Over the weekend of November 3-6, at Antiochian Village, an important conference took place. It was a conference that dealt with Scripture, but even more important, it was a cross-jurisdictional conference. Let me quote some lines from the Antiochian website:
The 2011 Orthodox Institute, held at Antiochian Village, near Ligonier, PA, over the weekend of November 3 – 6, was advertised as “an event like no other” and it proved to live up to its claim in more than one way. The theme was “Scripture through the Lens of the Holy Land” and this was the first time that the Orthodox Institute was a multi-jurisdictional collaboration between the host of the event, the Antiochian Department of Christian Education, and the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese, the Orthodox Church in America Department of Christian Education, and the Orthodox Christian Education Commission. …
Bringing the Holy Land to Antiochian Village was a feat requiring creativity and knowledge. Carole Buleza, the director of the Antiochian Department of Christian Education had a vision of displaying nearly-life-size photographs and maps, as well as artifacts, sights and sounds, costumes and plants so that participants could experience both sacred history and sacred sites. She used seven-foot banners that began with the Creation and worked chronologically through the Bible, so that as the tour progressed, participants could experience the entire Bible, both Old and New Testaments through the “lens of the Holy Land.” Dr. Maria Khoury related her own experiences as she led the tour. …
It is important that the Orthodox communicate more and more clearly a sound view of Scripture for a couple of reasons. One reason is that particularly the ancient patriarchates are located in the very lands in which Scripture was written. Not only do we keep a more ancient remembrance of Scripture, but it is even more important to note that these are cultures in historical continuity with the cultures that produced Scripture. I have met more than one Arabic or Greek priest who understood various passages of Scripture in a way that people who do not come from those cultures cannot. Our cultures have to continually read and research in order to begin to understand what some of the passages mean. The ancient Orthodox cultures do not have as difficult a task. Having said that, I need to cautiously state that I am not saying that their cultures are automatically correct in their interpretation. But, I will say that Americans have proven rather well that we can come up with a multiplicity of bizarre and non-historical interpretations.
But, there is a second reason it is important that these type of conferences take place. The Orthodox are now in a nation that has elevated the use of single Scriptures (proof-texting) to a fine art. It is difficult to speak to almost any Christian in the USA without the ability to quickly come up with several Scriptures that show the possibility of your viewpoint being the correct one. People little realize in the USA that the cry of “show us that in Scripture” is already a pre-decision about the function and relationship of Scripture and the Church. So, in order to make our arguments about the nature of Scripture and the Church, and Holy Tradition, it is necessary to be able to gain a hearing. That hearing will not be gained unless we know Scripture, and its correct use, inside and out.
Sadly, there is a last and most Orthodox reason to learn the correct use of Scripture and its full effect on our lives, and its correct place. There are some among the Orthodox that have had an over-reaction to the way the world of the Reformation handles Scripture. Sadly, some of the Orthodox speak of Holy Scripture as though it were merely a record of Holy Tradition at that time. Particularly some who have been influenced too heavily by some of the “Paris School” will speak of Holy Tradition as being able to continue the development of Scripture, as though Scripture were merely a passing record of Holy Tradition. This is a viewpoint that is also not in accord with the actual received Holy Tradition. The received Holy Tradition makes it clear that Scripture is faithful and must neither be ignored nor violated.
So, for all those reasons, I was glad to read about this conference.
Thank you for this review. I am a Lutheran who believes that some of these Bible courses that are offered in Protestant churches are actually counter productive. Bible Fellowship for one. It brings together people from various denominations and goes through the Bible but it is actually just straight Baptist theology under the guise of open discussion of the Bible. As an orthodox Lutheran I want our people to know the Psalms and New Testament above all else.
Proof texting is certainly rampant but not always wrong. There are only a few verses that deal with the nature of the Lord’s Supper but they come from the lips of Jesus and thus are authoritative for what the supper is. It is His Body and Blood. Only takes one sentence from the lips of Jesus to establish this.
Father…what exactly is the Sacred Tradition? Is this written up in one book?
Art, when it comes to such things as the nature of the Eucharist, one would think; however, this is not true for so many who nevertheless so loudly trumpet their affirmation of the infallibility, inerrancy, and especially, sufficiency of Scripture (in the Protestant canon, of course).
What is sacred Tradition? Well, first and foremost, it is “the voice of the Holy Spirit in the Church” leading it “into all truth.” Therefore, it is not reducible to any one text, or series of texts. However, one can identify witnesses to the Tradition. These include, first and foremost, the Bible itself as well as the decisions of the ecumenical councils, such as, first, the Creed. These witnesses also include the “rule” or “canon” “of faith”, the historic liturgies by which the Church worships. One can, for example, come to appreciate the role of the Theotokos in salvation by considering how she is venerated within the worship of the Church. One can think of these three in terms of “rules” or “canons”. There is the canon of Scripture, the canon of faith and the canon of prayer. Also included is the structure of the Church itself as a communion of local bodies, each led by a bishop, ordained in Apostolic succession, who is assisted by a college of presbyters and a body of deacons. The writings and careers of the fathers, martyrs, and other Saints are also part of this witness to the Tradition as is ikonography in that, “ikons do with colors with Scripture does with words”. Both reveal God.
Many thanks! Given that understanding, Lutherans have their own Holy Tradition: Scripture, the three Ecumenical Creeds, the witness of Church Fathers and the Lutheran Book of Concord but of course in our tradition, Scripture stands above all else. It is the Norm that Norms as we say. All that follows Scripture must be in keeping with it. We have a catalog of church fathers that we refer to as witnesses.
Art
Father…a further word. You refer to the Holy Spirit leading the church into all truth. I believe that promise is to the Apostles who were called by the mouth of Jesus and not a promise of open ended revelation from God to the church. The context of John 14-16 leans me strongly toward this interpretation. There are words in that section that patently do not apply to us today and can only be aimed at the Apostles. I believe this is why the Apostles are the foundation of the church and that no other foundation can be laid, no new revelation brought forth. The faith has been once and for all delivered to the saints. We could argue about the Canon of Scripture but in our Lutheran church we never name what books are included in the Canon and Luther himself freely questioned several books. So don’t go there.
John 14:26 is most relevant “But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.” Jesus is here speaking to the Apostles. THEY will be aided by the Spirit to preserve the words of Jesus for the Church. Hence “Memoirs of the Apostles. Sorry to split with you on this but I believe this is the central rub between Lutherans and Orthodox along with possibly justification. I cannot yet get hold of what you teach on justification.
Art
Thanks Fr. Greg. Your summary saved me some writing. GRIN.
The Orthodox are now in a nation that has elevated the use of single Scriptures (proof-texting) to a fine art.
Thus reducing the Bible to a set of one-line Ideology. Because of the proof-texting in my past, I cannot hear the word “Scripture(TM)” without hearing “EES PARTY LINE, COMRADE!”
Shouldn’t there be more difference between Christians and Communists than which Party Line gets quoted?
Art, Tradition is not open-ended revelation except in the sense that the Saints in each generation encounter the Risen Christ and enter into close communion with the Blessed Trinity in ways that are unique to them in that they are unique persons. However, if they are truly Saints and are truly experiencing such communion, their experience will not contradict that of those who have come before and their writings and their lives will enter into the life of the Church, not unlike new singers entering into a great chorus.
You ask about “justification”. This is simply not the issue for the Orthodox that it is for confessional Lutherans. Most would, I think, agree with Lutheran theologian Joachim Jeremias that “justification” is but one motif in the New Testament, and not the most important one, that speaks of the Christian’s status. Jeremias argues, I think rightly, that the major NT motif is that of being incorporated into Christ as a member of His body, the Church by means of faith and baptism.
Let me explain further. Orthodox soteriology is, first and foremost, a matter of being healed, being restored to the communion with the Trinity that we were created for. This is the common soteriology of East and West prior to Anselm. Christ accomplishes this, not by satisfying the Father’s wrath, but by defeating the common enemies of God and humanity: sin, death, Satan. He extends this victory to us in, with, and through the Church by the activity of the Holy Spirit and we enter into it by entering into the life of the Church. In Baptism, Chrismation, and Holy Communion, we enter Christ’s Body, the Church, and are given the gift of the Holy Spirit. We are reborn, regenerated. As St. Paul writes, “you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.” (I Cor. 6:11).
In other words, justification and sanctification are being used as synonyms here and are aspects of the same process, that of being made holy, “partaking of the Divine Nature” and thus fulfilling the destiny for which we were created, becoming fully realized in the image and likeness of God. However, in that moment, after being initiated into the Christ’s Body the Church, we are newborns, babes in Christ (regardless of chronological age), and we are called to mature in the Faith. While this is also a work of grace, it requires our active cooperation, not so that we score brownie points with God (merits), or to make God love us (God already loves us infinitely), but so that we might be healed, restored, and to become that for which we were created, to enter into loving communion with God. The analogy that I like to use is that of physical therapy. I break my leg. I go to the doctor, and she sets it, puts a cast on it, and we wait. However, once the cast is off, if I want to get back the full function of my leg, I must do physical therapy. I don’t do this to impress the doctor. I do this so that my leg will once again work the way it is supposed to. So yes, salvation requires works on our part, but not for the reason that is so often posited of Roman Catholic theology, whether fairly or unfairly.
In short, we are not saved, first, from the “wrath of God” (which is poured out at the end of history, not because of sin per se, but because lost humanity rejects Christ and the healing that he brings), but from sin, death, and Satan. Thus, “justification” is not a legal, forensic matter. It is intrinsic, therapeutic, and existential.
Fr. Ernesto: Glad to help. 😉
Why does it have to be either or, either forensic or therapeutic? And why the aversion for the “wrath” of God. We are saved from wrath of God through Him. I agree that sin, death and devil are primary but I believe it is a caricature of justification to speak of it only as deliverance from the wrath of God. It seems either side, East or West wants to exaggerate one or the other. I agree with you about incorporation into the church holy baptism. This where the Holy Spirit goes to work, taking away the guilt of sin and working to renew the image of God within us. American Protestantism is bankrupt when it comes ecclesiology and sadly my own church body is gaga over some of this Willow Creek crap. We need some of what you have but I believe you need some of what we have. The Orthodox Lutheran church is the best game on earth at this point in the churches history. It is too bad that the Eastern Patriarch would not give an ear to Luther. We might have come to some agreement but as it is we are not even talking to each other which is a shame.
I must continue on a bit. I do not understand your aversion for the “satisfaction” work of Christ. He has by His suffering satisfied the righteous requirements of the Law. Someone must suffer the curse of the Law (Galatians) and that someone is Jesus. In the Old Testament we have instances where sacrifice turned back God’s wrath. How much more then the death of the Lamb turns back the Father’s wrath against sin. Romans one teaches that His wrath is now active against those who exchange the truth of God for a lie and worship and serve the creature rather than the creator. Just as Israel escaped the wrath of God through the Passover lamb, so I have escaped the wrath of God by the blood of the Passover Lamb. This seems to me to be basic and incontrovertible. Romans, Galatians, Hebrews attest to this. His death is a substitution. Do not tell me it started with Anselm. It started with Leviticus and was fulfilled in Christ and was taught by the Apostles.
Sorry to get a bit worked up but these are precious truths.
Art, a justified sinner
Well, Art, to answer your question, you can start with the following.
God is LOVE. First, last, and always. Everything else is an aspect of this.
http://www.orthodoxpress.org/parish/river_of_fire.htm
In Christ, we see a conflation of Passover and the Day of Atonement (“covering”: expiation, the removal of sin. Not propitiation).
The dynamic of Passover is that of the rescue of the People of God from their enemies, in this case, the Egyptians.
Do not seek to place any sort of legal claim upon God. Infinite Love requires no legal basis for acting and, in fact, may offend against it.
Sorry but the alternative to putting blood on the door was the wrath of God expressed in killing the first born! If that is not wrath I don’t know what is. And at the same time they were delivered from their enemy. It is not either or. It is both and.
Long arguments have been made over “expiation” vs “Propitiation” and again I say, why either or? There is a Godward direction and an manward direction to the blood of the lamb in the OT and The Lamb of God our Lord Jesus.
Art
Art, if you haven’t done so, please read “River of Fire” linked above.
Our God is not so petty as to require propitiation, like any run-of-the mill pagan non-deity.
Fr. Breg…So…the Son of God suffered for nothing if “God is Love” does it all. Sounds like what universalists argue for all the time. God is love and condemns no one and requires no sacrifice for sins. Great discussion. I do appreciate you taking the time to respond to me.
Of course the sacrifice of Christ is necessary, Art, but not so that God will forgive us, or heal us. God does not find it necessary in order that God acts on your behalf. We do. It is the necessary means by which God indeed does heal us and does reconcile us, bringing us back into communion with the Most Blessed Trinity. The sacrifice of Christ is necessary in the same way that medicine for serious illness is necessary.
In the fall, we shut the door on God, so if the door to God is to be re-opened, we must do it. However, only God is capable of re-opening that door. Therefore, this is one reason why God becomes human, so that He Who Is both God and human might, by His life, death, resurrection, and ascension, indeed re-open the door, remove the barrier between humanity and God, by His “trampling down death by death”.
BTW, it is my pleasure to carry on such conversations as these. “Woe is me if I do not preach the gospel.”