A post on the liturgical day here.
The moderator begins on a surprising covenantal note. I am surprised–indeed, delighted–because Covenantalism is at war with his larger ontology of being.
later entire nations like the Russian people in the tenth century. God’s redemptive work in Christ aims at the restoration of fallen humanity through union with Christ (Ephesians 1:10, 3:14-15).
Slight difference here. I can understand how the Tsar could be the federal head of a nation (but if you affirm that, why don’t you affirm Christ as our federal head who imputes his righteousness to us?), but how did it work out for Russian piety?
The phrase “everything I have commanded you” is the basis for Holy Tradition which comprises both written and oral Tradition (2 Thessalonians 2:15).
This is assuming what you are trying to prove. Paul said to hold to the traditions he had delivered to them. How do you know that your cultural accretions today–like the iconostasis–are the traditions Paul had delivered? You simply cannot know this. Your argument looks like this:
Premise 1: If Paul uses tradition he is using them in the same way we are
Premise 2: and we use tradition then.
Conclusion: Therefore, he is using them in the same way we are!
This is the fallacy of asserting the consequent.
The main question I want to ask is this: Is Jesus bodily in heaven? If he is, and he only has one hypostasis, then how can he be in a million Eucharists on earth?