be remiss if I didn’t note that internet service in much of the world is highly sporadic and often *very* slow even for people who do have computers and who can afford to get service from local ISPs.

    But that brings me to another point: a whole lot of people don’t even have electrical power in their homes, and often only sporadic service when they’re hooked up to the grid. A couple of years ago, I read about how Ghanian kids who live in Accra (the capital city) often sit under parking lot lights at the airport so they can do schoolwork after sundown. Their families just don’t have the money for or access to electricity and/or other lighting sources (and if they do have things like kerosene or battery-run lanterns, they have to be sparing in their use of them in order to make the fuel last). Do you think people in these conditions – which are normal for a large W. African city – have the time, money and wherewithal to create “discernment” blogs?

    Most of the people in the world just do not have things that we think are basics. Even here in the US, cell phones are the primary/only internet access available to many people (my geographic area included). So any efforts at activism are more than likely to happen on a grassroots level first. And Western media rarely covers such stories, though it is more than possible to do so.

    We live with another kind of npress/media censorship, I think, but that’s a whole other discussion, and not one for here, I’m thinking.

  261. @ Nancy: I find it all highly confusing myself, Nancy. Don’t know if that’s any comfort, but anted to let you know that you’ve got company!

  262. An Attorney wrote:

    There are people who believe that gender based limits are applicable to all of life, including the church (e.g., CBMW).

    I always wonder how these folks can think this is the one true way when in many/most cases this “way” is only an option to the middle class and up in first world countries. I keep thinking of people out on the great plains 150 years ago. Dad breaks an arm or leg and it doesn’t heal properly. Is the family supposed to starve since mom shouldn’t take over his duties or what.

    Especially thinking of Piper’s lists. One has to do with women shouldn’t “muscle” up as it’s not appropriate. My ancestors and I’m sure his, unless they were wealthy gentry, had women on the farms with very strong muscles.

  263. 9 Marks is a great blessing. I don’t know what this post is about as I quickly lost interest because the author didn’t summarize the issue early on. But I’m fairly confident of two things: (1) 9 Marks is right (and Biblical) and (2) this post is therefore wrong.

  264. @ William G.,

    Christianity has only one high priest, the Lord Jesus, and all believers are priests. The Biblical church has no office of the priesthood. A “church” which has a “priesthood” is not a Biblical church.

  265. Hester wrote:

    What I’m saying is that, in a broad public terminology sense, no ordination of women = complementarian.

    BTW, hope your choral evensongs all went well, and sorry to hear your sad news. I remember now that you mentioned your then-upcoming visit to Ely a few weeks ago; apologies for forgetting that.

    On the ordination/comp Thing, your definition does make sense. Mind you…

    I have listened to around half a dozen podcast speeches by Park Fiscal. As it happens, one of them included his explaining to his audience the “biblical” teaching on the role of women. In the special sahft ‘n gennul voice he uses when it is politic to appear humble and gracious, he explained that a woman can do everything a man can do with the few exceptions of teaching in church and holding the roles of elder or pastor.

    Let’s suppose for a moment that Fiscal is “ordained” rather than just the self-appointed CEO of his own business. Some men like him do use that kind of terminology, after all. Let us for simplicity’s sake accept the above as analogous to saying: a woman can do everything apart from be ordained. The reality, as Jonna Petry found, is very different. When she organised a prayer meeting, this brought an enraged email from Fiscal demanding to know why his elders couldn’t keep their wives under control. The sahft ‘n gennul tone was gone, along with any attempt to be seen to uphold the basic equality of women.

    Of course, this is the difference between true complementarianism, and “new-calivinist” patriarchy. I have limited familiarity with the sacramental denominations, but certainly in the C of E:
     The parish priest does not in any sense rule, or run, the parish church
     (S)he is never described as the “founder” of the church, even if it is a recent plant
     His/her role bears no resemblance to the CEO role that Fiscal and his ilk have carved for themselves (their respective salaries differ likewise)

    So I suppose I’d have to suggest adapting the “true comp = no ordination” definition accordingly: it depends what you mean by “ordination”, and on the broader church culture.

  266. @ Nick Bulbeck:

    True comp means more that “no ordination of women”. It means “no leadership by women”. (BTW, Jesus said basically “no ‘leadership’ by a follower of his”!!!) And that “no leadership by women” also means in the home, in the bed, in life, in the workplace, etc. It is totally adapting a pre-historic and ancient cultural norm in most cultures in Africa, Europe, Asia (including the Middle East) into the interpretation of some Bible passages that were written two millennia ago or more and ignoring the more egalitarian teaching and behavior of the Christ.

    True comp = no leadership by women, anytime, anywhere, etc., EXCEPT of their female children and pre-teen boys (under the ancient age of adulthood, being 12), and then only consistent with and if approved by their husband, if one exists, or some other male like their pastor, deacon, father, brother, etc.!

  267. @ An Attorney:

    True egal = a woman can do whatever a man can do (except a particular part of the procreation process); if a Christian, whatever she understands God to be calling her to do. In an egal marriage, the spouses share and make joint decisions, with the lead being whichever has the greater ability, time, talent, affinity, etc. for whatever it is that needs to be done.

    If not True Comp, then, outside the church, people are practicing some version of egal. The actual opposite of egal is True Comp, aka absolute Patriarchy and male hierarchy in the church.

  268. In other news, the MAG * all-around competition in Glasgow is shaping up very well indeed, with the top competitors having just the high bar to go. Max Whitlock is in the lead by enough that he should be sure of gold – provided he doesn’t fall off. But it’s very close between Dan Purvis and Nile Wilson for silver/bronze. Wilson is still very young – he was technically a junior till a few weeks ago and this is his first senior competition; a fine performance, even better when you actually watch it.

    The WAG all-around final is this evening.

    * Explanation if required: Men’s Artistic Gymnastics

  269. @ An Attorney:
    @ An Attorney:

    Well, obviously that depends on what you mean by “true”, which kind of depends on what the definition of “is” is, etc etc etc.

    If you’re saying that new-calvinurgence patriarchy “True comp” means no leadership for women, I’d put it more strongly: it means no adulthood for women.

  270. In other news, the MAG all-around has just finished with four spectacular high-bar routines (arguably the best of the lot being that of Dan Purvis who finished just outside the medals).

    Now I’m off for a run, it being an ideal day for it here in Scotland – which bodes well for the athletics tonight. In which home favourite Eilish McColgan (daughter of former world 10000 meters champion Liz McColgan) goes in the steeplechase.

    I hope this is helpful.

  271. Oh, and here’s a quick travel update for those driving through the Scottish Borders: The A7 at Langholm is partially blocked due to an overturned lorry of chickens.

    I did not see that one coming.

  272. @ numo:

    Again, I was not talking about oppressed Muslims living in Islamic countries but Muslims living in Westernized countries. I have always wondered why there are not more discernment blogs about radical Islam from free educated Muslims who could have a voice and be a force for oppressed Muslims and against radical Islam.

    There just is not a lot of it and I have been searching this for last 8 years. (There was a great one by brothers who were both dentists in Iraq but not now)

    And I was wondering why. That is all. And if anyone here might know of some. Not looking for books, talks, etc. But for blogs, discernment sites where there is interaction. Interaction is key just as it is for Christian discernment blogs.

  273. @ Lydia:
    Well I can offer a few possible reasons Lydia. Most Muslims I know living here in the states, a grand total of 7 or so, try very hard not to look or act to Muslim, especially after 9/11. That’s a very limited sample of an anecdote so take it with a huge lump of salt, of course.

    I to would be interested in interacting and learning more about Muslims so if you do find any good interfaith or interactive places, please let me know. I just emailed our local mosque to do a visit so maybe I can find out more there.

  274. @ John Carpenter:
    John Carpenter wrote:

    9 Marks is a great blessing. I don’t know what this post is about as I quickly lost interest because the author didn’t summarize the issue early on. But I’m fairly confident of two things: (1) 9 Marks is right (and Biblical) and (2) this post is therefore wrong.

    The issue, or rather problem, is that an author on the 9Marks blog wrote this:

    “In this context, the word “Christian” can be particularly problematic. To much of the Muslim world, America, Europe, and Russia are “Christian” societies, and whatever is true for those countries is true of Christianity. Thus, when a Central Asian Muslim asks me if I am a Christian, what they mean by “Christian” is an alcohol-drinking, pornography-watching, sexually promiscuous, picture-worshipping Eastern Orthodox or Roman Catholic person who is part of the culture that has attempted to conquer and oppress them for centuries. Therefore, I never simply say yes. However, since Christian is a biblical word, neither do I say no. I define who I am in biblical terms apart from their historical experience.”

    When one contemplates the misery being suffered by the tens of thousands of Christians who were just exiled from Mosul by the murderous self-proclaimed Caliphate of Al Baghdadi, and the horrible persecution of the Church in Iraq, Syria and Egypt, which was ongoing even in 2009, to see a 9Marks author express sympathy for an Islamic hatred of the Orthodox and Catholic on the basis of the patently false allegation that they are sexually promiscuous, pornography watching, image worshipping drunks, is an utterly repulsive act, that, to me at least, suggests that 9Marks is not in fact a genuinely Christian organization, but rather, a cult, a heretical sect as vile and repulsive as the Arians of the fourth century, allying itself with Islamic fundamentalist and the forces of evil against the suffering Christians of the middle East.

    Also, one should note, for the record, that the Christians of the middle East, outside of Lebanon, suffer from severe shortages of sacramental wine, to the extent that the Eucharist is very nearly celebrated with water, with only a small amount of highly diluted wine present; this shortage naturally precludes the consumption of alcohol outside of the liturgical service. All of the Christians smeared therein known to myself personally abhor pornography and sexual promiscuity; someone who sins in this manner without repentance will not be admitted to Communion. The canons of the Seventh Ecumenical Council furthermore expressly prohibit the worship of icons, and the Assyrian Church of the East and the related Chaldean Catholic church do not even use iconographic depictions of people, limiting themselves to crosses and other symbolic imagery (although not due to any iconoclastic heresy on their part, but rather, in response to continual desecration of their churches by the Islamic tyrants).

    Thus, it should be fairly obvious what the problem is. 9Marks is a great blessing, it would seem, only to abusive and self-absorbed heretics, who have appointed themselves “Gods among men”, as Luther aptly described Pope Leo X, and to Islamic fundamentalists; it is a curse to the poor laymen of the churches that it as a movement has appropriated. The decalogue contains an injunction against bearing false witness; given that 9Marks allows articles to be hosted on its website which contain outright falsehoods about the persecuted Eastern churches, 9Marks should be regarded, on this point at least, as profoundly un-Biblical.

  275. John Carpenter wrote:

    @ William G.,
    Christianity has only one high priest, the Lord Jesus, and all believers are priests. The Biblical church has no office of the priesthood. A “church” which has a “priesthood” is not a Biblical church.

    There are a number of problems with this remark. Firstly, the fact is that the New Testament refers to the ordination of Presbyters, and the English word “Priest” is merely a translation of Presbyter, or Elder; it was later, somewhat misleadingly, understood to refer to the rather different concept of a Sacerdos, a mediator between God or the gods and man; the word Sacerdos describing the priesthood of the sacrificial cult of the Second Temple, and the sacrificial cults of the Pagan deities. While one can legitimately argue whether or not the Priesthood as described in the New Testament is sacerdotal in character, one cannot deny that it existed. In like manner, one cannot deny that it was hierarchical; with the Apostles directing the Presbyters or Episkopoi (meaning Superintendents) and Deacons. Later, the Episcopal office referred to those who succeeded the Apostles as superintendents of the Priests, and thus in that sense, can be interpreted to mean High Priest, but not in the same sense that our Lord is a High Sacerdotal Priest, forever, after the order of Melchizedek.

    Now the Orthodox church of course holds, on the basis of Patristic consensus, that the Priesthood is indeed sacerdotal, the Bishops forming High Priests who vicariously represent Christ, the Highest Priest, in the celebration of the Eucharist; the Bishops are in turn vicariously represented by the Priests who serve under them. The Bishop is an icon of Christ, and the parish priest, an icon of the Bishop; when the sacraments are confected, the Bishop or Priest acts in persone Christi; however, this vicarious representation of Christ is not limited to the Patriarch or Pope, as in the Roman church, but is rather exercised by the entire clergy; it is also exercised by the laity to the extent that they choose to live their lives in a manner that iconographically represents the love of Christ for His creation; that is to say, by loving God with all their heart, mind and soul, and loving their neighbor as themselves, striving to keep the commandments of God.

    However, even if one denies the high Orthodox view of the Priesthood, which requires one to deny such great Christians as St. Athanasius, the Patriarch of Alexandria who defended the Orthodox faith in the Holy Trinity against the Arian heresy (and indeed, the Arians naturally tried to claim the Trinity was “un-Biblical”, and who gave us the 27-book canon of the New Testament that is now the standard across all of Christendom, and his contemporary St. Basil, who among other accomplishments, invented the modern hospital, one still cannot deny that a priesthood, where priest is properly understood as meaning Presbyter, or Elder, perhaps in contemporary English best rendered as “Eldership”, is described in the pages of the New Testament.

    Thus, the Priesthood is certainly Biblical. Now, whether or not the Orthodox view of the Priesthood is Biblical is a subjective opinion, although if the Orthodox church is wrong, then so were the majority of those responsible for giving us the Bible that we now claim to interpret; in other words, rejecting a sacramental and sacerdotal priesthood requires that one put oneself at odds with the interpretation of those pious and learned men who discerned which of the myriad texts that could have made it into the New Testament were both authentic and relevant. So if one rejects the sacramental, sacerdotal priesthood, one should for that matter readily accept the Gnostic scriptures, or the Apocalypse of Peter, or other spurious works which were, after careful examination, excluded from the New Testament canon.

    However, if one can, without flinching, hold that it is possible to disagree with the interpretation of the Bible held by those who compiled it in the form known to us in the Christian faith, while still considering oneself to be a “Biblical Christian,” then on that basis it is possible to interpret the Priesthood described in the New Testament as being devoid of a sacerdotal character. However, to say that the Priesthood is not a Biblical concept betrays a simple ignorance of scripture and indeed of etymology.

    One other point should be raised; if Christ alone is High Priest, and there are no other Priests, then this would also of necessity abrogate the doctrine of the Priesthood of All Believers, which has historically been rather popular among Protestants. The Orthodox Church does accept the Priesthood of All Believers, to the extent that we believe that a Priest in Holy Orders is not required to act as a sacerdotal intermediary between the believer and God or the saints in offering prayer; anyone, even the unbaptized, can pray directly to God in faith, and their prayer might be answered. It is for this reason that we have “Reader Services;” all of the non-Sacramental parts of our liturgy (that is to say, everything except Holy Communion, Holy Matrimony, Unction, and Ordination; the initiatory sacraments can be validly performed by the laity in the event of an emergency), which is to say, the majority of it, can be served by ordinary laymen, not even in minor orders, if a priest is unavailable; this includes all of the Divine Office, the devotional and supplicatory services, and the Typika, which is essentially the Divine Liturgy without Holy Communion. The sacerdotal function of the ordained Priesthood is limited to the proper consecration of the sacraments; this relative lack of intermediation is made possible through the High Priesthood of Christ, who through his atoning sacrifice, trampled down death by death, making possible the sanctification of humanity and rendering obsolete the system of animal sacrifices, which had to be offered by the Kohanim, or Aaronic priests, according to the Levetical Code, in order to procure only the most limited atonement for sins; although direct prayer did exist, only the High Priest, following much sacrifice, on the Day of Atonement, had the power to enter the Holy of Holies, and effect what any Christian might accomplish through “Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who have trespassed against us.”

    It is because Christ has been made a High Priest forever after the order of Melchizedek, that through His single, all-satisfactory atonement, humanity reached a state where a legitimate priesthood of all believers does exist; our priesthood flows from our sanctification through faith in Christ, and it is through this sanctification that we are able to escape from the corruption of our nature and pray directly to the Lord without going through the sacrificial cult that previously existed, with the assurance that “ask, and you shall receive;” by cooperating with the Holy Spirit, freely given to the baptized faithful since Pentecost, we can strive to conquer the passions, and progressively purify ourselves from sin, attaining through humility and ascetic discipline theosis, or deification, the central soteriological doctrine that one finds in the writings of Irenaeus, who was a disciple of Polycarp, who was a disciple of John the Beloved Disciple; we can, only with the assistance of God, obey His command to “Be perfect, even as your Father is perfect.” This is not to imply that we become members of the Trinity, or Gods in a Pagan, polytheistic sense, but rather, that our salvation consists of becoming through grace what Christ is by nature; in Christ God became man so that man could become god, that is to say, like God, participating in his uncreated energies, while at the same time remaining in a state of perpetual perfection, for God is infinitely perfect, and we are inherently finite; it is for this reason that the uncreated essence of God, in contrast to His divine energies, is essentially unknowable.

    That is the soteriology of the Fathers of the Church, and the Orthodox Church of today, in a nutshell. A bit different from Calvinism, but the ideas that led to Calvin, while foreshadowed in the writings of Augustine, do not begin to emerge until Anselm of Canterbury, and even then, Calvin’s departure from the ancient dogma of the church is profoundly striking. While John Wesley did famously “agree to disagree” with his colleague George Whitefield on the merits of Calvinism, his Patristic sensibilities did at one time lead him to remark to Whitefield that “Your God is my devil,” and when one considers the rather unpleasant implications of double predestination, it is easy to sympathize with this viewpoint.

    The Apostolic viewpoint is somewhat less at odds with the modern Evangelical fervor for salvation by “accepting Jesus into your heart,” for although no Church Father ever used such terminology, it was understood that faith in Christ facilitated participation in the fruits of our Lord’s meritorious victory over death, and represented the beginning of the process of salvation through theosis, a process facilitated through participation in the sacramental life of the church (via regular receipt of the spiritual food of Holy Communion, the importance of which is best demonstrated in John ch. 6 and 1 Corinthians 11:17-34) and pursuit of ascetic discipline.

    9Marks, for its part, would doubtless decry all of the above dogma of the ancient apostolic church as “un-Biblical,” a charge that is difficult to swallow, given the profound apostasy suggested by 9Marks casual slander of the persecuted Christians in the Islamic world in the normal course of writing a blog post. However, assuming that 9Marks still had any credible sense of spiritual authority, their argument would still be moot on the grounds that any belief held by the Apostolic church which defined the Bible is inherently Biblical, even if it is at odds with contemporary interpretations of the Bible, which one might say are equally Biblical.

    The problem with using “Biblical” as a synonym for “Orthodox” is that one can remain faithful to the Biblical text while believing in a diverse array of doctrines; the vast majority of Christian churches that have existed, including those now generally regarded as heretical, used the Bible in support of their doctrine. The Unitarians of the late 18th century, for example, relied upon numerous Biblical proof-texts, and insisted that their doctrine most accurately reflected a rational exegesis of the New Testament. Thus, “Biblical” is profoundly unhelpful as a measuring stick; we must instead look at how the Bible has been interpreted over the centuries, and in particular, how it was interpreted by the earliest Christians, for it stands to reason that the early church, existing in a state of constant persecution and unimaginable horror, yet at the same time, only a few generations apart from the Holy Apostles, would be most likely to possess the correct interpretation of these texts. This interpretation we are commanded by the Apostle Paul to zealously defend, thus it behooves us to seek to inform ourselves, as best we can about events that transpired nearly twenty centuries ago, as to what that interpretation was.

  276. John Carpenter wrote:

    I don’t know what this post is about as I quickly lost interest because the author didn’t summarize the issue early on.

    This is a conversation, John, not a lecture followed by a Q & A session. The format is different. I checked out your web site and see you are NC. Several of us who read and comment here are also. I see you have an impressive academic record. Right many of us have various kinds of at least adequate educational backgrounds. Maybe we can all have some interesting conversation. But you need to know, we try to be polite to each other even in the midst of heated disagreements. And we have some baseline agreements. Abuse is not OK, and some here have suffered sexual abuse as a child. We tread lightly and compassionately in that area.

    I see that you have academic background in researching the Puritans, and that you share some Puritan ideas. That should make an interesting addition to the conversational mix, if you have the time and the interest.

  277. @ William G.:

    You may have said this and I missed it, but I cannot determine from your comments here or from your blog whether you have some official job or position or ordination or teaching/ apologetic position or such with the Russian Orthodox church. I would be interested to know that, unless you had rather not comment.

  278. Albuquerque Blue wrote:

    Most Muslims I know living here in the states, a grand total of 7 or so, try very hard not to look or act to Muslim, especially after 9/11.

    Yes to this, re. people I’ve known. Low profile is essential to survival here.

  279. @ Lydia: you are looking for a very specific type of site, aren’t you? My hunch is that you need to be willing to look for forums and newspaper sites w/comments etc.

    it’s something of a non sequiter, since sites like TWW are pretty thin on the ground. why wouldn’t the same be true of blogs or sites owned and run by people from Muslim countries?

    Another thing you might be missing: immigrants tend to interact a lot w/other immigrants. Which is why Arabic, etc. would be used by many who now live in the US when writing online. Mother tongue(s), after all, rather than a 2nd or 3d or 5th language, which is exactly what English is for an awful lot of people- historically true since very early days here, after all.

  280. @ Nancy:

    The post is summarised in the third paragraph, of course.

    If Mr Carpenter managed to acquire an impressive academic record with the attention-span he documents in his comment, that would be even more impressive. I, too, have a very pronounced case of ADHD, and even I can usually make it through the summary of an article up to and including the first bit in bold type before my Attention Deficit derails me…

  281. @ Lydia: fwiw, Karima Bennoune is Algerian-American. She lives and practices law and teaches *here,* and she is entirely fluent in English (and likely several other languages besides Arabic and French, which are standard in her home country).

    In rejecting my mention of her and her book, you are basically saying “no” to an American Muslim. I wish you would at least give her TED talk some time; she’s so articulate and very, very much the kind of person you are looking for.

  282. @ numo: You might want to shoot an email her way, come to think of it – people like her, and the faculty of the Islamic Studies program at Georgetown U., and Seyyed Hossein Nasr at George Washington U., and Vali Nasr (Iranian immigrant who has worked with the Navy and written eloquently on many of the topics you’re referring to – in English) and … well, I could go on. There are *lots* of people out there who can help further your search, and while I can’t speak for their schedules (or for the volume of email they receive), I’m sure they’d be willing to help if asked.

  283. @ Nick Bulbeck:

    I checked his (his church’s) website and read what he claims as his educational background. Then I checked out the location; I didn’t even know were Caswell County was. He seems to be a modern day Puritan who “shares their vision for a biblically “pure” church”. I never did run into anybody like that, and I thought it might be interesting. But not if he is going to be critical and abrupt all the time. The roadside explosive device method of communication may be Puritan but it is annoying.

  284. Nancy wrote:

    @ William G.:
    You may have said this and I missed it, but I cannot determine from your comments here or from your blog whether you have some official job or position or ordination or teaching/ apologetic position or such with the Russian Orthodox church. I would be interested to know that, unless you had rather not comment.

    I am not a member of what is commonly called the “Russian Orthodox Church,” but rather, the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad, which is a tiny remnant of the former Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia, which re-entered into communion with, and accepted subordination to, the Moscow Patriarch, in 2007. This was problematic given that Patriarch Kyrill is a former KGB man, and since that time ROCOR has become frighteningly authoritarian, working to shut down its Western Rite parishes (which use the old English Sarum Rite liturgy) and other areas where there are lots of non-Russian converts, in order to become a church of Russians, for Russians, by Russians, and Russians loyal to Putin at that.

    I myself hold no official position, but I’ve been invited to go to ROCA’s small monastery to discern my vocation. In like manner, I have similiar invitations from persecuted the Syriacs and Assyrians of Syria and Iraq, who are not Eastern Orthodox, but who I have a great love for (I speak a small amount of western-dialect Syriac, a very small amount that is, of commonly used liturgical phrases; not horribly useful in conversation, but better than my Old Church Slavonic at this point). In all three cases the people in question are horribly persecuted; ROCA by the Putin regime, the Syriac/Assyrian people by ISIS and the other terrorists. For that matter, I have a ton of Coptic friends and could probably work for them if I wanted to.

    The main advantage with the Russians, aside from the fact that they embrace all seven Ecumenical councils, which is a plus as far as dogmatic Orthodoxy is concerned (the Syriacs, Assyrians and Copts do not formally embrace these councils, and there are major problems with the Christological councils of the fifth century, but they lack, for example, universalism, monothelitism and iconoclasm, which were the main issues of the 5th, 6th and 7th councils), is the really excellent music. I also love West Syriac liturgical music to a great extent, but its extremely hard for someone with Western voice training to sing it; in all of these Eastern churches, the *entire* liturgy is sung, so a key factor in terms of being a priest is whether or not you’re able to sing it at least moderately well, and certainly, for an American with a mid-Atlantic accent, the Russian church music, all of which has been brilliantly translated into English, is a major plus, so I intend to pursue the Russian course first, trusting that God will lead me to the right ministry.

    Now all of the aforementioned jurisdictions represent cultures with really fantastic food, so from a gastronomic standpoint, I can’t lose. Except for the fact that in all of the above, one is expected to spend most of the year in various states of fasting. Ah well, at least it has helped my weight; since 2012 I’ve actually managed to lose 100 lbs. If all of America became Orthodox, that might be the solution to our obesity problems! :-p

  285. @ numo:

    I should tell you I do know and am on intimate terms with several Muslims; I was the best man at the wedding of one in Ghana in 2008. They are ordinary people and most of them aren’t terribly devout. The only thing that sets them apart from you or me is an absolute aversion to eating pork… They have never gone out of their way to attend the mandatory daily prayers; at most, they pray at the mosque at the main service on Friday, or in the US, over the weekend. One of them did make the Hajj.

    They’re strict monotheists, so if one does converse with them about religion, one won’t actually see much difference between their view and that of Christianity or Judaism. The main difference is of course the aversion to any representation or assignment of un-Quranic attributes to God; God is just, merciful, great, et cetera, but beyond that, somewhat of an impersonal or overpersonal force. One doesn’t get the sense that they feel a personal relationship to God in the way we do within Christianity (especially the kind of inter-personal love that dominates Orthodox thinking, which is based on a model of the Trinity as a union of perfect and eternal love that humans, created in the image of God, are called to represent), but rather, God, while capable of hearing their prayers, is an absolute entity which is to be submitted to with a certain sense of dread. However, their secular lives interfere with their religion to the point that none of them are actually strictly speaking obeying the five pillars of Islam, but one gets a sense that they’re either not fully aware of the obligations their religion places upon them, or they are, but assume God will be merciful to them, and they can handle these obligations later.

    I suspect that, 50 years ago, most Muslims were like this; consider even now the relatively weak religious observance from the pro-Western Hashemite monarchy of Jordan, the princesses of which do not bother with veils. This doubtless incensed traditionalists, particularly the Wahabis who had the backing of the powerful Saudi monarchy, who had displaced the Hashemites from Mecca (historically, the Hashemites ruled Mecca and Medina; after World War I, they were driven out of those regions by the Sauds, and were given control by the allies of Jordan and Iraq; they later lost control of Iraq, which eventually passed to the Ba’ath party, and we all know what happened then). Saudi control of Mecca meant Wahabi control of Mecca, and turned Mecca into a powerful propaganda tool for advocating a stricter observance of Islam, and I suspect that it was through the process of the Hajj in the 1970s that the initial wave of radicalization was accomplished. Nowadays, Hajj attendance is so massive, and the pilgrimmage sites such overcrowded madhouses, especially during the Hajj, that using it in such a manner would not work, so I believe that where radicalization happens, it takes place among the disaffected urban youth in major Arab cities, and also in European cities with large Islamic populations; young men who might otherwise be gang members are inducted into the militant factions, who provide them with a sense of solidarity and religious meaning; the promise of the rewards of martyrdom (something like 70 houris, among other heavenly perks) must also be a powerful draw, and we are talking about young men here, ages 15-18, who lack what one might call…discernment.

    My Muslim friends are older than that, and grew up in relatively decent conditions, and thus escaped radicalization and live very Pedestrian lives. They don’t want to talk about radicalization; they would prefer to pretend it didn’t exist, and that being a Muslim is similar to being a Presbyterian or a Catholic. Not a Jew mind you; there is an unspoken whiff of anti-Semitism, so in our conversations we don’t even go there, as I have a great love for Jews (and every Jewish friend I have is, not without reason, terrified of Muslims, even the moderate Muslims). I am not an optimist about the very tragic situation in the Israel and Palestine however due to the general loathing that exists between the religious communities present; as Christians though, I think we have the opportunity to try to be peacemakers, and build bridges, and I was very impressed by Pope Francis’s recent intervention; he managed to make more progress with the Israelis and Palestinians in a few days, than our government has been able to make in several months.

  286. I grew up Roman Catholic attending mass every Sunday. In college, to make a long story short, I tried to prove from the Bible why my Protesant friends were wrong when they said they knew they were going to heaven. Based upon what I was taught, good people go to heaven bad go to hell as determined by God when we die. I read a page a campus minister gave me on assurance of salvation that had many Bible verses I had never read. Then was asked the question what is my part and what is God’s part in salvation and forgiveness. Every one showed God did the saving and forgiving based on the work Christ did, and it was not based on my efforts as I was taught. The verse that shocked me the most was 1 John 5:13 that outright said the opposite of what I was trying to prove- it was written so we may know in the present tense we have eternal life. I asked God to do what I then realized I could not do. Since then I have read through the Bible many times, this truth is never refuted that it is God who saves by grace apart from works. For this cause, I very much am concerned about the teachings of the RCC and any religion that does not teach Ephesians. 2:8-9. I realize I cannot change anyone but as Paul prayed for Jews who went about seeking their own righteousness and not submitting themselves to the righteousness of God, I pray and witness of God’s amazing grace to all my family and friends. Rom. 9 thru 11 Sorry this is my first post but curious what you all think of my testimony and concerns that led me to leave Catholic faith and agree with the avowed enemies of RCC such as Luther (my mother did warn me of him)… let God be true and every man a liar including myself if I am wrong on anything, I want to always grow in grace and in knowledge of Him who loved me and gave Himself for me.

  287. Kraig

    Welcome to TWW and thank you for sharing your thoughts on RCC. The church that I currently attend, claims that 60%of attendees are former Roman Catholics. I do have a question for you. Prior to leanving the RCC, did you ever meet with a priest or bishop to discuss your concerns?

  288. Thanks for the warm welcomes! Dee- wWhat church do you currently attend if I may ask?

    So to continue my story, after God confronting me in the word that my beliefs were wrong, and me asking Him to do what I could not, my friend that had a bible study in my fraternity was very happy for me when I told him. I continued to go to the RCC with my aunt and uncle (I was 2 hours from my parents as a junior in college) for at least a month or two afterwards. I was very fearful of coming out to my family of what I had come to realize. Much like maybe Nicodemus and Joseph who buried Jesus.

    Then one day sitting listening to the mass at Regis, I realized that I would never hear the message there that changed my life and I had family and friends all around me that would never hear this wonderful message that you can know you have eternal life and that it was by grace + nothing.

    So I started to search for a church that taught this- tried the community church my friend went to (had a nice bible study by a reformed pastor who taught some things I found strange at the time), a mainline Presbyterian churches (another friend in college) but felt very lost as I still had a concept that there was some perfect church out there that had everything right. (haha…)

    Then I decided, I had to tell my parents I was no longer attending mass and why- so I took a 2 hour trip on a weekend to tell them. I can still remember the horror on my mother’s face telling me I was rejecting Christ by not having holy Eucharist (they believe it becomes Christ literally…). So that did not go well. I can say that after much strife on this and other items, we are in open communication now (I visited her last year, live across the country now), have had more discussions about faith but I think it really is at a stand still on this one issue of knowing vs. hoping (with not 100% confidence since RCC believes works have a part in it). So we talk about other things like my life (wife and 2 kids) and their life. I love both my parents so very much and they were wonderful to me in so many ways.

    But being a seeker of truth and wanting to really make sure I was doing the right thing I agreed to meet with both my parent’s priest to discuss this as well as a priest from Regis who had experiences with evangelical Christianity.

    In both sessions, I did not get a Biblical explanation on how I John 5:13 can say you can know, and it is absolutely contrary to Catholic teaching/doctrine to say you know (that would be the sin of presumption- after all you may commit a mortal sin later in life), I did not get satisfactory answers to my questions.

    I did not stop there though as I bought a copy of the Catholic catechism (the official teaching of the Church, I probably learned more about Catholicism in a year after leaving it than I knew while I was in it for 21 years and receiving confirmation and teaching confirmation classes).

    The more I studied what the official teachings of the RCC was, and the more I read scripture, the more I realized the two could not be reconciled at least on this major issue.

    I had every motivation to try to prove Catholicism was right and true (sure would have avoided a lot of grief and emotional pain with my family), but I truly felt that to remain a Catholic would violate my conscience. After all, how can the RCC say the Bible is God’s word and contradict not only that 1 main verse that changed me but so many others regarding grace vs. works role in justification? And this being on the most important subject of all- how a person can go to heaven when they die and can we know this?

    I have yet to find a Roman Catholic who is serious about it that believes in grace through faith as Eph. 2:8-9. The official teaching and what you learn in that Church is that Christ died to open the gate of heaven, and you have to walk in or merit eternal life by works. If there are Catholics that do believe this, I would greatly rejoice in that and I do not consider salvation is due to going to one type of church etc. I think it has to do with reliance upon what Christ did in His sinless life, dying on the cross and His resurrection.

    As I study more about Church history I see maybe this was not always the case (I am not an expert but many reformers pulled ideas from Augustine regarding grace but not his teachings on the Church), but certainly at the Reformation and afterwards, you can see at the council of Trent (which has not been repealed I understand), anyone believing in grace through faith alone is accursed (condemned to hell).

    In fact, of all people, I am in the most danger according to the RCC- see below from the catechism:

    RCC catechism 846 “Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.”

    I have more thoughts but need to think on them before writing and hear from others their thoughts on this. Obviously this issue is near and dear to my heart, and it is not my intent to be hurtful to anyone in any way. I desire to know truth and be faithful by God’s grace to what He has shown me.

    Again- would love to hear what others think on this- thanks for having this open forum where thoughts can be shared and ideas, as that is what really has helped me in my life (being able to ask questions, discuss different ideas, and learn from interaction with others).

  289. Kraig, I’m relating to the joy and freedom you found by reading the Bible as compared to some of the teachings of the RCC. I must add that it was a number of Catholics, however, that had a part in my finding the Lord in a personal way as well as introducing me to the Word. My parents were good Catholics who sent all of us 9 children to parochial schools to assure a good solid Catholic foundation and were, like your parents, disappointed in my new-found faith.

    Anyway, I just want to say I’m rejoicing with you as I read your journey. May I ask how long ago these things happened?

    I did, btw, approach the Bishop of the church we attended with some of the truth I had discovered but did not receive the response I had hoped for. I distinctly remember him looking at me and saying “child of God…you’re telling ME these things?? Do you know I studied in Rome??” He quickly walked away and left me stunned as I thought he would rejoice with me and have an encouraging word. Disappointed, yes. But not enough to detour me from continuing on my new-found journey!

  290. This was in 1996. Many more stories between then and now….

    Thank you for the kind words, and praise God for seeking and saving the lost.

  291. Kraig wrote:

    I did not stop there though as I bought a copy of the Catholic catechism (the official teaching of the Church, I probably learned more about Catholicism in a year after leaving it than I knew while I was in it for 21 years and receiving confirmation and teaching confirmation classes).

    I’ve had a similar experience. Just today I came across a Catholic catechism (published by the Daughters of St. Paul) and approved by Cardinal Law of Boston. It’s from the 1980’s. It emphatically states that baptism is necessary for salvation and goes on to an explanation of emergency baptism. It only forgives original sin, but not temporal sin. Where is this in the bible?

  292. elastigirl wrote:

    elastigirl

    I would love to see a post where people chime in on what the gospel/gospel means.
    but “the good news” is that we can know each other without religious rigamarole.
    is this not the gospel? the good news?
    It’s a shame no one seems to be able to answer your question. The short answer is “no”. That is not the gospel. Even Jesus said he came to bring a sword (Matt 10:34-36). Paul actually defines the gospel in Chapter 15 of 1 Corinthians. In verse 3 he writes that it is “that Christ died for our sins”. Verse 1 shows that he means this to be his synopsis of the gospel. Roman Catholicism says that this is true that Jesus died for our sins, but we must add meritorious works in this life (and the next in the form of purgatory) to obtain complete forgiveness of our sins. Martin Luther disagreed saying salvation came by faith alone with no reliance on works. For this Luther was to be arrested and prosecuted as a heretic. You’ll never believe the name of the place he fled to for protection. This teaching of the faith alone as the basis for salvation generated a lot of heat in Paul’s time (see Galatians). And that heat came from both sides. See the Council of Trent. Here is some of its proclamations —
    CANON XI.-If any one saith, that men are justified, either by the sole imputation of the justice of Christ, or by the sole remission of sins, to the exclusion of the grace and the charity which is poured forth in their hearts by the Holy Ghost, and is inherent in them; or even that the grace, whereby we are justified, is only the favour of God; let him be anathema. CANON XII.-If any one saith, that justifying faith is nothing else but confidence in the divine mercy which remits sins for Christ’s sake; or, that this confidence alone is that whereby we are justified; let him be anathema. CANON XIII.-If any one saith, that it is necessary for every one, for the obtaining the remission of sins, that he believe for certain, and without any wavering arising from his own infirmity and disposition, that his sins are forgiven him; let him be anathema. CANON XIV.-If any one saith, that man is truly absolved from his sins and justified, because that he assuredly believed himself absolved and justified; or, that no one is truly justified but he who believes himself justified; and that, by this faith alone, absolution and justification are effected; let him be anathema.
    This still stands as the official teaching of the Catholic Church. It has never been reversed. That means that it is Catholic doctrine that those who hold to traditional Protestant doctrine are accursed. So if a Catholic wants to go out with Protestants to tell people that faith in Christ alone atones for all their sins, he either must be denying Catholic doctrine or intending to subvert that teaching. While we can be civil AND passionate in our disagreement, pretending that these differences are minor or nonexistent will not make them so. But doing so will leave souls in a very precarious state. I was baptized, received first holy communion, was confirmed in the Roman Catholic Church and attended Mass every Sunday until I was out of college. I received valuable instruction in important doctrines such as the Trinity. However, I never once heard the gospel in a Roman Catholic church. I have little doubt that there are those who are saved who are members. But it is in spite of not, because of. their teaching.

  293. Regarding a derogatory Flyer left on the drivers’s side handle of my vehicle after attending the 4:30 p.m. Mass on Saturday, August 09, 2014 at All Saints Catholic Church on Montgomery Avenue, in Ohio.

  294. Dee,
    Thank you for your attitude regarding Roman Catholics. I was an Evangelical for 34 years and converted to Catholicsm 8 years ago. The meanest remarks came from my friends from church and Bible Study. They knew me and how much I loved the Lord and now all the sudden I must “never have been truely saved”? Yipes. I know self-righteousness comes from both camps but its nice I don’t have to sneak on this board for fear of being discovered a Catholic. I really learn alot and it helps me see I was not the only one who suffered at the hands of other Christians. Mutual respect and admitting we might not know all would help us. Thanks