I LOVE pancakes!
Posted on 06/10/2007 4:48:46 AM PDT by markomalley
Boy that's gonna leave a mark.
A stigmata, perhaps? 8~)
Let's see, basically anonymous poster on FR using the KJV or Scott Hahn?
You don’t suppose that rubber gloves were originally invented so that humble Saints could hide their stigmatas, do you?
“That is the priesthood of believers, not a church role .”
That seems to be a distinction without a difference. The church is an organism comprised of the priesthood of believers who bring the sacrifice of praise to God continually. Different offices and gifts for the equipping of all saints but all are priests before God.
HOLY COW!
Erm, sacred cows are always good targets & doing so doesn’t have to be malicious. No doubt going after them can be, but that doesn’t mean that it has to be.
My brother teased me constantly while we were growing up, cuz I always squawked real loud every time he did. To this day my mom thinks that I provoked him. She loves him best, cuz her mom loved her brother best. ::sniffle:: Can’t say that I blame her though, cuz he grew up to be the most wonderful guy that I know on this planet. Think all of his teasing was malicious?
Tolja, look at everything as an opportunity. After a couple of people did gut checks, they dug out the specifics of what your Church actually teaches, stead of relying on presenting a term that’s gonna be Greek to those of us on the outside. Challenge, whether it’s fair or unfair can motivate people to do what they might otherwise not do. Oh my, how awful that someone "made" them dig out their catechism.
You never know until you try, but I would ask the metaphysician to do the paper work.
Some are good, some not so good. IMO, the good ones force others to think, while the not so good ones try to provide all of the answers.
He says that he simply trusts that the Gospels tell us about Jesus.
That is a powerful message!
A crucial point in his thinking is that the Jesus of the Gospels in not a liberal rabbi, nor a prophet, not even a new Moses but the Lord himself, and that any Jew who encountered him was forced at some point or another to choose between “the eternal Israel” and Jesus. We also have to make this choice, and it is a hard one do do.
Utopianism is an easy trap to fall into. We get impatient & in our hubris, we think we can do it ourselves. We can't. We need Him!
I think this is simply a reading that justifies the break with the hierarchy in the 16th Century. After one rejects the priesthood, there does exist a rough equality among believers, but such a state I cannot find in, say, the Acts of the Apostles, where a commisioned leadership is in control of events. The Church "professionals" of the 16th Century were only superficially like the Jewish priesthood, which was centered on the temple. In the Catholic scheme, the High Priest is Jesus Christ and at mass the priest is only his instrument as He offers Himself to the Father. In a grand building like St. Peter's in Rome, the temple is, in a sense, recreated, but the nature of the sacrifice has been transformed. When one receives communion, nothing stands between the recipient and the person of Christ except his/her own sins.
That sounds like the Pharisees' response to the healing of the man born blind.
-A8
“I think this is simply a reading that justifies the break with the hierarchy in the 16th Century.”
The only offices given to the church in the New Testament were Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists and Pastor/Teacher. You also have Bishop/Elder/Shepherd which is basically the same as Pastor/Teacher and Deacon which appears to be the administrative office of the church. Nowhere do you find the office of Priest except when it refers to all believers and nowhere do you find that only the “professionals” are authorized to administer communion or baptism for that matter.
“Priest” is only a medieval form of the word presbyter, which is usually rendered in English as “elder.” We know a little about how Paul set up his mission-churches and we observe that he “ordained” elders. That the Lord’s Supper would be administered by elders is likely (the New Testament does not say otherwise, does it?) since by example of even Baptist Churches it is done by the pastor.
“by example of even Baptist Churches it is done by the pastor.”
That is tradition. In Acts it says that they met daily in the temple and went from house to house “breaking bread”. Now there was over 3,000 converts going from house to house and the houses were really not much larger than motel suites so more than Apostles were participating. In 1 Corinthians 1, Paul says he only baptized 2 of them but they were divided between Paul, Peter and Apollos. There is no evidence that Apollos was ordained or of any one laying hands on him and yet he preached and baptized.
You’re probably wondering what that has to do with Stigmatas. It has to do with the way Satan is gonna work to defeat God & His followers, but also the reason God would let him mess with some of His very worthy servants.
From the standpoint of Satan, what would be a better way to set up the placement of his minions in positions of power later, than to create “authorized” signs before he makes his final move? Would God let Satan do that? Look at everything God allowed Satan to do to His good servant Job. The why, God will deal with Satan in His own time & He ain't gonna let Satan force His hand.
He didn't. His foreknowledge of our free will decisions is all there is to His predestination.
“He’s very explicit there in what he taught...and many of his disciples were disturbed by his teaching and left that day (cf John 6:66).”
Now I understand your hermeneutic. So when Jesus says “this is my body” He means His real body. And when He says to Mary (John 19:26-27) that John is her son and to John that Mary is his mother and she goes home with him, Jesus is saying Mary really gave birth to John, which I’m sure came as a surprize to Salome, Mary’s cousin.
I pretty much agree with you about this, but then I have to consider where & when each of us are born into this world. Roll of the dice?
He did say "be fruitful and multiply" didn't He?
If you're a member of the RCC, it means that Jesus gave Mary to the church as its mother. Isn't that an interesting way to build "scriptural" support for mariology?!
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.