Frederica Matthewes-Green has written an article called "Why We Need Hell. It has been posted on her own site as well as on Virtue Online. It is an apologetic for the concept of Hell from an Eastern Orthodox perspective. The reality of Hell is something fire and brimstone revival preachers often return to and is a topic which needs to be emphasized from time to time - the notion that there are eternal consequences to our actions. And that is a healthy thing, if it is balanced and not manipulative.
But Matthewes-Green’s article raises some troubling questions about the meaning of the very concept of Hell. I had read before, in Franky Schaeffer's brutal Dancing Alone of an Eastern understanding of Hell which states that Hell is not so much a place where one is punished for his or her deeds and rejection of salvation, but rather is simply a state of natural consequence for the pattern of one’s life. Such a view removes the image of God as an angry executioner. In this view, all human beings wind up in a state of eternal existence in the presence of God, but for some, for those who have rejected God’s grace, His very presence is itself a state of torment. God is described in scripture as a consuming fire, so, according to this understanding, to reject God and then spend eternity in His presence will be a Hellish eternity. Mathewes-Green's article refers to more detailed explanations of this view from Peter Chopelas and Dr. Alexander Kaomiros.
Sunday, April 23, 2006
Turning Around the Mainline - A Synopsis
Thomas Oden's latest booke is called Turning Around the Mainline
Thomas Oden is the driving force behind Paleo-Orthodoxy, the blending of two concepts, right belief rooted in ancient and lasting consensus. This concept has been a bit of an inspiration for me personally, suggesting a way past the runaway pluralism of both modern and postmodern trends.
For the last few generations, the leadership of mainline denominations has been the opposite of orthodox and has embraced ideas that are anything but ancient or consensual. Over the last two centuries, there has been a gathering momentum in the mainline to see both scripture and the classical doctrine with a skeptical eye and to revise the teachings of the churches in accordance with modern assumptions. Thus national leaders could profess a “Christianity” that denied the resurrection of Christ, embrace radical political agendas and turn traditional morality completely upside down.
But this trend has been one that primarily affected the clergy, many of whom were educated in the radical sixties and have more recently ascended to denominational leadership. Such leaders have made sweeping decisions regarding doctrine, morality and church policy that have been baffling and often offensive to the orthodox laity and have managed to shut orthodox clergy out of positions of influence.
Thomas Oden is the driving force behind Paleo-Orthodoxy, the blending of two concepts, right belief rooted in ancient and lasting consensus. This concept has been a bit of an inspiration for me personally, suggesting a way past the runaway pluralism of both modern and postmodern trends.
For the last few generations, the leadership of mainline denominations has been the opposite of orthodox and has embraced ideas that are anything but ancient or consensual. Over the last two centuries, there has been a gathering momentum in the mainline to see both scripture and the classical doctrine with a skeptical eye and to revise the teachings of the churches in accordance with modern assumptions. Thus national leaders could profess a “Christianity” that denied the resurrection of Christ, embrace radical political agendas and turn traditional morality completely upside down.
But this trend has been one that primarily affected the clergy, many of whom were educated in the radical sixties and have more recently ascended to denominational leadership. Such leaders have made sweeping decisions regarding doctrine, morality and church policy that have been baffling and often offensive to the orthodox laity and have managed to shut orthodox clergy out of positions of influence.
Wednesday, April 12, 2006
Is The Reformation Over - Ecclesiology
In previous posts dealing with the Mark Noll book “Is The Reformation Over?”, I summarized a few thoughts regarding substantial agreement on terminology (if not meaning) on the issues of justification by grace through faith and the authority of scripture. I also expressed my opinion that in spite of growing commonalities on those points the reformation is not yet over. Noll indicates in his book that ecclesiology is the remaining obstacle, and it seems to be a significant one.
Even though Rome has made statements regarding justification by grace through faith, there remains in Catholic theology a belief that such justification is channeled through the church, and specifically through the ecclesial offices of pope, bishop and priest. One reason for this belief is the Pauline imagery of the church as the body of Christ, which is extended in Catholic thinking through the historical Episcopal office.
“Christ and his church are one! This basic confession explains why Catholics can offer salvation through baptism into the church. … It is why Ignatius, who died in 110, could say that only priests in connection with a bishop, in connection with the Pope, can offer valid sacraments.” p. 146-147
Even though Rome has made statements regarding justification by grace through faith, there remains in Catholic theology a belief that such justification is channeled through the church, and specifically through the ecclesial offices of pope, bishop and priest. One reason for this belief is the Pauline imagery of the church as the body of Christ, which is extended in Catholic thinking through the historical Episcopal office.
“Christ and his church are one! This basic confession explains why Catholics can offer salvation through baptism into the church. … It is why Ignatius, who died in 110, could say that only priests in connection with a bishop, in connection with the Pope, can offer valid sacraments.” p. 146-147
Thursday, April 06, 2006
The Clash of Civilizations
Chuck Colson has an absolutely must read article today on the clash of civilizations. He speaks rather broadly about the clash of cultures here in the United States toward the end of the article, the postmodern denial of truth in favor of cultural deconstruction, but a major portion is devoted to radical Islam. I simply offer the following excerpt.
"We say there is one God in three. The Trinity. They see the Trinity as blasphemy. We understand grace, that God loves us. They don’t. They understand Allah’s forbidding law. We understand that we are responsible for the sin in the world. They don’t. They believe that people are basically good, corrupted only by Western decadence. So that once Islam takes over by jihad, there will be peace forever.
"We believe in redemption. There is no redemption for the Muslim. He walks across the sword of judgment and can fall off on one side or the other. He may make it, or he may not make it.
"We say there is one God in three. The Trinity. They see the Trinity as blasphemy. We understand grace, that God loves us. They don’t. They understand Allah’s forbidding law. We understand that we are responsible for the sin in the world. They don’t. They believe that people are basically good, corrupted only by Western decadence. So that once Islam takes over by jihad, there will be peace forever.
"We believe in redemption. There is no redemption for the Muslim. He walks across the sword of judgment and can fall off on one side or the other. He may make it, or he may not make it.
Sunday, April 02, 2006
Is The Reformation Over - Scripture
In my last post, I cited a few examples of how Mark Noll’s book "Is The Reformation Over?” documented a forty-year long process of dialogue between the Roman Catholic Church and various protestant groups. On the issue of justification by grace through faith, numerous statements seem to indicate that the Roman church has become willing to accept, at the very least, the Protestant phrase “by grace through faith”.
It should be understood that Catholics, in my opinion, do not define grace in quite the same way Protestants do, so the chasm is not completely filled, yet the facts that such dialogue has occurred and led to substantial statements of agreement with Protestant sounding wording is something that needs more attention in both the Evangelical and Catholic world.
Noll’s book discusses as well Rome’s recent stance on the authority of scripture. It is the common view among evangelicals that Rome places tradition over scripture, so that scripture must mean only what the church says it means, sort of like many “living document” theorists view the U.S. Constitution. And certain Catholic dogmas, particularly Purgatory, Papal infallibility and the assumption of Mary, are cited as prime examples where tradition has defined doctrines not clearly found in the written text.
It should be understood that Catholics, in my opinion, do not define grace in quite the same way Protestants do, so the chasm is not completely filled, yet the facts that such dialogue has occurred and led to substantial statements of agreement with Protestant sounding wording is something that needs more attention in both the Evangelical and Catholic world.
Noll’s book discusses as well Rome’s recent stance on the authority of scripture. It is the common view among evangelicals that Rome places tradition over scripture, so that scripture must mean only what the church says it means, sort of like many “living document” theorists view the U.S. Constitution. And certain Catholic dogmas, particularly Purgatory, Papal infallibility and the assumption of Mary, are cited as prime examples where tradition has defined doctrines not clearly found in the written text.
Thursday, March 30, 2006
Is The Reformation Over - Justification
An old friend Pastor Matt Mitchell, sent me a link to Scot McKnight's post at Jesus Creed regarding the question "Is the Reformation Over?" McKnight is quoted significantly in Mark Noll's recent book, whose title frames the question. McKnight did a significant study of Evangelicals who had converted to Roman Catholicism. His post on the Jesus Creed site spawned, as of this writing , 78 comments, many of them lengthy.
I got around to reading Noll's book a few weeks ago. In answer to the question at hand, I think it would be good to expand just a bit on a few of Noll's key points. Noll's view seems to be that though the Reformation is not quite over, some of the key points of contention have been significantly worked on, particularly since Vatican II.
A key chapter in Noll's book is a documentation of the numerous, lasting and significant dialogue the Vatican has initiated with various Protestant groups. These included, according to Noll, dialogue with Anglicans 1966-1996, Methodists 1967-1996, Pentecostals 1969-1997, Reformed 1970-1990, Lutherans 1972-1999, Disciples of Christ 1977-1993, Baptists 1984-1988, Evangelicals 1977-1984.
All in all the dialogues are described as cordial, productive and positive. What strikes me is that almost no one I know in the Evangelical community is even aware that these dialogues have been taking place, with the possible exception of that with the Lutherans and the Joint Declaration of the Doctrine of Justification. This is unfortunate, in that it has allowed acrimony to continue rather than dialogue on local levels to be initiated.
I got around to reading Noll's book a few weeks ago. In answer to the question at hand, I think it would be good to expand just a bit on a few of Noll's key points. Noll's view seems to be that though the Reformation is not quite over, some of the key points of contention have been significantly worked on, particularly since Vatican II.
A key chapter in Noll's book is a documentation of the numerous, lasting and significant dialogue the Vatican has initiated with various Protestant groups. These included, according to Noll, dialogue with Anglicans 1966-1996, Methodists 1967-1996, Pentecostals 1969-1997, Reformed 1970-1990, Lutherans 1972-1999, Disciples of Christ 1977-1993, Baptists 1984-1988, Evangelicals 1977-1984.
All in all the dialogues are described as cordial, productive and positive. What strikes me is that almost no one I know in the Evangelical community is even aware that these dialogues have been taking place, with the possible exception of that with the Lutherans and the Joint Declaration of the Doctrine of Justification. This is unfortunate, in that it has allowed acrimony to continue rather than dialogue on local levels to be initiated.
Sunday, March 26, 2006
Contend for the Faith - Part IV
Once again, T.M. Moore has surprised me with part four of his series on contending for the faith. This time, the heresy of our age is anti-supernaturalism. His evidence of this problem is a lack of spiritual discipline for one. He says,
"Through prayer, meditative reading of Scripture, solitude, fasting, singing, and other disciplines, one draws aside from the normal routine of things to concentrate on meeting with the Lord, coming into the presence of His glory and experiencing new depths of His love, often with transforming effects."
He includes a lack of spiritual vision, the tendency to rely on human strength and methods and expect spiritual results. And he cites a preference for "activisim" over spiritual discipline, wanting to promote a cause rather than live a life.
"Through prayer, meditative reading of Scripture, solitude, fasting, singing, and other disciplines, one draws aside from the normal routine of things to concentrate on meeting with the Lord, coming into the presence of His glory and experiencing new depths of His love, often with transforming effects."
He includes a lack of spiritual vision, the tendency to rely on human strength and methods and expect spiritual results. And he cites a preference for "activisim" over spiritual discipline, wanting to promote a cause rather than live a life.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)