@curiousdannii Yes, baptism turns out to be the least issue among the 3 mainstream divisions. So I have finished that two hour episode which turns out to be an "emergency-mode" response to Ortlund's interview as well as other videos from Josh's YouTube playlist
which has a cross-listed episode (with TruthUnites) when Gavin enlisted feedback from Josh Schooping (as an ex-Orthodox) and Sean Luke (Anglican) about his recent debate with Trent Horn on Sola Scriptura, which in itself is very good in the way that Gavin brings out uncommon defense for Sola Scriptura from philosophical (ontological), Trinitarian, and Second Temple Jewish angles.
Which led me to the conversion interview of Craig Truglia by a Swedish-based Orthodox (both still very young, BTW, under 40, as opposed to Fr. John Whiteford who just had his 2nd grandchild). Turns out I may be wrong about Craig's coming from CMA (probably that was his wife's background). He himself was secular Jew but wasn't raised Jew but "cultural Christian" who was baptized in a liberal ELCA Lutheran church
(to which he came back after getting married and started volunteering but was shocked how the leftover from communion was being flushed without respect in the bathroom) and later attended a presbyterian church with his wife. But a major contributing factor is his college humanities education (Great Course based) and meeting a medievalist Roman Catholic professor who he said was the FIRST who explained the Bible intelligently to him.
I still haven't heard where CMA is mentioned; I haven't finished the interview yet. I just want to include it here because it has many interesting points for us Protestants who feel alien to Eastern Orthodox way of doing Christianity. One major topic is the cultural divide and different approach to Christianity: a lot less intellectual, more prayerful and emphasizing spiritual life, and veneration based (icon kissing, even kissing the dead in funerals!).
One good segment to illustrate the big difference is in minute 40:00 to about DOING fasting and praying when the focus is not on the reward / answer but the doing itself IS the reward.
Similar about Scripture reading (minute 40:30) that Protestants are very analytical but for Orthodox memorizing and chanting through them, soaking through the reading which is okay without understanding and "God will speak to you one day through a word and you will know what it means" which also enables you to then understand what the saints were saying and what it means in the liturgy.
I just got around to minute 50:00 where Ioannis Nusias talked about the process thinking in scholastic method and about science that got me squirming since I'm firmly entrenched in the Catholic view of the harmony of faith and reason. But he was more commenting on scholastic Protestant (of which Calvin is one) and certain conclusions that "an orthodox would never dream to say that" such as in Calvinism how "God would actually create people and send them to hell".
It's quite disappointing that Craig Truglia in minute 55:45 said "The West is going to die, it's like a disease", explaining that the western way of thinking has limitations and eventually leads to nihilism which he thinks is "intrinsic to the scholastic view of thought where everything's just about the individual devising meaning and then if the premises are wrong then nothing could be true... etc" which I think it's a caricature that given someone with his background shouldn't have made.
That charge should instead have been levelled against modernity and the later Biblicist way of conceiving Bible as propositions from which fundamentalists construct their theology. From how I see Thomism explained in the 21st century, the scholastic method is capacious enough to provide space for suprarational & preternatural mysticism, the DOING of religion in liturgies & other time-honored prayer and fasting, and incorporating ancient hermeneutics.
Did Jesus always have explicit knowledge that he is God? Or, did he figure out he is God by reading the old testament, and realizing the prophecies were about him? Or some other means? And, how did he know that he knew, instead of it being a matter of opinion?
@PeterTurner I truly hope Pope Francis and the 450 attending the synod allow the Holy Spirit to work through them with wisdom on leading the church in response to what the church really needs to do today. Even while on the fence I really want RC to remain a live option for me. And knowing how much "skin in the game" RC has by steadfastly declaring the church to be sacrament (thus has empirically visible elements showing spiritual truths) makes me watch with fear and trembling.
@Matthew I think it's human. 2 informal phrasings ("The last book ... Revelation... at 18:13" and the last sentence) as well sub-optimal organization of ideas (example: health benefit comes out of nowhere) and Kadalikatt's Indian background making him privy to add the last sentence prompted by the OP's ("Hindu and Buddhist practice"), and the stylistic & minor grammar correction by agarza are the indicators to me.
If the AI takes into account Kadalikatt's personal stylistic habit (such as abbreviating Matthew as "Mtt") I'll be a little scared of the advances it has made. For example, can we ask ChatGPT to generate the text in the style of Kadalikatt / GratefulDisciple ?
@PeterTurner @Matthew While on the topic of conversion, I'm also planning to watch Gavin Ortlund's response to Cameron Bertuzzi's conversion to Roman Catholicism here, which was affected by his interview with Josh Schooping mentioned above.
Oh, man. Thoughtful people are converting left and right at the intersection of 3 major freeways (Orthodox, RC, and Protestantism), all appealing to church fathers. Really need to study Patristics well !
It's interesting that the outgoing party (Eastern Orthodox in Josh Schooping case and Protestant Ortlund in Cameron's case) becomes immediately concerned to reassure the people of their flock by airing out the counter-narrative, both saying that the episode wasn't planned or reprioritized.
@GratefulDisciple Actually, it was the disjointedness that made me wonder... It doesn't really even answer the question (at least not clearly), and wanders off on tangents for no apparent reason.
@GratefulDisciple I watched an interview with someone that had converted to RCC. It might have been CB, but I'm not certain. I remember being struck by how most of what he said attracted him to Catholicism wasn't Catholicism, but "high church". I was not amused.
@Matthew Default ChatGPT response is not disjointed. Plus I have read a lot of his answers and my own neural net is comfortable identifying this as consistent with his.
@Matthew Yeah, in the CB episode Gavin Ortlund mentioned preference for "high church" as a false reason, pointing out there are high church historic Protestant churches too. I'm certainly not in danger of making that mistake since I know so much of J.S. Bach's work. Plus, going to Catholic mass in many parishes, the music has been disappointing; mostly run-of-the-mill evangelical church.
@Matthew Cameron Bertuzi's interview on Pints With Aquinas after he announced his conversion largely credited statistics. His stats showed him that Catholicism's claims were far more likely to be true than anything Protestants claims.
@PeterTurner Gavin mentioned about the stats too, but I haven't gone into the weeds with the Papacy (yet) so cannot say much about it. From what I know of both Catholics and Protestants, Gavin's response does NOT blatantly mischaracterize Catholic's position. He provides well reasoned arguments backed by scholarship (including Catholic scholars too) that looks good on the surface, which leaves to the reader having to make decision on the narrative of the facts.
Gavin is also quite charitable (compared to Craig Truglia & Fr. John Whiteford) in that he does not anathemize CB mainly because from Protestant point of view, particular churches and individual dioceses ARE churches in the fullest sense of the term. He advises Christians contemplating crossing the Tiber (like myself) to read much church history and Reformation era Protestant theologies as a better source than biased but popular point of views that influenced CB.
While from Eastern Orthodox point of view, Craig Truglia & Fr. John Whiteford advises potential converts to Protestantism to immerse themselves in Orthodox "way of thinking" first and studied Patristics and the Saints carefully. So both Gavin & the Truglia+Whiteford duo recommend much studying making use of increasingly-available-at-popular-level scholarly material available.
BTW, I found yet another case of Orthodox priest "apostisizing" to Protestantism 8 months after Joshua Schooping: the case of Matthew Joyner who converted to Anglican (interview by Dr. Tony Costa) (2 hr video), to which the same duo (Craig Truglia and Fr. John Whiteford) responded in this 2.75 hr video.
@GratefulDisciple I suspect this is more from people not being particularly committed to their original church's theology. Even more people would have those tough questions but then come to a place where they can settle back into their original branch. Personally I don't see how anyone truly committed to Protestant/Reformed theology could "cross the Tiber". Shift to a more sacramental/liturgical/whatever denomination within Protestantism, sure.
@curiousdannii Sure. So far only Dr. Scott Hahn came across as having done the homework before converting (from confessional reformed). His big issue is his Biblical understanding of covenants that are better answered from Catholicism PROVIDED you buy into the kind of typologies that the Catholic church say. Which is tricky, as Gavin Ortlund said in the CB episode how typology is super flexible and we have to be really mindful on how the NT authors (and early church fathers) are employing it.
As for liturgical, I would certainly be comfortable in high church Anglicanism and probably will stay comfortable there until I die, like C.S. Lewis. But sadly the ethical norms have been compromised. Still need to try ACNA.
I have seen the Matthew Joyner's case until around minute 17:00 enough to know that he fits what you said above. But while he was influenced by books by JI Packer and RC Sproul and by his understanding of PSA, I'm actually rather turned off by them. So in my current state, if the Catholic church didn't require the dogmas about Mary and Papal Infallibility, I would have become Catholic already.
From what I hear about Eastern Orthodoxy recently, I'm glad that I'm disabused by reports on the reality on the ground. I'm also turned off by their exclusivism. I think Catholicism retains the best of Eastern Orthodoxy.
@PeterTurner I haven't confirmed this yet, but I think they don't believe Mary to be mediatrix of grace. So no prayers implying this is in their Book of Common Prayer. I don't think they require believing the Assumption of Mary either, which seems to be the prerequisite for her being mediatrix of grace as well as the more elevated veneration offered to her.
I wonder about the Assumption though (Maybe they just don't think about it, the way they don't think much about Confession), that's obviously mainly Sacred Tradition - shared by Eastern Orthodox who believe in the Dormition of Mary.
Oh, I don't think I mentioned it, I've started The Evangelical Catholic training. Not 100% sure where that'll lead, but should be fun.
@PeterTurner But for committed Protestants, solus Christus removes any concept of Mary as mediator or intercessor. Protestants are firmly egalitarian in this regard. Mary is at most a great example we follow, just as we follow Paul (1 Corinthians 11:1).
@PeterTurner Yes, Pope Francis has been resistant to make it a dogma, but the recent (post 19th century) Popes who advocated rosary in their encyclicals so emphasized Maryan devotion to make me uncomfortable that she was given much roles that should have been Christ's. I have details in my mind, but I'm still studying this.
Mary is not the mother of the church, and definitely not the spouse of the Spirit! That idea would absolutely repulse almost all Protestants. While it isn't Catholic dogma, the fact that Catholics seemingly can't speak ill of it is deeply concerning, and would be enough for me to reject Catholicism if for nothing else.
@curiousdannii Mary as Mother of the Church, is a doctrine that Pope Francis put forward (maybe in a conciliatory way for those who wanted him to go further)
It's "pious traditions" like that which make me think that in reality Catholicism is much more of a free-for-all than Protestantism's sola scriptura, where the aim is to come together, and where fringe ideas can be firmly discouraged.
(Just to clarify, it's Mary as the Spirit's spouse that would repulse most Protestants, not Mary as the church's mother.)
@PeterTurner In some ways modern Catholicism defines things more than Protestantism (the Catholic Catechism is bigger than Protestant catechisms), but in other ways less (pious traditions, unconfirmed prophets, etc.)
@PeterTurner @curiousdannii To me, the right typology seems to underwrite both Assumption of Mary and the Papacy, since Gavin's posts show the very late historical development of both. So if 1) there is a convincing argument that new doctrinal development by Vatican is legitimate, and 2) the newer doctrines about Mary & the Pope follow organically from the church fathers and typologically valid (Dr. Scott Hahn's defense), then it's the kind of support I need.
I don't mean Protestantism has answered all the theological questions, there's obviously lots of internal diversity, but that the methodology of Protestantism should allow individuals to come to firm personal convictions on most issues, and allows Protestant denominations to have clear borders. Whereas I haven't seen any explanation on how Catholics are to decide if they'll personally adhere to a pious tradition or not. And individual churches are likely to have that diversity within them.
@GratefulDisciple Huh? If they're late developments shouldn't that mean they're less supported?
Oh, you mean they should be supported on the basis of typology, not history?
@curiousdannii In my understanding both Catholic and Protestant scholars agree that 1) some Catholic dotrines are LATE development and 2) there is internal coherence. Whether there is support is another issue. Gavin did a great job explaining Sola Scriptura by the way, recommend watching his several episodes since his debate with Trent Horn. Helps sharpen the root issue for me.
@curiousdannii There's pretty clear definitions on what is OK and what is no OK. I think there's basically 3 classes. Bad, OK for Private Devotion and OK for Public Devotion. If the promulgators of such and such devotion do their due diligence, it's easy to trace approval through a Bishop
@curiousdannii Because if it's based on history alone, it's checkmate for Catholicism. The only way out is via typology and the belief that the Holy Spirit really guides the Magisterium.
@PeterTurner So what's a normal Catholic to do if their parish priest's sermons promoting Mary being the Spirit's spouse cause them great distress? Would they just have to go to a different parish?
@GratefulDisciple I don't know what sort of typology would lead to either of those issues. Never looked into either because they're such non-starters for me.
I'm firmly committed to elder led churches. Even the Presbyterian church (of Australia) isn't presbyterian enough for me!
@curiousdannii I think within the framework of Catholic worship, sermons are not central. Liturgy is. Words in the liturgy is super important. If there is in the liturgy words implying Mary's being co-mediatrix, game over for me converting.
@GratefulDisciple So? Sermons, prayers, informal conversations, they can all cause great distress. But yes, fair enough for you.
@GratefulDisciple It seems a significant part of the typology supporting the assumption of Mary is the typology of Mary being the Arc of the Covenant. Which you already know I reject. And the article you shared supporting it actually seemed to do the opposite :P
@curiousdannii Sermons, prayers, and informal conversations are a lot less binding in the Catholic system. I'm a lot more worried about the recent Marian encyclicals such as Marialis Cultus (1974) and Ad Caeli Reginam (1954).
@curiousdannii Boy, if a priest ever said something close to that I think we'd all be very surprised. Is "Spouse of the Holy Spirit" a bridge too far, I don't believe it's in the Litany of Loretto, I don't even think it's something St. Maximillian Kolbe would be likely to say.
@GratefulDisciple I know they're less binding! My point was that teaching pious traditions could cause great distress in other people, and from what I've seen, it seems like other Catholics just have to put up with it.
@curiousdannii I think the common thing to do would be to report it to the Bishop. In my, limited knowledge, this would be for devotions to people who we'd really like to be Saints (like GKC) or for private exorcism prayers.
@curiousdannii yeah totally. Introduction to the Devout Life (helped my wife considerably in her faith), the Militia Immaculata of St. Max is the reason I wrested my way out of self-loathing and remained a Catholic and Pope Leo XIII is the inspiration behind the movement hearlded by heros GK Chesterton and Hilaire Belloc.
@PeterTurner I wonder whether after thanking Mary for her role in conceiving Jesus as Mother of God and thanking her to pray for the whole church (as Mother of the church), Catholics can otherwise address Mary like other saints in the Triumphant church? That way, there is no dilution in the flow of grace in the post-Jesus's ascension era from Jesus alone.
@PeterTurner Ah. To be honest, I had only heard of Kolbe, who I mostly know from jong ricafort. From my perspective he seems to be promoting some of the biggest heresies within Catholicism. At least his teachings aren't dogma. (I don't know what Militia Immaculata says, it may have nothing to do with those things.)
The Logos or the Incarnate Word became flesh in what known to be "hypostatic union". Jesus Christ the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity became flesh and dwelt among us having two nature both fully God and fully Man or God-Man.
In the case of the Holy Spirit the Third Person of the Most Holy...
Did Jesus always have explicit knowledge that he is God? Or, did he figure out he is God by reading the old testament, and realizing the prophecies were about him? Or some other means? And, how did he know that he knew, instead of it being a matter of opinion?
