The Orthodox Church

[aron]

How to create a Protestant splinter cell, by Aron

Originally Posted by InChristAlone

I believe it is a tragedy: whatever they do in the Lord’s Recovery, their activity doesn't bring them to Christ. Generally, they are nice people: kind and sincere. But no matter how much they desire and struggle to be perfected in Jesus Christ, they end up being perfected in Witness Lee.

The problem is not with them but with the system. The LC is a man-centered organization, not a Christ-centered church. It's all about WL, his gospel, and his speculations and it's so little about the Lord, His Gospel, and His commandments. As someone wise said, "A true prophet brings people to the Lord. A false prophet brings people to himself."

I might be mistaken but I think WL, his teaching, and practices is a serious barrier towards union with Christ. A Witness Lee-like life and a Christ-like life are not the same. I pray for my dear wife and other relatives so that they see the difference.

Why is it that the Orthodox church never had a Reformation? Why is it that the weird groups come out of the Protestants?

First, one of them gets a special word from a special Bible verse. Think of the so-called Latter Rain movement, and/or the New Apostolic Reformation, or Witness Lee and his proprietary 'revelations', or the Shouter spin-off the EL ("As the lightning from east to west, so shall. . .")

(Does the EO not believe in justification by faith? Why did no Luther rise up within its ranks?)

The revelator now has a fulcrum to separate the flock unto himself/herself. The focus shifts from the Bible to the revelation, so-called, and thence from the revelation to the person of the revelator themselves. In extreme cases like with the EL, the Bible itself is done away with as passe, and the speaking of the revelator reigns alone. In more moderate cases like with the LSM LC, the 'interpreted word' of the 'seer' guides one through the text, and the 'interpreted word' (teachings) tell the acolytes whether the text is 'fallen' or 'revelatory' and to what degree.

Revelation after revelation, splinter cell after splinter cell. It seems every time someone gets a vision, a new group is formed.

[InChristAlone]

Originally Posted by aron

Why is it that the Orthodox church never had a Reformation? Why is it that the weird groups come out of the Protestants?

So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter. (2 Thes 2.15)

Aron, I agree with you.

In my opinion, Sola Scriptura (in fact, which is one's personal interpretation of the Bible), the lack of Apostolic Succession and, of course, the human factor, are the reasons of every revelation after revelation.

Let me quote Dr. Jeannie Constantinou from her podcast:

Paul... also learned the apostolic tradition and passed it on just as he himself had received it. And that’s one of the important things in the concept of tradition: that you preserve what you receive, you don’t just take part of it, the part that you like, and pass that on and leave the rest behind. You pass it on whole, entire, well-preserved. So this is also extremely important.

In the Orthodox Church, we understand what Tradition is. The other churches have their own traditions, but they don’t adhere to Apostolic Tradition to the extent that we do. And frankly, that is the reason for our very strong unity of faith, for the fact that we do not have tremendous theological factions. We don’t have a wide-variety of opinions about basic doctrine and practices because we have made it our point to keep the Apostolic Tradition unchanged. That’s really the distinguishing characteristic of the Orthodox Church, this is exactly what St. Paul is talking about, and this is the meaning of Tradition. This, frankly, is the role of the bishop. You see, the bishop now stands in the place of the apostles. There are no more apostles, but the bishop stands in the role of the apostles. When an Orthodox bishop is ordained, the first thing that he does is recite the Creed. Why does he stand up in front of the congregation and recite the Nicene Creed? He says, “I believe in one God the Father Almighty,” and he recites the Creed, so that you will know that he teaches the Apostolic faith. The number one role of the bishop in the Church, aside from the many different purposes he serves in the Church, is to preserve Apostolic Tradition, because this is what they inherited from the Apostles. So when we speak about Apostolic succession, it’s not a mechanical thing, some nice idea or concept. It means that they stand in the succession of the Apostles because they have received the Tradition, and they’re passing it on to the next bishops who come after them, without altering it in any manner.

http://www.pravoslavie.ru/english/103305.htm

Originally Posted by aron

Does the EO not believe in justification by faith?

Salvation is indeed by grace. But if we fail to put our faith into action, our faith is purely intellectual, “lip service”. In other words, if we accept Christ as the Son of the Living God and the Savior of the world, yet we fail to bring His love to others around us, then we are liars. Hence, faith without such good works is dead.

Fr Michael Shanbour, an Orthodox priest from Wenatchee, Washington, says in his interview:

The Orthodox Church teaches, as do the Holy Scriptures, that we are saved by grace through faith. The question is, “What is grace and how is it acquired (i.e. what is faith)?”

The Church Fathers teach that grace is the very life that flows naturally and eternally from God. It is the real, life-bestowing power that brings us into communion with Him.

Think back to the story of the woman with the issue of blood. St. Veronica, as we know her in the Orthodox Church, touched the hem of Christ’s garment in faith. The Lord knew she touched Him because, as He said, “I perceived power going out from Me” (Lk. 8:46). This power is none other than His divine grace.

Grace is the energy that allows us to participate in God’s life. It is as real as (and more real than) the light and warmth of the sun by which we truly experience the sun. But unlike the created energy of the sun, God’s energies (as grace is called by the Fathers) are uncreated. God’s uncreated energies (i.e. grace) allow us to partake in Him and to know Him. St. Basil the Great wrote: “It is by the energies that we can say we know our God.”

All this means that grace is not merely an idea about God’s forgiveness in Christ. It is not a change in God’s “attitude” toward a person. It is not a mere release from “guilt.” It is the very life-giving, transforming, divine power and uncreated energies of God Himself. It is always received as a gift of God (never “earned”) by those who open their hearts and lives to receive it. And this grace saves inasmuch as it brings one into intimate union with the One who is Salvation...

https://blogs.ancientfaith.com/behin...race-shanbour/

I do recommend to read the whole interview as well as Fr Michael's new book “Know The Faith: A Handbook For Orthodox Christians And Inquirers”. One can find a sample chapter on the AncientFaith website:

http://store.ancientfaith.com/know-the-faith/
https://www.amazon.com/Know-Faith-Ha.../dp/B01MG1SCS7

[aron]

ICA, thanks for the reply. As you know, I'm a Protestant & a child of Protestants. It is the very human tradition and culture (and yet divinely inspired to a degree) I inherited when, in a Baptist congregation, I confessed the faith, that I am a sinner, and God loved me and sent His Son Jesus Christ. And Paul's advice, "in what you were saved, in this remain" has long seemed applicable, here.

But lately I've been examining the "recovery" narrative and it seems truncated, perhaps deliberately so. I know that Luther reacted within a sphere of late Middle Age thought and experience. Likewise, with Watchman Nee, Leland Wang, & others of the early 20th-century Chinese christians. In both cases the RCC dominated, in 16th century Western Europe literally; in Asia 400 years later Nee could confidently look to "the harlot and her daughters" in his narrative. Conceptually that's all there was. Western European & American sociopolitical might, and religious hegemony prevailed without challenge.

But a hundred years later we'd have to be deliberately obtuse to keep such a story as our primary motif. It just isn't so. Why can't we humble ourselves, even a little bit? Where's the seeking heart, the open-ness?

[InChristAlone]

Aron, it's always nice to talk to you. Years ago, thanks to your thoughtful advice and your kind words about the EOC and the Church Fathers, I got back to my roots and started to explore Orthodoxy.

Originally Posted by aron

And Paul's advice, "in what you were saved, in this remain"

Sorry, Aron, could you please tell me which verse is this? I can't find it in English. Can it be 1 Corinthians 7:20-21? Or 1 Corinthians 7:23-24? Or maybe some other verse? What is the context of the advice?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by InChristAlone

Aron, it's always nice to talk to you. Years ago, thanks to your thoughtful advice and your kind words about the EOC and the Church Fathers, I got back to my roots and started to explore Orthodoxy.
Sorry, Aron, could you please tell me which verse is this? I can't find it in English. Can it be 1 Corinthians 7:20-21? Or 1 Corinthians 7:23-24? Or maybe some other verse? What is the context of the advice?

Should be this entire section in I Corinthians 7.17-24, repeated in almost every verse.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Should be this entire section in I Corinthians 7.17-24, repeated in almost every verse.

Yes, 1 Cor 7. I think it's applicable. "Come out of her, my people", applied too liberally, makes us all leave one another alone. Nobody is perfect.

And the "her" of LSM LC lore was the Great Harlot sitting on the seven hills of Rome. That was all that Luther could see. Hardly blame him for posting his ideas on the door in Wittenberg.

But again, why no Luther rose up in the EOC? The RCC has spawned division after division. By rights I should have titled my mini-essay, "How to create a post-RCC splinter cell" because the Anglicans and thus the Wesleyans were not perforce Protestants. But they were all post-RCC. (Watchman Nee was educated in an Anglican school).

But the EOC never got "reformed" or "recovered". . . interesting to think about. Puts the "restored church" narrative in a new light, for me. I heard it so many times, and never really thought about it much. Took it for granted.

And not only that, but Witness Lee said that everyone who got a vision created a division, except somehow Nee was exempt from this rule. And only he and Nee could see revelations in the scriptural text; anyone else who tried to see anything was ambitious for power. Again, somehow (magically?) he & Nee were immune from self-interest, bias, corruption and self-delusion.

(And I do remain thankful for my Baptist roots, but am no longer proud of them. We have no room for pride of place on this earth. Pride creates false judgment which creates division, isolation, paranoia, darkness. And then Christ has died in vain - no, we must not have it. "Receive those whom God has received in Christ Jesus" said the apostle. . . amen.)

[aron]

Originally Posted by InChristAlone

. . . I got back to my roots and started to explore Orthodoxy

I don't think you were placed randomly in Orthodoxy. God does not move in a vain way. Among other attributes, Our Father is a God of purpose.

Originally Posted by InChristAlone

In my opinion, Sola Scriptura (in fact, which is one's personal interpretation of the Bible), the lack of Apostolic Succession and, of course, the human factor, are the reasons of every revelation after revelation.

Let me quote Dr. Jeannie Constantinou from her podcast

I like the points about the bishops. How remarkable that there is no history of bishops getting "up-to-date-truths" which lead them to form new sects! What a constrast to the post-RCC world!

I came to this consideration, and response, after reading about a group recently sprung up. Mike Bickle and the Kansas City (Missouri) International House of Prayer. Along with this, the "Toronto Blessing", the "Lakeland Revival", and the "New Apostolic Reformation". Very little scripture is used; instead it is subjective impressions. Scripture can mean whatever you want it to mean - context has vanished in the hub-bub. "God is doing thus and such", is confidently proclaimed. There is continual excitement, signs and wonders, and from what I can see much confusion. Each new prophet claims the final truth to end the age.

Compared to this, the Church Fathers and the testimony passed through the ages, while safe, seems tame, or even torpid. But it's not - if you touch the flame they touched. And by contrast the "latest and greatest" and "central lane of God's present move" begins to look like manufactured fluff, or worse, like flat-out delusion.

[InChristAlone]

Ohio, Aron, thank you brothers.

Just checked with Chrysostom and Theophylact. They interpret I Corinthians 7:17-24 as "Live as You Are Called". If God's call was to you as a circumcised man or as an uncircumcised man; as a slave or as a freedman - abide in that condition.

[InChristAlone]

Originally Posted by aron

But again, why no Luther rose up in the EOC? The RCC has spawned division after division... But the EOC never got "reformed" or "recovered". . . interesting to think about.

Aron, I am not sure if you agree with Fr Steven Freeman, an Orthodox priest. He calls it a miracle: "The miracle of the Church (and it must be called nothing less than a miracle) is that it received such teaching, and maintained such teaching, rejecting all attempts to change what had been given once and for all. I speak of this as a miracle because the New Testament describes Churches that were as weak and sin-laden in their beginnings as is the Church of the 21st century. This same Church, despite every weakness and sin, survived Emperors (I think many of them to have been as at least as dangerous as many heretics), persecutions, attacks from within and without. And despite the nightmare of the Dhimmitude, Communist oppression and assaults by modern philosophies, the Church and its Apostolic faith abides."

Personally, I do believe that the Orthodox Church is the "pillar and the ground of truth" (I Timothy 3:15). Otherwise, I would keep on looking for a "better", "recovered" or "restored church", which is a religious utopia. Among Russian Orthodox, there is such a common description of the Church: "The Church is gathering of repentant sinners, united by the Holy Spirit". The work of the Holy Spirit can be the key to the question and its mystery.

In another article, Fr. Stephen Freeman adds "...if we move away from the question of the One God and begin to think about the One Church, again, everyone immediately assumes a meaning that seems obvious: mathematics. But the Church is One, even as God is One:

I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word; that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. And the glory which You gave Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one… (Jn. 17:20-22).

Birthed into the Church by Baptism, we enter into a new kind of existence. St. Paul hammers at this new existence on the theme of the “one.”

But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually as He wills. For as the body is one and has many members, but all the members of that one body, being many, are one body, so also is Christ. For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body – whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free – and have all been made to drink into one Spirit. (1 Co 12:11-13)

And,

…that there should be no schism in the body, but that the members should have the same care for one another. And if one member suffers, all the members suffer with it; or if one member is honored, all the members rejoice with it. Now you are the body of Christ (1 Co 12:25-27).

...For many, the current plague of schism has become a manifestation of modern diversity. “Different people like different things! Why not different Churches? After all, we’re all really one!”

If we are in Christ, then indeed, we are one. But the mystery of that Divine reality has nothing to do with contemporary denominationalism. If we are in Christ, then if one suffers we all suffer. I suggest (and assert), that we are indeed one, and some, known only to God, are living out the mysterious suffering on behalf of all that preserves us as one beyond our ability to perceive.

Just as we should stand before the mystery of the One God in awe, so we should stand before the mystery of the Church. The Church is the “pillar and ground of truth,” the “fullness of Him who fills all in all.”

I always find it difficult to explain to the non-Orthodox, that I accept the Orthodox Church as the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church because there is no other way to accept and be united with the One Church. Life in the One Church is a mode of existence, and a necessary existence for the knowledge of the One God. To renounce this, or to hold it at some distance, is to renounce the unity that is Christ’s prayer and to embrace the scattered mind of modern man. The healing of my scattered mind is intimately part of my salvation.

What I can say – and what I mean to say in this article – is that our salvation is worked out through union with the One God. The fragmentation and scattered mind of modernity is contrary to the life of salvation. The Church as a multitude of choices, styles and theologies, is not the Church as salvation, as delivered to us in the Scriptures. To stand before the fragmented universe is to confess that a major portion of the journey has yet to be taken. In our many Christian permutations, the One God has become only one god. And he lives in competition with the many gods. Such a god is fittingly worshiped in the many and varied temples of the competing world.

Before the One, True God everything rightly comes to a standstill. There the mind must cease its fragmentation and frenetic scattering and be quiet. Then the journey begins.”

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by InChristAlone

Ohio, Aron, thank you brothers.

Just checked with Chrysostom and Theophylact. They interpret I Corinthians 7:17-24 as "Live as You Are Called". If God's call was to you as a circumcised man or as an uncircumcised man; as a slave or as a freedman - abide in that condition.

InChristAlone,

I have a friend who faithfully attends the Ukrainian OC, having grown up in the Russian OC. He is the only contact I ever had with the OC, and here in the USA, the OC has almost no visible presence.

Anyways, the difficulty I have is with their archaic structures, which seem so contrary to the NT church. For example, every part of service has symbolism and deeper meaning. This to me is indicative of the OT and not the NT, which severely limits symbolism to communion and baptism.

My friend told me that St John wrote the liturgy centuries ago. While it may be excellent, it still is not the scripture and also limits the Spirit from speaking freshly today.

I get what you and aron are saying about endless Protestant spinoffs, but the EOC does not provide for most a suitable alternative. Sure there are dangers in these spinoffs, but the environment often facilitates fresh pursuits of the Lord Himself, returning solely to His word, which does not seem possible in the EOC.

I'm not so sure that a continuous connection back to the church fathers always is better than freshly returning to the scriptures alone. Comments?