Thanks for your kind words. But, you know what John? . . . sometimes, 'me thinks' when we move towards the Zizioulasian heights, nothing short of divine intervention is needed to bring about any kind of real value the great majority of the time. Also, sometimes, I think if Keats were still with us, and he would meet some of us and read some of our threads, he would be inclined to write of the opium of the theologians which serves as the voice of a nightingale more than in any truly spiritual way, as it relates to the path of Christ. At least I will confess to this at times in my life. And, this is debatable, I know, but as I read your last post where the question is raised, 'who is meant to be included in His love?' While I am sure that the doctrine of the Trinity provides very clear answers, I am not sure that it provides them in a way that is accessible. So, if we do kick this down a few notches and very simply consider:
Quote:all who believe in Him, confess His name, receive His sacraments, show their salvation through faith and works, and who call on Him?
as you have said, then I wonder have we again provided a working definition of a Generous Orthodoxy? Or, have we provided in fact an example of universalism or indifferentism?
Is it possible that while not in the narrow sense, this is an example of a universalism or an indifferentism in the broad sense? Or, could this be worse than either of these two things which is a very divisive particularism under the guise of a call for generous behavior, under the guise of a call for unity? Well let's see . . .
You are presenting the Gospel of Christ here in the above, the Good News of Christ. So this is a particular message. You seem to be indicating that all who believe in Him and confess His name, receive His sacraments, and show salvation through faith and works together, and who call on Him will be saved. If I am understanding you correctly, you are saying this is available to all. And, there is a passion here that comes through your pen, just as does St. James in his addition to the New Testament.
So even at a glance, what do we conclude with little effort?
I would like to suggest that it is absurd to even consider indifferentism here. But, as we consider who is included and who is excluded from the Love of God, possibly we see that all are included who embrace this Divine Particularism which has a Universal appeal. The Gospel of Christ is a particularistic message with a universal appeal. No matter how we look at it this is a true statement. But, within the Gospel of Christ we do not see an introverted and self-seeking self-serving focus, or as some of the neo-Orthodox have written of 'eros,' but we see only a very beautiful 'agape' the agape/love of God, which is the opposite of 'eros' as spoken of previously.
And, I wonder if this offers a further help to us as we attempt to bring into view a Generous Orthodoxy? I wonder if we may use the agape of God as a 'reference point' whereby we may recognize each other? And, possibly this will need developed further in a future post here, but by the same token, I wonder if we may also use the 'eros' previously spoken of to bring about an identificational signification of the one's who have excluded themselves from the Gospel of Christ? And, I don't mean to sound harsh or judgmental here in the least; however, as we may consider moods and methods, and as we may seek to establish something more concrete and to give form to what is being said in a way that may be more helpful where the rubber meets the road, I wonder if this is a viable option at this time.