How could He always be the head of His Church when there were always no believers? The church is based on faith in Jesus Christ, for which one needs believers in Jesus Christ for a Church (ekklesia, gathering of the faithful) to exist. The Head existed, but not the Body. The High Priest existed, but not the congregation. God was always authority unto Himself, but his authority in the Church was not when the Church was not.
I'm not sure I follow you. God was the head of all believers in the OT, and when the NT Church formed, He was the head and full authority of that also. When were there no believers?
FK: "I'm talking about leadership here, along the lines of "Luke 12:48 ... From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be basked."
I hope you recognize yourself included in that statement. When you can tell me you have not failed, even once, I will reconsider.
I am only included to the extent of a semi-informed layman. That is to a lesser degree than my theologically trained pastor, and, presumably, infinitely less than Apostolic successors who have been given supernatural powers through Holy Orders. And no, I have never failed to the extent of the people I am talking about. The Bible teaches that some sins are worse than others. (Obviously the Latins use venial and mortal.) Christ speaks specifically about certain sins, and how it would be better for offenders had they never been born. Peter was indeed a lowly sinner, but he CHANGED after his "Holy Orders". There are too many who have apparently NOT changed for me to believe that Apostolic succession is real.
And [Apostolic successors] fall much lower than you and I, precisely because they have been given so much more.
What? How does that work? Should I expect the worst criminals in our society to be Apostolic clergy? :)
But don't you think it should be up to God to pronounce judgment on them rather than my sinful self or yours?
I don't judge their souls, but I do judge their conduct. The Bible tells us that we cannot serve two masters, and it appears that way too many in high positions have decided on a master I cannot follow. I do not believe in Clintonian compartmentalization. I absolutely believe that Clinton's moral failures fully affected him as a leader. Even if I wasn't a conservative, I could never trust him because his core morality was clear, and it was un-Godly. It is the same here. We CANNOT say that so and so is still a good priest or Bishop, even given that he did thus and such. That will never fly with me. It would be a full abdication of the accountability that you tell me your priests and Bishops have.
Is it not like one criminal calling another criminal a criminal?
No, it is not like that at all. By that standard, we should simply empty all the prisons because no one has standing to accuse another of wrongdoing. In addition, this philosophy would have hierarchs look the other way while Apostolic clergy commit heinous crimes. Given today's news, I guess that has already happened within the Church.
Surely you don't suggest the Jews were "true" believers before Christ? Surely you don't suggest the Jews had fullness of God's revelation! The few had a better idea of God and their faith was steadfast, but there could not have been a true Church without Christ. If it were, then what was Christ doing building His Church on the rock of faith given to Peter? The Church was established on the Pentecost, 33 A.D.
And no, I have never failed to the extent of the people I am talking about. The Bible teaches that some sins are worse than others. (Obviously the Latins use venial and mortal.) Christ speaks specifically about certain sins, and how it would be better for offenders had they never been born
Oh, I see. First the Bible does not teach that some sins are worst then others. It says that there is only one sin for which there can be no absolution -- blaspheming against the Holy Spirit. No reason is given for this.
Second, the Orthodox Churches does not distinguish between venial and mortal sins. To us, all sin is sin. As St. James says
For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles in one point, he has become guilty of all -- James 2:10
And mercy is one thing we must show in order to receive mercy.
For judgment will be merciless to one who has shown no mercy; mercy triumphs over judgment -- James 10:13
Do not feel yourself "worthy" of God's mercy just because you have sinned "less" in your eyes the the clergy you loathe.
[re And [Apostolic successors] fall much lower than you and I, precisely because they have been given so much more] How does that work?
It's that talent thing. They have been given so much and if they fail they have so much more to answer for.
I don't judge their souls, but I do judge their conduct. The Bible tells us that we cannot serve two masters, and it appears that way too many in high positions have decided on a master I cannot follow
And what master do we follow? God or money? Ambition or virtue? I find it funny to read something like this in a country founded on predatory capitalism, materialism, secularism lifestyle, and above all love for money. We seem to have done pretty good serving both masters, FK, don't you think? We even have God on our money, so we can love both!
You just have a think about clergy. It almost seems as something deep-seated. perhaps you can show me what master did they decide to follow that makes them worse than any other human being? And while you are at it, remember that RCC has 1.2 billion members and EOC about 300 million. How many priests are involved? One thousand, ten thousand? Ten thousand is 0.0006% for 1.5 billion (1,500,000,000) people. That would leave 99.999% of the priests serving God. I'd say, that's pretty impressive. And let's be generous, and say 1 million priests are serving the other master, that gives us 0.7% (less than 1%) with 99% of all priests serving God.
What are your figures?
I do not believe in Clintonian compartmentalization. I absolutely believe that Clinton's moral failures fully affected him as a leader. Even if I wasn't a conservative, I could never trust him because his core morality was clear, and it was un-Godly
Clinton lied under oath and should have been in a slammer for 30 years because that's what we ordinary "mortals" get and what the law calls for. What's un-Godly is that we are all equal but some of us are apparently more equal in a country that prides itself on being based on the rule of law!
And how is Clinton's lying any different than the one who lied us into a war in Iraq while pursuing agendas of dubious national interest instead of going after the guy who is responsible for the 9/11?
By that standard, we should simply empty all the prisons because no one has standing to accuse another of wrongdoing. In addition, this philosophy would have hierarchs look the other way while Apostolic clergy commit heinous crimes. Given today's news, I guess that has already happened within the Church
No, conduct that is evil should not, must not be tolerated. There is a difference between topping and avoiding and returning evil for evil. We don't have vigilante groups meeting out their own brand of justice. Our judicial system tries to give most people a chance to reform, which is the way it should be. I just don't agree with providing them with the kind of accommodations they get on taxpayers' money. I believe in dungeons, a place no one would ever want to come back to.