Posted on 10/11/2001 9:39:48 AM PDT by malakhi
| Statesmen may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue. - John Adams |
| Threads 1-50 | Threads 51-100 | Threads 101-150 |
| Thread 151 | Thread 152 | Thread 153 | Thread 154 | Thread 155 | Thread 156 | Thread 157 |
| Thread 158<;/a> | Thread 159 | Thread 160 |
The Neverending Story (The Christian Chronicles) -- Thread 161
As far as I know there are three. Possibly four.
1. The Infallibility of the Pope
2. The Immaculate Conception of Mary
3. The Assumption of Mary
4. The impossibility of ordaining women
The first one is infallible because it was a decree of an Ecumenical Council (Vatican I). The decrees of the Ecumenical Councils (Nicaea, Trent, Vatican I, etc...) are also infallible.
To Soothing Dave, if #4 is not a teaching of the extraordinary Magisterium, it certainly is one of the ordinary Magisterium and, because that is the case, the impossiblity of ordaining women is Truth.
Liberalism, and it's brother Modernism, is a sin. Can I get a witness from the congregation?
Pray for John Paul II
Now we extraordinary Magisterium and an ordinary Magisterium. I await further categories.
Doh
A year ago I started writing my thoughts and mini stories and results of Bible studies on certain subjects, and since I now had a spell check at my disposal, I thought this should be a snap.
My wife is an avid reader, and had a working career in an office and showroom, so naturally I took my first great work to her for final approval.
I still have no idea why she had problems reading it, because it was so brilliantly structured, It was in one solid block of words, all in upper case (to make it very easy to read,) and I had even written it with out sentence breaks and periods, and comas, and all those funny little things so the reader could easily follow the line of thought with out all the brain interruptions that punctuation marks cause.
I asked her to read it out loud, so I could experience the brilliance of my first sure to be award-winning piece.
Well to my dismay, I found out that my wife, who I had always considered to be very intelligent, failed me completely.
She had no sense of story flow what so ever, she kept hesitating, and starting over at key points where flow is so important, and then she would mumble something about needing "cumas" or something like that, and saying such dumb things as "Oh, this should be the starting of a new sentence, as if I didn't know that. Sheeesss
So anyway, I said why don't you correct it (as if there was anything to correct), so she wasted three full days trying to find something wrong with my article, so she could mark it all up, and make it appear that she had done more work on it then I had.
Well I pretended to humor her along, acting like it was conceivable possible for me to make a mistake here or there, (even with a spell checker) but when she got finished, I had to go print off an un- edited copy of it just so I could see what it was when I had written it.
Well to make a long story short, after this harrowing and deflating experience, I decided to not take chances anymore, so I started to put in comas every 8 words, and a period every 32 words, paying careful attention that I never use more then 4 comas per 32 word sentences.
But do you think this satisfied her? You guessed it, and would you believe it, she then started taking them out instead of putting them in, showing me that she had no intentions of trying to get along what so ever, so in anger, I made up a sheet of nothing but periods, and another of comas, and I gave them to her and in frustration said, "here, use the damn things anywhere you want," and we have done pretty well since.
The main reason I have written this is to warn you of what this obsession with punctuation marks can lead to.
Yesterday, I was praying, and I said to God, "Help me to better understand your word "COMA" and to change with knowledge and…. and…. and...,. I don't believe it. I said "coma" in my prayers "coma" and that is frightening "coma" because, can you imagine what my prayers are going to sound like when I start doing them in HTML code (question mark)
Does this mean that you believe we become God, or are absorbed into God, losing our individual identity?
Reminds me of a joke. A Hindu (Buddhist, New Ager, Unitarian Universalist, etc.) goes up to a NY City Hot Dog cart. The guy says "What'll ya have?"
The Hindu responds: "Can you make me one with everything?"
(rim shot)
I don't think our identities will be completely gone, but they will be radically changed. All of the bad will be gone. We will gladly serve forever at the throne, at the wedding feast. People who ask if they will be married, if their favorite dog will be there, etc. really don't understand that such things were designed to bring a shadow of God's bliss to us on earth. Marriage was the union of two souls, in Heaven all souls will be united. Any wonderful emotion you can think of will be as nothing compared to the joy we will experience there.
We certainly won't "become" God, or be absorbed into God to the loss of our personhood. We will be however, surrounded by God, enveloped by God, embraced by God.
SD
Ha. Shows how little you know. You forget the Church is universal. The blankey is Metric.
SD
There's a folk group comprised of sisters called The Roches (their last name being Roche). They recorded a song a while back entitled "My Sick Mind." You really ought to check it out.
I'm sorry vmatt, but I don't try to argue the meaning of Revelation. The style of literature used is wildly imaginative and I refuse to get into interpretation battles about it. We have a hard enough time trying to agree on the meaning of the stuff written as history.
In what sense are they one? In what sense do "twain become one" in marriage, a type of the church? Paul says that in marriage your interests become that of making your spouse happy.
And when I don't wish to make her happy anymore and wish to make another happy? No, it's not just about my interests. Man and wife become one, typified by the creative act. I didn't even see your post yet when I wrote above about marriage. It is the union of two souls, a taste of the eventual union of all believers. A true union, like the Trinity.
In this sense is God and Jesus one also, but their individual identity remains Father and Son, two beings..
Two persons. One God. Does not the rest of the Bible lead you to a monotheisim?
SD
This is a term used to describe the effect of Adam's sin on his descendants (Rom. 5:12-23). Specifically, it is our inheritance of a sinful nature from Adam. The sinful nature originated with Adam and is passed down from parent to child. We are by nature children of wrath (Eph. 2:3).
It is my personal belief (opinion) that is is passed down by the male.
There doesn't appear to be a difference between the 2 terms to me.
116 Posted on 10/11/2001 05:39:06 PDT by Iowegian
It is my personal belief (opinion) that is is passed down by the male.
That would be consistent with the need for the virgin birth !
Tehillim (Psalm) 119:105 Your Word is a lamp to my feet and a light for my path.
XeniaSt
There are dramatically different beliefs and practices among people who profess to follow the book called "The Bible." What is it worth then? Should we not attempt to write down what we know as true and transmit it to all and future? Some might dissent, so why bother?
Yes, and exactly what did he mean when he said "two or three"? That doesn't sound like the Magesterium of the (entire) body of the Church. It certainly doesn't imply that one of them is superior.
All the apostles were given the power to bind and loose. Today all Bishops have this power. Only Peter got the keys, which means he has the final say on all maters.
I don't necessarilly disagree that it could be used to defend the idea of the Apostolic Church. (The Orthodox Bishops, The Episcopal Bishops, and probably any Pastor who is ordained by the "laying on of hands".) Why not?
Why not what? Do you mean why not these other bishops and pastors? That's what I'll answer.
It is not just a question of having someone laying hands on one to ordain him. The man doing so must have the authority to do so. This authority only comes from a direct succession. The Orthodox have maintained this succession and their bishops and priests are validly ordained. The Anglicans used to have a claim to maintaining Apostolic succession. In some cases their priests are valid, but it is largely not so anymore. They've ordained women and practicing homosexuals. It can not be said that any given Anglican priest is valid.
Other churches can not usually said be said in any way to derive their teaching authority from a direct ordination from a validly ordained Bishop of any of the above mentiones churches.
SD
I guess that my conception of Heaven is different than yours. I agree that it will be beyond what we can comprehend. But I think we are fundamentally still "who we are" (only perfected), to the point that we will want to continue in relationship with those we loved in this life. Could you be happy in Heaven without your wife? Your daughter? If animals are in Heaven, it will be because their presence adds to our joy.
We will be however, surrounded by God, enveloped by God, embraced by God.
And we can have this relationship with God right now. This is what Jesus means when he says "the kingdom of God is at hand". We don't need to wait for Heaven to enjoy this closeness with the Father.
Agreed.
to the point that we will want to continue in relationship with those we loved in this life. Could you be happy in Heaven without your wife? Your daughter?
I didn't mean to imply that our loved ones wouldn't be there. (I think you know that) It's just that, like I said, there is a special union of souls between man and wife. Likewise among the man and wife and the soul they helped bring into this world.
In Heaven we will have this special bond, this special union of souls with everybody.
In a place of perfect love how could we love "our" family more than we love anyone else?
If animals are in Heaven, it will be because their presence adds to our joy.
I agree with that. I was taught that we will have no need for such things because we will already be perfectly fulfilled being with God. But I am willing to be flexible here. So many people are expecting to see their pets there. And God is their Creator as well, why wouldn't they be at the throne?
SD
SD
You couldn't have thought I would let this one pass. Orders cannot be invalidated retroactively, nor can the invalidity of one anglican church have an invalidating effect on those of another anglican church. There are Anglican churches around (not only continuing anglicans) who have maintained the validity of their orders and do not "ordain" women. The ordination of practicing homosexuals is largely an American innovation.
It is important to keep in mind that the "Anglican Church" is really an association of "anglican churches."
About ten years ago there was a song from the guy in the Georgia Satellites about a kid who sent a love note to his teacher and she returned it graded.
I love you period
Do you love me question mark
Please please exclamation point
I wanna hold you in parentheses
SD
Thanks for asking, Ang. I went to a conference last week about the Alpha Program, which is an evangelism program (originally developed in an Anglican church in London but used by many denominational and nondenominational churches for a number of years) designed for use by a local parish.
If anyone on these threads has been involved in running Alpha at their local church, please freepmail me, I'd like to hear about it.
Other than that, the Hawkeyes and Packers lost last week so this week has been a downer. But this weekend some friends are throwing a baby jam for us. It's a baby shower, dinner, and jam session rolled into one. Should be quite a time.
I thought I might hear from you. Of course a valid ordination can not be undone. My point was more that, without investigation, it is impossible for a person to know who is valid and who isn't. If a Catholic priest or Orthodox comes up to me on the street I can be reasonably assured of his validity. I can not say the same for an Anglican unless I investigate who ordained him, and who him, on up.
SD
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.