Topic: c38 Says "Abandon Orthodox Doctrine And Just Hug"

[c38]

MODERATION: This topic has been split off from the thread: Believer's Baptism

Let it go Peter.

[c38]

None of you guys want to ask why this keeps going back and forth? Is the Original Orthodox Church capable of noticing a pattern? Well here it is: you provide a response to what is considered out of step with Tradition/doctrine, give quotes and Biblical references to back it up. Does the matter get resolved? No, they just get more irate and come back at you with more quotes. Here’s the Truth Dragon folks, happily making himself at home in all denominations. A lot of good our orthodoxy did for us.

There’s a time to stand up for truth. Then there’s a time to love and forgive. This latter truth is what wins over adversaries.

[Justin Kissel]

There’s a time to stand up for truth. Then there’s a time to love and forgive. This latter truth is what wins over adversaries.

Which is why Orthodox participation in the Ecumenical movement has brought over so many converts! Oh, wait... . . 

[ozgeorge]

None of you guys want to ask why this keeps going back and forth? Is the Original Orthodox Church capable of noticing a pattern? Well here it is: you provide a response to what is considered out of step with Tradition/doctrine, give quotes and Biblical references to back it up. Does the matter get resolved? No, they just get more irate and come back at you with more quotes. Here’s the Truth Dragon folks, happily making himself at home in all denominations. A lot of good our orthodoxy did for us.

There’s a time to stand up for truth. Then there’s a time to love and forgive. This latter truth is what wins over adversaries.

And whose "truth" is that you want people to stand up for? Yours?
Yeah, great idea. Let's do Woodstock all over again, have a huge love-in and call it "truth".
Could you stop derailing threads please? If you want to start a thread about your ideas about "love replacing doctrine", fine, but the grown ups are talking Baptism now, so why not run along and play outside?

[ialmisry]

None of you guys want to ask why this keeps going back and forth? Is the Original Orthodox Church capable of noticing a pattern? Well here it is: you provide a response to what is considered out of step with Tradition/doctrine, give quotes and Biblical references to back it up. Does the matter get resolved? No, they just get more irate and come back at you with more quotes. Here’s the Truth Dragon folks, happily making himself at home in all denominations. A lot of good our orthodoxy did for us.

There’s a time to stand up for truth. Then there’s a time to love and forgive. This latter truth is what wins over adversaries.

Was this you?

Myself, I have always been Orthodox

Well, a lot of us here don't evidently bear a resemblance to most converts you meet.

 

but most converts I meet are trying to marry someone they are involved with, and conversion is required of them.

In fact, many I venture (I know for myself) were where Cleopas is.  So we know a thing or two about the "Truth Dragon": he does tire out.

Btw, it's Orthodoxy, with a capital "O."

None of you guys want to ask why this keeps going back and forth? Is the Original Orthodox Church capable of noticing a pattern? Well here it is: you provide a response to what is considered out of step with Tradition/doctrine, give quotes and Biblical references to back it up. Does the matter get resolved? No, they just get more irate and come back at you with more quotes. Here’s the Truth Dragon folks, happily making himself at home in all denominations. A lot of good our orthodoxy did for us.

There’s a time to stand up for truth. Then there’s a time to love and forgive. This latter truth is what wins over adversaries.

And whose "truth" is that you want people to stand up for? Yours?
Yeah, great idea. Let's do Woodstock all over again, have a huge love-in and call it "truth".
Could you stop derailing threads please? If you want to start a thread about your ideas about "love replacing doctrine", fine, but the grown ups are talking Baptism now, so why not run along and play outside?

Actually, I want to see the thread about how letting people to continue to eat green meat, when they can obviously barely handle milk, is love.

Kumbaya.

[PeterTheAleut]

None of you guys want to ask why this keeps going back and forth? Is the Original Orthodox Church capable of noticing a pattern? Well here it is: you provide a response to what is considered out of step with Tradition/doctrine, give quotes and Biblical references to back it up. Does the matter get resolved? No, they just get more irate and come back at you with more quotes. Here’s the Truth Dragon folks, happily making himself at home in all denominations. A lot of good our orthodoxy did for us.

There’s a time to stand up for truth. Then there’s a time to love and forgive. This latter truth is what wins over adversaries.

Man!  You're really dogmatic about dogma being such a divisively bad thing, aren't you?  Have you noticed that this is a place for us to discuss the Orthodox faith with those outside the Church?  Do you wish that we would just sit around the campfire as one big happy family, hold hands, and sing "Kumbaya?"  Is your warm, fuzzy "Kumbaya" going to win converts, or just make people feel good about being lost and misinformed?

[c38]

 

You're a forum moderator?

[PeterTheAleut]

You're a forum moderator?

Why do you ask?

[ozgeorge]

If you want to start a thread about your ideas about "love replacing doctrine", fine, but the grown ups are talking Baptism now, so why not run along and play outside?

There, I've done it for you. Now you can play to your heart's content.

[c38]

ozgeorge wrote:

"And whose "truth" is that you want people to stand up for? Yours?
Yeah, great idea. Let's do Woodstock all over again, have a huge love-in and call it "truth". 
Could you stop derailing threads please? If you want to start a thread about your ideas about "love replacing doctrine", fine, but the grown ups are talking Baptism now, so why not run along and play outside?"



I'm not trying to replace doctrine with love, though this is quite appropriate at times. I'm trying to illustrate a serious problem at the very heart of Orthodoxy, one which runs deep and profound. And a better name for this thread might be TRUTH DRAGON if you can rename it.

[ozgeorge]

And a better name for this thread might be TRUTH DRAGON if you can rename it.

I can rename it.
I'm not going to.
If you had thought of it yourself and started a thread on it instead of trying to derail other threads off topic, you could have done it yourself. But guess what: "Too late".

[c38]

 
Fair enough George. How about banning me?

[ozgeorge]

Fair enough George. How about banning me?

What for?
Do you intend to break the forum rules?

[c38]

ozgeorge,

Well since I’m not banned yet, do you consider this going back and forth ad infinitum productive? We've had 2000 years of it already. You’re telling me nothing's wrong here?

[Justin Kissel]

Why would you be banned? You have to do something really drastic (or consistently break the rules over a long period of time) to get banned in these parts. Call it love. 

[ozgeorge]

Why would you be banned? You have to do something really drastic (or consistently break the rules over a long period of time) to get banned in these parts. Call it love. 

"Love Orthodox Style"

Well since I’m not banned yet, do you consider this going back and forth ad infinitum productive? We've had 2000 years of it already. You’re telling me nothing's wrong here?

It's not very productive, so why do you keep doing it? I've given you your own thread to discuss what you want to discuss and instead you're throwing inane one-liners at me. Tell you what, put an essay of your thoughts together, post it on this thread, then we can read them and discuss them. That's called dialogue and discussion. That is what grown ups do. That's what a forum is for. A forum is not your personal Instant Messager, it's where lots of people around the world can look at a topic or someone's ideas and discuss them..

[c38]

ozgeorge wrote

"Tell you what, put an essay of your thoughts together, post it on this thread, then we can read them and discuss them."



I'll do that soon George, thanks. Just a small note, I try to respect everyone's personal style, but sarcasm doesn't do it for me. You too Peter.

[ozgeorge]

I'll do that soon George, thanks.

Good. I look forward to finally being able to understand what it is you are trying to say.

Just a small note, I try to respect everyone's personal style, but sarcasm doesn't do it for me. You too Peter.

And just a small note for you: I don't take kindly to attempts at manipulation such as this thread: http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,19197.0.html , which is why I didn't respond on it.
If you have an idea, then post it and put it up for peer review, don't play games.

[ozgeorge]

Tell you what c38, let's try again.
I'm going to lock this thread. When you get your essay of your thoughts together, start it as a new post in an appropriate forum (I would suggest this one or "Other Topics" or Free For All Religious Topics"). I would avoid putting it in "Faith Issues" to start with. If it turns out to be a "Faith Issue", it can always be moved there.
There you go: a clean slate for you.
Are you agreed?

[c38]

MODERATION: This post and the four posts following it have been split off from the thread: Believer's Baptism and merged here

PeterTheAleut wrote


"I've seen on this thread several very good statements from our Orthodox faith what baptism is, and with equally good support from patristic and liturgical sources.  Please correct me if I'm wrong, but you stated in your first post on this thread that the sacrament of baptism is not so much a significant moment as it is a lifelong process.  I acknowledge the lifelong work of appropriating the grace of one's baptism into one's life in cooperation with the sanctifying work of the Holy Trinity, but the idea of de-emphasizing the significance of the singular moment of baptism is a new concept to me.  I don't recognize this as coming from any traditional sources stated on this thread or found elsewhere.  Therefore, I think the context of this thread demands that YOU prove YOUR thesis true; I don't believe I bear any burden to prove you wrong"



I'm climbing out on a limb again Peter. For the sake of others I don't mind apearing foolish. When doctrine gets too far removed from life it starts sounding like nonsense.

[PeterTheAleut]

I'm climbing out on a limb again Peter. For the sake of others I don't mind apearing foolish. When doctrine gets too far removed from life it starts sounding like nonsense.

Yes, you're right.  When doctrine gets too far removed from [the Author of] Life, it starts sounding like nonsense.



Now, how does registering the vaguest of complaints about my position prove the correctness of yours?

I also have to ask whether you plan to stay on topic and discuss the question of believer's baptism or if you're going to try to derail this thread again into yet another discussion of your disdain for doctrine.

[c38]

You know Peter, I don't even remember where or when I registered vague complaints about your posts.

Doctrine being "too far removed from life" is a general observation in the broadest sense. I'll post shortly on it in another thread. Hang in there old boy.

 You are now on a warning for repeatedly derailing a thread after you were asked not to.

[ozgeorge]

Q:

I also have to ask whether you plan to stay on topic and discuss the question of believer's baptism or if you're going to try to derail this thread again into yet another discussion of your disdain for doctrine.

A:

You know Peter, I don't even remember where or when I registered vague complaints about your posts.

Doctrine being "too far removed from life" is a general observation in the broadest sense. I'll post shortly on it in another thread. Hang in there old boy.

In other words: "clearly not".

c38,
Since it is apparent that you don't yet understand that repeatedly derailing threads is against forum policies despite the fact that you have already been warned about this, I am going to:
1) Issue you an official warning.
2) Split off the latest tangent from this thread and merge it into your own thread which was started because of your last tangent.
3)  Insist that you now post related material only in this thread.

[Alveus Lacuna]

Doctrine being "too far removed from life" is a general observation in the broadest sense. I'll post shortly on it in another thread.

I will be waiting with baited breath!

[c38]

Lived-sacraments – all of them now, not just baptism – are pedagogical instruments. Sacraments are just magic spells for the vast majority of churchgoers. Have you ever surveyed people on what they actually believe? You’ll quickly discover that Orthodoxy is in reality a Hindu sect, a wild religious bizarre of magical thinking going in every which direction. Connecting the dots can be made a touch simpler when those dots are clearly seen in your own life – and hence, baptism happens everywhere, not just in church. It’s not suppose to be dogma at this level. Suppose I’m neither a Christian nor a native speaker of the English language. You announce to me that you are a “witness”. I grab my dictionary, translate, and then ask “What have you seen”? This is obviously going to take a bit of time. You’ll find yourself in this situation improvising a lot and being creative. Better hope the Bishop is looking the other way.

[Salpy]

You've obviously had a bad personal experience in church, or you wouldn't be so bitter.  If you tell us about it, maybe it will help us understand where you are coming from.  I'm not saying this to bait you.  I am asking you about this because I think it will be more helpful if you talk specifically about what has happened to you personally, as opposed to making generalities which many of us have trouble relating to.

I'm not trying to put you on the spot.  You don't have to share your personal life with us.  I just think it will help us to understand you better.

[serb1389]

Lived-sacraments – all of them now, not just baptism – are pedagogical instruments.

Absolutely!  How much research have you done on the sacraments? Have you ever gone through the services themselves?  Have you ever seen a priest do the services in their ENTIRETY, with commentary on each portion of the service, in english?  Let me know about the answers to these...

Sacraments are just magic spells for the vast majority of churchgoers. Have you ever surveyed people on what they actually believe?

You know, I find your comments interesting, considering the sheer amount of knowledge that has been collected by the people on this very site...who by and far are Orthodox Christians, who would be eligible for your survey.  

And, when you ask most people about a SACRAMENT and what they believe FROM the sacrament, they usually quote text from the Sacrament itself, so the sacramental pedagogy is working.  Maybe not to certain expectations, but there is a benefit.  

The issue I believe here is solutions.  How much do you know about Orthodox theology and sacraments?  Would you be qualified to teach a class on them?  Maybe then YOU can teach these people who don't know as much as they should....according to your standards (?).  I thought that Martha learned a good lesson.  The only thing necessary is for you to sit at the feet of Christ and listen.  No huge amount of knowledge necessary.  

Connecting the dots can be made a touch simpler when those dots are clearly seen in your own life – and hence, baptism happens everywhere, not just in church. It’s not suppose to be dogma at this level.

At what level?  Baptism happens everywhere?  How?  What is not supposed to be dogma, and who decided that an Ecumenical Council is just not cutting it?  

Suppose I’m neither a Christian nor a native speaker of the English language. You announce to me that you are a “witness”. I grab my dictionary, translate, and then ask “What have you seen”? This is obviously going to take a bit of time. You’ll find yourself in this situation improvising a lot and being creative. Better hope the Bishop is looking the other way.

Will I find myself in a situation to improvise?  I've had 7 years of theological study, plus my father is a priest.  I think I'd come up with something pretty much following the DOGMATIC teachings of the church, which you just said is not dogma at "this level" which I assume is the lay level, talking online, b/c that's the level we are at right now.  

Hopefully this will give you some more food for thought.  

[ozgeorge]

You've obviously had a bad personal experience in church, or you wouldn't be so bitter. 

I'm having trouble understanding what c38 means, so I'm not in a position to be able to discern how c38 feels.

c38,
I can understand parts of what you are saying, but it doesn't gel when I put your whole post together.
Here's what I understand you to be saying so far:
1) The Mysterions of the Church have no value or significance other than a means of instruction.
2) You have undertaken a survey which shows that the majority of the Faithful treat the Mysterions like "Magic Spells".
Is this correct so far?

The parts of your post which I can't understand are:

Connecting the dots can be made a touch simpler when those dots are clearly seen in your own life – and hence, baptism happens everywhere, not just in church.

What do you mean by this? How does "baptism happen everywhere"? Do you mean that "there are symbols of baptism everywhere"? Or do you mean "the Mysterion of Baptism is taking place everywhere outside the Church"? Or do you mean something else? An example of what you mean would probably help.

It’s not suppose to be dogma at this level.

Again, I don't understand what you mean.  "What" is not supposed to be dogma at "what" level?

Suppose I’m neither a Christian nor a native speaker of the English language. You announce to me that you are a “witness”. I grab my dictionary, translate, and then ask “What have you seen”?

I'm not sure what your point is here. Isn't the question "what have you seen?" a valid question to ask a witness?

This is obviously going to take a bit of time.

What is?

You’ll find yourself in this situation improvising a lot and being creative. Better hope the Bishop is looking the other way.

I have no idea what you mean here- could you explain please?
[/quote]

[c38]

George

Remove the sanctions and I'll answer you, Salpy, and Serb. We were having a discussion on baptism. Peter insisted on references. They were not provided, and I was deemed as derailing a thread.

Sorry, I thought this was a Christian forum. Peter have you considered refereeing a Theology Journal? I don't believe you're qualified, just it appears to be where your interests lay.

[ozgeorge]

Remove the sanctions and I'll answer you, Salpy, and Serb.

I can't do that. The rules apply to everyone equally (including me- I have been warned twice while a Moderator).

Sorry, I thought this was a Christian forum.

It is. That's why your ideas seem strange to me, but if you don't wish to discuss them, fine.

Peter have you considered refereeing a Theology Journal? I don't believe you're qualified, just it appears to be where your interests lay.

Do theology journals need referees? That would be an interesting job. But I'm sure Peter has his hands full at the moment as a moderator on OCnet.

[Robert W]

This thread reminds me of a podcast I listened to a while ago:
http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/podup/carlton/the_tragedy_of_dogma
It is called "the tragedy of dogma" and is part of the Faith and Philosophy series by Clark Carlton.

He makes the case that dogma does not define truth.
Dogma defines error so that people can know the boundaries, according to Carlton.

[recent convert]

Well, what in the world is so hard about understanding love within or outside the church? Cannot most of the Beatitudes be seen in Christians and non Christians  (Orthodox & non Orthodox)? We do not judge our neighbor & understand love as commanded by God, clarified by Christ, defined by St. Paul in 1 Corinthians 13. Much of this can potentially be found in any individual and God knows the hearts of all. If I truly love as our Lord commands, no individual will be juridically excluded from the kingdom of heaven and I may be the greatest sinner (& at greatest risk). Nonetheless, I also have thanksgiving in the salvation of Jesus Christ whose incarnation, Gospel, crucifixion, death, & resurrection make the kingdom of heaven possible for us and live in the worship & sacraments of the holy church; living & knowing these requires sound doctrine. Otherwise, how will repentance, confession, & the Eucharist be effectual?

[serb1389]

George

Remove the sanctions and I'll answer you, Salpy, and Serb. We were having a discussion on baptism. Peter insisted on references. They were not provided, and I was deemed as derailing a thread.

Sorry, I thought this was a Christian forum. Peter have you considered refereeing a Theology Journal? I don't believe you're qualified, just it appears to be where your interests lay.

I'm sorry good sir but this post was very confusing.  When I posted what I posted, I did it to try to understand what it is you were saying in a previous post.  that is why I asked so many questions. 

If you would like to discuss baptism, or the sacraments, or how tradition works with Dogma, I will be more than happy to discuss it with you, if you plan on discussing back, instead of providing vague statements. 

In terms of referencing things...if I were NOT following whatever standards Peter and George use, i'm sure they would moderate me as they feel necessary, and I would not be opposed to them b/c every man is in need of repentance for their transgressions.  I didn't feel that my questions were out of the ordinary, and in fact, when people have tried to use quotations and the like to discuss with you, you have not been very responsive...IMO (in my opinion). 

You posted this comment: 

Lived-sacramentsAlso, the original intent – all of them now, not just baptism – are pedagogical instruments. Sacraments are just magic spells for the vast majority of churchgoers. Have you ever surveyed people on what they actually believe? You’ll quickly discover that Orthodoxy is in reality a Hindu sect, a wild religious bizarre of magical thinking going in every which direction. Connecting the dots can be made a touch simpler when those dots are clearly seen in your own life – and hence, baptism happens everywhere, not just in church. It’s not suppose to be dogma at this level. Suppose I’m neither a Christian nor a native speaker of the English language. You announce to me that you are a “witness”. I grab my dictionary, translate, and then ask “What have you seen”? This is obviously going to take a bit of time. You’ll find yourself in this situation improvising a lot and being creative. Better hope the Bishop is looking the other way.

To which I responded: 

Lived-sacraments – all of them now, not just baptism – are pedagogical instruments.

Absolutely!  How much research have you done on the sacraments? Have you ever gone through the services themselves?  Have you ever seen a priest do the services in their ENTIRETY, with commentary on each portion of the service, in english?  Let me know about the answers to these...

Sacraments are just magic spells for the vast majority of churchgoers. Have you ever surveyed people on what they actually believe?

You know, I find your comments interesting, considering the sheer amount of knowledge that has been collected by the people on this very site...who by and far are Orthodox Christians, who would be eligible for your survey.  

And, when you ask most people about a SACRAMENT and what they believe FROM the sacrament, they usually quote text from the Sacrament itself, so the sacramental pedagogy is working.  Maybe not to certain expectations, but there is a benefit.  

The issue I believe here is solutions.  How much do you know about Orthodox theology and sacraments?  Would you be qualified to teach a class on them?  Maybe then YOU can teach these people who don't know as much as they should....according to your standards (?).  I thought that Martha learned a good lesson.  The only thing necessary is for you to sit at the feet of Christ and listen.  No huge amount of knowledge necessary.  

Connecting the dots can be made a touch simpler when those dots are clearly seen in your own life – and hence, baptism happens everywhere, not just in church. It’s not suppose to be dogma at this level.

At what level?  Baptism happens everywhere?  How?  What is not supposed to be dogma, and who decided that an Ecumenical Council is just not cutting it?  

Suppose I’m neither a Christian nor a native speaker of the English language. You announce to me that you are a “witness”. I grab my dictionary, translate, and then ask “What have you seen”? This is obviously going to take a bit of time. You’ll find yourself in this situation improvising a lot and being creative. Better hope the Bishop is looking the other way.

Will I find myself in a situation to improvise?  I've had 7 years of theological study, plus my father is a priest.  I think I'd come up with something pretty much following the DOGMATIC teachings of the church, which you just said is not dogma at "this level" which I assume is the lay level, talking online, b/c that's the level we are at right now.  

Hopefully this will give you some more food for thought.  

I would call that dialogue.  i didn't quote scripture or anything b/c I didn't even know what you were arguing in the first place - it was very confusing.  That is why I asked you questions.  To figure out what your position is, so that I may know what to dialogue ABOUT.  If you do not make declarative statements, it is very difficult to provide sources and scripture about vague thoughts.  Maybe other people are good at this, but I just am not. 

I hope you have not taken any offense to what I just posted.  It was meant to be in a dialogical spirit, not a corrective one. 

[SolEX01]

Based on c38's context, I draw the conclusion that he's had a disconcerting experience with monastics; hence, he's confused about Truth and dogma based on his monastic experiences (the analogy to Hinduism sold me).

Otherwise, he can send an e-mail to pokrov.org or other entities who deal with these situations.

I wish he would have been more upfront and not beat around the bush and play games; I sure have better things to do than playing games on this forum....    

[PeterTheAleut]

Based on c38's context, I draw the conclusion that he's had a disconcerting experience with monastics; hence, he's confused about Truth and dogma based on his monastic experiences (the analogy to Hinduism sold me).

Otherwise, he can send an e-mail to pokrov.org or other entities who deal with these situations.

I wish he would have been more upfront and not beat around the bush and play games; I sure have better things to do than playing games on this forum....    

And you think you can discern c38's mind based on what little he has shared here?  That, kind sir, is one of the most tenuous examples of reading between the lines I've ever seen.  Why don't you limit your "conclusions" to what c38 has actually said explicitly?  Otherwise, one could very well conclude that you're reading into c38's words your own disdain for some monastic communities, which you stated very clearly regarding Elder Ephraim's monasteries.

[SolEX01]

And you think you can discern c38's mind based on what little he has shared here?  That, kind sir, is one of the most tenuous examples of reading between the lines I've ever seen.

We haven't heard from c38, yet.

Why don't you limit your "conclusions" to what c38 has actually said explicitly?

What I've said is based on what c38 has said explicitly.    

Otherwise, one could very well conclude that you're reading into c38's words your own disdain for some monastic communities, which you stated very clearly regarding Elder Ephraim's monasteries.

PtA, please, what I've said about Elder Ephraim's Monasteries has no bearing on what I've said to c38 who has questioned whether or not this forum was Christian.     The topics are both unrelated and mutually exclusive.

If, for sake of argument, these threads of mine were the reason c38 joined this forum and expressed his concerns, I hope he finds resolution for whatever bothered him whether monastic related or not.  Also note that I didn't argue with c38 for most of my questions and comments have gone unanswered by him.

[PeterTheAleut]

And you think you can discern c38's mind based on what little he has shared here?  That, kind sir, is one of the most tenuous examples of reading between the lines I've ever seen.

We haven't heard from c38, yet.

Yet you would draw half-baked conclusions and expect him to confirm/deny them.  Not a best practice, IMO.

Why don't you limit your "conclusions" to what c38 has actually said explicitly?

What I've said is based on what c38 has said explicitly.    

Then I didn't express my point clearly enough, because you certainly didn't get it.  Ask c38 questions and let him tell us what his problem is.  Don't speculate based on a vague reference to Hinduism.

Otherwise, one could very well conclude that you're reading into c38's words your own disdain for some monastic communities, which you stated very clearly regarding Elder Ephraim's monasteries.

PtA, please, what I've said about Elder Ephraim's Monasteries has no bearing on what I've said to c38 who has questioned whether or not this forum was Christian.     The topics are both unrelated and mutually exclusive.

Are they now?  Where else could you have received the idea that a bad experience with monastics is what has embittered c38?  He certainly didn't say as much.

[SolEX01]

How about abandoning this debate and just hugging per the title of the thread?   

I had issues with Elder Ephraim long before I joined the board;  Let's wait for c38 to post a reply, if any, before proceeding further.   

[c38]

I’m not expressing it well. The problem isn’t doctrine per se, but clobbering people over the head with it (and in earlier days going to war for it). Call it a culture of scholasticism or whatever, it stinks! The memory of the Church is long; Pharisees and scribes behaved in the same way, and even pulled this stunt on Jesus.  One form of legalism is swapped for another in this dogmatism. Pharisees obsess over the Law as if the letter of the Law gives life. It does not. The Holy Spirit is known, along with other names, as a *Spirit* of Truth. God is mocking truth and Pharisees with His name.

I didn’t respond to Peter (and others) on baptism because I realised we were talking past each other. The sacrament of baptism is properly identified in the daily experience of a Christian. It goes beyond merely “appropriating the grace of baptism”. It is baptism, the very real thing, together with the immersion in water and the whole organic superstructure of salvation. Verification from Tradition? It’s all over the place! “... unless a kernel of wheat falls to the ground and dies...” The Teacher of Baptism makes no categorical distinction between immersion in water and death submitted to daily. So why object, why is life abstracted away from doctrine? Is it a contaminant?

Baptism into the death of Jesus is a mystery. It goes against human instinct, against the desire to live, and even against aesthetical judgement. I’m a fighter; I’m must learn how to die with Christ. Jesus is not leading us into oblivion; He is showing us with our baptism the best kept secret in the world. Life after death. Can you see now why for some of us a jurisdictional dispute over baptism seems so pitiful?

[SolEX01]

^ Who clobbered you over the head with this "culture of scholasticism"?

I find your "life after death" mantra very disconcerting.  Baptism is about the old person dying and being resurrected as a new person in Christ.  If you have been taught otherwise by this "culture of scholasticism" or some legalistic/dogmatic entity, I hope this forum helps you realize things differently....

If you wish to ignore me, I'll take the hint and stop replying on this thread for I don't wish to create issues for myself or anyone else on this forum.   

[c38]

Baptism is about the old person dying and being resurrected as a new person in Christ. 

Certainly, nothing to object to here.

[PeterTheAleut]

The sacrament of baptism is properly identified in the daily experience of a Christian. It goes beyond merely “appropriating the grace of baptism”. It is baptism, the very real thing, together with the immersion in water and the whole organic superstructure of salvation. Verification from Tradition? It’s all over the place!

Usually this kind of statement that your belief is "all over the place in Tradition" will be followed by proof from this very Tradition.  Show us where this belief is found in the writings of the Fathers and the prayers of the Church.  Verify your belief from Tradition.  Surely, if this belief is "all over the place in Tradition" as you say, proving this should be easy for you.

[SolEX01]

Baptism is about the old person dying and being resurrected as a new person in Christ. 

Certainly, nothing to object to here.

Good, we agree on something.     I'm going to bed.   

[c38]

Peter

I don’t happen to have a collection of books by Church Fathers on my shelf at the moment. Thank you for pointing this out; I should do something about that. I do recall however that it is a precept of the Orthodox Church that the exact form or even number of Mysteries is unknown and unknowable. Perhaps it’s due to a western influence that we occasionally think of sacraments as being more precise and measured. The mountain range analogy likely stems from Tradition.

[PeterTheAleut]

Peter

I don’t happen to have a collection of books by Church Fathers on my shelf at the moment. Thank you for pointing this out; I should do something about that. I do recall however that it is a precept of the Orthodox Church that the exact form or even number of Mysteries is unknown and unknowable. Perhaps it’s due to a western influence that we occasionally think of sacraments as being more precise and measured. The mountain range analogy likely stems from Tradition.

But how is the fact that we don't know the exact number of distinct sacraments the same as "properly identifying the sacrament of baptism in the daily experience of the Christian", thereby deemphasizing the singularity of the moment of just one of the sacraments?  There's a disconnect in your logic somewhere.