Where's the Christmas Thread?????

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

I have a family friend who is a Roman Catholic priest.

Is this him? Pretty impressive!

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Is this him? Pretty impressive!

That joker is a liberal Catholic.

Our friends are conservatives.

It's like this sis, when people or different beliefs get together, they usually like those who are as conservative as they are. Usually when you hang out with liberals of any religion, or ideology, they seem to start agreeing with anything you say, to a point. But even when you hit their sacred cows, they most of the time acquiesce, and agree to disagree. This is why I enjoy posting with you. You just don't salute everything that's ran up the flagpole. I appreciate that in my friends, and family.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

He was One God my foot. He was as Trinitarian as the rest of the Eastern Orthodox in Greece. The Bishop of Myra also was placed in prison when he slapped Arius. He was brought before Constantine and defrocked, and had his priest stole taken from him. Later that evening he was in his cell when Jesus and Mary appeared to him holding the books of the Gospel. Mary presented the Bishop with his priestly attire. Sorry my boy, but your Eastern Catholic priest was an icon kissing, Mary worshiper.

A Modalist? What a laugh!

Actually, his priest robes were taken from him by the council and he was placed in "jail" (not prison) for one evening. LEGEND has it that Nicholas was visited by Jesus and Mary, but this legend is a later addition to the Nicholas story. Historically, we know that Constantine did reinstate Nicholas and allowed him to return to Myra.

The political intrigue behind the actual history is how Nicholas was removed from the council in time to keep him out of the final deliberations. His name was also removed from the list of Trinitarian attendees who finalized the Trinity. Add the fact that Myra was a refuge for Modalists, and we see what most likely happened....

Most likely.... Nicholas was on the fence regarding Modalism and the emergent Trinitarianism. Myra was known for being a safe place for Modalists. Remember, Modalists were mostly found among the orthodox membership and leadership at the time. There were no strictly Modalistic organizations. So, it was common for Modalism to be tolerated throughout much of the orthodox church. At the council, Arius clearly blasphemed by denying the divinity of Jesus before the council. Nicholas became so enraged he struck Arius. As a result, this allowed the Trinitarians to remove a very popular (and potentially non-Trinitarian Bishop from the deliberations). Once Nicholas was secured in jail, and other less popular Modalists denounced, the Trinitarians easily ratified Trinitarianism. The next day, Nicholas was released. He was also eventually reinstated as Bishop of Myra. As for council records, his name was stricken from the list of Trinitarian attendees.

When it comes to history, it is important to separate the legend/myth from the story. It is also important to read between the lines.

As for icons, veneration of saints, etc.... many of those practices were rather common in those times within the historic church. We still participate in Catholic tradition when we partake in Communion using a wafer and small thimble of wine or juice. Old habits die hard.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Krishna most certainly was real, so was Rama, Laxman, and king Ravana. History becomes legend, legend becomes myth. Just as Heracles and even Zeus were made bigger than life, were actual people in history. Your Greek Orthodox monk's history was woven into a fat elf with eight tiny reindeer.

I'm glad you're catching on....

But again, his own history was hijacked and turned into some weird miracle worker who was able to summon Mary. Face it Aquila your want to have Santa Claus has been circling the drain.

I agree, there are many legends and myths surrounding Nicholas. Most of which are Catholic/Orthodox exaggerations placed on Nicholas some time later. All we can truly know about Nicholas is that he had a passion for Christ's divinity and he was extremely generous to those in need. So generous in fact, that his name became synonymous with generosity and giving.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Actually, his priest robes were taken from him by the council and he was placed in "jail" (not prison) for one evening. LEGEND has it that Nicholas was visited by Jesus and Mary, but this legend is a later addition to the Nicholas story. Historically, we know that Constantine did reinstate Nicholas and allowed him to return to Myra.

The political intrigue behind the actual history is how Nicholas was removed from the council in time to keep him out of the final deliberations. His name was also removed from the list of Trinitarian attendees who finalized the Trinity. Add the fact that Myra was a refuge for Modalists, and we see what most likely happened....

Most likely, Nicholas was on the fence regarding Modalism and the emergent Trinitarianism. Myra was known for being a safe place for Modalists. Remember, Modalists were mostly found among the orthodox membership and leadership at the time. There were no strictly Modalistic organizations. So, it was common for Modalism to be tolerated, throughout much of the orthodox church. At the council, Arius clearly blasphemed by denying the divinity of Jesus before the council. Nicholas became so enraged he struck Arius. As a result, this allowed the solid Trinitarian majority to remove a very popular and potentially non-Trinitarian Bishop from the deliberations. Once Nicholas was secured in jail, and other less popular Modalists denounced, the Trinitarians easily ratified Trinitarianism. The next day, Nicholas was released. He was also eventually reinstated as Bishop of Myra. As for council records, his name stricken from the list of Trinitarian attendees.

When it comes to history, it is important to separate the legend/myth from the story. It is also important to read between the lines.

As for icons, veneration of saints, etc.... many of those practices were rather common in those times within the historic church. We still participate in Catholic tradition when we partake in Communion using a wafer and small thimble of wine or juice. Old habits die hard.

Either you need to write slower or post slower. Most likely? Most likely really is factual, and doesn't prove anything. Even if you were a revisionist historian you would employe some detective work in your search for truth in history. The Bishop of Myra wasn't a modalist he was an Orthodox Greek bishop, of a Roman Greek town. He believed in Mariology and in all the trappings of the Eastern Roman Ecclesiastica. Also you should keep in mind that not everyone drinks grape juice with ritz crackers like the Baptist. It is supposed to be a meal with fermented wine and bread.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Either you need to write slower or post slower. Most likely? Most likely really is factual, and doesn't prove anything. Even if you were a revisionist historian you would employe some detective work in your search for truth in history. The Bishop of Myra wasn't a modalist he was an Orthodox Greek bishop, of a Roman Greek town. He believed in Mariology and in all the trappings of the Eastern Roman Ecclesiastica. Also you should keep in mind that not everyone drinks grape juice with ritz crackers like the Baptist. It is supposed to be a meal with fermented wine and bread.

Did you know that some early Modalists also venerated Mary and other "Saints"??? It was a wide spread custom. I'm not saying it is biblical. I'm simply saying that one's Christology isn't dependent upon one's peripheral ecclesiological practices.

As you know, I'm into house churching. We don't practice "Communion". We practice, "The Lord's Supper". We have a full meal together and close the meal with the breaking of bread and the passing of the cup. We believe that there must be a single loaf and a single cup (seeing that Paul describes the emblems in the singular). Some house churches in our fellowship slice the loaf, others pass the loaf and those present tear a piece off as they pass it to the next member. The symbolism is one Lord, being torn to pieces for us. Then the cup is passed. We dip the bread in the cup (like a sop) and then pass the cup to the next member. Once all have dipped, we have a Word, and partake. Some house churches use actual wine, others use grape juice. But it is a part of a full meal.

I don't know about you, but I find it rather amusing when believers rant and rave over some non-biblical practice or tradition, while partaking in the Lord's Supper in an equally pagan or Catholic manner.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Aquila

As you know, I'm into house churching. We don't practice "Communion". We practice, "The Lord's Supper".

they're the same thing scripturally.

1 Cor 10: 16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?

Communion means fellowship.

[houston]

Originally Posted by mfblume

they're the same thing scripturally.

1 Cor 10: 16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?

Communion means fellowship.

He means no cracker and juice in a thimble

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by houston

He means no cracker and juice in a thimble

Why use scriptural terms to describe traditions?

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Why use scriptural terms to describe traditions?