And this is a model of what you have accepted is the way Christ's church was intended to function?
Surely someone is kidding, here.
From what I keep hearing, "the church" is the be-all, and end-all. You guys have to go along with what any of the hierarchy says? And you are required to accept that they know what's best for you? And you do not accept that these are mere men you are listening to. Why even the concept of Apostolic Succession is something the forerunners of these mere men handed down, saying, "This is TRUTH, believe it, and follow what we say."
I know you guys live and die by this man instituted stuff, but to a thinking Protestant, this is frighteningly similar to the whole Jewish structure Jesus fought against.
Just an outside observation, of course.
Well, I'd just say, look at the bible. You have Jesus, who was fully human as well as fully divine, and he had authority. He then had twelve Apostles that he set up to carry on after his death and several times explicitly said to them that what you bind on earth is bound in heaven and what you loose on earth is loosed in heaven. At one point, he figuratively gives the keys of heaven to St. Peter in one of the Gospels.
Then, in the Acts of the Apostles (Part of the bible, as I'm sure everyone is aware), we see this group of Apostles act with authority, settling disputes among members of the Church, and even interpreting doctrine in a definitive way. Look at Acts 15 and what they did there doctrinally.
Having said that, maybe there is a certain balance that isn't there that should be there in the modern world. I spent a few years as an Episcopalian a long time ago, and sometimes I miss a more balanced approach between clerical authority and lay people being able to act in conscience and have more of a say at the parish, diocesan, and national levels. Absolute power can have a corrupting influence. For a long time in the Church's first millennium, local bishops were elected locally and accountable to other bishops and not just to the Pope.
But congregational Protestantism? I just see that and wonder how a random group of people can build a building, vote on a pastor, figure out their own local doctrinal standards, and then say they are following the model in the bible. In the bible, the churches were all tied together, and St. Paul was always telling local churches what to do (Many of the epistles where letters of that nature). These local churches weren't islands, they were part of a larger organization that was more than just something that existed in theological theory, but rather a literal institution that would hold church councils and interpret doctrine and make sure they were teaching the same Gospel, ultimately.
No offense intended in my comments about congregational Protestantism, of course. I respect it, I just don't buy it.
Please, stop with this malarkey.
I do have a fondness for the word malarkey...
Seek this bishop out and say or yell politics have no place in the house of the Lord.
What form would that take? Protests outside the chancellery? I can't say I'd be opposed to it. Certainly during the abuse scandal, it would have been justified in certain dioceses. But some would feel it crosses a line.
