Posted on 11/14/2003 1:07:04 PM PST by Gamecock
An interesting read from our Messianic friends:
The Synagogue of Christ by Steve Schlissel Messianic Jewish pastor Messiah's Congregation, Brooklyn, New York.
The church wasn't born at Pentecost. It was Bar Mitzvah'd. No small matter, this. The church had a long, albeit dotted, history by the time the Spirit in Christ's fullness fell, and a glorious, albeit difficult, future. By Pentecost, the church, because of its history, its providentially-ordained organization and the Holy Spirit's promised guidance, was well-prepared to fulfill its function in the world.
The Belgic Confession, in Article XXVII, states, "We believe and profess one catholic or universal Church...This Church has been from the beginning of the world, and will be to the end thereof..." It has not, however, always had the same form. In the Garden of Eden God identified and separated the church (then consisting of two) using the essential elements, Word and Sacrament, Promise and Token, which would be present throughout the church's history, in some form or another. Our first parents were created to understand themselves and all things else in terms of a word. They had received the defining Word of God; they had heard the anti-word of the serpent. Choosing the devil's definitions, they had broken covenant with their Creator and entered into league with the destroyer, becoming co-pretenders with him to the throne.
God was not about to forsake His purposes, or to quickly formulate a "Plan B." He graciously and forcefully took back Adam and Eve-He redeemed them-by placing hostility between them and their new master (the Antithesis), by promising in their hearing the incarnation of the conquering, suffering Messiah (the Protevangelium, first proclamation of the Gospel), and by clothing them with God-provided coverings (the "Sacrament"), indicating in the clearest terms that their fig leaves (their instinctive effort at self-atonement/covering) were wholly inadequate and unacceptable. It is God who saves. Calvinism did not originate in Geneva; it is found in Eden. God's people, the covenant line, would henceforth be the people redeemed by Him to live, once again, in terms of His Word.
Calvinists are not the "church" founded by John Knox in Scotland. Knox founded no "church", but a Denomination. We are not the "church" founded by the Protestant Reformers. The Reformers founded no "church", but a Reformation. We are not the "church" founded by the Popes at Rome. No "pope" has founded any "church", just a (false) Administration. We are not the "church" founded by the Apostles at Pentecost. The Apostles founded no "church", but a Dispensation. We are not the "church" founded by Moses at Sinai. Moses founded no "church", but a covenanted Theonomic Congregation.
Calvinists are the Church founded by God in the very Garden of Eden. We are the Covenant Line of God's People, redeemed by Him to live in terms of His Word. We have stood the test of Time. And the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against us.
I think that you are at least partly right. In thinking back over the last few years of news reports in my area, my impression is that, at certain times, there would be a spate of stories regarding Catholic priests, more scattered reports regarding various non-Catholic Christian authority figures, and many more regarding public school teachers, coaches, etc.
The news stories regarding priests (locally) had to do with lawsuits being filed about incidents which happened years ago. There tended to be clusters of these, over several days, even though they concerned only one actual case. Thus, there may have seemed to be more coverage of RCC incidents, I don't think there were significantly more actual incidents than non-Catholic incidents, at least in this area. [My impression is that there were FEWER actual incidents, locally, related to the RCC, and more related to non-Catholic churches. This is just an impression, not any kind of study.]
As to the schools, after a few cases in which it was discovered (too late) that the perpetrator had a criminal record of molesting, the states passed laws requiring fingerprints and a criminal background check, for people working near children. EXCEPT...Except the teacher's unions DEMANDED that teachers who were already employed were to be EXEMPT from these checks. To my way of thinking, this constituted a cover-up of criminal acts of (some--probably very few, but we will never know) existing teachers; without any regard for possible future (or even on-going) abuse by a teacher with a "past."
In this regard, there is a certain similarity to the problem in the churches. There has too often been a willingness to protect an institution, or a power structure, by covering up an embarrassment to the detriment of the innocents who should be protected.
There is another side to this, which does not relate to schools, but to any church or religious organization in which these molestings occur. The fact that a person who is capable of committing this kind of evil, and who is so much under subjection to Satan that he could actually commit such acts, can be appointed to any leadership position can only be due to one thing. That thing is an utter dearth of spiritual DISCERNMENT on the part of the "spiritual authorities" who made the appointment, and those who supervised the miscreant while he was molesting.
This applies to EVERY church, or group, or organization, which considers itself Christian, or even "spiritual." Protestant, Catholic, or other, this lack of spiritual discernment MUST call into question the spiritual authority of leaders who demonstrate such an appalling lack spiritual discernment.
DG
Unless I am mistaken, the first three Paragraphs of the above Article are a direct quotation from "The Synagogue of Christ", whereas the latter two paragraphs are expository commentary from yours truly, from way back (maybe back in my old "Uriel 1975" days) which have -- through the miracle of Internet cross-quotation -- become intertwined with the original Sermon.
I am relatively certain, of course, that Rabbi Schlissel would entirely agree with my posted commentary; but for the sake of accuracy, it bears acknowledgement that the latter two paragraphs are not originally Steve's, they are my own addendum to Steve's sermon to his Messianic congregation.
While Schlissel is indeed a former Jew, it is a bit misleading to identify him as "Messianic". That might lead some to believe he is a praciticing "Messianic Jew".
Schlissel is actually now a Belgic Confession waving, Heidelberg Catechism preaching, Canons of Dordt confessing (AKA: "Three Forms of Unity" subscribing) pastor from the Dutch Reformed tradition!
Jean
If you could bookmark it, and wait for me a little while (I post very little at present, as I am waiting on my new computer and the restoration of my DSL), I should like to respond.
I would like to engage the subject... just not at 14.4k (the best that my allegedly 56k dial-up modem back-up can accomplish anymore; I think that the coal-fired boiler is nearly out of steam).
Damn antiques...I share your frustration. Mine operates on a foot-treadle, and FR always gives me leg cramps.
Ping me when you begin your engagement. I love to watch a master at work :D
Well, Jean, this is entirely true.
HOWEVER, it is also true that Schlissel has (in essence) told the Dutch Reformed to go hang when certain elements thereof tried to interfere with his Messianic exposition of Apostle Paul's doctrine of Faith (the short-and-dirty summary of the Controversy is that certain elements of the Dutch Reformed community have felt it necessary to remind Rev. Schlissel that "Faith Alone saves"; whereas Schlissel is defending the other side of the equation, "The Faith which Saves is never Alone" [i.e., Good Works are a testament to True Faith]).
While Schlissel is Covenanted to the Dutch Reformed tradition, it is clear from his education, his writings, and the congregation which he leads, that he still very much proceeds from a Messianic Jewish foundation... perhaps moreso even than Meredith Kline; or maybe one might say that Kline generally attends to theory, whereas Schlissel generally attends to praxis.
It might be, perhaps, most correct to say (in view of his own biographical record -- from Orthodox Judaism to Messianic Hebrew-Christianity to Dutch Reformed) that Rabbi-Presbyter Schlissel is a Messianic Jew who has found his Christian home amongst the Dutch Reformed.
(Hardly surprising, I guess; the Dutch Reformed have often been accused -- or maybe complimented, depending on your view of the matter -- as "the Jews of Reformed Christianity")
best, OP
"(Hardly surprising, I guess; the Dutch Reformed have often been accused -- or maybe complimented, depending on your view of the matter -- as "the Jews of Reformed Christianity")"
And Grand Rapids is often jokingly referred to as the "New Jerusalem"
Jean
Sending you a hug.
You are right, they need a safe haven from the homosexual predators found in "some" churches that make man and works their god.
Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks.
You just realized how that comment reflects on YOUR faith and are embarrassed
Yea but no one calls them father or looks to them as demi gods
There is a difference
Thats because we can not stand the sight of blood :>))
How are you girl?
Hah!! I empathize. Try running a nifty-spiffy DSL connection for two years and then suddenly finding yourself relegated to the "guinea-pig on a treadmill" 56k back-up (which rarely exceeds 14k, at that).
Ping me when you begin your engagement. I love to watch a master at work :D
You -- and the rest of the Calvinist Caucus -- are, as usual, entirely too kind. I really didn't start up the Calvinist Caucus because I was fishing for compliments; honest I didn't. In the early days, back when I started the "Predestination" threads, I was just trying to explain to the FR Catholics why I could never go "home to Rome". The whole FR Calvinist Caucus just kinda grew up around that humble beginning... it wasn't a matter of a "master at work" (sheesh, I haven't even yet qualified for the diaconal requirements of my own Orthodox Presbytery).
Perhaps one of these days, "Calvinist_Dark_Lord" and I will call up an old friend of ours... My Mentor, and CDL's nemesis (though CDL, to his credit, at least gave him a run for his money)... the infamous David_K, Terror of the East Coast Debate circuit.
We haven't yet done so... last I checked, David had a wife and at least two kids (being that he is, I think, a Providentialist on the matter of Birth Control, he may now have more children than that) and I'm afraid it would be a dis-service to him to addict him to the FR Religion Forum (and he would surely be addicted).
But maybe, at some point, we'll invite him to the Playground. "A Master at work"? Brother Alex -- neither the Catholic Caucus nor the Calvinist Caucus has yet seen a Master at work. (grin).
How am I? Hmmmm....
In transition. I have suddenly been relieved of my Employment position, just last week (basically, my Boss took the Northern half of the market, and gave the Middle-market guy my branches in the South... meaning I have been squeezed out)... but I believe that I have enough clients to go into business for myself, which is my intent at this point. I believe that I have the numbers to make it work; God willing; it will.
Sending you a hug. 52 posted on 11/14/2003 10:31 PM PST by MarMema
Sending me a hug. (sigh)... gladly accepted, but why did you have to do that?
I have to confess, it's breaking my old Mother's heart that my French-Catholic elder brother has declared, "My Children will be raised Eastern Orthodox!!"
I have, of course, tried to explain to her that Martin Luther himself considered the Eastern Orthodox to be the "better half" of Christendom (from whence we derive the English marital expression); but we are a Protestant family... and though it would nearly kill her for her Grandchildren to be raised Papist Catholics, she is not greatly familiar or comfortable with Eastern Orthodoxy.
I myself would like to confront my elder brother on this matter -- IF he intends to raise his children (my nephews) according to the Orthodoxy of "The Confession of Cyril Lukaris", then I shall hold my peace, and shall advise my mother to do the same. Patriarch Cyril Lukaris, of course, was entirely Eastern Orthodox on the matter of Liturgy, Ecclesiology, Sacramentology, Veneration of the Saints, and other such Eastern Orthodox distinctives; but his Soteriological doctrine of Salvation was largely Lutheran-Protestant (or Fideistic-Orthodox, might be another way of putting the matter)...
...and if my Brother is intent upon raising his Children, my nephews, within the Lukarian Orthodox tradition, then I am able to overlook the adiaphora of distinctives between Orthodoxy and Protentantism.
But Protestants do have legitimate and genuine disagreements with the mainstream of Orthodox theology -- We really do. it's just that...
And, I think, the designation is often accurate. And the Churches have much to learn from eachother... for God is the giver of all good things: Faith, Law, and Love.
But you Eastern Orthodox sure make it difficult to fight with you. "Church of Love", indeed... I'm trying to fight about Theology, and you offer a Hug and a Benediction.
I still have my theological disagreements with the Eastern Orthodox church -- and I expect I always will (although, as I have said above, I shall be able to make my peace with Lukarian Orthodox, if my elder brother so decides). But you certainly make it difficult.
Eastern Orthodoxy -- "The Church of Love". And on your better days... you actually live up to that Reputation.
By the Grace of God... may ye always.
best, OP
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.