Modern day Christian “Phariseesâ€

[Cornelius]

http://www.oikoumene.org/

This is the website of the Word Counsel of Churches. They are a group that is working for the "unity" of churches.In order to achieve this "unity" churches will have to let go of some truth, in favor of unity.

We have to not just stare at the front cover of this, we have to look at what these people (Like Bishop Tutu) is SAYING when addressing crowds. Two years ago in Boston, a friend of mine went to listen to him and he is all for ALL religions becoming one. So this "unification" of "Christian churches" is just the first step in a larger agenda......

In this WCC video we see how they started and by the end of the video they have moved into politics and were now also aiming for inter-faith relationships. Listen carefully , because they sound so "correct" but here is the unfolding of the modern pharisees that will in the end time, be persecuting those who will not join their "unification for peace" We will be seen as the "anti-peace terrorists" who are preventing the world from achieving their goal of peace.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NgI6tuz4 ... r_embedded

So: What happens to terrorists that are resisting world peace ?

Luk 21:12 But before all these things, they shall lay their hands on you, and shall persecute you, delivering you up to the synagogues and prisons, bringing you before kings and governors for my name's sake.

By the opening of the second video, we see that totem poles have been accepted as part of the celebrations. One can see the direction clearly now in which they are moving : Unity at the cost of the gospel http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7lN5ivp ... r_embedded

 

[francisdesales]

There are things about the Catholic Church I appreciate. You stand firm on the issues of sexual morality.

We all were until the 1930's. It's too bad so many groups have caved into the desires of man and society.

I think you should allow women to become priests, however.

That won't happen, ever, because of the understanding of Sacramentalism is KEY to Catholicism.

A sacrament is a unique encounter with Christ. The priest is "in the person of Christ", especially during sacramental celebrations. Thus, at Mass, the priest says "this IS MY BODY". Not "this is CHRIST'S BODY".

A woman could not say that because Christ was not a woman.

This has nothing to do with a lady's ability to preach and minister. No doubt, many could do that better. This is a matter of sacramentalism.

I think it’s good to have celibate priests, though you seem to be wavering on that. You wouldn’t have to do that if you had women priests, of course.

As far as I can tell, this discipline in the Latin church will not change, the Popes have been pretty firm on it. The people "wavering" are the ones who have a liberal bent and are missing out on the meaning of celibacy, as Paul speaks about it. The priest is a sign of Christ's TOTAL self-giving, and this includes having a family that pulls him away from being an alter-Christ.

We allow everyone (who intends to lead a righteous life) to take Communion—you don’t. I don’t know whose way is best. I suppose we wind up with former Catholics in our church who are barred from Catholic Communion.

To us, our unity is EXPRESSED by Holy Communion, not the other way around. Does that make sense?

Thus, we take that seriously. There are exceptions in dire emergencies where a non Catholic Christian could receive the Eucharist, however.

Regards

 

[francisdesales]

No one can know "the whole truth", that is nowhere testified to in Scriptures or in Christian Tradition. We are talking about GOD, even Paul sang out in praise on the depths of God and how we don't have a clue!

The Bible has not such teaching and I care nothing for traditions of men.

What is a tradition of men again? Leaving the church and following yourself would be a good example, quite frankly. Read Numbers 16 lately?

Jesus on the other hand, I trust. He said. Joh 8:32 and ye shall know the truth, and the truth ]shall make you free.

As USUAL, you twist verses around to make it say what you want and justify your church of one position.

Look at the context of John 8, He is talking about being a disciple of Christ, not about knowing everything about God. Following Christ leads away from a life of slavery. This truth will set you free. Be a slave to God or sin.

Nothing about "all knowledge" that is somehow piped into your brain because you decide to remain outside of the camp, where the Spirit dwells, in the House of the Lord...

More wishful thinking...

Of course this is related to our faith. If we believe God is not able to reveal all truth to us, then that is what we get. "Let it be to you according to your faith" If we depend on the revelation of our "church" then we also deserve what we get. We only will receive what they have received.

Keep dreaming. Every person I have run across who proclaims such fantasy are relying on themselves, not God. The proof is that these "churches of one" do not agree, thus, they cannot be receiving some fantastic magical pipeline to the knowledge of God. The Spirit dwells within the Temple, not outside.

Since God established the Church, we can be certain that God is not also attempting to destroy it or push men outside of it, as a kingdom bent upon itself will fall.

 

[francisdesales]

I am just pointing out that we COULD be more unified on many fronts.

We are never called to unify in spite of our error.We are called OUT of error into unity.

True, that is why Catholics and the Orthodox still have not united. We each claim to be in error in certain things.

I mean, even if we just use human logic, the RCC and the various other denominations will never unify, unless they unify under the leadership of the One Word Religions initiative . In my country Bishop Tutu is leading that initiative where religious tolerance is preached so that "peace" can be achieved.

False. The Anglican church in America has requested en masse to rejoin Rome. Over 100 parishes. A definite work of the Holy Spirit over the years, not something that happens overnight.

I don't know enough about the "One Word Religions initiative", but I am certain Rome is not about to preach error just to join it.

...

RELIGION
Ushering in the One-World Religion
By Wendy Griffith
CBN News Reporter

rest of the article here.......
http://www.prisonplanet.com/ushering_in ... ligion.htm

I REALLY do not want to unite with these people, do you? Are you seriously saying we should ? If yes, then you should be in serious prayer.

I think you are misunderstanding the purpose of these statements. They are just statements that recognize that we all seek out God in our own way. I don't see where everyone is going to give up their particularly specific beliefs and come to some consensus on theology. Nonsense. This is just a recognition that we are all people of prayer and that we respect each other's freedom to serve God and man.

If "NO" then you are in fact in agreement with me, that we indeed should be separated from those in error. Now, the thing is, most of us have some error and its only God Who can reveal it to us and its only God who can show us , out of what He wants us to come. That ONLY happens in prayer. It ONLY happens when we humble ourselves and ask Him what HE thinks about where we are.

We will remain separate from them, C, as far as sacramentalism. They WILL NOT BE joining us at the Communion table, the ultimate sign of unity among us, Christ Himself. They do not share in the one Faith, one Lord, or the one Loaf. Our Pope has written encyclicals that ensure that Catholicism will always remain distinct and the fullness of the truth given to man - but this does not preclude that we reach out to other people and say "Hey, we worship God, we desire to bring Him to all of mankind. We all seek Him out and desire to share Him with others". I don't see it as a "caving in" and tossing our doctrines out the window.

We aren't about to give up 2000 years of truth just to be popular, C. That is the opposite of love. Love is sharing the TRUTH.

Regards

 

[francisdesales]

Pope Benedict is openly calling for a "true world political authority" with "real teeth". At a time when many prominent world leaders are publicly calling for a "New World Order", to have the Roman pontiff openly declare that we all need a world government is more than a little alarming.

Pope Benedict said :

"There is a strongly felt need... for a reform of the United Nations Organisation, and likewise of economic institutions and international finance, so that the concept of the family of nations can acquire real teeth... there is urgent need of a true world political authority."


http://thefinalhour.blogspot.com/2009/0 ... -with.html

As usual, you cannot see the context. Rather than reading some blog, (opinions) perhaps you should go to the source of the story and read what the Pope is talking about and think for yourself here...

THEN, you'll understand why he is calling for a stronger UN.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8137849.stm

To help you understand the Church's view here, let me help you by citing the Pope himself...


"There is a strongly felt need... for a reform of the United Nations Organisation, and likewise of economic institutions and international finance, so that the concept of the family of nations can acquire real teeth... there is urgent need of a true world political authority," the Pope wrote.

The strengthened international body should work "to bring about integral and timely disarmament, food security and peace, to guarantee the protection of the environment and to regulate migration," Benedict said.

The letter, addressed to all Catholics "and people of goodwill", reminds them of their moral duties in financial dealings.

"Profit is useful if it serves as a means toward an end," he wrote.

"Once profit becomes the exclusive goal, if it is produced by improper means and without the common good as its ultimate end, it risks destroying wealth and creating poverty."

He warned that globalisation, properly managed, could "open up the unprecedented possibility of large-scale redistribution of wealth on a world-wide scale".

But badly directed, it could "lead to an increase in poverty and inequality, and could even trigger a global crisis".


The Pope is not calling for a "One World Government", but a more effective means of ensuring that people have access to basic human rights. Profit that exploits people is not in keeping with our Christiain faith. The Pope is not saying all nations or religions must unite to become one, but that the UN must have more "teeth" in implementing policy that directs or punishes nations that refuse to abide by universal natural law, such as the Golden Rule.

He is expressing the Church's view on social doctrine, which, if you bother to read James 2 or the Gospels, you'll find it quite in line with the Sacred Scriptures.

Regards

 

[Cornelius]

Nothing that you have said, disproves my point. But it proves what I am saying: You are speaking the view of your denomination and defending your denomination. If you were a Baptist, you would have been speaking the doctrine of that particular denomination. That is what people do who serve a system. They ALL do that, without fail. If they fail to do so, they fail their denomination. You HAVE to believe that the RCC is THE CHURCH or else you fail them. Any true (..........) (fill in the denomination) will do the same for their camp. Its human.

The Pharisees of our time are not stupid.

By no means. They have their flocks securely under their control. They have indoctrinated them with various methods. Fear not being the least of the methods. What they say, the flock laps up and in turn propagate again to others. Books are written to explain the doctrines that fill libraries and still it carries on. But they are lost in their religion , serving religion, serving a "Church".

 

[VertigoAge]

The recent discussion in this thread is probably very pleasing to Satan. He wants us to fight about our differences, to pass judgment on each other, and get caught up in the ritual details like the very Pharisees that are named in this thread. We all worship the same God, the same Holy Spirit works through us, and all denominations have dysfunction of man. Instead of trying to convert each other, we should turn our focus inward, and work on our own relationship with God. As for our ministries, we should help others to find that relationship, knowing full well that there are differences in how to do it.

A sacrament is a unique encounter with Christ. The priest is "in the person of Christ", especially during sacramental celebrations. Thus, at Mass, the priest says "this IS MY BODY". Not "this is CHRIST'S BODY".

A woman could not say that because Christ was not a woman.

Is there documentation to support this? I've been a Catholic all of my life and I've never heard that the Priest's body has anything to do with the Eucharist...

 

[elijah23]

I think you should allow women to become priests, however.

That won't happen, ever, because of the understanding of Sacramentalism is KEY to Catholicism.

A sacrament is a unique encounter with Christ. The priest is "in the person of Christ", especially during sacramental celebrations. Thus, at Mass, the priest says "this IS MY BODY". Not "this is CHRIST'S BODY".

A woman could not say that because Christ was not a woman.

This has nothing to do with a lady's ability to preach and minister. No doubt, many could do that better. This is a matter of sacramentalism.

I don’t know if this would stand up in “court.â€

You are a nice person.

 

[francisdesales]

Nothing that you have said, disproves my point. But it proves what I am saying: You are speaking the view of your denomination and defending your denomination. If you were a Baptist, you would have been speaking the doctrine of that particular denomination. That is what people do who serve a system. They ALL do that, without fail.

To include yourself. Don't be a hypocrite. We all defend our current paradigm, thinking we are right. You belong to a "system", just as much as anyone else, defending your own denomination, the church of Cornelius.

If they fail to do so, they fail their denomination. You HAVE to believe that the RCC is THE CHURCH or else you fail them. Any true (..........) (fill in the denomination) will do the same for their camp. Its human.

You too. No need to preach to me something that applies to your equally.

Regards

 

[francisdesales]

A sacrament is a unique encounter with Christ. The priest is "in the person of Christ", especially during sacramental celebrations. Thus, at Mass, the priest says "this IS MY BODY". Not "this is CHRIST'S BODY".

A woman could not say that because Christ was not a woman.

Is there documentation to support this? I've been a Catholic all of my life and I've never heard that the Priest's body has anything to do with the Eucharist...

What does "in persona christi" mean?
What is a sacrament?

Pope John Paul 2 in 1994 said that the Church has NO POWER to ordain women.

Seeing that the priest is "in persona christi" and that Christ is the BRIDEGROOM, married to the BRIDE, the Church, the church will NEVER have the "power" to declare a metaphorical homosexually union...

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/j...i_apl_22051994_ordinatio-sacerdotalis_en.html

Regards

 

[francisdesales]

I don’t know if this would stand up in “court.â€

Depends on who is the "jury" in this case...

You are a nice person.

You too.

Regards

 

[Cornelius]

Nothing that you have said, disproves my point. But it proves what I am saying: You are speaking the view of your denomination and defending your denomination. If you were a Baptist, you would have been speaking the doctrine of that particular denomination. That is what people do who serve a system. They ALL do that, without fail.

To include yourself. Don't be a hypocrite. We all defend our current paradigm, thinking we are right. You belong to a "system", just as much as anyone else, defending your own denomination, the church of Cornelius.

If they fail to do so, they fail their denomination. You HAVE to believe that the RCC is THE CHURCH or else you fail them. Any true (..........) (fill in the denomination) will do the same for their camp. Its human.

You too. No need to preach to me something that applies to your equally.

Regards

With one difference: I say , come out to be free . I agree with the Word Rev 18:4 And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come forth, my people, out of her, that ye have no fellowship with her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues:

You are saying : Rev 18:4 ......Stay in her my people, have fellowship fellowship with her sins, and that ye receive of her plagues:

 

[elijah23]

I don’t know if this would stand up in “court.â€

Depends on who is the "jury" in this case...

The Lord, of course.

 

[VertigoAge]

A sacrament is a unique encounter with Christ. The priest is "in the person of Christ", especially during sacramental celebrations. Thus, at Mass, the priest says "this IS MY BODY". Not "this is CHRIST'S BODY".

A woman could not say that because Christ was not a woman.

Is there documentation to support this? I've been a Catholic all of my life and I've never heard that the Priest's body has anything to do with the Eucharist...

What does "in persona christi" mean?
What is a sacrament?

Pope John Paul 2 in 1994 said that the Church has NO POWER to ordain women.

Seeing that the priest is "in persona christi" and that Christ is the BRIDEGROOM, married to the BRIDE, the Church, the church will NEVER have the "power" to declare a metaphorical homosexually union...

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/j...i_apl_22051994_ordinatio-sacerdotalis_en.html

Regards

Well, add that to the list of things I don't like about Catholic doctrine then... In Catholic school and church, I was always taught that the Priest was just an intermediary (for the Sacrament of Reconciliation for example) between us and God/Jesus. Even then, I don't believe that such an intermediate is necessary for all Christians. It is a good and suitable way to be forgiven, but not the only way.

Back to the matter at hand: I do not accept that the Priest becomes Jesus, when saying this is my body. I'm not particularly fond of your homosexual metaphor either... The love of God by a Christian through the Holy Spirit is not Eros love. There is no such thing as Homosexual Agape love in my book.

 

[VertigoAge]

I am a Christian. I am a Christian that believes in the presence of God in the Eucharist. I am a Christian who has an Autistic son that gets more out of the Catholic mass than he ever could form a Protestant service. He has a very hard time understanding sermons, but he worships God through the ritual of the Mass - something that is very comforting to an Autistic child. I'm a Christian that likes the fellowship and people of my Catholic church. I am a Christian who believes in Salvation by faith through grace (as now supported by the Catholic church). I am a Christina who appreciates the importance of works as an essential part of our sanctification, and who believes that the world could use a bit more "Catholic guilt" in our world of relativism where self-esteem comes first. That said...

I don't like: "from the chair" proclamations as Gospel and certain aspects of Mary (praying to her statue, her own conception being without sin, and the "ever virgin" rejection that Jesus could have had brothers despite the Bible referencing them). I am saddened by a checkered past that includes indulgences, hate, and other man-made influences. But there is no perfect church. No perfect congregation. It's my Church, warts and all... but I'm a Christian first, with Catholic as my subtitle. If that means I'm a Cafeteria Catholic that needs to be excommunicated, then so be it.

 

[francisdesales]

With one difference: I say , come out to be free .

Since you have error, you are not as free as you think...

I agree with the Word Rev 18:4 And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come forth, my people, out of her, that ye have no fellowship with her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues

Having problems interpreting simple passages, I see.

"Her" is the harlot, forces that move us to serve the world, rather than Christ.

Even in your state of error, you should have the intellect to realize this cannot apply to any particular Christian denomination or the Catholic Church, since they all preach Christ.

As usual in this case, you are twisting Scriptures to justify leaving Christ's Church and fellowship with her...

 

[francisdesales]

Well, add that to the list of things I don't like about Catholic doctrine then... In Catholic school and church, I was always taught that the Priest was just an intermediary (for the Sacrament of Reconciliation for example) between us and God/Jesus.

What you don't like about Catholic doctrine??? Interesting...

The priest is an intermediary, and more.

If you are Catholic, as you claim, what does the priest say when he holds the Eucharist aloft?

Consider carefully the answer and I hope you'll figure out why a woman could NEVER say those words in a Catholic worship service ("Catholic" would also include Eastern Orthodox, Coptics, and other orthodox Christians of the first millenium before our respective splits)

Even then, I don't believe that such an intermediate is necessary for all Christians. It is a good and suitable way to be forgiven, but not the only way.

Explain, please. Why are you Catholic, again?

Back to the matter at hand: I do not accept that the Priest becomes Jesus, when saying this is my body. I'm not particularly fond of your homosexual metaphor either... The love of God by a Christian through the Holy Spirit is not Eros love. There is no such thing as Homosexual Agape love in my book.

He doesn't literally BECOME Christ, I didn't say that - the priest is the sacramental presence. Perhaps you should read the Catechism "again"...

The "homosexual metaphor" is one made by many orthodox theologians, which help to explain why woman CANNOT be priests. Not because men are smarter, better at homilies, etc., but because Catholicism is a sacramental religion, where God comes to us through material and physical presence.

Of course there is no such thing as homosexual agape, which is why it cannot be. How can women be "persona christi" and be the bridegroom sacramentally, married to the Bride? The Bridegroom is celibate BECAUSE He is married to the Bride.


Regards

 

[francisdesales]

I am a Christian. I am a Christian that believes in the presence of God in the Eucharist. I am a Christian who has an Autistic son that gets more out of the Catholic mass than he ever could form a Protestant service. He has a very hard time understanding sermons, but he worships God through the ritual of the Mass - something that is very comforting to an Autistic child. I'm a Christian that likes the fellowship and people of my Catholic church. I am a Christian who believes in Salvation by faith through grace (as now supported by the Catholic church). I am a Christina who appreciates the importance of works as an essential part of our sanctification, and who believes that the world could use a bit more "Catholic guilt" in our world of relativism where self-esteem comes first. That said...

I don't like: "from the chair" proclamations as Gospel and certain aspects of Mary (praying to her statue, her own conception being without sin, and the "ever virgin" rejection that Jesus could have had brothers despite the Bible referencing them). I am saddened by a checkered past that includes indulgences, hate, and other man-made influences. But there is no perfect church. No perfect congregation. It's my Church, warts and all... but I'm a Christian first, with Catholic as my subtitle. If that means I'm a Cafeteria Catholic that needs to be excommunicated, then so be it.

Not excommunicated, eductated would be a better answer. It sounds more like you are a Protester, given your issues... Some self-education with an open mind will help you to understand your faith better and why we do and believe what we do...

Regards

 

[VertigoAge]

If you are Catholic, as you claim, what does the priest say when he holds the Eucharist aloft?

Before He was given up to death, a death He freely accepted,
He took bread and gave you thanks.
He broke the bread, gave it to his disciples, and said:
"Take this, all of you, and eat it: this is my Body which will be given up for you."

Four times, the priest uses the word "HE", not "I". In the last line, the priest quotes Jesus. He doesn't say, "I broke the bread... and said..." Also, the priest is addressing God here: "He took bread and gave you thanks". If the last line is a quote, it makes perfect sense... the priest is speaking to God using 3rd person to recount the events of the Last Supper (and the "you" in the last line refers the the Disciples at the table). Otherwise the whole tense switches for the last line only, and the priest goes from speaking TO God to speaking FOR God.

For the record, I'm not saying that women should be priests. I'm only arguing against some of your reasoning. However, as someone who served as an altar boy for a pastor that turned out to have raped two boys (friends of mine) repeatedly for years without anyone knowing... and another priest was borderline inappropriate towards the grade school girls... I'm sickened by the much higher degree of sexual depravity of priests than of pastors who can marry.

Explain, please. Why are you Catholic, again?

I explained why in my last post. I was baptized Catholic, and later in life sought out other perspectives so I could make my own decision. I went to a Presbyterian college and married a Protestant, but in the end, we decided that the Catholic Church was right for our family, despite some things that don't sit well with me.

The "homosexual metaphor" is one made by many orthodox theologians

Orthodox theologians through the years also said that your sins could be forgiven by paying money, and that you need to earn your way into Heaven by doing good works, and other things that go against the Bible. I happen to like the Catholic church that is repenting of the errors of its old ways (whether it be indulgences or "salvation by works") and looking for brotherhood with all Christianity, not the one that adopts a form of orthodox legalism.

 

[Cornelius]

b

Having problems interpreting simple passages, I see.

"Her" is the harlot,

Exactly ! :yes