Comments on: Riffs: 11:07:09: The New/Old Look Evangelical Ecumenism: IVCF Splits at GWU http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/riffs-110709-the-new-look-evangelical-ecumenism-ivcf-splits-at-gwu ...dispatches from the post-evangelical wilderness Sat, 20 Mar 2010 02:55:53 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Matt Stephens http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/riffs-110709-the-new-look-evangelical-ecumenism-ivcf-splits-at-gwu/comment-page-1#comment-518885 Matt Stephens Fri, 13 Nov 2009 16:15:20 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/?p=4995#comment-518885 I know I'm embarrassingly late to this conversation (forgive me, my wife just had a baby a couple weeks ago), but I thought I'd point out the absurdity of Dr. Sweeney's "observation" about the 2000 statement. It does not state simply that Christians are saved by Jesus Christ alone, but through genuine <em>repentance</em> and conscious <em>faith</em> in Jesus Christ (and implicitly, His work) alone. This is not really a loosening of the doctrine of sola fide at all. How a scholar as able as Sweeney could miss this I have no idea. I know I’m embarrassingly late to this conversation (forgive me, my wife just had a baby a couple weeks ago), but I thought I’d point out the absurdity of Dr. Sweeney’s “observation” about the 2000 statement. It does not state simply that Christians are saved by Jesus Christ alone, but through genuine repentance and conscious faith in Jesus Christ (and implicitly, His work) alone. This is not really a loosening of the doctrine of sola fide at all. How a scholar as able as Sweeney could miss this I have no idea.

]]> By: JoanieD http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/riffs-110709-the-new-look-evangelical-ecumenism-ivcf-splits-at-gwu/comment-page-1#comment-518449 JoanieD Tue, 10 Nov 2009 00:13:57 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/?p=4995#comment-518449 So I guess if you think you want to be married AND be a Western-rite Permanent Deacon or Eastern Rite priest, you better hope you can find a wife before being ordained. So I guess if you think you want to be married AND be a Western-rite Permanent Deacon or Eastern Rite priest, you better hope you can find a wife before being ordained.

]]> By: Ross from KY http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/riffs-110709-the-new-look-evangelical-ecumenism-ivcf-splits-at-gwu/comment-page-1#comment-518437 Ross from KY Mon, 09 Nov 2009 22:04:12 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/?p=4995#comment-518437 In my personal experience where I've found out at the time or later the details. Not all Calvinist are heresy hunters. But all (at least 99.99%) of the heresy hunters I've be accosted by in evangelical circles have been Calvinists. All the standard disclaimers about limited data set sizes apply here. In my personal experience where I’ve found out at the time or later the details.

Not all Calvinist are heresy hunters.

But all (at least 99.99%) of the heresy hunters I’ve be accosted by in evangelical circles have been Calvinists.

All the standard disclaimers about limited data set sizes apply here.

]]> By: Headless Unicorn Guy http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/riffs-110709-the-new-look-evangelical-ecumenism-ivcf-splits-at-gwu/comment-page-1#comment-518436 Headless Unicorn Guy Mon, 09 Nov 2009 22:04:02 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/?p=4995#comment-518436 <i>I know that with this new Catholic thing where some Anglicans will be in full communion with Catholics that married bishops cannot be a part of it. Married priests can be, though.</i> That's the same rules used for Western-rite Permanent Deacons and Eastern Rite priests. A married man can be ordained, but an ordained man cannot marry after being ordained. And Bishops must be single or widowed. I know that with this new Catholic thing where some Anglicans will be in full communion with Catholics that married bishops cannot be a part of it. Married priests can be, though.

That’s the same rules used for Western-rite Permanent Deacons and Eastern Rite priests. A married man can be ordained, but an ordained man cannot marry after being ordained. And Bishops must be single or widowed.

]]> By: Curtis http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/riffs-110709-the-new-look-evangelical-ecumenism-ivcf-splits-at-gwu/comment-page-1#comment-518417 Curtis Mon, 09 Nov 2009 19:03:16 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/?p=4995#comment-518417 Just a clarification that all Catholics are Tridentine, Latin Rite and otherwise. It's not a byword for traditionalists, right-wingers, hard-liners or anything like that. The term makes sense as used in the article but it doesn't denote a subset of Catholics. Trent was an ecumenical council. Just a clarification that all Catholics are Tridentine, Latin Rite and otherwise. It’s not a byword for traditionalists, right-wingers, hard-liners or anything like that. The term makes sense as used in the article but it doesn’t denote a subset of Catholics. Trent was an ecumenical council.

]]> By: Headless Unicorn Guy http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/riffs-110709-the-new-look-evangelical-ecumenism-ivcf-splits-at-gwu/comment-page-1#comment-518402 Headless Unicorn Guy Mon, 09 Nov 2009 17:37:30 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/?p=4995#comment-518402 Probably because it's making a virtue out of a necessity. Or laughing to keep from crying. Probably because it’s making a virtue out of a necessity.

Or laughing to keep from crying.

]]> By: Headless Unicorn Guy http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/riffs-110709-the-new-look-evangelical-ecumenism-ivcf-splits-at-gwu/comment-page-1#comment-518401 Headless Unicorn Guy Mon, 09 Nov 2009 17:35:35 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/?p=4995#comment-518401 Until you reach the theoretical end state: Millions of One True Churches, each with only ONE member, each calling Jihad <i>ex cathedra</i> on all the others as Heretics and Apostates. Until you reach the theoretical end state: Millions of One True Churches, each with only ONE member, each calling Jihad ex cathedra on all the others as Heretics and Apostates.

]]> By: Headless Unicorn Guy http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/riffs-110709-the-new-look-evangelical-ecumenism-ivcf-splits-at-gwu/comment-page-1#comment-518400 Headless Unicorn Guy Mon, 09 Nov 2009 17:33:27 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/?p=4995#comment-518400 As the guy who wrote <i>Evangelical is Not Enough</i> put it: "If we stand just because Enemy Christians kneel, that is Protestantism taken to its end-state sterility." As the guy who wrote Evangelical is Not Enough put it:

“If we stand just because Enemy Christians kneel, that is Protestantism taken to its end-state sterility.”

]]> By: Headless Unicorn Guy http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/riffs-110709-the-new-look-evangelical-ecumenism-ivcf-splits-at-gwu/comment-page-1#comment-518399 Headless Unicorn Guy Mon, 09 Nov 2009 17:31:12 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/?p=4995#comment-518399 <i>I doubt that IV has a lot to worry about on the national level with this sort of division, but it demonstrates that when we talk ecumenism, Nicene creed confessionalism and so forth, our reformed Baptist brothers and sisters are thinking how to separate over issues like where is the “alone” in the statement on justification?</i> You know what that reminds me of? A lawyer who got caught at something, parsing and lawyering his way out. "That all depends on what the meaning of 'is' is." -- Bill Clinton I doubt that IV has a lot to worry about on the national level with this sort of division, but it demonstrates that when we talk ecumenism, Nicene creed confessionalism and so forth, our reformed Baptist brothers and sisters are thinking how to separate over issues like where is the “alone” in the statement on justification?

You know what that reminds me of?

A lawyer who got caught at something, parsing and lawyering his way out.

“That all depends on what the meaning of ‘is’ is.”
– Bill Clinton

]]> By: dumb ox http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/riffs-110709-the-new-look-evangelical-ecumenism-ivcf-splits-at-gwu/comment-page-1#comment-518340 dumb ox Mon, 09 Nov 2009 00:45:27 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/?p=4995#comment-518340 I think there needs to be some truth in advertising behind this sola-fide statement. The qualifications placed on saving faith need to be state, something like this: 1. faith must be sincere (do you really, really, REALLY believe? Really? You better try harder, just to be sure.) 2. faith must be committed (Is Jesus only 99.99% Lord of your life? Sorry, not good enough.) 3. faith works (where's your fruit? Does it measure up to a 100 different arbitrary standards? No? Sorry, you fail). 4. faith must never doubt (questioning your faith? Then you must have never truly believed. Fail. Try again.) 5. faith must persevere (sin? gasp! Backslider! Perhaps you were never truly predestined to grace. Hope you like warm climates.) I think Catholics are a little more honest about lumping together justification and sanctification; protestants tend to confound the two in the fine print. I think there needs to be some truth in advertising behind this sola-fide statement. The qualifications placed on saving faith need to be state, something like this:

1. faith must be sincere (do you really, really, REALLY believe? Really? You better try harder, just to be sure.)
2. faith must be committed (Is Jesus only 99.99% Lord of your life? Sorry, not good enough.)
3. faith works (where’s your fruit? Does it measure up to a 100 different arbitrary standards? No? Sorry, you fail).
4. faith must never doubt (questioning your faith? Then you must have never truly believed. Fail. Try again.)
5. faith must persevere (sin? gasp! Backslider! Perhaps you were never truly predestined to grace. Hope you like warm climates.)

I think Catholics are a little more honest about lumping together justification and sanctification; protestants tend to confound the two in the fine print.

]]>