Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

To: impimp

Well, the RC church is a different animal because the actual church (the company of Faithful) has been obliterated and usurped by the papacy.
Your own words prove it and in pointing to “lawsuits” you strengthen my argument.
Restricted churches, of any tradition, are social clubs, not churches.
The nascent Christian church in Rome hid in the catacombs and suffered worse (death!) for being outwardly XPian.
Today, not wearing a mask is grounds for exclusion from church.
Do you like being excommunicated for not wearing a mask.
Of course, if you don’t mind being treated as a sub-human by your own ecclesiastical hierarchy, then you do you.
Masks achieve two ends.
(1) to hide your appearance of being human and (2) give others authority over your Faith and practice.

Note, this is not a diatribe against the RC church or the papacy.
It is a theological/doctrinal argument to eliminate the requirements for masks in ANY church.

15 posted on 08/10/2020 5:38:02 AM PDT by Cletus.D.Yokel (I'm a lifetime Detroit Tiger fan. The Tiger players don't think that matters because...I'm white.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: Cletus.D.Yokel

The notion of restricted churches goes back to the bible:
1 Corinthians 11 discusses the exclusion on members from receiving communion if they are not worthy. Not to turn Flubros into a theology bashing session but I thought I would point out that from the early days the Christian church imposed restrictions on its own members and who can do what. I see a scriptural basis, regardless of your denomination, for a church pastor to have the power to impose restrictions on its members.

72 posted on 08/10/2020 8:24:40 AM PDT by impimp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson