Posted on 11/23/2011 11:11:08 AM PST by marshmallow
A notoriously 'gay-friendly' parish in San Francisco has invited an openly homosexual Episcopalian cleric to lead an Advent Vespers service.
Most Holy Redeemer parish asked Bishop Otis Charles, a retired Episcopalian prelate, to lead the November 30 service. After serving as the Bishop of Utah from 1971 to 1993, he publicly announced that he is homosexual. Divorced from the mother of his 5 children, he solemnized a same-sex union in 2004.
Kiss the ring.
Now... go buy yourself one of those wide brimmed cowboy hats.
NetPopius Hossus I, ex interwebzia
Look around. Take even one small branch of sola scriptura, Dispensationalism. You have one version of Dispensationalism, sola scriptura of course, calling another version of Dispensationalism, sola scriptura also, the work of Satan. Hardly a workable system for One Church.
It's one person at a time.
Each person alone as "church" would be inconceivable to the Apostles, early Christians, and those in the Church today.
Read, study, Christ's prayer in the garden.
We are not alone, we are part of One Body, we pray and help each other, as one, in the Communion of Saints with Christ as the head.
It is not just you and Holy Scriptures, this is not what Church is, not what Our Saviour intends and wishes for us. There is no need for you to be alone, tasked with deciding your own interpretation of Church Scriptures, your own religion, your own theology, soteriology, eschatology, etc. etc.
This is not the daunting task that the Christian faith puts upon its adherents. Christ established a Church, gave it authority and guidance. For all who follow Him and share the same belief to be together as one, as He prayed in the garden.
To remain alone and outside, tasked to figure out your own religion, is a sad and needless choice.
..so you seriously believe that you will be saved as a member of a group? That the RCC is group salvation?
someone once said that “patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel”
i say “resorting to Constantine did.......... ( fill in the blank ) is the last refuge of someone who does not know history”
LOL, you and Greg Dues ( whoever he is ) need the read Igantius of Antioch, the Didache and Justin Martyr.
but he does admit something you won’t
“priesthood as we know it in the Catholic Church was unheard of during the first generation of Christianity”
hmm.....the Catholic Church was around during the first generation of Christianity!!
wow, it’s what i’ve been saying all along!
but we don’t need to look to the Fathers, Paul tells you in 1 Corinthians 10 that the Eucharist is a sacrifice.
Do you believe you are alone, that what you do has no effect on others and what they do has no effect on you? What of the prayers of the righteous? What of our intercessions according to St. Paul?
We are not saved as a group, but we are not alone, ever. Unless we separate ourselves in our pride, or in thinking we have to figure it all out for ourselves as individuals.
No, as Christians, we are one body. What we do, good or ill, affects the whole body. How we treat each other, what we do or do not do for each other matters. This is as Christ taught us. He emphasized it in His commandment. It matters. It has significance.
If you stand before Christ having lived your faith as if it were all up to you alone, solely your self in your individualism, then I believe you will truly be alone in that moment. I don’t wish that on anyone.
It is not your task to take Scripture and decide what the Christian religion or your religion is. This is not what Christ intended for His Church.
You are not alone with the task of determining what it all means, what is the true faith, the ‘correct’ decoding of the Gospel; Holy Scripture is not a puzzle each person must solve for themselves.
Again, this is a sad and needless choice you are putting yourself into on your own, to create or discover your own religion. I know, I have been there.
the proof of what ALL the Apostles taught was the Catholic Church they left behind.
whether you went to Turkey, Egypt, Rome, Jerusalem, Greece, India, Northern Africa, the same Faith was found.
reading the Church Fathers from beginning to end and you won’t find a Church that resembles anything close to what Protestants believe.
and you know what else you won’t find anywhere in the NT?
you won’t find anyone reading the Scriptures and based on their own private interpretation, attacking the Church and starting their own “church”.
I don't think the phrase used here to describe the Holy Father passes muster with the RF rules. I'd be a little shocked if it did.
In any event, the poster has used it a number of times herein.
Thanks,
sitetest
NICE TRY...
Now for some TRUTH
The role of priest is NEVER given to the NT church..The function of the priest was to offer SACRIFICES...The jewish priesthood was a TYPE OF CHRIST which was FULFILLED on the cross.. there was not longer a NEED for a priest because the FINAL sacrifice had been offered by the one that was prophet, king and PRIEST..
the greek word for elder is different than the greek words for priest.. archiereus which translates into "High Priest" and hiereus which translates one that OFFERS SACRIFICES.
The role of the priesthood in scripture was to offer sacrifices.. That is what a priest does in scripture.. God set aside one tribe to be priests, they were not granted any land as God was their inheritance .
The greek have a couple words for priest and NEITHER is givenas a role for the new church
hiereus
1) a priest, one who offers sacrifices and in general in busied with sacred rites
a) referring to priests of Gentiles or the Jews,
2) metaph. of Christians, because, purified by the blood of Christ and brought into close intercourse with God, they devote their life to him alone and to Christ
and archiereus
Outline of Biblical Usage
1) chief priest, high priest
2) the high priests, these comprise in addition to one holding the high priestly office, both those who had previously discharged it and although disposed, continued to have great power in the State, as well as the members of the families from which high priest were created, provided that they had much influence in public affairs.
3) Used of Christ because by undergoing a bloody death he offered himself as an expiatory sacrifice to God, and has entered into the heavenly sanctuary where he continually intercedes on our behalf.
Neither role is given in scripture for the new church .. Christ fulfilled the role of Priest on the cross.. there is no more sacrifice for sin
He is now our High Priest..
The word for elder is presbyteros here is the GREEK definition (NOT PRESIDENT)
1) elder, of age,
a) the elder of two people
b) advanced in life, an elder, a senior
1) forefathers
2) a term of rank or office
a) among the Jews
1) members of the great council or Sanhedrin (because in early times the rulers of the people, judges, etc., were selected from elderly men)
2) of those who in separate cities managed public affairs and administered justice
b) among the Christians, those who presided over the assemblies (or churches) The NT uses the term bishop, elders, and presbyters interchangeably
c) the twenty four members of the heavenly Sanhedrin or court seated on thrones around the throne of GodStrongs )
Now the Holy Spirit knows the difference in the greek words.. there is no priesthood provided for in the NT church.
There was no priests in the new church. It was about 300 AD before the first priesthood appeared..
Greg Dues has written Catholic Customs & Traditions, a popular guide (New London: Twenty Third Publications, 2007). On page 166 he states, "Priesthood as we know it in the Catholic church was unheard of during the first generation of Christianity, because at that time priesthood was still associated with animal sacrifices in both the Jewish and pagan religions."
"A clearly defined local leadership in the form of elders, or presbyteroi, became still more important when the original apostles and disciples of Jesus died. The chief elder in each community was often called the episkopos (Greek, 'overseer'). In English this came to be translated as 'bishop' (Latin, episcopus). Ordinarily he presided over the community's Eucharistic assembly."
"When the Eucharist came to be regarded as a sacrifice, the role of the bishop took on a priestly dimension. By the third century bishops were considered priests. Presbyters or elders sometimes substituted for the bishop at the Eucharist. By the end of the third century people all over were using the title 'priest' (hierus in Greek and sacerdos in Latin) for whoever presided at the Eucharist."
LOL, you figured the Pope out. He went into the priesthood so he could live like a rich man.
you do realize that the Pope owns nothing of what is shown, it is the property of the Church and will be there for the next Pope and the one after that.
You're the one that made it about me. Follow the discussion back. I replied to your post making it about me, and you now try to lecture that it isn't about me.
The more you whine, the more I pushed the right button.
I'm not whining, I'm responding to your whine. Or deflection.
Friend, it's not like no one can follow a thread of discussion. This all started when you brought up size and veered when you realized that was a bad idea when you didn't want to answer the simple question of the size of the congregation of the church you attend.
Keep digging if you wish.
the Mass became official in 33ad, not 1215.
This is what we would call the fox watching the hen house.. see how it goes.. the 'church " decides all truth..people are bound to that truth.. and one of the things THEY get to determine is what the Bible says...
Most cults use the same pattern... Truth?? What we say is TRUTH ...so do not read the bible unless we tell you what it means...
They don’t care. They think they know better than the Church fathers.
It’s better to focus on your own holiness and salvation than arguing with people who don’t want to listen.
prove it
Ignorant comments don’t deserve replies.
The only problem they have when debating history is history.
The only solution is to ignore it or start history four hundred years ago, or a hundred years ago, or yesterday, or today.
you have to love this quote from Justin, he shows the Church taught baptismal regeneration and the Eucharist as the Body of Christ mid-2nd century, while many people who were personally taught by the Apostle John were still alive.
he contended for the Faith once delivered to the saints against unbelievers in his day, just as we deal with these unbelievers in our day.
nothing new under the sun.
LOL LOL LOL>>>Thats because the Roman church FORBIDS reading the scriptures UNLESS they interpret it.. fox/henhouse effect... brain washed effect/cult effect
Do you know that there is NO official commentary of the ENTIRE BIBLE written by Rome ..could be there is just no way to harmonize what they teach with most of scripture..
1Cr 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned.
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.