Bishop Smith illegally storms St John's Church

I'm going to keep beating this dead horse until it is as fine as dust, but just when did I Timothy drop out of the Scripture?? Or has the word 'andros' changed its meaning while I wasn't looking?

In Christ,
Deacon Paul+

Back in earlier days of the Christian Church, religious authorities used murder, death, torture and legal force to compel faith. The Arians did in the example you did. The Catholics did against the Albigensians in France, particularly. Protestants burnt about 50,000 "witches" in Germany in the post-Reformation period. The Inquisition is infamous. So is the hanging, drawing and quartering of priests by Queen Elizabeth.

The Christians have stopped doing this.
But the Muslims are still in the "blood and fire" phase of their religion. Unfortunately for them (and all of their neighbors), their holy book itself explicitly commands this. By contrast, all of the various Christian-perpetrated horrors of violence and torture sit, and always sat, very uncomfortably with the Gospels of Jesus of Nazareth.

Nazareth was not a warmonger.
Mohammed was.
The difference shows in their religious texts.
And that difference ultimately shows through their religions.
Men being prone to violence and being bad, they all do bad things from time to time. But for Christians, even if justified by their religion, there was always a powerful countercurrent in their religious texts that, read plainly in plain language, tell us that Christians who kill and torture in the zeal for their faith are actually in defiance of the tenets of their own God.
By contrast, the Koran sets the Muslim free to follow his own worst impulses and justify it in the name of God.

What I meant by "Yeah, that was back in the days when Christians acted like Muslims on jihad. At least that much has changed" was that Christians used to murder others to advance their religion, just like Muslims.
The difference is that Christians don't do it any more, because their Bible actually says not to do that, and in a literate age, more people know that. Muslims continue to do it, and their Koran says to to do that, and in a literate age, more people know that.

"Christians used to murder others to advance their religion, just like Muslims."
Well, as an Orthodox Christian, I am impelled to observe that Orthodox Christians have never advanced the faith by murder or by war. They did, however, defend their territory as needed against the depredations of non Christians and against heretics.

But, as you say, "The Catholics did against the Albigensians in France, particularly. Protestants burnt about 50,000 "witches" in Germany in the post-Reformation period. The Inquisition is infamous. So is the hanging, drawing and quartering of priests by Queen Elizabeth."

True enough. Please note that none of foregoing involved Orthodox Christians. And as Orthodox Christians were not involved, I see no need to feel embarrassed by any of it. I was afraid you were going to throw stuff at me that involved Orthodox Christians, e.g the massacre of the Muslim men at Srebrenica in 1993. As to that, please see http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=GOR20050714&articleId=692

This is perhaps special pleading. It is my understanding that more than a few Patriarchs were removed by assassination, which I would think counts as 'advancing one's faith by murder', even if the murderers were not necessarily orthodox Orthodox (as odd as that sounds).

In Christ,
Deacon Paul+

The only Patriarch I am aware of who so suffered was the Holy New Hieromartyr Gregory V, Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople. He was hanged by the Turks over the door of the Patriarchal Residence. Is that whom you refer to? Another was executed by the Romans. That was St. Ignatius the Godbearer of Antioch, thrown to the lions in the Colliseum in Rome.

Go back and check the history of the persecution of the pagans in the East in the 400s, 500s and 600s AD. It's pretty ugly, and Orthodox.

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, we now have an accurate definition of what the Left defines as DIVERSITY!!!

Indeed!!!

A "priest" is someone who has taken and represents (and practices) the Catholic faith.

Protestant clerics are "ministers."

I realize that some in the ECUSA still mistankenly promote their clerical positions as being "priests," but it's a misnomer.

The ECUSA is a protestant "church" and therefore, their clerics are minisers.

Not priests.

"Priest" is a Catholic moniker, a title to indicate a man who is ordained by the Catholic Church to represent the Catholic faithful.

Not that anyone asked, I realize, just saying from a point of clarity.

Episcopal ministers, especially, some of them at least, tend to abuse the term of "Priest" and it is entirely misleading -- which may be the point, I've often wondered.