Posted on 11/23/2012 6:07:24 PM PST by marshmallow
To paraphrase Michael Crichton, Consensus is politics, not science. With that in mind I would add... religion is closer to politics than science
A Christian Church is supposed to represent the values of Christ.
They have it exactly opposite. The world should reflect the values of the church.
It does not need to reflect the values of society. If it finds that it does not reflect the values of society, then it need to evangelize society, not cave in.
Take it one step further,
Islam will soon rule the day for the Christian church.
Fools.
And the church the values of Christ, there is no other option or it is nothing but another social club. We left one liberal church (ELCA) for the Biblical Lutheran Church Missouri Synod and if it goes off the left end, I have no idea where we’d go. There is such a thing as Biblical truth and it does not change.
Can any Anglicans here help me understand to what extent the Church of England is accountable to Parliament and/or the monarchy? I have a difficult time understanding this because Christianity is countercultural by nature, isn't it? Are there penalties government can apply toward the church if government decides the church no longer reflects societal norms? If so, to whom in the church would such penalty be directed?
Please understand that I'm genuinely curious and not interested in starting a discussion critical of or disrespectful toward Anglicans. I simply don't understand to what extent church has to answer to government. This must be a heart wrenching time for some Anglicans!
You would be welcome with us stogy Southern Baptists.
>> With that in mind I would add... religion is closer to politics than science
Because we all know the science of “Climate Change” is empirically apolitical.
What ever happend to “Reflectin g the Values of God?”
Isn’t that what churches are supposed to do?
There is no “science of “Climate Change””, only the politics of climate change.
Well, if you’re going to qualify the term ‘science’, then why not ‘religion’?
Many former members of Episcopal churches have found a home in the Orthodox Church because in more than 2000 years it has never changed and it will not change ever because of the highly structured nature of its Liturgy.
I don’t know the answer to your question but I do know that Queen Elizabeth is the Head of the Church.
The theory is that science can’t be qualified, it aspires to the truth...even if only one person suspects it (The ancient Arab that deduced the diameter of the earth, Copernicus, Galileo, Einstein, etc.) Religion is by its very nature unprovable, and therefore political, whether you acknowledge many deities, one deity or none.
I have a good friend who’s LCMS. If things goes liberal there, you’re welcome to come to my denomination, the Presbyterian Church in America(PCA). There’s also the WELS(Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod) and many independent Baptist and Bible churches that are Biblically orthodox and solid.
“As a consequence of the decision by the General Synod, the Church of England no longer looks like a national Church; it simply looks like a sect, like any other sect. If it wishes to be a national Church that reflects the nation, it has to reflect the values of the nation.”
There’s something to be said about separation of church and state which means no state church not “protecting” the government from Christianity as the psycholib secularists keep trying to enforce on the rest of us.
I’m talking about the terms not what the terms truly represent — elaborating on your post #13.
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.