If Protestantism is true, why they are not united? (2)

[Albion]

If only it ended there. It tossed out the Liturgy, the Eucharist and Baptism as well.

Hmm. They next time I'm in church and the liturgy, the Eucharist, and/or Holy Baptism are being administered or celebrated -- as at least 2 of the 3 of them are every time I am in church, I'll ponder your observation. Whether or not I'll laugh to myself, I'm not sure.

 

[MoreCoffee]

What was hated was the authority of the pope and bishops and priests and what came in its place was the unbending authority of bible verses. The former could often be wicked and abusive the latter has proven itself abusive and wicked. Was there anything gained?

 

[Albion]

What was hated was the authority of the pope and bishops and priests and what came in its place was the unbending authority of bible verses.

I'll think of that sage observation, too. I'll make a good story to tell my priest and my bishop. They may not realize that they don't exist anymore.

 

[Mama Kidogo]

Hmm. They next time I'm in church and the liturgy, the Eucharist, and/or Holy Baptism are being administered or celebrated -- as at least 2 of the 3 of them are every time I am in church, I'll ponder your observation. Whether or not I'll laugh to myself, I'm not sure.

Like i said, if only it stopped there. I did not include the Anglican church into that. I included Protestantism as a whole. Lest we leave out the Evangelicals. Or did they suddenly cease to be protestant?

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Cutting through all the verbiage, tell us 2 or 3 traditions extant in Paul's time to which we should hold.

No need - as it was already addressed earlier. Specifically, It was laid out plainly here - and it was also dealt with earlier here - if one really wants to deal with it, they can deal with it there - or go to From Shadow to Reality - Ancient Christian Worship

Now, Cutting through all the games (as there was enough verbiage sculley went through from you earlier), you need to show where Paul did not follow tradition. If you won't deal with where others already laid out their stances, it is inconsistent to even demand others do the same.

 

[MoreCoffee]

In England it was alien Episcopal supremacy that was the linchpin of Henry VIII's revolt against the Catholic Church. He was not opposed to the doctrine of the church on most matters and the issue of indulgences that ran hot in Germany was not hot in England.

 

[Standing Up]

Liturgical services. They were Jewish, so they just took the service traditions of the Jews and ran with it. There was sermonizing too, but Liturgy was a big part of the Apostolic era. It is actually shown through in the letters, too, where Paul would use very standardized methods of greeting, blessing, and farewells in his letters.

Feasts and Fasts. The Apostles and their disciples still kept the feasts and fasts of the Jewish calender. For instance, Paul was arrested while celebrating Pentecost in the temple.

We don't have any liturgical services that source to apostles. Feasts and fasts we do, but last I checked, EO OO RC aren't following those either.

So, they say follow tradition, but don't. And don't have any specifics.

 

[Standing Up]

If only it ended there. It tossed out the Liturgy, the Eucharist and Baptism as well.

P still does those things. They may understand it differently from EO, but so does RC. You ready to toss that baby (RC) out too?

 

[Gxg (G²)]

And then it kept removing everything else. Protestantism removed the context in which Scripture was given. It threw the baby out with the bathwater

Technically, as Martin Luther himself was addressing a tradition that was not based on what the Apostles did in their tradition for centuries, it was never his goal to have others remove the context in which scripture was given - but there were others who ended up taking the work done by him and making into something that no one ever had in mind.

Thus, the politics got in the way of real reform...and I honestly think that Luther, if seeing what Protestantism has become today, would be shocked at what others attribute to him since he did not encourage that when it came to his initial battles with indulgences and false traditions. Luther's passion for tradition was never about what other Protestants say today when it comes to exalting the Bible alone under the false narrative that the Bible was kept from people - as shared before here:

The lie that I am referring to is the one propagated by many ignorant Protestants that the Church withheld the Scriptures from the masses. That is a lie that has no foundation in history.

Where the Bibles chained in many churches? Yes. Why? Was it to keep the peasant from having one? No. It was keeping someone from stealing them, because a Bible during that time was a small fortune. On average it took a monk about 20 years to copy the Bible. 20 years! Not a few hours, not a few days, not a few weeks, not even a few years. Bibles were in short supply and it wasn't possible for individuals to have their own, unless they spent the time copying the words of the Bible for themselves.

Instead of giving the people their own individual Bibles, the Church did the next best thing. She read it to them, in the Mass and in the Divine Office each day. She illustrated it to them through the Sacred Art found in the Churches. She sang it to them through the Sacred Music offered.

The people then probably knew the Bible better than the people today, even though everyone has access to the Bible. Because the people then knew just how precious the Word of God is.

People have a problem of always equating what we have now to another period of time. Thus when they hear that Bibles were chained in the churches, they just assume that the Church just withheld those Bibles and prevented the people from getting their hands on them, because today Bibles are so easy to get. That hasn't always been the case.

I mean I got probably 10 to 15 Bibles at my house, could you imagine how much they would be worth 1000 years ago? If they were written in Latin of course.

Ironically...

For all of the claims of "Catholics kept the Bible out of the hands of people!!!", people end up forgetting that having it in the hands of everyone wasn't what happened after the Reformation anyhow - and even so, many Bibles and historical works were BURNED in protests others did toward Catholicism...monasteries destroyed and the poor harmed even further since there was a political side to things no one considered.


....Newspapers and gossip make a difference today - and it was the same then. For if not for the printing press, news of Luther's 95 theses would not have spread as quickly and the Protestant Reformation may never have occurred...but on the same token, many of the false narratives others spread wouldn't have occurred either.

Also, with the Reformation and books, there were several factors that tied things together since Reformation scholars note that four movements of reform in the Church antedated the Protestant Reformation: (1) northern Christian humanism, (2) Spanish clerical reforms, (3) Italian confraternities, and (4) the rigorist movement that called the church back to scholastic theology.

​

 

[Standing Up]

No need - as it was already addressed earlier - and Cutting through all the games (as there was enough verbiage sculley went through from you earlier), you need to show where Paul did not follow tradition. If you won't deal with where others already laid out their stances, it is inconsistent to even demand others do the same.

Three one line quotes doesn't come close to the paragraphs.

What tradition didn't Paul follow? Salvation by Law?

You trotted out 1 Tim about following tradition. Which tradition extant in Paul's time should we be following? A floating "easter"? What?

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Liturgical services. They were Jewish, so they just took the service traditions of the Jews and ran with it. There was sermonizing too, but Liturgy was a big part of the Apostolic era. It is actually shown through in the letters, too, where Paul would use very standardized methods of greeting, blessing, and farewells in his letters.

Feasts and Fasts. The Apostles and their disciples still kept the feasts and fasts of the Jewish calender. For instance, Paul was arrested while celebrating Pentecost in the temple.

The same dynamic with Eucharist can be added to the list as well, in light of the symbolism that was present in OT and NT analogies on the Jewish Sacrifical system and how sacrifices had a new light to be interpreted in when seeing the finished work of Christ - with Communion being done in a sense foreign to what many in Protestantism do today. The Traditions of the Early Church are consistent with the Jewish culture in regards to Communion and they all had no issue with the concepts of Real Presence when it came to the Eucharist. which was celebrated

In addition to that, there's the dynamic with architecture based on OT Designs, the practices of priesthood.....and the use of incense. In Revelation 8:3 we read, "And another angel came and stood at the altar, having a golden censer; and there was given unto him much incense, that he should offer it with the prayers of all saints upon the golden altar which was before the throne." Fr. Michael Johnson went much more in-depth on the similarities between the Liturgy and what is outlined in Revelations.. Orthodoxy truly offers the closest to reflection of what the scriptures testified to when it came to liturgical practices in the heavens. Early in my own spiritual development, it was amazing learning of the ways that incense adds an entirely differing dimension to how we see the spiritual.

What's fascinating to me is realizing the extensive ways that smell was a BIG DEAL in the early Jewish culture and other Eastern cultures - it was essential to know what scents needed to be picked up since that is a focus for the Lord. He went out of his way to mention it many times....and when seeing that theme present in Revelation at the end, I have to wonder why many make it out like it's not a big deal. one of my dear brothers in Christ/one of the leaders at one of the fellowships I attended gave an excellent presentation on the subject of Essential Oils and the various ones available that can make a difference in the health of our bodies - just as they did in the lives of the Saints/Early Church (and for others who wish, To listen to the audio, one can go here and here

There's an excellent book on the matter I am hoping to get a hold of in the future - entitled Scenting Salvation.

​

One can go here to Scenting Salvation | Citydesert for more - or investigate the following:

• THE OLFACTORY CONTEXT: Smelling the Early Christian World

Prayer like burning incense – Revelation 8:1-5..

There are so many other examples besides this which were mentioned earlier...

And for others within Jewish culture who have spoken in-depth on the matter, I seriously suggest people wondering follow the work of people like Father James Bernstein and other Jewish Christians who came into Liturgical camps (more in A Brief History of Jewish Conversion | The Groom's Family ) and Ancient Christianity because of seeing the culture they were told to honor being more than present..

Fr James Bernstein on: Beauty in Orthodox Worship - YouTube

The Jewish Roots of Orthodox Christian Worship - Fr. A.J. Bernstein - YouTube

 

[Standing Up]

And then it kept removing everything else. Protestantism removed the context in which Scripture was given. It threw the baby out with the bathwater, and because of that, it is a divided, disunited mess of conflicting doctrine.

If all one see's in the Body of Christ as those with whom one agrees (ie your EO, OO, RC, A, P, etc), then of course you only see the rest of the Body as a mess.

That, or no one but your group is the Body one thinks.

 

[Standing Up]

The same dynamic with Eucharist can be added to the list as well, in light of the symbolism that was present in OT and NT analogies on the Jewish Sacrifical system and how sacrifices had a new light to be interpreted in when seeing the finished work of Christ - with Communion being done in a sense foreign to what many in Protestantism do today. The Traditions of the Early Church are consistent with the Jewish culture in regards to Communion and they all had no issue with the concepts of Real Presence when it came to the Eucharist. which was celebrated

There are so many other examples besides this which were mentioned earlier...

Guesses. Undefined terms.

What oral traditions extant in Paul's time are we to follow?

Remember the context of Irenaeus.
1) Scripture only is authoritative.
2) Follow only tradition that ties clearly to apostles.
If you can't prove your tradition per #2, then we are left with #1.

PS. Since EO RC OO follows a fixed easter, rather than a floating Pascha, they aren't doing #2 anyway. Can you correct your group to align with, wait for it, Scripture?

 

[MoreCoffee]

Well, there is the tradition of not following people whose teaching differs from the message delivered by the apostles to the Church.

 

[Standing Up]

Well, there is the tradition of not following people whose teaching differs from the message delivered by the apostles to the Church.

We come full circle to Firmilian in 256ad, Rome does not abide the teachings of apostles.

Back to what the earliest church taught: Scripture is authoritative. Abide the traditions of apostles. I expect you can correct your group also about their fixed easter man-made tradition. Let me know if you need help.

 

[sculleywr]

Yeh, it threw out the sale of indulgences, the domination of the worldly and immoral Renaissance Popes, the trafficking in phony relics, Purgatory, and so many other corrupt practices and abuses of Scripture. I'm surprised that you'd so easily jump on the bandwagon of defending the status quo as it was at the lowest point in the history of the Christian Church.

The Reformation also threw out much of the Old Testament because Greek is hard, the wisdom and history of thousands of Christians from the early Church who gave them their Bible in the first place, the respect for Truth, and many other things.

 

[sculleywr]

We don't have any liturgical services that source to apostles. Feasts and fasts we do, but last I checked, EO OO RC aren't following those either.

So, they say follow tradition, but don't. And don't have any specifics.

I gave some evidences. Besides that, the term Liturgy appears in Acts in its Greek form. You could also point to the Didache, which was written contemporary to the Apostles, which gives a liturgical order to Baptism.

As to feasts and fasts, lay the Orthodox calender next to the Jewish calender. Observe how pascha (passover) matches the Jewish timing, as does Pentecost. Twice-weekly fasting, the Feast of Booths (Transfiguration occurred during that time), and others. With the addition of a few other feasts, our calender does hold a striking resemblance to the Jewish festal calender.

 

[sculleywr]

Three one line quotes doesn't come close to the paragraphs.

What tradition didn't Paul follow? Salvation by Law?

You trotted out 1 Tim about following tradition. Which tradition extant in Paul's time should we be following? A floating "easter"? What?

SU, perhaps you should be focusing rather on the fullness of what is meant by Tradition. Not practices, but teachings. The attitudes toward Eucharist, what it truly is, and what it means.

You're so determined that Tradition means practices, but it is not just practices. It's the DOGMA that matters, and the dogma is what practices come from

 

[sculleywr]

If all one see's in the Body of Christ as those with whom one agrees (ie your EO, OO, RC, A, P, etc), then of course you only see the rest of the Body as a mess.

That, or no one but your group is the Body one thinks.

The Body is not divided. To say it is divided or disunited is heresy. To define the Body as a group of disunited, divided gatherings (AKA Protestantism) is to say that Paul is a liar. It is to say, "yes, Christ is divided."

So yes, I say that the Orthodox Church is the unique Body of Christ and that all people who are in heaven exist in eternal Communion with the Orthodox Church. Every person in heaven has rid themselves of the heresies they had on earth and accepted Christ as He truly is, which, I contend, is the Christ presented in the Orthodox Church, following the Chalcedonian creeds and the Creeds of the Ecumenical Councils, whose only Head is Christ.

This is neither of arrogance, nor of pride. It is as calm and measured a statement for me as a statement that energy can neither be created, nor destroyed, by any natural process.

 

[sculleywr]

Guesses. Undefined terms.

What oral traditions extant in Paul's time are we to follow?

Remember the context of Irenaeus.
1) Scripture only is authoritative.
2) Follow only tradition that ties clearly to apostles.
If you can't prove your tradition per #2, then we are left with #1.

PS. Since EO RC OO follows a fixed easter, rather than a floating Pascha, they aren't doing #2 anyway. Can you correct your group to align with, wait for it, Scripture?

Your personal interpretation of Irenaeus violates the actual writing of Irenaeus, so I see no reason to accept your personal interpretation of Irenaeus as true. Rather, I take Irenaeus's statement at face value.