Is there a wrong way to read the scriptures? Of course there is. If the scriptures are wrested so that they seem to justify committing sin, that is certainly out of line.

One thing I think that we get wrapped around the axel about is passages that don’t seem to make sense or seem wrong. It is tempting to try to twist them around to fit our ideas, but I’ve learned that I should just let them be and keep reading them along with everything else and studying them and praying for understanding. I have faith that sooner or later answers come.

I was not expecting this to be a travel week, which is really making life interesting. GRIN.

I agree with you in one way. One does not see the “vibrancy” that one tends to see in various Protestant communities. In fact, the influx of converts into Orthodoxy has helped to bring some of that vibrancy into Eastern Orthodoxy.

And, yet, I have also observed some things that have made me think. I have met many “cradle” Orthodox who are the children of the children of the children of the children. . . . You get the idea. Particularly, belonging to a denomination that is of Arab origin, I have met people who can literally trace their ancestry in Christianity almost to the time of Christ. That is something that is rather rare among Protestants. It seems as though each Protestant generation has to struggle to preserve their children in a way that the Orthodox and the Roman Catholic do not.

And, so, it makes me realize that there is a different type of faithful stream flowing through the Catholic Churches (EO’s and RC’s). I used to denigrate that stream. I would say that it is nominal. I would say that it is not truly alive. I would say that they do not understand salvation. I would even hint strongly that they have reproduced generations of unsaved people. But, when all is said and done, I look back and have to repent of that attitude. When all is said and done, they have accomplished what many non-EO’s and non-RC’s have not been able to accomplish. They have successfully passed on the faith for generations. And that is something of which to stand in awe.

I have read some people who says that Protestantism is a “hothouse” religion. That is, it relies on a constant stimulus in order to keep people involved and engaged. While that is an insult, there is a partial truth there. Nevertheless, I would not mind some of that hothouse experience being present among the Orthodox. What I would not wish is for us to become focused on a hothouse type of experience. I would like the heat to be turned up in such a way that we do not become reliant on experience to shore up our faithfulness.

So, I do not have a full answer to what you are saying. I have seen the Lord working to “warm up” the Orthodox. May He also work with Protestants to teach them the ability to pass the faith on for generation after generation.

The revelation therefore is not that we have Jesus with us in the moments between the consecration and the eating. It is that we have Him here in ourselves and in each other perpetually.

In this light, just consider the Letter of St. John — how can you say you love God if you don’t love your brother …?

The monstrance is symbolic of the majesty of Christ, artificially illuminating for the “general” congregatant adorers what was specifically revealed to those receiving “special” revelation into the Beatific Vision.

But we all can see the real state of our brethren who are all living monstrances. When I focus the very same reverence on my neighbor communicants that I do on the symbolic monstrance, I see the Incarnation illuminating their helplessness and neediness — not their unworthiness. I can do nothing with Original Sin — neither mine or anybody else’s. But my original wounds begin to be healed when I reach out in love and compassion to my neighbor who is in need of something I can give.

The center of Catholic life is the Eucharist, perpetually adored in the tabernacles of every church, chapel and cathedral. We must enter these sanctuaries with worship and reverence in our hearts and outward attitudes.

But the Incarnate Body and Blood of our crucified Lord and Savior is in the earthly form of food and drink, meant for consumption by the faithful congregants. And, so, the consecrated hosts there, either enclosed in those specially designed and blessed metal containers or exposed in ornate monstrance, do not really achieve their own fulfillment until they are ingested by what the metal containers represent, i.e., a living and breathing human container.

Perhaps the teaching of more than a little Buddhist-style reverence of the real thing rather than the symbolic is what’s needed here ….

We’ve all been taught that the only way to get to the true “Faith of the Fathers” is to exhaustively study the Scriptures. This is the offspring of Rabbinical Judaism — the two tiered student/teacher v the illiterate masses model.
Now, we are told that whoever has the time, wherewithal and scholarly knowledge to peruse the great expository theological volumes can get to the Truth. And then maybe you can make a living teaching others — either in the classroom or from the pulpit, be they actual or virtual.

But the Hebrew Fathers of the Faith, of whom Abraham is the Chief, had only the voice they heard, the gift of Faith to believe that what they had heard was true (despite how it seemed to them and their cultural communities), and the courage to act upon that belief.

We are graced with having the reports from those who saw with their own eyes what the Fathers longed to see but didn’t. Again I say that the only real study that needs to be done is to look with virgin eyes and hearts upon the attitude and actions of the One who is and was the only full representation of God that human eyes and ears have ever beheld. After that honest and open examination, all else becomes clear ….

Remind me not to write when very tired. One of the lines should have said, “. . . likes to quote the figures that show that during the revival, the Roman Catholics grew every bit as fast. . .”

Also, some of my logic does not quite flow like I would like. Oh well, maybe a good night’s sleep. And, would you believe tomorrow I have another trip?

I find it helpful to look at couple incidents, one in the Old Testament and two in the New Testament. They help give me an idea of what God might be about.

The first incident is the rebellion of Rehoboam against Jeroboam. God actually sends a prophet to tell him to go ahead and rebel. You see, Israel had become a rather bad country. Moreover, King David’s sin still had to be fully punished. And so, in order that Israel learn a lesson, the rebellion was not only permitted, but actually partly instigated by God! Nevertheless, what became the Kingdom of Judah was considered by God to still be the inheritor of the promises.

The second incident is in the New Testament, that of the Samaritan woman, St. Photine. Please note that when the question of worship comes up, Jesus’ first comment is to clearly point out that the correct Temple, with the approved worship, is the one in Jerusalem, and not the one in Samaria. He quickly turns the discussion back on the woman because she is just trying to deviate the discussion. But, there is an interesting principle here, as the Samaritans were the descendants of that northern Kingdom. (Hmm, ok history buffs, I know lots more detail, but I am over-summarizing on purpose.)

And, finally, there is the Scripture from St. Paul where he says, “Did Israel not understand? First, Moses says, “I will make you envious by those who are not a nation; I will make you angry by a nation that has no understanding.” And Isaiah boldly says, “I was found by those who did not seek me; I revealed myself to those who did not ask for me.” But concerning Israel he says, “All day long I have held out my hands to a disobedient and obstinate people.”

Again, it is only a guess on my part, but I think God is doing the same as he did with Israel, when he split that nation up. The Church sinned badly. And, so God split her up for the purpose of teaching her a lesson and making her jealous. But, there is still a correct Church, a correct place of worship.

The Reformation clearly forced all of Christianity to examine itself, to return to a better use of Scripture than she had had in a long time. It is interesting to me that some of the greatest geographical expansion of both Orthodoxy and Romans came after the Reformation. Apologetics, missiology, exegesis, etc., all improved in both EO’s and RC’s.

The Second Vatican Council’s statement acknowledging that there are brethren outside the RC’s was the remarkable concession that the Reformation had some of God’s mark upon it. Having said that, the 18th and part of the 19th century were bad centuries for all of Christianity. There was a reason why the Schleiermacher types sprung up!

Now, part of our problem is that our vision is somewhat limited. The same East Africa revival in the 1950’s that led to the phenomenal change in middle and southern Africa was a revival for the Roman Catholics as well. No Protestant likes to quote the figures that show that during the Roman Catholics have grown every bit as fast in those areas as Protestants. When the revival struck, it struck everyone!

Few chunks of Christianity in the USA are really alive. And that colors our perception. Moreover, for you, the cultural perception of what worship is probably colors your perception of the EO’s. I can remember talking to a young lady raised Greek Orthodox who visited a Baptist church with her friend a few times. She told me that she could not believe how short and unfulfilling the worship was! Her cultural perception said that a worship with no chanting, no litanies, and no Eucharist was a boring worship.

Well, I could say more, but this gives you an outline of my thought and this is already too long a post.