To sum it up: It [the inscrutable One] is the life of the living, the Being of beings, It is the Source and the Cause of all existence, and therefore Itself transcending existence.
I do wish that the Church had a more humble view of what God is. But maybe if it didn't have such a rigid view, the Church would have been overrun by heresy. There are some positive things we must say about God based on Holy Scripture, but I think there is plenty of room for mystery and disagreement.
One example here is the Filioque controversy. Roman Catholics believe that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the the Father and the Son, and the Eastern Orthodox believe the Holy Spirit only proceeds from the Father. I think the historical case is on the Orthodox side, since Rome had to change this formulation (in response to heresy) about 1,000 years after the birth of Christ. But I think the Catholics have a better theological case. Either way, does it really matter? Can we not just say that the interrelationship between the Three Persons of the Holy Trinity is something of a mystery?
"Those who do not know must be taught, not punished. We do not hit the blind. We lead them by the hand."
But what if in addition to them not knowing, they think they know everything and will use everything at their disposal, including political force, to marginalize, malign, and destroy the truth as completely as they are able to? Those with willing hearts and minds should be treated with every bit of decency and compassion in the attempt to bring them into the fold. For those "cities" that callously reject and spit on Christ and His Gospel?
"Amen I say to you, it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city." - Matthew 10:15
ATL, to your first comment, it is something I struggle with. I would like there to be more humility in describing God and the Trinity, yet...sometimes lines have to get drawn. After all, we cannot worship a God for which all we can say is what He is not. I don't like that the divisions have come from this, but I also didn't live in the time and circumstance of the battle.
To your second point, this is why I really appreciate that the commenters here minimize going deep into theological debates. Just try to learn from each other.
2. The Gospels, Acts, and Epistles are a factual historical account.
3. Triune God. Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
4. Salvation only by grace through faith in and fidelity to Jesus Christ.
5. Baptism for one-time remission of sins, including original sin.
6. Women and gay (or otherwise sexually disordered) men should not be members of the clergy or in leadership positions within the structure of the church.
7. Mary is the Mother of God and shall be specially venerated and called blessed by all Christian generations into eternity.
8. Holy Scripture and Sacred Tradition(s) are the most important resources for ordering and defining the Christian life.
9. Church is the continuation of the House of Israel and the heir of God's promises to Abraham. Judaism as a religion is cut off the vine, but Jews can be saved by accepting Jesus Christ as their prophesied Messiah and Lord.
10. The Church is the tree of believers in Christ, past, present, and future, spanning Heaven and Earth.
11. There will be a Second Coming of Christ to Earth and a Final Judgement before the world is made anew.
12. When the world is made anew there will be a bodily resurrection and eternal life for all those written in the Book of Life.
I could be convinced to accept a score of 90% or above, depending on which ones were omitted.
(I want to add that the Eucharist is the real presence of Christ, but that would alienate a lot of misguided Protestants, and I don't want to do that, even though in John Chapter 6 Jesus makes one of the most belabored points in all the Gospels and He was willing to lose many (if not all) of His disciples over it. And the Church was unified in its belief in the real presence for 1500+ years)
Very good. I am pretty close to 90% (perhaps 1.5 that I would push back on, but I won't say which 1.5!)
And, yes on the Eucharist. I think a part of the issue is how we understand the word "real." To the mind grounded in Enlightenment, it can only mean one thing - but I don't believe it need mean just that one thing. (whoops, now maybe I have gone too far...)
"Since the way of negation..."
I do wish that the Church had a more humble view of what God is. But maybe if it didn't have such a rigid view, the Church would have been overrun by heresy. There are some positive things we must say about God based on Holy Scripture, but I think there is plenty of room for mystery and disagreement.
One example here is the Filioque controversy. Roman Catholics believe that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the the Father and the Son, and the Eastern Orthodox believe the Holy Spirit only proceeds from the Father. I think the historical case is on the Orthodox side, since Rome had to change this formulation (in response to heresy) about 1,000 years after the birth of Christ. But I think the Catholics have a better theological case. Either way, does it really matter? Can we not just say that the interrelationship between the Three Persons of the Holy Trinity is something of a mystery?
"Those who do not know must be taught, not punished. We do not hit the blind. We lead them by the hand."
But what if in addition to them not knowing, they think they know everything and will use everything at their disposal, including political force, to marginalize, malign, and destroy the truth as completely as they are able to? Those with willing hearts and minds should be treated with every bit of decency and compassion in the attempt to bring them into the fold. For those "cities" that callously reject and spit on Christ and His Gospel?
"Amen I say to you, it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city." - Matthew 10:15
ATL, to your first comment, it is something I struggle with. I would like there to be more humility in describing God and the Trinity, yet...sometimes lines have to get drawn. After all, we cannot worship a God for which all we can say is what He is not. I don't like that the divisions have come from this, but I also didn't live in the time and circumstance of the battle.
To your second point, this is why I really appreciate that the commenters here minimize going deep into theological debates. Just try to learn from each other.
"...minimize going deep into theological debates"
Hopefully what follows does not violate this.
For me the lines are:
1. Jesus Christ is fully God and fully Man.
2. The Gospels, Acts, and Epistles are a factual historical account.
3. Triune God. Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
4. Salvation only by grace through faith in and fidelity to Jesus Christ.
5. Baptism for one-time remission of sins, including original sin.
6. Women and gay (or otherwise sexually disordered) men should not be members of the clergy or in leadership positions within the structure of the church.
7. Mary is the Mother of God and shall be specially venerated and called blessed by all Christian generations into eternity.
8. Holy Scripture and Sacred Tradition(s) are the most important resources for ordering and defining the Christian life.
9. Church is the continuation of the House of Israel and the heir of God's promises to Abraham. Judaism as a religion is cut off the vine, but Jews can be saved by accepting Jesus Christ as their prophesied Messiah and Lord.
10. The Church is the tree of believers in Christ, past, present, and future, spanning Heaven and Earth.
11. There will be a Second Coming of Christ to Earth and a Final Judgement before the world is made anew.
12. When the world is made anew there will be a bodily resurrection and eternal life for all those written in the Book of Life.
I could be convinced to accept a score of 90% or above, depending on which ones were omitted.
(I want to add that the Eucharist is the real presence of Christ, but that would alienate a lot of misguided Protestants, and I don't want to do that, even though in John Chapter 6 Jesus makes one of the most belabored points in all the Gospels and He was willing to lose many (if not all) of His disciples over it. And the Church was unified in its belief in the real presence for 1500+ years)
Very good. I am pretty close to 90% (perhaps 1.5 that I would push back on, but I won't say which 1.5!)
And, yes on the Eucharist. I think a part of the issue is how we understand the word "real." To the mind grounded in Enlightenment, it can only mean one thing - but I don't believe it need mean just that one thing. (whoops, now maybe I have gone too far...)
Haha. Maybe I should accept 83% or above, because that would allow 10/12 points of agreement. Sounds fair.