The Council of Ephesus was the triumph of Alexandria over Constantinople and Antioch, and the prestige of the Egyptian Patriarch in the East rose considerably.
Reading this, I realize that I'm trapped within my own skin, within my own mind. The Miaphysites did not subordinate The Word to The Father, yet one nature vs two was divisive. In the end, the God/Man still expired on a cross for you and me.
Apparently there is a gulf between the oriental mind and occidental mind. When the chasm is filled with fog, the gap seems insignificant, however, on a clear day the divide is huge. When one sees black and white, the other sees a synthesis — but the positions may switch.
(The more my wife and I interact with our rural neighbors here in Mexico, the more we don't understand them. We constantly uncover more micro points of differentiation.)
In the realm of theology, the East thought differently than the West. In the West alone, I believe that the high point was Scholasticm. Then the Enlightenment intruded and spawned the "analytical" Protestants governed by strict cause-and-effect and time-sequence. EXAMPLE: One is born-again at a point in time and one cannot lose that salvation (or one can). Or one's relationship with God is not bound by time-sequence, hence one's salvation was preordained and yet chosen, and is both certain and conditional. My standing with God is the same before confession and penance as it is afterward, though my sense of my standing is different.
Much of our faith is like trying to nail Jello to a tree. Or as my daddy said near the end of his life, "I'm a pan-millennialist. Everything will pan out in the end."
"Much of our faith is like trying to nail Jello to a tree."
As should be obvious from my writing, I have (at least at this point) decided that exploring and changing how I live is more important than flushing out the nuances of doctrinal positions that have no effect on a simple statement: if you love Me, keep My commandments.
At least His commandments aren't Jello. Precisely describing the God-man, how He is both God and man? Nailing down the moment of being "born-again" as if the Christian life is an event and not a journey? The list of such concerns is endless....
Love the Lord your God; love your neighbor as yourself. These are already tough enough; maybe because these are so tough, we decide to distract ourselves with such doctrinal debates. Live at least the first Beatitude or two before deciding one is a doctor of the Church.
Reading this, I realize that I'm trapped within my own skin, within my own mind. The Miaphysites did not subordinate The Word to The Father, yet one nature vs two was divisive. In the end, the God/Man still expired on a cross for you and me.
Apparently there is a gulf between the oriental mind and occidental mind. When the chasm is filled with fog, the gap seems insignificant, however, on a clear day the divide is huge. When one sees black and white, the other sees a synthesis — but the positions may switch.
(The more my wife and I interact with our rural neighbors here in Mexico, the more we don't understand them. We constantly uncover more micro points of differentiation.)
In the realm of theology, the East thought differently than the West. In the West alone, I believe that the high point was Scholasticm. Then the Enlightenment intruded and spawned the "analytical" Protestants governed by strict cause-and-effect and time-sequence. EXAMPLE: One is born-again at a point in time and one cannot lose that salvation (or one can). Or one's relationship with God is not bound by time-sequence, hence one's salvation was preordained and yet chosen, and is both certain and conditional. My standing with God is the same before confession and penance as it is afterward, though my sense of my standing is different.
Much of our faith is like trying to nail Jello to a tree. Or as my daddy said near the end of his life, "I'm a pan-millennialist. Everything will pan out in the end."
Indeed. Jesus is Lord to the glory of the Father.
"Much of our faith is like trying to nail Jello to a tree."
As should be obvious from my writing, I have (at least at this point) decided that exploring and changing how I live is more important than flushing out the nuances of doctrinal positions that have no effect on a simple statement: if you love Me, keep My commandments.
At least His commandments aren't Jello. Precisely describing the God-man, how He is both God and man? Nailing down the moment of being "born-again" as if the Christian life is an event and not a journey? The list of such concerns is endless....
Love the Lord your God; love your neighbor as yourself. These are already tough enough; maybe because these are so tough, we decide to distract ourselves with such doctrinal debates. Live at least the first Beatitude or two before deciding one is a doctor of the Church.
Amen