Protesting Protestantism

[TheBarrd]

Drive through West Virginia on a Sunday morning with the AM radio on. Then come back and tell me that you weren't laughing your head off at the way they mangle the King's English.

And they're proud of it, too!

I've been in West Virginia. My sister used to live there.
And I've heard their dialect.
I guess I'm just not one to make fun of someone else...especially over something they really can't help. I mean, if you had been raised in West Virginia, why, chances are you'd talk like that, too.
I don't make fun of people of other cultures who don't talk the same way that I do.
Such behavior is brutish and rude...and quite unnecessary.

 

[Light of the East]

My King Henry? My dear, I'm an American. The closest I come to being British would be my Mom, whose ancestry was Welsh. On my Dad's side, I'm half American Indian...Iroquois and Cattaraugus, to be precise...and the other half is French Canadian, I believe. There may be a splash of black, as well, from a much beloved slave...but I can't be sure about that one. In any case there is nothing in my person or in my heritage that connects me to the old naughty king.

Besides, most of us know that there were several popes who had illegitimate children...and several who were actually married. So throwing stones might not be the best policy.

Your analogy isn't all that bad, actually.
Of course, I don't accept comparing the church to a police force...but it was still a banging good try.

Yeah, I was afraid it wouldn't exactly make the point.

I know that there were a couple of cads seated in the Chair of St. Peter. Any Catholic who is honest will not gloss over that. But that's not the question....

The question is whether or not their sins caused them to lose the authority of the Chair? And if you say yes, then there really can't be any such thing as authority at all because every human being sins, don't we? Heck, look at Peter, the first leader of the Church. Not particularly a sterling character in some ways.

**" a much beloved slave"**

Hmmmmmmmmmmm.......I would say a little too much beloved, if that be the case.

 

[TheBarrd]

Yeah, I was afraid it wouldn't exactly make the point.

I know that there were a couple of cads seated in the Chair of St. Peter. Any Catholic who is honest will not gloss over that. But that's not the question....

The question is whether or not their sins caused them to lose the authority of the Chair? And if you say yes, then there really can't be any such thing as authority at all because every human being sins, don't we? Heck, look at Peter, the first leader of the Church. Not particularly a sterling character in some ways.

**" a much beloved slave"**

Hmmmmmmmmmmm.......I would say a little too much beloved, if that be the case.

I'm not sure I'm understanding you here...what are you accusing Peter of?

 

[TheBarrd]

Yeah, I was afraid it wouldn't exactly make the point.

I know that there were a couple of cads seated in the Chair of St. Peter. Any Catholic who is honest will not gloss over that. But that's not the question....

The question is whether or not their sins caused them to lose the authority of the Chair? And if you say yes, then there really can't be any such thing as authority at all because every human being sins, don't we? Heck, look at Peter, the first leader of the Church. Not particularly a sterling character in some ways.

**" a much beloved slave"**

Hmmmmmmmmmmm.......I would say a little too much beloved, if that be the case.

There were more than "a couple of cads", but I don't think you quite got the point I was trying to make.

What I've been saying all along is that there is no real authority in the chair at all.
The only real authority belongs to Jesus Christ, and is not invested in any man, much less any piece of furniture...not even if it were carved out of one huge diamond...

 

[Light of the East]

I've been in West Virginia. My sister used to live there.
And I've heard their dialect.
I guess I'm just not one to make fun of someone else...especially over something they really can't help. I mean, if you had been raised in West Virginia, why, chances are you'd talk like that, too.
I don't make fun of people of other cultures who don't talk the same way that I do.
Such behavior is brutish and rude...and quite unnecessary.

Sweetie, I was born and raised outside of Atlanta, GA, and you will not find anyone more proud of being a Southerner. And I love to hear a good Southern accent. I just think these guys overdo it, and do so because they think it has some sort of ability to sway the people who are listening to them.

I remember one Sunday, driving through West Virginia to Maysville KY, where I had business to do. I was playing with the radio dial and heard some guy huffin' and puffin' and decided to stay there and listen.

"Ahhh don't have a lot of edjeeecation." "Ahhhhhh may not have been to a seminary." "But I jest want to preeeeeeeach Jaaaaaayzuz"

I almost ran off the road I was laughing so hard.

But really, in a sense, this is pathetic. The man admitted over and over that he was not educated. Now certainly, there have been a lot of educated devils in the pulpit. One only has to look at the Catholic Church at the turn of the century to see this. Highly educated men preying upon children (and who should be rotting in jail even as I type this!). But this kind of lack of education is what causes problems in the realm of the Christian faith.

What would this man do if he actually went to school and found out that his Anabaptistry only started about 500 years ago? That the Apostles believed in the Eucharist? That the Early Church baptized infants? How could I talk to him about the Covenant of God when he probably doesn't even know what the term means? Do you see the problem?

And ultimately, he is misleading his flock, and may be one of those fierce anti-Catholic bigots who are keeping the Body of Christ shredded into thousands of warring factions.

 

[Light of the East]

I'm not sure I'm understanding you here...what are you accusing Peter of?

Peter denied Christ three times, later got into an argument with Paul, and ran away from crucifixion in Rome. Not the most sterling moments of his career, eh?

 

[JustHisKid]

Light of the East

No offense. I can't even take you seriously. Jaaaaayyyyzzus forgive you, for you know not what you do.

 

[TheBarrd]

Sweetie, I was born and raised outside of Atlanta, GA, and you will not find anyone more proud of being a Southerner. And I love to hear a good Southern accent. I just think these guys overdo it, and do so because they think it has some sort of ability to sway the people who are listening to them.

I remember one Sunday, driving through West Virginia to Maysville KY, where I had business to do. I was playing with the radio dial and heard some guy huffin' and puffin' and decided to stay there and listen.

"Ahhh don't have a lot of edjeeecation." "Ahhhhhh may not have been to a seminary." "But I jest want to preeeeeeeach Jaaaaaayzuz"

I almost ran off the road I was laughing so hard.

But really, in a sense, this is pathetic. The man admitted over and over that he was not educated. Now certainly, there have been a lot of educated devils in the pulpit. One only has to look at the Catholic Church at the turn of the century to see this. Highly educated men preying upon children (and who should be rotting in jail even as I type this!). But this kind of lack of education is what causes problems in the realm of the Christian faith.

What would this man do if he actually went to school and found out that his Anabaptistry only started about 500 years ago? That the Apostles believed in the Eucharist? That the Early Church baptized infants? How could I talk to him about the Covenant of God when he probably doesn't even know what the term means? Do you see the problem?

And ultimately, he is misleading his flock, and may be one of those fierce anti-Catholic bigots who are keeping the Body of Christ shredded into thousands of warring factions.

I wonder...where did Peter get his edjeeecashun? Wasn't it at the feet of Jesus?
And Paul...he had to "relearn" everything he'd been taught as a Pharisee, right? Who helped him with his "re-edjeeekashun"?? Again, wasn't it Jesus Who knocked him off his high horse (in a manner of speaking)?

As you pointed out, education does not necessarily make a Christian, does it?
Now, don't get me wrong, here...I am as much for getting a good education as you are. I am proud to say that I was educated in New York State...I guess I'm a bit of an intellectual snob on that score. I don't think the schools in the South were as capable in that time as my own state...
But I digress.
The point is, I was educated as a Yankee, and I spoke as a Yankee for the first 22 years of my life. When I first came south, I was fascinated by the "southern drawl" everywhere around me. And there were the typical Yankee jokes, of course...I was very young and easily entertained, I suppose. I now know that the difference between a northern gal and a southern gal is not that the northern gal has a canopy over her bed, while the southern gal has a can o' pee under her bed, or even that the northern gal say "you can" while the southern gal says "y'all can"...but when Redd Foxx made these silly jokes on a tape I had of famous comedians, I did laugh at them.
And then I realized how demeaning these jokes are to some fine and beautiful southern women.
I ought to tell you, I used to be a blonde...before age turned my gold into silver...and I have heard just about every dumb blonde joke that there is...yes, even some very nasty ones. In response, I just sing a chorus of "cuz I'm a blonde, yeah, yeah, yeah"...it's all just a lot of silliness, but people do get hurt.

I talk differently than you, I'm guessing...all though over the years I have picked up a bit of that charming drawl. I remember my Mom telling me on the telephone that I was starting to sound as if I had never been to school and learned to speak "the king's English".
Amazing coincidence, what? Aye-yuh...
(that's Yankee for "doan dat jes' take de rag offn de bush"...or, in your lingo, "how 'bout dat, y'all")

 

[TheBarrd]

Light of the East

No offense. I can't even take you seriously. Jaaaaayyyyzzus forgive you, for you know not what you do.

Aaaaaaaaaye-men, y'all!!!!

 

[TheBarrd]

Peter denied Christ three times, later got into an argument with Paul, and ran away from crucifixion in Rome. Not the most sterling moments of his career, eh?

I don't recall reading anything in my Bible about Peter running away from crucifixion in Rome. Where did this idea come from?

 

[Albion]

Do you think in some ways that the reformation did not go far enough in removing catholic elements from church in making it more "christ like?" In what ways? what do you envision?

No, I think it did its job well. Of course, you can take your pick of which Protestant movement you prefer; some "reformed" extensively while others only modestly. But IMO those that did not go to the radical extreme got it right, and that's about what all those that did not do so thought of those that did--radical.

 

[Light of the East]

I don't recall reading anything in my Bible about Peter running away from crucifixion in Rome. Where did this idea come from?

Christian historical lore. The story is that when the authorities in Rome came for Peter, he split. On his way out of town, he met Jesus.

"Where are you headed, Lord?" asked Peter.

"To Rome, to be crucified again."

It is said that Peter returned in shame to Rome and submitted to the execution waiting for him.

Don't mind me.....it's Contrarian Friday, and I'm just being my usual jerky self.

 

[TheBarrd]

Christian historical lore. The story is that when the authorities in Rome came for Peter, he split. On his way out of town, he met Jesus.

"Where are you headed, Lord?" asked Peter.

"To Rome, to be crucified again."

It is said that Peter returned in shame to Rome and submitted to the execution waiting for him.

Don't mind me.....it's Contrarian Friday, and I'm just being my usual jerky self.

Actually, I kinda remember having read something about that. I just never took it very seriously.
Kinda like Mary Magdalene being a prostitute...although I used that idea in a short story once, I never really thought of her as a prostitute...and I believe she was very close to Jesus. She was the first one to see Him after His glorious resurrection.
What an honor!

 

[interpreter]

Sorry. You are historically inaccurate. The Episcopalian Church is the American branch of Anglicanism, which was founded by the adulterous Henry the VIII when he couldn't get his way with the Church.

When the Crazy King broke away from the Catholic Church, the link of apostolic succession was gone in under a century. You do not have valid Sacraments and you have no apostolic succession. If you want to remain Episcopalian (which is a very beautiful Liturgy) and have valid Sacraments, you should consider the Anglican Ordinariate. You get the BEST of both worlds - valid Eucharist and Anglican Liturgy.

Since 312 AD, when the sign of the Son of Man appeared in the clouds, Jesus has ruled the earth through 4 "horsemen" which are 4 Christian superpowers that were founded by the Church established by St. Peter. Until Obama, most of our presidents have been members of a Church descended from St. Peter (the Episcopal or Roman Catholic Church). Now we must elect Jeb Bush to restore the balance of power and allow God to keep blessing us. Otherwise, God will spit us out and replace us with the 5th horseman.

 

[interpreter]

Since 312 AD, when the sign of the Son of Man appeared in the clouds, Jesus has ruled the earth through 4 "horsemen" which are 4 Christian superpowers that were founded by the Church established by St. Peter. The US is the 4th horseman, and until Obama, most of our presidents have been members of a Church descended from St. Peter (the Episcopal or Roman Catholic Church). Now we must elect Jeb Bush to restore the balance of power and allow God to keep blessing us. Otherwise, God will spit us out and replace us with the 5th horseman.

 

[Albion]

Sorry. You are historically inaccurate. The Episcopalian Church is the American branch of Anglicanism, which was founded by the adulterous Henry the VIII when he couldn't get his way with the Church.

The Church in Britain has had a continuous existence since ancient times. Henry neither started a new one nor was he ever declared a heretic by the Church of Rome, not either before or after the RCC broke away from the Church of England.

When the Crazy King broke away from the Catholic Church, the link of apostolic succession was gone in under a century.

According to the Roman Catholic Church, that is, and it took 300 years before the Pope was in a condition where he desperately needed to throw some weight around in order to show that he hadn't lost all of his authority.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Michael -- what you are saying is true. Now take the time to read about the bishops and popes of the Church, especially in the first six centuries. They were servants who cared for their people and gave their lives for the truth. 25 of the first 27 popes were martyred. Doesn't sound self-serving to me!

I don't understand what this has to do with the topic of the thread. The topic of the thread is a present day application, what people did back in the 600s doesn't really impact what is being observed now.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

No, I think it did its job well. Of course, you can take your pick of which Protestant movement you prefer; some "reformed" extensively while others only modestly. But IMO those that did not go to the radical extreme got it right, and that's about what all those that did not do so thought of those that did--radical.

As far as radical versions of reformation theologies, that's not so much the direction my mind was leaning. However, I would agree that the original protestant denominations with their "balance" tend to be preferable. I think my observation of "not going far enough" is because of the imbalances in the next-generation reformation denominations and the harm this has caused to people psychologically.

a lot of this harm has been caused because the reformation theologies are being reinterpreted into a culture that was not imagined by the reformers. The balance is what is needed to be restored, basically.

 

[Albion]

As far as radical versions of reformation theologies, that's not so much the direction my mind was leaning. However, I would agree that the original protestant denominations with their "balance" tend to be preferable. I think my observation of "not going far enough" is because of the imbalances in the next-generation reformation denominations and the harm this has caused to people psychologically.

a lot of this harm has been caused because the reformation theologies are being reinterpreted into a culture that was not imagined by the reformers. The balance is what is needed to be restored, basically.

Yes, some good points there.

 

[bottomofsandal]

Do you think in some ways that the reformation did not go far enough in removing catholic elements from church in making it more "christ like?" In what ways? what do you envision?

Of course you are correct in your assessment that elements still exist that are extra-biblical and traditional. Primarily, the extravagant, opulence of buildings, clothing, decor, and surroundings appears to be for man's benefit, not The Almighty. The humility of Jesus, the lowliness of Jesus, the servant attitude of Jesus has no connection or resemblance to the fatness of earthly riches . All the glitter is for man, it does absolutely nothing for God.

Jesus was born in a barn, He had nowhere to lay His head, He had no tomb in which to be buried. The life of Jesus gives no indication to build manmade monuments, especially since we are The Temples of The Holy Spirit.