Concerning those who have partaken at a heathen feast in a place appointed for heathens, but who have brought and eaten their own meats, it is decreed that they be received after they have been prostrators two years; but whether with oblation, every bishop must determine after he has made examination into the rest of their life.
Karl von Hefele gives an excellent commentary on this canon:
This does not preclude a true repentance and turning to Christ. Certainly those mentioned in this and the previous canons can have believed on the finished work with salvation full and free but were possibly weak in faith. In the end we do not know. We simply must guard against those who easily stumble or practice deceit to save themselves or their reputations, yet desire to have full fellowship with the local body.
1 Karl J. von Hefele, The Seven Ecumenical Councils, (NPNF2 14:66).
Karl von Hefele gives an excellent commentary on this canon:
Several Christians tried with worldly prudence, to take a middle course. On the one hand, hoping to escape persecution, they were present at the feasts of the heathen sacrifices, which were held in the buildings adjoining the temples; and on the other, in order to appease their consciences, they took their own food, and touched nothing that had been offered to the gods. These Christians forgot that St. Paul had ordered that meats sacrificed to the gods should be avoided, not because they were tainted in themselves, as the idols were nothing, but from another, and in fact a twofold reason: 1st, Because, in partaking of them, some had still the idols in their hearts, that is to say, were still attached to the worship of idols, and thereby sinned; and 2dly, Because others scandalized their brethren, and sinned in that way. To these two reasons a third may be added, namely, the hypocrisy and the duplicity of those Christians who wished to appear heathens, and nevertheless to remain Christians. The Synod punished them with two years of penance in the third degree, and gave to each bishop the right, at the expiration of this time, either to admit them to communion, or to make them remain some time longer in the fourth degree.1The remarkable hypocrisy demonstrated here brings genuine faith in Christ into question. We can understand the extreme duress and desire to avoid pain and conflict, but where is the line drawn? When Christ says in Matt 16:24-26,
If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever would save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it. For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? Or what shall a man give in return for his soul?then we must rightly assume he means that our lives are nothing compared to the surpassing value of knowing him. (Phil 3:8). Perhaps there is a Christian who does not understand that completely, but in what does he or she believe? What is the thing in which they trust—the gospel or vain philosophy of man's invention?
This does not preclude a true repentance and turning to Christ. Certainly those mentioned in this and the previous canons can have believed on the finished work with salvation full and free but were possibly weak in faith. In the end we do not know. We simply must guard against those who easily stumble or practice deceit to save themselves or their reputations, yet desire to have full fellowship with the local body.
1 Karl J. von Hefele, The Seven Ecumenical Councils, (NPNF2 14:66).
No comments:
Post a Comment