The Second Coming of Christ
Posted on 01/01/2006 4:48:03 PM PST by HarleyD
"Ultimately, there is one set of keys and it is in the hand of the successor of St. Peter."
Actually there are more than one set of keys;
Rev 1:18 "I [am] he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death."
Rev 3:7 "And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write; These things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth;"
Rev 9:1 "And the fifth angel sounded, and I saw a star fall from heaven unto the earth: and to him was given the key of the bottomless pit. And he opened the bottomless pit; and there arose a smoke out of the pit, as the smoke of a great furnace; and the sun and the air were darkened by reason of the smoke of the pit."
No, Christ promised them in the future.
Except for how the train gets on the track, this sounds like an analogy I might use. :) Of course I would say that the Conductor puts the trains on the track. And yes, while trains do derail, they do not choose to do so. If the conductor is competent, and the track is true, then the train is on a fixed course to only one destination, ultimately. Stops are made along the way, but the train remains on the same track.
God, the Father of mercies,
through the death and the resurrection of his Son
has reconciled the world to himself
and sent the Holy Spirit among us
for the forgiveness of sins;
through the ministry of the Church
may God give you pardon and peace,
and I absolve you from your sins in the name of the
Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.
Ah, but first we have to remember that my comment was directed to Alex. Not that I mind at all your weighing in, I welcome it, it's just that I don't think I would have said that to you. That's because I "think" that Orthodox and Catholics see the Holy Tradition differently, in a structural sense. Catholics have described authority to me in terms of a three-legged stool, with two of those legs being Tradition and scripture. I think that Orthodoxy sees authority more as a perfectly balanced "one-legged stool". :) I'm just trying to figure out how these ideas do and do not work together.
"Yes, but the Apocalypse speaks of the end of times"
Yes it does, but it also speaks of things John had seen, things that were at the time and things to come. At the time of the vision it was around 95 A.D. and Jesus is saying "I [am] he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death." He is saying at the time of the vision He had the keys of life and death, physical and spiritual, which means He now exercises rule and judgment.
1457 According to the Church's command, "after having attained the age of discretion, each of the faithful is bound by an obligation faithfully to confess serious sins at least once a year."56 Anyone who is aware of having committed a mortal sin must not receive Holy Communion, even if he experiences deep contrition, without having first received sacramental absolution, unless he has a grave reason for receiving Communion and there is no possibility of going to confession.57 Children must go to the sacrament of Penance before receiving Holy Communion for the first time.58The notes refer to the canons of Trent.
Note that the exception granted when no possibility to receive the sacrament exists is rather theoretical in the free world.
I've pinged you to another thread which, if you read the linked article, will give you some more insight into the Orthodox position on Holy Tradition.
Catholicism is generally more prone to legalistic compartmentalizations, such as drawing these boundaries between Tradition, Scripture and Magisterial teaching. Sometimes it works for the good, sometimes it opens more questions. Nevertheless, a sregards the relationship between the Scripture and Tradition, I do not think there is a different of substance between the West and the East.
But besides, the Church does not teach that the grant of the keys somehow diminished the sovereignty of Christ and took the keys away from Him; it is entirely appropriate to employ the key metaphore to the sovereign judgememt of Christ at all times, and so also to the Church Age. What is not appropriate is to attach the power of the Keys to the laity outside of the apostolic succession, as such transfer is not described in the Scripture and was never taught by the Church.
"For example, I noted him saying "Thus, according to St. Paul, creation as it is is not what God intended it to be— ...". You know what kind of buttons that presses with me. :)"
In fact, FK, that is precisely the Orthodox theology. God created us for theosis, but gave us divine attributes, among them free will, which the angels also possess. The misuse of that free will lead to the Evil One and his rule over the Earth with his parasitical existence in creation as well as to the Fall. For this reason we can say that mankind, indeed all of creation, has a perfect nature which has become distorted. The fact that things turned out other than, for now, as God intended does not limit His sovereignty; it merely recognizes His willingness and purpose in allowing us our freedom.
"It seemed to me that his idea was to peg satan with the blame for man's sin as sort of the Orthodox version of, or response to, the doctrine of original sin. I.e., man sins because of satan, not because of Adam."
Well, sort of. Fr. John is most definitely describing the Orthodox theology on what the West calls Original Sin. An understanding of this theology is fundamental to an understanding of Orthodox theology in general and in particular why it is so very different, while often appearing the same, or nearly the same, from the theology of the West. Think about what Fr. John writes here and see how it fits in with the Orthodox concept of theosis and then compare that with the Western notions of "salvation". I think you'll see that there is an ontological difference between these concepts and that the root of that difference lies in differing ways of looking at the Sin of Adam.
Now as for the Evil One being to blame for the Fall, well, yes he is, but both Adam and Eve knew it was wrong to eat the fruit, but they did it anyway. They were the authors of their own fall. The fact that the Evil One played a part doesn't get them, or us, a pass.
"Because the Gospel says so. See John 20,"
How many disciples were there at the time you mention? We know Thomas was not there, nor Matthias nor Paul. John 21 says there were 7 disciples. Acts 1 says there were 120 disciples. Where does it say that the disciples, what ever the number, had the authority to pass this gift concerning remittance of sin on to any other?
The James passage deals with confessing to one another but there is no mention of absolution. It has to do with sin that affects the body of believers, like if one has ought against a brother, one is to go to them and be reconciled or if the particular sin has such a hold on one that there is sickness and one cannot overcome it, then friends are to pray for that person. But the mention of prayer removes the necessity of an earthly mediator. They are petitioning God.
"What is not appropriate is to attach the power of the Keys to the laity outside of the apostolic succession, as such transfer is not described in the Scripture and was never taught by the Church."
Where is the "transfer" of the Keys (Matt. 16) from Peter to anyone else, authorized in scripture?
They [science and faith] are by their nature: one is of human and the other of divine origin. Science is a product of our mind; faith is a product of God. Science can only reveal that which is of this world. Science cannot prove or disprove God.
I'm not sure I understand your view that science is of human origin. I just recently quoted John 1:1-3, 10. If you haven't already addressed this, do you disagree that God creates all things, including science?
Since you have a more scientific mind than I do, I'd be interested in what you thought of the following page from a website that purports to show that science and faith can work together just fine: Checkable Biblical Accuracy. Some of the proofs looked a little sketchy, but I thought it was interesting.
Where does it say that the disciples, what ever the number, had the authority to pass this gift concerning remittance of sin on to any other?
The gift is properly to forgive sins in the name of Christ, Who alone atoned for them.
2 Then the twelve calling together the multitude of the disciples, said: It is not reason that we should leave the word of God, and serve tables. 3 Wherefore, brethren, look ye out among you seven men of good reputation, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business. 4 But we will give ourselves continually to prayer, and to the ministry of the word. 5 And the saying was liked by all the multitude. And they chose Stephen, a man full of faith, and of the Holy Ghost, and Philip, and Prochorus, and Nicanor, and Timon, and Parmenas, and Nicolas, a proselyte of Antioch. 6 These they set before the apostles; and they praying, imposed hands upon them. 7 And the word of the Lord increased; and the number of the disciples was multiplied in Jerusalem exceedingly: a great multitude also of the priests obeyed the faith.From these we see how the power flowed through imposition of hands to many newly ordained priests. Their powers included, in addition to serving other sacraments, also the power of justice and condemnation.(Acts 6)
2 And as they were ministering to the Lord, and fasting, the Holy Ghost said to them: Separate me Saul and Barnabas, for the work whereunto I have taken them. 3 Then they, fasting and praying, and imposing their hands upon them, sent them away.
(Acts 13)
15 For if you have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet not many fathers. For in Christ Jesus, by the gospel, I have begotten you. 16 Wherefore I beseech you, be ye followers of me, as I also am of Christ. 17 For this cause have I sent to you Timothy, who is my dearest son and faithful in the Lord; who will put you in mind of my ways, which are in Christ Jesus; as I teach every where in every church.
(1 Corinthians 4)
5 Not that we are sufficient to think any thing of ourselves, as of ourselves: but our sufficiency is from God. 6 Who also hath made us fit ministers of the new testament, not in the letter, but in the spirit. For the letter killeth, but the spirit quickeneth. [...] 9 For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more the ministration of justice aboundeth in glory.
(2 Corinthians 3)
13 Till I come, attend unto reading, to exhortation, and to doctrine. 14 Neglect not the grace that is in thee, which was given thee by prophesy, with imposition of the hands of the priesthood.
(1 Timothy 4)
6 For which cause I admonish thee, that thou stir up the grace of God which is in thee, by the imposition of my hands. 7 For God hath not given us the spirit of fear: but of power, and of love, and of sobriety.
(2 Timothy 1)
Was the power of absolving sin somehow not transferred? There us no record that the imposition of hands transferred the power partially; moreover, administration of condemnation and justice would not be possible without an ability to absolve sin, as well as condemn of it.
The James passage deals with confessing to one another but there is no mention of absolution.
Here it is.
18 But all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Christ; and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation. 19 For God indeed was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself, not imputing to them their sins; and he hath placed in us the word of reconciliation. 20 For Christ therefore we are ambassadors, God as it were exhorting by us. For Christ, we beseech you, be reconciled to God.(2 Corinthians 5)
10 And to whom you have pardoned any thing, I also. For, what I have pardoned, if I have pardoned any thing, for your sakes have I done it in the person of Christ.
(2 Corinthians 2)
Where is the "transfer" of the Keys (Matt. 16) from Peter to anyone else
Never happened. The office of Peter holds the keys, even as it commissions bishops and priests to do the work of Christ, as described above. At the same time, the office of Peter did not die with Peter:
13 But I think it meet as long as I am in this tabernacle, to stir you up by putting you in remembrance. 14 Being assured that the laying away of this my tabernacle is at hand, according as our Lord Jesus Christ also hath signified to me. 15 And I will endeavour, that you frequently have after my decease, whereby you may keep a memory of these things.(2 Peter 1)
These are not scriptural? I must not understand what you mean. Here are two for just the first one:
1 John 4:8, 16 : 8 Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love. ... 16 And so we know and rely on the love God has for us. God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in him.
It is Mary that guides, really. Because, just like the Filipino ladies with their rosaries, this Russian 50+ year old male cannot identify with the Divine in a sterile way. I can only get to Christ through Mary, as a man, husband, and parent.
Thank you for your whole answer. Here, I'm sure there is Tradition that supports coming to Christ through Mary. However, this would seem to contradict the scriptures, such as 1 Tim. 2:5. Therefore, your entire post leads me to conclude that Tradition is paramount in inanimate authority, and the scripture just needs to be read in light of this Tradition in order to know what it means. Tradition does not appear to depend on scripture because so much of it is not in scripture. However, the reverse does seem to be true, scriptural interpretation does appear to depend on Tradition because the two must match.
FK to Kosta: Depending on what you mean, there's no figuring to it, it's simple. Sin happens. God has the exclusive and ultimate authority to prevent it. He doesn't in all cases. Therefore He allows it
You recognize that God allows sin but not free will? I would say that sin is a product of the free will. In your case, "sin happens."
You are concerned with free will diminishing God's sovereignty. But, the Apostolic Church has always taught that God remains sovereign, because he weaves our good or evil decisions, all of which are foreknown to Him, into His plan.
Sin without free will is no sin, because it lacks fault, it lacks responsibility, it lacks accountability. In your theology, there is no freedom to sin, and therefore there is no freedom to come to God. We are simply puppets on God's strings. There is no fault to be found in the slave, but in the master.
5 For there is one God, and one mediator of God and men, the man Christ Jesus: 6 Who gave himself a redemption for all, a testimony in due times(1 Timothy 2)
Once again, your prooftexting is out of context. Surely Our Lady did not gave herself in redemption, nor in testomony. I know that. She mediates to Christ Who mediates to God the Father. And not she alone, I have attachment to many saints; I spoke of my attachment to St. Francis for example on this thread. I ask them to pray for me and I pray for others too. This is how the Communion of Saints operates.
scripture just needs to be read in light of this Tradition in order to know what it means. Tradition does not appear to depend on scripture because so much of it is not in scripture. However, the reverse does seem to be true, scriptural interpretation does appear to depend on Tradition because the two must match.
Yes. Of course.
What I am hearing here is that evil, like good, is a creature of God? Wow!
God created sharks. Sometimes, sharks eat people. We say that's "bad". This is very different from any suggestion that God proactively inserts an evil demon or something into someone to make him do something terrible
Hmmmm, Job comes to mind...and Judges 9:23, and 1 Sam 16:14, and 1 Sam 16:15, and 1 Sam 16:16, and 1 Sam 18:10, and 1 Sam 19:19, and 1 Kings 22:23, and 2 Chron 18:22. (Notice how they are all from the Old testament, by coincidence I am sure).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.