why not be utterly changed into Fire?

RSS

collywollykinz:

The saints are more than just morally upright individuals, as many outside of the Church reduce them to. They are those who, while they walked among us in the flesh, participated in the life of God in such a way that they bore the Uncreated light, becoming as Christ is. It is the teaching of the Church, witnessed in the lives of the saints and declared by the Fathers of the Church, that “He was made man that we might be made God.” Let us then repent of our sins and enter into the sacramental life of the Church, where we will be united with Christ and participate in the life of the Godhead, by grace becoming what He is.

As an assembly of the faithful around the altar, the Eucharist is a reconstitution of our ancient home in paradise. As a full communion of the faithful with God and with each other, it perfects that home and unites humanity entirely, making it the body of God. As a sacrifice and an offering it creates once again the relationship that man had with creation before the fall and at the same time completes it. The crea­tures which constitute man’s wealth are offered by him with love to God. Thus creation becomes the means by which man is united with God. Matter comes to be filled with the Spirit, and the spiritual life functions within the Eucharist unhindered and in its true fullness. All these things take place because the Eucharist is Christ, who constitutes the past, present and future of the saints, which is the real past, present and future of the world.

- Panayiotis Nellas, Deification in Christ: Orthodox Perspectives On the Nature of the Human Person, trans. Norman Russell (Crestwood, NY: St Vladimirs Seminary Pr, 1987), 129. (via thepoorinspirit-extras)

Reblog if it’s okay to befriend you, ask questions, ask for advice, rant, vent, let something off your chest, or just have a nice chat.

theorthodoxbritreturns:

Genuinely, I am here to listen/advise.

(Source: prisonofsociety)

The oratory ought to be what it is called, and nothing else is to be done or stored there. After the Work of God [i.e., liturgy], all should leave in complete silence and with reverence for God, so that a brother who may wish to pray alone will not be disturbed by the insensitivity of another. Moreover, if at other times someone chooses to pray privately, he may simply go in and pray, not in a loud voice, but with tears and heartfelt devotion. Accordingly, anyone who does not pray in this manner is not to remain in the oratory after the Work of God, as we have said: then he will not interfere with anyone else.

- Rule of Saint Benedict, ch. 52

(Source: markjakesjohnson)

gospelofthekingdom:

If the telos of what it means to be human is to be transfigured into the image of Christ, and Christ is a prize fighter with a commitment to make someone bleed, then we in trouble.  And if we want to multiply that message then we fucked.

Why don't you like Mark Driscoll?

dogetalpapist:

the-violent-take-it-by-force:

gospelofthekingdom:

His oppressive understanding of genders and particularly masculinity, strange obsessions with [anal] sex, cultish practice with leaders in his Church, poor patristic and ecclesial understanding, absolutely horrifying eschatological beliefs, poor ethics in regards to plagiarism, and his need for a Jesus he can beat up.

But particularly; we really don’t need more voices like Mark Driscoll. What a scary theological terrain that would be.

You mean you don’t want a preacher whose idea of shepherding his flock is to stand on a large stage surrounded by ridiculous props and to scream and shout at his congregation audience about Gangsta Jesus?

This fetish with a macho Jesus is scaring me, not in the least because it is infecting certain quarters of Catholicism. 

Driscoll’s need for a savior who can beat him up is telling.  I admit to being a mean and cynical person, but even I know that the way out of a violent world isn’t through the invocation of infinite theological violence. 

This need for a violent Jesus comes from either a person who has been so broken by this world that the only recourse they can hope for is through violence, or from a person so emotionally immature that they are still stuck in the mind of child who thinks war and destruction is a really cool thing.

The first is terribly tragic, the second is terribly pathetic. 

Can you give an example of how Mark Driscoll's eschatology is oppressive?

Anonymous

gospelofthekingdom:

Horrifying*

But sure, I can give many.  But here’s one.

“Jesus is not a pansy or a pacifist; he’s patient. He has a long wick, but the anger of his wrath is burning. Once the wick is burned up, he is saddling up on a white horse and coming to slaughter his enemies and usher in his kingdom. Blood will flow. Some of those whose blood will flow as high as the bit in a horse’s mouth for 184 miles will be those who did not repent of their sin but did wrongly teach that Jesus was a pacifist. Jesus is no one to mess with.”

*cut shredding guitars, blast beats, and pig squeals*

teach non-violence —> go to hell

TIL

Why don't you like Mark Driscoll?

gospelofthekingdom:

His oppressive understanding of genders and particularly masculinity, strange obsessions with [anal] sex, cultish practice with leaders in his Church, poor patristic and ecclesial understanding, absolutely horrifying eschatological beliefs, poor ethics in regards to plagiarism, and his need for a Jesus he can beat up.

But particularly; we really don’t need more voices like Mark Driscoll. What a scary theological terrain that would be.

You mean you don’t want a preacher whose idea of shepherding his flock is to stand on a large stage surrounded by ridiculous props and to scream and shout at his congregation audience about Gangsta Jesus?

A pour over is a manual form of brewing where the barista pours the water from a gooseneck kettle into a cone that has the coffee and filter, which drips into a cup. It allows for a better cup of coffee, since the barista can control all variables.

It’s definitely better than their regular brewed coffee

the-violent-take-it-by-force:

I went to Starbucks just now and asked for a tall black coffee, but the guy working the drive-through said that they had stopped brewing black coffee. Then he offered to do a pourover and said some other words I didn’t quite make out, and I just said okay. I got up to the window to pay, and he had made some mistake putting my order into the register. So, in the end, I ordered a tall black coffee, paid for a grande, and got a venti pourover.

I’m so confused. I don’t even know what a pourover is. When did coffee get so confusing?

I went to Starbucks just now and asked for a tall black coffee, but the guy working the drive-through said that they had stopped brewing black coffee. Then he offered to do a pourover and said some other words I didn’t quite make out, and I just said okay. I got up to the window to pay, and he had made some mistake putting my order into the register. So, in the end, I ordered a tall black coffee, paid for a grande, and got a venti pourover.

I’m so confused. I don’t even know what a pourover is. When did coffee get so confusing?

(Source: mistaahwhite)