Author Topic: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?  (Read 4540 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Nephi

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,829
  • A non-Chalcedonian in Chalcedonian clothing.
  • Faith: Orthodox
So I've noticed quite a bit of this specific argument directed against Orthodox claims lately, and so I figured I'd just make a thread on it.

Anyway the argument goes along these lines: "Orthodox that reject the Penal Substitution theory (etc.) are exhibiting wrongful anti-Westernism (e.g. the anti-Augustinianism of Fr. Romanides), and these Orthodox primarily consist of Western converts but not entirely. Most Orthodox theologians living in the East that aren't rabidly anti-Western are more comfortable with (or outright teach) Penal Substitution, and as such the Western converts' obsessive rejection of it is wrong at best."

In short, "only those that are acting out with extreme anti-Westernism deny Penal Substitution (etc.) - everyone else (within Orthodoxy) does not."

Is there any truth to these claims, or is it just a strawman?

Romanides is obviously strongly against it, but Meyendorff does seem to exhibit a much more comfortable tone. In fact, the little I read from Meyendorff was only against substitution theories being believed exclusively or at the expense of theosis - he seemed okay with substitution theories if the deification of man was the focal point...

Offline Benjamin the Red

  • Recovering Calvinist
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,601
  • Have mercy on me, O God, have mercy on me.
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #1 on: August 03, 2012, 12:06:08 AM »
I think that Orthodox need to realize that legal and banking terminology (e.g., "forgive us our debts...") is biblical terminology. At the same time, however, a strict understanding of penal substitution (that Christ dies to satisfy God's honor (Anselm) or wrath (Calvin/Luther) is unOrthodox. But, again, that's just my opinion.
"Hades is not a place, no, but a state of the soul. It begins here on earth. Just so, paradise begins in the soul of a man here in the earthly life. Here we already have contact with the divine..." -St. John, Wonderworker of Shanghai and San Francisco, Homily On the Sunday of Orthodoxy

Offline Severian

  • My posts on this site don't necessarily reflect my current position on any given subject.
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,642
  • Pat. St. Severus, pray for my family & friends
    • St. Severus of Antioch's Writings
  • Faith: Coptic Orthodox Christian
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #2 on: August 03, 2012, 12:41:56 AM »
I think that Orthodox need to realize that legal and banking terminology (e.g., "forgive us our debts...") is biblical terminology. At the same time, however, a strict understanding of penal substitution (that Christ dies to satisfy God's honor (Anselm) or wrath (Calvin/Luther) is unOrthodox. But, again, that's just my opinion.
Well, even Romans 5:9 says that Christ saves us from God's wrath. The key is understanding what "wrath" or "justice" means in this context. If by "wrath" or "justice" we mean that God has a petty human sense of honor that needs to be satisfied in a spirit of hateful vengeance, than this is unacceptable because God transcends such human pettiness. The justice of God is not a justice based upon human needs for revenge, rather it is a justice which ultimately leads to the goal; the salvation of man.

NicholasMyra told me that Saint Athanasius lays out his teaching concerning God's "Divine consistency" in his exhortation against the heathen, and it seems to be -from what I have been told- consistent with what I was taught growing up as an OO.

Am I on to something here, or do you think I am off base?
« Last Edit: August 03, 2012, 01:02:11 AM by Severian »
"I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die [...] These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world." -The Lord Jesus Christ

No longer active on OC.net. Please pray for me and forgive any harm I might have caused by my ignorance and malice.

Offline jmbejdl

  • Count-Palatine James the Spurious of Giggleswick on the Naze
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,480
  • Great Martyr St. John the New of Suceava
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #3 on: August 03, 2012, 04:09:47 AM »
I think that Orthodox need to realize that legal and banking terminology (e.g., "forgive us our debts...") is biblical terminology. At the same time, however, a strict understanding of penal substitution (that Christ dies to satisfy God's honor (Anselm) or wrath (Calvin/Luther) is unOrthodox. But, again, that's just my opinion.

I would second this. A decade ago I was one of those anti-Western converts. I think it's a natural (over-)reaction for western Christians who convert to Orthodoxy. Thankfully my attitude has been tempered over the years and I no longer have any problem with juridical metaphors, so long as they are understood as metaphors that help explain the faith rather than the crux of it. PSA, however, as generally explained to me by westerners who adhere to it remains in my eyes heretical.

James
We owe greater gratitude to those who humble us, wrong us, and douse us with venom, than to those who nurse us with honour and sweet words, or feed us with tasty food and confections, for bile is the best medicine for our soul. - Elder Paisios of Mount Athos

Offline Severian

  • My posts on this site don't necessarily reflect my current position on any given subject.
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,642
  • Pat. St. Severus, pray for my family & friends
    • St. Severus of Antioch's Writings
  • Faith: Coptic Orthodox Christian
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #4 on: August 10, 2012, 05:53:52 PM »
--Bump--
"I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die [...] These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world." -The Lord Jesus Christ

No longer active on OC.net. Please pray for me and forgive any harm I might have caused by my ignorance and malice.

Offline Nephi

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,829
  • A non-Chalcedonian in Chalcedonian clothing.
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #5 on: August 10, 2012, 06:44:35 PM »
So it wouldn't be mere anti-westernism to deny satsifcation/PSA theories. However, a basic idea of substitutionism (yet not fully systematized) is indeed part of the Orthodox Mystery of the Atonement?

It is often hard, to many in the West I think, to picture a substitutionary element that isn't satisfaction/Penal.

Offline Melodist

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,522
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #6 on: August 10, 2012, 06:51:14 PM »
I try not to be anti-western just for the sake of being anti-western. I have nothing against western expressions of faith, and try to be as charitable as possible when forming my opinions. I am not against the use of legal terminology in describing our salvation, but I am against any use of that terminology that distorts who God is, denies the role that Christ's resurrection plays in our salvation, or is incompatible with other expressions describing our salvation. The most popular form of penal subtition (especially as believed and taught by most Protestants) does these things. It's amazing that most people who reject Christianity do so because they can't believe in a God that would kill His own innocent Son because He was upset with everyone with the one exception of His Son. The concepts of any kind of God at all or a man being raised from the dead are secondary. Someone once posted this on my blog. If you read and look close enough, you will notice that the person is against "original guilt" (which I already stated in that post and the one before that I don't believe in) and then argues against a theory of atonement that deals only with the death of Christ and never addresses the resurrection.

Quote from: http://openthoumylips.blogspot.com/2012/05/jesus-prayer-part-15-personal-sin.html
God had himself incarnated as a man, Jesus, in order to be hideously tortured and executed for atonement of our sins. If god wanted to forgive our sins, why not just forgive them and be on with it. Why is there a need for such a display of sadomasochism? Who is he trying to impress? Perhaps himself, since he is judge, jury, and now the execution victim. The point is that this entire idea is repulsive and just nonsensical.
And FWIW, these are our Fathers too, you know.

Made Perfect in Weakness - Latest Post: The Son of God

Offline Severian

  • My posts on this site don't necessarily reflect my current position on any given subject.
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,642
  • Pat. St. Severus, pray for my family & friends
    • St. Severus of Antioch's Writings
  • Faith: Coptic Orthodox Christian
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #7 on: August 10, 2012, 06:57:34 PM »
^Good point.
"I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die [...] These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world." -The Lord Jesus Christ

No longer active on OC.net. Please pray for me and forgive any harm I might have caused by my ignorance and malice.

Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Section Moderator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,140
  • Pray for me St. Severus
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #8 on: August 10, 2012, 07:10:01 PM »
Check this out:

http://razilazenje.blogspot.com/2006/12/ancestral-vs-original-sin-false.html

Quote
In the current debate over the Orthodox view of Original Sin, one popular entry is Ancestral Versus Original Sin: An Overview with Implications for Psychotherapy by the Very Rev. Fr. Antony Hughes, rector of St. Mary's Antiochian Orthodox Church in Cambridge, Massachusetts. The essay was written in early 2005 at the request of one of the editors of The Journal of Psychology and Christianity, a publication of the Christian Association for Psychological Studies, in order to provide an explanation of the alleged differences in the Eastern and Western doctrines of Original Sin and their bearing on pastoral practice. My purpose in this response is to take on several of what I consider to be the defects of Fr. Antony's presentation, and to demonstrate the falsity of his artificial dichotomy between Ancestral and Original Sin. I do so not to defend Western Christianity, though I often feel compelled to since that tradition is so deeply misrepresented. Rather, what I find to be of great concern is the jettisoning of concepts that have, for the entirety of Church history, been part and parcel of Orthodox teaching, in favour of the innovations of a few recent thinkers who have been deeply influenced in significant (though certainly not in all) ways by postmodernism and Protestant Liberalism.

I tend to agree with this, although I have listened to Protestants who have been fatalistic in their soteriological teachings, specifically those of Calvinist traditions.
« Last Edit: August 10, 2012, 07:11:11 PM by minasoliman »
Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.

Offline Nephi

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,829
  • A non-Chalcedonian in Chalcedonian clothing.
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #9 on: August 10, 2012, 08:07:19 PM »
Check this out:

http://razilazenje.blogspot.com/2006/12/ancestral-vs-original-sin-false.html
I read through most of that and it's pretty thought-provoking. He seems to be asserting, effectively, that the West/East are the same regarding Original Sin. In that the results are the same (separation from God, death, corruption, sin, etc). I can see the sense in this, but a few comments should be made:

Orthodox puts less focus on guilt, whereas the West gives it a place of higher importance (or only importance) - even if it is personal guilt, as per the blog post's clarification. Usually the view I see regarding Western views of the Church as a hospital/healer is in terms of this priority of guilt (however I may be assuming here).

The result of Original Sin is different in how death afflicts creation. The West, especially the Reformers, view death as a punishment (explicitly from God) for Original Sin. The East tend to view death as from Satan or a natural result of the separation from God (however not as punishment).

So while it can be accurate to say that the East/West share the same understanding of the consequences of the Original Sin (not just guilt/gone astray distinction of Fr Romanides' sort), I don't see how it makes the bridge necessarily any closer, which seems to be the blogpost author's purpose. Even if we both agree we have the same starting location, the directions we go from there seem irreconcilable.

But thank you for sharing that blog post, it's given me a lot to consider.

Offline JamesR

  • The Second Coming of Jason
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,915
  • Remember me?
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: OCA
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #10 on: August 10, 2012, 09:51:51 PM »
I'm not anti West, I'm just anti child-abuse.

Offline neon_knights

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 513
  • My political hero.
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #11 on: August 10, 2012, 10:07:18 PM »
How do you all respond to Romans 5:9?

Offline Nephi

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,829
  • A non-Chalcedonian in Chalcedonian clothing.
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #12 on: August 10, 2012, 11:39:56 PM »
How do you all respond to Romans 5:9?

I think it's better understood in context of the preceding and following verses:
Quote
8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.

10 For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.

The insistence is that we shifted from being in enmity with God to becoming his friends, as St. John Chrysostom seems to be saying in one of his homilies on the passage:

Quote
It is not from His Death then only, he says, that we draw strong assertions, but from the gift which was given unto us through His Death. And indeed if He had died only for such creatures as we be, a proof of the greatest love would what He had done be! But when He is seen at once dying, and yielding us a gift, and that such a gift, and to such creatures, what was done casts into shade our highest conceptions, and leads the very dullest on to faith. For there is no one else that will save us, except He Who so loved us when we were sinners, as even to give Himself up for us. Do you see what a ground this topic affords for hope? For before this there were two difficulties in the way of our being saved; our being sinners, and our salvation requiring the Lord's Death, a thing which was quite incredible before it took place, and required exceeding love for it to take place. But now since this has come about, the other requisites are easier. For we have become friends, and there is no further need of Death. Shall then He who has so spared his enemies as not to spare His Son, fail to defend them now they have become friends, when He has no longer any need to give up his Son?
-from http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/210209.htm

As I previously said, we shift from being His enemy (because of us being wicked, and inciting his wrath), to being his friend because of his outpouring of love in reconciling us with Himself. So I suppose one response is that we do avoid God's wrath; only that's not the purpose of the death of Christ, but a (wonderful) symptom of our reconciliation with God.

Offline NicholasMyra

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,691
    • Hyperdox Herman
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Partially-overlapping
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #13 on: August 11, 2012, 02:51:05 AM »
NicholasMyra told me that Saint Athanasius lays out his teaching concerning God's "Divine consistency" in his exhortation against the heathen

This is what I was referring to:

"We saw in the last chapter that, because death and corruption were gaining ever firmer hold on them, the human race was in process of destruction. Man, who was created in God's image and in his possession of reason reflected the very Word Himself, was disappearing, and the work of God was being undone. The law of death, which followed from the Transgression, prevailed upon us, and from it there was no escape. The thing that was happening was in truth both monstrous and unfitting.

It would, of course, have been unthinkable that God should go back upon His word and that man, having transgressed, should not die; but it was equally monstrous that beings which once had shared the nature of the Word should perish and turn back again into non-existence through corruption. It was unworthy of the goodness of God that creatures made by Him should be brought to nothing through the deceit wrought upon man by the devil; and it was supremely unfitting that the work of God in mankind should disappear, either through their own negligence or through the deceit of evil spirits. As, then, the creatures whom He had created reasonable, like the Word, were in fact perishing, and such noble works were on the road to ruin, what then was God, being Good, to do? Was He to let corruption and death have their way with them?

In that case, what was the use of having made them in the beginning? Surely it would have been better never to have been created at all than, having been created, to be neglected and perish; and, besides that, such indifference to the ruin of His own work before His very eyes would argue not goodness in God but limitation, and that far more than if He had never created men at all.

It was impossible, therefore, that God should leave man to be carried off by corruption, because it would be unfitting and unworthy of Himself."

-St. Athanasius, on the Incarnation

[Trigger warning: Neoplatonism]


Why was this Law necessary? Perhaps there is a paradox: For God to condescend to create something truly other than Himself, that thing would have to rely on Him for life. This is because God is uncreated and yet chooses to exist; were creatures to have that capacity apart from God, they would have to be Divine by nature, and thus a part of God Himself, which is absurd.  
« Last Edit: August 11, 2012, 02:52:12 AM by NicholasMyra »
Quote from: Fr. Thomas Hopko, dystopian parable of the prodigal son
...you can imagine so-called healing services of the pigpen. The books that could be written, you know: Life in the Pigpen. How to Cope in the Pigpen. Being Happy in the Pigpen. Surviving in the Pigpen. And then there could be counselling, for people who feel unhappy in the pigpen, to try to get them to come to terms with the pigpen, and to accept the pigpen.

Offline NicholasMyra

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,691
    • Hyperdox Herman
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Partially-overlapping
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #14 on: August 11, 2012, 02:54:31 AM »
I think that Orthodox need to realize that legal and banking terminology (e.g., "forgive us our debts...")
That's not really legal or banking terminology in a 1st century jewish context.
Quote from: Fr. Thomas Hopko, dystopian parable of the prodigal son
...you can imagine so-called healing services of the pigpen. The books that could be written, you know: Life in the Pigpen. How to Cope in the Pigpen. Being Happy in the Pigpen. Surviving in the Pigpen. And then there could be counselling, for people who feel unhappy in the pigpen, to try to get them to come to terms with the pigpen, and to accept the pigpen.

Offline akimel

  • Fr Aidan
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 523
    • Eclectic Orthodoxy
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #15 on: August 11, 2012, 10:27:29 AM »
Why is it, do you think, that when Orthodox polemicists speak of the "Western" doctrine of  original sin, they immediately invoke St Augustine and his notion that humanity is condemned by God to eternal perdition because of the sin of Adam?  One finds this repeated over and over again on the internet and even in the writings of Orthodox theologians who should know better.  Yet anyone who has the least bit of acquaintance with second millennium Latin theology knows that Augustine's notion of original guilt was replaced in Catholic theology by the position of St Thomas Aquinas and St Bonaventure that original sin is the inherited privation of sanctifying grace; and it is this understanding that is represented in the Catholic Catechism. 

There can only be one explanation for this obtuseness--original guilt is a much easier polemical target to attack than the more theologically sophisticated view that we are born into a state of spiritual separation from God. 

Similarly, Orthodox polemicists typically identify the "Western" understanding of atonement as penal substitution; but of course, this totally misrepresents the satisfaction views of Sts Augustine, Anselm, and Thomas Aquinas.  One certainly does not find penal substitution advanced in the Catholic Catechism and the writings of the best contemporary Catholic theologians.  When did the views of Luther and Calvin on the atonement become representative of Western Christianity as a whole? 

Do not misunderstand. I am as critical of original guilt and penal substitution theories as the next Orthodox guy; but I am equally critical of the popular tendency to misrepresent the teachings of non-Orthodox Christian traditions.  I am myself a convert to Orthodoxy.  I was brought to faith in Jesus Christ by non-Orthodox Christians.  I learned the essential catholic doctrines in a non-Orthodox church.  I acquired a love for the Eucharist in a non-Orthodox sacramental tradition.  When I became Orthodox, I did not need to discard everything I had believed and practiced previously--quite the contrary.  I learned the Orthodox faith and came into a living relationship with the Father through the Son in the Holy Spirit outside the canonical boundaries of the Orthodox Church.  That this occurred for me, and I suspect for many reading this comment, has implications for our understanding of Church and the work of the Spirit; it certainly requires more than simplistic dismissals of Western Christianity.   

I am also very much aware that much greater diversity exists in the Orthodox world on specific theological questions and practices than anyone would ever guess by the reading of Orthodox forums.  The Catholic Church has only one Pope.  In Orthodoxy, every internet polemicist deems himself as an infallible Pope and anointed guardian of the true faith.  Orthodox polemicists dish out more anathemas than their counterparts in any other Christian tradition, excepting perhaps the Calvinists.  I wonder how many Orthodox apologists are ex-Calvinists.   


       

Offline Nephi

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,829
  • A non-Chalcedonian in Chalcedonian clothing.
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #16 on: August 11, 2012, 11:29:48 AM »
Why is it, do you think, that when Orthodox polemicists speak of the "Western" doctrine of  original sin, they immediately invoke St Augustine and his notion that humanity is condemned by God to eternal perdition because of the sin of Adam?  One finds this repeated over and over again on the internet and even in the writings of Orthodox theologians who should know better.  Yet anyone who has the least bit of acquaintance with second millennium Latin theology knows that Augustine's notion of original guilt was replaced in Catholic theology by the position of St Thomas Aquinas and St Bonaventure that original sin is the inherited privation of sanctifying grace; and it is this understanding that is represented in the Catholic Catechism. 

There can only be one explanation for this obtuseness--original guilt is a much easier polemical target to attack than the more theologically sophisticated view that we are born into a state of spiritual separation from God.

It confuses me that a professor (Reformed/Calvinist) of mine seemed to agree with the idea of original guilt. Is this something characteristic of his tradition, or just him?

So once the polemics are out the way, is there actually a fundamental difference between the West and the East in terms of Original Sin?

Offline akimel

  • Fr Aidan
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 523
    • Eclectic Orthodoxy
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #17 on: August 11, 2012, 12:08:46 PM »

It confuses me that a professor (Reformed/Calvinist) of mine seemed to agree with the idea of original guilt. Is this something characteristic of his tradition, or just him?

So once the polemics are out the way, is there actually a fundamental difference between the West and the East in terms of Original Sin?

There is no universal "Western" view of original sin.  We have to take it one tradition at a time, one theologian at a time.  

If you want to know what the contemporary Catholic Church believes, then take a look at the section on original sin in its Catechism.  Orthodox readers are often surprised by how "Orthodox" it sounds.  Where the discussion needs to take place is on the meaning of "privation of sanctifying grace."  

As far as Protestant understandings of original sin (note the plural), what we need to know is who today teaches the imputation of Adam's sin to humanity.  I honestly don't know who teaches this today, though I suspect that it continues to be taught by hard-core Calvinists and perhaps others (but I'm open to correction).  I spent 25 years as a priest in the Episcopal Church.  Not once did I ever hear any Anglican speak of the imputation of Adamic sin.  Does that mean that Anglicans are not "Western"? 

Do you see why caricatures and stereotypes are so unhelpful here?  We are all damaged when we distort the theological convictions of others.      
« Last Edit: August 11, 2012, 12:10:36 PM by akimel »

Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Section Moderator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,140
  • Pray for me St. Severus
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #18 on: August 11, 2012, 12:19:15 PM »
Thank you Fr Kimel. I find your post here refreshing
Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.

Offline dllwatkins

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 65
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #19 on: August 11, 2012, 12:23:41 PM »
I liked Frank Beckwith's book Return to Rome.  He was president of the Evangelical Theological Society and then returned to the Roman Catholic Church.  He describes the difference in the Reformed concept of forensic justification versus the Catholic (read "historical" and "Biblical") concept.  It's brief but very helpful.

Offline akimel

  • Fr Aidan
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 523
    • Eclectic Orthodoxy
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #20 on: August 11, 2012, 12:36:33 PM »
I liked Frank Beckwith's book Return to Rome.  He was president of the Evangelical Theological Society and then returned to the Roman Catholic Church.  He describes the difference in the Reformed concept of forensic justification versus the Catholic (read "historical" and "Biblical") concept.  It's brief but very helpful.

The imputation of Adam's sin seems to cohere very nicely with the imputation of Christ's righteousness.  See, e.g., the article by B. B. Warfield on imputation, as well as John Piper's article "Adam, Christ and Justification"; but I simply do not know Protestant and evangelical theology well enough on this particular question to offer a confident opinion.  It is certainly the case that Protestants can teach the imputation of righteousness without invoking any notion of the imputation of Adamic guilt. 

Offline NicholasMyra

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,691
    • Hyperdox Herman
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Partially-overlapping
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #21 on: August 11, 2012, 01:41:03 PM »
Why is it, do you think, that when Orthodox polemicists speak of the "Western" doctrine of  original sin, they immediately invoke St Augustine and his notion that humanity is condemned by God to eternal perdition because of the sin of Adam?  One finds this repeated over and over again on the internet and even in the writings of Orthodox theologians who should know better.  Yet anyone who has the least bit of acquaintance with second millennium Latin theology knows that Augustine's notion of original guilt was replaced in Catholic theology
Psst...

There are these guys called Protestants out there...

Augustine's notion of original guilt was replaced in Catholic theology by the position of St Thomas Aquinas and St Bonaventure that original sin is the inherited privation of sanctifying grace

Someone better tell the Council of Trent:

"1. If anyone does not confess that the first man, Adam, when he transgressed the commandment of God in paradise, immediately lost the holiness and justice in which he had been constituted, and through the offense of that prevarication incurred the wrath and indignation of god, and thus death with which God had previously threatened him, and, together with death, captivity under his power who thenceforth had the empire of death, that is to say, the devil, and that the entire Adam through that offense of prevarication was changed in body and soul for the worse, let him be anathema.

2. If anyone asserts that the transgression of Adam injured him alone and not his posterity, and that the holiness and justice which he received from God, which he lost, he lost for himself alone and not for us also; or that he, being defiled by the sin of disobedience, has transfused only death and the pains of the body into the whole human race, but not sin also, which is the death of the soul, let him be anathema, since he contradicts the Apostle who says:

'By one man sin entered into the world and by sin death; and so death passed upon all men, in whom all have sinned.' [Vulgate Romans 5:12]

3. If anyone asserts that this sin of Adam, which in its origin is one, and by propagation, not by imitation, transfused into all, which is in each one as something that is his own, is taken away either by the forces of human nature or by a remedy other than the merit of the one mediator, our Lord Jesus Christ, who has reconciled us to God in his own blood, made unto us justice, sanctification and redemption; or if he denies that that merit of Jesus Christ is applied both to adults and to infants by the sacrament of baptism rightly administered in the form of the Church, let him be anathema; for there is no other name under heaven given to men, whereby we must be saved."

"5. If anyone denies that by the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ which is conferred in baptism, the guilt of original sin is remitted, or says that the whole of that which belongs to the essence of sin is not taken away, but says that it is only canceled or not imputed, let him be anathema."
« Last Edit: August 11, 2012, 02:03:14 PM by NicholasMyra »
Quote from: Fr. Thomas Hopko, dystopian parable of the prodigal son
...you can imagine so-called healing services of the pigpen. The books that could be written, you know: Life in the Pigpen. How to Cope in the Pigpen. Being Happy in the Pigpen. Surviving in the Pigpen. And then there could be counselling, for people who feel unhappy in the pigpen, to try to get them to come to terms with the pigpen, and to accept the pigpen.

Offline akimel

  • Fr Aidan
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 523
    • Eclectic Orthodoxy
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #22 on: August 11, 2012, 02:32:21 PM »
Why is it, do you think, that when Orthodox polemicists speak of the "Western" doctrine of  original sin, they immediately invoke St Augustine and his notion that humanity is condemned by God to eternal perdition because of the sin of Adam?  One finds this repeated over and over again on the internet and even in the writings of Orthodox theologians who should know better.  Yet anyone who has the least bit of acquaintance with second millennium Latin theology knows that Augustine's notion of original guilt was replaced in Catholic theology
Psst...

There are these guys called Protestants out there...

Augustine's notion of original guilt was replaced in Catholic theology by the position of St Thomas Aquinas and St Bonaventure that original sin is the inherited privation of sanctifying grace

Someone better tell the Council of Trent:

"1. If anyone does not confess that the first man, Adam, when he transgressed the commandment of God in paradise, immediately lost the holiness and justice in which he had been constituted, and through the offense of that prevarication incurred the wrath and indignation of god, and thus death with which God had previously threatened him, and, together with death, captivity under his power who thenceforth had the empire of death, that is to say, the devil, and that the entire Adam through that offense of prevarication was changed in body and soul for the worse, let him be anathema.

2. If anyone asserts that the transgression of Adam injured him alone and not his posterity, and that the holiness and justice which he received from God, which he lost, he lost for himself alone and not for us also; or that he, being defiled by the sin of disobedience, has transfused only death and the pains of the body into the whole human race, but not sin also, which is the death of the soul, let him be anathema, since he contradicts the Apostle who says:

'By one man sin entered into the world and by sin death; and so death passed upon all men, in whom all have sinned.' [Vulgate Romans 5:12]

3. If anyone asserts that this sin of Adam, which in its origin is one, and by propagation, not by imitation, transfused into all, which is in each one as something that is his own, is taken away either by the forces of human nature or by a remedy other than the merit of the one mediator, our Lord Jesus Christ, who has reconciled us to God in his own blood, made unto us justice, sanctification and redemption; or if he denies that that merit of Jesus Christ is applied both to adults and to infants by the sacrament of baptism rightly administered in the form of the Church, let him be anathema; for there is no other name under heaven given to men, whereby we must be saved."

Nicholas, I'm not sure what you think that the citations from Council of Trent prove, but they do not prove the imputation of the guilt of Adam.  But perhaps I was not as clear as I should have been.  In Orthodox apologetics the Catholic Church is typically accused of teaching that the guilt of Adam is imputed to his descendants, who are then condemned by God on that basis.  It is this caricature that I am attacking. 

As far as the Tridentine decree on original sin, it should be read through the theological lens of Thomas Aquinas (see the article on original sin in the Catholic Encyclopedia).  Original sin is the the privation of sanctifying grace, which is the fundamental spiritual consequence of Adam's sin.  The important point here is that the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church on original sin cannot be simplistically identified with the views of St Augustine, yet Orthodox apologists and theologians assert this identification all the time.  The question is why.  The answer seems obvious to me: it makes for a good polemical sound byte. 

As far as what Protestantism teaches on original sin, you need to take it one theologian, one confession at a time.  Protestantism is not uniform in its teaching.  It wasn't uniform five hundred years ago and it sure ain't uniform today.  My impression, though, is that for most contemporary Protestants original sin has a lot more to do with the inheritance of a corrupt, even depraved, human nature than with the imputation of the guilt of Adam. 

Offline NicholasMyra

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,691
    • Hyperdox Herman
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Partially-overlapping
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #23 on: August 11, 2012, 03:23:32 PM »
Nicholas, I'm not sure what you think that the citations from Council of Trent prove, but they do not prove the imputation of the guilt of Adam.
Yeah, they do. Even if the Catholic Church did not believe it "essentially" (whatever that means), or chooses not to believe it now, or did not believe it for a 200-400 year period in history, it still produced, pastorally, the belief in the imputation of the guilt of adam via sexual reproduction, cited above in the Council of Trent. We are Orthodox Christians; we think that even if a teaching is essentially correct, a faulty manner of presenting it is just as unacceptable and worthy of condemnation and removal.

I've heard the argument, "all that roman legal language involving guilt is merely a way of saying <insert Orthodox teaching here>." Great! Glory to God if that is true. If it is true, then terminate the misleading 'way of saying', so that you don't lead any more people into error or apostasy by it.

 But perhaps I was not as clear as I should have been.  In Orthodox apologetics the Catholic Church is typically accused of teaching that the guilt of Adam is imputed to his descendants
It did, at least pastorally in the way it presented its teachings (I.E. what functionally matters).

As far as the Tridentine decree on original sin, it should be read through the theological lens of Thomas Aquinas
Irrelevant to the presentation of the teaching to the masses.

The important point here is that the teaching of
As far as what Protestantism teaches on original sin, you need to take it one theologian, one confession at a time.
For the sake of cognition we can generalize.

 
 My impression, though, is that for most contemporary Protestants original sin has a lot more to do with the inheritance of a corrupt, even depraved, human nature than with the imputation of the guilt of Adam.
Among small sectors of emergents and seeker friendly evangelicals, perhaps. The internet distorts things.
« Last Edit: August 11, 2012, 03:30:17 PM by NicholasMyra »
Quote from: Fr. Thomas Hopko, dystopian parable of the prodigal son
...you can imagine so-called healing services of the pigpen. The books that could be written, you know: Life in the Pigpen. How to Cope in the Pigpen. Being Happy in the Pigpen. Surviving in the Pigpen. And then there could be counselling, for people who feel unhappy in the pigpen, to try to get them to come to terms with the pigpen, and to accept the pigpen.

Offline PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 37,280
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #24 on: August 11, 2012, 03:33:01 PM »
I'm not anti West, I'm just anti child-abuse.
1. What do you mean?
2. How does your mention of child abuse contribute to this discussion?
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline NicholasMyra

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,691
    • Hyperdox Herman
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Partially-overlapping
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #25 on: August 11, 2012, 03:44:13 PM »
I'm not anti West, I'm just anti child-abuse.
1. What do you mean?
2. How does your mention of child abuse contribute to this discussion?
It's a slogan against penal substitution (the Father taking pleasure in torturing Christ on the Cross in a bizzare reading of Isaiah/ "Wrath bombing")
« Last Edit: August 11, 2012, 03:46:18 PM by NicholasMyra »
Quote from: Fr. Thomas Hopko, dystopian parable of the prodigal son
...you can imagine so-called healing services of the pigpen. The books that could be written, you know: Life in the Pigpen. How to Cope in the Pigpen. Being Happy in the Pigpen. Surviving in the Pigpen. And then there could be counselling, for people who feel unhappy in the pigpen, to try to get them to come to terms with the pigpen, and to accept the pigpen.

Offline akimel

  • Fr Aidan
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 523
    • Eclectic Orthodoxy
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #26 on: August 11, 2012, 10:43:16 PM »
I suppose, Nicholas, that I should thank you for proving the point of my original comment. 

Offline NicholasMyra

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,691
    • Hyperdox Herman
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Partially-overlapping
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #27 on: August 12, 2012, 01:04:08 AM »
I suppose, Nicholas, that I should thank you for proving the point of my original comment. 
fr. ,  I wouldn't know which point that is.
Quote from: Fr. Thomas Hopko, dystopian parable of the prodigal son
...you can imagine so-called healing services of the pigpen. The books that could be written, you know: Life in the Pigpen. How to Cope in the Pigpen. Being Happy in the Pigpen. Surviving in the Pigpen. And then there could be counselling, for people who feel unhappy in the pigpen, to try to get them to come to terms with the pigpen, and to accept the pigpen.

Offline Peter J

  • still a CAF poster
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,463
  • Faith: Christian
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #28 on: August 12, 2012, 09:58:10 PM »
I spent 25 years as a priest in the Episcopal Church.  Not once did I ever hear any Anglican speak of the imputation of Adamic sin.  Does that mean that Anglicans are not "Western"? 

Do you see why caricatures and stereotypes are so unhelpful here?  We are all damaged when we distort the theological convictions of others.     

Hi Father. I'm mostly just reading this thread (since it's in the faith section and I'm an inquirer); nevertheless, I'd like to chime in that I like what you're saying here. One of my biggest concerns, as I look into Orthodoxy, is whether people draw any real distinction between Orthodox and Eastern.
- Peter Jericho

Offline Melodist

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,522
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #29 on: August 12, 2012, 10:33:35 PM »
2. If anyone asserts that the transgression of Adam injured him alone and not his posterity, and that the holiness and justice which he received from God, which he lost, he lost for himself alone and not for us also; or that he, being defiled by the sin of disobedience, has transfused only death and the pains of the body into the whole human race, but not sin also, which is the death of the soul, let him be anathema, since he contradicts the Apostle who says:

'By one man sin entered into the world and by sin death; and so death passed upon all men, in whom all have sinned.' [Vulgate Romans 5:12]

3. If anyone asserts that this sin of Adam, which in its origin is one, and by propagation, not by imitation, transfused into all, which is in each one as something that is his own, is taken away either by the forces of human nature or by a remedy other than the merit of the one mediator, our Lord Jesus Christ, who has reconciled us to God in his own blood, made unto us justice, sanctification and redemption; or if he denies that that merit of Jesus Christ is applied both to adults and to infants by the sacrament of baptism rightly administered in the form of the Church, let him be anathema; for there is no other name under heaven given to men, whereby we must be saved."

I think this could be interpreted to say that we inherit everything that the fall did to Adam's nature becasue we inherited all of Adam's nature and not just part of it. It refers to original "sin" as "death of the soul", not "guilt".
And FWIW, these are our Fathers too, you know.

Made Perfect in Weakness - Latest Post: The Son of God

Offline Nephi

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,829
  • A non-Chalcedonian in Chalcedonian clothing.
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #30 on: August 12, 2012, 10:38:26 PM »
Hi Father. I'm mostly just reading this thread (since it's in the faith section and I'm an inquirer); nevertheless, I'd like to chime in that I like what you're saying here. One of my biggest concerns, as I look into Orthodoxy, is whether people draw any real distinction between Orthodox and Eastern.

I never thought about that but you're right, usually there is no distinction between Eastern and Orthodox (Oriental/Eastern) in common usage. I think most of the time the Eastern Catholics are included when someone says "Eastern," except in cases when EC's and Orthodox differ on something.
« Last Edit: August 12, 2012, 10:38:47 PM by Nephi »

Offline akimel

  • Fr Aidan
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 523
    • Eclectic Orthodoxy
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #31 on: August 12, 2012, 11:59:11 PM »
I think this could be interpreted to say that we inherit everything that the fall did to Adam's nature becasue we inherited all of Adam's nature and not just part of it. It refers to original "sin" as "death of the soul", not "guilt".

Yes.  That is the Tridentine point--not the transmission of guilt but the transmission of a human nature that exists in a state of alienation from the supernatural life of God.  This is why the scholastics needed to invent limbo for infants who die without Holy Baptism.  Because unbaptized infants are conceived and born into this condition of spiritual death, i.e., separation from God, they are incapable of enjoying the divine life of Heaven; but because they are not guilty of personal sin, they do not deserve the just infliction of punishment and pain. 

In any case, what is at issue here is not that God arbitrarily holds us responsible for something we didn't do, namely Adam's sin.  What is at issue is the inheritance of a human nature which has been divorced from sanctifying grace--or to put it in Eastern terms, divorced from the divine energies of God.  It's still a fully functioning human nature, but it's not human nature as God intended it to be.  I am not suggesting that the Latin formulation of sanctifying grace is equivalent to the Orthodox formulation of the divine energies, but I do suggest that this may be the best way for Orthodox Christians to approach the Latin doctrine of original sin. 

And once we have understood what the Latins mean by sanctifying grace and the privation of sanctifying grace, then we can raise the question, How well does this accord with our understanding of grace, human nature, and ancestral sin?  But before we can raise this question, we first have to do our homework and really try to understand what the Catholic Church authoritatively teaches about original sin. 

As I commented above, we are all damaged when we distort the theological convictions of others.   

Offline Sleeper

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,350
  • On hiatus for the foreseeable future.
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #32 on: August 13, 2012, 12:08:01 AM »
Two of my favorite contemporary theologians take the time and care to make the distinction between what is actually orthodox and that which is merely an Eastern (or any cultural) response to, and embodiment of, orthodoxy: David Bentley Hart and Abp. Hilarion Alfeyev.

However, my favorite theologian of recent memory is Fr. John Meyendorff, who also takes great care to make these distinctions. Some random samplings from his wonderful book, The Orthodox Church:

"While the Eastern Church claimed--and still claims today--to be the only true Church of Christ, it saw its cultural and geographical field of vision restricted: historically, it became identified with the Byzantine world."

"Consequently, one of the basic problems confronting Orthodox theology today is to be able to distinguish clearly between the holy Tradition of the Church—the faithful voice of Revelation—and mere human traditions which sometimes express the Revelation quite imperfectly, and which are always qualified by the historical circumstances in which they appeared.  Quite often, they actually obscure the Truth, by identifying it with relative values.  How many traditions of this kind the Orthodox must abandon, or at least reinterpret, before they can make their message credible to our contemporaries!"

"From Byzantium also [the Orthodox Church] has inherited certain historical characteristics of a less important nature.  It is our task to attempt to distinguish in this heritage between the Tradition of the Church, the expression of revealed Truth, on the one hand, and mere human traditions which have naturally tended to accumulate on the other.  This distinction will sometimes be painful to make, sometimes it can only be made gradually; but in any case the necessary adjustments can only be achieved with the help of the Spirit who teaches “all truth.”  For it is He who, without nullifying man’s free will, guides the Church toward its final destination."

"Yet, while it is perfectly true that the Orthodox Church claims to be the true Church of Christ, the one and only Catholic Church, the Orthodox theologian, nevertheless, is under strict obligation to distinguish careully in this heritage between that which forms part of the Church’s Holy Tradition, unalterable and universally binding, received from the past, and that which is a mere relic of former times, venerable no doubt in many respects but sometimes also sadly out of date and even harmful to the mission of the Church."

"Orthodox must do a bit of rethinking and reflecting themselves.  If the truth which they are conscious of possessing is really the Catholic truth, it must of course be valid for all men, all times and all countries.  It must be capable of supplying an answer to the very real problems raised by Western Christians during the centuries which have elapsed since the separation.  It must face the challenge of the modern world.  In order to make their message meaningful, the Orthodox must learn to live these problems from inside, not externally.  It is not enough merely to conform outwardly to Western customs or make a few liturgical adjustments; there must be an act of love as well as of humility.  It is all too obvious that while the Church as a supernatural body always possesses the fullness of divine life and truth, individuals, groups, nations, and local churches fail to conform to this life and this truth in all respects.  In this regard, what may be called historical Orthodoxy, that is, the various nations which formerly made up or still make up the Orthodox world, have much to ask forgiveness for."

Others would include Fr. Patrick Henry Reardon, and to a certain extent, Met. Kallistos Ware.
« Last Edit: August 13, 2012, 12:09:11 AM by Sleeper »

Offline Nephi

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,829
  • A non-Chalcedonian in Chalcedonian clothing.
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #33 on: August 20, 2012, 08:56:47 PM »
I'd appreciate it if someone could comment on this, regarding substitution:

The PSA is rejected because a punishment is inflicted upon the Son, by the Father, and for the Father, in place of our sins. The Orthodox view is that Christ died as a substitute-offering to the Father in place of our sins, but not as a punishment from the Father.

Is this correct?

If so, would it then be correct to also say that Christ's death-substitute-offering does satisfy the justice of the Father?

Offline Melodist

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,522
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #34 on: August 20, 2012, 09:44:08 PM »
If so, would it then be correct to also say that Christ's death-substitute-offering does satisfy the justice of the Father?

According to St Athanasius, God's "justice" was to undo the destruction brought on His creation by sin without changing the destructive nature of sin. God could not say that sin is no longer destructive, but refused to allow His creation to be destroyed by it, the only solution was was for the Word to become flesh, take onto Himself the full consequences of sin up to and including death, and then to be raised from the dead never to die again because He has life in Himself. Having joined Himself to us in our state of destruction, He can pull us out of that destruction in His resurrection. In this manner God's "justice" is done because He does not allow His creation from nothing to go back to nothing (defeating the purpose of creating it in the first place), which fell subject to corruption through sin, without changing the fact that sin, that is missing the mark (God is our mark), is destructive.
And FWIW, these are our Fathers too, you know.

Made Perfect in Weakness - Latest Post: The Son of God

Offline Nephi

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,829
  • A non-Chalcedonian in Chalcedonian clothing.
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #35 on: August 20, 2012, 10:13:32 PM »
If so, would it then be correct to also say that Christ's death-substitute-offering does satisfy the justice of the Father?

According to St Athanasius, God's "justice" was to undo the destruction brought on His creation by sin without changing the destructive nature of sin. God could not say that sin is no longer destructive, but refused to allow His creation to be destroyed by it, the only solution was was for the Word to become flesh, take onto Himself the full consequences of sin up to and including death, and then to be raised from the dead never to die again because He has life in Himself. Having joined Himself to us in our state of destruction, He can pull us out of that destruction in His resurrection. In this manner God's "justice" is done because He does not allow His creation from nothing to go back to nothing (defeating the purpose of creating it in the first place), which fell subject to corruption through sin, without changing the fact that sin, that is missing the mark (God is our mark), is destructive.

Then the entire Mystery of Salvation is the working, fulfillment, and satisfaction of God's justice - not just the Father receiving the offering of the Son's substitutionary death. Am I correct?

Offline Melodist

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,522
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #36 on: August 20, 2012, 10:47:17 PM »
Then the entire Mystery of Salvation is the working, fulfillment, and satisfaction of God's justice - not just the Father receiving the offering of the Son's substitutionary death. Am I correct?

And this is where I have problems with some Protestants - they neglect the role of the resurrection in our salvation. Everything important happens in Christ's death and then someone can preach a "gospel" of salvation and omit the resurrection as if it's not really that important or a cause of our salvation. Romans 10:9 doesn't say that salvation is dependent strictly on belief that God punished Jesus for what you did wrong and now you're off the hook, but that for salvation you must believe that God raised Him from the dead.

It is substitutionary because Christ takes the death of the collective human race onto Himself in order to give His resurrection to the collective human race. The use of legal language to describe sin and its consequences is not uncommon in the scriptures. If the law is fulfilled in Christ, then Christ fulfills all of the offerings and sacrifices, which were made to God, which God received. There is nothing wrong with the use of this language and imagery, it's when Christ's death alone apart from His resurrection becomes a "gospel of salvation" that I take issue with.
And FWIW, these are our Fathers too, you know.

Made Perfect in Weakness - Latest Post: The Son of God

Offline Nephi

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,829
  • A non-Chalcedonian in Chalcedonian clothing.
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #37 on: August 20, 2012, 10:58:27 PM »
Then the entire Mystery of Salvation is the working, fulfillment, and satisfaction of God's justice - not just the Father receiving the offering of the Son's substitutionary death. Am I correct?

And this is where I have problems with some Protestants - they neglect the role of the resurrection in our salvation. Everything important happens in Christ's death and then someone can preach a "gospel" of salvation and omit the resurrection as if it's not really that important or a cause of our salvation. Romans 10:9 doesn't say that salvation is dependent strictly on belief that God punished Jesus for what you did wrong and now you're off the hook, but that for salvation you must believe that God raised Him from the dead.

It is substitutionary because Christ takes the death of the collective human race onto Himself in order to give His resurrection to the collective human race. The use of legal language to describe sin and its consequences is not uncommon in the scriptures. If the law is fulfilled in Christ, then Christ fulfills all of the offerings and sacrifices, which were made to God, which God received. There is nothing wrong with the use of this language and imagery, it's when Christ's death alone apart from His resurrection becomes a "gospel of salvation" that I take issue with.

Okay I think I understand. Thanks.

Until recently I always thought the anti-Western rejection of the substitutionary/sacrificial aspect of the Atonement was the norm, and so I'm miserably trying to re-understand the Atonement in light of all this.  :-[

Offline NicholasMyra

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,691
    • Hyperdox Herman
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Partially-overlapping
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #38 on: August 21, 2012, 12:45:01 AM »
I think this could be interpreted to say that we inherit everything that the fall did to Adam's nature becasue we inherited all of Adam's nature and not just part of it. It refers to original "sin" as "death of the soul", not "guilt".
Okay.

What about the demonic sperm/ via propagation part?

The teaching was functionally understood as "original sin is transmitted via sexual union; since the woman is merely the earth in which the seed is tilled, original sin is transmitted totally from the man's sperm."
« Last Edit: August 21, 2012, 12:59:13 AM by NicholasMyra »
Quote from: Fr. Thomas Hopko, dystopian parable of the prodigal son
...you can imagine so-called healing services of the pigpen. The books that could be written, you know: Life in the Pigpen. How to Cope in the Pigpen. Being Happy in the Pigpen. Surviving in the Pigpen. And then there could be counselling, for people who feel unhappy in the pigpen, to try to get them to come to terms with the pigpen, and to accept the pigpen.

Offline NicholasMyra

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,691
    • Hyperdox Herman
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Partially-overlapping
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #39 on: August 21, 2012, 12:48:42 AM »
Yes.  That is the Tridentine point

Quote from: Fr. Thomas Hopko, dystopian parable of the prodigal son
...you can imagine so-called healing services of the pigpen. The books that could be written, you know: Life in the Pigpen. How to Cope in the Pigpen. Being Happy in the Pigpen. Surviving in the Pigpen. And then there could be counselling, for people who feel unhappy in the pigpen, to try to get them to come to terms with the pigpen, and to accept the pigpen.

Offline NicholasMyra

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,691
    • Hyperdox Herman
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Partially-overlapping
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #40 on: August 21, 2012, 12:49:41 AM »
Until recently I always thought the anti-Western rejection of the substitutionary/sacrificial aspect of the Atonement was the norm, and so I'm miserably trying to re-understand the Atonement in light of all this.  :-[
Part of your confusion arises from the common confusion of "penal substitution" and "substitution", which occurs in Protestant, Catholic and Orthodox circles in English.
Quote from: Fr. Thomas Hopko, dystopian parable of the prodigal son
...you can imagine so-called healing services of the pigpen. The books that could be written, you know: Life in the Pigpen. How to Cope in the Pigpen. Being Happy in the Pigpen. Surviving in the Pigpen. And then there could be counselling, for people who feel unhappy in the pigpen, to try to get them to come to terms with the pigpen, and to accept the pigpen.

Offline Severian

  • My posts on this site don't necessarily reflect my current position on any given subject.
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,642
  • Pat. St. Severus, pray for my family & friends
    • St. Severus of Antioch's Writings
  • Faith: Coptic Orthodox Christian
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #41 on: August 21, 2012, 01:31:13 AM »
What do you guys think of a concept of "infinite sin?"
« Last Edit: August 21, 2012, 01:31:41 AM by Severian »
"I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die [...] These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world." -The Lord Jesus Christ

No longer active on OC.net. Please pray for me and forgive any harm I might have caused by my ignorance and malice.

Offline William

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,359
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #42 on: August 21, 2012, 01:44:52 AM »
What do you guys think of a concept of "infinite sin?"

What's that?
Cursed be he that doeth the work of the LORD deceitfully, and cursed be he that keepeth back his sword from blood.

Offline Severian

  • My posts on this site don't necessarily reflect my current position on any given subject.
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,642
  • Pat. St. Severus, pray for my family & friends
    • St. Severus of Antioch's Writings
  • Faith: Coptic Orthodox Christian
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #43 on: August 21, 2012, 01:57:05 AM »
What do you guys think of a concept of "infinite sin?"

What's that?
Basically, because God is infinite when you sin against Him the price is infinite. In order to atone for this infinite price, it requires an infinite sacrifice like Christ.
« Last Edit: August 21, 2012, 01:58:04 AM by Severian »
"I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die [...] These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world." -The Lord Jesus Christ

No longer active on OC.net. Please pray for me and forgive any harm I might have caused by my ignorance and malice.

Offline William

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,359
Re: Anti-Westernism as Rejection of Substitution/Satisfaction Theories?
« Reply #44 on: August 21, 2012, 02:24:18 AM »
What do you guys think of a concept of "infinite sin?"

What's that?
Basically, because God is infinite when you sin against Him the price is infinite. In order to atone for this infinite price, it requires an infinite sacrifice like Christ.

Does it take an infinite amount of cleanser to clean a blob in the ocean?
Cursed be he that doeth the work of the LORD deceitfully, and cursed be he that keepeth back his sword from blood.