Snowbunny
Mexican Princess
- Jul 24, 2006
- 4,458
- 236
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
hola,
i agree with the general proposition that christians are supposed to emulate christ... and i also agree that his ministry seemed to have an informalness to it. i do not think this is an endorsement for what you are talking about OP.
though informal, Jesus, John the Baptist and the Disciples still provided the sacrements and very importantly they did not diminish their importance or meaning. though done in a river instead of in a font, baptism literally meant a new life in God, though done with bread and wine communion literally meant the body and blood of Christ, though done without a confessional men were literally required to say what they had done and repent of it.
i think the informality you notice is really one of necessity, Jesus was poor and a traveller... he did not have time and money for what we have today... but the fundamentals were the same, just in a more rustic format.
i contrast this against the 'informality' of what i see from protestant evangelicals like joel osteen (who i do like), where they do not bother with sacrements or creeds and seemingly their only connection to worship is that they talk about God alot and justify this by saying Jesus talked about God alot ergo they are being Christ like...
it's a different, incorrect, kind of informality that what the early Church used. i think the early Church's informality was really more a matter of needing to worship on a limited budget and underground so that the authorities did not constantly interrupt and kill people... it was not an attempt to break down the sincerity of worship.
que Dios te bendiga
i agree with the general proposition that christians are supposed to emulate christ... and i also agree that his ministry seemed to have an informalness to it. i do not think this is an endorsement for what you are talking about OP.
though informal, Jesus, John the Baptist and the Disciples still provided the sacrements and very importantly they did not diminish their importance or meaning. though done in a river instead of in a font, baptism literally meant a new life in God, though done with bread and wine communion literally meant the body and blood of Christ, though done without a confessional men were literally required to say what they had done and repent of it.
i think the informality you notice is really one of necessity, Jesus was poor and a traveller... he did not have time and money for what we have today... but the fundamentals were the same, just in a more rustic format.
i contrast this against the 'informality' of what i see from protestant evangelicals like joel osteen (who i do like), where they do not bother with sacrements or creeds and seemingly their only connection to worship is that they talk about God alot and justify this by saying Jesus talked about God alot ergo they are being Christ like...
it's a different, incorrect, kind of informality that what the early Church used. i think the early Church's informality was really more a matter of needing to worship on a limited budget and underground so that the authorities did not constantly interrupt and kill people... it was not an attempt to break down the sincerity of worship.
que Dios te bendiga
Upvote
0
Everyone still missing the point!
