Skip to comments.
Southern Baptist Pastor Leaves Everything for the Eucharist
Coming Home Network ^
| Jun 8th, 2007
| Andy
Posted on 05/01/2008 5:07:35 PM PDT by annalex
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100, 101-120, 121-140 ... 221-230 next last
To: annalex; Paridel
“The Orthodox have an issue with the entire magisterial system. Both Marian dogmas themselves are not a problem for the Orthodox Church. The notion that a belief that was not spoken about with a single voice by the Church of the first seven councils, could be clarified with such precision by the Latin Church, is unsettling to them.
I am pinging Kolokotronis who can clarify this better than I can.”
Orthodoxy rejects completely any notion that the Pope is infallible and there is no nuance to make the idea acceptable to us, but you both know that. You, Paridel, should know that our resolute rejection of papal infallibility, however defined or limited, says nothing about our understanding of the role of the pope of Rome as the primus among the Patriarchs and bishops of The Church during the first 1000 years of the Church’s existence.
The question we Orthodox have had about the Assumption is why it was ever dogmatized. Quite aside from the fact that we reject the idea that the pope can do such a thing sua sponte, the dogmatization was unnecessary as it combats no heresy and one is hard pressed to understand why it is that belief in the Assumption is a sine qua non of theosis. In fact, however, I have never met an Orthodox Christian who does not believe in the Assumption.
The Immaculate Conception is, to an extent, a different matter. Alex says that the consensus patrum accepts the IC. This is incorrect. That dogma of the Latin Church as a belief is necessitated by the Latin Augustinian notion of Original Sin which the Church in the East rejects. Without Original Sin, there is no need for the Immaculate Conception notion. Furthermore, as Orthodox theologians make clear, the idea that Panagia was born in some fashion different from the rest of humanity means that her Son was not the Son of a true woman but rather of something else, a goddess of sorts, which leads straight to a Christological heresy denying the two natures of Christ. If His mother was not human, then He could not be true God and true Man. Now no one can gainsay the Orthodox when it comes to Marian devotion so it stretches credulity to the breaking point to assert that refusal to believe in the IC results in damnation. It too suffers from the defect that it addresses no heresy.
101
posted on
05/02/2008 4:15:37 PM PDT
by
Kolokotronis
(Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated)
To: griffin
This is not how the Catholic Church works.
102
posted on
05/02/2008 4:18:22 PM PDT
by
annalex
(http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
To: Kolokotronis; Paridel
Thank you.
It is true that the Immaculate Conception is necessitated by the doctrine of the original sin, and for that reason is more problematic to the Orthodox. I should have mentioned that.
The heresy both marian dogmas combat is modernism: darwinism and atheism especially.
103
posted on
05/02/2008 4:23:43 PM PDT
by
annalex
(http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
To: annalex
“In Protestant thinking (I don’t know what the Anglican thinking is), salvation is what happens at the time a believer makes a decision for Christ.”
Not according to a Soveriegn Lord. Nobody’s right hand can save themselves (Job). Some ‘free will’ protestant do think that and their way of thinking tries to rob the Lord of His glory in “having mercy upon whom I will have mercy”
IN CONTEXT
In 1 Peter, Peter describes life after the spiritual rebirth....
“In this you rejoice, though now for a little while, if necessary, you have been grieved by various trials, 7so that the tested genuineness of your faith”
It is not the re-birth that takes a life time. That happens in an instant. It is the testing of that faith that lasts a lifetime. We reborn ELECT are not insulted from the ramifications of sin, Inherited or otherwise. However, perseverance of the saints is always in effect. “Nothing can pluck My sheep from My hand”. AND that salvation, once sealed is forever....
1 Peter 1:23 states, “For you have been born again, not of perishable seed, but of imperishable, through the living and enduring word of God.”
Romans 10:17 states, “So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ.”
Thw WORD of Christ. Not Catechism. Not tradition. Not some druid-looking priest that slips a wafer into your mouth. The WORD, through the Power of Christ, according to Him. Period.
104
posted on
05/02/2008 4:33:00 PM PDT
by
griffin
(Love Jesus, No Fear!)
To: annalex; Quix
His crisis was spiritual and has to do with the lack of devotional life
False. What he was suffering from was the dichotomy of living a sinful life (apart from God's revealed will) and trying to make the disordered pieces fit and make sense.
His ministry work was commendable; who would disagree with this objective
I would. Works, in and of themselves, are nothing. Submission to the revealed will of Christ and finding his way in Church government and in the process of sanctification is all.
Absorbed in this struggle, he admits to a neglect of his marital life.
Again, false. His abandonment of his primary duties contributed directly to his struggle with his faith. One is fitted for ministry by the tempered life of Scriptural piety - not the other way around.
It {his faith struggle} is a consequence of the Baptist faith's deficiencies, not the cause of his leaving it.
Once more, false. This is not a question of the chicken or the egg. Dissonance is the consequence, or outgrowth, of sin and neglect of the first part.
[W]hatever that neglect was, the family obligations were a factor in keeping him in the Baptist ministry, as he needed a job.
Here you have hit the nail on the head - not the one you sought to hit, but you have hit one and driven it home. He was likely thinking (as many clergy and para-church lay people think) that he needed this work (for his sustenance) and, besides, he was doing the Lord's work (wrong-o). Unfortunately, this is the case across time in dividing the sheep from the goats. What one assumes to be the Way today, is not necessarily the way because it was yesterday or a thousand years ago. Faith, alone, in the revealed truth is.
I think, you are simply unprepared to face the fact that reasonable, academically gifted, devoted to the ministry people would discover the Christ in the Eucharist and the veracity of Catholic historical root, and so you try to find fault in this man.
Reason, academic achievement, intelligence and good intentions have nothing whatsoever to do with things of God or faith unless submitted to the spotlight of revealed Scriptural truth.
I think you are hearing what you wish to hear.
I am not disparaging Catholicism. What I am simply pointing out is the clear departure from Scriptural injunctions about the requirements of leadership. The fact that this man was in "ministry" and in a failing relationship plainly illustrates that he wasn't really in "ministry" at all - only his self-willed verisimilitude. In short, whatever is done in this kind of "ministry" (and that just might describe the majority of "Christianity" today) is being done by his own lights and is worth just as much. Good works are just that - they are not, however, of God, unless God-inspired and controlled. To be there, the life must be in order and in synch.
So, it seems clear to me that what this man really served, in the end, was himself and his own ideas about God (Evangelical pedigree nothwithstanding). It is no wonder that he grew sick of what he thought to be the source of his problems and sought something else. Thankfully, he has wandered into another Christian fellowship. However, I still fail to see the deeper truths that are inherent in his current state of faith - other than it is right that he give up his masquerade in ministry and to concentrate on matters at hand - the application of truth in his personal life.
105
posted on
05/02/2008 4:33:08 PM PDT
by
WorkingClassFilth
(Don't cheer for Obama too hard - the krinton syndicate is moving back into the WH.)
To: annalex
Right.....never mind history then.
106
posted on
05/02/2008 4:35:03 PM PDT
by
griffin
(Love Jesus, No Fear!)
To: annalex; Paridel
“The heresy both marian dogmas combat is modernism: darwinism and atheism especially.”
As to darwinism, how so? As to atheism, well that’s sort of a catch all, isn’t it, Alex? Couldn’t any dogma or even theologoumennon be said to combat atheism?
107
posted on
05/02/2008 4:40:23 PM PDT
by
Kolokotronis
(Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated)
To: griffin
I don’t understand the point you are trying to make, especially as you seem to connect some scripture quotes to your apparent dislike of the Catholic Church.
108
posted on
05/02/2008 4:42:20 PM PDT
by
annalex
(http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
To: WorkingClassFilth
You have developed a myth of the authors sinfulness and "failed relationship", basically out of the whole cloth. There is none of that in the article, -- I don't know what your sources are, if any.
Reason, academic achievement, intelligence and good intentions have nothing whatsoever to do with things of God or faith unless submitted to the spotlight of revealed Scriptural truth.
The man was using his reason and academic achievement precisely to do that, to get to the scriptural truth. The article describes his discoveries.
You also seem to concentrate on his qualifications for Baptist ministry. I don't see that as relevant: we are not discussing his leaving the ministry, we are discussing his leaving the Baptist faith community altogether.
109
posted on
05/02/2008 4:48:53 PM PDT
by
annalex
(http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
To: Kolokotronis; Paridel
None of these heresies were combatted directly by the recently proclaimed dogmas. Still, Immaculate Conception counters the darwinist insistence of strictly natural origin of life, and Assumption of Mary sets forth a tangible promise of resurrection in the body: where she has gone, we shall follow.
110
posted on
05/02/2008 4:52:22 PM PDT
by
annalex
(http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
To: annalex
The conditions of his personal life were concurrent with his “ministry.” His first duty was/is to his primary relationships - his marriage. At this point, he should have left his duties as a minister and returned to his basic responsibilities.
Reason and academic standing mean nothing to God. Truth is NOT apprehended through these means anymore than Washington leads us into better government through increased use of experts. Truth can only be attained through the Holy Spirit in the life of a yielded servant. Academics may aid this, but the key is submission.
111
posted on
05/02/2008 4:55:14 PM PDT
by
WorkingClassFilth
(Don't cheer for Obama too hard - the krinton syndicate is moving back into the WH.)
To: annalex
“Assumption of Mary sets forth a tangible promise of resurrection in the body: where she has gone, we shall follow.”
Where does that idea come from? I should think the traditional theologoumennon of The Church would be sufficient. Is it astonishing to the West, or otherwise insufficient, that the Theotokos would be bodily assumed into heaven? Why does it have to mean more than it plainly does?
“Still, Immaculate Conception counters the darwinist insistence of strictly natural origin of life....”
How does a dogmatic insistence on Panagia being free from Original Sin (which of course presupposes that Original Sin is real) counter secular notions of a strictly “natural” as opposed to divine origin of life? I will agree that such a notion is likely heretical.
112
posted on
05/02/2008 4:58:51 PM PDT
by
Kolokotronis
(Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated)
To: annalex
You have developed a myth of the authors sinfulness and "failed relationship", basically out of the whole cloth. There is none of that in the article, -- I don't know what your sources are, if any.
Dude! I don't think we're headed anywhere except where you like to play. For your benefit, however, here's a clue:
In spite of a tough course load, three part-time jobs, and school related ministry opportunities; I still managed to graduate on time with a BA in Christian Studies and minors in both Greek and History.
Busier than ever, with a new baby, a new job, and with school, I was beginning to substitute activity for piety. But I didn't notice my mistake.
I was so busy studying and doing ministry work that I wasn't making time for the kids or my wife, so busy that I didn't even notice my neglect.
He revealed to my heart, in no uncertain terms, that I was shipwrecking my life. He clearly showed me that my heart was not with my wife or with my children, but with myself and my activities. I was a shallow and selfish man who blamed his ministry for not having enough time to read to or play with his own kids or spend time conversing with his wife. I was living my dream as a teacher, but I was failing to practice the very truths I taught. I was living a lie and I had no excuses.
It was a deep cathartic cry because my hard heart was finally seeing the message God had been trying to get through my thick skull for almost eight years. He was trying to help me get my life together, not just my personal life and my family, but my eternal life and the eternal lives of my wife and kids.
Capiche?
113
posted on
05/02/2008 5:08:21 PM PDT
by
WorkingClassFilth
(Don't cheer for Obama too hard - the krinton syndicate is moving back into the WH.)
To: WorkingClassFilth
Truth can only be attained through the Holy Spirit in the life of a yielded servant What makes you think the Holy Spirit did not lead him to the Catholic Church as soon as he yielded to Him?
114
posted on
05/02/2008 5:12:49 PM PDT
by
annalex
(http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
To: annalex
I didn’t say that. In fact, I referred to Catholocism as another Christian fellowship. What I point out is that his issues are far more basic than some problem with SB doctrine. Oddly, you continually gravitate to that as though you believe Catholocism is the path of truth - not submission to revealed truth in Scripture...
115
posted on
05/02/2008 5:15:34 PM PDT
by
WorkingClassFilth
(Don't cheer for Obama too hard - the krinton syndicate is moving back into the WH.)
To: WorkingClassFilth
OK, I see your point. I read these passages not as indication of any actual sin but as a desire for fuller sanctification, — part of the same process of “yielding to the Holy Spirit” as you put it, that lead Him to the Eucharistic Christ. What we have here is hearing the call to repentance, the precursor to conversion.
116
posted on
05/02/2008 5:21:51 PM PDT
by
annalex
(http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
To: WorkingClassFilth
Catholocism is the path of truth - not submission to revealed truth in Scripture There is no "not" here: Christ, the Way, the Truth and the Life subsists in the Catholic Church. Read the scripture, and that will make you Catholic. Or Orthodox. In fact, both.
117
posted on
05/02/2008 5:24:39 PM PDT
by
annalex
(http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
To: Kolokotronis
I should think the traditional theologoumennon of The Church would be sufficient It should be, like with any dogma, but the fact is, people dispute the Assumption.
Immaculate conception shows that God as the sovereign author of life created at least one woman perfect as He designed all human life.
I agree that none of this enters a point-by-point polemic with the heretics, but the desire was to introduce a beakion of hope in two especially bleak moments of recent history, the aftermath of the revolutions of 1940's and the Second World War.
118
posted on
05/02/2008 5:30:17 PM PDT
by
annalex
(http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
To: annalex
OK, I see your point. I read these passages not as indication of any actual sin but as a desire for fuller sanctification, part of the same process of yielding to the Holy Spirit as you put it, that lead Him to the Eucharistic Christ.
I'd say that what you're seeing is what is actually is there - not the pretexts for his conversion to Catholocism. It is interesting that you say this factual state of his life is not sin but, rather, a desire for "fuller sanctification." Then, in the next phrase, you say that he is responding to the call for the call to repentance - a precursor to conversion...
The question is, was he was saved before his awakening - or not. Since you believe his awakening was pre-salvational, you probably believe that his faith was false from the beginning and only valid when he converted to Catholocism.
Correct?
119
posted on
05/02/2008 5:35:25 PM PDT
by
WorkingClassFilth
(Don't cheer for Obama too hard - the krinton syndicate is moving back into the WH.)
To: annalex
Read the scripture, and that will make you Catholic. Or Orthodox. In fact, both.
How and why?
120
posted on
05/02/2008 5:38:05 PM PDT
by
WorkingClassFilth
(Don't cheer for Obama too hard - the krinton syndicate is moving back into the WH.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100, 101-120, 121-140 ... 221-230 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson