Posted on 12/22/2007 2:56:20 AM PST by Gamecock
If you're a member of any church or if you're not sifting through all religious writings you can get your hands on,(including everything rejected by any church body) you too are following a tradition.
You are correct. If your position is "reform", the logical implication would be that there was something there before it.
Which should be based on the Word, where and how the Word address them.
Classic "reform" churches stop short. The Anabaptists did much better. There is always room for improvement and "traditions taught by men" should not, must not, get in the way.
Which Word? Did you comb through all of the gnostic gospels before discarding them?
Classic "reform" churches stop short. The Anabaptists did much better. There is always room for improvement and "traditions taught by men" should not, must not, get in the way.
That is your belief & you have every right to hold it. There are good odds you arrived at this belief through a tradition taught by some men.
I employ several JW’s and their smugness about Christmas inspires me to turn up the carols and put more lights on the office Christmas tree. As for my very reformed OPC church we plan to have a Christmas Eve service tonight where I will be reading from Luke( not Calvins Institutes) and singing hymns with great alacrity. Merry Christmas to all my brothers in Christ here be they reformed or otherwise.
Indeed.
Merry Christmas all!
***I will be reading from Luke( not Calvins Institutes)***
[snort]
I’m sure that will shock many around here
Angels gave glory to God in the highest, Simion and Anna had waited for the day. The “fulness of time had come- yet one clear directive from our Lord Jesus Christ, “This do in remembrance of me.”
Perhaps the “anti-Christmas spirit” is an attempt to place the emphasis on why Christ has come, or to guard the antithesis between the world and the bride of Christ.
Sad to say it may even be (hopefully not) an arrogant, self serving pride to be different.
Maybe this would be the top of the fence...On Christmas-lets rejoice that Christ has come, give thanks for what he has done, and look to the heavens for Him to return.
Thank you for the article- Blessings on Christmas to you
They do, but they pretend not to enjoy it. ;-)
Yes, clearly a Catholic guest by your tagline regarding Mary not sinning.
Be nice.
Merry and Blessed Christmas from the Catholics.
Why thank you.
I watched the Pope live, midnight my time (we’re in the same time zone as the Vatican)) and thought of all of my Catholic FRiends. I didn’t get it, but knew how important it was to each of you...
I wanted to post Christmas wishes to ya’ll as I watched, but my internet was down.
That being said, I hope each of you had a special Christmas and I look forward to having a spirited New Year with each of you.
GC
Shalom!
“Do not follow the Pagan rituals of the Roman church.”
What exactly do you mean? Since i’ve been a Catholic since my baptism at the age of 10 days, I cannot interpret your meaning. Perhaps you can enlighten me a bit?
I am aware that Christmas, the day we Christians celebrate the birth of Jesus, was set at the time of the longest nights of the year on purpose, and it coincided with the old pagan celebrations of the lengthening of days; it does not mean the Christian use of Dec. 25 is pagan in origin. It means that the Christians set that date to celebrate Jesus’s incarnation as He is “The Light of the World”. This is directly from the Gospel readings.
Maybe you referred to something else? [I hope you are not referring to that old erroneous assumpltion that we Catholics worship staatues, since that is untrue!]
I would like to find out exactly what you mean by pagan practices in the “Roman” church.
He does have every right to hold it. He does not have any right, however, to advance it aggressively on a reform caucus thread.
(As may be obvious, the caucus protections are important to me.)
3. “Closed” threads on the Religion Forum include devotionals, prayer threads and caucuses. The header of the thread should make it obvious that the thread is closed, i.e. like a church meeting behind closed doors. Such assemblies will not be disturbed. Any challenges or ridicule will be removed. Any thread can be designated a caucus - e.g. labeled as a “[Catholic Caucus]” or “[LDS Caucus]” - provided that neither the article nor any of the posts challenge [*see footnote] or ridicule any other confession. These are “safe harbors” for those who are easily offended or are ill equipped to defend their own confession.
I think a bit of indulgence must be applied, as long as the posters to a thread do not start echoing the offense. The historic roots of the Reformation are due to the break from the perceived apostasy of the RCC, and their rhetoric runs throughout all the foundational works.....always provided, of course, that it's understood that after the Reformation there is a similar rhetorical problem in some Catholic texts.
If the initial poster of the thread or those posting responses said, "Yeah, BOY, them Papists sure ARE idolatrous!" then I think the Caucus protections go. If the general thrust of the thread were in agreement with the cited material, there would be at least a suspicion of a violation. For example, if someone were to say, "I agree that we Presbies can observe Christmas and that doing so does not align us with those filthy, idolatrous, fish-eating, Papists ..." that would yank it.
But, imagine if I were to post an article on the way the Christian Hope stimulates us to works of praise, prayer, and mercy, and suppose further that in the course of the article the author quoted -- only to disagree with it (and that's important) -- some Arminian writer accusing the double-predestination gang of sloth, indolence, and inertia, and suppose my argument were along the lines of, "Just as those whose trust in the 'blessed Assurance' seems to release energy spent in voluble praise and notable acts of mercy, so also we who deny 'blessed assurance' in the strict sense but still claim a 'sure and certain hope' in our salvation find ourselves spurred to, rather than hindered from, grateful praise and plentiful good deeds," then it seems to yank the Caucus status because Arminians and Calvinistas were referred or alluded to would be silly.
Or we could all resolve to understand and mutually to bemoan our differences and look for our agreements and not to try abuse one another into a new point of view, and then we wouldn't need a Caucus status ... like that'll ever happen.
I think we got a ruling, as the caucus designation is now gone.
It seems to me that ever since that disastrous thread in late summer or early Fall, the way to end a caucus designation is to ignore it.
Which one? There are so many to choose from.
It initially was marked Catholic Caucus. Post #3 violated the Caucus rules. Several other violations happened speedily. They were responded to. The caucus status was pulled.
In my daughter's high school a young, attractive but frail, girl was set upon by some groping thugs. She responded with suprising effectiveness, since there was no staff person there to protect her. She was suspended.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.