Posted on 06/21/2014 5:16:01 PM PDT by don-o
WASHINGTON – An openly transgender Episcopal priest is set to preach at Washington National Cathedral.
The Rev. Dr. Cameron Partridge, the Episcopal chaplain at Boston University, will be a guest preacher on Sunday. He'll be the first openly transgender priest to preach from Canterbury Pulpit at the cathedral.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
References, please. My vantage point as a former Episcopagan (48 years) who left the denomination in NOV 2003 when the ECUSA presiding bishop consecrated Gene Robinson as the bishop of the diocese of NH sees a different picture. The ECUSA/TEC diaspora have scatterd across a multitude of denominations with no clear trend = Anglican re-alignment denominations, Orthodox Church, Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, non-PCUSA Presbyterians, Roman Catholic, and others.
Well, no. Wrong. Again.
Seems to me the Eastern Orthodox denomination would have an equal claim to NT authorship.
Jimmy Swaggart primarily lost his ministry due to messing around with hookers. I don't think you ever have seen anyone defend him.
The first time I saw Jim and Tammy on tv it was easy to identify them as the charlatans they were.
Benny Hinn has been busted for his "cures" on more than one occasion. They have been proven to be false.
My personal favorite was Robert Tilton...or as I called him "pay for prayer". ABC did an expose on him and he was basically put out of business. I think he may still be lurking around on very late night tv.
In all of these cases their false teachings were revealed. In most of these cases their ministries have either been stopped or diminished. I realize some may be around still.
Part of this was due to an appeal to Scripture.
When I see the RCC, Baptists, Mormons, JWs, preacher, teacher,etc....that makes a claim on certain statements, the first thing I, or anyone should do, is to verify their claim against the Bible as Paul tells us to do in the Bible.
It is the only source we have that is God breathed.
If the claims don't measure up against the Bible they need to be called out.
So when I see the RCC make the claims it does regarding Mary, which have evolved over about an 1800 year time period, and are continuing to evolve, the papacy itself, indulgences, etc, and measure those against the Bible.....yes I call them out as being made up as there isn't any scriptural support for these.
In the case of Mary, if the teachings aren't supporting the worship of idols/false gods, they're about as close as you can get. I realize that statement will upset a great number of Catholics.
However, when you examine the Bible nowhere does it say we are to pray to Mary. Yet, the RCC teaches its members to pray to Mary. Indeed, there are segments of the RCC devoted to the study of Mary.
So which standard should we use? The Bible or tradition? I go with the Bible as it is the only one of the two that is God-breathed. Catholic tradition cannot make that claim.
I would contend that it is God who has given us His Word.
Agreed. I think you can see my point though, that the earliest Christian church centers in Jerusalem, Damascus, Alexandria, Byzantium, and Rome were roughly of equal status before the EO and RCC denominations became entrenched. I have never read an EO member make the claim that their denomination wrote the Bible like I have seen several RCC Freepers make.
In the Religion forum, on a thread titled Transgender priest to preach at National Cathedral, MacNaughton wrote:
Seems to me the Eastern Orthodox denomination would have an equal claim to NT authorship.
In a sense, yes. When Holy Writ was written, there was no Great Schism, so both the Eastern and Western Church were one. Even to this day, they both respect each other as valid successors to that time of unity and hold each others’ Sacraments as valid. If I need a priest in an emergency and the only available priest is Orthodox, I can validly and licitly have recourse to their Sacramental ministries. At least such is my understanding.
How say the rest of the Catholic contingent?
“84 I would contend that it is God who has given us His Word.”
He did, through His appointed Priesthood. The Apostles and their validly ordained successors.
So when I see the RCC make the claims it does regarding Mary, which have evolved over about an 1800 year time period, and are continuing to evolve, the papacy itself, indulgences, etc, and measure those against the Bible.....yes I call them out as being made up as there isn't any scriptural support for these.And you are shown to be wrong, again and again. Our Lord did NOT give us the Holy Writ, He appointed the Apostles. Under the guidance of the Paraclete, they and their successors wrote and compiled Holy Writ. They also built the traditions that support the Great Commission given them by Our Lord. You deny the very essence of the faith when you deny the Sacraments - all of which are clearly Biblical.
“... just as narses seemed too eager to initiate it in the first place...”
Hey, that post you responded to regards tradition was not mine. It was rather that of a poster trying to point out the unChristian attitudes here, mine included.
Just saying.
Maybe, but truly the reason for the evil that happens is because of the inability of the Sola Scriptura crowd to have any governance beyond the congregational. The root issue really is heresy right? And should we not point out that truth, in good times as well as bad?
“There’s no Office of Protestantism, Church of Protestantism. We talk about denominations.”
And each one their own final arbiter of what the Word says.
Bingo. The essential issue.
Yet, the RCC teaches its members to pray to Mary. Indeed, there are segments of the RCC devoted to the study of Mary.
...a classic case of a poster who doesn’t know what he’s talking about expostulating as if he did...nobody, repeat, nobody prays to the Holy Mother...we invoke her name to pray for us, as we invoke the saints in the Mass to do the same...it’s a simple matter of seeking help to approach divinity...if you don’t need help to speak to the divine, bully for you...but you shouldn’t go about spreading misinformation while you do it...
...as for segments of the RCC studying Mary...you have some sort of point to make...?
Hey, that post you responded to regards tradition was not mine.
...I know I was responding to someone else...about something you said...
The root issue really is heresy right?
...IIRC, the topic of this thread originally had nothing to do with heresy...
In the Religion forum, on a thread titled Transgender priest to preach at National Cathedral, IrishBrigade wrote:
...IIRC, the topic of this thread originally had nothing to do with heresy...
The TOPIC:
Transgender priest to preach at National Cathedral
If that is NOT heresy, please explain to me what it is?
WTF???
WHAT THE HELLLL IS GOING ON..THIS IS A CRICUS!
Hell is right. I argue heresy. Other argue clowns. Hell is the result.
More Christians walk this earth that venerate Mary than Christian that don’t. And it just happens to be the earliest Christians that have been around for the last 2,000 years.
As far as Tradition, the teachings of Jesus Christ were being taught BEFORE A WORD WAS WRITTEN ABOUT HIM. End of subject.
Sola Scriptura is a fraud.
My soul magnifies the Lord,
And my spirit rejoices in God my Savior.
For He has regarded the low estate of His handmaiden,
For behold, henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.
For He who is mighty has done great things for me, and holy is His name. And His mercy is on those who fear Him from generation to generation.
He has shown strength with His arm:
He has scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts.
He has put down the mighty from their thrones,
and exalted those of low degree.
He has filled the hungry with good things;
and the rich He has sent empty away.
He has helped His servant Israel, in remembrance of His mercy;
As He spoke to our fathers, to Abraham and to His posterity forever.
Glory be to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit.
As it was in the beginning, is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen
Magníficat ánima mea Dóminum,
et exsultávit spíritus meus
in Deo salvatóre meo,
quia respéxit humilitátem
ancíllæ suæ.
Ecce enim ex hoc beátam
me dicent omnes generatiónes,
quia fecit mihi magna,
qui potens est,
et sanctum nomen eius,
et misericórdia eius in progénies
et progénies timéntibus eum.
Fecit poténtiam in bráchio suo,
dispérsit supérbos mente cordis sui;
depósuit poténtes de sede
et exaltávit húmiles.
Esuriéntes implévit bonis
et dívites dimísit inánes.
Suscépit Ísrael púerum suum,
recordátus misericórdiæ,
sicut locútus est ad patres nostros,
Ábraham et sémini eius in sæcula.
Glória Patri et Fílio
et Spirítui Sancto.
Sicut erat in princípio,
et nunc et semper,
et in sæcula sæculórum.
Amen.
She became the Mother of God, in which work so many and such great good things are bestowed on her as pass man’s understanding. For on this there follows all honor, all blessedness, and her unique place in the whole of mankind, among which she has no equal, namely, that she had a child by the Father in heaven, and such a Child . . . Hence men have crowded all her glory into a single word, calling her the Mother of God . . . None can say of her nor announce to her greater things, even though he had as many tongues as the earth possesses flowers and blades of grass: the sky, stars; and the sea, grains of sand. It needs to be pondered in the heart what it means to be the Mother of God.
(Commentary on the Magnificat, 1521; in Luther’s Works, Pelikan et al, vol. 21, 326)
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.