Discussion in 'Theology and Doctrine' started by Traditionalist, Dec 20, 2018.
Good topic to start with....
They tried that in Crete in 2016 and the result was a disaster.
The filioque is less of an issue than most people think, because there is a way of interpreting it that is compatible with Orthodox theology.
Also one myth is that the Filioque caused the Great Schism; it did not. Rather, a belligerent eleventh century Papacy demanding submission from the Eastern churches, and desiring control of the missions which were converting the remaining European Pagans (the Romans bitterly resented the Byzantine missions, such as that of St. Cyril and Methodius to the Slavs), wound up sending a hot-tempered cardinal to Constantinople who threw a writ of excommunication on the altar of the Hagia Sophia while the priests were preparing to serve the divine liturgy. Deacons were sent to try and get him to come back, but he left with great swiftness.
Then further division resulted from the crusades and the adverse impact they had on Eastern Christians, especially the Fourth Crusade, so by the time of the Council of Florence, the Greeks preferred Turkocratia to submission to Rome, hence the success of St. Mark of Ephesus in scuppering the council.
This is something Protestants and Orthodox share in common, and that is, both churches suffered to an extreme extent from excesses of the Roman church during the late medieval and renaissance periods.
Sorry for the phone post. It should read:
That is not going to happen while the west persists with the filioque!
Whilst I believe the East (in part at least) would be comfortable with some expressions of a theology of double procession they would certainly not be happy with any expression of it. The phrase monarchical integrity of the Father is clearly heard, and it is important to see that this references the earlier part of the Nicene Creed where the Father is referred to has the maker of all seen and unseen. The point being that as monotheists it is essential that we sense a single point of origin. For the East Proceeds from the Father (always) and the Son (sometimes) is probably getting close.
Papal Authority is inherently bound up in this because the Pope acted alone in allowing this change in the Creed of the Council of Constantinople, and in the face of the anathemas of Ephesus which were both affirmed at the Council of Chalcedon. The East argued that it was only with a Council that such a change could happen, and the Popes argued that as the inheritors of the See of Peter they had the power. Any effort to resolve the understanding of the nature of the authority will as a result be inevitably have to deal with this as well.
There is no doubt that the bald reading of the filioque inserted in the Nicene Creed is incompatible with Eastern Theology. The Mystagogy of Photeus should leave now western reader in any doubt about this.
Oh, I have no objection to a guitar accompanying the organ or piano, or played in an occasional solo. As long as all of that is somewhere behind my line of sight, so it's not distracting.
The LCMS came out with a supplemental resource a while back that made guitar notations for the Lutheran Service Book. It was something of a recognition of the fact that there are a lot more guitar players than there are piano players these days. I became aware of it when I did a parish profile for a parish and their minister used it for a mid-week service he held when their organist was not available. It is possible to hold a dignified traditional service using this book. However, it seems to be a rare thing. Most churches that bring in guitars immediately dispatch with their hymnals in favor of the Christian Radio Top 40.
I also used to worship at a church that would use a violin and flute along with the organ for a few of the major feasts throughout the year. It was very elegant. We have a couple of youth who've been in the school marching band at my parish. I mentioned getting some music for them to play leading up to Easter. The Organist was okay with this in the case of the clarinet player but when I suggested we also equip the percussionist with a set of cymbals I had pushed a bridge too far. She is apparently unaware that cymbals are the primary accompaniment to Coptic worship and probably is somewhat foggy on the details of Psalm 150.
Reading that makes me more sympathetic to the very powerful A capella-only lobby in my church; I support organs in Armenian and Greek churches where they have an established history of use, and cymbals in the Coptic church, but, when I read about that, and mentally contrast that to the exquisite music of the Georgian and Slavonic churches which historically have had none of the above, I understand the appeal of the a capella approach. Alas in the West its usually only been done very incompetently, for example, the dreadful Presbyterian practice of “lining out” and the mediocre a capella exclusive psalmody, which ignores nearly a third of the music in the Bible based on a bizarre reading of “psalms, hymns and spiritual songs” to mean “psalms, psalms and more psalms.”
But in general, Protestant churches need more Palestrina and Howells and less pretentious howling; the former can be part of worship, but rocking to a praise band is decidedly not worship in any real sense. At least the guitar being used according to the refined precepts of the LSB has some reverence and does not descend into the latter.
I would argue Anglican bishops have a duty to wield their crosier and not allow parishes to degenerate into the kind of aliturgical nightmare characteristic of the other LSB parishes you mention. Within Anglicanism, the aliturgical worship style one might associate with, say, Holy Trinity Brampton, is a tragedy that never should have happened.
The roots of the word liturgy are laos and ergon, meaning the people's work. The idea of a group of people gathered together for worship being aliturgical is of course a tautology. Nonetheless I take you point, and I get your meaning. Sadly I suspect those engaging in such practices would not know what a crozier was, even if they were caught in its crook!
“Alas in the West its usually only been done very incompetently, for example, the dreadful Presbyterian practice of “lining out” and the mediocre a capella exclusive psalmody, which ignores nearly a third of the music in the Bible based on a bizarre reading of “psalms, hymns and spiritual songs” to mean “psalms, psalms and more psalms.”
Can you explain this further? What do you mean by lining out? Also, what is the music being left out?
He's referring to a very old hymnal practice among some Western Christians which he bizarrely dislikes.
Sed contra, some of the old lining out is some of the most beautiful corporate singing that western Christianity has.
And yeah we all must return to the 1662 Book of Common Prayer.[/QUOTE]
I’m definitely in favour of this.