The Christian Discussion Thread VI

[Luminesa]

Trying to steal our members away, eh Const?

I always recommend everyone, regardless of background, to explore different Christian denominations; especially Eastern Orthodoxy. Confirmation, to a Catholic, is a very big deal. You should be certain in your decision.

Mostly, I just want to make sure people know that converting to the Orthodox Church is an option. Orthodoxy is not well known in the English-speaking world, and it's often seen as a thing that only exists in other countries, in other parts of the world. I've met many people who were surprised to learn that there are actually thousands of Orthodox parishes in North America and Western Europe.

But yes, I always recommend that people explore several different Churches when looking to convert (or return) to Christianity. And the Catholic Church is usually second on my list, after Orthodoxy.

I'll take a look. In the past I was interested in Orthodoxy and discussed it with some people here, but at the time it was still too early in my conversion to delve much deeper. I even own an Orthodox study Bible, which I read in addition to my Catholic one. Arguably, the biggest hurdle I can see is cultural; my background is in the RCC so that's most familiar to me and much of what I've read has been from Catholic sources. But I will take a look in to it.

The best English-language website for exploring Orthodoxy is really Ancient Faith Radio (which was also the first link I gave in my previous post). In particular, their series of podcasts by the late Fr. Thomas Hopko is extremely insightful, and I highly recommend it. If you are in North America and would like to find a parish near you that you could visit, the website Orthodoxy in America provides a useful search engine. And in terms of printed books, the recently-published Welcome to the Orthodox Church provides the best introduction, in my opinion.

Obviously, the liturgy of the Orthodox Church is very different from that of the RCC (except for the very tiny handful of Western Rite Orthodox parishes that I mentioned in a post above). But the fundamental elements are the same, so that if you are sufficiently familiar with one liturgy, you will be able to recognize the parallels in the other liturgy. In general, besides being just different in various ways, the Orthodox liturgy is also distinctly more traditional (or "traditionalist"). The current form of the most commonly used Orthodox liturgy (the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom) has remained almost unchanged since the 5th century - so we often joke about the Catholic Tridentine Mass as being too modern. However, unlike the Tridentine Mass, the Orthodox liturgy is always performed in the vernacular (or at least it should be; sometimes parishes founded by immigrant communities maintain the liturgy in the language of the old country).

WE HAVE COOKIES! *Gives him a box of cookies.*

*Meanwhile St. Philomena gives him puppy-dog eyes.*

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Definitely, I want to make sure my decision is as certain as it can be.



I will see, and thank you.

Come to the dark side. We have cookies.

Well, I have cookies. I dunno if-*Pope Francis pops in from under the tile Soldati is standing on. He is holding a pan of chocolate-chip cookies.*

Papa: ¡YO HORNO UNAS GALLETAS! (I MADE COOKIES!!!)

You see? Papa made cookies. So you should totally be Catholic now. Lol.

I will pray for you on your spiritual journey.

"Horneé" but close enough.

[Salus Maior]

No its not. You honor Roman gods by calling him that name.

You assign significance to this far beyond what its meant to be.

No, that's ridiculous. Jesus is not a Roman god, for one, nor anything close to it.

And anglicizing names is not paganism. Jesus and Yeshua are the same names spoken in different language pronunciations, to suggest anything other than that is stubborn ignorance.

[Nationes Pii Redivivi]

A lighthearted question, to what degree would you say that being correct on the minutae of the faith, such as how to cross oneself, whether Jesus is really present in the Eucharist, whether God's divine gift of grace is given freely to all, or to those he predestines into heaven, and how does God go about predestining, is important in your salvation?

[Salus Maior]

Messiah somehow is suppose to cover your sins

That's not even close to paganism. In fact, the symbolism of Christ's death is highly Judaic.

Akin to the sacrifice of lambs in the Old Testament. Hence why Jesus is "the Lamb of God".

[Constantinopolis]

WE HAVE COOKIES! *Gives him a box of cookies.*

I can't have cookies now, silly, I am planning to receive communion tomorrow morning! But thank you.

[Vetalia]

Come to the dark side. We have cookies.

Well, I have cookies. I dunno if-*Pope Francis pops in from under the tile Soldati is standing on. He is holding a pan of chocolate-chip cookies.*

Papa: ¡YO HORNO UNAS GALLETAS! (I MADE COOKIES!!!)

You see? Papa made cookies. So you should totally be Catholic now. Lol.

I will pray for you on your spiritual journey.

Two things I do definitely like, Pope Francis and cookies. That's an offer that's hard to refuse.

Good night everyone, and thanks for your helpful responses!

[Nationes Pii Redivivi]

Messiah somehow is suppose to cover your sins

That's not even close to paganism. In fact, the symbolism of Christ's death is highly Judaic.

Akin to the sacrifice of lambs in the Old Testament. Hence why Jesus is "the Lamb of God".

Only, Judaism has consistently been opposed to human sacrifice.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

A lighthearted question, to what degree would you say that being correct on the minutae of the faith, such as how to cross oneself, whether Jesus is really present in the Eucharist, whether God's divine gift of grace is given freely to all, or to those he predestines into heaven, and how does God go about predestining, is important in your salvation?

If predestination was true and God didn't give the divine gift of grace to all freely then Christianity would be meaningless.

The rest are not as important I would think, but still a major point of doctrinal contention.

[Cill Airne]

A lighthearted question, to what degree would you say that being correct on the minutae of the faith, such as how to cross oneself, whether Jesus is really present in the Eucharist, whether God's divine gift of grace is given freely to all, or to those he predestines into heaven, and how does God go about predestining, is important in your salvation?

Only predestination and God's Gift of Grace are important out of that list (and whether you believe in them, and how you believe in them). The rest are not nearly as important.

[Coulee Croche]

Same shit.

Also, it's the same Christians believe, so, Protestant.

No its not. You honor Roman gods by calling him that name.

You assign significance to this far beyond what its meant to be.

Incorrect, and youve been corrected.

However, I will note that there are words in the English language which derives from the names of other gods, and I'm sure youve used them...

[Nationes Pii Redivivi]

A lighthearted question, to what degree would you say that being correct on the minutae of the faith, such as how to cross oneself, whether Jesus is really present in the Eucharist, whether God's divine gift of grace is given freely to all, or to those he predestines into heaven, and how does God go about predestining, is important in your salvation?

If predestination was true and God didn't give the divine gift of grace to all freely then Christianity would be meaningless.

The rest are not as important I would think, but still a major point of doctrinal contention.

I don't think there is a Church that rejects predestination.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

If predestination was true and God didn't give the divine gift of grace to all freely then Christianity would be meaningless.

The rest are not as important I would think, but still a major point of doctrinal contention.

I don't think there is a Church that rejects predestination.

It depends on what "predestination" means to you.

I associate predestination with the teachings of John Calvin on the subject, which are cringeworthy in my opinion.

Then again, I just have a passing knowledge of them having seen them in High School and a bit in college.

[Salus Maior]

That's not even close to paganism. In fact, the symbolism of Christ's death is highly Judaic.

Akin to the sacrifice of lambs in the Old Testament. Hence why Jesus is "the Lamb of God".

Only, Judaism has consistently been opposed to human sacrifice.

And so has Christianity.

The self-sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross is not comparable to human sacrifice in pagan religions. For one, it was not ritualistic, he was simply crucified (and not by any sort of priesthood or faithful, but by the Romans, as a criminal), and second, it wasn't for the glory or worship of God, but for the salvation of humanity.

[Nationes Pii Redivivi]

A lighthearted question, to what degree would you say that being correct on the minutae of the faith, such as how to cross oneself, whether Jesus is really present in the Eucharist, whether God's divine gift of grace is given freely to all, or to those he predestines into heaven, and how does God go about predestining, is important in your salvation?

Only predestination and God's Gift of Grace are important out of that list (and whether you believe in them, and how you believe in them). The rest are not nearly as important.

If I understand the various disagreements between the Churches correctly, the Arminian believe that foresees that you would accept his free gift of grace and therefore predestines you for it, whereas, for the Calvinist, God elects you and gives you his free gift of grace, which, in the end, results in the same thing, a selected group of people gets predestined into heaven and receives God's grace, so that is why I don't understand why this doctrinal difference is all that important.

[Cill Airne]

I don't think there is a Church that rejects predestination.

The only Church that comes to mind at the moment is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. Although the LDS Church does have a similar teaching, known as foreordination; they reject predestination entirely.

[Nationes Pii Redivivi]

I don't think there is a Church that rejects predestination.

It depends on what "predestination" means to you.

I associate predestination with the teachings of John Calvin on the subject, which are cringeworthy in my opinion.

Then again, I just have a passing knowledge of them having seen them in High School and a bit in college.

I mean God predestining his elects into heaven, without all the Calvinist doctrine of double predestination, that is damning people to hell (though to accept predestination, it logically follows that God damns those he does not elect to hell).

[Nationes Pii Redivivi]

Only, Judaism has consistently been opposed to human sacrifice.

And so has Christianity.

The self-sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross is not comparable to human sacrifice in pagan religions. For one, it was not ritualistic, he was simply crucified (and not by any sort of priesthood or faithful, but by the Romans, as a criminal), and second, it wasn't for the glory or worship of God, but for the salvation of humanity.

The use of human sacrifice to atone for the sin of man and please a God would seem deplorable to Judaism, but it has become the entire basis of the Christian faith.

[Cill Airne]

Only predestination and God's Gift of Grace are important out of that list (and whether you believe in them, and how you believe in them). The rest are not nearly as important.

If I understand the various disagreements between the Churches correctly, the Arminian believe that foresees that you would accept his free gift of grace and therefore predestines you for it, whereas, for the Calvinist, God elects you and gives you his free gift of grace, which, in the end, results in the same thing, a selected group of people gets predestined into heaven and receives God's grace, so that is why I don't understand why this doctrinal difference is all that important.

Calvinists believe in what is termed, "double predestination." Some Christians, like myself, believe those whom God has elected to eternal life will infallibly attain it and are therefore predestined to Salvation; but those who die are not necessarily predestined to hell. Not everyone is predestined to salvation, and no one is certainly predestined to hell. Double predestination is that God chooses, actively, who will attain Salvation and who will be damned to hell. That makes it a major distinction.

Anyway, I'm off to prepare for Mass! Have a blessed Sunday!

[Nationes Pii Redivivi]

If I understand the various disagreements between the Churches correctly, the Arminian believe that foresees that you would accept his free gift of grace and therefore predestines you for it, whereas, for the Calvinist, God elects you and gives you his free gift of grace, which, in the end, results in the same thing, a selected group of people gets predestined into heaven and receives God's grace, so that is why I don't understand why this doctrinal difference is all that important.

Calvinists believe in what is termed, "double predestination." Some Christians, like myself, believe those whom God has elected to eternal life will infallibly attain it and are therefore predestined to Salvation; but those who die are not necessarily predestined to hell. Not everyone is predestined to salvation, and no one is certainly predestined to hell. Double predestination is that God chooses, actively, who will attain Salvation and who will be damned to hell. That makes it a major distinction.

Yes, but the net of it is that God allows those that are not elected into hell, even if he is not active in damning them, he allows them to 'damn themselves' so to speak. So the end is the same, some who are predestined are heaven bound, those that aren't are going to hell.

[Salus Maior]

The use of human sacrifice to atone for the sin of man and please a God would seem deplorable to Judaism, but it has become the entire basis of the Christian faith.

It wasn't to please a God. And you're forgetting that Christ is God as well according to Christianity.

[Nationes Pii Redivivi]

The use of human sacrifice to atone for the sin of man and please a God would seem deplorable to Judaism, but it has become the entire basis of the Christian faith.

It wasn't to please a God. And you're forgetting that Christ is God as well according to Christianity.

It was a sacrifice of God in human form to appease God the father, was it not, it remains human sacrifice.

[The Alma Mater]

Only, Judaism has consistently been opposed to human sacrifice.

And so has Christianity.

Depends if you believe the Roman tales that Christ was a cannibal - and that that is the origin of the ritual of the host

[Constantinopolis]

A lighthearted question, to what degree would you say that being correct on the minutae of the faith, such as how to cross oneself, whether Jesus is really present in the Eucharist, whether God's divine gift of grace is given freely to all, or to those he predestines into heaven, and how does God go about predestining, is important in your salvation?

First of all, it depends on who you are. Members of the clergy will be judged far more harshly on the correctness of their faith than members of the laity. A priest who holds heretical views, and especially one who teaches heresy, is putting his soul in extreme danger. A layman, on the other hand, is not expected to be so familiar with the minutae of the faith. If theology is not your calling, then your lack of knowledge of theology (or holding some mistaken views) is not going to seriously hinder your salvation.

By the way, everyone, please take note of this in light of the earlier conversation we had about how clergy are not superior to laity. It is actually harder for a clergyman to be saved than for a layman to be saved - in the sense that the clergyman is held to higher standards.

But also, if you are a layman holding some incorrect beliefs, it makes a difference how attached you are to these mistaken views. Are they just some guesses that you've made, that you don't feel particularly strongly about? Then they will probably not hinder your salvation. Or are you constantly arguing in favour of them, writing books about them, trying to teach them to others? Then you are teaching heresy and putting your soul in danger.

[Salus Maior]

And so has Christianity.

Depends if you believe the Roman tales that Christ was a cannibal - and that that is the origin of the ritual of the host

Which was a false view based on a misunderstanding of Eucharist.