Irenic: tending to promote peace or reconciliation; peaceful or conciliatory.
Irenicism in Christian faith refers to efforts to combine Christian apologetical systems by utilizing reason as an essential attribute. The word is originated from the Greek word ειρήνη (eirene) significance peace. Those who affiliate themselves with irenicism recognize the importance of unity in the Christian Church and state the typical bond of all Christians under Christ.
This is various than reaching ecumenical arrangement– in reality it is a required step before any such agreements are possible: do we understand each other?
I have been enjoying a series of videos by Dr. Gavin Ortlund through a playlist on his YouTube channel, entitled Catholic-Orthodox-Protestant Discussion. The playlist has more than sixty videos and counting. Ortlund stresses his desire for Irenic dialogue: he is not after winning, he is after understanding— thus, he frequently describes the function and technique of his discussion and commentaries as “irenic.”
Something of Dr. Ortlund:
Gavin Ortlund is a pastor, author, speaker, and apologist for the Christian faith. He is a husband to Esther, and a father to Isaiah, Naomi, Elijah, Miriam, and Abigail (not imagined). He serves as the senior pastor of First Baptist Church of Ojai in Ojai, California.
Gavin has a Ph.D. from Fuller Theological Academy in historic faith, and an M.Div from Covenant Theological Seminary. He is the author of 8 books in addition to various scholastic and popular posts.
I was extremely delighted to find this channel and this effort. I listen to numerous in the broad Christian world– Orthodox, Catholic and Protestant. Possibly it’s simply me, but there is substantial content from Catholics and Orthodox regarding their doctrine, faith, and so on. I realize there is also much Protestant material, however I haven’t seen as much of it in the present discussion– in straight dealing with the issues, stereotypes, misinformation, etc, relating to the world of Protestant thought and doctrine.
I do not at all value when the discussion is dismissive or assaulting, when the objective is to score points instead of to make points. I have seen some that are downright nasty– this towards others who believe Jesus is divine, is the Boy of God, that His death and Resurrection in some way reconciles us when again with God the Father. Not able to even love their neighbors (in the Mere Christianity house of C.S. Lewis), they even treat them even worse than the opponents that they are likewise called to enjoy.
What I have seen is that so much of the divisiveness is based upon comparing the best of one’s teachings to the worst of the other’s practice. It only works to increase division needlessly.
What I have also seen is that when one understands the teachings and history, much of what are considered significant differences are absolutely nothing of the sort. Not to say that there are no major issues, however clearing the field would bring focus.
Of course, this confusion is easy to understand when it is amateur publishers or commenters on YouTube videos. But it is troubling when it originates from those who are well-read in the teachings and history. I have seen it from all sides.
And this is why I appreciate Ortlund’s channel and approach. Not to say that I agree with all of it (from the little I have actually heard from him regarding social and cultural topics, he seems a mess), however his technique is irenic, and he is well-read not only in Protestant history, he likewise points back to the earliest Church dads (his Ph.D. remains in historical faith, after all), discovering worth in many of them– and a common thread from these earliest dads to numerous teachings in Protestant denominations (yes, even Calvin-Reformed).
I offer a few of the remarks made in his videos, handling a few of the stereotypes of Protestant-Reformed faith. First, a couple of the “solas“:
Sola Scriptura is the claim that the Scriptures are the only foolproof guideline for faith and practice.
It says absolutely nothing about the bishop’s pronouncements or custom being invalid or are to be neglected. Just that these are not infallible.
Validation by faith alone, judgement according to works.
Judgement describing 1 Corinthians 5: 10 For we should all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that every one may receive what is due for what he has actually carried out in the body, whether great or evil. This is judgment of the justified.
Martin Luther, think it or not, speaks in even more powerful terms:
Functions are needed to redemption, however they do not cause redemption, because faith alone provides life.
The number of times is Luther assaulted for providing an easy Christianity– you need refrain from doing any greats?
Lastly, something you may never have actually heard from someone raised in a Reformed Church:
Icons are appropriate for mentor and design.
He comprehends the distinction in the terms “veneration” and “worship”; he simply doesn’t truly see the difference in numerous taught practices.
Conclusion
How I see things: I thank God that He has actually offered us multiple methods to worship Him, such that different people with different attributes can find a community of fellow followers.
I think the arrogance of the exclusivists (only those who attend our church and worship our way are in the Church) does more to send people away than to draw them in. It certainly does so for me. I have seen a lot of Christians in a lot of customs and denominations bearing excellent fruit to buy into the exclusivist mindset.
I think the conceit is unjustified given the histories of each custom– Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant; each tradition has actually provided lots of examples of hypocrisy and mortally wicked habits. Each custom uses evidence where they have actually left from either Biblical teaching or long-accepted tradition. Real humility is called for from all celebrations.
I think much of our divisions are based upon things that are not made clear in Bible and not made clear in tradition– and, for that reason, ought to not be used as the basis for exclusivist claims.
I think there were sufficient differences in between and among the early Church dads such that everyone and no one can claim to apply to their mentors and understandings. Everybody can find some church daddy to support their view and attack the other’s view.
I pray that God works to unite these different expressions on the crucial problems of reason and sanctification. However on the practices in each different tradition and expression, there is no need for conformity and there is no benefit in exclusive thinking.
And it can remain one true Church.
Epilogue
An intriguing item indicated by Ortlund– a demonstration that he is well aware of the information of the early Church and is not scared of pointing to the earliest of Church daddies:
The Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching, by Irenaeus of Lyons.
Who was Irenaeus!.
?.!? Irenaeus (c. 130– c. 202 AD) was a Greek bishop noted for his function in guiding and broadening Christian neighborhoods in the southern regions of present-day France and, more widely, for the advancement of Christian theology by combating heterodox or Gnostic analyses of Scripture as heresy and defining the Catholic and Orthodox teachings of the Apostolic Churches. Originating from Smyrna, he had seen and heard the preaching of Polycarp, who in turn was said to have heard John the Evangelist, and hence was the last-known living connection with the Apostles.
He had to do with as apostolically linked as one gets.
The description, from Amazon:
In a day of numerous and differed denominations, one might question what the doctrine and belief of the merged apostolic church appeared like. Due to a modern-day discovery of an ancient, lost manuscript, now we understand. The Presentation of the Apostolic Preaching is a loyal transmission of what the intellectual Christian was taught in the second century. Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons, famous as the subduer of heretics and as the most brilliant Christian mind of his day, now brings us this early body of doctrine, being only years eliminated from the apostles of Christ.
As to the current discovery of this document:
The manuscript which includes our writing was found in December 1904, in the Church of the Blessed Virgin at Eriwan in Armenia, by Dr Karapet Ter-Mekerttshian, among the most learned of the Armenian clergy. It was edited by him with a translation into German, in combination with Dr Erwand Ter-Minassiantz, in 1907, in the Texte and Untersuchungen; and Dr Harnack added a quick dissertation and some notes. Then in 1912 Dr Simon Weber, of the Professors of Catholic Theology in the University of Freiburg in Breisgau, being dissatisfied with this discussion of the work, released a fresh translation with the assistance of some Armenian scholars.