Posted on 07/26/2014 4:41:46 AM PDT by michaelwlf3
I am coming up on my first year as an ordained minister in a continuing Anglican church, and I have noticed that participating on political forums (even when the topic is religious) I find that my opinions and postings more often than not generate more hatred than anything else. Among the things I often hear are that the laity are the real priests and that I am a Pharisee, that my vocation disqualifies me from offering an opinion on anything Christian because I am too narrow minded, and (my personal favorite) because I look too Catholic I must be a child molester.
Are these people really Christians?
Martin Luther in 1517 - Protestant Reformation.
I am curious however. If you don't take my comments seriously why would you think to respond to them?
God calls men, He doesn’t ask us to “hire” them.
“Do not acquire gold, or silver, or copper for your money belts, or a bag for your journey, or even two coats, or sandals, or a staff; for the worker is worthy of his support. And whatever city or village you enter, inquire who is worthy in it, and stay at his house until you leave that city.” Mt. 10
Furthermore, I am not subject to the pope. I am subject to Christ and Christ only.
Assume for a moment that a king came to a far off province of his. During his visit, he established his rule and set up ministers to oversee the province for him while he returned to his kingdom. Would you be obeying him by saying you are only subject to the king and not to the ministers he set up over you?
In the context of the Apostles, remember that they were given authority in Heaven and on Earth (binding and loosing; see Matt 16:19 & Isaiah 22:22). In other words, it isn't just "like" authority where they can set up little rules that have no Heavenly significance. They have real authority in all of creation throughout the eternal Catholic (universal) Church.
Being subject to Christ means obeying Christ and those in whom He vested His authority. You can't have one without the other. If there is a Church (and He promised to build His Church [Matt 16:18]), then it must have authority in order to preach, teach and hold the faithful to the Way. If it does not have such authority then there is no Church but rather a conglomeration of confederates who can only study what has been but possess no authority for teaching what the Spirit inspires. In that view, we have been orphaned and Christ has not fulfilled His promise to us. For though some may be inspired, there can be no teaching and building of doctrine without authority.
But facts will never convince someone who wants to accuse others of hate.
They’re so consumed with it themselves that they cannot comprehend that others are different than themselves.
Do you wear a long robe which the scriptures teach against??? Do the clergy at your church call themselves priests which BTW do not exist in the NT church??? Do you believe the bible is the final authority for all matters of faith and practice???
Sorry, but the King did not set anyone in your religion to be overseers of his flock...
Are we talking about the same Sierra Club? I referred to the radical environmental organization that was taken over by communists.
“In the “continuing Anglican church” you have already aligned yourself with a group who think they have superior knowledge and piety and don’t want to play with others.”
A doctor has superior knowledge of medicine. Why doesn’t a priest have superior knowledge of theology?
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
“You have an awful lot to learn, my friend, both about Christianity and about people.”
And you have a lot to learn about Christianity and the ministry AND people, since ministers are people, too. I am here because God put me here, and if you knew the circumstances of how I came to be here, well, you’d probably argue about that, too. That said, let it suffice to say that mediocrity has never been God’s plan, not in the OT, not in the NT, and not now. I don’t run my ministry that way, and I don’t run my life that way. Christians are called to be the light of the world, not wet blankets.
“Another hit piece on Protestantism.
This is akin to asking if you stopped beating your wife yet.....
It’s presuming guilt and instead of just manning up and making the accusation, it engages in major league passive/aggressive impugning of another’s character and attitude by presuming guilt and *innocently* asking a question and then putting the person so accused in a position of defending themselves against a false accusation.
And of course, when the Protestant denies hating clergy, then it’s automatically presumed that they’re lying.
It’s a disingenuous debate technique used by someone who cannot build a case on facts.”
I don’t know about you guys, but I am sure feeling the love now. How silly of me to think that Protestants hate us.
“So, half a day later ... are you happy you posted this question, or sorry?”
Nope, sorry I asked. I’ll let myself out.
Oh you've gone and done it now...
“I am curious however. If you don’t take my comments seriously why would you think to respond to them?”
For the sake of charity and for common courtesy I respond to children and mentally handicapped people. I see no reason to treat you any differently since your comments are of the same relative value as theirs.
If you’re feeling battered, you could come by the Undead Thread, talk about the weather and cars, share a cat picture ...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3175641/posts?q=1&;page=661
That may be your conclusion, versus what the weight of Scriptural substantiation supports, thus explaining their contention for basic truths we both profess, versus such a thing as praying to departed saints in Heaven.
Yet RCs often essentially argue that if we agree with them on some things then we are inconsistent in disagreeing on others.
They also tend to argue that an assuredly (if conditionally) infallible magisterium is essential for determination and assurance of Truth (including writings and men being of God).
And or to fulfill promises of Divine presence, providence of Truth, and preservation of faith, and authority.
And for support that being the historical instruments and stewards of Divine revelation (oral and written) means that Rome is that assuredly infallible magisterium. Thus those who dissent from the latter are in rebellion to God.
Does this fairly represent what you hold to or in what way does it differ?
I wonder if you are cut out to be a Minister, it appears not.
You don’t post for a whole year then post this article and worry about hate? From what I can tell Protestants don’t hate you. If they hated you they would simply allow you to stay in the errors without consistently trying to show the errors with examples from scripture.
Assume for a moment that a king came to a far off province of his. During his visit, he established his rule and set up ministers to oversee the province for him while he returned to his kingdom. Would you be obeying him by saying you are only subject to the king and not to the ministers he set up over you?
In the context of the Apostles, remember that they were given authority in Heaven and on Earth (binding and loosing; see Matt 16:19 & Isaiah 22:22). In other words, it isn't just "like" authority where they can set up little rules that have no Heavenly significance. They have real authority in all of creation throughout the eternal Catholic (universal) Church.
There are several problem with your premise.
First is the presumed superiority of Peter over all of the other apostles which is not supported by the Bible.
Second is that there is no apostolic succession. We do not have any guidance in the NT about the apostles "passing on" their authority.
In other words, it isn't just "like" authority where they can set up little rules that have no Heavenly significance.
I wish this were true, but very sadly, the RCC has done just that. See indulgences, mortal v venial sins, loss of salvation, forgiveness only through a priest, prayer/worship of Mary etc.
Being subject to Christ means obeying Christ and those in whom He vested His authority. You can't have one without the other. If there is a Church (and He promised to build His Church [Matt 16:18]), then it must have authority in order to preach, teach and hold the faithful to the Way.
The authority is found in the Word itself as noted in many passages in the NT. That's the reason Paul, Peter, James and the rest of the boys left us the written Word. There is no new revelation. The NT contains all we need to know about obtaining salvation and how to conduct our walk with Christ.
You're attempting to tell me that if I, or another Christian, am in a conversation with someone regarding eternity and that person asks how one is saved and I show them in the Bible the passages regarding believing in Christ for salvation that I don't have the authority to do that??
Let's even suppose this person was in a car wreck and they're dying. Are you saying I wouldn't have the authority to witness to them as an adopted member of God's family?? Nonsense.
If it does not have such authority then there is no Church but rather a conglomeration of confederates who can only study what has been but possess no authority for teaching what the Spirit inspires.
If/when the RCC gets it right I would listen to them. However, the RCC is scripturally off on a lot of topics as previously noted.
In that view, we have been orphaned and Christ has not fulfilled His promise to us.
Nothing could be further from the truth. Jesus has said He would not leave us as orphans. He will come back for us. He has given us the Holy Spirit as a helper. The Holy Spirit is also a pledge of our inheritance. If the Holy Spirit is in us as Christians, then we have the authority and guidance of the Holy Spirit in our walk with Christ.
We have been adopted as children into God's family.
For though some may be inspired, there can be no teaching and building of doctrine without authority.
A reading of the NT will clear this up.
The Christian church is built upon Jesus. Ephesians 2:19-22 does a really nice job of explaining this.
The authority we have when we teach comes from Him. Recall that some are given the gift of teaching, prophecy, etc. But as noted in 1 Cor 12:4-7, now there are varieties of gifts but the same Spirit, and there are varieties of ministries, and the same Lord, and there are varieties of effects, but the same God who works all things in all persons. But to each one is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good.
Sure sounds like authority to me.
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.