"Many of us simply do not feel at home in ECUSA anymore. I dream of an Anglican Church in North America that is truly biblically centered, mission-focused, evangelistically on fire, doctrinally sound, led by wise, passionate godly leaders - a church that will offer confused 21st century post moderns a real faith, a life-changing encounter with Jesus Christ, and community in which the healing, powerful, and sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit is being celebrated in worship and fellowship day by day." --- The Rev. John Yates
On the subject of potential disaster: what if Robinson is wrong on the homosexuality issue? How can he be sure, on this issue that threatens to split the Church, that he's got it right? Robinson: "I am not at all sure. It's true as best as I can discern it's true. It's God's will and I think only over time do we really come to know the answer.
One of the essential differences between pre-Reformation religion and Reformation religion is that the former was in many respects man-centered, while the Reformers were determined to be God-centered. In the matter of authority, they repudiated the traditions of *men*, because they held the supremacy and the sufficiency of *God's* Word written. In the matter of salvation, they repudiated the merits of *men*, because they held the sufficiency of *Christ's* finished work. --- From "Christ the Controversialist" by John R.W. Stott
The very fact that an entire decennial gathering of Bishops should be spent bickering about homosexuality in an environment dominated by swarms of homosexuals, rather than seeking a deeper understanding of Jesus' message to our schizophrenic generation, reveals how far our priorities have wandered away from what the Crucifixion really means to every sinner among us. We want all the trappings, Bishop's Mitres, prestigious titles, sumptuous real estate, and freedom from guilt about our actual behavior, without having to pay the price of self surrender to the transforming power of Jesus Christ, or considering what He was telling us in the Sermon on the Mount. --- John Becker, East Carolina Episcopal layman L4.E.Carolina.
Dear Brothers and Sisters,
www.virtueonline.org
8/22/2009
It was not a good week for The Episcopal Church especially in the DIOCESE OF VIRGINIA. For the third time, a judge ruled in favor of 11 churches in that diocese who had decided to depart for greener spiritual pastures. The judge said the contracts clause would apply to any church property before 1867; historically in Virginia, denominations could not own church property at the time; only trustees of each church could. The ruling "is a significant victory," said Steffen Johnson, one of the lawyers for the 11 churches. "It eliminates their last constitutional argument that the statute is not valid." At stake is $30 million to $40 million worth of properties.
Does this mean the diocese will now roll over? Not a prayer. The diocese has no intention of taking this lying down with Bishop Peter Lee saying that while he was disappointed in the ruling the diocese will continue "to explore every option available to restore constitutional and legal protections for all churches in Virginia."
Clearly no one is listening to the Archbishop of Canterbury who called for a cessation of lawsuits (he also called for an end to diocesan boundary crossing). Perhaps Dr. Williams was merely "thinking aloud" and should not therefore be taken seriously. Apparently no one is taking him seriously about much anymore.
There will be a trial in October to finally settle the issue. TEC and the diocese will appeal directly to the VA Supreme Court. Beyond that, the cases will be heard in federal court (1st amendment issues). Schori's scorched earth policy will be her dismal legacy.
Not to be outdone, the California Supreme Court has scheduled oral arguments for Oct. 8 in Riverside County over the Episcopal Church Property cases led by the DIOCESE OF LOS ANGELES: http://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov/search/dockets.cfm?dist=0&doc_id=484283
Is this the third or fourth attempt by the diocese to take back these parishes? It is almost impossible to keep up with the litigation going on across the country. Among the parishes under siege is St. James Anglican Church, Newport Beach. Recently this parish called the Rev. Richard C. Crocker as its new rector. He left Truro Church in Virginia, one of the parishes under siege by Bishop Lee. Is this a case of out of the frying pan and into the fire for Crocker and his family?
The Rev. Matt Kennedy in the DIOCESE OF CENTRAL NEW YORK got a stay of execution recently when a judge ruled that the Good Shepherd parish in Binghamton could stay put until next year. The diocese got a bit too pushy with the judge who decided to hold off any action till next year, giving the young rector and his congregation some breathing room. In the end, they will probably lose as New York does not have the same property laws as Virginia and California, but Binghamton is an old industrial town and there are plenty of rentable places for him to take his congregation.
In the DIOCESE OF SAN JOAQUIN, the Episcopal version, not the Anglican version, the newly appointed Bishop Jerry Lamb says he won't immediately inhibit and depose any fleeing Episcopal priests who have joined the ANGLICAN DIOCESE OF SAN JOAQUIN.
In a July letter, Lamb said he would issue another invitation leading to reconciliation. He offered the clergy three choices, "(1) I want to remain a member of the clergy of the Episcopal Church and adhere to my ordination vows; (2) I no longer wish to exercise my ordained ministry in of the Episcopal Church, and desire to be removed there from for reasons not affecting my moral character; or (3) I do not consider myself a clergy member of the of the Episcopal Church, nor do I believe I am obligated to conform to the doctrine, discipline, or worship of the Episcopal Church." On Aug. 4, Bishop Schofield, his standing committee and diocesan council wrote to Bishop Lamb informing him that "we accept the recognition by the Archbishop of Canterbury of our bishop and reject any purported authority of The Episcopal Church, or Bishop Jerry Lamb, over any of our ministries. Our obligation is to conform to the doctrine, discipline, and worship of the world-wide Anglican Communion." Basically what Schofield is saying is "we don't care what you do or do not decide to dare, it is irrelevant, and we are under the Province of the Southern Cone."
*****
So where is all the money coming from to litigate against fleeing parishes and dioceses? A reliable source sent the following report to VOL: "At the Executive Council meeting in NYC, June 2007, there was conversation about taking endowments and trust funds to probate court and getting their expressed purpose changed so that the money could be spent for other 'purposes.' These were primarily trust funds and endowments established more than 60 years ago and were deemed to have '"archaic'" language in their purpose statements. Also, at the February Executive Council meeting, there was discussion about broadening the stated language of trust funds. Those designated for '"missionary'" purposes were originally used for overseas mission. Now, they can be used to reestablish dioceses here in the States. The prime example was $500,000 designated to rebuild San Joaquin, Ft. Worth and Pittsburgh that came from 8 funds designated for '"mission'" purposes. If the trust language does not include the word '"overseas'" mission work that money can be used anywhere."
*****
THE next big speed bump for the HOUSE OF BISHOPS is the deposition of the Rt. Rev. Bob Duncan at the HOB meeting in Salt Lake City Sept 16-19. Mrs. Jefferts Schori is planning on installing her bishop within days after the vote, not giving the 30-day time required for deposition to take effect as per the canons, VOL has learned. "Her" bishop will then run the diocesan convention and attempt to avert the vote to withdraw. But Mrs. Jefferts Schori and David Booth Beers need to read the canons: 1) The canons require that a bishop be inhibited before there is a vote. Duncan has not been inhibited 2) The canons require abandonment of communion. Duncan has not taken any action. 3) The canons require abandonment to a group not in communion with The Episcopal Church. The Province of the Southern Cone is in communion with TEC and 4) the canons require a majority vote of ALL bishops entitled to vote - not merely a majority of those present.
*****
PITTSBURGH Assistant Bishop Called to New Ministry. Bishop Henry Scriven is moving to the United Kingdom to take up a key mission post for South America. The new position will begin January 1, 2009. Bishop Scriven will continue in his work as the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh's assistant bishop until mid-December. The Church Mission Society (CMS) and South American Missionary Society (SAMS) are planning to join together progressively from January 2009, subject to final negotiations and decisions by their respective governing bodies. Bishop Scriven will initially work in a leadership role within SAMS but it is planned that he will ultimately become the Mission Director for South America for the new joint entity that SAMS and CMS will set up together. Bishop Scriven, a British citizen, has a long history of involvement in mission work, including serving with SAMS in Argentina, serving as the chaplain of the British Embassy Church in Madrid, Spain and as Suffragan Bishop in Europe for the Church of England.
*****
AS the Episcopal Church unravels with more fleeing parishes and dioceses, Continuing churches that started to flee TEC in 1977, at the time of the St. Louis Convention, are looking and sounding a little more cocky with some saying "see we told you so" statements on a number of blogs. The biggest and fastest growing of the Anglo-Catholic groups is the Traditional Anglican Communion, headed up by Australian-born Archbishop John Hepworth. He was briefly in Philadelphia and agreed to an extensive interview about his church's proposed union with the Roman Catholic Church. What he wants for his 700,000 followers is full sacramental and organic union. You can read the interview here or in today's digest. http://tinyurl.com/5bm475
*****
Ever wondered what evangelism looks like in the ultra-liberal DIOCESE OF MASSACHUSETTS? The Bishop of Massachusetts, Tom Shaw doesn't want what he calls "conservative fundamentalist Christians to define the word evangelism". So in "These Young Evangelists," a column of his in the Summer 2008 issue of the Episcopal TIMES, the diocesan newspaper of the Episcopal Diocese of Massachusetts, he equates a female graduate student at Boston College as being an "evangelist" for having arranged an evening of Reiki therapy and Zen tarot card readings with the assistance of her Episcopal college chaplain. Furthermore, he states, regarding the five examples he gives, "These young people under the age of 35 seem unafraid of being evangelists. They see themselves as disciples, the 21st-century recipients of our risen Lord's command to go out everywhere teaching in the name of God (Matthew 28:20)."
*****
A couple of liberal Episcopal bloggers believe The Episcopal Church should step back from remaining in the Anglican Communion if they do not accept full inclusion Executive Council and House of Deputies member, Canon Mark Harris seriously considers the possibility that it will not. Some are calling the decision before The Episcopal Church - between, on one hand, remaining in the Anglican Communion under the moratorium prohibiting the blessing/marriages of same sex couples as well as prohibiting the election and consecration of non-celibate homosexuals or, on the other hand, embracing what has been described as the "prophetic witness of full inclusion" as an Episcopal-version of Sophie's Choice.
Another blogger calling himself Pluralist writes on the possible decision to make this sacrifice. It has been picking up steam in recent days by Jim Naughton of the Diocese of Washington and with the leader of Integrity, Susan Russell.
The Presiding Bishop has publicly taken the view that such a decision would come from General Convention, but at the same time opens the door wide by qualifying her remarks, saying: "Individual bishops have always made their own decisions within the canonical responsibilities of their dioceses." So if individual bishops make their own decisions to choose full inclusion over inclusion in the Communion, there seems no evidence that Katharine Jefferts Schori will do anything to stop them. Perhaps she might apply the same logic to those who wish to flee her embrace for sounder theological and ecclesiastical pastures.
*****
ON the plus side of the equation, the FREE CHURCH OF THE ANNUNCIATION in Broadmoor, New Orleans opened its doors to Jubilee Church, formerly Christian Faith Ministries, and the Rev. Gregg Thomas, to the Uptown sanctuary in September. The move unites the two churches in ministry while maintaining separate entity status. Annunciation Church, a member of the Anglican Communion and the Episcopal diocese of Louisiana, will move its primary Sunday service to 10 a.m. and Jubilee, a nondenominational church, will congregate at 11:30 a.m. Annunciation's Prayer Book Service at 8 a.m. will remain unchanged. The Rev. Jerry Kramer, rector at Annunciation Church, said the new partnership goes beyond sharing space and will afford the two congregations new opportunities for ministry. "I believe passionately that churches must work together," Kramer said. "This is not two churches under one roof. Our eyes will be continually open for opportunities to join together in prayer, worship, service and outreach."
Since Katrina, Annunciation has partnered with the Broadmoor Improvement Association for neighborhood restoration, working on 50 homes and posting a net worth of volunteer services set to surpass $2 million this year. Other mercy ministries include a reduced-cost food program, a children's camp, a senior adult ministry and global partnerships with an East African orphanage and an AIDS hospice. Thomas said the partnership will facilitate his return home to a racially blended community that fits well with the two congregations.
*****
The Bishop of the DIOCESE OF GEORGIA, Henry I. Louttit wrote to his clergy, in a "Lambeth 2008 - What happened?" letter which blasted the proposed Covenant offered up by the Archbishop of Canterbury saying, that from an American Protestant experience, it was a wonderful tool for splitting denominations and congregations, not for holding people together. ("Look you did not do it correctly, look at Item VI A, Paragraph 3 - You are heretic and no longer belong to our church.") "However, I think we will have one. Will it be accepted, I do not know. But the finished Covenant Text is months and probably more like a year and a half to two years away.
"Each of the Provinces - that means national or multinational self governing churches - not internal subdivisions as we use the word "Province" in the Episcopal Church. In world Anglicanism, "Province" means the Episcopal Church or the Church in England. It is also interesting to note that the Episcopal Church itself has dioceses in number of other countries, at least twelve that I can count in my head. "The Archbishop of Canterbury on several occasions called the Bishops to work to stay together. Once saying "If we split, it would take at least 400 years to put us back together." He stated, "God needs us together!"
*****
The former Bishop of the DIOCESE OF EAU CLAIRE, William Wantland recently told members of the South East Wisconsin American Anglican Council (SEWACC) at Nashotah House that "GAFCON (the Global Anglican Future Conference) didn't need Lambeth, but Lambeth needs GAFCON."
Now the Assisting Bishop of Fort Worth, Wantland said he was confident that the GAFCON council of primates, which is currently comprised of the nine primates who attended the meeting in Jerusalem in June, would recognize a provisional overlapping Anglican province in North America within the next year.
"Rather than seeking official recognition of the new province from Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, the primates will work to bring the matter to a vote before the Anglican Consultative Council (ACC). By precedent, the ACC is the canonically recognized body with the authority to recognize a new province," Wantland said.
"It is not totally unknown to have overlapping jurisdictions, but it is not the norm," the bishop said. "You think you're living in a litigious time of confusion now? Well, welcome to chaos after that happens. We are in for a long period of confusion and litigation. It almost makes me wish I was still a practicing lawyer." "In my opinion, we missed a golden opportunity to address the crisis [at Lambeth]," he said. "Sweeping it under the rug is not dealing with it. I don't want to be unduly critical of this Lambeth Conference, but they really didn't know what they were doing."
*****
LAMBETH LEFTOVERS. Western Bishops dominated Lambeth. The Church of England Newspaper reports that Bishops from the American Episcopal Church and the Church of England comprised almost 40 percent of the bishops present at the 2008 Lambeth Conference. The largest proportion of those who attended came from the Episcopal Church which sent 127 bishops followed by the Church of England with 113 bishops. Australia sent 39; Canada, 37; and Southern Africa 27, with these five provinces sending over 55 percent of all bishops present. The majority of African bishops boycotted the Lambeth Conference with 209 of the continent's 324 diocesan bishops absent. As many African as American bishops attended Lambeth with the continent sending 127 bishops: 115 diocesan and 12 suffragan. The Anglican Communion comprises 729 dioceses divided into 38 provinces and six extra-provincial jurisdictions. 469 diocesan bishops, 140 suffragan and assistant bishops, and 8 bishops without territorial sees, accepted Dr. Williams invitation to Lambeth.
*****
A KENYAN Anglican bishop has backed a call by the country's prime minister for Palestinian independence, made at a ceremony to mark the 10th anniversary of deadly bomb attacks in East Africa that the authorities blamed on al-Qaida. "I support an independent state for Palestinians. Much of the terror there has to do with a degree of oppression and suppression by Israel," Bishop Gideon Ireri of Mbeere told Ecumenical News International. "You only need to go to Gaza and see the degree of oppression we are talking about." Ireri was commenting on a statement that Kenyan Prime Minister Raila Odinga made earlier the same day. Odinga had said that unless just solutions were found to crises such as that in the Middle East, there would be an increase in the kind of extremism that led to the bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania that killed more than 230 people and injured another 5000.
*****
In the ROMAN CATHOLIC Diocese of Kansas City, MO, - St Joseph, Fr. Ernie Davis of St. Therese Little Flower Catholic Church, wrote VOL to say that his parish was going to provide another haven for orthodox Episcopalians and Anglicans in Kansas City."We are beginning September 7th at 11:15 with the Liturgy of the Word (Rite I) from the Book of Divine Worship followed by an instructive talk. Presentations will be made by Catholics with Episcopalian or Anglican backgrounds. These liturgies and presentations will continue through Advent when we will launch the Anglican Use mass. It is not necessary to intend to convert to the Catholic Church. People can visit and participate as long as they like, but Catholic discipline on reception of the sacraments will apply." Orthodox or lapsed Episcopalians who may be willing to give the Anglican Use a visit are welcome, he said. People can visit his blog www.gospel-anglican.blogspot.com, or his website: www.ourladyofhope.org.
******
The PRIMATE OF NIGERIA, the Most Rev. Peter Jasper Akinola has been moved in his spirit to call on all intercessors throughout the world to seek God's face fervently, spending nights and days on our knees, praying earnestly for our Anglican Communion. The Most Rev. Dr. Benjamin A. Kwashi Archbishop of Jos coordinator of GAFCON Prayer Teams is asking for Spirit-led, united leadership for the GAFCON Primates Council, that they may remain faithful to the teachings of the Bible, steadfast in promoting the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ, and uncompromising in the pursuit of the truth of the word of God and the love of the Lord Jesus Christ. "Also pray for the GAFCON Theological Resource Group and the GAFCON Leadership team that they may remain faithful, focused and not distracted."
*****
The Church in the Vineyard, Bronx, NY, will welcome The Lord Bishop of Ukwa Diocese of the Church of Nigeria (Anglican Province of Nigeria) and The Rt. Rev. Kelechi Eze, to the Greater New York Area from Sept.11 -September 14, 2008. They will be in the area to conduct revival meetings. Members of CANA and all the Nigerian Anglican congregations in the Greater New York area, including New Jersey and Connecticut, will come together again to build up their fellowship and foster bonds as they see things falling apart in The Episcopal Church. Contact: The Venerable M. Joe Omeokwe, Ph.D., Senior Pastor, The Church in the Vineyard - CANA (718) 538-9211 (Church).
*****
The Reverend Rob Schenck (pronounced SHANK), who was recently quoted in the Los Angeles Times and on National Public Radio criticizing PASTOR RICK WARREN for announcing he would not pose questions on hot-button issues to presidential candidates Barack Obama and John McCain during his Civil Forum on the Presidency, reversed his negative opinion before the event had even ended.
"I was wrong to jump to negative conclusions," said Schenck, president of the National Clergy Council and a minister to elected and appointed officials in Washington, DC. "I made the wrong assumptions. As a result of his Saddleback Forum, Rick Warren helped us to get a clearer picture of the candidates, their moral and spiritual principles and their philosophy of government. It was better than I had prayed it would be."
Rev. Schenck, who has been a critic of Warren's in the past, did add he would have been even harder on each of the candidates than Warren was and would not have let them ramble on at times with well-worn stump speech language. Still, Schenck praised the contribution the forum has made to the election process.
*****
OHIO: How many light bulbs does it take to reduce 'carbon footprint' by replacing incandescent bulbs with CFLs? Sixty of 95 congregations of the DIOCESE OF OHIO have exchanged their incandescent light bulbs for compact fluorescents (CFLs) so far this summer. "That's 5,431 bulbs," reports intern Andy Barnett. He estimates that when the bulb exchange is completed it will reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 3,640,000 pounds and mercury emissions by more than 41,000 milligrams over the next nine years. It will also bring savings of more than $298,700.
*****
For the latest word from the Rev. Dr. Robert Gagnon, a world authority on morals and ethics, and the author of "Homosexuality and the Bible" the definitive word on that subject, read the latest here: http://www.robgagnon.net/ArticlesOnline.htm
*****
Birth Rates Continue to Plunge says a US Census Bureau. The percentage of childless women who have reached the end of their child-bearing years in the United States has doubled from 10% to 20% in the last 30 years, reported the US Census Bureau on Monday. The survey also found that, "Women 40 to 44 years old will end their childbearing years with an average of 1.9 children each, a number below replacement-level fertility." This is markedly fewer children than in 1976, when 3.1 children was the national average. 36% of the women who gave birth in 2006 were separated, widowed, divorced or never married. Five percent were living with a partner. Mrs. Jefferts Schori has opined that Episcopalians are not much interested in breeding. Episcopalians, she said, "tend to be better-educated and tend to reproduce at lower rates than some other denominations. Roman Catholics and Mormons both have theological reasons for producing lots of children. We encourage people to pay attention to the stewardship of the earth and not use more than their portion." So the question is if there are no new births and no replacement of the 60 somethings that now occupy Episcopal pews, who will take over Episcopal parishes in the future? She is litigating against fleeing parish priests who have a gospel to proclaim and like families. Perhaps when all the Trust Funds have emptied and the money given to lawyers, she can find a friendly columbarium for David Booth Beers and herself...preferably a church that is still open for business.
*****
AAC Selects Chief Operating Officer -- . The American Anglican Council (AAC) has selected a new Chief Operating Officer and Chaplain (COO). His name is the Rev. J. Philip Ashey. "The COO position requires unique training and gifts; I believe Phil Ashey has both," said The Rt. Rev. David C. Anderson, AAC President and CEO. "His addition will strengthen our ability to advocate orthodox Anglicanism in the Americas and global Anglican Communion." Fr. Ashey is in his 22nd year of serving in the ministry. Along with parish rector, his ministry experiences include teaching at Trinity Episcopal School for Ministry, Ambridge, PA; leading and participating in mission trips to Uganda and Kenya; and pastor and counsel for the Christian Legal Society.
*****
AND just when you thought you had heard it all, St. Luke in the Fields', of the DIOCESE OF NEW YORK, LGBTQ Youth Outreach Benefit program is reaching out to homeless and marginally housed Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer/Questioning young people who hang out on the Piers near Christopher Street. "We offer dance and drama workshops, a nutritious meal, and evaluation by a social worker to connect to services they need. The benefit of a drug-free environment where over 400 thirteen to twenty year olds are affirmed and accepted for who they are is immeasurable (an average of 60 kids each Saturday)," said a flyer. There is absolutely no mention of the gospel which could actually redeem their tragic lives, just inclusivity and a shoulder to cry on.
*****
And from the DIOCESE OF DUNEDIN in New Zealand comes this. "Eighteen months ago, the bishops were invited to ask their dioceses to agree to a voluntary moratorium until General Synod 2008. This was to be in relation to taking new people into the ordination selection and assessment process. The specific issue was the selection of gay and lesbian persons in faithful committed partnerships. The Diocesan Council decided that it ought not to discriminate against any particular group and resolved that it would not take any person into the selection process. "However I continue to ask you to pray that God will provide new candidates for ordination," writes Bishop George Connor. The province of the Anglican Church in Aotearoa, New Zealand and Polynesia has only one reported orthodox diocese - Nelson - and it is growing by all accounts, otherwise the rest of the province, like most liberal provinces are in decline.
*****
There are a number of excellent columns in today's digest from some of the finest writers in the Anglican Communion including Gerald R. McDermott, William Wheatley, Mike McManus on Mccain/Obama at Rick Warren's church and many more.
If you know a friend who would like to receive VOL's FREE weekly news digest of stories from around the Anglican Communion, please drop us a line and we will gladly add you. Write to david@virtueonline.org. All we require is an e-mail address.
To support this FREE service to Anglicans around the world, VOL does need your financial support. If you would like to make a tax-deductible donation to VOL you can do so by going to the website www.virtueonline.org and hitting the PAYPAL link. If you would prefer to make a snail mail donation you can do so by sending a check to:
VIRTUEONLINE
1236 Waterford Rd.,
West Chester, PA 19380
Thank you for your support.
In His service,
David W. Virtue DD
| Poster | Thread |
|---|---|
| patulous | Posted: 2008/8/22 14:20 Updated: 2008/8/22 14:20 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2007/5/18 From: Posts: 1778 |
Quote: "We encourage people to pay attention to the stewardship of the earth and not use more than their portion."
I am wondering how much I have to be a steward for......I don't have as much as Al Gore does. |
| frjude | Posted: 2008/8/22 14:24 Updated: 2008/8/23 21:20 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2005/1/9 From: Heartland Posts: 280 |
But I would argue that 'Sola Scriptura' caused the church/es to BE man-centered. If the Scriptures ALONE were 'sufficient', then why oh why do we have 100's of denominations?
|
| Craig | Posted: 2008/8/22 21:11 Updated: 2008/8/22 21:11 |
Just can't stay away ![]() ![]() Joined: 2004/6/8 From: Diocese of San Joaquin Posts: 72 |
Statement 1: "So where is all the money coming from to litigate against fleeing parishes and dioceses?"
Statement 2: "THE next big speed bump for the HOUSE OF BISHOPS is the deposition of the Rt. Rev. Bob Duncan" .....NEWS FLASH FROM THE FRONT LINES..... KJS has suspended the constitution, taken "emergency powers" and instituted martial law. KJS has shed her peace-time rainbow vestments in exchange for some green fatigues, a fake moustache and a couple big cigars! |
| MichaelA | Posted: 2008/8/23 3:21 Updated: 2008/8/23 3:32 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2006/5/29 From: Posts: 869 |
Frjude,
Before you use phrases like "sola scriptura", make sure you know what they mean. Conceding the authority of God's word does not cause churches to be man-centred, but causes them to be God centred. Elevating man-made traditions to superiority over (or even parity with) the word of God by definition makes a church man-centred. "If the Scriptures ALONE were 'sufficient', then why oh why do we have 100's of denominations?" The Christian Church has always had 100s of denominations, throughout its history, so your question is irrelevant. Rather than worrying about the fact that two congregations in your town might disagree about whether someone should be baptised by immersion, sprinkling or pouring, you would do better to (a) build up your own congregation and (b) work together with those other churches in joint mission to the unsaved. |
| MichaelA | Posted: 2008/8/23 3:24 Updated: 2008/8/23 3:24 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2006/5/29 From: Posts: 869 |
"The PRIMATE OF NIGERIA, the Most Rev. Peter Jasper Akinola has been moved in his spirit to call on all intercessors throughout the world to seek God's face fervently, spending nights and days on our knees, praying earnestly for our Anglican Communion. The Most Rev. Dr. Benjamin A. Kwashi Archbishop of Jos coordinator of GAFCON Prayer Teams is asking for Spirit-led, united leadership for the GAFCON Primates Council, that they may remain faithful to the teachings of the Bible, steadfast in promoting the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ, and uncompromising in the pursuit of the truth of the word of God and the love of the Lord Jesus Christ. "Also pray for the GAFCON Theological Resource Group and the GAFCON Leadership team that they may remain faithful, focused and not distracted.""
Amen |
| MichaelA | Posted: 2008/8/23 3:28 Updated: 2008/8/23 3:28 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2006/5/29 From: Posts: 869 |
"The largest proportion of those who attended [Lambeth] came from the Episcopal Church which sent 127 bishops followed by the Church of England with 113 bishops. Australia sent 39; ..."
Those 39 bishops have less total regular attenders in their services than the 6 who did not attend Lambeth! |
| Craig | Posted: 2008/8/23 5:03 Updated: 2008/8/23 5:03 |
Just can't stay away ![]() ![]() Joined: 2004/6/8 From: Diocese of San Joaquin Posts: 72 |
My dear Brother Tom.
My family donoted this land, our neigbors built this church. Our families were baptised, married and buried here for 100 years. At what point, exactly, did this sacred ground become the property of MRS. Schori? |
| Cennydd | Posted: 2008/8/23 5:10 Updated: 2008/8/23 5:10 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2005/10/30 From: Los Banos, CA, Anglican Diocese of San Joaquin Posts: 6862 |
TBWSalinas, David isn't the only one to refer to your "Presiding Bishop" as "Mrs Schori." And we are perfectly within our rights in doing so, since we do not believe that she is a validly-ordained member of the clergy. Yes, The Episcopal Church claims that she is, since your Church ordains women. This diocese does not, a fact of which I am sure you are well aware.
The lawsuits you mentioned....every single one of them....were brought against faithful orthodox Anglican Christians who want nothing more than to remain in the spiritual homes which they paid for and have maintained, where they were married, where their children and grandchildren were baptized, confirmed, and married, and yes, even buried from. The Episcopal Church filed those lawsuits; no one else did, and you know it! In most cases, the dioceses and the Church have not contributed a dime to the purchase and upkeep of these properties; the people themselves having contributed gladly and with no thought that they would ever be sued in court simply for wanting to remain in their church properties....again for which they paid. You will no doubt say that "faithful Episcopalians" also want to remain in their church homes, and you'd be right. I was once a faithful Episcopalian, and I never dreamed that I would one day leave the parish in which I had spent so many years of my adult life. But when the Church I once loved decided to begin ordaining women to the priesthood and to do nothing to discipline +John Spong and +James Pike for their heresies (Pike got his hand slapped and was told to not do it again), and when they consecrated your present leader as Presiding Bishop....a woman who openly stated the "there is more than one way to God than through Jesus," when Jesus Himself said "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. He who hath seen Me hath seen the Father,"I knew that I had to make a decision. You know by my avatar what decision I made. Yes, the lawsuits can stop, and they should! It has been said that Christians don't sue Christians. Certainly, Christian churches don't, but The Episcopal Church has chosen to ignore that message, and have diminished themselves in the eyes of the rest of Christendom. It is a proven fact! The issues of ordaining known non-celibate homosexual persons and of same-sex "marriage" are merely "presenting issues." The real issue is one of remaining faithful to 2000 years of teachings of the Church through Holy Scripture. The Episcopal Church was once a great and highly-respected part of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. Sadly, by its own actions, it is no longer. Cennydd |
| Anglicanum | Posted: 2008/8/23 15:44 Updated: 2008/8/23 15:55 |
Just popping in ![]() ![]() Joined: 2008/1/17 From: Georgia Posts: 16 |
Deleted
|
| frjude | Posted: 2008/8/23 22:49 Updated: 2008/8/23 22:49 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2005/1/9 From: Heartland Posts: 280 |
Quote:
Before you use phrases like "sola scriptura", make sure you know what they mean. I know what 'sola scriptura' means, thank you very-much! What follows from this erroneous doctrine is the idea of an absolute right of private judgement in the interpretation of Scripture! 'Every man does what is right in his own eyes'! Each individual becomes his own theologian! Each theologian becomes his own pope! Quote: The Christian Church has always had 100s of denominations, throughout its history, so your question is irrelevant. Really? This is the first I've heard of this! And, btw, the question is NOT irrelevant. People's souls are at stake! Truth matters. And the truth is, not all churches TEACH the same doctrine. Truth is, Protestantism is a mass of confusion...and 'sola scriptura' is the reason why. |
| johncarl | Posted: 2008/8/24 4:23 Updated: 2008/8/24 4:25 |
Just can't stay away ![]() ![]() Joined: 2008/4/18 From: Posts: 122 |
Amen, Fr. Jude, AMEN!!! For a good read on this try "The Church or The Bible" a sermon written by Fr. Arnold Damen, S.J. written more than 100 years ago it is still relevant today. Again, thank you Fr. Jude!!! Some people forget that the Bible was written years after Christ left this earch - and in the meantime, there was Tradition.
|
| MichaelA | Posted: 2008/8/24 7:05 Updated: 2008/8/24 7:24 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2006/5/29 From: Posts: 869 |
Frjude,
1. "I know what 'sola scriptura' means, thank you very-much!" I don't think you do. I am not saying that to be abusive, but because your following comments are inconsistent with a correct understanding of it. Have a look at the writings of the man who I think coined the latin phrase (Martin Luther) but also look at his predecessors (as Luther did not dream up the concept): Hus, Wyclif, William of Occam, Athanasius. Better yet, read the writings of those who originated it: Christ and his Apostles. 2. "What follows from this erroneous doctrine is the idea of an absolute right of private judgement in the interpretation of Scripture!" No, it doesn't. Your words better describe the practice of those who believe in "oral tradition". 3. "Each individual becomes his own theologian! Each theologian becomes his own pope!" Each of us is *commanded* to be his own theologian: Theology is simply the knowledge and study of God. When you face the last judgment (as each of us will), you will get no shrift at all by saying, "Well, I followed this theologian or that [or this Pope, or that Patriarch or this collection of Church Fathers] so as long as they are alright, I should be too". The Lord will say to you, "I am not interested in them. I am interested in YOU. What doctrine have you lived out, and what have you taught others?". The comment about each being his own pope is meaningless, because Christ and his Apostles taught nothing whatsoever about popes - the papacy is a later human invention. Forget the concept. 4. "Really? This is the first I've heard of this! And, btw, the question is NOT irrelevant." The christian Church has never been united, in doctrine or anything else, in the sense you mean. I suggest you study the history of the western church from the 6th through to the 15th centuries for a start. And your question *is* irrelevant to salvation: NOBODY gets saved merely by being in a united church. Human beings are only saved by the blood of Jesus, received through faith and worked out in their lives. Again, at the last judgment, you and I will not be asked anything about how many other people were in our church -"Hey, Lord, I was in a church with lots of other people, so you have to save me because weight of numbers is what counts!". No, each of us will be asked: "Did you follow me?". 5. "People's souls are at stake! Truth matters. And the truth is, not all churches TEACH the same doctrine." My point exactly. Not all churches teach the same doctrine, and they never have. The flaw in your 'logic' is that you assume that if they all teach the same thing, it must be right. Nowhere are we promised that in Scripture, rather the opposite. The Church was riven by false doctrine and wrong ideas even in the time of the Apostles. Nothing has changed. That didn't stop people being saved in the first century AD and it doesn't stop them now. I can go downtown to a Baptist church, where their teaching about baptism is different to mine. But the pastor tells his congregation to believe in the bible and not to follow man-made traditions. That is godly and Christian teaching. Then I can go next door to a Roman catholic church where the priest tells his congregation that they must (on pain of eternal damnation)follow the post-medieval dogma that Mary was born without sin, and that they should pray to her - doctrines that are nowhere found in the scriptures, and are contrary to them. That is not godly teaching and I do not have to give it the slightest respect. Therefore, your issue about 100s of denominations is indeed irrelevant. 6. "Truth is, Protestantism is a mass of confusion...and 'sola scriptura' is the reason why." Anyone familiar with church history knows that the pre-reformation church was a mass of contradictory groups, who from time to time gave lip-service to the idea that the Emperor or Pope or perhaps a local prelate was in charge. That was all simply power politics. True christians in the Middle Ages were just the same as true Christians today - they put their faith in Jesus and they followed the teachings of our Lord as set out in Scripture. Protestantism itself did not arise at the Reformation, but was merely a continuation of the true teaching that all human traditions must be subject to the living and God-breathed Word - Holy Scripture. |
| MichaelA | Posted: 2008/8/24 7:14 Updated: 2008/8/24 9:09 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2006/5/29 From: Posts: 869 |
"Some people forget that the Bible was written years after Christ left this earch - and in the meantime, there was Tradition."
Wrong, johncarl! First, Christ commissioned his Apostles to found his church, giving them the same authority as his prophets had had in Old Testament times (which included the writing of scripture). He did not commission anyone else to wield Apostolic authority after the passing of the Apostles. So the fact that the Apostles wrote the Scriptures a few years after Christ left this earth is neither here nor there. Secondly, by definition the Scriptures had to be complete and were complete before the last Apostles left this earth. Thirdly, there was no Tradition in the sense that you mean. The Apostles left no "oral teaching" that varied or extend their written teachings, like a secret "gnosis" to be passed among the privileged few. We Anglicans certainly believe in tradition - when millions of Christians over two millenia have put the Scriptures into practice, we would be foolish not to learn from them. In particular we learn from the way that our forebears resisted heretical teachings: attempts to argue that Christ was not really God, or that man is not really sinful arose very early and we learn much from the Christians of those days who resisted them. We also learn many lessons in regard to church government. But that is quite different from the heretical concept of an "oral tradition". |
| Cennydd | Posted: 2008/8/24 13:08 Updated: 2008/8/24 17:54 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2005/10/30 From: Los Banos, CA, Anglican Diocese of San Joaquin Posts: 6862 |
Ever hear of the parchments on which Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John wrote their letters and accounts of Jesus' life? Or How about the parchments on which Peter and Paul wrote their letters? How about the Dead Sea Scrolls?
Of course, the Holy Bible wasn't published much until Gutenberg printed it, but the scriptures were in the hands of the priests who preached from them. Cennydd |
| Cennydd | Posted: 2008/8/24 21:22 Updated: 2008/8/24 21:22 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2005/10/30 From: Los Banos, CA, Anglican Diocese of San Joaquin Posts: 6862 |
TBWSalinas, I stand by what I said, and I make no apologies for doing so.
You mention theologies, but you don't name them....theologies such as Arianism, for instance. There is but one theology for faithful practicing Christians, and that theology is found in the teachings of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church through Holy Scripture for the past 2000 years, and it is not changing. Scripture cannot be rewritten. It can, of course, be interpreted, but never rewritten, contrary to the claims of the thoroughly discredited Bishop of Pennsylvania, Charles Bennison. As for the Dennis Canon, it is highly presumptuous for TEC to claim ownership of properties that they never paid for, founded, and supported financially. Let me give you an example: Suppose you and your wife....assuming you're married....bought a home and joined a homeowners' association, and then that association passed a CC & R which stated that since you are members of that association, they now owned your home. Would you tolerate that? I don't think so! Then why would you support a denomination which asserts ownership of properties for which they never paid....notwithstanding the fact that that denomination claims to be "hierarchical?" I have been a member of two Episcopal parishes which were rather unusual: They were incorporated, and the deeds were registered with the following descriptions shown: "The parish and vestry of XXXXXXX Church" shown as the property owners....not TEC. No mention of any other entity. Unless I am mistaken, the State of California recognizes that whoever has their name on a registered deed owns that property. My wife's and my name are on our deed, and we own our property outright. Therefore, why should it be any different for parishes? I am neither a realtor nor an attorney, but the foregoing is my understanding of the law. I could mention the problems facing Anglicanism in this country and in Canada, but they have been covered ad infinitem. It remains for better minds than ours to resolve the situation. The one certain thing is that God Himself will decide, while all we can do is to trust the courts to make the ownership decisions. We can claim and counterclaim all we want, but ultimately the matter is out of our hands....and that means it's out of the hands of TEC and their attorneys as well. They will have to live with....and abide by.... the court's decision. Cennydd |
| MichaelA | Posted: 2008/8/24 22:35 Updated: 2008/8/24 22:35 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2006/5/29 From: Posts: 869 |
Tom Woodward,
Thanks for your comment. You wrote: 1. “Don't try to fool me into believing that you believe all of "2000 years of teaching of the church. . ." If you read early church history you are aware that there were many theologies and ethics for a long time -- and little of early Christian ethics and understanding of the church's place in culture survived very long -- but then you may be in favor of the subjugation of women, the institution of slavery and approval of polygamy -- and what about women having their heads covered in church, etc., etc..” Good point – there have been times in history when some parts of the church have promoted slavery. Since that is contrary to scripture, the true Christians in the church declined to follow it, even though it was taught “by the church”. In the same way, when some parts of the church ordain as priests those who openly practice homosexuality, then true Christians decline to follow that teaching, because it is contrary to Scripture. So TEC is not being treated unfairly at all when the rest of the church treat it like a pariah, indeed like a naughty child that must be disciplined. TEC deserves no better. 2. “Isn't it odd that the women who were the only followers of Jesus who remained faithful through his crucifixion, who were the first witnesses to the Resurrection and leaders in the early church are branded by you and some others as unfit or unqualified for priestly or episcopal ministry in the church of Jesus Christ. So much for Jesus" witness.” You are right – the women stayed faithful to Jesus throughout. And yet, Jesus himself called only men to the headship roles of the 12, who in turn became the Apostles. Obviously Jesus himself did not see anything discriminatory in this – just because a particular role is not open to women doesn’t mean that women are in any sense inferior. Those who disagree about this do not disagree with us, they disagree with Jesus. 3. “Cennydd, I believe your vision of the mission and identity of the church lacks the compassion, generosity, vision and witness of Jesus Christ.” No doubt you do believe this. But that doesn’t mean your belief is rational. Presumably the best yardstick for telling whether Cennydd’s vision measures up to that of Jesus Christ would be the words of Jesus Christ himself – and I note you don’t seem to have much to say about those words…. 4. “And those who agree with your understanding of John 14.6 are a marginal group, with few Biblical scholars to back them up.” John 14:6 means what it says. Any competent biblical scholar agrees with that. 5. “I wish for you the joy and peace that is the Christian Gospel -- but for that you are going to have to let go of Christianity as a Country Club for the guys -- and straight guys only, at that.” That is a nice fantasy, Tom, but let’s look at reality. Our “brand” of “narrow Christianity” is followed by women, men, old, young, whatever. Gay people might well have a problem, because practicing homosexuality is a choice that they make. But as for who they are, all are welcome. And that shows, because we have far more people in our churches than you have in yours, and ours are growing while yours are shrinking. |
| Cennydd | Posted: 2008/8/25 2:26 Updated: 2008/8/25 14:32 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2005/10/30 From: Los Banos, CA, Anglican Diocese of San Joaquin Posts: 6862 |
I wonder which part of John 14:6 Tom doesn't understand? Jesus was very explicit in His statement. I don't know how He could have been any clearer.
Mrs Schori seems to have the same inability to understand Jesus' statement that He is THE Way, THE Truth, and THE Life. Or she doesn't accept His word. But of course, she is a product of that screwed up mess called the Episcopal seminary system......minus Nashotah House and Trinity School for Ministries. Cennydd |
| gregory | Posted: 2008/8/25 16:09 Updated: 2008/9/5 16:39 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2004/8/4 From: Nflorida Posts: 4436 |
"Christ commissioned his Apostles to found his church, giving them the same authority as his prophets had had in Old Testament times (which included the writing of scripture). He did not commission anyone else to wield Apostolic authority after the passing of the Apostles."
What about St. Luke? Who do you think told him the personal info of BVM? Why do Protestants NOT have all the Books of Holy Scripture that Jesus Christ had? "Secondly, by definition the Scriptures had to be complete and were complete before the last Apostles left this earth." That's so sad... and an excellent example of the disconnect Protestants of the post modern time have with Orthodoxy. Which is why there are so many interpretations amoung the 33,000 and growing and competing Protestant groups. Much more Prayer is needed... gregory |
| gregory | Posted: 2008/8/25 16:15 Updated: 2008/8/25 16:15 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2004/8/4 From: Nflorida Posts: 4436 |
"Protestantism itself did not arise at the Reformation,"
Wow really? "but was merely a continuation of the true teaching that all human traditions must be subject to the living and God-breathed Word - Holy Scripture." The traditions of Protestants are "human tradition". There are still those who worship using the Holy Tradition and the Holy Scriptures as they were and still are... See the Book of Jude. Prayerfully, gregory |
| frjude | Posted: 2008/8/25 23:06 Updated: 2008/8/26 11:46 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2005/1/9 From: Heartland Posts: 280 |
No, all things must be subject to the Church--
1Ti 3:15b the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth. Mat 16:18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. Where in the Bible is THAT? Goodness gracious, this is the temptation that Satan offered in the Garden: Gen 3:5 For God doth know that in what day soever you shall eat thereof, your eyes shall be opened: and you shall be as Gods, knowing good and evil. No, you go downtown and the pastor tells the congregation to follow HIS interpretation of Scripture. He is 'pope' for them. |
| MichaelA | Posted: 2008/8/26 3:36 Updated: 2008/8/26 3:48 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2006/5/29 From: Posts: 869 |
Gregory, thanks for your posts. Responses:
1. "What about St. Luke? Who do you think told him the personal info of BVM?" What about him? He wrote under the authority of the Apostles, just as Mark did. As for who told him personal details about Mary, I expect he asked her - that would be the logical thing to do... 2. "Why do Protestants NOT have all the Books of Holy Scripture that Jesus Christ had?" We do. And quite a few more (the New Testament!) 3. "That's so sad... and an excellent example of the disconnect Protestants of the post modern time have with Orthodoxy." Hmm, are you disagreeing with my statement that "Secondly, by definition the Scriptures had to be complete and were complete before the last Apostles left this earth"? Does that mean you are arguing that the Scriptures were not actually authored by the apostles? There are many who believe that of course - Spong and Pike among them. However, that is not what I believe, nor is it what the Christian Church has believed for millenia. 4. "'Protestantism itself did not arise at the Reformation,' Wow really?" Yes, really. 5. "The traditions of Protestants are "human tradition"". Of course they are. So are the traditions of the Eastern Orthodox, and those of the Roman Catholic Church, and anyone else you care to name. Having traditions is not a bad thing, so long as they are always subject to the Word of God. 6. "There are still those who worship using the Holy Tradition and the Holy Scriptures as they were and still are... See the Book of Jude." Too vague for me, I'm sorry. |
| MichaelA | Posted: 2008/8/26 4:07 Updated: 2008/8/26 6:27 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2006/5/29 From: Posts: 869 |
Fr Jude, thanks for your post. My responses:
1. "No, all things must be subject to the Church-- 1Ti 3:15b the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth." Okay, instead of just quoting part of a verse in isolation, let's look carefully at what St Paul actually wrote, because it is the opposite of the meaning you are trying to draw out of it: "Although I hope to come to you soon, I am writing you these instructions so that, if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God's household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth." [1 Tim 3:14-15] Paul says that, without having his instructions, Timothy and the members of the Church will not know the truth. Therefore without his written instructions, they will not be what they should be, i.e. the pillar and foundation of truth. BTW this text is one of the primary references in support of Protestantism. I never understood why so many catholics quote it, until I realised that they never quote it in full. 2. "No, all things must be subject to the Church-- “Mat 16:18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”" Again, you are trying to draw a meaning out of the passage that it cannot possibly have. Jesus uses different words for Peter and the rock. A more accurate translation is: “I say to you, you are a stone. But upon THIS large rock I will build my church…” i.e. the Rock on which the Church is built is Jesus himself, and is specifically not Peter. 3. “Quote: Each of us is *commanded* to be his own theologian. Where in the Bible is THAT?” Lots of places. The individual responsibility of each Christian before God is a strong theme throughout the scriptures. But let’s look at a specific example: Christ condemned the Pharisees for following a tradition instead of reading and obeying the plain words of scripture. It follows from Jesus’ statement that he expected these Pharisees to read the Scriptures themselves, and follow their plain meaning: “And he said to them: "You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions! For Moses said, 'Honor your father and your mother,' and, 'Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.' But you say that if a man says to his father or mother: 'Whatever help you might otherwise have received from me is Corban' (that is, a gift devoted to God), then you no longer let him do anything for his father or mother. Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like that." [Mark 7:9-13] Another example is John 9:28-34 where the priests and Pharisees completely missed the point of Jesus’ ministry, whereas the uneducated blind man understood it simply but deeply. 4. “Goodness gracious, this is the temptation that Satan offered in the Garden: Gen 3:5 For God doth know that in what day soever you shall eat thereof, your eyes shall be opened: and you shall be as Gods, knowing good and evil.” A failure of logic here – if you try to use Genesis 3:5 in this way, you also condemn every priest and every theologian who has ever lived. 5. “No, you go downtown and the pastor tells the congregation to follow HIS interpretation of Scripture. He is 'pope' for them.” This contradicts your earlier position that each parishioner is his own Pope. Regardless, it is not true. If you actually attended orthodox Protestant churches (not the liberals) you would know that this is not what happens. |
| frjude | Posted: 2008/8/26 11:50 Updated: 2008/8/26 11:50 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2005/1/9 From: Heartland Posts: 280 |
Quote:
2. "Why do Protestants NOT have all the Books of Holy Scripture that Jesus Christ had?" It is because the Reformers took out 7 books from the Holy Bible. The Bible of the early church, the Septuagint, had the Deuterocanonicals. Most Protestant Bibles are missing 7 books. If Luther would have had his way, Hebrews, James and Revelation would have been removed as well. |
| frjude | Posted: 2008/8/26 11:57 Updated: 2008/8/26 11:57 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2005/1/9 From: Heartland Posts: 280 |
Quote:
Paul says that, without having his instructions, Timothy and the members of the Church will not know the truth. Therefore without his written instructions, they will not be what they should be, i.e. the pillar and foundation of truth. Even the Roman catechism cites Scripture as the highest authority. That said, the Church is still the (or should be) the last word on doctrine and Scriptural interpretation. Quote: Jesus’ statement that he expected these Pharisees to read the Scriptures themselves, and follow their plain meaning: If the meaning was always so 'plain', we wouldn't have 100's of denominations. Quote: If you actually attended orthodox Protestant churches (not the liberals) you would know that this is not what happens. I stand by this statement. Protestants do not have a 'Pope', of course. But they do have a pastor who serves as 'Pope' for them. Or they have a Macarthur Study Bible, or an ESV Study Bible (with notes from RC Sproul), or an NIV Study Bible, with its infallible notes. Quote: Jesus uses different words for Peter and the rock. A more accurate translation is: “I say to you, you are a stone. But upon THIS large rock I will build my church…” i.e. the Rock on which the Church is built is Jesus himself, and is specifically not Peter. Ah, but Jesus wasn't speaking GREEK to Peter, was he? Clearly, Jesus is the Rock. Yet, it IS upon Peter (his leadership)that this special authority is given. |
| gregory | Posted: 2008/8/26 15:49 Updated: 2008/8/26 17:47 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2004/8/4 From: Nflorida Posts: 4436 |
Michael, Thank you for giving me more Christian Charity in your last post than i seem to have gotten in the past.
1. i was showing you that your statement that the Holy Scriptures were written by The Apostles was not correct. Thank you for correctly qualifying your statement. There are 12 Apostles and Luke was not one of the 12. And yes i was referring to St. Luke talking directly to The BVM. Reckon there was an Apostle coaching The BVM? NOT! Once Christ was in The BVM and i can NOT nor will i deny that She is in Christ now... as well as many Saints. I continue to Pray that more Protestants would be more respectful to Her and The Saints. 2. frjude has corrected your statement about Protestants having all the Holy Scripture that Jesus Christ and His Apostles had... Seems it'd be difficult to have the same understanding as our fore fathers with pieces missing... 3. Yes i agree that Holy Scripture was complete... and no i do Not agree with Spong or Pike. The point is that most Protestants have pieces of Holy Scripture missing that Christ and His Apostles are using... that'd be a "disconnect" with God's Church and His children which leads to division and confusion. 4. You must have different definition than me about the when and the what of the Protestant meaning. Not surprising since we have different definitions on catholic... and even in these times the meaning of orthodox seems to be headed for the same Protestant reference point than was originally the case. 5. So you believe that the Holy Tradition of The Apostles and the Orthodox Church are the same as the varying human traditions of 33,000 protesting "churches" ??? Isn't this like re-inventing the wheel? " " Having traditions is not a bad thing, so long as they are always subject to the Word of God." " That's like putting the cart in front of the horse... i do agree that the two have to square with what Christ and His Apostles teach. 6. "Too vague for me, I'm sorry." Okay, i will pray to make a difference; The book of Jude writes that evil works are evidence of apostasy. He admonishes us to contend for The Faith once delivered, for there are tares among the wheat, false brethren are in the Church. Maybe we should understand more about what Holy Scripture tells us about "teaching the Faith". Now that should be a warning concerning the use of our tongue or today the use of the keyboard. 1:8 Yet in like manner these also in their dreaming * defile the flesh, * despise authority, * and slander celestial beings. A rebellious attitude is key to recognizing the wolves. They do not fear God's judgment despite their behavior. 1:9 But Michael, the archangel, when contending with the devil and arguing about the body of Moses, dared not bring against him an abusive condemnation, but said, "May the Lord rebuke you!" 1:10 But these speak evil of whatever things they don't know. What they understand naturally, like the creatures without reason, in these things are they destroyed. vs 14,15 Jude is not quoting the Protestant Bible but the apocryphal book of Enoch. This book, known to the Church Fathers of the second century, lost for some centuries with the exception of a few fragments, was found in its entirety in a copy of the Ethiopic Bible in 1773. Most Protestants reject the Deuterocanonical books completely. The original version of the King James Bible, the most popular version of the Bible in English, included most of the Deuterocanonical books. And for many years in England, it was even illegal to publish a Bible without these books. Most evangelical Protestants in America are ignorant of the fact that most of the Deuterocanonical books are quoted or alluded to as Scripture by the Apostles, the Church Fathers, and even Jesus Christ Himself. Jude verses 18-19: In the last days there will be scoffers who will follow their own ungodly desires. These are men who divide you, who follow mere natural instincts and do not have the Holy Spirit. i pray continuously about those who try to block The Path to The Father. The Path that Christ opened and that The Father uses to send The Holy Spirit to us. And also for those who want to and try to intercept the message from The Father, then claiming a new revelation from the Holy Spirit. Many prayers in the Church are based on prayers found in the Deuterocanonical books. The stories (or full stories) of many Saints and Angels celebrated in the liturgical calendar of the Orthodox Church are found in these books. The Wisdom of Solomon and the Book of Sirach, listed among the Deuterocanonical books, are storehouses of wisdom on a par with Proverbs. Edification and inspiration await those who take the time prayerfully to read these important books of the Church. humbly submitted for edification, gregory ps i'd fail without links; Christian Classics Ethereal Library http://www.ccel.org/wwsb/ What are the "Deuterocanonical" Books of the Bible? http://www.bluffton.edu/~bergerd/deutero.html not my favorite place but here it is; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Enoch And my favorite; How to Read the Bible by Bishop Kallistos Ware http://orthodoxwiki.org/Kallistos_(Ware)_of_Diokleia Click to read about Bishop Kallistos Ware |
| MichaelA | Posted: 2008/8/28 0:01 Updated: 2008/8/28 0:58 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2006/5/29 From: Posts: 869 |
Fr Jude, you wrote:
1. "It is because the Reformers took out 7 books from the Holy Bible. The Bible of the early church, the Septuagint, had the Deuterocanonicals. Most Protestant Bibles are missing 7 books. If Luther would have had his way, Hebrews, James and Revelation would have been removed as well." Wrong on several counts. The Jewish scholars who translated the Hebrew scriptures into Greek also translated the “Apocrypha”, which were their books of recent history. Just because they translated the latter doesn't mean they considered them to be scripture, and in fact they did not. The Jews didn’t think the Apocrypha were Scripture, nor did Jesus think so, nor did the early church think so, nor did much of the medieval church think so. For example, even at the debate between Luther and the papal legate Cardinal Cajetan, both Luther and Cajetan agreed that the Apocrypha were not scripture. (BTW, the word “Apocrypha” was coined by St Jerome in order to make the very point that they were not Scripture). It is only at the Council of Trent that the Roman church insisted that the Apocrypha must be scripture, and that was only because they realised that many of the medieval doctrines that they wished to retain could not be justified without them. It is true that Luther questioned whether parts of three books belonged in the Scriptures, because he didn’t like what was in them. However even he had to concede that they objectively were. Therefore the Anglican position expressed in Article VI is in full accord with both apostolic teaching and tradition. 2. “...That said, the Church is still the (or should be) the last word on doctrine and Scriptural interpretation.” Okay, by this point in the discussion you have descended to mere assertion, without any attempt to support it. As I wrote above, your position has no support in scripture. Rather Scripture makes clear that the scriptures, being both living and god-breathed, interpret themselves, and the church has no special authority. You may follow whatever human tradition you choose – there are thousands of them, and often self-contradictory. But I will follow the teaching of Christ, his Apostles and his Prophets. 3. “If the meaning was always so 'plain', we wouldn't have 100's of denominations.” Another bald assertion, which you do not support by any reasoning or authority (because you know that you cannot). In fact, the existence of various denominations is not inconsistent with Scripture being as Jesus described it – having a plain meaning, and being “living” and “god-breathed” - for two reasons: (a) The scriptures explicitly tell us that Christians are allowed to disagree about things that are not fundamental to faith: “One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord. He who eats meat, eats to the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who abstains, does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God. For none of us lives to himself alone and none of us dies to himself alone”. Romans 14:5-7 Most differences between protestant denominations are nothing more than this: whether one celebrates holy days, whether one baptizes by immersion sprinkling or pouring, etc. That is a type of division that is recognised by scripture, and there is nothing wrong with it. (b) The second reason we get divisions (e.g. consider the dozens of “Catholic” and “Orthodox” denominations, and the huge variation in actual belief among members of those denominations) is because of man’s sinfulness. As St Paul writes: “In the first place, I hear that when you come together as a church, there are divisions among you, and to some extent I believe it. No doubt there have to be differences among you to show which of you have God's approval”. [1 Cor 11:18-19] So, when I separate from the church of Rome and its many heresies, I am not being “divisive”, I am simply following God and leaving an apostate church. That makes me both protestant and orthodox. 4. “I stand by this statement. Protestants do not have a 'Pope', of course. But they do have a pastor who serves as 'Pope' for them. Or they have a Macarthur Study Bible, or an ESV Study Bible (with notes from RC Sproul), or an NIV Study Bible, with its infallible notes.” Of course you stand by it, regardless of the facts. But you do not know what you are talking about : Protestant pastors are in no sense “popes”. Nor does any rational Protestant claim that the notes to Macarthur Study Bible, or an ESV Study Bible or an NIV Study Bible are infallible. You are making up a straw man of "protestantism", so that you can find an excuse for your opposition to them. I prefer to deal in reality. 5. “Ah, but Jesus wasn't speaking GREEK to Peter, was he? Clearly, Jesus is the Rock. Yet, it IS upon Peter (his leadership)that this special authority is given.” No, quite the opposite. The one thing that this passage makes very clear is that the Church is NOT built upon Peter, but upon Jesus. Yes, of course Jesus wasn’t speaking Greek, but that doesn’t allow you to ignore what is written and just substitute anything you like (which is what the Roman argument amounts to). St Matthew translated what Jesus said, and the language Matthew used (petros vs petra) means that Jesus said that the church is built on himself, not upon Peter. The original Aramaic would have been Peter as the keypha (small stone) and Jesus as the Tsur or Shua (huge rock). The Roman interpretation of this passage is simply impossible. (plus of course that neither Peter himself, nor the other apostles nor the early fathers believed that Peter had been granted any special authority). However, the passage IS consistent with the teaching of the rest of Scripture, i.e. that all of the Apostles *together* form the foundation of the church. |
| MichaelA | Posted: 2008/8/28 0:48 Updated: 2008/8/28 1:05 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2006/5/29 From: Posts: 869 |
Gregory, you wrote:
1. “i was showing you that your statement that the Holy Scriptures were written by The Apostles was not correct. Thank you for correctly qualifying your statement. There are 12 Apostles and Luke was not one of the 12” Splitting hairs does not assist any discussion. We both know that Luke, Mark, James and Jude were not members of the twelve. We also know that "apostle" is used in a number of senses. Regardless, you and I have discussed this before and you already knew my position, i.e. that all of scripture was written under Apostolic authority. That was the position of the early church, and of the true church throughout history. 2. "And yes i was referring to St. Luke talking directly to The BVM. Reckon there was an Apostle coaching The BVM? NOT!" Of course, just as there was no “Apostle coaching” Bartimaeus, or Nicodemus or any other eye-witness. 3. “So you believe that the Holy Tradition of The Apostles and the Orthodox Church are the same as the varying human traditions of 33,000 protesting "churches" ??? Isn't this like re-inventing the wheel?” Yes, I believe that the “varying human traditions” of the various Eastern Orthodox Churches, Oriental Orthodox Churches, Roman catholic and other western catholic churches (ALL of which differ) are no better than the traditions of the various protestant churches. That is also the position of the Anglican Articles of Religion. We learn from the example of those who went before us - they are our predecessors in the faith, just as much as they are the predecessors of the EOC, RCC etc. And we believe that we (Anglicans) are as faithful or in many cases more faithful to the beliefs of those predecessors than are the EOC, RCC etc. But none of that changes the fact that human tradition is always subject to the teachings of Jesus, his Apostles and Prophets, which are found in Holy Scripture. 4. “vs 14,15 Jude is not quoting the Protestant Bible but the apocryphal book of Enoch.” Yes, everyone knows that. Just as St Paul quoted from the pagan authors Epimenides, Menander and Aratus. What is your point? 5. “Most evangelical Protestants in America are ignorant of the fact that most of the Deuterocanonical books are quoted or alluded to as Scripture by the Apostles, the Church Fathers, and even Jesus Christ Himself.” No, most evangelical protestants are aware that the Apocrypha (i.e. Jerome’s term for that small number of deuterocanonical books which the non-Protestant churches try to include in scripture) are NOT cited in scripture at all. You may recall an earlier thread where someone tried to adopt Patrick Madrid’s argument that the New Testament was full of allusions to the Apocrypha: I took the first 20 alleged “allusions” and demolished them – they weren’t references to the Apocrypha at all. I gave up after 20 because the list obviously had no credibility. So I will put a proposition to you: There are no certain references to the Apocrypca in the New Testament. Now, please come up with some examples in contradiction of that, if there are any. (BTW, please do not just give me a link to one of the catholic clone web-sites that throw up a hundred wrong allusions – they have no credibility. Rather, cite for me the “allusions” that YOU believe are credible). 6. "Jude verses 18-19: In the last days there will be scoffers who will follow their own ungodly desires. These are men who divide you, who follow mere natural instincts and do not have the Holy Spirit." I agree. I believe there are many like that today, including many of those who insist that a spurious “oral tradition” has authority over scripture. 7. "i pray continuously about those who try to block The Path to The Father. The Path that Christ opened and that The Father uses to send The Holy Spirit to us. And also for those who want to and try to intercept the message from The Father, then claiming a new revelation from the Holy Spirit." Exactly. There are no new revelations, just one revelation (Scripture), which is living and god-breathed, and the Holy Spirit interprets it to all who will accept his ministry. 8. "Many prayers in the Church are based on prayers found in the Deuterocanonical books." Indeed. And that is why the non-Protestant churches defend the Apocrypha as Scripture – not because they have any objective reason to believe that they are Scripture, but because they have built a whole edifice on them and now must defend it, regardless of the facts. |
| gregory | Posted: 2008/9/9 12:05 Updated: 2008/9/17 18:56 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2004/8/4 From: Nflorida Posts: 4436 |
update; i see that Micheal's post that i responded to below has been removed from VOL. GOOD!
================== Michael, commiserate??? ""verb (used with object) 1. to feel or express sorrow or sympathy for; empathize with; pity."" Durn it, i just complimented you on you having more Christian charity in your posts. Why did you make that uncalled for condescending post? Is it because it goes with you calling posters, "boy" ? If you open your eyes and look at my profile you'd see that i have six grand children and many more posts and much more time on VOL than you. i am sure you will soon find out that you will be facing traumatic situations while being a grand father. i could be wrong but maybe you are really as self centered and demanding of your way being the only correct way, as your posts portray. "In the meantime, if you wish to offer any *substantive* response to my post, I am more than happy to discuss." In God's time, we get to see that you have rejected, argued, dismissed and shrugged off the important points you needed to see that many many Christians have gone before you ... You seem to condemn everyone outside your little circle of understanding to hell. You have great potential but attacking Christian brothers and sisters that are not protestant is a problem. Jesus did respond differently when the Apostles complained about those "others" casting out demons, healing the sick, etc. Those that have gone before us are watching and yet surely some are asleep in Christ... Eternal Life is going on right now... humbly, gregory ps, The links and posts are there for everyone to see. |


















