On Exorcism and Exorcists: An Evangelical View

Albert Mohler Blog ^ | November 15, 2010 | Albert Monler

[Persevero]

“Not exactly- the gay and pro-choice groups are dissident at the minimal, to the point of de facto schismatic in some cases. Jesuits/Franciscans and all the other religious orders have different charisms or missions, but they all believe in the same faith. “

But we’d say that the Unitarians and the liberal Presbyterians and the homo staffed Episcopalians are dissident at minimal, absolutely to the point of de facto. We’d say that Bible believing Baptists, Lutherans, Presbyterians, etc have different “missions” in a sense but we all believe in the same essential faith.

That was my point.

Roman Catholics often seem to hold that they are unified and Protestants are not. I don’t agree.

[mitch5501]

FWIW caww.

From my point of view your post #20 contained much wisdom.

[Cronos]

Sigh, Latin Rite, Maronite Rite, Syro-Malabar Rite etc. are not separate Churches with separate theology. The theology and dogma are the same, that of Christ's as taught by His Apostles and passed down through His Church, the One Holy Apostolic Catholic Church. These are Autonomous ("sui iuris") particular Churches, aggregations of local particular Churches that share a specific liturgical, theological and canonical tradition. The largest such autonomous particular Church is the Latin Rite. The others are referred to collectively as the Eastern Catholic Churches. The larger Eastern Catholic Churches are headed by a bishop who has the title and rank of patriarch or major archbishop.

All acknowledge the bishop of Rome as the primus inter pares and all share the same dogma and theology. Disciplines may differ (for example, in the Eastern Catholic Churchs, you may have married men becoming priests (but not priests getting married)), however dogma is the same.

Secondly, Jesuits, Franciscans, Benedictans, Dominicans, Mother Teresa's Roses etc. are all orders of priests or nuns or monks. These are groups of Catholic religious or laity who chose to follow a particular discipline -- for example, Carthusians wish to glorify and pray to God living as hermits, cut off from the world, Mother Teresa's nuns are to go directly into the world, the Jesuit religious are to work directly with the people and follow a military discipline etc., however, they all follow the common Catholic basic dogma. If they don't, then they are chucked out, like the Mariavite Church.

Thirdly, the politico-groups you refer to such as politicos are just that -- political groups, no different than "Democrats for Romney" or "Republicans for Romney" or "Chinese Juggling belly-dancers with blonde hair choosing to dance the tango with Irish kathak dancers" --> these are not Churches or a Church dogma. They are purely individual initiative groups.

[Cronos]

There is a difference -- in a particular Protestant group, there can be dogmatic unity -- for exmaple, amongst the Ortodox PResbyterians (all 20,000 of them), there will be a shared dogma and belief system. These will differ from say the beliefs in salvation as evidenced by Arminians or the hyperCalvinism of Mennonites and will differ from Lutherans on the True Presence, confession, episcopality and even predestination. These will differ from the pentecostals and the Methodists.

Anyone who forms a group say "practising gay OPC" are not following OPC tenets of belief and are not a sub-division of the OPC but either dissenting people who happen to be OPC or people expelled from the OPC for their unbiblical actions. And "Democratic OPCers" are just a group of individuals, these are not a division of the OPC. When a group splits from the OPC like the BPC and the EPC did, then they are separate completely in organization and belief.

Protestants -- that umbrella terminology that is used by groups as diverse as calvinists, unitarians, anglicans, lutherans, pentecostals, christian scientists or even those saying they are the fruit of the reformation like Seventh Day Adventists or the 4th generation protestants like Mormons or other Great Apostasy theology proponents are unified in only one belief and that is not a belief in Christ in the Trinitarian sense...

[Campion]

I wasn't referring to spiritual danger in general, but specifically to what frequently causes and/or accompanies demonic possession.

But in terms of raw spiritual danger, I think religions which borrow Christian verbiage to dress up what amounts to a naked appeal to spiritual or theological pride are the most dangerous of all. Remember that it was pride that lead to Satan's fall in the first place.

[caww]

Thank you...and others opinions are always worth the read, even when there may be differences.

Having seen the results of people who tread into the spirit world one can get a general overall view of where that road leads. Unfortunately many all too easily today are mislead to travel that road..and it is increasing in numbers who are willingly going there...and that who claim Christianity yet are not grounded in what God requires and or warns us about. Therefore many are targets and fall easily into counterfeit belief systems, who breath just enough Christianity to hook and then indoctrinate the masses.

The church needs to be warning of these as their are many infiltrations occurring in the body of Christ..... yet are today so preoccupied with building the programs and buildings on the backs of the saints they have lost sight of their mission to “equip the saints”. As a result without the “armor of God” and knowing what that entails and how to use it many more will fall prey to the wiles of the enemy of God.

Thank you for your post.
CW

[Persevero]

“Protestants — that umbrella terminology that is used by groups as diverse as calvinists, unitarians, anglicans, lutherans, pentecostals, christian scientists or even those saying they are the fruit of the reformation like Seventh Day Adventists or the 4th generation protestants like Mormons or other Great Apostasy theology proponents are unified in only one belief and that is not a belief in Christ in the Trinitarian sense... “

I agree. I think the use of the word “Protestants” is too broadly applied. “Protestants” in my opinion should refer to those who basically agree with the 95 theses posted by Luther. Instead, it basically means “not-a-Roman-Catholic.”

[Persevero]

“All acknowledge the bishop of Rome as the primus inter pares and all share the same dogma and theology. Disciplines may differ (for example, in the Eastern Catholic Churchs, you may have married men becoming priests (but not priests getting married)), however dogma is the same.”

I know. But I still think there is a similarity, let’s say, between evangelical Baptists, Presbyterians, Congregationalists and Methodists. We all share the same basic doctrines, encapsulated in the Apostle’s creed; we all acknowledge Jesus as head of the Church and the Bible as the only source of doctrine.

We differ in “minors,” that is, church government, and/or finer points of doctrine. But we accept one another as fellow Christians.

Baptist baptize on profession of faith only; Presbyterians baptize infants of believers. It’s a different “rite.”

“Thirdly, the politico-groups you refer to such as politicos are just that — political groups, no different than “Democrats for Romney” or “Republicans for Romney” or “Chinese Juggling belly-dancers with blonde hair choosing to dance the tango with Irish kathak dancers” —> these are not Churches or a Church dogma. They are purely individual initiative groups.”

Absolutely, and I don’t like them intertwined in the “Protestant” or “Christian” groups. Presbyterians for Choice are no more Christians than Gay Catholics are. They are just usurpers, who slap the name upon themselves and then behave horribly and agitate for evil, thereby imputing evil to the Presbyterians or the Catholics they claim to “represent.”

I don’t see schismatic or heretic groups as representatives of Roman Catholics; and I don’t like it when schismatic or heretic groups are accepted as representative of Protestants. It is not fair in either case.

Similarly, I don’t hold the sexually subversive priests in the news lately as representatives of Catholics; nor should the sexually depraved big name ‘evangelists’ in the news lately be considered representative of Protestants.

[Cronos]

yes, that’s my point. Within each of these groups there is unity, but among the umbrella term or even in the particular sense you use it, there is a lot of diversity on basic dogma, which is why they are separate groups. If one don’t agree with Catholic dogma, one is free to leave.

[Cronos]

Not really — between evangelical, non-Calvinist Baptists and Presbyterians and between Presbyterians and Methodists there is a vast gulf in the teachings on salvation for example. The basic dogma is not the same.

[Cronos]

Similarly, I don’t hold the sexually subversive priests in the news lately as representatives of Catholics; nor should the sexually depraved big name ‘evangelists’ in the news lately be considered representative of Protestants.

I agree -- otherwise, people would say that Rev. "bishop" eddie Long (with his "cross it dance") and Jesse Duplantis (who supposedly went to heaven, met Jesus, Abraham, David and then comforted Christ) are reps --> btw, check out these vides of those two loons on youtube, it is hilarious, especially Jesse who makes such big ones, it's incredible people believe him!

[Persevero]

“Not really — between evangelical, non-Calvinist Baptists and Presbyterians and between Presbyterians and Methodists there is a vast gulf in the teachings on salvation for example. The basic dogma is not the same.”

I’d disagree. We can all recite the Apostle’s Creed.

[Cronos]

The Apostles Creed is a beautiful creed, however, if that is the only criteria than all Christian groups from Seventh Day Adventists to Presbyterians to Catholics, Orthodox, Orientals, Assyrians fit into the same category. Even Mormons and JWs would fit in.

The Nicene Creed is a better clarifier -- the AThanasian is the most explicit, however even using these as the basis there is no differentiation beteen all Christian groups (Mormons and JWs get excluded with the Nicene Creed)