ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2017 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Tuesday, July 15, 2014

The end of the CoE

The Church of England just assisted its own suicide:
The Church of England finally voted yesterday to let women become bishops – to the anger of many traditionalists. The move was passed by a comfortable majority at a tense gathering of its parliament, the General Synod, in York.

It ended 14 years of hand-wringing and faction-fighting, delighting Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby and almost all of his fellow bishops.

The decision freed the Church from the risk of intervention by politicians.

MPs had threatened to step in to force the Church to accept women bishops in 2012, after a disastrously botched vote saw traditionalists narrowly block reform.

David Cameron described yesterday’s vote as ‘a great day for the Church and for equality’. Ed Miliband said it was ‘wonderful news’, while Nick Clegg called the decision a ‘long overdue step’.
Of course, any church that was founded on the political basis of an adulterous king's divorce was always going to have questionable theology. But this will serve to finish off what has been a dying denomination that severed itself from the roots of faith several generations ago.

I would encourage any Anglicans of my acquaintance to leave the organization, just as I encouraged Episcopalians to do the same a few years ago, except for the fact that I don't know any Anglicans anymore. They already left.

While they are far from the only red flag, female leadership is an inerrant sign of a church that does not take the Bible or Christian doctrine seriously. Once female leadership is embraced, it's only a matter of time before God is declared to be a Goddess, marriage is declared to be malleable, and the Crucifixion is declared to be some sort of poetic metaphor rather than a literal historical event. It was only 21 years from when women were first permitted to become priests to this event, and in another 21, I expect the Church of England will be rapidly approaching its extinction.

Remember, the same snakes that have methodically destroyed these churches are at work in your church as well. They're always assiduous about being helpful, filling in the gaps, and working hard for the church body. There is a very good reason the Roman Catholic Church saw fit to create its various inquisitions, which were not aimed at its enemies outside the Church, but at those within it.

Look at the pictures of the fake tears of the triumphant crocodiles. They're already planning their next offensive.

Labels:

206 Comments:

1 – 200 of 206 Newer› Newest»
Anonymous Peter Garstig July 15, 2014 3:06 AM  

One need merely be exclusive of women to attract them in hordes.

Your daily game.

Anonymous castricv July 15, 2014 3:23 AM  

There is a certain stupendously hideous layer of hell that awaits those who say they are believers but then do everything they can to willfully destroy their faith and their church.
500 years ago this led to endless wars and splits. This time it will simply lead to attrition and a flocking back to the more orthodox. The remnants will only be stronger for it. These simpletons don't actually think they will win do they?? Not against God.

But perhaps that isn't the endgame they seek. It's the comforting shield against seeing one's own sin that they crave. If enough people can be made sinners, if enough righteous people can be perverted, heck if enough righteous people will be silent and just go with it, they'll never have to face their sins. At least on this Earth. But to the nihilists that may be enough for them. How sad.

A murderer can repent, embrace God, and be saved.
A non-believer can be filled with Grace, repent and be saved.

A believer that willfully twists the Word to suit their own petty desires and disguise their shame is the worst of all things : Heretic. And heretics deserve all the fire they can get.
Don't be surprised to hear that word a lot more as we go forth and old problems start to burn anew in a less civilized world.

David Cameron claims to be a Christian, even an evangelical, yet in his pursuit of maintaining pathetic power on Earth over a garbage nation, he sells out his own church. What a warrior one could be by simply standing up with the last of your true Christian countrymen and proclaiming loudly from your lofty position. "Not any further"

Anonymous PhillipGeorge(c)2014 July 15, 2014 3:35 AM  

The slippery slide or the spiral dive began with man equals woman. As with marriage, the slide/ spiral dive began not with Gaytopian fantasies, but no-faults state sanctioned church endorsed divorce. As with borders the slide/ spiral dive began not with amnesty debates but with dual citizenships.

Quite right though the self flagellators have taken another step forward in complete self effacement. The nation that gave us John Bunyan has just taken a fall for the other team.

Blogger vandelay July 15, 2014 4:59 AM  

Funny how they just keep holding votes on these issues until they get the result they want,, and then there's never another vote again. It's almost as if they only respect democracy when it goes their way...

Anonymous PaleFace2014 July 15, 2014 5:05 AM  

There's a simple way for the Church of England to know what is bad for it. Just ask: Does pro-atheist, pro-secularist, pro-dissolution-of-Western-society Guardian support it? Apparently the C of E has been asking itself that for the past fifty years. And then doing exactly what the Guardian would want it to do.

Anonymous tspoon July 15, 2014 5:26 AM  

Brilliant work from the ladies. They get ownership of the collected hard work and sacrifice for multiple hundreds of years by dedicated worshippers. It won't matter if nobody shows up to their sermons. They won.

OpenID standingagainsttheworld July 15, 2014 5:54 AM  

One by one they fall into the maws of the matriarchy. Little by little the church is purified:
http://empathological.wordpress.com/2013/09/13/into-the-maw-of-the-matriarchy/

Anonymous Anonymous July 15, 2014 6:04 AM  

Where else would anti-Christs gravitate to? Positions of power and the churches. It's not to be unexpected. Judgement Day is around the corner.

Blogger Cataline Sergius July 15, 2014 6:23 AM  

This is the inevitable result of having a state supported religion. The bishops may be an internal choice but their appointment is the result of a recommendation to the Queen by the PM.

If there was a church of the United States of America. Imagine the choice Obama would make.

OpenID cailcorishev July 15, 2014 6:31 AM  

Pope Benedict had some success in bringing traditionally-minded Anglican parishes back to the Catholic Church. With them out of the way, it was surely much easier for the modernists to push this through. I was surprised to read they hadn't already had women bishops for years, actually.

The most revealing words in that quote are "finally" and "reform." These changes are seen as an inevitable part of progress; the only question is whether they'll happen sooner or later.

Anonymous Roundtine July 15, 2014 6:34 AM  

Is there no champion who can subdue the pagans, purge the Saracens and restore order and harmony to the Britsh Isles? Polish plumbers, to arms!

Blogger Hermit July 15, 2014 6:35 AM  

The predictable final outcome of heresy.
Too bad catholicism is following the same path, all our churches are under attack.

What I find amazing is how "progressive christians" actually follow the advice of radical secularist on how we must follow our faith.

Yes it really is just a matter of time before every supernatural things in the Bible will be called a symbol, including Christ divinity and resurrection.
I don't want to be a ranter but this really looks like the great apostasy.

Anonymous Goodfaith July 15, 2014 6:35 AM  

Yet another proof that St.Peter's earthly throne is the One Holy Church. The gates of hades have been prevailing against the rest of every single quasi-church.

Anonymous Axeman July 15, 2014 6:35 AM  

Why not just elect a new god and be done with it.
via Reddit

Anonymous zen0 July 15, 2014 6:39 AM  

There was a story 3 years ago in the Telegraph about the CoE being defunct in 20 years as the old folks die off. The average age then was 61.

Dying it will die.

Anonymous PAPIST FIRST July 15, 2014 6:42 AM  

me church is only one... u calvinist the devil

Anonymous PAPIST FIRST July 15, 2014 6:44 AM  

i blame southern baptists

Anonymous zen0 July 15, 2014 6:55 AM  

Yet another proof that St.Peter's earthly throne is the One Holy Church. The gates of hades have been prevailing against the rest of every single quasi-church.

Not so fast, there, Sparky. See headline from last year:

After membership declines, Catholic church sold to Muslims

Blogger Hermit July 15, 2014 6:58 AM  

Probably all the anglican priests younger than 60 years does not even believe in the gospel and call everything a myth.

In ther "christianity" metaphysics is completely dead, everything is just a myth.
They reduced their religion to to a mere morality hard to be distinguished from the pragmatic humanism of our secular opponents.
What they do is not christianity and not even a religion, that is just a moral fairytale.

Where is the transcendence? Everything is reduced to this world, to be a good person in this world, mere morality and nothing more.
Where is the sacrifice of the redeemer? Where is the kingdom of heaven?
Is there anything outside this world in their pseudo-doctrine?


There is not even the need to quote anything from the Bible, I could quote half of the Bible to support this. Every single word of the book say to not live for the world, for his pleasures and for his problems.

They are much closer to complete anti-christianity than they are to true christianity.

Anonymous FrankNorman July 15, 2014 7:14 AM  

Goodfaith July 15, 2014 6:35 AM

Yet another proof that St.Peter's earthly throne is the One Holy Church. The gates of hades have been prevailing against the rest of every single quasi-church.


Never heard of Vatican II, I take it? Or Liberation Theology? Or pedophile priests?

Anonymous FrankNorman July 15, 2014 7:17 AM  

Here's a question I saw asked somewhere: if the Archbishop of Canterbury doesn't place the crown on the head of the next king or queen of England, who will?
A parliament of world religions? The president of Europe? Nobody at all?

Anonymous Stilicho July 15, 2014 7:18 AM  

Sergius, Obama has appointed bishops to his state church: Kagan and Sotomayor.

Anonymous Laz July 15, 2014 7:28 AM  

Anybody notice how homely all these women are?

Anonymous Rantor July 15, 2014 7:28 AM  

Goodfaith,

How about the Pope inviting the Muslims to pray to their pagan God at the Vatican in June of 2014? Brilliant Benedict, nice to everyone except our LORD.

Anonymous Jeigh Di July 15, 2014 7:30 AM  

FrankNorman July 15, 2014 7:14 AM
Goodfaith July 15, 2014 6:35 AM

Yet another proof that St.Peter's earthly throne is the One Holy Church. The gates of hades have been prevailing against the rest of every single quasi-church.


Never heard of Vatican II, I take it? Or Liberation Theology? Or pedophile priests?

Apparently he hasn't heard anything about the new pope either.

Anonymous Peter Garstig July 15, 2014 7:37 AM  

Yes it really is just a matter of time before every supernatural things in the Bible will be called a symbol, including Christ divinity and resurrection.

Here in Switzerland, there was a female protestant pastor openly preaching that God himself is not to be taken literally ('he's not a being), but mainly a symbol that units all people. Pretty close to budhism really.

Christianity might be under attack from the Muslims. The greatest danger to Christianity is inside.

Blogger Hermit July 15, 2014 7:38 AM  

Allah is not a pagan god, Allah is an erroneous view of our God.
It's still the only One true God. Allah is just the arab word for God, arab christians worship Jesus son of Allah.

If it was a different god the muslim would not recognize Jesus as one of the prophet of the One.
They worship the same God of the Bible, they are certainly many wrong things in their faith but Allah is not at all a pagan idol.

Anonymous Fran July 15, 2014 7:58 AM  

Damn! Even their own readers won't fall for this...story comes out, fully supporting the decision but this news agency's commenters are mostly against it. Yeah Atheists think it's wonderful. Of course, they would.

Blogger Crude July 15, 2014 7:59 AM  

It ended 14 years of hand-wringing and faction-fighting, delighting Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby and almost all of his fellow bishops.

Also notice how, whenever the progressive wing gets its way, the talk is how finally all the faction-fighting and hand-wringing has ended. As if all the people who disagree magically disappear. Last year's vote didn't end any faction-fighting or hand-wringing whatsoever.

Then again, insofar as they may well leave the CoE, that may happen - if it hasn't already.

Anonymous Fran July 15, 2014 8:01 AM  

Somet5imes I think the Catholics should have just let Henry has his divorce...since Catherine gave no male issues and too old to conceive again. He was a King after all. May have saved a lot of trouble in Tudor England.

Blogger njartist July 15, 2014 8:05 AM  

@ Hermit July 15, 2014 7:38 AM

Allah is not a pagan god, Allah is an erroneous view of our God.

This is simply not true. Allah is the old moon god of the Arabs. The name of God is Yahweh: He has demanded that we call Him by His true name as when He commanded the Hebrews not to call Him Baal, which translates Lord; and yes, one can go through the bible finding this word used; but using a bible with Strong's reference numbers one will see that the true name was meant but replaced by false scribes - yes, I just admitted that the bibles we read have/had deliberate distortions put there by the scribes: this is one of the charges of Jesus against the scribes. It becomes our duty as Christians to read carefully and use reference materials such as Strong's.

Anonymous SteveOff July 15, 2014 8:16 AM  

The greatest threat to christianity in the west are the feminist women and lesbian feminist women. The feminist white women, especially. As we see here in the Anglican church in England. Feminist and Lesbian white women won't be happy until they destroy all of the traditional institutions that European caucasian men have created.

And these feminist and lesbian feminist women receive moral and financial support from one small ethnic/religious group who has a genocidal hatred of European caucasian people.

Anonymous Stg58/Animal Mother July 15, 2014 8:21 AM  

Catholic Attack!

Anonymous NorthernHamlet July 15, 2014 8:29 AM  

I was talking to several young ladies this week. They insisted that the world need to have more equality, that women need to be able to do the same jobs and men to do their fair share. Everyone should do the same things because there was no difference between men and women.

I asked them if they intended me to have their babies too. [Smirks all around.]

Then I said I hoped they'd be nice enough to give me maternity leave too. [Playful punch to the arm.]

Blogger Glen Filthie July 15, 2014 8:33 AM  

The next offensive will be the mainstreaming of homosexuality into religious doctrine and possibly pedophilia as well.
Of course by then both will be firmly established in society outside the church...

Anonymous RedJack July 15, 2014 8:36 AM  

With what I have seen locally (my bride is Catholic) and with the new Pope Francis, the Roman Catholic church will follow along soon.

The local priest is an open apostate (he stated in a CHRISTMASTIDE homily that Jesus was not God), and the bishop doesn't care. Not to mention the active and ongoing moves to hide abuse.

Once the EU or the USA start threatening to take their tax exempt status away, they will follow orders.

Blogger ScuzzaMan July 15, 2014 8:44 AM  

"The decision freed the Church from the risk of intervention by politicians."

Yeah, right.

The decision confirmed for everyone paying attention that the Church will bow to any political pressure, no matter what her claimed religious convictions.

The decision makes the Church a slave of politics and ensures it will remain so.

Anonymous Loki Sjalfsainn July 15, 2014 8:47 AM  

The greatest threat to christianity in the west are the feminist women and lesbian feminist women.

But the men who let them take over, they are blameless.

Anonymous RedJack July 15, 2014 8:54 AM  

Loki,

No they are not blameless. They were naive at best, evil at worst.

The outcome was the same.

Blogger CM July 15, 2014 8:57 AM  

My poor home church.

I've been identifying myself as Anglican while attending a very conservative episcopal parish. Our diocese has only been lenient on female priests, while consistently ordain in oddly conservative ones.

While I disagree with their stance, the bulk of their theology I find more consistent with scripture than any other denomination. And while I sit in church and hold to my views, gaining audience with those who disagree yet more and more willing to hear me speak and consider what I say, should I leave because the over church has abandoned this tenant yet my small parish refuses to bring in a female priest who doesn't preach wifely submission?

When the bedrock of my doctrine and theology is in keeping with C.S. Lewis and Augustine, should I walk away from that and adopt Catholicism? I'd be a dishonest one and a heretic (by their standards).

I'd rather stay and preserve whatever is left of biblical theology within our tiny parish. Perhaps someday it will abandon their conservatism and I'll be left seeking another church, but for now, I'll stay.

Anonymous Loki Sjalfsainn July 15, 2014 9:04 AM  

No they are not blameless. They were naive at best, evil at worst.

The outcome was the same.


Indeed. The gravest threat to your faith is, in my experience, its adherents' smiling refusal to uphold its core tenets in its haste to attract warm bodies. So it is with any group bound by common belief that there is a higher guiding principle than the whims of the moment; it will have enemies, and those enemies will seize upon any opportunity to infiltrate, subvert, and conquer.

The enemies may do the work of destruction, but the gatekeepers permitted them entry.

Blogger CM July 15, 2014 9:11 AM  

God gives his name after Ishmael left. So you believe Ishmael's God is not the Arabic god? The biggest distortion, where I sit, was perpetrated by Muhammed and he corrupted their faith. However I am unfamiliar with pre muhammad Arabic faith. But Muhammad's slander of Christ must have meant Christ was having some impact in their world.

Blogger John Wright July 15, 2014 9:11 AM  

"Yet another proof that St.Peter's earthly throne is the One Holy Church. The gates of hades have been prevailing against the rest of every single quasi-church."

Hear, hear.

Another proof is hearing how the heretics and infidels squawk when we say the simple truth about this. We have scandals and weather them and emerge stronger and more glorious than before. The breakaway churches fling themselves headlong into secularism and perish.

Aside from the Catholic Church, only the Mormons seem to hold out against modernism.

Before anyone starts counting the Catholic Church as going the way of the Anglicans, look at the statistics: half the population in North and South America, a quarter of Europe, and eighth of Africa, a tenth of Asia, totaling roughly 1,181,000,000. That is one sixth of the world.

(And, of those numbers, maybe one in twenty actually knows what our faith teaches. So, alas, it is not all good news.)

Blogger James Dixon July 15, 2014 9:20 AM  

> ... all our churches are under attack.

Of course. They always have been. But they're not "our" churches. They're "his" Church.

> The decision makes the Church a slave of politics and ensures it will remain so.

The CoE was, by definition, always a slave to politics. That's why it split from the Roman Catholics.

And yes, this grieves me greatly (mostly for my wife's sake), but it's been coming for a long time.

Anonymous VD July 15, 2014 9:21 AM  

I'd rather stay and preserve whatever is left of biblical theology within our tiny parish. Perhaps someday it will abandon their conservatism and I'll be left seeking another church, but for now, I'll stay.

Why? I would only recommend staying in your parish if your parish will separate itself from the Anglican Church. Otherwise, you are knowingly accepting evil authority over you and your family.

Bring up the possibility of separation and I suspect you'll see how truly conservative it is. Or not.

Blogger Random July 15, 2014 9:22 AM  

"When the bedrock of my doctrine and theology is in keeping with C.S. Lewis and Augustine, should I walk away from that and adopt Catholicism?"

Augustine would approve, being Catholic after all.

Anonymous RedJack July 15, 2014 9:24 AM  

CM
If you have kids, you MUST leave now.

Your parish may be safe for now, but your children will some day grow up and move away. What will happen when they go to an Anglican church that has embraced all these things?

I love my home church, but if they went the way of the ELCA, I will leave my Book of Concord on the pew and never return.

This is not our home.

Anonymous The Biblical Church July 15, 2014 9:24 AM  

This is happens when you worship a corporate entity "church" instead of worshiping the true Christ...

"The breakaway churches fling themselves headlong into secularism and perish. Aside from the Catholic Church, only the Mormons seem to hold out against modernism. "

False. Consider thousands of independent non-denominational churches, the Pentecostals, Southern Baptists, etc. Not just in the US, but ESPECIALLY in places like China, Africa, etc. I am not even counting Orthodox. In short, there are thousands of non-Roman churches that effectively holds the line 100 times better than your average Roman parish. I am unsure if you count all of above as "heretics and infidels"... but given your "hear hear" it's probably likely and unfortunate.

"We have scandals and weather them and emerge stronger and more glorious than before"

I sincerely pray for this. But your current Pope makes me fearful.

"(And, of those numbers, maybe one in twenty actually knows what our faith teaches. So, alas, it is not all good news.)"

Yet you still claim that Roman denomination " hold out against modernism." ? I hope you see the contradiction in your own statements.

Anonymous Loki Sjalfsainn July 15, 2014 9:25 AM  

Before anyone starts counting the Catholic Church as going the way of the Anglicans, look at the statistics: half the population in North and South America, a quarter of Europe, and eighth of Africa, a tenth of Asia, totaling roughly 1,181,000,000. That is one sixth of the world.

Appeals to popular opinion, particularly of those you admit are grossly ignorant, are excellent proofs.

Anonymous Stephen J. July 15, 2014 9:27 AM  

"Once the EU or the USA start threatening to take their tax exempt status away, they will follow orders."

Some will. Some won't. God tempers His own.

We're allowed to pray that the cup will pass from us, and even to do what is licit to help it pass by; we're just not allowed to push the cup away when it becomes obvious that it hasn't.

Anonymous Vic July 15, 2014 9:36 AM  

Could this be the great falling away described by Paul? The anti-Christ sitting in the temple of God showing himself as God? Having a form of Godliness but denying the power thereof?

Some have gone as far as to remove the cross, as others simply embrace the idea of secular humanism with a cross on top. These deluded individuals believe becoming more lukewarm is some kind of victory, ignoring Rev. 3-14. They don't believe Christ has the power to chastise them.

Truth is never refuted by popular vote.

OpenID gnardopolo July 15, 2014 9:41 AM  

@John Wright:

I am a Mormon living in Salt Lake (the county, not the city), but I am a convert. It is very interesting as someone who joined the church seeing the various reactions to current attempts to have women ordained to the priesthood. Those who were raised in the church, faithful members all their lives, are more likely to say, "Well, maybe it is time to let women have some of the power." And then you have my wife, raised as a liberal New York Jew (and also a convert to the LDS church) saying, "What is wrong with these people? Don't they understand how the priesthood works?"

It's not a matter of traditionalism in my church any more than it is in the Roman Catholic church. If you believe God is directing you, blessing you, and teaching you, then you do things His way, not yours. you may believe that God is telling you something different than the church teaches, and that's fine: go found your own church. The fruits of whatever seed you plant will tell. But too often, like with the Church of England, we see the appeal for equality made, not based on any scriptural, theological, or even relevatory basis, but because SOCIETY says it is the right thing to do.

Yes, base your church on the whims of the mob. A house built on sand would be more stable.

Anonymous Michael July 15, 2014 9:41 AM  

Isn't the church of England run by the government over there, and isn't their government filled with freemasons?

Well, no matter. They can do whatever they want with their state-run "church." The Protestants and other denominations are already fragmented for kowtowing to the PC agenda. It's like they're being transformed into godless progressive cults from within.

Anonymous Porky July 15, 2014 9:50 AM  

Next Sunday's sermon: If You Were A Dinosaur, My Lord

Blogger Michael July 15, 2014 9:51 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Michael July 15, 2014 9:53 AM  

Let’s try again

I cannot think of a mainline protestant church that hasn’t embraced the left. They all seem to follow the left’s script: abortion, homosexual marriage, pastors, women “priest”, and so on….. I think that eventually it will come down to the Roman Catholic Church, Orthodox faith, evangelicals, , and some fundamentalist. It will be the believers with similar belief in the supernatural and Jesus.

I am not sure how this applies, but I know a female pharmacist who went to the same ELCA Lutheran church I formerly attended. I left and converted to Roman Catholicism. I am at peace. I love it. She went around looking for a traditional Lutheran church. She couldn’t find one; then returned to the same ELCA church with her sons. The two issues that struck me: first her boys will be taught that homosexuality is “normal” and to be celebrated. Second, her husband has to be a “beta” male. He did not assert his Godly duty to tell her that they were going to go to a traditional Christian church or he would do what he had to do to save his son’s souls. This is what happens when the left gets in-charge of the institutions. In the USA, most pharmacists are women……. And there are very few young male pharmacists… When they make money – I think they attract the loser husbands, the “beta males” when let them rule the roost.

BTW – I had the CEO of a large business tell me a joke that I thought was funny and accurate at the same time. It goes something like this, “ Know what you call a man whose wife makes more than him?” , Answer, “No”. Answer, “ A pimp”.

Anonymous Titus Didius Tacitus July 15, 2014 9:55 AM  

ScuzzaMan: "The decision confirmed for everyone paying attention that the Church will bow to any political pressure, no matter what her claimed religious convictions."

Since Henry VIII established his church on the principles of his own divinely authorized rule, the practical right of the King of England to divorce and / or decapitate as many wives as he chooses, and his right to sack and close the monasteries, "disperse" the charitable monks, hurl the poor into starvation, and devastate the treasures of the people's religious art (the proceeds to be spent on such things as a field of cloth-of-gold), the Anglican Church has had no ultimate "principles" except submission to terrifying power, just or unjust. As it was made in the beginning, so it will be to the end.

Only, like an aging and increasingly unattractive tramp, the church has spent a long time in need of and without a terrifying power to be in submission to. It is not needed, loved, or respected. Its eager willingness to assert authoritatively the blessing of Jesus on anything, absolutely anything is moot. The ruling class of the Anglosphere now bows to an older religious power than Rome or even Jesus, one that has historic grievances against Anglicanism and every other form of Christianity. The Prince of Wales (no awesome figure anyway) wants to be the Defender of "Faith" in general, meaning no faith in anything in particular, and certainly no particular church.

So now the aging church has fallen in with new company: a collective religious Jack the Ripper composed of cultural Marxists, feminists, anti-whites and sodomites. These are eager, effective persecutors. For the effeminate Anglican clergy, the sexy thrill of fear is back.

The Anglican church has agreed to go home with saucy Jack to see his collection of surgical instruments, and whatever else he'd like.

I wonder whether this will work out for the best.

Blogger Laguna Beach Fogey July 15, 2014 10:01 AM  

Well, what did anyone expect? Egalitarianism is Christianity taken by radicals to its logical ends.

As for Anglicanism, I've heard it's growing rapidly in Darkest Africa. So it has that going for it.

But there are some Anglican hold-outs, such as the Anglican Catholics (Continuing Anglican). I know of at least one traditional [for now] Anglican Catholic parish nearby.

http://www.anglicancatholic.org/

David Cameron described yesterday’s vote as ‘a great day for the Church and for equality’

I never thought I'd witness the spectacle of a Conservative politician defending 'equality'. WTF?!

Anonymous The Biblical Church July 15, 2014 10:01 AM  

The concept of "denominations" themselves -- of a single corporate entity "church" is phony, un-biblical and an invitation to Satan.

OpenID cailcorishev July 15, 2014 10:06 AM  

The greatest threat to christianity in the west are the feminist women and lesbian feminist women.

Feminism, combined with witchcraft, lesbianism, goddess worship, and group therapy deconstruction and reprogramming, utterly destroyed the Catholic women's religious orders in the US in the 1960s-1970s soon after Vatican II. Religious sisters were largely responsible for the strong Catholic parochial school system and hospitals that spread across the land in the previous century, and it was all gone (or corrupted) in a decade or two. As bad as that era was for priests and the laity, it was even worse for women religious thanks to the herd mentality. Traditional orders are rebuilding now, and are strong and growing, but they're having to do it from scratch because the feminists/lesbians/witches who remain from that generation are still in control of the main orders and resisting any change.

By the way, when I say witchcraft, I mean witchcraft. Women dancing around trees, worshiping the four winds or elements, calling on pagan spirits to do their bidding, that kind of thing. And all this happening at Catholic nun retreats.

Blogger Clint July 15, 2014 10:06 AM  

I would throw Eastern Orthodoxy into the mix of those who are pretty resistant to such things. We have been resisting such things since they began and while there may be an errant cleric or two out there that spouts nonsense, there is no move in the churches themselves for female priests, much less bishops.

Anonymous LS July 15, 2014 10:10 AM  

@FrankNorman: "Never heard of Vatican II, I take it? Or Liberation Theology? Or pedophile priests?"

I speak as a non-Catholic, but this is simply dishonest. Unlike the CoE's vote to allow female bishops, which is therefore now an official position of that institution, the Catholic Church has never endorsed either pedophilia or Liberation Theology as a proper doctrine or principle of the Church. It consides pedophilia a sin and its cover-up of pedophilia priests as a grave moral failing. Liberation Theology is not an official position of the Chruch and, under John Paul II and the then Cardinal Ratzinger, its influence was severely undermined and redirected. And while you can argue that Vatican II changed the Church in certain ways, whether for the good or for the ill, you cannot properly argue that that change introduced fundamental compromises to the core tenets, doctrines and principles of the Church. That the Catholic Church, as an institution, and that individual Catholics, as individuals, have not always lived up to their beliefs and have fallen short of the glory of God is no argument against the Church and its adherents because all institutions and all individuals have fallen short. We are a fallen people and require God's forgiveness no matter what church body we belong to, or whether we belong to any. The issue relevant to this blog post is rather the official doctrines of the church in question, and the Anglican compromise with modernity on women priests and bishops, among other compromises, is in fact evidence that, as Goodfaith said, "St.Peter's earthly throne is the One Holy Church." One might argue that the Orthodox have as good a claim to that title as the Roman Catholics, or that certain Protestant denominations do, but that is an entirely different question than pointing to an institution's moral failings. They are moral failings, and recognized as such, precisely because the Catholic church still retains and advocates standards of right and wrong. The Anglicans are in the process of jettisoning all traditional moral and doctrinal positions of Christianity and that means it is appropriate, if one wishes to remain true to one's love and loyalty to Christ, to look around and consider which Christian body remains true to the core tenets of the faith. There are fewer and fewer such bodies left in this world, and the Catholic church is certainly one of them.

Anonymous Stryker July 15, 2014 10:11 AM  

Not all mainline protestants have embraced liberalism. In addition to faithful congregations stuck in decaying denominations (think some Presbyterians, and some in the ELCA) the Lutheran Church, Missouri Synod has officially rejected the tenets of liberalism and it's attendant BS, going so far as to get rid of an entire seminary staff in the 70's, and continuing to reject women's ordination and Higher Criticism. Unfortunately, many LCMS congregations are enamored with Evangelicalism and church growth methodologies, so finding a liturgical and Confessional congregation can be a challenge in some parts of the country.

Blogger swiftfoxmark2 July 15, 2014 10:15 AM  

Somehow, I doubt the third world Anglicans will follow suit.

But I swear, if my next bishop is a woman, I'm out.

Blogger Random July 15, 2014 10:16 AM  

Didn't the LCMS go in for gay 'bishops' a few years ago?

Blogger Michael July 15, 2014 10:30 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger John Starks Ghost July 15, 2014 10:44 AM  

Random - the LCMS (Lutheran Church Missouri Synod - which I am member) did not "go in" for gay bishops. That was the ELCA - Evangelical Lutheran Church of America. The ELCA is the very liberal step sister of the LCMS. The LCMS is fairly conservative and traditional and I don't see them allowing gay or women clergy at any rank in the near or distant future. If they did then it will be as Vox says here......it will mark the beginning of the end for the LCMS.

Anonymous Michael July 15, 2014 10:56 AM  

It's a calculated assault by secularist ideology, geared toward fragmenting and dissolving Christianity, no doubt in the hopes that Christians won't be able to unify against them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/League_of_Militant_Atheists

------------------------------------------
The League embraced workers, peasants, students, and intelligentsia. It had its first affiliates at factories, plants, collective farms (kolkhoz), and educational institutions. By the beginning of 1941, it had about 3.5 million members from 100 nationalities. It had about 96,000 offices across the country. Guided by Bolshevik principles of antireligious propaganda and party's orders with regards to religion, the League aimed at exterminating religion in all its manifestations and forming an anti-religious scientific mindset among the workers. It propagated atheism and scientific achievements, conducted 'individual work' (a method of sending atheist tutors to meet with individual believers to convince them of atheism, which could be followed up with harassment if they failed to comply). The League's slogan was "Struggle against religion is a struggle for socialism", which was meant to tie in their atheist views with economy, politics, and culture. One of the slogans adopted at the 2nd congress was "Struggle against religion is a struggle for the five-year plan!" The League had international connections; it was part of the International of Proletarian Freethinkers and later of the Worldwide Freethinkers Union.

The League was a "nominally independent organization established by the Communist Party to promote atheism." It published newspapers, journals, and other materials that lampooned religion; it sponsored lectures and films; it organized demonstrations and parades; it set up antireligious museums; and it led a concerted effort telling Soviet citizens that religious beliefs and practices were "wrong" and "harmful", and that "good" citizens ought to embrace a scientific, atheistic worldview.
-------------------------
In 1929, the Second Congress changed the society's name to The Union of Belligerent (or Militant) Atheists. At this Second Congress of Atheists, Nikolai Bukharin, the editor of Pravda, called for the extermination of religion "at the tip of the bayonet." There, Yaroslavsky also made the following declaration:

"It is our duty to destroy every religious world-concept... If the destruction of ten million human beings, as happened in the last war, should be necessary for the triumph of one definite class, then that must be done and it will be done."
-------------------------------------------

Blogger Michael July 15, 2014 10:57 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Matamoros July 15, 2014 10:57 AM  

Anglicans/Episcopalians who are tired of the heresy of their groups are welcomed into the Catholic Church. They may enter either as individuals or as groups.

The Personal Ordinariate of the Chair of St. Peter (http://www.usordinariate.org/) is specifically for Anglicans/Episcopalians who wish to retain their Anglican patrimony while in union with Rome. The Ordinariate embraces the U.S. and Canada.

There are currently 35 Anglican Use parishes in the U.S. It is "a structure, similar to a diocese, that was created by the Vatican in 2012 for former Anglican communities and clergy seeking to become Catholic. Once Catholic, the communities retain many aspects of their Anglican heritage, liturgy and traditions".

The ordinariate was established by a decree of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith dated January 1, 2012 to include people:

"who, originally having belonged to the Anglican Communion, are now in full communion with the Catholic Church";

or "who have received the sacraments of initiation within the jurisdiction of the Ordinariate itself";

or "who are received into it because they are part of a family belonging to the Ordinariate".

Membership is open to former Anglicans and former Methodists, as Methodists have an Anglican patrimony. Pope Francis has widened the criteria for membership.

Those in England and Australia are not left out: Three such ordinariates exist: Personal Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham (England and Wales, Scotland), Personal Ordinariate of the Chair of Saint Peter (United States, Canada) and Personal Ordinariate of Our Lady of the Southern Cross (Australia).

It is time for Anglicans and Methodists to come home.

Blogger Feather Blade July 15, 2014 10:58 AM  

"only the Mormons seem to hold out against modernism"

Ehh... they hold out until their leadership get a "revelation" that something previously anathema and/or forbidden - like blacks, or caffeine - is now okay.

Anonymous The Biblical Church July 15, 2014 10:59 AM  

" There are fewer and fewer such bodies left in this world, and the Catholic church is certainly one of them"

Not every church is a franchise or wholly owned subsidiary of McChurch or Wal-Church, Inc.

Anonymous Thales July 15, 2014 10:59 AM  

Female "leadership" means that men who need religion the most will be the first to leave.

Blogger Michael July 15, 2014 11:02 AM  

This is Michael H, there is more than one of us out here! Good name -- the archangel Michael.

I don't disagree: not all mainline protestant churches have gone to the liberal left; however, there are very few remaining that adheres to the tenants of the faith. My observation is that most that stay within the faith traditions are populated with "gray hair" people. There are very few young families, children, and young people (< 22). They have an odor to me of death. My observation is that the Roman Catholic and Orthodox traditions have a wide range of ages in their services. The presence of children, young adults, and young families makes it seem like a family reunion every Sunday (or Saturday evening vigil). One of my parishioner friends said something like, “We grow our own” – with a smile. Yep, lots of babies (immortal souls).

For my conversion process, it was akin to the 40 days in the desert before I found my home. I made up my mind that I would follow God no matter the cost. And, I am no dummy – the last IQ test I took showed a number of 125 – lest someone try to assert that you have to be dumb to believe.

Like it or not, the Roman Church has survived around 2,000 years. You will find the Roman Catholic church officially does not criticize the “separated brethren” – which is entirely different by protestants (of which my pedigree goes back to the reformation). But as Father Tom gently chided me, in the pew, everyone is trying to do the same thing, love and serve God. Leave the theological arguments up to the theologians. I agree.

My observation, on the other hand, is that the traditional faith seems to be lots of people in the pews and a lot of children.

Anonymous Tex July 15, 2014 11:04 AM  

You will find the Roman Catholic church officially does not criticize the “separated brethren” –

They leave that to John Wright and other commentators to do un-officially. Either directly, or passively-aggressively like yourself.

Anonymous zen0 July 15, 2014 11:11 AM  

@ Michael

Like it or not, the Roman Church has survived around 2,000 years.

And apparently, its adherents are 17.% of the population of the world.

Not a very good track record for what is supposedly the Universal Church.

Blogger CM July 15, 2014 11:15 AM  

Vox - as a lot of commenter's here have pointed out, there are very very few hold outs. Even evangelicals are struggling with feminist "man-up" pure feminity bs. And the ones that are left have some deep - seated theology that bothers me.

If national churches all around are corrupt, than why should I be aligning myself with ANY church?

And the suggestion to leave the Anglican Communion being a test of how truly conservative they are? There are other reasons for desiring to stay.

For the episcopal church, the diocesan bishop has ultimate authority on doctrine in our area. Schori does not. We have limited our ordination process to a very select group of conservative seminaries and our last bishop and newest bishop our doing their best to conserve true biblical authority.

That's not to say those who feel convicted to leave are in the wrong. But those convicted to stay have reasons beyond the upper level politics. It's like telling a devout Catholic to leave the Catholic Church because his Pope is playing Russian roulette with church theology and politics. A Catholic stays because he believes the Catholic faith is the One True Faith, because of the Apostolic Succession, and the tradition of theology.

To the comment on my kids:
I grew up in the episcopal church and have very conservative parents. I have managed quite well finding a church that taught biblical doctrine and sifting through those that preach new age and feminist crap without mommy and daddy holding my hand. Perhaps I can teach my children to do the same?

Especially given my political bent and strong convictions, I seriously doubt I'll fail to pass on some conviction and caution to my children.

Blogger The Remnant July 15, 2014 11:17 AM  

Christianity was triumphant for so long that it got comfortable, and that comfort metastasized into compromise, worldliness, and ultimately betrayal. The silver lining is that true Christians can rediscover the faith and devotion of the early ones, who had to walk the walk and risk their earthly fortunes (and lives) to preserve their souls. With sellouts now joining the powers-that-be to attack us, true Christians can make a righteous stand that will serve as a shining beacon to all those who hunger in silence for the truth.

Blogger JDC July 15, 2014 11:19 AM  

Didn't the LCMS go in for gay 'bishops' a few years ago?

No. That was the ELCA. The ELCA in 2009 voted to accept homosexual pastors and to allow same sex blessings in their congregations. The LCMS remains committed to support the biblical doctrine of only male pastors. I don't see this ever changing - even against political pressure.

Was at a pastor's conference a few months ago, and the speaker was telling us to prepare for having our tax exempt status removed (because we speak openly against homosexuality and against female ordination). He predicts this to happen in the next decade. Many congregations will close, many pastor's will lose their jobs...but the church remains...hope is not dead.

In a way it is an exciting time to be in the church. There are so many unsatisfied hopeless people walking around literally dying to hear the clear gospel of Jesus Christ. The clear law and gospel presentation of God's word has never been popular - the left hate the law, and do anything they can to dismiss it and to demonize it.

Blogger John Wright July 15, 2014 11:22 AM  

"If national churches all around are corrupt, than why should I be aligning myself with ANY church?"

Well, at the risk of offending my Protestant brothers in Christ, there is one universal, catholic, ecumenical and international Church which has been around not for your five hundred years but for two thousand.

Anonymous Stilicho July 15, 2014 11:26 AM  

Leave the theological arguments up to the theologians.

"I was just following orders" is not an acceptable defense where moral decisions are the responsibility of the individual. I strongly suspect that it will not be acceptable on Judgment Day for much the same reason. God gave you a mind. Any failure to use it is your responsibility alone.

Anonymous Titus Didius Tacitus July 15, 2014 11:27 AM  

Cataline Sergius: "This is the inevitable result of having a state supported religion."

I don't think so, or everything would have gone wrong directly with Henry VIII. In fact he was a tyrant but a Christian. There were many wicked things he would do, and demand divine approval of, and there were other things he would never do.

(Like denying the divine right of kings such as himself. Therefore the real, non-metaphorical existence of the God that stood behind Henry had to be unquestionable.)

Reciprocal power on some terms is necessary, and the terms are to some extent up for grabs. An Eastern-style church with a strong emperor and a compliant clergy is workable most of the time.

Putin understands that in supporting his state church he is supporting himself and the morals and thus the fertility of the population needed to strengthen his state. That makes sense, as well as being traditional. And it's not only Russians that can figure out that a ruler who intends to strengthen his nation can achieve his political ends in part by bolstering the national religion.

Henry VIII would not have understood Charles' desire to renounce the title "Defender of the Faith" in favor of the vacuous phrase "Defender of Faith". He would have found the lack of appetite for power as alien as the practical atheism it implies.

Blogger jaericho July 15, 2014 11:28 AM  

There seems to be several of my confessional lutheran brethren here. I like that.

Anonymous RedJack July 15, 2014 11:30 AM  

CM,

I grew up with a lot of friends in the ELCA (well, in its earlier forms) They all said the same thing as the ELCA went slouching to Gommora. "My kids will be safe. Our home parish is fine, our home bishop is fine. I have transmitted my values.".

Most of them left for school and came back full blown liberals, if not atheists.

In my LCMS church, that didn't happen to a great extent. When you leave town and go to another LCMS church, you don't have to worry about Rudy Tutty Fruity having a Gay Mass on the altar.

I will pray for you, but if you are a parent you have to remember that it isn't just about you. Your children's souls hang in the balance. If you love the Anglican rite there are many Anglo Catholic parishes around.

Blogger John Wright July 15, 2014 11:31 AM  

@gnardopolo
"It's not a matter of traditionalism in my church any more than it is in the Roman Catholic church. If you believe God is directing you, blessing you, and teaching you, then you do things His way, not yours. "

God bless the Mormons. You guys actually 'get it', you understand when the issue is and what is at stake.

I saw two Mormons biking down the street yesterday and pointed them out to my children. "Those are the Latter Day Saints" I said. "How do you know, Daddy?" "They are wearing white shirts and ties. Mormons are always squared away, and they are out in the heat of the day knocking on doors and trying to save souls. If my people had half of their moxie, you'd see a flock of Nuns knocking on doors, too."

I don't agree with your theology, but in time of spiritual war, I am happy to share a foxhole with a Mormon.

Blogger CM July 15, 2014 11:32 AM  

Well, at the risk of offending my Protestant brothers in Christ, there is one universal, catholic, ecumenical and international Church which has been around not for your five hundred years but for two thousand.

Yes... and I come from a theological tradition that believed it was part of it.

But even so, the new Pope seems to be doing his best to apologize for the Catholic church's antiquated ways.

Again, I'm not a Catholic because I disagree with some aspects of their theology. I'm coming from a position that goes past politics and into the theological tradition it holds to.

And I don't really think we need a debate on what that is as ports and catholics have been debating those issues for centuries.

Anonymous Porky July 15, 2014 11:33 AM  

Well, at the risk of offending my Protestant brothers in Christ, there is one universal, catholic, ecumenical and international Church which has been around not for your five hundred years but for two thousand.

RCC. Come for the history. Stay for the unbridled pederasty.

Anonymous Stilicho July 15, 2014 11:34 AM  

Well, at the risk of offending my Protestant brothers in Christ, there is one universal, catholic, ecumenical and international Church which has been around not for your five hundred years but for two thousand.

(Leaving aside the older, Orthodox Church which claims the same universality) Is your church immune to the corruption and venality? Is survival an adequate argument for acceptance (even if passive) of corruption, venality, or even false teachings? Finally, in what respect is the Word or Christ's Church dependent upon the institution known as the Roman Catholic Church?

Blogger CM July 15, 2014 11:36 AM  

I will pray for you, but if you are a parent you have to remember that it isn't just about you. Your children's souls hang in the balance. If you love the Anglican rite there are many Anglo Catholic parishes around.

I have never heard of this before, so most of my comments and positions are coming from a perspective that my only options are lutheran, catholic, presby, methodist, and baptist.

I'll see if there are any of those around us.

Blogger CM July 15, 2014 11:43 AM  

s your church immune to the corruption and venality? Is survival an adequate argument for acceptance (even if passive) of corruption, venality, or even false teachings?

I suppose this is where I stand, as well. I have a church that has sound teaching. And I need to trust that God will reward faithfulness for teaching my children scripture and apologetics.

Anonymous RedJack July 15, 2014 11:44 AM  

They are an Ordinate, and part of the Roman Catholic church but still have the old Anglican liturgy.

I have visited a few with extended family, but I have no idea how widespread they are.

Anonymous True Neoreactionary July 15, 2014 11:48 AM  

The problem is NOT Roman Caltholics, guys. the REAL problem is Protestants are heretics. Yes, even our baptist host here Vox Day is as much a heretic as the most evil gnostic cult. And that's a BIG problem. The term ‘Protestant’ signifies the amorphous mass of non-Latin heresies formed since the 16th century in the West in contradiction or retaliation to the Roman Catholic Church. Whereas the one dogma that binds all Roman Catholics past and present together is submission to the Pope as sole authority (thereby abolishing every other authority), the one dogma that all Protestants have in common is the rejection of the need for submission to any rule for salvation, other than one’s own private opinion (about everything). Undoubtably, within Protestantism there are many opinions and contrary beliefs, but they all base their religion ultimately in a rejection of external authority as needed for salvation. What Rome began with rejection of all authority save that of the Pope, Protestantism finished by rejecting the authority of the Pope as well. This results in an indifference to and a severance from the Body of Christ, the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, the sole Church founded by Him and His Apostles. Among the innumerable heresies found among Protestants (the number of ‘denominations’ in the world currently exceeds 26,000), there are: denial of the priesthood and all mysteries (baptism, eucharist, etc.), denial of the saints and their ability to intercede for us, assertion that the character of one’s life is a matter indifferent for salvation - only confession or lack of confession that Jesus is your Savior affects one’s salvation, rejection of Apostolic tradition and the Church as authorities, predestination or the arbitrary election and damnation of men by nothing but a divine whim, millenialism or chiliasm, and many others.

Blogger CM July 15, 2014 11:51 AM  

And as if I needed any help, neoreactionary just summed up some of my biggest theological contentions with the Catholic church.

Anonymous Stilicho July 15, 2014 12:00 PM  

TLDR version: no man cometh unto the Father except by the Pope (and assorted mummery). This type of ignorance is what gives Roman Catholics a bad name.

Anonymous Daniel July 15, 2014 12:01 PM  

No one noticed that the crying priestess is literally a Kat lady?

Anonymous patrick kelly July 15, 2014 12:09 PM  

"Yet another proof that St.Peter's earthly throne is the One Holy Church. The gates of hades have been prevailing against the rest of every single quasi-church.

Never heard of Vatican II, I take it? Or Liberation Theology? Or pedophile priests?

Apparently he hasn't heard anything about the new pope either."

and totally unaware of the Eastern Orthodox Churches....

Anonymous patrick kelly July 15, 2014 12:14 PM  

"It becomes our duty as Christians to read carefully and use reference materials such as Strong's."

So much for sola scriptura..... you know there are a bunch of people who can pretty much read existing old manuscripts in a language very close to their current vernacular, and they likely disagree with much of your interpretation and application of those scriptures.

"Aside from the Catholic Church, only the Mormons seem to hold out against modernism. "

Uh.....sigh......from the East all ya'll Romans look pretty modernized to us....

Anonymous words are not words July 15, 2014 12:18 PM  

you know there are a bunch of people who can pretty much read existing old manuscripts in a language very close to their current vernacular, and they likely disagree with much of your interpretation and application of those scriptures.

I interpret your words to mean you molest chimpanzees.

WHY DO YOU TOUCH THE MONKEY'S NAUGHTY PARTS???

Anonymous Porky July 15, 2014 12:19 PM  

Pop quiz:

What's worse?

A) The SFWA ignoring pedophiles in it's midst
B) The RCC systematically hiding pedophiles in it's midst
C) Parishioners who continue to fund B

Anonymous patrick kelly July 15, 2014 12:23 PM  

"WHY DO YOU TOUCH THE MONKEY'S NAUGHTY PARTS???"

Cuz they not quite as ugly as your sister.

Anonymous words are not words July 15, 2014 12:25 PM  

Cuz they not quite as ugly as your sister.

I interpret "sister" to mean "your mom." IS THERE A POPE IN THE HOUSE???

Blogger Chiva July 15, 2014 12:26 PM  

"Well, at the risk of offending my Protestant brothers in Christ, there is one universal, catholic, ecumenical and international Church which has been around not for your five hundred years but for two thousand."

No offense taken. I have the utmost respect for my Catholic brothers in Christ.

NeoReactionary talks much about authority. Is there a good historical resource of the formation of the Roman Catholic church? Specifically how that authority was given or granted. Not trying to be a troll, I am really interested in this.

Anonymous bob k. mando July 15, 2014 12:26 PM  

John Wright July 15, 2014 11:22 AM
Well, at the risk of offending my Protestant brothers in Christ, there is one universal, catholic, ecumenical and international Church which has been around not for your five hundred years but for two thousand.


well, at the risk of offending my Catholic brothers in Christ, there are multiple international Churches which are older than the Catholic church ( Orthodox, Copts, Oriental ) and which have introduced far fewer bizarre appropriations of the Babylonian mystery religion than the Romans.

Anonymous True Neoreactionary July 15, 2014 12:33 PM  

Specifically how that authority was given or granted.

Matthew 16:13-20

read it, memorize it, use it to shun heresy (including Amish and Bapitsts)

Anonymous Axeman July 15, 2014 12:34 PM  

Vox's rules for business apply here as well.

1. Don't hesitate. If you're to the point of voting and debating things that should have no debate, it's already time to leave.
2. Find good partners and hold them accountable to high expectations. The people you church with should be good, honest folk who won't make excuses for their failures and will do their absolute best to succeed. Pastors and leaders should be held to a higher standard.
3. Forget the concept of non-working hours. The wolves will try to get into things when you least expect it. Expect to be mindful at all times.
4. If something isn't working, cut bait immediately. Fail faster! Don't wait around for things to get better on their own. Either kick them out or move on. No middle ground!
5. Make progress every single day. Buns in the oven. Raise them right. Every great movement has a great mass of youth to carry the torch.

Anonymous A Visitor July 15, 2014 12:46 PM  

The hyperlink text made me think of this.

Blogger James Dixon July 15, 2014 12:54 PM  

> Matthew 16:13-20

Except for the minor matter that the Greek (which is the original text in this case) uses two different words for Peter and rock. Petros (Peter) and petra (rock).

Blogger Michael July 15, 2014 12:56 PM  

My son was talking to me about protestant ministers. He is a skilled tradesman – not college educated, but a good man and a war veteran. He said that he and his friends quit giving to church because he observed that: the pastor’s lived in better homes than he could ever hope to live in, drive better vehicles than he’d ever be able to afford, took better vacations than he’d be able to afford, went out to eat more often in higher quality restaurants than he was able to routinely do with his family, had more toys (motorcycles, camping trailers – the ones that require a big truck, airplanes, etc.), worked shorter hours than him. You couldn’t tell the difference between these pastors and the rest of upper middle class society.
Generally, the pastoral staff had a much better life and didn’t seem to do what the beatitudes said. The attitude was that if you’re going to talk the talk, then you should walk the walk. Here in the USA, take a look around you at the ministers and observe the life they live. You can draw your own conclusion. When I find some time later on, I can imbed videos from you tube.

Blogger Outlaw X July 15, 2014 1:09 PM  

It was only 21 years from when women were first permitted to become priests to this event, and in another 21, I expect the Church of England will be rapidly approaching its extinction.

Paraphrasing:
"When the Church becomes as the world that is the end of the Church, and I hear the world clanging all around me." - Pope Pius XII

Remember, the same snakes that have methodically destroyed these churches are at work in your church as well. They're always assiduous about being helpful, filling in the gaps, and working hard for the church body.

"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear. The traitor is the plague." - Marcus Tullius Cicero

Anonymous Not Michael July 15, 2014 1:13 PM  

RCC priests rape little kids... but protestant ministers drive nice cars. So there.

Blogger Random July 15, 2014 1:13 PM  

"Except for the minor matter"

Not minor, completely irrelevant and easily understood by everyone who knew Jesus wouldn't give a man a feminine name.

Blogger Me Guerrero July 15, 2014 1:19 PM  

heheh see? talking about the Theist vs Atheist intelligence, yesterday i was shocked at what Susan wrote, threatening with hell, is like she put a gun on me if i don't convert! her viewpoint is not THAT different from Muslim Sharia except that she implied to kill me afterline, most people are comfortable with the concept of God because is ... comfortable, but they are also becoming tolerant ,because is the right and intelligent thing to do C:

Anonymous Cheech And Chong Found God July 15, 2014 1:25 PM  

“There is a certain stupendously hideous layer of hell that awaits those who say they are believers but then do everything they can to willfully destroy their faith and their church.”

The believers themselves that what they are doing is righteous in the eyes of the Lord. Who are YOU to state otherwise as a non-believer of their brand of faith?


“A believer that willfully twists the Word to suit their own petty desires and disguise their shame is the worst of all things : Heretic.”



Assuming that YOUR standards of faith are “true”.


“David Cameron claims to be a Christian, even an evangelical, yet in his pursuit of maintaining pathetic power on Earth over a garbage nation, he sells out his own church.”



Debatable, to say the least.





“The slippery slide or the spiral dive began with man equals woman.”



In the eyes of the Lord, they are “equal”.


“They are much closer to complete anti-christianity than they are to true christianity.”

Only God will make that judgement.


“How about the Pope inviting the Muslims to pray to their pagan God at the Vatican in June of 2014?”

Bridging the gap between “competing” religions is righteous and just in the eyes of the Lord.


“The breakaway churches fling themselves headlong into secularism and perish.”



OR, they bask in the glory of the Lord, Jesus Christ, without concern about your scorn and contempt.


“Otherwise, you are knowingly accepting evil authority over you and your family.”


“Feminism, combined with witchcraft, lesbianism, goddess worship, and group therapy deconstruction and reprogramming, utterly destroyed the Catholic women's religious orders in the US in the 1960s-1970s soon after Vatican II.”

Gatekeeper talk.


"It's not a matter of traditionalism in my church any more than it is in the Roman Catholic church. If you believe God is directing you, blessing you, and teaching you, then you do things His way, not yours. "



And exactly what countless churches are doing, following things His way!


“Consider thousands of independent non-denominational churches, the Pentecostals, Southern Baptists, etc. Not just in the US, but ESPECIALLY in places like China, Africa, etc. I am not even counting Orthodox. In short, there are thousands of non-Roman churches that effectively holds the line 100 times better than your average Roman parish. I am unsure if you count all of above as "heretics and infidels"... but given your "hear hear" it's probably likely and unfortunate.”

HEAR, HEAR! Praise Jesus!

Blogger Michael July 15, 2014 1:26 PM  

HI not Michael -- When I was growing up and attending a protestant church, I went to see the pastor on a youth minister that was having a very difficult time with one of the 16 year old girls that liked to give out hugs. When I told him what was going on, he started yelling at me, turned red, that's all I remember. But I do remember that that protestant youth minister was gone at the next meeting, replaced by one of my teachers (about 7 years older than me) and her husband (who was leaving for Vietnam). The end of the story -- it goes on in protestant churches too, just no one goes and tells the pastor. The Roman church and not dealing with the priest who molested little boys? I don't know why, but now they will....

Blogger Vincent Castrillo July 15, 2014 1:29 PM  

CM - myself and no one else here will be able to convince you either way on what you should do or not do with your faith. I only respectfully ask that you consider how many times you used "I" or "my" in regards to faith in your last several posts. Is it not possible that the true faith of God cares little of how "you" are absorbing it, and merely exists despite your qualms or objections?

This has always been the issue with any Protestant offshoot. If "one" doesn't like or agree with something, simply adopt a prideful position "I'm smarter, I don't agree" etc. etc. and then you are free to believe whatever you want. In many ways it feels like shades of female solipsism. "I, my experience. my feelings"

If one is a Christian you are already using the overwhelming majority of the true Faith carried to you for 1500 years by Catholics, Orthodox, etc. How much you choose to dilute it is a human conceit, not a godly one.

Something to consider and I truly mean no offense.

Blogger James Dixon July 15, 2014 1:36 PM  

> Not minor, completely irrelevant and easily understood by everyone who knew Jesus wouldn't give a man a feminine name.

I only wish that were true. :(

Blogger Random July 15, 2014 1:41 PM  

"I only wish that were true. :( "

Your lack of acceptance of the truth makes it no less true.

Blogger Michael July 15, 2014 1:42 PM  

Hi James

I don't understand what you mean?

Anonymous The Biblical Church July 15, 2014 1:42 PM  

"This has always been the issue with any Protestant offshoot. If "one" doesn't like or agree with something, simply adopt a prideful position "I'm smarter, I don't agree" etc. etc. tand then you are free to believe whatever you want"

so, does the RCC support bald-faced lying propaganda? Because we both know that's what you are doing here.

Anonymous Tex July 15, 2014 1:44 PM  

Do you guys remember when Martin Luther pinned "I, my experience. my feelings" on that door? Good times, good times.

Blogger Vincent Castrillo July 15, 2014 1:47 PM  

Not interested in that worn out argument that every faith post seems to devolve into here. My original post that you linked to was clearly meant to ask the original poster to consider why he has so many "I" and "My" etc. in regards to faith. We are called to believe not to decide.

Blogger Michael July 15, 2014 1:49 PM  

Hi Biblical Church

I thought that we were supposed to have a professional discussion here? Am I right?

BTW -- Where did the protestant scripture come from?

Anonymous The Biblical Church July 15, 2014 1:55 PM  

Where did the protestant scripture come from?

What is "protestant scripture"?

Blogger Quadko July 15, 2014 1:56 PM  

Michael: the pastoral staff had a much better life and didn’t seem to do what the beatitudes said.

Yes, that's a problem just about everywhere. Long ago I heard something about the original Jewish tithe setup that stuck with me, "Any group of nine or ten family units who tithe could have a Rabbi live in their neighborhood and minister, teach, and study for them." Wouldn't that be a different and great way for pastors to work - with ten-ish "familys" to care for, plenty of time to specifically minister, relate, serve, and interact with peers. Much greater ability to "shepherd".

Blogger JaimeInTexas July 15, 2014 1:59 PM  

Loki Sjalfsainn: Scriptures teaches that "through one man sin entered the world" (Romans 5:12), that it was Adam's willful disobedience and lame attempt at accusing God (Genesis 3:12 "... the woman you gave me made me ...") that judgment was fallen. Though, unlike the angel's fall redemption was made possible by death being made a shadow under which we labor our lives. After the Fall, women try to usurp authority and men try to evade blame.

Blogger Michael July 15, 2014 2:00 PM  

Hi Biblical Church

It is whatever you are referring to.

Anonymous Porky July 15, 2014 2:05 PM  

The average compensation package for senior pastors and catholic priests is pretty much the same - around 80k/yr.

The RCC just also offers free access to little boys. Call it an "incentive".

Blogger JaimeInTexas July 15, 2014 2:09 PM  

True Neoreactionary and Goodfaith: When you try, for example, to determine when something is, do you reference case law or the text of the Constitution?

Blogger JaimeInTexas July 15, 2014 2:09 PM  

True Neoreactionary: Obviously we will disagree as to what you claim Matthew 16:13-20 says/means.

I will match you Mark 7. You can start at verse 5. The issue in verses 10-12 since it deals with a specific example at the time but the conclusion in verse 13 still applies.

BTW, I am a former Roman Catholic. I grew up in a place that at was once 92%, IIRC, (Southern Baptists were a curiosity) at one point and thoroughly Catholic in its culture. Yes, I do know the Roman Catholic Church.

Blogger JaimeInTexas July 15, 2014 2:12 PM  

True Neoreactionary and Goodfaith: When you try, for example, to determine when something is unconsitutional, do you reference case law or the text of the Constitution?

Blogger Michael July 15, 2014 2:12 PM  

Hi Quadko:

I think that the pastors shouldn't live better than the people they support. Before I became a Catholic, I used to think about Mother Teresa routinely. She lived with the people she served, had something like 2 pairs of shoes and 2 dresses. That was it. The rest went to serving the poor and destitute. They dying. I read somewhere that when she passed, on her lips were something like, " I love you Jesus"; this was even after the dark night of the soul. Where, when she was younger she had an encounter with him, then silence. She went on doing her job anyway. This is what she was called to do. At the end of the mass, there is a prayer about "vocations". My take on part of the prayer is that we are here for some definite purpose and it ask God to let us know. I will see if I can find an on line version and post it for those interested. OR if another Catholic is reading this, you can beat me to the punch and post it for me, I would appreciate it.

Blogger Michael July 15, 2014 2:16 PM  

Oh Porky -- you are just making up numbers about the Catholic priest. I know because of my priest has his in the financial statements. We will call me an accountant that puts me in a position to know.

BTW, Porky -- this is off topic, but how'd you get the name?

Blogger James Dixon July 15, 2014 2:35 PM  

> I don't understand what you mean?

I'm not surprised.

The Protestant view: http://www.gotquestions.org/upon-this-rock.html
The Roman Catholic view: http://www.ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/PETPOPE.HTM

The latter argues that it's an artifact of the translation into the Greek. The former that it means what it says and they are different things.

Of course those who argue the artifact of translation have the problem that this argument calls in to question the inerrancy of scripture, which Roman Catholics also accept.

Blogger Retrenched July 15, 2014 2:45 PM  

This.

Blogger CM July 15, 2014 2:49 PM  

I only respectfully ask that you consider how many times you used "I" or "my" in regards to faith in your last several posts. Is it not possible that the true faith of God cares little of how "you" are absorbing it, and merely exists despite your qualms or objections?

Except my use of "I" and "my" was an attempt to not call into question other people's convictions on this issue of which I sympathize, mostly agree with, and do not think are wrong or ungodly.

It is just that for "me" and what "I" have read in scripture, there is a place for those who would wish to preserve, uphold, and defend what was built on scripture and counter what the world around us is trying to do. And there is nothing unbiblical in choosing to worship with a group who, while flawed in a myriad of ways, are still open to what scripture has to say and submit to it even while struggling with their human nature and lack of understanding.

There are GOOD and GODLY things happening in the place I have chosen to worship. And I have no conviction to leave - biblically or otherwise. I have conviction to stay and speak God's Truth to those who will listen.

And YOU can't sit there and tell me what I believe I'm called to do (based on my gifts, passion, and the giving of the Holy Spirit, and the fruit of my obedience) is wrong unless you can point to the scripture that says so.

As to the fruit, one woman pursuing the priesthood gave it up while seeking advice from me. Another male priest has requested to hear my views on wifely submission. That's not a small thing. I believe God is using me where I am. And that is important.

Blogger njartist July 15, 2014 2:50 PM  

@ Chiva July 15, 2014 12:26 PM

NeoReactionary talks much about authority. Is there a good historical resource of the formation of the Roman Catholic church? Specifically how that authority was given or granted.

The Samaritan whore, founded by Simon Pater - known as Simon Magus - was given its authority by Emperor Constantine in the sixth century. (Odd how the Romanists don't discuss by what authority the Emperor gave such power to Rome; yet they are so quick to hold in contempt the authority of King Henry VIII.)

OpenID gnardopolo July 15, 2014 2:53 PM  

@John Wright: I have been in several different countries, but even here in the USA, the easiest way to find a Mormon is to look for young men wearing a white shirts and ties walking or biking down the road.

Anonymous Porky July 15, 2014 2:56 PM  

Oh Porky -- you are just making up numbers about the Catholic priest. I know because of my priest has his in the financial statements.

Well, you have a sample of one. I have the Bureau of Labor and Statistics.

It's an old stat (about $31,000 average salary as of 1998), but adding 3% cost of living increase + retirement + healthcare + automobile + food + unlimited use of little boys - it's easy to see how this can add up quickly.

BTW, Porky -- this is off topic, but how'd you get the name?

It was my parish priest's nickname for his pecker.




Anonymous Peter Pan July 15, 2014 2:57 PM  

"The Church of England finally voted yesterday to let women become bishops – to the anger of many traditionalists."

While they are far from the only red flag, female leadership is an inerrant sign of a church that does not take the Bible or Christian doctrine seriously. Once female leadership is embraced, it's only a matter of time before God is declared to be a Goddess, marriage is declared to be malleable, and the Crucifixion is declared to be some sort of poetic metaphor rather than a literal historical event.


I've seen this happen in my own church. I'm sure most of the Ilk is familiar with the LDS (Mormon) Church, but are likely unfamiliar with the RLDS. If you take away all of the weirdness of the Mormons (such as polygamy and sacred underwear, among other beliefs) then possibly you would have the RLDS... the way it was about forty to fifty years ago. By the early 1980's certain viewpoints had gained such strength that the members voted in favor of ordaining women to priest[ess]hood. As a result, there was a schism in the RLDS church and the traditionalists left while the RLDS became increasingly liberal and progressive. Now, thirty years after the vote, the above description by Vox is practically true if not literally true.

In contrast, the unorganized traditionalist remainder is under no inclination to ordain women, that being the reason they left. They have kept their biblical stance on all other issues as well, such as marriage and sexual deviancy. They continue to practice the principles as publicly stated and set forth by Joseph Smith Jr. (These are very different from the twisted version of beliefs and principles as fabricated, enforced, and attributed to Smith by Brigham Young, et al, after Smith's assassination in 1844.)

I bring this up only as an example supporting what Vox has said on the subject. The contrast between the RLDS and those who left the organization testify to his words. One group is visibly and increasingly liberal-progressive in matters of spirituality and subsequently everything else, and the other group practices fundamental Christian principles with high regard for biblical doctrine and everything such conservative views entail--both groups derived from the same entity but are now vastly different, and the point of divergence was literally ordination of women.

OpenID gnardopolo July 15, 2014 2:57 PM  

All this difference in theology obscures few broad points: first, that you can certainly believe in the ordination of females (homosexuals, children, or what have you), and still be a decent human being. You can also be a God-fearing, bible-preaching, seminary educated douchebag. The thing I am most wary of in this world is anyone who judges others only by what group they belong to, because it is always easy to tar someone with what is perceived to be the worst behavior of the group, and isolate, demonize, and destroy that group.

All Catholics are pedophiles. All Mormons are polygamists. All Muslims are terrorists. All atheists are idiots. All Amish are non-violent (I threw that in to show how even a positive judgement is still a judgement, and not true for every member).

Major theological changes, such as those happening in the Presbyterian church and the Anglican church are always going to be heralded by some as the dawning of a glorious new day, and by others as the first steps into hell. Among this ilk, I was surprised to see how quickly the debate went from the Biblical, or defensible, role of women in a Christian church into the yelling of "Papist!" and "Heretic!". Somehow I was expecting something more intelligent, or at least thoughtful.

Criticize me, criticize my church all you want. But it's not a rational conversation at this point, and I am unlikely to hear you.

Anonymous patrick kelly July 15, 2014 3:03 PM  

"The Samaritan whore, founded by Simon Pater - known as Simon Magus - was given its authority by Emperor Constantine in the sixth century."

Oh really? Sounds more like make-it-up-as-I-pull-history-out-of-my-ass crap. What is your authoritative source for information about a religion or church founded by "Simon Magus"? Where can I find more information about this 6th century Constantine and his interaction with them? Certainly can't find this it via "sola scriptura".

Blogger Michael July 15, 2014 3:03 PM  

Thank you James, I will look at the videos. In the Catholic Church, to know that you have something that can be relied upon, there is stamp, if you will, it says, Nihil Obstat (which means without error) followed with Imprimatur (stamp of approval) because most of us don't have the time to read through something, take it back to the source documents, then determine if the "book" is accurate. Now a book that I read (as part of my conversion process) is titled, " Why do Catholics do that?" A guide to the teachings and practices of the Catholic Church by Kevin Orlin Johnson, Ph.D. The ISBN is: 0-345-39726-6. One of the things that "hit me" the hardest was how the cannon was developed. It starts, of all places, in Egypt, with the Ptomlemy Philadelphus- succesor to Alexader the great. From why catholics do that, " He commissioned 70 Jewish scholars to come up with the standard cannon of jewish and a standard version of each book of that cannon. The collection of the forty-six books that the seventy men established is called the septuagint because the latin word for seventy is called septuagintus. It is often abbreviated LXX. The septuagint was used universally by Jews right up to the time of Christ. It's the only scripture that he and the apostles used" " When christ read from prophecy in the synagogue, it was the septuagints Isaiah tht he read from (Luke 4:16-21), when he said, "search through scripture (jn 5:39), he meant septugint. These are the books that let his disciples recognize him (jn 1:45), and reading them makes it hard to deny Christ is the messiah." This talks about the re write of the scripture here by eliminating books by the Jamina Jews, " To do this, they assembled a completely new version of Jewish scripture, omitting some books entirely and re-writing others. The result, which you call the Jamnin or Palestinian cannon, changed Judiasm forever." Here is another snippet, " That's why the Jamnian version of Jewish scripture appealed to them -- the rabbis of Jamnia had written it, after all, to remove the basis for a lot of the Christian teachings that the Protestants themselves were rejecting. So the Reformeres took the Septuagint out of their Bibles and substituted their own translations of the Jamnian canon." There is more to it. If you cannot afford the book, I will bet the library has a copy. Thanks again for responding.

Anonymous patrick kelly July 15, 2014 3:04 PM  

"Somehow I was expecting something more intelligent, or at least thoughtful."

Drink more, it helps.....

Blogger Michael July 15, 2014 3:06 PM  

Porky

I thought you were a protestant?

Anonymous Porky July 15, 2014 3:10 PM  

@Michael - I was just kidding about the priest naming his pecker "porky".

Blogger njartist July 15, 2014 3:13 PM  

St. Peter buried in Jerusalem - Mary's was also.

Anonymous Porky July 15, 2014 3:14 PM  

He actually named it "Señor Salchicha".

Blogger Michael July 15, 2014 3:19 PM  

Ok so you were not abused by a Roman Catholic Priest. Wow,

So you are taking about this guy? https://www.facebook.com/pages/SE%C3%91OR-SALCHICHA/113899905324101

Blogger CM July 15, 2014 3:19 PM  

All this difference in theology obscures few broad points: first, that you can certainly believe in the ordination of females (homosexuals, children, or what have you), and still be a decent human being.

If you mean rebellious and sinful, on the road to sanctification, as we all are, I agree with you.

Rejecting scripture is rebellion. For some, they have been sold lies and don't possess the integrity to search scripture themselves (we are all called to test everything on scripture).

While the biggies are Sin, the Godhood, death, & resurrection of Christ, and baptism (Hebrews), the rest are details. Important and needing redirection to The Word (incidentally, Christ) constantly, they are byproducts of our sinful nature.

It's when confronted by Truth (God's Word) and the open rejection of it that those here find problems.

Blogger James Dixon July 15, 2014 3:28 PM  

> Somehow I was expecting something more intelligent, or at least thoughtful.

New here, huh? There is intelligent and thoughtful exchange here, but it seems there's always something that re-triggers the old feuds.

> If you cannot afford the book, I will bet the library has a copy.

I'll keep it in mind, but I don't see how it's relevant to the particular subject.

Blogger James Dixon July 15, 2014 3:33 PM  

> ... first, that you can certainly believe in the ordination of females (homosexuals, children, or what have you), and still be a decent human being.

Females? Sure. What you can't have is the apostolic succession, which the CoE claims to have. Christ didn't have any female apostles.

The others? We'll just have to disagree.

Blogger Michael July 15, 2014 3:44 PM  

I read all the time. I never have time to respond. Work sucks up about 10-11 hours per day. I spend my days dealing with CEO's, senior management, professionals, and lawyers. I just cannot use my employers computer to write anything, so I use a phone or an ipad. The darn Ipad doesn't seem to let me post anything. I have given up trying to use it. I am writing a long - legal type of brief today at home, so I can use my own personal computer. Any discussion of religion or politically incorrect (from their perspective) items on my employers computer would be bad news for me. They are very sympathetic to the progressives. Unfortunately, someone has to be able to do the technically hard work. My experience is that not many can get the work product out that is satisfactory.

Blogger Hermit July 15, 2014 3:49 PM  

@njartist

The muslim worship the same God of Abraham: YHWH. There is a reason Christianity, judaism and Islam are called abrahamic religions, they worship the One.
They do not know his name, as we don't, and call him with the 99 names (the merciful, the powerful, the eternal etc..). The common word they use is Allah.

Saying that Allah is a pagan god is simply not true. As I said Allah is just their erroneous view of the One true and only God that we worship after he sent his son on Earth.

Islam is a mix of heretic christianity, judaism and some folk helements from Arabia.
There is some truth in it but it is buried under those errors.
Allah is YHWH but their comprehension of him is distorted by the heretical and the local arabic helements.

Around 600 AD when the christians in the middle east were attacked for the first time by the caliphate they tought at first it was a christian heretical sect.

Anonymous Porky July 15, 2014 3:50 PM  

Señor Salchicha

Blogger Sherwood family July 15, 2014 3:53 PM  

All of this reminds me of a Bugs Bunny cartoon titled 14 Carat Rabbit where the starting quote sets the scene in the Klondike Gold Rush with a sign that says: "The Klondike - Where Men are Men, and Women are Women - A Darn Good arrangement."

That is what saddens me. The men have in large measure ceased to be men, the women want to become men in their place, and the arrangement that God created when He place Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden is under continual assault by those who do not recognize how darn good the arrangement was. The worst part is that the women pushing to take over the positions previously occupied by men do so, not out of a hatred for men (typically) but out of violent self-loathing for themselves and their God-given role as women.

Blogger John Starks Ghost July 15, 2014 4:04 PM  

True Nonreactionary - Your kidding right? Please tell me that your are.....with all of the well documented crap that popes have pulled in the past I am supposed to, as a protestant, look at myself as some heretic? Oh please....Popes who carry on sexual relations, facilitate and arrange for the murder of their rivals, dig up the corpse of their predecessor put them on trial and declare all of their proclamations or what have you null and void, protection and cover up of pedophile priests, collection of money to "pay your way out of purgatory" because I guess Christ dying for you sins just wasn't quite enough for someone to make into heaven, etc. These are the men we are supposed to hold up as ultimate authority here on earth......they can be as immoral and corrupt as any politician.

Blogger Michael July 15, 2014 4:05 PM  

Off topic, but a thank you to a female member of the ILK that posted a link to audiosancto.org. which lead to sensus traditionis.org. I enjoy it, and thank you again...

Blogger JaimeInTexas July 15, 2014 4:08 PM  

"Of course those who argue the artifact of translation have the problem that this argument calls in to question the inerrancy of scripture, which Roman Catholics also accept."

Inerrancy only applies to the originals and not to translations.

That is why there are things as interlinear Bibles, Bibles with 3 or 4 columns, each with a different translation of the passages, side by side, for comparison. Sometimes, one of the columns is an interlinear.

BTW, an interlinear Bible has a line in the original (Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek) with the target language words in the following line. Then, you can use a dictionary or a String's Concordance to compare with the translations. A common sight in an evangelical church's Sunday school.

Blogger JaimeInTexas July 15, 2014 4:14 PM  

And, when the RC begins to allow priests to marry?

Which would be a good thing. The RC just need to disallow married priests from becoming popes. No, no divorced popes either.

Blogger James Dixon July 15, 2014 4:20 PM  

> Inerrancy only applies to the originals and not to translations. ... in the original (Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek)

The Greek is the one that uses two different words. And since this is the New Testament, that is the accepted original.

Anonymous Sigyn July 15, 2014 4:24 PM  

As I said Allah is just their erroneous view of the One true and only God that we worship after he sent his son on Earth.

Like an impostor is just an "erroneous view" of the actual person.

Anonymous Sigyn July 15, 2014 4:27 PM  

BTW, an interlinear Bible has a line in the original (Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek) with the target language words in the following line. Then, you can use a dictionary or a String's Concordance to compare with the translations. A common sight in an evangelical church's Sunday school.

It's also available online.

Blogger SirLopan July 15, 2014 4:36 PM  

“He said that he and his friends quit giving to church because he observed that: the pastor’s lived in better homes than he could ever hope to live in, drive better vehicles than he’d ever be able to afford, took better vacations than he’d be able to afford, went out to eat more often in higher quality restaurants than he was able to routinely do with his family, had more toys (motorcycles, camping trailers – the ones that require a big truck, airplanes, etc.), worked shorter hours than him.”

If you attend a church and do not contribute, unless you are under dire economic circumstances, you are a deadbeat. The building that shelters you has a cost. The bulletin and hymnal that you are reading has a cost. The utilities that heat or cool you have costs. The compensation of the pastor, the keyboardist, office personnel is an internal organizational issue. Sure, no one should be getting rich while the paint is pealing off the wall, nor should the priest be dressed in sack cloth and sleeping on a park bench after preaching at the Westminster. If you don’t approve of how the church is run, don’t go there. You contribute at a church to give something back to God for your existence, not as some proportional quid pro quo. The truth is that, apparently to those who the means to support these pastors, their work is worth far more than your trade. The practice of not contributing because of jealousy and resent simply makes one (like all progressives) a thief of sorts. God may forgive you (if you are actually one of His, which I doubt). A Christian will forgive you. But that forgiveness does not change what you are. It is a mystery to me why someone so petty would even bother to attend a church or dabble in empty, ritualistic Christianity at all when they clearly not a legitimate participant in the faith.

Blogger Matamoros July 15, 2014 4:55 PM  

bob k. mando: well, at the risk of offending my Catholic brothers in Christ, there are multiple international Churches which are older than the Catholic church ( Orthodox, Copts, Oriental ) and which have introduced far fewer bizarre appropriations of the Babylonian mystery religion than the Romans.

Actually you would do well to study history. All those you list are break-aways from the Catholic Church. Why do you think the creed says, "I believe in one, holy, Catholic, and apostolic church"?

You should read Vladimir Soloviev's "Russia and the Universal Church" for a better understanding of Eastern history. (lulu.com/rheims)

Blogger Matamoros July 15, 2014 5:02 PM  

Stilicho: Finally, in what respect is the Word or Christ's Church dependent upon the institution known as the Roman Catholic Church?
The Word/Bible was put together by the Catholic Church, and is her book.

Christ's faith dependent upon the Catholic Church - Matt. 16:18.

Matt. 18:17 - if he refuses to hear the Church, let him be to you as a heathen and publican.

Anonymous patrick kelly July 15, 2014 5:07 PM  

""I believe in one, holy, Catholic, and apostolic church""

Nothing Roman mentioned there.....study those who wrote that creed and why, and what they meant by "Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic church".......we Orthodox still recite it that way, and we ain't from Rome....there has been a long historical conversation about who split from who and why, not hidden from anyone who wants to find it......

Blogger James Dixon July 15, 2014 5:28 PM  

> Actually you would do well to study history. All those you list are break-aways from the Catholic Church.

It could equally well be argued that the Roman Catholic Church is a break-away from the Orthodox Church, and the Orthodox Church has the dominant claim to the the title of the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church. And that ignores the Anglicans, who also lay claim to those traits.

Blogger James Dixon July 15, 2014 5:46 PM  

> Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic church

Catholic merely means whole or universal. The OED says "all-embracing", or specifically "Of or including all Christians"

Apostolic, I believe, merely means following the Apostolic Succession, with bishops and other clergy directly tracing their lineage back to the original apostles. If that's not correct, I would welcome correction.

I doubt Holy needs to be defined in this context. :)

I agree that none of these are explicitly tied to the Roman Catholic Church.

Blogger Bard July 15, 2014 5:47 PM  

"Yet another proof that St.Peter's earthly throne is the One Holy Church. The gates of hades have been prevailing against the rest of every single quasi-church."

This is proof of the same blindness affecting the English church. Scandal upon scandal but it is the One... HOLY... church? What more will it take before the scales fall from your eyes.

BTW, Gates are defensive, not offensive. They aren't attacking. If it said the "Hordes of hell will not prevail", I could understand. Their gates are supposed to fall from our assault.

Blogger James Dixon July 15, 2014 5:48 PM  

Hmm. Make that are explicitly tied exclusively to, or perhaps just are exclusively tied to. Take your pick.

Blogger Bard July 15, 2014 5:51 PM  

Except we aren't assaulting anything but windmills.

Anonymous Al July 15, 2014 7:15 PM  

@LS

Liberation Theology is not an official position of the Chruch and, under John Paul II and the then Cardinal Ratzinger, its influence was severely undermined and redirected.

Only in the same way that governments have been pushing "austerity" (i.e. marginally lower DEFICITS) in the current economic crisis. I live in the world's largest Catholic country by population, Brazil. The Church here is Liberation Theology root, branch and leaves, with very rare exceptions. Liberation Theology is only weak in places where it has never been strong (i.e., Europe and the US).

And while you can argue that Vatican II changed the Church in certain ways, whether for the good or for the ill, you cannot properly argue that that change introduced fundamental compromises to the core tenets, doctrines and principles of the Church.

Are you nuts? Plenty of people, including plenty of Catholics, argue precisely that. In fact, if you just go with common sense and the obvious meaning of the words, the thing is both almost indisputable and actually commemorated if you spin it right. (I.e,. "Vatican II was a springtime and put an end to the old, desiccated, fading tradition-bond Church, wasn't it, Father?" "Of course", say 99,77% of Catholic priests worldwide). And have you never head of the Society of Saint Pius X and their interminable dispute with the Vatican?

* I didn't take the "99,77%" out of my ass. See here:

http://centurioweblog.blogspot.ch/2014/07/forecast-for-number-of-active.html?m=1

Blogger Quadko July 15, 2014 7:20 PM  

St.Peter's earthly throne is the One Holy Church.
Yeah, but I don't worship St. Peter. I'm only concerned with Jesus' throne. ;P j/k
And I'm glad to see the Orthodox churches are finally getting some love in this squabble.

Humor aside - PCUSA's faceplant the last few years definitely shows that you should "remain and fight if you care." The denomination split after a close vote on homosexual issues to "conservative" ECO a few years ago predictably lead to a new PCUSA vote this year by everyone who remained - and gee, so many of the "conservatives" had left that the vote was overwhelmingly secular lefty pro-homosexual and anti-Israel in political and socially left methods. All things the left couldn't get even from PCUSA suddenly delivered on a silver platter once the more conservative branch abandoned the organization and stopped holding the line.

So if you don't care, of course leave. But why let them infiltrate and take over an organization you care about? When you leave, they will win. They know this. That's their goal. That's why they don't leave when they lose votes - they just keep irritating you until you leave and they win. Then they get to use and misuse the name, history, and reputation (such as it is) of your organization.

Anonymous Varenius July 15, 2014 7:29 PM  

I would throw Eastern Orthodoxy into the mix of those who are pretty resistant to such things.

I fear that won't always be true, especially as it expands in the West outside of its traditional ethnic enclaves. Orthodoxy's relative isolation has been one thing protecting it, and as that fades it may be wracked by the same corrupting social influences bringing down other churches.

Anonymous Cheech And Chong Found God July 15, 2014 7:33 PM  

“Christ didn't have any female apostles.”



Well, it was a group of women who were the first to know about Jesus’ resurrection...

But very early on Sunday morning the women went to the tomb, taking the spices they had prepared. They found that the stone had been rolled away from the entrance.  So they went in, but they didn’t find the body of the Lord Jesus. As they stood there puzzled, two men suddenly appeared to them, clothed in dazzling robes…  It was Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and several other women who told the apostles what had happened. (Luke 24: 1-4, 10)


“Islam is a mix of heretic christianity, judaism and some folk helements from Arabia. There is some truth in it but it is buried under those errors.”



Only non-believers of Islam would make that false characterization.


“The worst part is that the women pushing to take over the positions previously occupied by men do so, not out of a hatred for men (typically) but out of violent self-loathing for themselves and their God-given role as women.”

With tens of millions of women practicing a particular faith and doing God’s work, this statement is incredibly ignorant.

Anonymous Varenius July 15, 2014 7:35 PM  

OT: Patrick Kelly, does the name "St. Tikhon's House" mean anything to you? I think we may have met in real life.

Anonymous Varenius July 15, 2014 7:55 PM  

JaimeInTexas: When you try, for example, to determine when something is unconsitutional, do you reference case law or the text of the Constitution?

The more appropriate statement would be: When you try to understand the meaning of the Constitution, do you study only the text itself, or do you also reference materials that give it context and explain the use of language at the time of its writing?


Blogger JaimeInTexas July 15, 2014 8:06 PM  

Yes. But, when in your study you realize that is in conflict with one side and in agrerment with another? The text must be understood within the context and usage in common at the time it was written.
When the RC is in clear contradiction of Scripture, the RC is to corrected.
There is value in traditions and rites but they must not be put on the same plane as Scriptures.

Anonymous Varenius July 15, 2014 8:39 PM  

The text must be understood within the context and usage in common at the time it was written.

Yes, and in the case of Scripture, this means among other things going back to what the earliest Christians understood them to mean. Thus I will take the interpretations of the Early Fathers over what anyone else of any denomination claims to be their true meaning. And it is the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches that adhere most closely to the Early Fathers.

When the RC is in clear contradiction of Scripture, the RC is to corrected.

Of course, but the question is: what constitutes "clear contradiction"? This goes back again to interpretation, and what our basis for it is.

Blogger Michael July 15, 2014 8:50 PM  

Wow sirlopan.! Sounds like an excellent business plan!

Blogger Michael July 15, 2014 9:05 PM  

Pastor flying airplane. http://youtu.be/Gqhv58azeUU

Anonymous Porky July 15, 2014 10:04 PM  

Priest's 43 million dollar bachelor pad.

Blogger Michael July 15, 2014 10:41 PM  

Thank you for pointing this out. Wow..... At least the church is moving him out and turning it into something useful. That's a problem when you don't own the property. The land lord can come in and kick you out of the bachelor pad. The church handled it quickly ( for the Catholic Church).

Pope Francis on Tuesday effectively fired a German bishop who had attracted controversy for extraordinary expenses on a new diocesan center, sending a signal that he is willing to oust bishops who do not align with his vision of a "poor church for the poor."

So what do you make of this guy?

At Lakewood Church, Joel Osteen proclaims,"It's God's will for you to live in prosperity instead of poverty." The pastor of the Houston megachurch and wife Victoria certainly practice what they preach.

The couple has moved to a $10.5 million mansion in River Oaks, while keeping their former Tanglewood residence, valued at $2.9 million.

They are, however, selling a vacant lot next to their former home. Asking price for the half-acre property at the corner of Doliver and Sherbrooke: $1.1 million. Martha Turner Properties has the listing.

http://houston.culturemap.com/news/real-estate/07-04-10-after-move-to-river-oaks-joel-osteen-wants-to-sell-tanglewood-land-for-11-million/

Blogger John Wright July 15, 2014 11:14 PM  

@Bard
"BTW, Gates are defensive, not offensive. They aren't attacking. If it said the "Hordes of hell will not prevail", I could understand. Their gates are supposed to fall from our assault."

This is why it is useful to have a Magesterium to help interpret scripture, so that you can call on experts. Once such expert pointed out to me the meaning of the passage: the gates of a walled city was where in the ancient Near East the government met to discuss public business.

This is why, for example, in the story of Ruth, Boaz goes to the city gate to settle the marriage obligations with his cousin.

In other words, the word 'gate' was used the same way we might use the word 'agora' or 'throne' or 'town hall' not to refer to the town square or the king's chair or to a building, but to the officers and power of the government.

'The Gates of Hell' means 'the princes and assembled government of hell', not the big doors covering an archway in a city wall.

OpenID rationalityofaith July 16, 2014 3:59 AM  

Whenever people speak of how we need to change the church to attract more people, I am reminded of this report from an Anglican vicar about a woman student he spoke to about woman priest:

"She was a Christian sharing a house with a number of non-Christian women, all of whom were glued to the television news. As the result was announced from General Synod, a great cheer went up. "Oh," said my friend, "I suppose this means you're all going to start going to church, does it?" Embarrassment ensued all round."

Blogger ScuzzaMan July 16, 2014 7:31 AM  

@ Titus Didius Tacitus:

All you say (in your reply to me) seems accurate.

I was no commenting, though, on the origins or character of the Anglican Church itself, but on the deliberate untruth of the reporting on this subject.

The statement I quoted is a blatant, deliberate lie.

The truth is as far from this statement as it can be.

Par for the course in such reporting, I fear, but it needs to be pointed out, nonetheless.

Anonymous Stilicho July 16, 2014 8:11 AM  

So what do you make of this guy?

I suspect there is a special place in Hell reserved for such con artists.

Anonymous Porky July 16, 2014 8:22 AM  

Half million dollar home makeover for the cardinal.

We can do this literally all day long. The list of cardinals, bishops, priests, megachurch pastors and televangelists is indeed long.

But at the end of the day, the RCC still harbors criminal pedophiles.

Period.

Pointing the finger at Joel Osteen does not change that.

Anonymous Stilicho July 16, 2014 8:26 AM  

Matamoros, not one single reference to the RCC in those passages. Christ's believers, certainly, but not the RCC. The RCC argues from the assumption that it is the exclusive Church without properly proving the assumption. Moreover, the quote about the little rock (Simon Peter) and the boulder (the confession of Jesus as the Messiah) actually shows that the RCC claim about being the one true church is based upon a false, or at best faulty, translation. The attempt by the Bishops of Rome to arrogate to themselves extra-scriptural powers and authority is probably the single biggest problem the Protestants have with the all-too-human institution known as the Church of Rome. Thanks for your sincere answer, though. These things can be discussed amicably, contra what some commenters think.

Anonymous Porky July 16, 2014 8:29 AM  

Pope Francis on Tuesday effectively fired a German bishop who had attracted controversy for extraordinary expenses on a new diocesan center, sending a signal that he is willing to oust bishops who do not align with his vision of a "poor church for the poor."

So will Francis be selling his Vatican digs and moving into a double-wide or is he just another hypocrite trying to gain popularity?

Anonymous Luke July 16, 2014 10:05 AM  

Michael July 15, 2014 9:53 AM

"I cannot think of a mainline protestant church that hasn’t embraced the left. They all seem to follow the left’s script: abortion, homosexual marriage, pastors, women “priest”, and so on….."

What about the Southern Baptists?


" BTW – I had the CEO of a large business tell me a joke that I thought was funny and accurate at the same time. It goes something like this, “ Know what you call a man whose wife makes more than him?” , Answer, “No”. Answer, “ A pimp”."

I would have predicted "defendant".

Anonymous Luke July 16, 2014 10:13 AM  

The Biblical Church July 15, 2014 10:01 AM

"'The concept of "denominations" themselves -- of a single corporate entity "church" is phony, un-biblical and an invitation to Satan."

The Roman Catholic church is a denomination, BTW. ;)

Anonymous Luke July 16, 2014 10:25 AM  

John Wright July 15, 2014 11:31 AM

@gnardopolo
"It's not a matter of traditionalism in my church any more than it is in the Roman Catholic church. If you believe God is directing you, blessing you, and teaching you, then you do things His way, not yours. "

"God bless the Mormons. You guys actually 'get it', you understand when the issue is and what is at stake.

I saw two Mormons biking down the street yesterday and pointed them out to my children. "Those are the Latter Day Saints" I said. "How do you know, Daddy?" "They are wearing white shirts and ties."


I disagree vehemently here. First, the Mormons are technically polytheists. That, along with putting another book above the Bible (same thing that Muslims do) clearly marks them as NOT Christian. (Accepting as prophets allowed to set key doctrine people who clearly fail the Bible's tests for being such also arguably theologically condemns their organization as any kind of valid Christian church.)

Second, their claim to be "saints" is offensive gross overreaching, akin to calling all the women and REMF males in the US Army "real warriors", disease infectees "heroes" (no, they're just sick), etc. I don't think it's possible as a practical matter in America now to gather 20 real saints in one place at one time.

I do respect the Mormon penchant for early marriage, large families, proscribing female clergy, and clean living. (I do suspect that the prohibitions against booze are most of all so there's more money for young Mormon families to yield up to their wealthy overlords in Salt Lake City, to be sure.)

Anonymous patrick kelly July 16, 2014 10:47 AM  

@Varenius: "Patrick Kelly, does the name "St. Tikhon's House" mean anything to you? I think we may have met in real life."

Not particularly, but if you've visited any of the Orthodox churches in the Austin area we could have met. Or other places where deep conversations get deeper as the liquor flows and the cigars burn short.....

Anonymous Michael July 16, 2014 10:59 AM  

Note how none of the secular-atheists and others who demonize the RCC over sexual abuse never point out how less than half of one percent of all priests were ever accused, let alone prosecuted (look up the John Jay study) -- far from the "epidemic" the MSM constantly portrays. Also, note how they never illustrate how the majority of sexual abuse was homosexual, for obvious reasons. Never mind that children are 100 times more likely to be abused by teachers in public schools, relatives and others who have access to children. It's no accident how the LGBTXQNPF "community" constantly pursues access to children and turns everything into a propaganda platform for a sexual/gender free-for-all. Parents need to be more proactive in protecting their children from this state-sponsored assault rooted in moral relativism.

Anonymous Porky July 16, 2014 11:11 AM  

less than half of one percent of all priests were ever accused, let alone prosecuted

I'd call that a poor record considering that the pope himself says that 2% of all priests are pedos. The real number is likely much higher.

But of course you miss the point. It's not that they exist in the church. It's that they are protected by the church.

We had one in my church years ago. You know what we did with him? We moved him to another parish... oh wait, that's what the RCC does.

We sent the bastard to jail.

We all followed the Cardinal Mahoney case where his office hid documents, stalled legal proceedings for years, protected the priests, and continued to insult the victims in the press. The RCC is absolutely complicit.

And so are you.

Anonymous Luke July 16, 2014 11:30 AM  

Porky, my impression of the Catholic priest pedos is that most of the problem originated from the RCC bowing to outside pressure and letting a bunch of them into the seminaries back in the 60s and 70s. The (IMO misguided) requirement proscribing marriage is a distant second cause at most.

RCC black priests in Africa supposedly commonly treat that rule as a prohibition against marriage, not against having (mostly hetero) sex. A partial explanation why the RCC has less trouble getting priests in Africa than in the U.S.?

Anonymous Michael July 16, 2014 11:42 AM  

"I'd call that a poor record considering that the pope himself says that 2% of all priests are pedos."

No, he didn't. Again, the MSM misquotes him and runs with it to suit their agenda.

OpenID cailcorishev July 16, 2014 2:10 PM  

Porky, my impression of the Catholic priest pedos is that most of the problem originated from the RCC bowing to outside pressure and letting a bunch of them into the seminaries back in the 60s and 70s.

Close. Quite a bit of the pressure actually came from the inside, and started before things began changing in the outer society. Modernism was becoming a problem within the Church by the turn of the century; Pope St. Pius X and Chesterton both warned of it. Many in the hierarchy, like their counterparts in secular academia, began signing onto modern notions of philosophy and psychology well before they gained general traction. So by the 1950s, they were dropping the long-standing prohibition against homosexuals in the seminaries, under the theory that it was either okay or could be treated or controlled easily with therapy.

By the 1960s, radicals completely took over the women's religious orders, and the sisters who had been running the vocations offices began barring masculine, orthodox men who spoke against things like women priests, and the process accelerated drastically. Most of the molesters themselves were ordained in the 1960s and '70s, but the men who were bishops by the late 1970s in time to ignore their swishiness and start the cover-ups entered seminary back in the 1950s or earlier, when there wasn't much homo-friendly outside pressure to speak of.

Blaming it on celibacy is just stupid or trolling. These were homosexual men having sex with teenage boys. Letting them marry would only have provided them with beards, at best. Only a liberal, and an unusually foolish one at that, would think that a normal heterosexual man who can't marry would turn next to young men as an alternative.

Anonymous Porky July 16, 2014 5:01 PM  

Porky, my impression of the Catholic priest pedos is that most of the problem originated from the RCC bowing to outside pressure and letting a bunch of them into the seminaries back in the 60s and 70s.

The Mahoney cases date back to the 1930's.

Mahoney is still a priest in good standing even though documents reveal that he actively harbored pedos.

Anybody who gives money to the RCC is complicit.

Repent, assholes.

1 – 200 of 206 Newer› Newest»

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts