Baptism, theology and formula is Trinitarian.

Baptism is always Trinitarian. The teaching & theology of the NT Letters proves this (1 Pet. 1:2 / Tit. 3:4-6). Both the economic but most important an ontological reality in God’s Triune unity and character. There can be no economy of God without also His own ontology: being & substance!

On Acts 2:38, Calvin wrote: “I maintain that Peter is not speaking in this passage of the form of baptism but simply declaring that the whole efficacy of baptism is contained in Christ; although Christ cannot be grasped by faith without the Father by whom he was given and the Spirit by whom he renews and sancifies us.“

Calvin knew that the Greek prepositions in the Book of Acts as to the doctrine of baptism supports the reality of Christ being the one in authority and sovereign in the command to baptise, rather than the formula, etc. And we need to also note that the Gentiles were not regenerated by the water in baptism, as they were filled (made regenerate) with and by the Holy Spirit even before the act and action of baptism (Acts 10:44..etc.) “And he (Peter) ordered them to be baptised in (by the authority of) the name of Jesus Christ.” (verse 48)

Fr. Robert

Christian Mysticism

Christian Mysticism is perhaps one of the least understood doctrines in the Church today!  The word mysticism itself is often defamed, as it is not defined within the Judeo-Christian sense with many in the Church. It simply must be seen in its reality as biblical, theological, and certainly Pauline and Johannine.  There is a certain mystical reality to the NT revelation, as both St. Paul and St. John can bring testimony ( Gal.2:20 / Rev.1:12-13), not to mention really Moses, and the OT Prophets. The whole Scriptural history and revelation is based upon God’s own self-disclosure, this produces the immediate principle of authority, which is finally the Spirit Himself speaking in the Holy Scripture, but also in the Christian himself. But the NT mysticism is in the revelation of Christ Jesus Himself…”who has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.” (2 Cor. 4:6) And certainly all those who have seen and felt this in their heart and soul, can say amen! (See, Rom. 8:14-16 / 1 Peter 1:8)

Greek Predestination

Greek thought concerning predestination perhaps culminates in the teaching of St. John of Damascus, who perfected the earlier doctrine especially by his insistence on the distinction between God’s antecedent and consequent salvific will. If God is infinitely good, he asks, how is it that some men are lost? He replies by pointing out that many sin and persevere in their evil ways. God punishes them only in consequence of their sin. Prior to His prevision of sin He wills the salvation of all, because He is supremely good; if He punishes subsequently to sin, it is only because He is also supremely just. Hence God’s antecedent will to save is not absolute, but conditional; His foreknowledge of the good or evil will of man. Thus predestination, is an act of God, is in accordance with the divine prevision of man’s co-operation with grace. This distinction was to prove of paramount importance in all later speculations on predestination.

This is the basic thought of the Greek fathers, who did treat the subject more so in the first four centuries, the Patristic period.  The ideas were fully based upon the co-operation of man with the grace of God. Later of course the western Father St. Augustine set the whole discussion in relation to God’s sovereign independence of divine grace against all systems of nature by itself. Of course later the Pelagians held that grace is not necessary, but the will of man. And this was later condemed at Council of Ephesus, 431. 

Thus for the Greeks, predestination, as an act of God, is in accordance with the prevision of man’s co-operation with grace. Against this is of course Augustine’s position, that the mystery of predestination does not lie in the co-operation alone between God and man, but in the unfathomable secret of the divine decree.

I respect the Greek position, but left to itself and without the doctrine that God alone, is the complete person (triune) at work, in the salvation of the sinner (1 Peter 1:2), it is not complete. Thus we must have a real balance, but God must have the top or first place.

The Conflict Of The Word

“The struggles that the militant Church is engaged in are rarely clear-cut in their issues; they do not often appear as a battle between Christ and anti-Christ. Standing outside them or viewing them over a distance of the years, we can see what was at stake and can simplify them into one of the battles in the war of the Word of God.” ~ Quoted by T.H.L. Parker in his book: Portrait Of Calvin

Father Robert

Take Up Your Cross..

The Cross in the Christian life is very real! If we are going to be true disciples of Christ, we can be sure this reality will come. And all of our problems in this life are really theological ones. They come back to our relationship to our God. So God and His nature are ever the center round which all things tend. But we can never capture this great mystery of God, it is more than definition also, though God is the definitive in Himself. But the cross cuts across our human nature, and it always brings us to the place of Christ, and His place of “death”. As St. Paul tells us: “For you are dead (for you died), and your life is hidden with Christ in God.” (Col.3:3) It from only this place and position, that we can deny ourselves, and take up “our” cross, and follow Him! (St. Luke 9:23) But HE has already gone this way before us, and we have the surety that the way can be possible, and even filled with His presence and power “in weakness”. As He said, “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect (perfected/Gk.) in weakness. Therefore I will boast all the more gladly of my weakness, so that the power of Christ may rest upon me.” (2 Cor.12:9)

Oh let us in faith, take up..and follow Him!

 

The Divine Sophia in the Holy Trinity

It was Fr. Bulgakov’s observation that in the Church there is a very well-developed theology of the Divine Persons, but there was hardly any development of the Divine Essence. Convinced that Tradition is a creative rather than a restrictive force, Fr. Bulgakov devoted his philosophers and writers talent as well as his mystical sensitivity to developing this aspect of Orthodox Trintarianism.

“The dogma of the Holy Trinity consists in two basic postulates. The first affirms the triune character of the Deity, Trinity in Unity and Unity in Trinity. The Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, who are three distinct Divine Persons together constitute one God. The second postulate is concerned with the consubstantiality of the Holy Trinity, which has but one Substance or Nature.” (Fr. Sergius Bulgakov ‘ Sophia the Wisdom of God’ p. 23).” 

Dogmatic Theology, the expression & charm of Truth

Christianity can really only be expressed by and in dogmatic theology. “The dogma of consubstantiality, which safeguards the unity of the Holy Trinity, thus remains a sealed book so far as we are concerned — for in a religious sense it has neither assimilated nor unfolded.” ~ “Sophia the Wisdom of God” p. 25, Fr. Serguis Bulgakov

“Orthodoxy does not persuade or try to compel;it charms and it attracts.” ~ S. Bulgakov

“And I, when I am lifted-up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.” (St. John 12:32)

First Council of Nicaea (325)

This first Oecumenical Council is of the highest importance in the history of Christianity. Its convocation by Constantine shows the place which Christianity had become in the whole region and the confines of the Roman empire. And this within months of the conquest of the Eastern provinces, and primarily to deal with the Arian problem.  It should perhaps be noted that for Constantine his main interest was to maintain unity. And besides Bishop Hosius, it seems that Eustathius, Bishop of Antioch took some lead and authority. The two terms that came to the expression of most importance in the Nicene Creed were Homoousion (Gk. of one substance) to express the relations of the Son with the Father. And also perhaps the preferred term Homoiousion (Gk. of like substance with The Father), which was held to leave more room for the distinctions in the Godhead.

And later there was the longer formula, also known as the ‘Niceno-Constanopolitan Creed.’  It needs to be said, that the later Eucharist worship, and the added Filioque in the early Middle Ages, was not and never really accepted with the East and Orthodoxy. And many today in the Anglican Church, as in the Orthodox do not accept the filioque.

Israel…the Jewish People.

With the 60th anniversary of the Nation of Israel earlier this month. Judeo-Christians (all Christians) should ask themselves, where does Israel today fit into our Christian consciousness? Even Vatican II declared: “Israel according to the flesh, which wandered as an exile in the desert, was already called the Church of God (Num.20:4)”. The new Israel will come when the Jewish people rejoin the Gentiles in the Church (Rom.11:25-29). How can we Christians not love and care for our Jewish brethren? As Our Lord said: “for salvation is from the Jews.” (St. John 4:22)

Shalom!

Orthodoxy contin.

The Orthodox and Eastern Church has no creeds in the modern western use of the word, no normative summaries of what must be believed. It has preserved the older idea that a creed is an adoring confession of the Church engaged in worship. The eastern creeds may thus be placed in two classes – the ecumenical creeds of the early undivided church, and later testimonies defining the position of the Orthodox Church of the east with regard to the belief of the Roman Catholic and of the Protestant Churches. The first four councils settled the Orthodox faith on the doctrines of the Trinity and of the two natures of the one person of Christ; the fifth supplemented the decisions of the first four.