Posted on 07/26/2014 4:41:46 AM PDT by michaelwlf3
I am coming up on my first year as an ordained minister in a continuing Anglican church, and I have noticed that participating on political forums (even when the topic is religious) I find that my opinions and postings more often than not generate more hatred than anything else. Among the things I often hear are that the laity are the real priests and that I am a Pharisee, that my vocation disqualifies me from offering an opinion on anything Christian because I am too narrow minded, and (my personal favorite) because I look too Catholic I must be a child molester.
Are these people really Christians?
“I agree. However, when error is being taught it is the duty of Christians to speak up and against error.”
People who are going to “speak up against error” need to make sure they are not in error themselves.
“Maybe the pastor doing the complaining is spending a bit too MUCH time in political forums?”
Once I am well enough to get back to full speed, I promise myself that should I ever find myself recovering from another operation I will not try to engage anyone on the internet in conversation. Count on it.
I am unable to answer your private message, the software tells me my account is too new. Sorry about that.
“My only answer is to keep praying for Christian unity.”
Thank you for your support.
It must suck to not be a native English language speaker...
Roman Catholics ceased to be a church and viewed themselves as a country (or state) in the Middle Ages. Arguably one could trace the start of this back to the fall of Rome in the 5th century and was accelerated in 1000AD when the Eastern Orthodox rebelled against the Catholic control.
The Roman Catholics didn't view themselves as an institution as much as a country. The Roman Catholic Church's goal was to become the "one" country in which all countries would pay tribute to them. This was not unlike the Soviet Union concept of satellite countries. They wrote books about this. They fought wars over it. They codified much of their theology around this purpose (e.g. Pope is the final word, one can only find grace through the Eucharist dispensed by the Church, people who don't belong to the Church are lost, etc.). They even had their own civil war and they have their own ambassador.
Today, thanks to God's intervention and faithful Protestants who risk all, the word of God has persevere. Much of the dogmas of the Church today are laughable if not downright offensive. Consequently 21st Century Catholics try to explain away these false teachings (e.g. "Catholic dogma doesn't mean what it states", "Protestants can be saved but the only way to receive grace is through the Eucharist", etc.) Catholic theology has become such a muddled mess that it is absolutely no wonder that they've turned to Mary for help. The end result of poor theology is idolatry.
Didn't anyone ever watch the 3 Musketeers? :O)
Jesus is God, what’s your excuse?
I only know of SEVEN catholic churches: those found in Revelation.
What ever happened to them?
Which one lead to the creation of the Roman branch?
Let's try some easy math:
There are approximately 1.2 billion Catholics world wide;
If merely 1% of them 'ask' Mary for help just once each day;
that means that 12 million separate prayers are headed Mary's direction every day.
Given that there are 86,400 seconds per day... (24 hours times 60 minutes times 60 seconds)
...that means that Mary has to handle approximately 139 'requests' per second!
Purty good fer someone NOT 'devine'!
Philippians 2:5 (KJV)
Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
The assumption she hears is fallacious
It's kind of interesting. While in Turkey in the mid-70s, of the six churches that God had something against, they were gone. Of the last remaining church, the church of Philadelphia who God praised, there still was an operative Christian church there at the time I was there.
Well done.
Thank you.
When God does it it’s righteous, when we do it we’re just... self-righteous. God has a right to be disgusted by his creatures for he is the great king who forgives, meanwhile we act like jerks to each other and call it righteousness. Pluck that massive tree growing out of your own eye before you assault your brother for the speck in his.
Seriously, there are a handful, well maybe a double handful of posters on the RF who make Christianity look like a complete waste of time and effort. Christ is not glorified, He’s dragged through the mud by people trying to one up each other on how vile and nasty they can be while calling themselves Christlike.
Just because far too many Catholics/Protestants act like selfish, brain-dead, children isn’t a reason to imitate them.
Only Yeshua could appoint an apostle.
And Yeshua gave Simeon the keys to the kingdom of heaven and the power to bind and loose. I trust Simeon, I know he knew the LORD and was appointed to shepherd the sheep.
You must be correct.
You got a stupid rerun of a graphic for a response.
http://biblehub.com/drb/john/3.htm
Read and weep.
John 3:7 Wonder not, that I said to thee, you must be born again.
You can only wish it was not part of "properly termed theology," but is "nonsensical irrelevancy" to your assertion that a priest has "superior knowledge of theology," but the fact is that the issue of "priests" is indeed part of theology, that of pastoral theology, which
is a branch of practical theology; it is essentially a practical science. All branches of theology, whether theoretical or practical, purpose in one way or another to make priests "the ministers of Christ, and the dispensers of the mysteries of God" (1 Corinthians 4:1). - http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14611a.htm
And it is due to the theology of the priesthood of Catholicism that women priests are excluded, and the role of extraordinary ministers defined.
Moreover, the aspect of distinctively titling NT pastors "priests" is central to RC theology, as the main reason they are called priests is based upon the premise that the central act of the Church is the celebration of the Eucharist, and that ordination into the priesthood "confers on a man the power of consecrating and offering the body and blood of Christ, and of remitting and retaining sins," a priest being one who is "an authorized mediator who offers a true sacrifice in acknowledgment of God's supreme dominion over human beings and in expiation for their sins." - http://www.therealpresence.org/eucharst/priesthd/priesthd.htm)
As R. J. Grigaitis (O.F.S.) states while also trying to defend the use of priest - states:
"The Greek word for this office is ‘ιερευς (hiereus), which can be literally translated into Latin as sacerdos. First century Christians [such as the inspired writers] felt that their special type of hiereus (sacerdos) was so removed from the original that they gave it a new name, presbuteros (presbyter). Unfortunately, sacerdos didn't evolve into an English word, but the word priest took on its definition." http://grigaitis.net/weekly/2007/2007-04-27.html
Catholic writer Greg Dues in “Catholic Customs & Traditions, a popular guide” states,
"Priesthood as we know it in the Catholic church was unheard of during the first generation of Christianity, because at that time priesthood was still associated with animal sacrifices in both the Jewish and pagan religions."
"When the Eucharist came to be regarded as a sacrifice [after Rome's theology], the role of the bishop took on a priestly dimension. By the third century bishops were considered priests. Presbyters or elders sometimes substituted for the bishop at the Eucharist. By the end of the third century people all over were using the title 'priest' (hierus in Greek and sacerdos in Latin) for whoever presided at the Eucharist."
And this relates to the issue of Anglican priesthood as "Leo XIII in pronouncing Anglican order to be invalid did so on the basis of an argument that the sacerdotal function of priests in relation to the Eucharist was the central aspect of priesthood." - http://anglicaneucharistictheology.com/Anglican_Eucharistic_Theology/Case_Studies/Entries/2006/2/21_Saepius_Officio.html
Yet you dismiss the issue of distinctively titling NT pastors "priests" as not being part of what is "properly termed theology," but is "nonsensical irrelevancy," and which avoids the fact that the Holy Spirit never calls the pastors of the NT church "priest" ( “hiereus”), and that the only priesthood in the NT church is that of the general priesthood (hierateuma) of all believers, as they all function as priests, offering both gifts and sacrifices response to being forgiven of sins, in thanksgiving and service to God and for others. (1Pt. 2:5,9; Rm. 12:1; 15:16; Phil. 2:17; 4:18; Heb. 13:15,16; cf. 9:9)
Nor do we see the primary function of NT pastors as being that of dispensing physical food to be eaten to gain spiritual and eternal life, or the Lord's supper otherwise being manifest in Acts or the rest of the NT, interpretive of the gospels, being the "the source and summit of the Christian life," upon which all else revolves in which "the work of our redemption is accomplished."
And instead, in the only place that the Lord's supper is manifestly mentioned in the life of the church then this "feast of charity" is a communal meal in which the church is the focus as the body of Christ that needed to be recognized, by showing the Lord's death in their sharing of the communal meal. (1Cor. 11:17ff)
And if you try to argue otherwise, you will see even more how much titling NT pastors as "priests" is part of what is "properly termed theology."
A vain attempt indeed.
Unfortunately the cults do seduce and corrupt believers who had entrusted themselves to His sacrifice alone. By your definition of a church, do they comprise a church within a church, or just a church ?
It can include any denomination or no denomination. It can include a handful of illiterate natives in the darkest jungle who get together to pray and worship. They are his and gathered. It can be a “house church” or a gathering in a movie theater on Sunday. If they are His and gathered, they are a gathering.
Good morning, sunshine.
You're just a bundle of joy and encouragement.
There's a verse that says something about a log and mote.
Did it occur to you that telling someone that they're whining is a lessor thing than telling someone they're full of cr@p?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.