Posted on 12/14/2009 11:06:25 AM PST by the_conscience
This is a great article that shows the root problem with Romanism, that is, the pagan notion of a heirarchy of being that informs all Romanist theology as shown through the specfic problem of clerical celibacy.Learned and charitable refutations are humbly solicited.
“...so Luther tried to give his friend a semi “legal” way out.”
In a world of sola scriptura, what claimed authority had Luther to make such an error?
Would there be any reason to think an Apostle wouldn’t have such authority in the early Church? Not that I conclude Paul had the “authority”, or exercised it, but I’ve never considered Paul to have been limited in authority.
The Old Testament Patriarchs (Abraham, David, Solomon) had multiple wives.
The practice ended a few hundred years before Jesus was born, but was fairly common in Near Eastern societies of the time.
Good grief the French king's had their mistresses in official state and Church functions! Granted it was the French Church, which for many centuries claimed certain extra privileges that would not fly well in other places.
Sadly, the human condition has not really changed in history.
So Luther was a Patriarch? Or just some dude who claimed religious authority?
Because all men are created in the image of God. That's how our Constitution got the notion of "all men are created equal".
Is the saint in heaven not better than the just man on earth?
No. The Saint in heaven is glorified but the man on earth who is justified is equally as good as the Saint in heaven. The only difference being their current state of body and soul.
Is the just man is not better than the sinner?
NO. The man justified is as equally a sinner as the man not justified. The only difference lies in obtaining an alien righteousness. As James tell us, if you break one law you've broke them all. Simul Justus et Peccator.
Is the sinner not better than the damned in hell?
Only if the sinner is justified by the alien righteousness of Christ.
Among the just are there not more and less virtuous men?
Yes, but that has nothing to do with their Justification. A less virtuous Christian will obtain glorification over a virtuous pagan.
Are there not better and worse sinners?
All sinners are equally sinful in the sight of God.
Was St. John the Baptist not the best of all men born from women? (St. Matthew 11.11)
"Yet the one who is least is greater than he."
And as to the notion of heirarchy being "Romanist", heirarchical division of society are and always have been clearly present among men in all societies, ancient and modern, primitive and advanced.
According to gifts not Ontology.
I understand. I disagree.
I agree. It depends on the conscience of the person.
That Church is wrong.
The castrated.
Amen.
We're seeing that played out. Natural rights according to a chain of being.
That's news to me. And I was having so much fun, too.
ROTFLMAO!
Baptist preacher’s kid, here. We don’t have parishes — and I only remember a few rumors or confirmations about preachers who were adulterers.
I’ve never understood why anyone would choose to ignore the qualifications for church leaders in Timothy and Titus and the examples of married Peter, unmarried Paul, and councils like that one in Jerusalem.
And we’re taught that we’re all saints, all members of the priesthood, not to call any man “Father,” that we may each approach the throne, there is only one mediator between us and the Father, and that no man (or woman) can modify the Bible to come up with new rules - there are no single leaders like the popes, etc.
Luther's heretical schism most certainly led to the apostasy of overt, active homosexual clergy in the denomination that bears his name. By breaking the apostolic authority passed down from Jesus Christ through his apostles, Luther created the "anything goes" morality of today's Lutheran majority synods.
This doctrine of enforced, required celibacy, which didn't apparently come into vogue (as mandatory requirement) did not arise until at least TWO CENTURIES after the original Apostles. One could reasonable surmise, that matter of such import would have been addressed somewhat earlier on.
Priestly continence was practiced from the earliest apostolic times. However, even assuming the falsehood that priestly celebacy hadn't been a tradition of the early Church, this discipline would have in no way been an even partial justification for the schism of Western Christianity.
You seem to be arguing that one should judge a tree by it's fruits, yes? While pointing at the evil fruit of the fem-bot/gay clergy, yes?
The fact is that the majority synods of today's Lutheran Church permit the scandal of overt sodomites as their shepherds. Truly a rotten fruit for any church.
Sounds ok, but if such logic is indeed applicable, in broad strokes of the tar coated brush, what does same that logic say in regards to "some" (not all, mind you, just "some") of the historical evidence regarding human sexuality in the Catholic Church? Here ya go, buddy. Read 'em & weep;
I absolutely do weep at the sins of those in my Church or any other. The distinction you obviously miss with your document dump is that these are still held as sins by the Catholic Church. Despicable, yet personal, failings of individual members of the laity and clergy which the Church to this day still condemns. The difference between the Catholic Church and the Lutheran Church is that these sins are still held as moral crimes in the Catholic Church while more and more of them are becoming publicly sanctioned behavior among the very leaders of the Lutheran Church. The fact that so much of the Lutheran Church has fallen into defining the abominations of sodomy and even abortion as good behavior is most certainly the rancid fruit of a wicked tree.
IF. Sexual relations may, of course, not be so good, in which case the guy is going to have to suppress some sexual urges also,
In all candor, the author of that post is entitled to his or her opinion. No matter how wrong. It is up to each of our prudential judgment whether or not to engage said author. It is my prudential judgment that it is not worth wasting my time when there are more important matters to deal with, to include watching a spider weave its web.
And Luther was attacked by his own supporters for it. He was not perfect, and no one ever claimed he was.
Are you implying that if the Pope said “Go ahead and marry four wives” that would be ok since he has the authority?
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.