Posted on 11/22/2005 7:26:10 AM PST by NYer
That has historically been used as cover for some sort of heresy regarding the reality of the incarnation. It's an interesting coincidence (or maybe there's a cause-adn-effect) that iconoclasm became a problem in the East in the 800s ... about the same time islam (lower case intentional) began to present a real threat to Christendom. Islam could be described as the Arian heresy on steroids.
Hah! Don't be afraid of the Truth ... it will set you free.
The sack of Constantinople was an utterly reprehensible case of theft, vandalism, thuggery, and murder. The Pope condemned it as such. The English "reformation" was worse, as it was not confined to one city, and spanned decades.
Depending on exactly what you mean by "place of primacy" I might very well agree with that.
" Depending on exactly what you mean by "place of primacy" I might very well agree with that."
That is precisely what our theologians are working on even today. Until that issue is resolved and we can agree on the proper function of the Petrine Office, we're going nowhere towards unity. On the Orthodox side, there is great hope that this issue will be resolved. It has to be. Without resolution, there can be no Ecumenical Council because the Pope must preside and all the particular churches must attend. Without an Ecumenical Council, there can be no resolution of the dogmatic issues which divide us. It really is that simple. As all of that is going on, we as lay people and lower clergy have to come to understand each other's beliefs better, as frankly I think we have been doing for two years at least here on FR.... We are a small group, but not one without influence or a voice.
No, I don't mean the Pope (he's just a man), and No, I don't mean the crucifix (that's just an icon), and No, I don't mean the roses (they're just a decoration), and No, I don't mean the ornately decorated gold object (that's just a monstrance).
One thing left in that picture ...
;'}
And the Church's mission is the celebration of Christ. To pursue some watered down exhaltation of "beauty" is to play into the hands of the world.
Even Jesus celebrated with his mother and friends at the Wedding Feast of Cana. He admonished the Apostles and other disciples when they tried to stop the woman from washing his feet with her tears and then anointing them with perfune. He worshipped in the temples of his day, with great reverence for the Torah, carefully rolling the scroll when He finished reading.
One can appreciate beauty and celebration without worshipping it, without allowing the beauty or celebration to take the place of the worship of God above all else, as outlined in the 10 Commandments.
May The Lord bless their labours.
I hope one day to be able to worship and receive Holy Communion at your parish, and you at mine.
SD
I like your way of putting things on that picture, AB...
What absence?
"So, do you wear nice clothes to church or what?"
Sorry for being slow SD.
I wear good clothes.
But have you never seen church turn into a vain fashion show with everyone preening in the Sunday best? I have. And I seen poor folks come in and feel so underdressed that they leave - and fail to hear God's word.
Given Texas' track record, that's not a very good comparison. ;o)
"What absence?"
Mark 14:7
For ye have the poor with you always, and whensoever ye will ye may do them good: but me ye have not always.
"The Person of Jesus, eh? Got that raht h'yar:"
Interesting. Eucharist as denial of the incarnation.
Incarnation means that Jesus has a real body. A real body can't be in two places at once.
Christ is present in any church with valid sacraments at all times, and in a less tangible way everywhere two or more are gathered in His name. Where He is not present, art cannot be present either. Just look at the "art" secular societies produce.
So you're denying that Christ's glorified Body can do things His pre-Crucifixion Body can't? How do you explain how He entered the Upper Room?
I'm sure you are going to see this a lot but:
While they were eating, Jesus took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and giving it to his disciples said, "Take and eat; this is my body."
Is His body in two places?
First of all, the article didn't capitalize the word "beauty" as you do. Second, that part of the article is addressing the art that you find in our churches. It says nothing about our Mass being a celebration of beauty. You've taken the statement out of context.
A human limited body, maybe, but for God, all things are possible. Jesus said, and Paul taught, and the early church fathers believed Jesus was right there in the Eucharist. You may disagree, you may not believe, but this is the historical reality.
And I, as would others here, truly appreciate it if you would quit insulting Jesus here.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.