The Fullness Theory

During the past two to three years, an Ecclesiastical Theory has been developing in my mind (and hopefully also in my heart) that might be a potential alternative to The Branch Theory where different churches are seen to be specialized “branches” of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.

The Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches reject The Branch Theory, although some Roman Catholics like to say that The Church breathes with two lungs, Eastern and Western.

Instead of the Branch Theory, I would like to posit an alternative understanding.

It is said in the Eastern Orthodox Church as follows:  “We know where The Church is, We Don’t Know where She Isn’t.”  This is a very Apophatic statement so typical of Orthodoxy.  Theology understood by what something or Someone isn’t.

The western churches seek the understanding of spiritual realities via Cataphatic Theology.  Defining what   Someone or what something IS.

Perhaps, from an Orthodox point of view, one should strongly hesitate in seeking to comprehend or define God Cataphatically, but this prohibition shouldn’t necessarily extend to a created thing like The Church.  The Church is not God, but She helps us to God.

Understanding the very real nature of The Church, therefore, is vitally important.

I agree with Holy Orthodoxy.  We know where The Church is.  I continue to believe, as an Orthodox Covert of 14 years, that The Visible Church is fully and perfectly present in the Institution of The Eastern Orthodox Church.

However . . .

I’ve come to believe that The Visible Church I.E. The Eastern Orthodox Church is Imperfectly Present in other Christian jurisdictions at a very High Level (in some specific cases) ranging to a Medium Level (in other cases) and passing a boundary to a None-Existent Level (in cases where religious bodies depart from  Christian beliefs entirely).

This is, admittedly, a Cataphatic understanding of the Nature of The Church.

This position is a None Rigorist position that nevertheless retains Rigor.

Unlike Orthodox Rigorists that posit no sacramental or special grace of The Lord outside the boundaries of the “Canonical” Eastern Orthodox Church, The Fullness Theory of The Church holds that there are Essential Ingredients of The Church as founded by Jesus Christ that perfectly constitute The Church.  The less of these ingredients, the weaker and more incomplete a Local Church and Local Congregations are.

And there are matters of Agreement with these Ingredients.  The more gladly a church agrees to and lives by and within these ingredients, the more Fully Present The Church is.

These Ingredients are informed by Word and Sacrament, Holy Tradition and Canonical Obedience.

The Orthodox Church holds all None-Orthodox Christians as being in a state of Schism and Separation from the Grace of God.  I submit that instead they are in a state of incomplete Grace, but Grace nevertheless with some individuals and parishes exceeding the Grace found in unhealthy or rebellious Eastern Orthodox parishes and even whole jurisdictions.

God is no respecter of persons

Some of these “separated brethren” are not spiritually guilty of the sin of Schism, even if some of their ancestors were. 

Their jurisdictions might be partially separated from The Orthodox Church, but some of them are closer to God then some of The Orthodox.

There exist “Accidents of History” where Extenuating Circumstances call for Special Mercy.

The English Church is a prime example of an Ecclesiastical people suffering from many of these “Accidents.”

Should every church and all people be Orthodox?  Yes.

But God saves many Christian people anyway, whether they are fully Orthodox or not.

The Visible Church is Fully Present in some places, and Partially Present in others, But God is Everywhere Present and Fills All Things.

I believe Western Liturgical and Sacramental CONSERVATIVE Christians are PARTIALLY AND STRONGLY CONNECTED TO THE EASTERN ORTHODOX VISIBLE CHURCH, MANY TO A HIGH DEGREE.  

These need to be drawn ever closer to The Essential Orthodox Defined Ecclesiastical Ingredients of The Church.

I would personally grade the following bodies like this:

The G4 Anglicans are in the extremely high 98 to 99 percent range.

The Orthodox Archdiocese of New York and The Anglican Vicariate are also in the 98 to 99 percent range.

The GAFCON Anglicans are in the 85 to 95 percent range, depending on Diocese and Sub-jurisdiction.

The Lutheran Church Missouri Synod and The Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod are in the 80 -90 percent range depending on whether a parish is “Confessionally Lutheran.”

The Lutheran Church Missionary Conference ranges from 80 to 91 percent (The LCMC has bishops).

Evangelical Presbyterians are in the 70 - 80 percent range.

Faithful Roman Catholics are in the mid-90’s.

Baptists and Congregational Christians are in the 70 - 80 percent range.

Jehovah’s Witnesses and Main Jurisdiction Mormons are outside of The Church with Individual members inside.

Just my personal grading system in a nutshell, but this a possible outworking of The Fullness Theory.

On the Passing of Rush Limbaugh

I first started listening to The Rush Limbaugh Show in Virginia Beach in the early 1990s.  I remember his hilarious trolling of how he was going to “endorse Bill Clinton for President” then going to the commercial break, then denying it to all the subsequent callers to illustrate Clinton’s duplicitousness dishonesty by being absurd.  This followed one of the Rush Dictums:  Illustrate Absurdity by Being Absurd.

I was hooked and listened to Rush off and on until his last in person show a few weeks ago (I had two regular periods where I was able to listen to Rush regularly:  Working in the mailroom of Georgia-Pacific, and working in my present job where I have my own office).

I listened to him at other times in my life as able when driving around.

So much “Talent on Loan From God Duh.”

He was the freshest, funniest, and most concise conservative voice of our generation after President Reagan.

It’s too bad I didn’t know about him and his burgeoning show during my California years of the mid-to-late 80’s.  While I was a student at Biola, I was able to watch a predecessor of his named Wally George.  

The Wally George TV Show never took off and became national like Rush’s radio show.  Perhaps if the internet had existed in those days, it might have.  

But Wally George, although entertaining, was no Rush Limbaugh.

Knowing about and listening to Rush during my college years might have been truly life-altering.

Listening to him in the early 90s and up to the present was always encouraging and inspiring.

I’ll be mulling over his passing for a while.

One part of his story really sticks out.  After a few firings / setbacks in his early career, Rush gave up on his Radio dreams and went to work for the Kansas City Royals in a marketing capacity.  But he was miserable and mostly broke.

As he tells it, God kept nagging at him to reengage with his dream, basically telling him that the only person standing in the way was Rush, himself.

Rush listened and 30 years of radio later, the talk show radio world has these giant-sized shoes that may never be filled again.

I think Rush wouldn’t rule out his shoes being filled, although everyone else is right now.

This is because Rush, like Ronald Reagan, was an optimist who believed in God, who loans out talent on a continual basis.

I pray God raises up some more Rush Limbaughs, though they will be different and unique, like he and we all are.

May his Memory be Eternal!