New Topic= Ecthelion: Man, or Elf? - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

galpsi · 07-24-2000, 04:34 PM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Ghost-Prince of Cardolan
Posts: 0</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
<img src="http://www.barrowdowns.com/images/posticons/sting.jpg" align=absmiddle> Re: New Topic= Secret fire of Anor-ecumenism

Thank you for your clarification. The leap from Zwingli and what you referred to as "Protestant Eucharistology" to pagans or other anti-Trinitarians strikes me as unjustified and prejudicial in the extreme. Since I was attempting to contrast divergent Eucharistic interpretations which could as easily be characterized as Lutheran contra Zwinglian as it could be characterized as Catholic contra Zwinglian your comprehensive vituperation seems (at the very least) unfair.
If you opt to live in a world of orthodoxy and heterodoxy, it seems the better part of wisdom to figure out which tenets of the faith are essential and which are adiaphora. The Roman tent, itself, has always proved to have room for many more widely divergent theologies than have the (big O) Orthodox churches or many of the Protestant churches, and I think wisely.
I also believe that you will find that there are some pagans (or neo-pagans, I'm not sure quite how -- or whether -- they identify themselves) participating on this board. Since the council that you are lambasting defines itself as a Council of Churches -- in the plural -- to suggest that pagans have no place in their conversations might seem offensive to them. It does to me although I am a member of the Orthodox Church (big O). It doesn't seem to me that conciliar projects make sense if any orthodox line is allowed to exclude other participants on the basis of their heterodoxy. A group which seeks that kind authority strikes me as schismatic rather than as catholic (small c).

</p>

07-24-2000, 04:34 PM	#16
galpsi The Unquiet Dead Join Date: Jun 2000 Posts: 971	<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Ghost-Prince of Cardolan Posts: 0</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE> <img src="http://www.barrowdowns.com/images/posticons/sting.jpg" align=absmiddle> Re: New Topic= Secret fire of Anor-ecumenism Thank you for your clarification. The leap from Zwingli and what you referred to as "Protestant Eucharistology" to pagans or other anti-Trinitarians strikes me as unjustified and prejudicial in the extreme. Since I was attempting to contrast divergent Eucharistic interpretations which could as easily be characterized as Lutheran contra Zwinglian as it could be characterized as Catholic contra Zwinglian your comprehensive vituperation seems (at the very least) unfair. If you opt to live in a world of orthodoxy and heterodoxy, it seems the better part of wisdom to figure out which tenets of the faith are essential and which are adiaphora. The Roman tent, itself, has always proved to have room for many more widely divergent theologies than have the (big O) Orthodox churches or many of the Protestant churches, and I think wisely. I also believe that you will find that there are some pagans (or neo-pagans, I'm not sure quite how -- or whether -- they identify themselves) participating on this board. Since the council that you are lambasting defines itself as a Council of Churches -- in the plural -- to suggest that pagans have no place in their conversations might seem offensive to them. It does to me although I am a member of the Orthodox Church (big O). It doesn't seem to me that conciliar projects make sense if any orthodox line is allowed to exclude other participants on the basis of their heterodoxy. A group which seeks that kind authority strikes me as schismatic rather than as catholic (small c). </p>