Hi.  I've been giving more thought to the role of free will in salvation, which
was the biggest hurdle for me coming into Orthodoxy, and seems to be a biggee
for many Lutherans.  Are we completely depraved, dead in the water till He makes
the first move?

Yesterday I came across the clearest statement I've found, which seems to tie
things up in wonderful patristic depth and clarity, including the concept of
synergy.  I've read this work--a classic since it was written in the 8th
centure--twice before, but never noticed it (duh).

FROM EXACT EXPOSITION OF THE ORTHODOX FAITH BY ST. JOHN OF DAMASCUS (+ 750)

     Bear in mind, too, that virtue is a gift from God implanted in our nature,
and that He Himself is the source and cause of all good, and without His
co-operation (Gk synergia) and help we cannot will or do any good thing.  But we
have it in our power either to abide in virtue and follow God, Who calls us into
ways of virtue, or to stray from paths of virtue, which is to dwell in
wickedness...
     While then we abide in the natural state we abide in virtue, but when we
deviate from the natural state...we come into an unnatural state and dwell in
wickedness.
(II.30 [NPNF pp. 42-3; PG 44])

+

Thus, being able to incline in some slight way toward God of one's own free will
isn't to claim one's own righteousness apart from God.  GOD PUT THAT IN OUR
NATURE.  WE GET NO CREDIT.  HE IS GOOD AND HE MADE US GOOD.  Virtue is natural
for His human creatures because He made us in His image.  Sin is unnatural.

Yes, we've bungled things to an extraordinary degree; and as St John points out
here, we can't even will a good work, much less complete it, without Him.  The
ancestral curse afflicts us all, and we choose the unnatural and irrational life
of sin throughout our lives.

However, since He made us in His image to live a life of virtue, it's imperative
that we do our best to do that.

The New Testament is written in such a way to reflect this...the grace of God
and our path (Law and Gospel, if you will) are constantly intermixed.

Hope this helps---

Subdeacon R.





________________________________
_._,___

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

 Tschüß!   
  Perhaps of some interest.
  Deacon Fr Peter Brandt-Sorheim


--- On Fri, 12/4/09, FrAugustine <theophylact2009@...> wrote:---
 
>
> We have begun to scan the 38 Volume set Medieval Monastic Psalter of Orthdoox
England ( compiled and translated under the aegist and direction of Archbishop
John of New York and New Jersey).
>
> For know, I have scanned about 100 pages, comprising the Sunday Divine Offices
from Volume 1. The other 340 pages of the Volume 1 are forthcoming. This is the
beginning of scanning 18,000 pages from 37 other volumes, both seasonal and
sanctoral, with the Office Music in them. We will also be scanning a thousands
of Mass sheets, which comprise all the propers of the Mass, for both seasonal
and sanctoral periods.
>
> This is a prelude, as regards the Mass, to publishing a Missal. Such a Missal
will be composed to encompass the entire liturgical year. It will be about 4
volumes, each about 500 pages.
>
 


From: FrAugustine <theophylact2009@...>
Subject: [Occidentalis] Re: Medieval Monastic Psalter (St. Gregory's Press,
Milan Synod) Now Online,(parts)
To: Occidentalis@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, December 4, 2009, 11:45 PM


 



the first section can be found here:

http://www.scribd. com/doc/23699648 /Medieval- Monastic- Psalter-Volume-
1-Sunday- Divine-Offices- Western-True- Orthodox- Rite







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Orthodoxy in Colonial
Virginia<http://orthodoxhistory.org/2009/11/orthodoxy-in-colonial-virginia/>

Posted by: Nicholas Chapman<http://orthodoxhistory.org/category/early-converts/>

*A note from Matthew Namee: What follows is a first glimpse of what is, I am
confident, the most exciting research currently being done on the subject of
American Orthodox history. As I’ve been telling others, my own research is
pretty interesting stuff, but Nicholas Chapman’s work blows mine out of the
water. Nicholas is a native of England, but he now lives in New York, where
he works for the presses of both St. Vladimir’s and Holy Trinity
(Jordanville) seminaries. I hope to interview Nicholas for my American
Orthodox History <http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/history> podcast in the
near future, and his article below is only the first of many.*

It will come as a surprise to many, if not all Orthodox Christians in
America, to learn that the story of their Church here begins not in 1794 but
in 1738. Not in Russian Alaska, but rather British Virginia. Furthermore,
what began in 1738 was not a mere blip on the radar, a passing moment of no
historical import. Otherwise, how could it be that the daughter of a man
described as “renowned in early Virginia history “*(Annette Gordon-Reed: The
Hemingses of Monticello)* would write to President Thomas Jefferson early in
his second term of office (Aug 27, 1805) “With the blessing of God I am now
in good health, and with my priest’s blessing and command who is the Rev.
Mr. Smirnov.”

Where does this story begin and who are its principal characters? Where are
there descendants today and what became of their heritage of Orthodox faith
and life that lasted for at least sixty/seventy years? My early research is
only beginning to answer some of these questions, whilst posing many more.

Let’s begin with Colonel Philip Ludwell III, a third generation Virginian.
He was the man who in 1753 gave George Washington his commission in the army
and they exchanged frequent correspondence. Ludwell was a cousin of
Washington’s wife, Martha. He was also a relative of Confederate General
Robert E Lee and Presidents William Henry Harrison and Benjamin Harrison,
amongst many other distinguished figures of American history. His
grandfather, Philip Ludwell I was the first British Governor of the
Carolinas and his father, Philip Ludwell II a member of the Virginia House
of Burgesses and Rector of the College of William and Mary. (The second
oldest college in the USA and its first University.) Ludwell’s English
manservant, John Wayles, was the father in law of Thomas Jefferson and the
father of Jefferson’s African American mistress, Sally Hemings!

When, where and why did Colonel Philip Ludwell become Orthodox? He was
received in the Russian Orthodox Church in London, on December 31, 1738 (Old
style) by Fr. Bartholomew Cassano, a half French, Alexandrian Greek whose
wife Elizabeth (nee Burton) is one of the first recorded English converts to
Orthodoxy.  Ludwell would have been twenty-two years old at the time. His
reception was authorised at a meeting of the Holy Synod of the Church of
Russia, who blessed him to take the Holy Gifts back to Virginia and which
approved of his translation into English of the “Orthodox Confession”
written by Peter Moghila, Metropolitan of Kiev, one hundred years earlier.
They also granted him a dispensation to continue attending the Anglican
church in Virginia, taking into account his position as “an important Royal
official” and recognising that “apart from the Province of Pennsylvania, all
religions but Protestantism are banned.”

His extensive business interests seem to have led him to travel frequently
between Virginia and London. The London parish register documents his
participation in the sacraments of confession and Holy Communion on twelve
occasions between August 5 1760 and his death on March 14, 1767. (This is
very frequent by the standards of the time when once a year communion was
the norm.) On April 3, 1762 (Holy Wednesday) he brought his three daughters
to be chrismated and somewhat unusually also stood as their sponsor.

His health began to fail him during 1766 and the register records that on
Sunday, September 17, 1766, “The sick Philip Ludwell received Holy Communion
in his house during the day.” On February 22, 1767 it states “the sick Mr.
Philip Ludwell confessed and received Holy Communion, and was anointed with
oil at his home.” Shortly thereafter on March 14, 1767 “Philip Ludwell died
at five o’clock in the afternoon” and that the following day the “Canon
after the departure of the soul from the body” was read at the church. On
March 19, 1767 (the fourth day of Great Lent) his funeral took place. On
March 22,1767 he was buried in the crypt of the church of St. Mary Bow. (A
small Anglican Church to the east of the City of London, which at that time
was a distinct village apart from the city.)

Another hint of the intensity of Ludwell’s commitment to the Church is found
in Edward L Bond’s 2004 work *Spreading the Gospel in Colonial Virginia*.
Writing in the context of what Bond describes as  “Private devotional
exercise common among some of Virginia’s elite gentleman” he states that
“Philip Ludwell  III transcribed from the Greek his own translation of the
Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom “The Divine and Holy Liturgy of St. John
Chrysostom as it is performed without a Deacon.” ”  Did Ludwell’s so called
“private devotion” set him on a path to Orthodoxy? Perhaps it is so.

For now, I have only one clear statement, which is found in a letter written
in 1791 by the Russian Ambassador in London, Count Vorontsov to his brother
Alexander in St. Petersburg. The relevant passage is actually focusing on
John Paradise (of whom there is much more to say.) Vorontsov writes “By a
strange coincidence an Englishman, a friend of his *(i.e.
Paradise’s)*father’s, who had some property in Virginia, took it into
his head to read
in the original all the Fathers of the Church and become convinced that our
religion was the only true one; he forsook his own to study it and brought
up his only daughter who afterwards married my friend Mr. Paradise.”

As mentioned previously, Ludwell in fact had three daughters, but only one
was alive in 1791 and known to Count Vorontsov. All three daughters had been
baptized as Orthodox Christians and at least one (Lucy who wrote to
Jefferson in 1805) was married in the Church. In my next articles I will
turn to their stories and those of the men they married.

Nicholas Chapman, Herkimer, NY, Nov 11, 2009
Orthodoxy in Colonial Virginia (Part
2)<http://orthodoxhistory.org/2009/12/orthodoxy-in-colonial-virginia-part-2/>
from
OrthodoxHistory.org<https://www.google.com/reader/view/feed/http%3A%2F%2Forthodo\
xhistory.org%2F%3Ffeed%3Drss2>
by
Nicholas Chapman

*On the latest
episode<http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/history/orthodoxy_in_colonial_virginia>\
of
our American
Orthodox History podcast <http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/history>,
Nicholas Chapman recounts the almost incredible story of Orthodox
Christianity in colonial Virginia. Last month, we published Nicholas’ first
article <http://orthodoxhistory.org/2009/11/orthodoxy-in-colonial-virginia/>on
the subject. Below, he continues his series.
*

On July 4, 1789, after nearly five years of service, Thomas Jefferson was
coming to the end of his time as US minister plenipotentiary to France. It
was the eve of what would come to be known as the French revolution, but
this did not prevent Jefferson from hosting a celebration to mark the
recently won independence of the United States. The party was attended by
many of Jefferson’s closest friends in Paris, including John Paradise, the
son in law of Philip Ludwell III.

John Paradise was by any account a remarkable man: an extraordinarily gifted
linguist with a talent for friendship which brought him into contact with
almost all the great men of his day. English was probably only his seventh
language and by all accounts he never spoke it well! He was, however, able
to converse freely in Greek, Italian, Turkish and Arabic amongst others and
almost certainly knew Russian. He used his gifts to teach Thomas Jefferson
classical Greek whilst visiting him in Paris.

John Paradise was also an Orthodox Christian. His father, Peter Paradise,
had been the British Consul in Salonika (Thessalonica) and his mother was
half Greek. It is possible that his paternal grandfather was also both
English and Orthodox, making John Paradise a third generation English
Orthodox at the time of his birth at Salonika in April 1743. His father,
Peter, had contacts with monks from Mt. Athos during his years in Salonika
and it is not known whether it was these, or his marriage, that had brought
him to the Church.

After his early years in Greece, John was sent to the University of Padua
(modern day Italy) and ultimately to Oxford to complete his education. At
some point in the 1760’s it seems that the Paradises met Philip Ludwell and
his three daughters in London. On April 20, 1766 they are all recorded as
partaking of the sacrament of Holy Communion at the Russian Orthodox Church
in London. When Philip Ludwell III died less than a year later, Peter
Paradise became one of the legal guardians of Ludwell’s three daughters.
When Frances died less than a year after her father and Hannah (the eldest
daughter) married in March 1769, Lucy Ludwell went to live at Peter
Paradise’s London home. Barely two months later Lucy married Peter’s son
John.

Philip Ludwell III’s London house was also a home for an extended Virginian
family including three of his sister Hannah’s children: Alice, Arthur and
William Lee. It was William who was to marry the eldest Ludwell daughter in
March 1769. She was also his first cousin. Close to the Ludwell house in
Cecil St. was the London home of Benjamin Franklin, who at that time was on
his second extended visit to England.  Franklin was one of the early members
of the Royal Society, to which John Paradise would subsequently be elected.
  Philip Ludwell III was very proud of the inventive achievements of his
fellow countryman and in 1762 commissioned a portrait of Franklin.  This
became Franklin’s preferred painting of himself.

Franklin was an intimate of the Ludwell household and on his return to
America he sent his “best wishes to Miss Ludwell and the other ladies.”
This familial contact with Franklin was to prove vital for John Paradise and
Lucy Ludwell Paradise. The division of the Virginian estates of Philip
Ludwell III after his death was to prove complex and made even more so by
the outbreak of war between the American colonies and the British Empire. By
that time Franklin was the first US minister plenipotentiary to France. In
this capacity John and Lucy Ludwell Paradise visited him in Paris in 1779.
Through his office John Paradise was to be granted US citizenship in October
1780, whilst the War of Independence was still raging. It can be said
therefore that one of the first (and perhaps the first) naturalized American
citizen was an Orthodox Christian, a member of the Russian Orthodox Church
of mixed English and Greek ethnicity!

It was not until September of 1787 that John and Lucy Ludwell Paradise were
finally able to travel to their estates in Virginia. During their time in
America they were able to spend four days at Mt. Vernon with General George
and Martha Washington. Washington’s diary for Sunday, December 30, 1787
records that at around eleven o’clock that day “Mr. Paradise and his Lady,
lately from England but now of Williamsburgh , came in on a visit.” Sadly,
we have no detail of the conversation that was exchanged during their stay,
although it is known that Washington suspended the normal conduct of his
affairs during their visit, which was not his normal practice. As John
Paradise was on intimate terms with the two most important representatives
of the United States overseas (John Adams and Thomas Jefferson) and
personally acquainted with so many other persons of note, it is not
difficult to think that Washington would have found his visit of immense
interest.

Barely two months after their visit to Mt. Vernon, the Paradises were to
receive the shocking news of the death of their daughter Philippa, aged only
thirteen, in London. So it was, that shortly afterward, they were to return
to London. Here it was that they met the newly appointed Russian priest, the
Rev. Yakov Smirnov, who was to become Lucy’s cherished spiritual father.
John Paradise was to work very closely with Fr. Smirnov is 1791 in a
concerted public campaign to persuade British public opinion against war
with Russia. For his service in this respect Paradise was awarded a pension
of Ł150 p.a. by the Russian Empress Catherine the Great, a substantial sum
for its time.

It also seems likely that Paradise recruited the assistance of Frederick
North, the future Earl Guildford, whose father Lord North was British Prime
Minister during the American War of Independence. The young North was
secretly baptized as an Orthodox Christian in Corfu in 1791 and at the same
time was composing and publishing sonnets in praise of Catherine the Great!
When John Paradise died in 1795 he left Frederick North some of his most
precious possessions, thereby indicating the closeness of the relationship
they must have enjoyed during his lifetime.

I have only briefly skimmed the facts of John Paradise’s life and adventures
here. There is more to be written. But it must be of considerable interest
that a man who was clearly an active Orthodox Christians was on intimate
terms with the first three Presidents of the United States. James Boswell in
his famous “Life of Johnson” penned the best obituary of him. He wrote:
“John Paradise (1743 1795). Son of the British Consul at Salonica and a
native woman of that country. He was distinguished by his learning and a
very general acquaintance with accomplished persons of almost all nations” (
*Boswell’s Life of Johnson, vol. IV, p. 364, note 2*).

Nicholas Chapman, Yonkers, NY, December 14, 2009


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I thought some of you might find this upcoming series of posts on the
Frontier Orthodoxy blog interesting:

> Concordia Series, an
Introduction<http://frontierorthodoxy.wordpress.com/2010/01/06/concordia-series-\
an-introduction/>
>
> This is simply a quick post to introduce another upcoming series.  I will
> return to the filioque.  In fact, I will likely present on it in this
> series.  This semester I am teaching a course on Orthodox Christianity at
> Concordia College.  This provides a natural resource for blog posts for
> Frontier Orthodoxy.  As I write up handouts for the class, I will share many
> of those here.  I strongly caution all of you against reducing the class to
> the portions of the handouts posted here.  Even on the days when we utilize
> such handouts, more will have been presented and discussed in class.
> Additionally, there will not be handouts every day.  Some days are set aside
> for round table discussions and student presentations.  I will interject
> other posts as well, but I shall post enough church history notes from the
> class to warrant the creation of its own series.  Perhaps, these will be of
> interest and use to people studying the history and theology of the Orthodox
> Church.
>
Christopher Orr


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

St. Nikolai Velimirovich on
Faith/Works<http://anongd.blogspot.com/2010/01/st-nikolai-velimirovich-on-faithw\
orks.html>
From Is God
Anonymous?<http://anongd.blogspot.com/2010/01/st-nikolai-velimirovich-on-faithwo\
rks.html><http://anongd.blogspot.com/2010/01/st-nikolai-velimirovich-on-faithwor\
ks.html>

*Prayers by the Lake, *LXXXIII

People carry on foolish conversations as soon as they move away from Your
presence, my Wisdom. Those without faith speak about works, and those
without works speak about faith.

Each disparages what he does not have, and what he does have he proclaims
throughout the marketplace.

While You, O Lord, are filling my home with Your life-creating breath, I
always forget to ask which is more important -- faith or works? As soon as I
offend You and feel abandoned by You, I angrily enter into people's
discussions, and support one side or the other.

For without You I am like a weather vane on a chimney that rattles in the
direction of the wind. When the wind of faith rises in my soul, I stand with
those who have abandoned works and championed faith; when the wind of
activity rises in my soul, I support the side of those who have abandoned
faith and championed works.

But in Your all-calming presence there is no wind, no swaying, no "doing
things." I neither feel faith nor see works; instead I feel and see only
You, the living God. In truth, You are not my faith but my vision. And You
are not my doing, but I am Your doing. And again I say: You are not my faith
but I am Your faith, and Your trust.

And so I teach those around me who are carrying on the debate: whoever has
true faith in the Living God prefers to remain silent. And whoever performs
a true work of God, prefers to remain silent. But whoever shuts up his faith
with his mind, gladly squabbles about faith. And whoever does his own work
and not God's gladly boasts of his works.

Deep is the tranquility of the soul in a man of faith, deeper than the
tranquility at the bottom of the sea. For God's Wisdom is born and resides
in deep tranquility.

Deep is the tranquility in the tongue of one who does God's work, deeper
than the tranquility of the iron in the heart of a mountain. For whoever
does the work of another listens to instructions and carries them out,
moreover he listens, and has no time to speak.

I speak believing in works: Is not my prayer a working and reworking of my
very self? Is not the whole world within me, from beginning to end, together
with all the world's poverty and impurity? Truly I am not without works,
when I sweat and weep in prayer, but am immersed in the weighty task of
helping the poor in my soul -- healing the sick and casting out the unclean
spirits from my soul.

I speak believing in faith: Do I not awaken faith in my neighbors through
the good works that I do?

Is not my work in the world the song of my faith, the psalm of one saved
among the unsaved? Who would stop the song in the throat of a brimming soul?
Who would stop a brimming spring from flowing? Would the nymphs who guard
the spring quarrel with the nymphs in the spring's stream over which water
is more beneficial? Truly, if there were no spring, there would be no
stream.

O my Lord, do not go far away from me, lest my soul succumb to meaningless
quarrels. Silence in Your presence expands my soul; discussions in Your
absence shrink her and expend her to the thinness of a boon of flax.

I listened last time to the people squabbling, and You waved your hands and
went far away. Indeed, those who truly have faith do not squabble with those
who are true doers of Your work. This is the quarrel of servants with little
faith and much ill will. Those who are of little faith squabble with the
errand boys of the world. They are a dried-up spring quarrelling with a
dried-out stream.

While they were full, they both used to sing a true song of joy, and
joyfully used to hail each other.

But this is a malicious believer quarrelling with a malicious doer. What do
I have in common with them? What ties me to them except compassion, which
flows forth from Your radiance?

Fill the house of my soul, O Life-Creating Spirit, so that I may become
blind and not see angry squabbling people, and so that I may be deaf to
their foolish discussion.

They have slipped away from You, my Joy, therefore they engage in foolish
discussions.

I bow down and beseech You, tie my soul across the thousands of sunbeams to
You, lest she slip away from You, and plunge into the cold abyss.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

There have been a few posts on the "Concordia Series" on Orthodox
Christianity taught by Fr. Oliver Herbel that I posted about previously.  If
anyone is interested in seeing this former Lutheran, current PhD historian
and Orthodox priest's introduction to Orthodoxy, the first three posts
(after the Intro) can be found at frontierorthodoxy.wordpress.com or here:

    - Concordia Series 1: The Spirit in the Church (Israel), Giving Gifts and
    Guiding
Interpretation<http://frontierorthodoxy.wordpress.com/2010/01/07/concordia-serie\
s-1/>
    - Concordia Series 1, Post 2: The Continued Importance of Biblical
   
Interpretation<http://frontierorthodoxy.wordpress.com/2010/01/11/concordia-serie\
s-1-post-2-the-continued-importance-of-biblical-interpretation/>
    - Concordia Series 1, Post 3: The Scriptural Christ, Once for
All<http://frontierorthodoxy.wordpress.com/2010/01/12/concordia-series-1-post-3-\
the-scriptural-christ-once-for-all/>

Christopher


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi,

I don't come on here very much anymore, since I'd been immersing myself in the
Orthodox Church and its life over the past year. Wanted to just say that I am
now yet another former LCMS Lutheran who has joined the Orthodox Church, my
chrismation having been just last Sunday January 10.

I humbly ask for your prayers for the Lord's continued guidance as I start off
on this journey as a "green Orthodox".

Blessings,

David

I have only recently stumbled across this name and school of Lutheran thought,
and was curious as to how well studied and received he is in Lutheran
theological circles. His interpretations of Luther's teaching seem to draw some
very interesting parallels with Orthodoxy's teaching of theosis, which normally
is unheard of in the West. Given the historic proximity of Finland and Russia
and the blurring of borders and cultures, such as in Karelia, I wonder if the
Finnish perspective is hitting on something that Luther emphasized and modern
Lutheranism has lost, or if this is simply overreaching in the name of
ecumenism. I know this is not a Lutheran forum, but the connection with Orthodox
theosis is what is causing me to raise the point. Below is the Wikipedia blurb
on Mannermaa:

"Tuomo Mannermaa (b. 29 September 1937 Oulu, Finland) is professor emeritus of
ecumenical theology at University of Helsinki. He is known especially for his
theological criticism of the Leuenberg Concord and his research on the
relationship between justification and theosis in the theology of Martin Luther.
His initiating and furthering this research caused him to be regarded as the
father of "The New Finnish Interpretation of Luther" or "the Finnish School of
Tuomo Mannermaa"."

    This formerly Lutheran pastor does not recall hearing of such but never
took a course in review of European Lutheranism after the redormation.  Such
would be a useful course for improving breadth of knowledge. Thanks for the
tip. Deacon Fr Finbar

--- On Sat, 1/16/10, luvlinguae <reddogzrule@...> wrote:


From: luvlinguae <reddogzrule@...>
Subject: [LutheransLookingEast] Question concerning Mannermaa
To: LutheransLookingEast@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, January 16, 2010, 12:48 PM


 



I have only recently stumbled across this name and school of Lutheran thought,
and was curious as to how well studied and received he is in Lutheran
theological circles. His interpretations of Luther's teaching seem to draw some
very interesting parallels with Orthodoxy's teaching of theosis, which normally
is unheard of in the West. Given the historic proximity of Finland and Russia
and the blurring of borders and cultures, such as in Karelia, I wonder if the
Finnish perspective is hitting on something that Luther emphasized and modern
Lutheranism has lost, or if this is simply overreaching in the name of
ecumenism. I know this is not a Lutheran forum, but the connection with Orthodox
theosis is what is causing me to raise the point. Below is the Wikipedia blurb
on Mannermaa:

"Tuomo Mannermaa (b. 29 September 1937 Oulu, Finland) is professor emeritus of
ecumenical theology at University of Helsinki. He is known especially for his
theological criticism of the Leuenberg Concord and his research on the
relationship between justification and theosis in the theology of Martin Luther.
His initiating and furthering this research caused him to be regarded as the
father of "The New Finnish Interpretation of Luther" or "the Finnish School of
Tuomo Mannermaa"."











[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

May God grant you many years, David!
My dh and I became catechumens on January 1, 2010.  Our children will be
baptized sometime before Pascha this year so they may begin receiving the
Eucharist.  They are also taking classes to prepare them for their first
confession. They were baptized in the Methodist church during the brief
period we attended there when they were toddlers; my dh and I were baptized
in the Methodist church as children, too.  Our priest has requested that we
all be baptized in the Orthodox church before chrismation.
God Bless,
Kim

On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 11:41 AM, luvlinguae <reddogzrule@...> wrote:

>
>
> Hi,
>
> I don't come on here very much anymore, since I'd been immersing myself in
> the Orthodox Church and its life over the past year. Wanted to just say that
> I am now yet another former LCMS Lutheran who has joined the Orthodox
> Church, my chrismation having been just last Sunday January 10.
>
> I humbly ask for your prayers for the Lord's continued guidance as I start
> off on this journey as a "green Orthodox".
>
> Blessings,
>
> David
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

So, I'm new to this list and to my curiosity as a Lutheran Looking East.

Is it standard practice for Orthodox congregations to re-baptize baptized
Christians - who come from other Christian traditions - such as myself?  It
seems so strongly contrary to the Christian faith to re-baptize.  Maybe someone
on this list could explain this to me or point me to resources which might
explain the process of becoming an Orthodox Christian, including issues related
to possible re-baptizing of otherwise faithful, baptized Christians.

-- David Tinker
Ohio

--- On Sat, 1/16/10, Kimberly Sparling <belleartmom@...> wrote:

From: Kimberly Sparling <belleartmom@...>
Subject: Re: [LutheransLookingEast] Newly christmated
To: LutheransLookingEast@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, January 16, 2010, 2:30 PM

May God grant you many years, David!
My dh and I became catechumens on January 1, 2010.  Our children will be
baptized sometime before Pascha this year so they may begin receiving the
Eucharist.  They are also taking classes to prepare them for their first
confession. They were baptized in the Methodist church during the brief
period we attended there when they were toddlers; my dh and I were baptized
in the Methodist church as children, too.  Our priest has requested that we
all be baptized in the Orthodox church before chrismation.
God Bless,
Kim

On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 11:41 AM, luvlinguae <reddogzrule@...> wrote:

>
>
> Hi,
>
> I don't come on here very much anymore, since I'd been immersing myself in
> the Orthodox Church and its life over the past year. Wanted to just say that
> I am now yet another former LCMS Lutheran who has joined the Orthodox
> Church, my chrismation having been just last Sunday January 10.
>
> I humbly ask for your prayers for the Lord's continued guidance as I start
> off on this journey as a "green Orthodox".
>
> Blessings,
>
> David
>
> 
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I seem to recall his name from an "ecumenical" Orthodox-Lutheran journal that
was started by those involved with the Finnish overlap.  (Not the Finnish
overLapp, ha ha.)

Back in the mid-90's, before we were Orthodox, I looked through a bunch of them,
and even assembled a "Theosis-Pak" to give other Lutherans.  There was a lot of
stuff there on the existence of theosis in Lutheran theology.  Unfortunatley my
aging brain can't remember the name of that journal....but I'll let you know if
it comes to mind.

I remember too that the CTS library in Ft Wayne had a book on the shelf called
"Luther und Palamas" (or "Palamas und Luther," I can't remember which)....but
since my German is next to non-existent, I never read it.

In Christ,

Subdeacon Randall








________________________________
From: luvlinguae <reddogzrule@...>
To: LutheransLookingEast@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sat, January 16, 2010 12:48:17 PM
Subject: [LutheransLookingEast] Question concerning Mannermaa


I have only recently stumbled across this name and school of Lutheran thought,
and was curious as to how well studied and received he is in Lutheran
theological circles. His interpretations of Luther's teaching seem to draw some
very interesting parallels with Orthodoxy's teaching of theosis, which normally
is unheard of in the West. Given the historic proximity of Finland and Russia
and the blurring of borders and cultures, such as in Karelia, I wonder if the
Finnish perspective is hitting on something that Luther emphasized and modern
Lutheranism has lost, or if this is simply overreaching in the name of
ecumenism. I know this is not a Lutheran forum, but the connection with Orthodox
theosis is what is causing me to raise the point. Below is the Wikipedia blurb
on Mannermaa:

"Tuomo Mannermaa (b. 29 September 1937 Oulu, Finland) is professor emeritus of
ecumenical theology at University of Helsinki. He is known especially for his
theological criticism of the Leuenberg Concord and his research on the
relationship between justification and theosis in the theology of Martin Luther.
His initiating and furthering this research caused him to be regarded as the
father of "The New Finnish Interpretation of Luther" or "the Finnish School of
Tuomo Mannermaa"."




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I wouldn't say rebaptism is standard practice.  I myself was only
chrismated....which puts me in the distinguished company of Fr Seraphim Rose and
St. Alexis of Wilkes-Barre.

It's ultimately up to the bishop whether or not to re-baptize.

However, more and more bishops are leaning toward re-baptism, for the simple
reason that the mainline denominations---and many nondenonimations---are losing
contact with the basic dogmas of Christ and the Trinity.

Fifty years ago an Episcopal priest or Presbyterian pastor or neighborhood
minister would have believed and been able to explain that Christ was fully God
and fully man; and that Father, Son and Holy Spirit are one God.

Now the Episcopalian priest may be a homosexual-activist Unitarian, and the
Presbyterian might reject God the Father as a fallacy of an oppressive
patriarchal society.  The nondenominational guy might not have a clue if you
asked him about one God in three Persons.

Since bishops are accountable to God for the baptism of a parishioner, they are
less inclined toward christmation.

In Christ,

R.




________________________________
From: DAVID TINKER <davidtinker@...>
To: LutheransLookingEast@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sat, January 16, 2010 3:13:48 PM
Subject: Re: [LutheransLookingEast] Newly christmated


So, I'm new to this list and to my curiosity as a Lutheran Looking East.

Is it standard practice for Orthodox congregations to re-baptize baptized
Christians - who come from other Christian traditions - such as myself?  It
seems so strongly contrary to the Christian faith to re-baptize.  Maybe someone
on this list could explain this to me or point me to resources which might
explain the process of becoming an Orthodox Christian, including issues related
to possible re-baptizing of otherwise faithful, baptized Christians.

-- David Tinker
Ohio

--- On Sat, 1/16/10, Kimberly Sparling <belleartmom@ gmail.com> wrote:

From: Kimberly Sparling <belleartmom@ gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [LutheransLookingEa st] Newly christmated
To: LutheransLookingEas t@yahoogroups. com
Date: Saturday, January 16, 2010, 2:30 PM

May God grant you many years, David!
My dh and I became catechumens on January 1, 2010.  Our children will be
baptized sometime before Pascha this year so they may begin receiving the
Eucharist.  They are also taking classes to prepare them for their first
confession. They were baptized in the Methodist church during the brief
period we attended there when they were toddlers; my dh and I were baptized
in the Methodist church as children, too.  Our priest has requested that we
all be baptized in the Orthodox church before chrismation.
God Bless,
Kim

On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 11:41 AM, luvlinguae <reddogzrule@ gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> Hi,
>
> I don't come on here very much anymore, since I'd been immersing myself in
> the Orthodox Church and its life over the past year. Wanted to just say that
> I am now yet another former LCMS Lutheran who has joined the Orthodox
> Church, my chrismation having been just last Sunday January 10.
>
> I humbly ask for your prayers for the Lord's continued guidance as I start
> off on this journey as a "green Orthodox".
>
> Blessings,
>
> David
>
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

------------ --------- --------- ------

Yahoo! Groups Links

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I read a book on the subject..."Union with Christ:  The New Finnish
Interpretation of Luther"

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0802844421/ref=cap_pdp_dp_0

Quite honestly I think it is a bit of a stretch but I certainly appreciate
the desire to try to bring the concept of Theosis into Lutheranism.  When I
was a Lutheran, I tried too!

Welcome, David!  Chronia Polla! (as the Greeks say).-----R

________________________________
>
> From: luvlinguae <reddogzrule@... <reddogzrule%40gmail.com>>
> To:
LutheransLookingEast@yahoogroups.com<LutheransLookingEast%40yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Sat, January 16, 2010 12:48:17 PM
>
> Subject: [LutheransLookingEast] Question concerning Mannermaa
>
> I have only recently stumbled across this name and school of Lutheran
> thought, and was curious as to how well studied and received he is in
> Lutheran theological circles. His interpretations of Luther's teaching seem
> to draw some very interesting parallels with Orthodoxy's teaching of
> theosis, which normally is unheard of in the West. Given the historic
> proximity of Finland and Russia and the blurring of borders and cultures,
> such as in Karelia, I wonder if the Finnish perspective is hitting on
> something that Luther emphasized and modern Lutheranism has lost, or if this
> is simply overreaching in the name of ecumenism. I know this is not a
> Lutheran forum, but the connection with Orthodox theosis is what is causing
> me to raise the point. Below is the Wikipedia blurb on Mannermaa:
>
> "Tuomo Mannermaa (b. 29 September 1937 Oulu, Finland) is professor emeritus
> of ecumenical theology at University of Helsinki. He is known especially for
> his theological criticism of the Leuenberg Concord and his research on the
> relationship between justification and theosis in the theology of Martin
> Luther. His initiating and furthering this research caused him to be
> regarded as the father of "The New Finnish Interpretation of Luther" or "the
> Finnish School of Tuomo Mannermaa"."
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Here are a few resources discussing the issue of the reception of converts
from non-Orthodox, but Christian churches:


    - On Non-Orthodox Baptism I
(Pagodin)<http://www.fatheralexander.org/booklets/english/reception_church_a_pag\
odin.htm>
    - On Non-Orthodox Baptism II
(Metallinos)<http://www.oodegr.com/english/biblia/baptisma1/perieh.htm#periex>
    - On Non-Orthodox Baptism III
(Rodzianko)<http://www.holy-trinity.org/liturgics/rodzianko-acceptance.html>
    - On Non-Orthodox Baptism IV
(Erickson)<http://jbburnett.com/resources/erickson_reception-svtq97.pdf>


For the record, I was received into the Orthodox Church by baptism; my
sister was received by chrismation.

A question to ponder when thinking about this issue is how various churches
view the baptism of Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses who consider themselves
to be fully Christian, but who are considered anything but by most
traditional Protestants (and Catholics).  The question comes down to what is
the minimum of form required to be recognized as the Church's Baptism,
rather than something vaguely resembling the full rite but called baptism.
Some Orthodox argue that water and the trinitarian formula is 'enough',
others argue that triple immersion and the trinitarian formula are enough,
others argue that triple immersion and the trinitarian formula done within
the Orthodox Church are enough.  Within this context, it isn't about
re-baptism, it is about whether baptism ever took place in the first place.

Christopher


On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 3:13 PM, DAVID TINKER <davidtinker@...>wrote:

>
>
> So, I'm new to this list and to my curiosity as a Lutheran Looking East.
>
> Is it standard practice for Orthodox congregations to re-baptize baptized
> Christians - who come from other Christian traditions - such as myself?  It
> seems so strongly contrary to the Christian faith to re-baptize.  Maybe
> someone on this list could explain this to me or point me to resources which
> might explain the process of becoming an Orthodox Christian, including
> issues related to possible re-baptizing of otherwise faithful, baptized
> Christians.
>
> -- David Tinker
> Ohio
>
> --- On Sat, 1/16/10, Kimberly Sparling
<belleartmom@...<belleartmom%40gmail.com>>
> wrote:
>
> From: Kimberly Sparling <belleartmom@... <belleartmom%40gmail.com>>
> Subject: Re: [LutheransLookingEast] Newly christmated
> To:
LutheransLookingEast@yahoogroups.com<LutheransLookingEast%40yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Saturday, January 16, 2010, 2:30 PM
>
>
> May God grant you many years, David!
> My dh and I became catechumens on January 1, 2010.  Our children will be
> baptized sometime before Pascha this year so they may begin receiving the
> Eucharist.  They are also taking classes to prepare them for their first
> confession. They were baptized in the Methodist church during the brief
> period we attended there when they were toddlers; my dh and I were baptized
> in the Methodist church as children, too.  Our priest has requested that we
> all be baptized in the Orthodox church before chrismation.
> God Bless,
> Kim
>
> On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 11:41 AM, luvlinguae
<reddogzrule@...<reddogzrule%40gmail.com>>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I don't come on here very much anymore, since I'd been immersing myself
> in
> > the Orthodox Church and its life over the past year. Wanted to just say
> that
> > I am now yet another former LCMS Lutheran who has joined the Orthodox
> > Church, my chrismation having been just last Sunday January 10.
> >
> > I humbly ask for your prayers for the Lord's continued guidance as I
> start
> > off on this journey as a "green Orthodox".
> >
> > Blessings,
> >
> > David
> >
> >
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

God grant you all many years!  Don't spill the grace that's been given you -
the spiritual life is like carrying a very full bowl.

Christopher



On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 12:41 PM, luvlinguae <reddogzrule@...> wrote:

>
>
> Hi,
>
> I don't come on here very much anymore, since I'd been immersing myself in
> the Orthodox Church and its life over the past year. Wanted to just say that
> I am now yet another former LCMS Lutheran who has joined the Orthodox
> Church, my chrismation having been just last Sunday January 10.
>
> I humbly ask for your prayers for the Lord's continued guidance as I start
> off on this journey as a "green Orthodox".
>
> Blessings,
>
> David
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

A few years ago I saw a copy of book published, I think, by American Lutheran
Publicity Bureau (ALPB, Lutheran Forum) about Lutheranism and Eastern
Orthodoxy.  When I looked on the ALPB web site recently I could not find
anything about it.  I've tried to see if Amazon.com used books might have it,
but to no avail.  I asked some colleagues about this, but nobody remembered it.
Maybe some of you all might know of this book, how to find it, if it is worth a
read, etc.  Regrettably, I do not have a title to share with you.

This book, although I didn't get to read it, was a major spark in my pondering
regarding Eastern Orthodoxy.  Another was when, a few years ago, the men's group
at our church hosted the local OCA priest who gave a presentation about the
Orthodox Church. 

Thanks for you warm welcome and your help in my quest.

- David Tinker


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Thank you. What I have read so far has been helpful.

David Tinker

I found importing theosis didn't get me anywhere, either...no matter how many
Theosis-Paks I handed out.  I don't think it really fits into a theology and
piety built on law/gospel.

R.




________________________________
From: Rosemarie Lieffring <rose.lieffring@...>
To: LutheransLookingEast@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sat, January 16, 2010 4:21:49 PM
Subject: Re: [LutheransLookingEast] Question concerning Mannermaa

I read a book on the subject..."Union with Christ:  The New Finnish
Interpretation of Luther"

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0802844421/ref=cap_pdp_dp_0

Quite honestly I think it is a bit of a stretch but I certainly appreciate
the desire to try to bring the concept of Theosis into Lutheranism.  When I
was a Lutheran, I tried too!

Welcome, David!  Chronia Polla! (as the Greeks say).-----R

________________________________
>
> From: luvlinguae <reddogzrule@... <reddogzrule%40gmail.com>>
> To:
LutheransLookingEast@yahoogroups.com<LutheransLookingEast%40yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Sat, January 16, 2010 12:48:17 PM
>
> Subject: [LutheransLookingEast] Question concerning Mannermaa
>
> I have only recently stumbled across this name and school of Lutheran
> thought, and was curious as to how well studied and received he is in
> Lutheran theological circles. His interpretations of Luther's teaching seem
> to draw some very interesting parallels with Orthodoxy's teaching of
> theosis, which normally is unheard of in the West. Given the historic
> proximity of Finland and Russia and the blurring of borders and cultures,
> such as in Karelia, I wonder if the Finnish perspective is hitting on
> something that Luther emphasized and modern Lutheranism has lost, or if this
> is simply overreaching in the name of ecumenism. I know this is not a
> Lutheran forum, but the connection with Orthodox theosis is what is causing
> me to raise the point. Below is the Wikipedia blurb on Mannermaa:
>
> "Tuomo Mannermaa (b. 29 September 1937 Oulu, Finland) is professor emeritus
> of ecumenical theology at University of Helsinki. He is known especially for
> his theological criticism of the Leuenberg Concord and his research on the
> relationship between justification and theosis in the theology of Martin
> Luther. His initiating and furthering this research caused him to be
> regarded as the father of "The New Finnish Interpretation of Luther" or "the
> Finnish School of Tuomo Mannermaa"."
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

The Finnish school of thought regarding Luther was being talked about
when I left CTS 5.5 years ago.  The general feeling then was that,
while touching upon some rather overlooked aspects of Luther's
un-systematized theology, the school was stretching things a bit.
Since Luther never really had any quality exposure or dialogue with
Holy Orthodoxy in and of itself, one can only guess at his response to
some of the Finnish school's interpretations.

That's always been one of the nice things about Luther, though: he's
not a neat and clean theologian.  Like St. Augustine he tends to
overstate his point to achieve his objectives.

In Christ,
Benjamin Harju

P.S.
We're newly Chrismated, too: 19 Dec 2009
http://paredwka.blogspot.com/2009/12/chrismated.html

On 1/16/10, randall hay <stortford@...> wrote:
> I found importing theosis didn't get me anywhere, either...no matter how
> many Theosis-Paks I handed out.  I don't think it really fits into a
> theology and piety built on law/gospel.
>
> R.
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Rosemarie Lieffring <rose.lieffring@...>
> To: LutheransLookingEast@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Sat, January 16, 2010 4:21:49 PM
> Subject: Re: [LutheransLookingEast] Question concerning Mannermaa
>
> I read a book on the subject..."Union with Christ:  The New Finnish
> Interpretation of Luther"
>
> http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0802844421/ref=cap_pdp_dp_0
>
> Quite honestly I think it is a bit of a stretch but I certainly appreciate
> the desire to try to bring the concept of Theosis into Lutheranism.  When I
> was a Lutheran, I tried too!
>
> Welcome, David!  Chronia Polla! (as the Greeks say).-----R
>
> ________________________________
>>
>> From: luvlinguae <reddogzrule@... <reddogzrule%40gmail.com>>
>> To:
>> LutheransLookingEast@yahoogroups.com<LutheransLookingEast%40yahoogroups.com>
>> Sent: Sat, January 16, 2010 12:48:17 PM
>>
>> Subject: [LutheransLookingEast] Question concerning Mannermaa
>>
>> I have only recently stumbled across this name and school of Lutheran
>> thought, and was curious as to how well studied and received he is in
>> Lutheran theological circles. His interpretations of Luther's teaching
>> seem
>> to draw some very interesting parallels with Orthodoxy's teaching of
>> theosis, which normally is unheard of in the West. Given the historic
>> proximity of Finland and Russia and the blurring of borders and cultures,
>> such as in Karelia, I wonder if the Finnish perspective is hitting on
>> something that Luther emphasized and modern Lutheranism has lost, or if
>> this
>> is simply overreaching in the name of ecumenism. I know this is not a
>> Lutheran forum, but the connection with Orthodox theosis is what is
>> causing
>> me to raise the point. Below is the Wikipedia blurb on Mannermaa:
>>
>> "Tuomo Mannermaa (b. 29 September 1937 Oulu, Finland) is professor
>> emeritus
>> of ecumenical theology at University of Helsinki. He is known especially
>> for
>> his theological criticism of the Leuenberg Concord and his research on the
>> relationship between justification and theosis in the theology of Martin
>> Luther. His initiating and furthering this research caused him to be
>> regarded as the father of "The New Finnish Interpretation of Luther" or
>> "the
>> Finnish School of Tuomo Mannermaa"."
>>
>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>

David,

Perhaps you are describing "Salvation in Christ: a Lutheran-Orthodox
Dialogue."  It's not from ALBP, but it does treat on the area of
doctrinal dialogue.  I read this a few years ago, and it was likewise
helpful to me.  One of the contributors was also a presenter at the
Colloquium for Lutherans held a couple years back.

If this is what you are trying to find, Amazon lists it at
http://www.amazon.com/Salvation-Christ-Lutheran-Orthodox-Robert-Tobias/dp/080662\
5805
.  It's not too costly, and even if you were looking for something
else, I recommend it to the readers of this list.

In Christ,
Benjamin Harju

On 1/16/10, DAVID TINKER <davidtinker@...> wrote:
>
> A few years ago I saw a copy of book published, I think, by American
> Lutheran Publicity Bureau (ALPB, Lutheran Forum) about Lutheranism and
> Eastern Orthodoxy.  When I looked on the ALPB web site recently I could not
> find anything about it.  I've tried to see if Amazon.com used books might
> have it, but to no avail.  I asked some colleagues about this, but nobody
> remembered it. Maybe some of you all might know of this book, how to find
> it, if it is worth a read, etc.  Regrettably, I do not have a title to share
> with you.
>
> This book, although I didn't get to read it, was a major spark in my
> pondering regarding Eastern Orthodoxy.  Another was when, a few years ago,
> the men's group at our church hosted the local OCA priest who gave a
> presentation about the Orthodox Church.
>
> Thanks for you warm welcome and your help in my quest.
>
> - David Tinker
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>

It might be the book, but the cover at Amazon looks different.  I think it had
an icon on the cover.  I will look into it more.  It could be helpful even if it
is a different book.

-David Tinker

On Jan 17, 2010, at 9:14 PM, Benjamin Harju <benjamin.harju@...> wrote:

David,

Perhaps you are describing "Salvation in Christ: a Lutheran-Orthodox
Dialogue." It's not from ALBP, but it does treat on the area of
doctrinal dialogue. I read this a few years ago, and it was likewise
helpful to me. One of the contributors was also a presenter at the
Colloquium for Lutherans held a couple years back.

If this is what you are trying to find, Amazon lists it at
http://www.amazon.com/Salvation-Christ-Lutheran-Orthodox-Robert-Tobias/dp/080662\
5805
. It's not too costly, and even if you were looking for something
else, I recommend it to the readers of this list.

In Christ,
Benjamin Harju

On 1/16/10, DAVID TINKER <davidtinker@...> wrote:
>
> A few years ago I saw a copy of book published, I think, by American
> Lutheran Publicity Bureau (ALPB, Lutheran Forum) about Lutheranism and
> Eastern Orthodoxy.  When I looked on the ALPB web site recently I could not
> find anything about it.  I've tried to see if Amazon.com used books might
> have it, but to no avail.  I asked some colleagues about this, but nobody
> remembered it. Maybe some of you all might know of this book, how to find
> it, if it is worth a read, etc.  Regrettably, I do not have a title to share
> with you.
>
> This book, although I didn't get to read it, was a major spark in my
> pondering regarding Eastern Orthodoxy.  Another was when, a few years ago,
> the men's group at our church hosted the local OCA priest who gave a
> presentation about the Orthodox Church.
>
> Thanks for you warm welcome and your help in my quest.
>
> - David Tinker
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I am in the middle of reading this book, which I did get from Amazon's used
sellers list. It's definitely a good read, and faithfully and honestly addresses
salvation as taught by the confessional Lutherans and also by the Orthodox
Church. There's no attempt to blur lines but it does address the commonalities.
The book is laid out as a series of theological papers by different authors.
Unfortunately the book is old and not well glued and the pages are literally
falling out of it now. I think it was sitting on a shelf somewhere for the last
20 years. Hopefully I'll get to the end of it before it disintegrates into dust.
:o)

David

--- In LutheransLookingEast@yahoogroups.com, David Tinker <davidtinker@...>
wrote:
>
> It might be the book, but the cover at Amazon looks different.  I think it had
an icon on the cover.  I will look into it more.  It could be helpful even if it
is a different book.
>
> -David Tinker
>
> On Jan 17, 2010, at 9:14 PM, Benjamin Harju <benjamin.harju@...> wrote:
>
> David,
>
> Perhaps you are describing "Salvation in Christ: a Lutheran-Orthodox
> Dialogue." It's not from ALBP, but it does treat on the area of
> doctrinal dialogue. I read this a few years ago, and it was likewise
> helpful to me. One of the contributors was also a presenter at the
> Colloquium for Lutherans held a couple years back.
>
> If this is what you are trying to find, Amazon lists it at
>
http://www.amazon.com/Salvation-Christ-Lutheran-Orthodox-Robert-Tobias/dp/080662\
5805
> . It's not too costly, and even if you were looking for something
> else, I recommend it to the readers of this list.
>
> In Christ,
> Benjamin Harju
>
> On 1/16/10, DAVID TINKER <davidtinker@...> wrote:
> >
> > A few years ago I saw a copy of book published, I think, by American
> > Lutheran Publicity Bureau (ALPB, Lutheran Forum) about Lutheranism and
> > Eastern Orthodoxy.  When I looked on the ALPB web site recently I could not
> > find anything about it.  I've tried to see if Amazon.com used books might
> > have it, but to no avail.  I asked some colleagues about this, but nobody
> > remembered it. Maybe some of you all might know of this book, how to find
> > it, if it is worth a read, etc.  Regrettably, I do not have a title to share
> > with you.
> >
> > This book, although I didn't get to read it, was a major spark in my
> > pondering regarding Eastern Orthodoxy.  Another was when, a few years ago,
> > the men's group at our church hosted the local OCA priest who gave a
> > presentation about the Orthodox Church.
> >
> > Thanks for you warm welcome and your help in my quest.
> >
> > - David Tinker
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

It's also a common back at any major library, public or academic.  I
remember reading parts of it at the NY Public Library many moons ago.  I had
also found it at the UCLA library.

Christopher



On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 11:17 AM, dkwiech <reddogzrule@...> wrote:

>
>
> I am in the middle of reading this book, which I did get from Amazon's used
> sellers list. It's definitely a good read, and faithfully and honestly
> addresses salvation as taught by the confessional Lutherans and also by the
> Orthodox Church. There's no attempt to blur lines but it does address the
> commonalities. The book is laid out as a series of theological papers by
> different authors. Unfortunately the book is old and not well glued and the
> pages are literally falling out of it now. I think it was sitting on a shelf
> somewhere for the last 20 years. Hopefully I'll get to the end of it before
> it disintegrates into dust. :o)
>
> David
>
>
> --- In
LutheransLookingEast@yahoogroups.com<LutheransLookingEast%40yahoogroups.com>,
> David Tinker <davidtinker@...> wrote:
> >
> > It might be the book, but the cover at Amazon looks different. I think it
> had an icon on the cover. I will look into it more. It could be helpful even
> if it is a different book.
> >
> > -David Tinker
> >
> > On Jan 17, 2010, at 9:14 PM, Benjamin Harju <benjamin.harju@...> wrote:
> >
> > David,
> >
> > Perhaps you are describing "Salvation in Christ: a Lutheran-Orthodox
> > Dialogue." It's not from ALBP, but it does treat on the area of
> > doctrinal dialogue. I read this a few years ago, and it was likewise
> > helpful to me. One of the contributors was also a presenter at the
> > Colloquium for Lutherans held a couple years back.
> >
> > If this is what you are trying to find, Amazon lists it at
> >
>
http://www.amazon.com/Salvation-Christ-Lutheran-Orthodox-Robert-Tobias/dp/080662\
5805
> > . It's not too costly, and even if you were looking for something
> > else, I recommend it to the readers of this list.
> >
> > In Christ,
> > Benjamin Harju
> >
> > On 1/16/10, DAVID TINKER <davidtinker@...> wrote:
> > >
> > > A few years ago I saw a copy of book published, I think, by American
> > > Lutheran Publicity Bureau (ALPB, Lutheran Forum) about Lutheranism and
> > > Eastern Orthodoxy. When I looked on the ALPB web site recently I could
> not
> > > find anything about it. I've tried to see if Amazon.com used books
> might
> > > have it, but to no avail. I asked some colleagues about this, but
> nobody
> > > remembered it. Maybe some of you all might know of this book, how to
> find
> > > it, if it is worth a read, etc. Regrettably, I do not have a title to
> share
> > > with you.
> > >
> > > This book, although I didn't get to read it, was a major spark in my
> > > pondering regarding Eastern Orthodoxy. Another was when, a few years
> ago,
> > > the men's group at our church hosted the local OCA priest who gave a
> > > presentation about the Orthodox Church.
> > >
> > > Thanks for you warm welcome and your help in my quest.
> > >
> > > - David Tinker
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

The ALPB book is called "Heaven on Earth:  A Lutheran-Orthodox Odyssey" by
Robert Tobias.  It went out of print about a year ago.  I called the ALPB and
bought the last of their stock because I used it to start a discussion group
here in Sioux City involving some of the local ELCA clergy, an Orthodox priest
and layman (who is also a former Presbyterian pastor).

It served as a pretty good introduction and stimulated some interesting
discussion.

Thank you for the update on the book status.  I found a good condition used copy
on Amazon for a dollar plus shipping.

-David Tinker
Ohio

On Jan 18, 2010, at 2:31 PM, "jayedenne" <jedenne@...> wrote:


The ALPB book is called "Heaven on Earth: A Lutheran-Orthodox Odyssey" by Robert
Tobias. It went out of print about a year ago. I called the ALPB and bought the
last of their stock because I used it to start a discussion group here in Sioux
City involving some of the local ELCA clergy, an Orthodox priest and layman (who
is also a former Presbyterian pastor).

It served as a pretty good introduction and stimulated some interesting
discussion.




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Theorists are greatly occupied by the question of the relationship between
grace and free will. For anyone who has grace within him, this question is
resolved by practical experience.

*- St. Theophan the Recluse*

HT: Is God
Anonymous?<http://anongd.blogspot.com/2010/01/theophan-recluse-on-grace-and-free\
-will.html>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Here is something I think you'll find interesting.  It is a quote by St John
Chrysostom, from around 400, in which he discusses the interchanging of terms
related to clergy in the NT.

It is important to bear the Greek in mind!!  In Greek  a "diakonos" is a
"servant," and a "presbyter" is an elder.  While the church had a threefold
ministry quite early---as we see in the epistles of Ignatius---the terms
"diakonos" and "presbyteros" maintained their meanings as 'servant' and 'elder.'
So, as you'll see,  bishops were still referring to themselves as "diakonoi" and
"presbyteroi" for centuries after the NT was written.  You can't take this use
of terms as evidence of a presbyterian ecclesiology!

---And please note that Titus 1:5 does not state that Paul will ordain bishops,
but that Titus will. Titus was a bishop.  The fathers are quite unanimous on
that.

I'm not sure where people get the idea the NT church was a bunch of
congregations with voters but no hierarchy...unless it was from Enlightenment
propaganda.  Anyone can see---as you touched on---that the apostles were over
the NT Church.  If there were people over the church during the NT era, why
wouldn't there be people over the Church after the NT era?  It makes no sense.

A Lutheran pastor on this site mentioned one time that he'd counted, and around
two-thirds of the Lutheran churches in the world have bishops.

Here's the quote from St John.  (Chrysostom, by the way, can be considered the
greatest Greek scholar of his age; he was archbishop of Constantinople, which is
equivalent of leading patriarch, and the most influential exegete of the Church
for 1600 years.)

                                             +



“To the fellow-Bishops and Deacons.” What is this? were there several
Bishops of one city? Certainly not; but he called the Presbyters so. For then
they still interchanged the titles, and the Bishop was called a diakonos.  For
this cause in writing to Timothy, he said, “Fulfil thy ministry,” when he
was a Bishop. For that he was a Bishop appears by his saying to him, “Lay
hands hastily on no man.” (1 Tim. v. 22.) And again, “Which was given thee
with the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery.” (1 Tim. iv. 14.) Yet
Presbyters would not have laid hands on a Bishop.

And again, in writing to Titus, he says, “For this cause I left thee in Crete,
that thou shouldest appoint  in every city, as I gave thee charge. If any man is
blameless, the husband of one wife” (Tit. i. 5, 6.); which he says of the
Bishop.  And after saying this, he adds immediately, “For the Bishop must be
blameless, as God’s steward, not self willed.” (Tit. i. 7.) So then, as I
said, both the Presbyters were of old called Bishops and Deacons of Christ, and
the Bishops Presbyters; and hence EVEN NOW many Bishops write, “To my
fellow-Presbyter,” and, “To my fellow-Deacon.” But otherwise the specific
name is distinctly appropriated to each, the Bishop and the Presbyter. “To the
fellow-Bishops,” he says, “and Deacons”...


Here, as writing to those of equal honor, [Paul] does not set down his
rank of Teacher, but another, and that a great one. And what is that?
He calls himself a “servant,” and not an Apostle. For great truly is
this rank too, and the sum of all good things, to be a servant of
Christ, and not merely to be called so. “The servant of Christ,” this
is truly a free man in respect to sin, and being a genuine servant, he
is not a servant to any other, since he would not be Christ’s servant,
but by halves. And in again writing to the Romans also, he says, “Paul,
a servant of Jesus Christ.” (Rom. i. 1.) But writing to the Corinthians
and to Timothy he calls himself an “Apostle.” On what account then is
this? Not because they were superior to Timothy. Far from it. But
rather he honors them, and shows them attention, beyond all others to
whom he wrote. For he also bears witness to great virtue in them. For
besides, there indeed he was about to order many things, and therefore
assumed his rank as an Apostle. But here he gives them no injunctions
but such as they could perceive of themselves...

Homily I on Philippians, NPNF Series I Vol. 13, p. 184
















________________________________
From: Richard K. Futrell <PastorFutrell@...>
To: LutheransLookingEast@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wed, January 20, 2010 1:22:38 PM
Subject: [LutheransLookingEast] Titus 1 and pastors/elders/overseers


Someone in my congregation had a question from Titus 1.  This was my long-winded
reply.  I'd like an Eastern Orthodox understanding/ view to my response if you'd
like to go there.

The Bible uses the term “elders” to refer to men who are older in age (Acts
2:17; 1 Timothy 5:1), to officials among the Jews (Matthew 16:21, Luke 7:3), as
well as to public ministers, that is, pastors (Acts 15:2; 20:17; 1 Peter 5:1). 
We see that elder/presbyter, overseer/bishop, and pastor are synonyms with
overlapping meanings in the New Testament.  But the terms are not exactly
interchangeable, for they have differing semantic ranges.  Also remember our use
of “elder” for our elders is not biblical but is a holdover from our
Germanic heritage as Lutherans.  (That’s why it’s always best to speak as
Scripture speaks to help prevent confusion.)

That being said, we see in three passages where the early New Testament
elders/presbyters and overseers/bishops were the same men with the same calls. 
In fact, their work is twice described using the word pastor (shepherd) as a
verb:

- 1 Peter 5:1: “So I urge the elders among you, as a fellow elder and witness
of the Messiah’s suffering and as a partner in the glory about to be
revealed--shepherd God’s flock among you!”

- In Acts 20:17, Paul sends for the elders of the Ephesian congregation.  The
apostle tells these very elders in Acts 20:28: “Keep watch over yourselves and
for all the flock, among whom the Holy Spirit has appointed you as overseers, to
shepherd the church of God, which He purchased with His own blood.”

- Titus 1:5: “For this reason I left you in Crete, that you would set right
what was left undone and, as I directed you, to appoint elders in every town.

The word for appoint also means ordain.  So Paul was not telling Timothy to have
“lay ministers” to be pastors or elders.  He is ordaining them and he will
act as their bishop.  Here we see the beginnings of the historic Church
government of bishops overseeing pastors (and deacons assisting pastors).

The immediate post-apostolic Church Fathers, Polycarp and Clement, also used
“bishop” and “presbyter” as synonyms for each other.  Clement wrote in
his epistle to the Corinthians, Chapter 44, verses 1-5 (circa 95AD):

1. And our Apostles knew through our Lord Jesus Christ that dissension would
exist about the title of bishop.  2. So for this reason, having receiving full,
advance knowledge [of this], they appointed those previously mentioned
[bishops].  Then they gave additional instructions, that after they fell asleep,
other approved men should succeed [them] in their work.  3. Therefore, we do not
consider it right to remove from their work those appointed by them, [and]
after, by other reputable men, [who have had] the consent of the entire
congregation, and have blamelessly served the flock of Christ, with humility,
peaceably, and impartially, [and], over time, of whom all have spoken well.  4.
For it is not a small sin when we remove a bishop [who] has blamelessly and in a
holy way handed out the gifts.  5. Blessed are the presbyters . . .

Polycarp wrote in this epistle to the Philippians, Chapter 6, verse 1 (circa
120AD):

1. And the presbyters also should be compassionate, merciful to all, turning
back those who have gone astray, bishoping <looking after> all [the] ailing, not
neglecting [the] widow, the orphan, [and] the poor, but doing what is honorable
before God and people.  [They should] stay away from all anger, favoritism,
unrighteous judgment, being far removed from [the] love of money, not quick to
believe [accusations] against someone, not abrupt in judgment, knowing that we
are all in debt because of sin.  [BTW, I love this from Polycarp and use it as
my “mission” statement of who I am to be as a pastor!]

From the whole of New Testament, we find that the apostles were
overseers/bishops (Acts 1:20) and elders (1 Peter 5:1: 2 John 1; 3 John 1).  The
New Testament often used these titles interchangeably (compare 1 Timothy 3:1-7
with Titus 1:5-9.) and synonymous with what we, today, call the pastoral office.

However, Ignatius differentiated the role of bishops and elders more
specifically.  We see the beginnings of this in scripture but also see
bishop/overseer and presbyter/elder used interchangeably.  So Polycarp and
Clement stressed their similarities and Ignatius stressed their differences.

Remember that “house churches” were the norm back then.  Christianity was
persecuted/illegal and people often worshiped in secret.  So a pastor acted as a
bishop (Titus in this case) and he ordained and/or appointed elders to preach,
serve communion, etc in the house church where he was to serve.  If the bishop
was killed, then the elders would meet to select one to oversee them.  And so
the Church went on.

In this context, deacons also served and were always in theological training to
replace a martyred elder of a house church.

This is probably more than you wanted to know.  Our LCMS polity does not
honestly admit the three-tier church government that started to form even while
the New Testament was being written.  We want to stress the church government
that first formed yet also recognize the large overlap in meaning with the terms
elder/presbyter and elder/overseer.  Pastor was usually used a verb in the New
Testament.

Also, were pastors appointed?  Yes.  Despite our polity, we was must recognize
what Scripture says.  Also that Paul is writing this to Pastor Timothy (and
similarly to Timothy)--and not to a congregation- -speaks volumes.  That shows
that he has the primary responsibility of choosing the pastors who will serve,
not the congregation.  This is where our LCMS polity does not grow out of the
biblical witness but instead operates from a the-Bible-does- not-forbid- it
mentality.  Our Confessions say that we would have preferred the traditional
Church government of Bishop, Elder, and Deacon--but since the Roman Catholic
Church refused to ordain our pastors, we changed to a presbyteral form of
ordination and polity (with early Church precedent in emergency situations)!

But we know historically this appointing of pastors/elders was also done with
the agreement and blessing of the congregation being served (refer back to what
Clement said).

--
Rich Futrell, Pastor

Where we are to receive and confess the faith of the Church (in and with the
Augsburg Confession): The faith once delivered to the saints, the faith of
Christ Jesus, His Word of the Gospel, His full forgiveness of sins, His flesh
and blood given and poured out for us, and His gracious gift of life for body,
soul, and spirit.




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

*Expiation, Blood and Atonement *

by Fr. Patrick Henry Reardon

Among the biblical concepts supporting St. Paul’s theology of atonement, one
of the most important, surely, is that of expiation. What does the Apostle
mean when he writes,

“God set forth [Jesus Christ] as the expiatory in His blood” (Romans 3:25)?

Although this is the only time St. Paul uses the noun *hilasterion*, I
believe that the full context of his epistles, along with the Old Testament
substratum on which they depend, provides the correct and adequate meaning
of that term.

If I seem to belabor an obvious point–that we should go to the Bible for
enlightenment on the subject of expiation – let me say that I do so from a
sense that some readers of Holy Scripture in recent centuries either have
not done so, or have done so inconsistently. They have borrowed misleading
ideas from elsewhere.

In classical and Hellenistic Greek, the verb “to propitiate” (*hilaskomai*),
when used with a personal object, normally signified the placating of some
irate god or hero. It is a curious fact that since the rediscovery of
ancient Greek literature in the West, beginning from the Renaissance, there
has grown a strong tendency to impose this pagan meaning of “expiation” on
the teaching of the Bible.

Understood in this way, Paul is presumed to teach that Jesus, in His
self-sacrifice on the Cross, placated God’s wrath against sinful humanity.
That is to say, the purpose of the shedding of Christ’s blood was to
propitiate, to assuage an angry Father.

Let me say that this interpretation of the Apostle Paul is very erroneous
and should be rejected for three reasons.

*First,* this picture is difficult to reconcile with Paul’s conviction that
God Himself is the One who made the sacrifice. How easily we forget that the
Cross did cost God something. He is the One that gave up His only-begotten
Son out of love for us. It was Jesus’ Father

“who did not spare His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all” (Romans
8:32).

Sacrificial victims are expensive, and in this sacrifice the Father Himself
bore the price. He gave up, unto death, that which was dearest and most
precious to Him. In the death of Jesus, everything about God is love, more
love, infinite love. There is not the faintest trace of divine anger in the
death of Christ.

*Second,* in those places where Holy Scripture does speak of propitiating
the anger of God, this propitiation is never linked to blood sacrifice. When
biblical men are said to soften the divine wrath, it is done with prayer, as
in the case of Moses on Mount Sinai, or by the offering of incense, which
symbolizes prayer. Because blood sacrifice and the wrath of God are two
things the Bible never joins together, I submit that authentic Christian
theology should also endeavor to keep them apart.

Moreover, when the Apostle Paul does write of God’s anger, it is never in
terms of appeasement but of deliverance. At the final judgment, when that
divine anger, far from being placated, will consume the realm and servants
of sin, Christ will deliver us from it, recognizing us as His faithful
servants (1 Thessalonians 1:10; Romans 5:9). There will be not the slightest
hint of appeasement at that point.

*Third,* the word *hilasterion*, which I have translated as the substantive
“expiatory,” seems to have in Paul’s mind a more technical significance. In
Hebrews 9:5, the only other place where the word appears in the New
Testament, *hilasterion* designates the top, the cover, of the Ark of the
Covenant, where the Almighty is said to throne between and above the
Cherubim. In this context, the term is often translated as “mercy seat,” and
it seems reasonable to think that this is the image that Paul too has in
mind.

On Yom Kippur, the annual Atonement Day, the high priest sprinkled
sacrificial blood on that *hilasterion*,

“because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel, and because of their
transgressions of all their sins” (Leviticus 16:16).

Therefore, by saying that God “set forth” (*proetheto*) Jesus as the
expiatory, or “instrument of expiation,” for our sins, Paul asserts that the
shedding of Jesus’ blood on the Cross fulfilled the prophetic meaning and
promise of that ancient liturgical institution of Israel, reconciling
mankind by the removal of the uncleanness,

“their transgressions of all their sins.”

The Cross was the supreme altar, and Good Friday was preeminently the Day of
the Atonement. The removal of sins was not accomplished by a juridical act,
but a liturgical act performed in great love:

“Christ also has loved us and given Himself for us, an offering and a
sacrifice to God for a sweet-smelling aroma” (Ephesians 5:2).

Loving both the Father and ourselves, Jesus brought the Father and ourselves
together by what

He accomplished in His own body, reconciling us through the blood of His
Cross.

In the Bible,

“the life of the flesh is in the blood” (Leviticus 17:11).

The victim slain in sacrifice was not the vicarious recipient of a
punishment, but the symbol of the loving dedication of the life of the
person making the sacrifice.

This sacrificial dedication of life is the means by which the sinner is made
“at one” with God.

Such is the biblical meaning of expiation and the proper context in which to
interpret Paul’s teaching on the sacrifice of Christ.

Senior Editor of *Touchstone Magazine*, and archpriest of All Saints
Orthodox Church in Chicago, IL, Fr. Patrick is, perhaps, the most erudite
writer in the Orthodox Church in North America today. This article, one of
his Pastoral Ponderings, was published by Orthodoxtoday.org.

http://www.johnsanidopoulos.com/2010/02/sacrifice-of-christ-as-expiation.html


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hello,
This is my first time posting anything, so forgive me if I mess anything up.

Re Predestination/Election etc, readers may find useful Ben Witherington's "The
Problem with Evangelical Theology", which has a few detailed chapters on
predestination/grace/election. He hits Calvinism pretty hard, Lutheranism to a
degree, and while he is Protestant, his analysis of those topics seem to be
rather Eastern.

Also, the excellent work by Dr. Farrell, "Free Choice in St. Maximus the
Confessor" is, if you can find it, a gem of a read on these topics.

"Salvation in Christ: A Lutheran Orthodox Dialogue" addresses these issues, too.
And you can find it for under a buck online.
  Yours in Him,
Matt H.



--- In LutheransLookingEast@yahoogroups.com, randall hay <stortford@...> wrote:
>
> Hi.  I've been giving more thought to the role of free will in salvation,
which was the biggest hurdle for me coming into Orthodoxy, and seems to be a
biggee for many Lutherans.  Are we completely depraved, dead in the water till
He makes the first move?
>
> Yesterday I came across the clearest statement I've found, which seems to tie
things up in wonderful patristic depth and clarity, including the concept of
synergy.  I've read this work--a classic since it was written in the 8th
centure--twice before, but never noticed it (duh).
>
> FROM EXACT EXPOSITION OF THE ORTHODOX FAITH BY ST. JOHN OF DAMASCUS (+ 750)
>
>     Bear in mind, too, that virtue is a gift from God implanted in our nature,
and that He Himself is the source and cause of all good, and without His
co-operation (Gk synergia) and help we cannot will or do any good thing.  But we
have it in our power either to abide in virtue and follow God, Who calls us into
ways of virtue, or to stray from paths of virtue, which is to dwell in
wickedness...
>     While then we abide in the natural state we abide in virtue, but when we
deviate from the natural state...we come into an unnatural state and dwell in
wickedness.
> (II.30 [NPNF pp. 42-3; PG 44])
>
> +
>
> Thus, being able to incline in some slight way toward God of one's own free
will isn't to claim one's own righteousness apart from God.  GOD PUT THAT IN OUR
NATURE.  WE GET NO CREDIT.  HE IS GOOD AND HE MADE US GOOD.  Virtue is natural
for His human creatures because He made us in His image.  Sin is unnatural.
>
> Yes, we've bungled things to an extraordinary degree; and as St John points
out here, we can't even will a good work, much less complete it, without Him. 
The ancestral curse afflicts us all, and we choose the unnatural and irrational
life of sin throughout our lives.
>
> However, since He made us in His image to live a life of virtue, it's
imperative that we do our best to do that.
>
> The New Testament is written in such a way to reflect this...the grace of God
and our path (Law and Gospel, if you will) are constantly intermixed.
>
> Hope this helps---
>
> Subdeacon R.
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> _._,___
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>