Father Andrew Stephen Damick (162:04)
So. Yeah. Yeah. And I mean, I think. Okay, so for. I think the place that I'm landing at the end of this episode is number one. I think that a lot of the errors of trying to understand what's going on in the sacrificial system in the Old Testament and then how it's interpreted and applied and expanded on and transformed in the New Testament in many cases comes, frankly from a lack of liturgical context. A lot of the people doing this interpretation do not have liturgical. Well, I mean, everyone has a liturgical thing that they're doing, but it's been so kind of deracinated, you know, all of the liturgical tradition of Christianity, most of it maybe has been set aside, especially by evangelicals. Although it's interesting. It's interesting. Some are now kind of trying to recapture some of that. You know, that's something that we talk a lot about on the Areopagus podcast, is this sort of appropriation, this attempted appropriation of liturgical elements, but. Or other elements from Christian history. But I think that when you don't have a liturgical Christianity, then frankly, you have a lot of blind spots in terms of reading the liturgics that is in the Scriptures. Right. And so like. Like the. To me, the. The locus classicus for that is, you know, putting sins on an animal that is being sacrificed to God. And as you have pointed out, that is nowhere in the Scriptures. That is simply never there. You have to read into it in one way or another. Like, the only time that sins are ever put on an animal explicitly is the goat for Azazel in the Day of Atonement ritual. And that goat is not sacrificed. It is sent off into the wilderness. You can't say it's being sacrificed, because if it is being sacrificed, then that means God is literally telling the children of Israel to make a sacrifice to a demon that lives in the wilderness. And that is not what he's telling them to do. So I think that there's a blind spot there, and that's why the kind of liturgical details like that are not as clear, because the matrix within which to interpret and understand liturgics is simply not present to bring this home, especially to the kind of Christianity I was raised in. And to make reference again to that video that I just went and looked. It has like 35 million views on YouTube or something like this. And it's why, though. I know, right? Right. It's titled why I Hate Religion But Love Jesus. This is based on, number one, it's a complete misunderstanding of the word religion. Ridiculous misunderstanding the word religion. But it's based on this idea that, you know, a lot of Christians will say, I don't have a religion, I have a relationship. I don't have a religion, I have a relationship. You know, and so obviously, relationship is a good thing and religion is a bad thing, and religion is, you know, this ritualistic, dead religion, you know, or whatever, whatever. And relationship is something else. However you want to define how that works. But here's the thing is And I understand why that's being said. I understand and I affirm the sincerity behind it. Like, I know, I know the people who say that, why they say it. But the irony is when you have this transactional model of what sacrifices and salvation are about, then isn't that what you're calling religion, like you're making a deal with God. Whereas relationship is much more fulsome, has a lot more going on to it within a relationship. You can't just say, well, look, I paid you off, dear, now you need to forgive me. Now a relationship means that there has to be change of life, repentance, right? Relationship, you know, the shared meal is an intimacy based on everything being in the right order. And of course, you know, like within a marriage, marital intimacy is based on everything being in the right order. You can't just say, look, I did, I did this X, Y and Z for you. And so therefore our relationship is fine. Which is literally what people who believe in a transactional model of salvation, that is literally what they believe. Now whatever the X, Y and Z that has to be done for everything to be fine might vary from one tradition to another. Whatever it is you have to do to satisfy God varies from one tradition to another. But it is still a transactional approach. That is religion, quote unquote, not relationship. So I mean, that's the irony is this whole I have a relationship, not a religion thing by its own terms, it's doing the opposite thing. But and here's where I want to end people who do that, most of them, even if in their, the theology that they speak and like, you know, you press them on it. Father Stephen, as you've mentioned, even if the theology that they speak is still this kind of transactional model and like, no, you can't do anything to contribute to your salvation, that would actually be kind of a sin if you try to do these works of repentance in, you know, bring about forgiveness, whatever. Even the people who might say that, they still know that they need to live in repentance, they still do that. Only the most kind of antinomian weirdos don't, right? They're still, they still have a sense you need to live your life, right? And there's something wrong with you if you don't. And they still feel the existential brokenness and wounding if they don't. And they still try to put it back together if it gets broken. In other words, they understand that repentance is necessary and they're still doing it even if their theology in some Cases may say, you don't need to do that. Why do you, Once saved, always saved, what's wrong with you? And so there's this kind of multiple personality disorder going on now. I believe that all faithfulness to God, even if it's done within a theological framework that is messed up, is faithfulness to God. And God will judge to whatever extent you know he's going to save someone within that. That's for him to judge. I'm not saying that that validates the theology. It doesn't. But the truth is that there is an integrated way, and that is what historic Christianity, orthodox Christianity is. You know, this. This sense of, well, I know I'm saved and I don't have to do anything more. And the weird tension that exists between that and I need to get my life right, there doesn't need to be a tension. And it doesn't mean, contrary to the caricature that some have so that they can have what they call assurance. It doesn't mean you live in this constant anxiety. Am I in a state of grace? Out of state of grace? My experience as an orthodox Christian for almost 30 years does not include that idea. Because the way of damnation is not, whoops, I sinned. Or, you know, like, truly accidentally, or even like, I had a fall. No, no, no, no. The way of damnation is the sinner with a high hand. The sinner who says, you know what? I know I'm sinning and I'm gonna keep sinning. Not just, oh, man, I keep sinning. God help me not to sin again today. That's repentance. Even if you fall every single day, you get up every single day, that's repentance. It's the sinner who says, I don't care. This is the way that I'm going to live. I'm not going to change. I'm not even going to try to change. That's the sinner with the high hand. That's the sinner who's in really deep trouble. Not the person who keeps sinning. It's the person who decides not to repent. And so if you're living a life where you've decided to repent and you're doing it even if you keep sinning, then you are being faithful. You are fulfilling the commandments of God. And that is a place of assurance. And it's a much better place of assurance than, well, I know everything's fine. I don't have to bother now, because you know what that's predicated upon? It's predicated usually upon the idea of that, you know, that you were sincere at some particular moment and you don't really know if you were really, really sincere. Did I really mean it? I knew a lot of people that went and got baptized multiple times or kept quote, unquote, rededicating their lives to Christ because they couldn't be sure that they were really sincere at that moment. Now, maybe I'll do it this time, but it's actually much easier to answer the question, am I continuing to repent? It's not a psychological game. It's did I get up and start again? Okay, I did. My father confessor told me I did. I'm doing it. That's assurance. That's assurance. That's peace. That's real peace. And that's a piece that actually connects with the 3D life of the Christian on the ground. So those are my big takeaways from this conversation today.
