Posted on 07/09/2006 4:41:38 AM PDT by Oshkalaboomboom
The accelerating fragmentation of the strife-torn Episcopal Church USA, in which several parishes and even a few dioceses are opting out of the church, isn't simply about gay bishops, the blessing of same-sex unions or the election of a woman as presiding bishop. It also is about the meltdown of liberal Christianity.
Embraced by the leadership of all the mainline Protestant denominations, as well as large segments of American Catholicism, liberal Christianity has been hailed by its boosters for 40 years as the future of the Christian church.
Instead, as all but a few die-hards now admit, all the mainline churches and movements within churches that have blurred doctrine and softened moral precepts are demographically declining and, in the case of the Episcopal Church, disintegrating.
It is not entirely coincidental that at about the same time that Episcopalians, at their general convention in Columbus, Ohio, were thumbing their noses at a directive from the worldwide Anglican Communion that they "repent" of confirming the openly gay Bishop V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire three years ago, the Presbyterian Church USA, at its general assembly in Birmingham, Ala., was turning itself into the laughingstock of the blogosphere by tacitly approving alternative designations for the supposedly sexist Christian Trinity of Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Among the suggested names were "Mother, Child and Womb" and "Rock, Redeemer and Friend." Moved by the spirit of the Presbyterian revisionists, Beliefnet blogger Rod Dreher held a "Name That Trinity" contest. Entries included "Rock, Scissors and Paper" and "Larry, Curly and Moe."
Following the Episcopalian lead, the Presbyterians also voted to give local congregations the freedom to ordain openly cohabiting gay and lesbian ministers and endorsed the legalization of medical marijuana.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Since you gave us such a wide selection, all saying the same thing, I suspect that it is from a website with an axe to grind. That being the case, I would like to see the original quotations in context, because I suspect that context is being omitted and the translations may even have been fudged.
Every priest is "alter Christus" (another Christ) when he offers the Sacrifice of the Mass. But only as a representative (just as Christ is the Head of the Church - the Pope is simply his Vicar on earth.)
Even with all that being the case, nobody has ever claimed that no Pope in history never made a mistake (or never said or did stupid stuff. I mean, look at Alexander VI). Usual misunderstanding about the scope of infallibility.
You did not answer my question.
The word you are referring to, I think, is 'charitoo'.
From Strong's Greek Lexicon:
1) to make graceful
a) charming, lovely, agreeable
2) to peruse with grace, compass with favour
3) to honour with blessings
Nothing in the word itself indicates permanent, sinless grace.
The word is used also in Ephesians 1:6
Eph 1:3 Blessed [be] the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly [places] in Christ:
Eph 1:4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:
Eph 1:5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,
Eph 1:6 To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath "made us accepted" (charitoo) in the beloved.
Eph 1:7 In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;
Again, there is NOTHING in the scriptures that indicate Mary should be worshipped or revered. She was the chosen vessel by which the Savior of mankind was brought into the world. And that was done through the Holy Spirit.
But nothing indicates anywhere that Mary was instilled with a sinless character, that she was to be worshipped or revered, that anyone should hold her in high esteem.
Here's the last reference to any actions by Mary, the mother of Jesus.
Jhn 19:25 Now there stood by the cross of Jesus his mother, and his mother's sister, Mary the [wife] of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene.
Jhn 19:26 When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy son!
Jhn 19:27 Then saith he to the disciple, Behold thy mother! And from that hour that disciple took her unto his own [home].
They did have the Old Testament. And they did have the writings of the Apostles and the Gospels. they just weren't "official" except with God.
And Peter is clearly instructed by Christ to be not only the Rock with the Keys of the Kingdom and the power to bind and loose, but also the shepherd of the sheep -- Matthew 16:17-19 and John 21:15-17.
And what was the Church doing until the canon was established? And what was St. Paul talking about when he mentioned not only that which was written, but that which was verbally taught?
This has happened in Protestant churches too, it just doesn't get the same press.
If a man claims to be "God on earth", I would fully expect him to claim he is infallible.
God is perfect and perfection. Christ is perfect and perfection.
Popes have claimed to be God and/or Christ on earth, yet they are imperfect.
The word in question is kecaritwmenh. It is indeed a form of the verb caritow, "to grace" or "to endow with grace", but a very unique and particular one - the passive perfect participle. That form indicates a continuous and complete state of the verb -- in other words, grace that has existed completely and fully from all time.
"Do you think a pastor is only a pastor if he is sinless?"
No. However, I know of NO pastors (elders) or even any evangelists (preachers) who claim to be God on earth or even claim to speak directly for God (except for a few fruitcakes).
Popes claim deitical status. Deity is sinless.
Popes have often claimed their word is the infallible word of God. Yet, popes issue conflicting statements.
The scriptures tell us that "All scripture is given by inpiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works." Paul to Timothy in II Timothy 3:16
If the man of God could be made perfect through the scriptures and furnished unto all good works, and this in AD 60-65, why do we need popes? We don't.
Sorry, I didn't know James Strong was so inept.
Since the same word is used referring to us as Christians in Ephesians 1, you might want to go back and revise your thoughts on exactly what it "means".
Again, you have taken one word (incorrectly, I might add)and created a doctrine out of it that is INCOMPATIBLE and CONTRADICTORY with other teachings in the scriptures.
IMO the greatest sin of the liberal Protestant churches is that they're pro-choice. The Presbyterian Church USA even gives abortion coverage to its pastors and their families. Plus, the Presbyterians are trying to get Isreal to stop building the wall. A once great denomination has been taken over by liberal democrats at the highest levels.
Worship? You are being silly.
"Honor your mother and father" would be one biblical commandment that Jesus fulfilled, and his followers have always followe dhis example and honored Mary .
"Behold your mother", words of Jesus to his apostle about his mother while on the Cross. I follow that example and do likewise - I treat Mary as my own mother.
"Hail Mary, full of grace, blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb, Jesus." gospel quote from the angel to Mary (note that the angel describes Mary and Jesus using the same word: "blessed").
Extremely scriptural to single Mary out for special refelction. Its what the earliest Christians understood was the right thing to do. And 1500 years later people decided to pitch Mary aside as just a woman. Your knowledge of Church history is either severly lacking, or else you are too stuobborn to admit that some protestant ideas are just plain from out of nowhere. Even Luther understood Mary as having a special status among God's human creatures.
BTW, the word in Ephesians is completely different (it's an aorist form.)
Puh-leeze. God is not such a crappy writer that He cannot be understood without outside help.
(I said Holy Ghost for years. 17th century survival. Nothing against King James's version - I still read it. Probably the greatest single item a committee has ever produced.)
I honor my father and mother. But I don't pray to them.
Jesus himself taught us how to pray. We pray to our Father in heaven.
"Because we want to" is not how you establish biblical authority. That is all you have on Mary.
You say that the bible is easy to understnad without help. I agree.
Bible:
"Amen I say to you, unless you chew on my flesh and drink my blood you shall not have life within you."
Simple meaning: A person has to chew on Jesus' flesh and drink jesus' blood, or else the person will be dead.
Protestant meaning: You don't really have to eat and drink his real flesh and blood to have that life, you can pretend with symbols - its the same thing.
The protestant interpretation of this passage requires lots extra-biblical crapola that was invented to negate the imporatnce of the ordained priesthood and riutal liturgical worship.
Jesus first repeated what he said, then summarized: "‘I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh.’ The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, ‘How can this man give us his flesh to eat?’" (John 6:51–52).
His listeners were stupefied because now they understood Jesus literally—and correctly. He again repeated his words, but with even greater emphasis, and introduced the statement about drinking his blood: "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him" (John 6:53–56).
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.