A Contemplation on 1st Corinthians 1:27

“… but God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise, God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong… (RSV Bible)”

- 1st Corinthians 1:27

The First Epistle to the Corinthians was probably written by St. Paul, and perhaps around 53 to 54 AD. In the passage of 1^st Corinthians 1:27, some bible translations in English use the word “confound” instead of to “shame.” Kataischuno is the word used in the original Greek which does mean “to shame.” The related question which I ask is who is wise, and who isn’t, and is that up to us humans to determine with relevance to other humans? Most of my life, I have heard some immediately think divisively when reading this passage. A good example of what I mean is what Rev. R.J. Rushdoony said: “…Because Jesus Christ is our foundation, we are empowered to confound and disestablish all false faiths.... As we build, we confound or break down the powers of evil (http://chalcedon.edu/)." Let me be clear and just say that the only one with the authority to disestablish anything is God. Moreover, this is a good example of reading way too much into a passage.

The remainder of 1st Corinthians chapter 1 partially reads: “...so that no human being might boast in the presence of God...God made our wisdom, our righteousness and sanctification and redemption; therefore, as it is written, ‘Let him who boasts, boast of the Lord.’” The issue is that as soon as one Christian thinks another Christian or another religious person is not to par with him or her than that person has already made the assumption that they are perhaps better, and technically is boasting and assuming that he or her are “empowered” or given a higher authority of some sort. In a sense, it could be said that one has already placed him or herself in a self-proclaimed elite status thus becoming the very wise or strong he or she are supposed to be shaming…very redundant, if you ask me, because one just comes full circle. Perhaps, this is why St. Paul said at the end of the chapter: “Let him who boasts, boast of the Lord.”

I have a much bigger question to ask with relevance to this passage, and it is could 1st Corinthians 1:27 be one of the major reasons for lack of unity among Christians? The truth is that when one starts thinking the other is wrong, spiritually speaking, one is already making oneself the elite or spiritually superior to the other. This is actually very typical of what I call post-reformation thinking which is very much all about Scripture interpretation. A good illustration of what I am saying is when people start raising petty issues about how baptism is done correctly by us and wrong by them when in reality the important thing is Christ being in us the same as he is in them. We will always view all things differently even if we have common ground because God made everyone of us different, and this actually makes God bigger and way beyond grasp of our extremely limited human comprehension. God can speak to us through the Scriptures, but this is personal; however, many fall into the error of limiting the Scriptures' multifaceted and multidimensional ability to manifest itself by giving it only one interpretation, and forcing that interpretation to apply to all readers when God has given everyone a brain that is different for reasons that God only knows, most often.

“Both Sides, Now” is a song written by Joni Mitchell that was recorded by Judy Collins back in 1967... I am sure many have heard it. Part of the lyrics to the song say: “…I’ve looked at clouds from both sides now, from up and down and still somehow, it’s cloud's illusions I recall I really don't know clouds at all…” If we substitute the word “Scriptures” for the word “Clouds,” we may actually get a better understanding of how the Scriptures are, as I said before, multifaceted and have multidimensional ability to manifest itself. In fact, Scriptures can be and are often transcendent. We can even return to read the same verse many years later and see things we had not seen before. Maybe we can now say, or perhaps one day say the following:

I've looked at Scriptures from both sides now

From up and down and still somehow

It's Scriptures' illusions I recall

I really don't know Scriptures at all

Well, I hope you enjoyed reading this post. Thank you and blessings!

References:

http://chalcedon.edu/research/articles/confounding-the-mighty/#author-rev-r-j-rushdoony

RSV Bible

Is Ecumenism Just a Dream?

 I hope everyone is having a wonderful autumn. This post is going to be brief. I simply wanted to share an article about ecumenism in a specific local area of the globe that perhaps mirrors the big picture of ecumenism worldwide. Sometimes the macro is very similar to the micro, and vice versa. The article is by Alf McCreary, and it was published in the Belfast Telegraph on September 19th, 2015. Of course, by now most of you have already figured out that the specific area of the globe I was referencing is Ireland, which is an excellent guess and match. The title of the article is: Is ecumenism and peace only a dream and nothing more? Well, it seems to me that is a good question to ask on a macro level, as well. I mean, when we really think about it, Christians seem more divided than ever these days. So, are ecumenism and peace only a dream and nothing more? The reason Alf  McCreary asked the question was because Trinity College Dublin is selling its former Irish School of Ecumenics building in north Belfast, and it seems like the end of an era for ecumenism, symbolically speaking. The author says that for some time clerics from various denominations lived in the building, and he expresses what he thinks is the reason for the dwindling. One of the things the author said was the following: “Until the Catholic Church approves of Protestants sharing communion with its members, there will be no true Christian unity.”

I suggest reading the full article, and decide what you think for yourself.  Thanks you for reading my post and blessings! The link to Is ecumenism and peace only a dream and nothing more? is below.

Is ecumenism and peace only a dream and nothing more? - BelfastTelegraph.co.uk

Reexamining the Papacy

Until now, I have spoken quite favorably about Pope Francis, although at times I have my doubts. A friend recently said something like “the Holy Father is not a liberal or a conservative; he is a man of God that teaches church doctrine.” Well, in actuality, the Holy Father teaches Roman Catholic Church doctrine, and I do not know if we can prove if he is a liberal or a conservative, but I am sure he knows what he is. I have to say Roman Catholic because often those that are not Christian are not aware of this fact. There isn’t much ecumenism in Christianity today. In fact, there are more denominations and groups than ever before in the history of Christianity. In 1054, the Eastern Church and the Western Church split up; this was called “the Great Schism.” In 1517, on All Saints Day, one could say that Martin Luther by posting his 95 Theses began what would later be called the Protestant Reformation. The Reformation basically became a split from the Roman Church in thought and theology which eventually produced new denominations in Christianity. Furthermore, many of those denominations split into many groups which exist today. This post is not about church history, but I strongly urge everyone to get to know this history because it is extremely important to know, and it is a basic foundation for what I am about to say. This post is about the papacy (the office of the Pope), but I will not go into every detail of what the papacy is. The Roman Catholic Pope, for one thing, is NOT the leader of all Christians worldwide which altogether amount to about 2.2 billion. The Roman Pope is, however, the leader of the Roman Catholics which are about half of that aforementioned number. Indeed, Roman Catholics are the largest of the Christian denominations. As Fr. Thomas Hopko used to say: “the Pope is the de facto leader of the Christians because of the media,” but not because Orthodox, Anglicans, and Protestants, and other groups accept him as such. Of course, I have no doubt that the Pope wants for all Christians to be Roman Catholic. To move a bit faster in this post, what exactly is the Roman Pope?

On September 24^th, 2015, Pope Francis gave a speech addressing the members of the US Congress. During the speech, Pope Francis said something interesting in between the lines, he said: “recently my brother bishops here in the United States….” The Pope said “brother bishops.” So, he considers himself a bishop, and indeed he was the Archbishop of Buenos Aires, Argentina, and his name was or is also Jorge Mario Bergoglio; however, Pope John Paul II made him a cardinal in 2001. A cardinal is still a bishop; however, his primary duty is to elect the pope when the seat is vacant. Before the schisms and divisions, and  when  Christians were a little more united, the maximum title in church leadership was that of bishop, and one became a bishop through apostolic succession, and the laying on of hands going back to Christ and the disciples. Bishops were the highest authority; for example, we get the Nicene Creed from the Council of Nicea in 325 when Christian bishops from throughout the empire (East and West) met in Nicaea in Bithynia to discuss theological beliefs...there was a presiding bishop, but no Pope yet. So, this cardinal and Pope thing are much newer hierarchical positions that did not exist in the original blue print of the Church. But, still, what is the Roman Pope?

According to Roman Catholic tradition, the Pope is the Bishop of Rome and leads the Roman Catholic Church. He is considered the successor of Saint Peter, whom Roman Catholics claim was the first bishop of Rome, although when one reads the Book of Acts, it seems that the founder or planter of the church in Rome was Saint Paul. It is known that Saint Irenaeus said that Linus was the first bishop of Rome, and Tertullian said it was Clement. I am not going to reference anyone on this post, just feel free to do the research and confirm whatever I say. Between 1868 and 1870, during Vatican I, the proclamation papal infallibility was established. Of course, many will say that I'm a heretic for saying what I may say on this subject because I may not use an accurate definition; however, 1 plus 1 equals 2, and in the case of papal infallibility, to claim that a man is infallible in any moment of his life is false…there is no need to debate, but feel free to research it yourself. Basically, when a dogma such as papal infallibility is made it also becomes the reason why at a time the phrase “vicar of Christ or God” has also been erroneously used which is an even bigger error, in my opinion, because now, instead of representing Saint Peter, one is claiming to represent God on Earth which is a very delusional claim to me because no man is flawless or perfect. Of course, don’t think I am not the only one who believes this way. Hans Kung was one of the Roman Catholic priest and theologians that participated in Vatican II who rejects papal infallibility. Moreover, Joseph Ratzinger, Pope Benedict XVI, who was the Pope that retired before Pope Francis, seems to have supported Kung in the book, Unfehlbar.This makes one wonder why he may have really resigned? I am not saying every Roman Pope has believed this way, nor Pope Francis, but if they want to claim to be the “Vicar of Christ” than they should retire very quickly similar to Pope Benedict XVI. After all, Jesus’ ministry on Earth only lasted three years, and he retired at age 33 at His Ascension.

Thinking about it, at first almost everyone criticized Pope Benedict for his retirement, but an early retirement is probably not a bad idea. Yeah, Jesus only served a three year term and retired at 33, so perhaps the Popes are retiring too late and serving at too old of an age. Well, that is for those who want to be infallible and want to be the “Vicar of Christ” on Earth. Maybe, just maybe, Popes need to be way younger, and only serve three year terms… just some food for thought. Oh, and on the idea of being the leader of all Christians, maybe Rome should have an ecumenical council that is not unilateral in which they do include leaders from all Christian denominations to participate, and have a vote as to who will be Pope every three years. I know this sounds crazy, but God gave me a mind to think, and that is what I am doing at this moment. In fact, I have a lot of other good ideas, and no man calls me a heretic.

I just spoke about three year terms for Popes which I am sure rubbed many the wrong way. Here is another crazy idea. I think maybe we should let priests get married, after all this idea of celibacy is only a thousand year old rule, more or less, and maybe that'll slow down this epidemic of child molestation which has cost the Roman Church much in financial settlements. In fact, I think the children of priest would be some of the most properly raised children. If Saint Peter was indeed the first Pope, we have to admit that he was married, although Saint Paul on the other hand was not married. Honestly, the idea of celibacy is not even fair because exceptions are made in some cases as in married clergymen of other churches such as Anglican that convert to Roman Catholicism…seriously, that is not fair to others that would rather be married like Father Albert Cutie from Miami who had to resign a few years ago to have a family, although he is now an Episcopal priest. Well, I probably seem to have got sidetracked into another subject, but it is all relevant. Pope Francis says all the beautiful words that remind us of what Jesus said, but they are just words it seems to me. Of course, these days we are all seemingly infatuated with words, but I wonder how much action is taken in adherence to the words. In Pope Francis’ speech to the US Congress, he said: "a nation can be considered great when it defends liberty as Lincoln did, when it fosters a culture which enables people to “dream” of full rights for all their brothers and sisters…." I really wish that while in Cuba a couple of days earlier he would have said the same thing because it would have been very significant due to all the human rights violations, oppression, and injustices the Cuban people have endured under the regime of the Castros these past 50 plus years, but I suppose we can't always get what we want when we want it. Instead, it seems that while in Cuba, Pope Francis did not "Open his mouth for the dumb, for the rights of all who are left desolate," as Proverbs 31: 8 claims. But, no man is perfect, so maybe next time. Obviously, we are fascinated with words.

In conclusion, and because it seems that I have gone off into a rant, I want to close quoting the Book of James. James 1: 22-24 reads:

“But be doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves.  For if any one is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man who observes his natural face in a mirror; or he observes himself and goes away and at once forgets what he was like (RSV Bible).”

I think Pope Francis is great, and he seems to have a good heart, but I am a bit skeptical of the hierarchy he represents, and all the ramifications which that title invokes and implies. Blessings and thanks for reading!

Reference:

RSV Bible

I Was a Stranger and You Welcomed Me

"...for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me... (RSV Bible)."

Matthew 25:35 is without a doubt how we should always be thinking as Christians, but it perhaps becomes a more clear instruction as we view the current Syrian refugee crisis unfolding, mostly in Europe. The World Council of Churches (WCC) just published an article encouraging European churches to work together in addressing the refugee crisis (European churches encouraged to work together to address refugee crisis — World Council of Churches).

Following the same line of thought as the WCC, this crisis is obviously a great ecumenical opportunity in which we can ALL bring comfort and stability to those in need. Moreover, we are showing love to those who need it beyond despair. As Saint Paul said in 1st Corinthians 13: 2-3: "And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. If I give away all I have, and if I deliver my body to be burned, but have not love, I gain nothing (RSV Bible)."

In conclusion, we can all work together along with the many charitable organizations, as well, to bring an end to this tragic crisis. Thanks for reading and blessings to all!

References:

Bible, Revised Standard Version

http://www.oikoumene.org/en/press-centre/news/european-churches-encouraged-to-work-together-to-address-refugee-crisis

What Does Rome Need To Do By Father Thomas Hopko

Father Thomas Hopko was Dean Emeritus of Saint Vladimir’s Orthodox Theological Seminary in Crestwood, NY. Fr. Thomas passed away or fell asleep in the Lord earlier this year on March 18, 2015 (In Memoriam: Protopresbyter Thomas Hopko - Orthodox Church in America). Fr. Thomas had a program on Ancient Faith Radio which I heard and enjoyed from time to time that was titled: Speaking the Truth in Love. One can still download podcasts and listen to them at the Ancient Faith Radio website. Since this blog is about ecumenism, I wanted to share Fr. Thomas' thoughts on the subject in this post.

On June 20, 2014, Fr. Thomas shared with the audience a paper he wrote back in 2005 when he had been invited to a meeting in Washington D.C. at Georgetown University. The subject of the meeting was ecumenism related, and Fr. Thomas wrote about what the Roman Catholic Church needed to do to unite with the Orthodox Church according to his views. The relevant podcasts were divided into two parts. The links to part one and two, What Does Rome Need To Do? - Part 1, and Part 2, are below. I hope you enjoy them as much as I. Blessings! 

What Does Rome Need To Do? - Part 1 - Speaking the Truth in Love | Ancient Faith Ministries

What Does Rome Need To Do? - Part 2 - Speaking the Truth in Love | Ancient Faith Ministries









References:

http://oca.org/in-memoriam/protopresbyter-thomas-hopko

http://www.ancientfaith.com/

http://www.ancientfaith.com/podcasts/hopko/what_does_rome_need_to_do_part_1

Arango's Apologetics Page: You Cannot Serve God and Money

Hello! I hope everyone is having a wonderful summer. Here in South Florida it is way too hot this time of the year. I wanted to share an article that I recently wrote on my other blog, Arango's Apologetics Page. Blessings! The link to the article is below.


Arango's Apologetics Page: You Cannot Serve God and Money

Asa Kent Jennings and the Armenian Genocide

"His name was Asa Kent Jennings, and he is worth remembering now at the centennial of the Armenian genocide. His memory is also timely now that the problem of Christian persecution has arisen again in the Mideast and refugees are flooding out of Africa seeking safety in Europe (pri.org)."

The foregoing quote is from an article by Lou Ureneck on PRI's The World which was published on April 24, 2015. The article is tittled: The American who saved 250,000 from death during the Armenian genocide. I was actually going to share it as a comment, since it is a related story, on my previous blog post which was titled: The Armenian Genocide; however, after giving it some thought I decided that it was worthy of being independent. I hope you enjoy. The link is below.





The American who saved 250,000 from death during the Armenian genocide | Public Radio International