The Briefing Room
General Category => Politics/Government => Topic started by: mystery-ak on June 18, 2021, 06:26:50 pm
-
Catholic bishops advance effort to deny Biden communion
By Alex Gangitano - 06/18/21 01:45 PM EDT
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) has voted to proceed with drafting a formal statement on the meaning of communion, which will include whether President Biden and other politicians should be denied the rite based on their stance on abortion.
The action item for the committee on doctrine to start a teaching document on the Holy Eucharist passed 168-55, with six bishops abstaining from the vote, the USCCB announced Friday.
The document will be up for debate, subject to amendments and voted on at the group’s next meeting in November.
When asked at a press conference on Thursday following the vote if Biden, who is only the second Catholic president, should be able to receive communion, Bishop Kevin Rhoades of Fort Wayne-South Bend, said, “I can’t answer that question.”
“We will be looking at that whole issue of eucharistic consistency. ... When you look at cannon law, that is a decision of his bishop,” he added.
more
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/559167-bishops-vote-to-proceed-with-drafting-document-on-denying-communion
-
Joe Biden on Potentially Being Denied Communion: ‘A Private Matter, Don’t Think That’s Going to Happen’
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/06/18/joe-biden-on-potentially-being-denied-communion-a-private-matter-dont-think-thats-going-to-happen/
-
Good to see the fake NY Slimes story about the Pope and Biden is being left in the dust.
-
‘I dare you’: Pro-abortion Democrat Ted Lieu challenges Catholic bishops to deny him Communion
June 19, 2021 | BPR Wire
Democratic California Rep. Ted Lieu publicly challenged Catholic bishops Friday to deny him Communion for supporting contraception, abortion, same sex marriage and more.
Lieu responded to news that the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) overwhelmingly approved a measure Friday to draft a statement discussing whether high profile pro-abortion politicians, like President Joe Biden, may be denied Communion.
more
https://www.bizpacreview.com/2021/06/19/i-dare-you-pro-abortion-democrat-ted-lieu-challenges-catholic-bishops-to-deny-him-communion-1091191/
-
This is funny and my fav
Joe Kennedy on Biden Communion Ban: Bishops Not Bashing Trump ‘Behavior’ Shows ‘Robust Double Standard’
https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2021/06/18/joe-kennedy-on-biden-communion-ban-bishops-not-bashing-trump-behavior-shows-robust-double-standard/
-
Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, Respond To Catholic Church Vote On Denying Communion To Them
https://conservativebrief.com/joe-biden-catholic-church-43114/
-
Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, Respond To Catholic Church Vote On Denying Communion To Them
https://conservativebrief.com/joe-biden-catholic-church-43114/
Biden, Pelosi and Lieuy= CINO's
-
‘I dare you’: Pro-abortion Democrat Ted Lieu challenges Catholic bishops to deny him Communion
June 19, 2021 | BPR Wire
Democratic California Rep. Ted Lieu publicly challenged Catholic bishops Friday to deny him Communion for supporting contraception, abortion, same sex marriage and more.
Lieu responded to news that the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) overwhelmingly approved a measure Friday to draft a statement discussing whether high profile pro-abortion politicians, like President Joe Biden, may be denied Communion.
more
https://www.bizpacreview.com/2021/06/19/i-dare-you-pro-abortion-democrat-ted-lieu-challenges-catholic-bishops-to-deny-him-communion-1091191/
Not double-dog dare?
What's that moron going to do, sneak into the church and steal the cookie jar?
-
U.S. Bishops Vote to Draft Document on Worthiness to Receive Communion
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/06/19/u-s-bishops-vote-draft-document-worthiness-receive-communion/
-
Every person owns his/her body - the church does not, the government does not, own that body. He/she can do what he/she wants with his/her body. If the person wants to cut off his/her right toe, he/she can. If a man wants to have surgery so he will not produce children, he can. If a woman wants to abort a pregnancy, she can. Others may think a man should not stop himself from having children, but those people do not own this man's body. Others may think a woman should not have an abortion, but those people do not own this woman's body.
Church denominations make their own rules. Baptist rules may be different than Methodists rules, Catholic rules may be different than Church-of-Christ rules. So, all denominations make their own rules. A Christian does not have to join any church to be a Christian. Catholics/other denominations are going to be surprised in heaven when there are other denominations there along with those Christians who belong to no church.
-
Every person owns his/her body - the church does not, the government does not, own that body. He/she can do what he/she wants with his/her body. If the person wants to cut off his/her right toe, he/she can. If a man wants to have surgery so he will not produce children, he can. If a woman wants to abort a pregnancy, she can. Others may think a man should not stop himself from having children, but those people do not own this man's body. Others may think a woman should not have an abortion, but those people do not own this woman's body.
Church denominations make their own rules. Baptist rules may be different than Methodists rules, Catholic rules may be different than Church-of-Christ rules. So, all denominations make their own rules. A Christian does not have to join any church to be a Christian. Catholics/other denominations are going to be surprised in heaven when there are other denominations there along with those Christians who belong to no church.
I will assume that you are not an Evangelical Christian, or Catholic, based on your post.
Let me educate you a little bit on Christianity. As Christians we do not "own" our bodies. We are bondservants to our Savior Jesus Christ. IOW, if we truly abide in Christ we happily follow his commands, so we really don't get to do whatever we want with our bodies.
You are correct that a Christian does not have to be member of a congregation to be saved, but what you will find is all Christians that are saved have faith in Christ alone and having that faith lived their lives on earth trying to walk by faith abiding by God's will.
So in answer to your post Scripture is very clear about things we should not be doing, or supporting.
@Hoodat
@roamer_1
-
I will assume that you are not an Evangelical Christian, or Catholic, based on your post.
Let me educate you a little bit on Christianity. As Christians we do not "own" our bodies. We are bondservants to our Savior Jesus Christ. IOW, if we truly abide in Christ we happily follow his commands, so we really don't get to do whatever we want with our bodies.
You are correct that a Christian does not have to be member of a congregation to be saved, but what you will find is all Christians that are saved have faith in Christ alone and having that faith lived their lives on earth trying to walk by faith abiding by God's will.
So in answer to your post Scripture is very clear about things we should not be doing, or supporting.
@Hoodat
@roamer_1
FACTS. We are bought for a price. We serve the House of YHWH and must conduct ourselves accordingly.
We are also brothers in Yeshua, and thereby heirs in him to the House of YHWH, and must conduct ourselves accordingly... And we are ambassadors of the House of YHWH and must conduct ourselves accordingly...
In every facet a pattern emerges.
-
Others may think a woman should not have an abortion, but those people do not own this woman's body.
It isn't the woman's body that is in question.
Church denominations make their own rules. Baptist rules may be different than Methodists rules, Catholic rules may be different than Church-of-Christ rules. So, all denominations make their own rules. A Christian does not have to join any church to be a Christian. Catholics/other denominations are going to be surprised in heaven when there are other denominations there along with those Christians who belong to no church.
Follow Yah, not men.
-
Every person owns his/her body - the church does not, the government does not, own that body. He/she can do what he/she wants with his/her body. If the person wants to cut off his/her right toe, he/she can. If a man wants to have surgery so he will not produce children, he can. If a woman wants to abort a pregnancy, she can. Others may think a man should not stop himself from having children, but those people do not own this man's body. Others may think a woman should not have an abortion, but those people do not own this woman's body.
The issue with abortion is that the woman does not own the child's body, even though she carries it in her own. More fundamentally, the woman has no authority to determine that the child's life is less sacred than her convenience or her future plans, notwithstanding her rights over her own body.
Church denominations make their own rules. Baptist rules may be different than Methodists rules, Catholic rules may be different than Church-of-Christ rules. So, all denominations make their own rules. A Christian does not have to join any church to be a Christian. Catholics/other denominations are going to be surprised in heaven when there are other denominations there along with those Christians who belong to no church.
I agree that salvation is independent of denomination. What does that observation have to do with the point of this thread, that the US Conference of Catholic Bishops suggests denying communion to Catholics who openly flout the teachings of the Catholic Church?
-
FACTS. We are bought for a price. We serve the House of YHWH and must conduct ourselves accordingly.
We are also brothers in Yeshua, and thereby heirs in him to the House of YHWH, and must conduct ourselves accordingly... And we are ambassadors of the House of YHWH and must conduct ourselves accordingly...
In every facet a pattern emerges.
:amen:
A lot of believers do not delve into systematic theology and it can easily become confusing. It doesn't take an advanced degree though to understand we don't get to do whatever we want.
As far as the Catholic Church and members not abiding in Christ is concerned, they practice a closed communion (only Catholics can partake) and if members don't want to do what this church expects of them in order to partake in communion they should respect that and not take communion. I am a member of an Evangelical Church and we practice an open communion (all Christians can partake) but prior to having communion our Pastors are very clear in their warning that if you are in open violation of our Lord's commands you should not partake.
-
:amen:
A lot of believers do not delve into systematic theology and it can easily become confusing. It doesn't take an advanced degree though to understand we don't get to do whatever we want.
If there is no law, what need for grace? A conundrum many fail to consider.
As far as the Catholic Church and members not abiding in Christ is concerned, they practice a closed communion (only Catholics can partake) and if members don't want to do what this church expects of them in order to partake in communion they should respect that and not take communion. I am a member of an Evangelical Church and we practice an open communion (all Christians can partake) but prior to having communion our Pastors are very clear in their warning that if you are in open violation of our Lord's commands you should not partake.
That's right. An organization deserves the right to it's order... The member voluntarily submits to the doctrine and dogma. Nothing requires his adherence... Except his voluntary acceptance of that which makes him a member. He can walk off at any time, and they, so long as he submits, can call him a member (or not) according to his submission.
The reason I do not have membership in any church is specifically because I cannot agree with their interpretations and cannot therefore adhere. Nor would I insult them by falsely claiming that to which I cannot adhere.
It has long been my dilemma. :shrug:
-
@bilo
@roamer_1
Bilo, you said: "I will assume that you are not an Evangelical Christian, or Catholic, based on your post."
__________________________________
No, Bilo, I belong to a Catholic church and have taught a Bible class there; we stopped about the time the virus hit. I have taught Bible classes in Missionary Baptist Churches, Baptist Churches, a good part of my adult life. I was the pianist at three Baptist churches.
Some want "others" to act a certain way. That is the point; you may do what you want; interpret the Bible the way you want. You can only decide for yourself, not others.
Women own their bodies. Men ruled women as their "property" (I say men owned women as their furniture - would change their furniture when they wanted a different looking piece of furniture.) Men were stronger than women, so men "ruled". This changed when Jesus Christ came and honored women.
Back to present day individuals:
Remember, individuals make individual decisions that affect no one but the individual self. These "individual" choices do not involve other people as the choice would not be "individual" if others are involved.
A subject we cannot discuss on this forum: I think we are in the end times and have reasons for that. Maybe I will see you and friend roamer in the near future. Want coffee? Okay, @Cyber Liberty, will have the coffee, and beer. 44444heart
-
We serve the House of YHWH ....
Is the House of YHWH the religious sect by the same name?
-
You and roamer and others here have spoken about what others "should" do. That is the point; you may do what you want; interpret the Bible the way you want. You can only decide for yourself, not others.
Beside the point @Victoria33 . On point is the demands made by doctrine and dogma, and who can call themselves what. It is incumbent upon submission to authority to actually submit to that authority, or be shunned or disciplined until the situation is rectified. The Roman church has every right to define its doctrines and dogma, and to chastize those who cross it, providing that member values being a member in good standing. IOW, they DO have the right to tell others what to do if those others claim to embrace that faith.
Women own their bodies. Men ruled women as their "property" (I say men owned women as their furniture - would change their furniture when they wanted a different looking piece of furniture.) Men were stronger than women, so men "ruled". This changed when Jesus Christ came and honored women.
Funny that, because the woman now treats the child as property, just as you accuse men. the woman is stronger than the child, so the woman rules. And the child dies. That's irony for ya.
The body being controlled unrighteously is the child's, not the woman's.
-
Is the House of YHWH the religious sect by the same name?
If you read on, you would know I am a member of no rite or order.
-
If you read on, you would know I am a member of no rite or order.
How about a religious group?
-
How about a religious group?
Nope. Other than loosely Christian, and Messianic Christian, which again loosely denotes Christians who follow Torah as part of following Yeshua.
-
If you read on, you would know I am a member of no rite or order.
Out of curiosity, how do you square this with Christ's covenant in Matthew 18:20?
-
Out of curiosity, how do you square this with Christ's covenant in Matthew 18:20?
That does not require a building full of pews and a 501c3... :shrug:
-
That does not require a building full of pews and a 501c3... :shrug:
Oh ok. I thought you were implying no affiliation with a religious group.
-
Oh ok. I thought you were implying no affiliation with a religious group.
Not implied... declared. I think the brotherhood in Yeshua stretches far beyond the domain of any religious group.
If I meet a man on the trail, and find he is a brother, that is two and Yeshua is there.
If I am on my back porch arguing doctrine with the Jehovah's Witnesses, He is there.
If I go to a Baptist Bible study, or a Evangelical praise service, or the Cowboy church, he is there.
So I guess I don't see how that could be otherwise.
-
Not implied... declared. I think the brotherhood in Yeshua stretches far beyond the domain of any religious group.
If I meet a man on the trail, and find he is a brother, that is two and Yeshua is there.
If I am on my back porch arguing doctrine with the Jehovah's Witnesses, He is there.
If I go to a Baptist Bible study, or a Evangelical praise service, or the Cowboy church, he is there.
So I guess I don't see how that could be otherwise.
I suppose we read Matthew differently. I do not belong to a church currently, either. But that’s because I can’t find one that isn’t conforming to the current social norms.
-
I suppose we read Matthew differently. I do not belong to a church currently, either. But that’s because I can’t find one that isn’t conforming to the current social norms.
Precisely so... And more the point of my own dilemma too - One is to submit to the Church... That is commanded. But that conformity cannot be done if one cannot adhere to the doctrine they ascribe to. So I do the best I can, placing value in elders that I find to be wise... And commit my charity to a couple churches in particular where it isn't given directly. I know no other way to function in submission when I cannot find a church that adheres to the doctrine of Yah. That, I believe should come first. I am no fan of unity in error.
-
Precisely so... And more the point of my own dilemma too - One is to submit to the Church... That is commanded. But that conformity cannot be done if one cannot adhere to the doctrine they ascribe to. So I do the best I can, placing value in elders that I find to be wise... And commit my charity to a couple churches in particular where it isn't given directly. I know no other way to function in submission when I cannot find a church that adheres to the doctrine of Yah. That, I believe should come first. I am no fan of unity in error.
Neither am I. And I typically do not get along well in group situations of any kind. But I do miss communing with like minded biblical literalists.
-
If there is no law, what need for grace? A conundrum many fail to consider.
That's right. An organization deserves the right to it's order... The member voluntarily submits to the doctrine and dogma. Nothing requires his adherence... Except his voluntary acceptance of that which makes him a member. He can walk off at any time, and they, so long as he submits, can call him a member (or not) according to his submission.
The reason I do not have membership in any church is specifically because I cannot agree with their interpretations and cannot therefore adhere. Nor would I insult them by falsely claiming that to which I cannot adhere.
It has long been my dilemma. :shrug:
In today's culture the God men worship is themselves, so they can create any rules they want.
At death they will find how foolish they truly were. The problem for us is they want to drag us down with them.
As far as Church membership goes, I find it strengthens me to fellowship with other believers.
-
Neither am I. And I typically do not get along well in group situations of any kind. But I do miss communing with like minded biblical literalists.
You might suppose I am likewise a Biblical literalist, and I also enjoy long-form (classical) argument and communing with like minds... Especially like-in-kind that think differently. So I go out of my way to engage, often inviting people to my porch, or attending Bible studies that are again, long form and expositional. I tend to favor Baptists and Pentecostals the most, finding their scholarship to be more intense and more open.
But any ol thing will do... I have had elders and deacons from just about every faith on my porch, excepting the Orthodox... And that more form a lack of opportunity... I think all, or many (orgs) that follow Messiah are in possession of something precious. But I have found none that are entirely right. Some of that is Yah's economy... Diversity seems to be a signature. So I am cool with differentiation in emphasis... But when it comes down to bare bones, I dare not offend by adhering to a doctrine I cannot fully endorse.
Perhaps some day I'll find my Church in the Wildwood, but I doubt it. He has put it in me to prefer rocky trails and high pastures to the safety of the sheepfolds.
And I say all that not to be critical of my brothers. But rather to define somehow the path I follow. When I say no one has it right, I would include me in that... But one must strive even yet, to get it right somehow, within the parameters he has laid down...
-
Catholic Democrats Appeal to ‘Primacy of Conscience’ in Abortion Support
Thomas D. Williams, Ph.D. 19 Jun 2021
Sixty Catholic Democrats in Congress have written an open “Statement of Principles” explaining why the Catholic Church should not deny Holy Communion to professed Catholics who promote abortion.
The open letter was published online on June 18 to coincide with the June meeting of the U.S. bishops, who discussed, among other things, the question of “Eucharistic coherence” and conditions under which a Catholic should not present himself to receive Holy Communion.
“As legislators in the U.S. House of Representatives, we work every day to advance respect for life and the dignity of every human being,” the letter states.
The representatives declare that “the weaponization of the Eucharist to Democratic lawmakers for their support of a woman’s safe and legal access to abortion is contradictory.”
The Catholic Church has consistently taught that taking an innocent human life in abortion is always gravely evil.
more
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/06/19/catholic-democrats-appeal-primacy-conscience-abortion-support/
-
“As legislators in the U.S. House of Representatives, we work every day to advance respect for life and the dignity of every human being,” the letter states.
That's not true..Your Dem Party's main platform is Pro abortion...writing and pass inglaws to make it easier and *lawful* to kill unborn babies...IOW's murderers...imho
-
In today's culture the God men worship is themselves, so they can create any rules they want.
At death they will find how foolish they truly were. The problem for us is they want to drag us down with them.
As far as Church membership goes, I find it strengthens me to fellowship with other believers.
That's mostly right. And I too am strengthened in fellowship. Some of that I get from non-denominational Evangelicals I LOVE their praise. Some I get from Pentecostals. I LOVE their spirit. And some from the Baptists and the fire coming from their pulpits. But when it comes to religion, I am a meat-eater. I tire quickly of modern philosophy disguised as Word. It isn't. And in that, all I can do is go on my way.
Which is really alright. I have had my best fellowship along the trail, or in the camp. And while I hunger, I do not go hungry.
-
The representatives declare that “the weaponization of the Eucharist to Democratic lawmakers for their support of a woman’s safe and legal access to abortion is contradictory.”
Have to hand it to the Ds and progressives for their gift of coining provocative, hyperbolic distortions.
I'm not Catholic, but I hope the USCCB makes clear that this discussion will take place in terms which reinforce the transcendent essentials of the Christian faith, not the false, transient doctrines of progressive ideology.
-
@bilo
@roamer_1
Bilo, you said: "I will assume that you are not an Evangelical Christian, or Catholic, based on your post."
__________________________________
No, Bilo, I belong to a Catholic church and have taught a Bible class there; we stopped about the time the virus hit. I have taught Bible classes in Missionary Baptist Churches, Baptist Churches, a good part of my adult life. I was the pianist at three Baptist churches.
Some want "others" to act a certain way. That is the point; you may do what you want; interpret the Bible the way you want. You can only decide for yourself, not others.
Women own their bodies. Men ruled women as their "property" (I say men owned women as their furniture - would change their furniture when they wanted a different looking piece of furniture.) Men were stronger than women, so men "ruled". This changed when Jesus Christ came and honored women.
Back to present day individuals:
Remember, individuals make individual decisions that affect no one but the individual self. These "individual" choices do not involve other people as the choice would not be "individual" if others are involved.
A subject we cannot discuss on this forum: I think we are in the end times and have reasons for that. Maybe I will see you and friend roamer in the near future. Want coffee? Okay, @Cyber Liberty, will have the coffee, and beer. 44444heart
Nothing could be further than the truth. The "clump of cells" in the woman's uterus will become a human being. The church aspect of this came in because biden is openly disregarding the teaching of the church you are a member of. In teaching your Bible class you may want to exam Exodus 21:22-23 it's not hard to understand. Your church is on sound Biblical footing condemning abortion and those member who are pro-abortion should be denied communion.
-
How about a religious group?
YHWH is the name for GOD. happy77
-
Neither am I. And I typically do not get along well in group situations of any kind. But I do miss communing with like minded biblical literalists.
Large groups can be tough because factions form, but if you can find small group Bible studies it's pretty nice.
-
Back to present day individuals:
Remember, individuals make individual decisions that affect no one but the individual self. These "individual" choices do not involve other people as the choice would not be "individual" if others are involved.
I'm Baptist, and we are among the most individualistic of the Christian denominations. The late Herschel Hobbes wrote that a "Baptist Distinctive" is the idea of "soul competence", meaning that each individual has an in-born capability to recognize right from wrong; when guided by the Holy Spirit this "soul competence" equips the believer to read and apply scripture in his or her own life, with no need for the intervening authority of an Ecclesiastical Magisterium.
Even from this tradition of individualistic polity, it is clear that The Church is not about individualism. It is about Communion; communion with other believers; and through Christ The Son, communion with God The Father. "Individual decisions that affect no one but the individual self" are essentially fiction in a Christian spiritual context, and even were they not fiction, abortion is not such a decision.
The Body of Christ can be neither complete nor even subject to His will when it tolerates the destruction of the mortal bodies of the most innocent and helpless, who, not yet having the opportunity to respond volitionally to God's will, represent His glory purely in their existence.
-
The liars lie about nearly everything and deceive constantly. What of those that love being lied to and lead astray? Clearly those love false leaders and their fate is of such.
Jeremiah 1:5
“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you; Before you were born I sanctified you; I ordained you a prophet to the nations.”
Before being formed in the womb, how should God have to make it any clearer that that. They who are willingly lead astray have chosen their leader and where he is known to be leading them, death. Their lieing denials only dig the ditch they are in deeper.
-
You might suppose I am likewise a Biblical literalist, and I also enjoy long-form (classical) argument and communing with like minds... Especially like-in-kind that think differently. So I go out of my way to engage, often inviting people to my porch, or attending Bible studies that are again, long form and expositional. I tend to favor Baptists and Pentecostals the most, finding their scholarship to be more intense and more open.
But any ol thing will do... I have had elders and deacons from just about every faith on my porch, excepting the Orthodox... And that more form a lack of opportunity... I think all, or many (orgs) that follow Messiah are in possession of something precious. But I have found none that are entirely right. Some of that is Yah's economy... Diversity seems to be a signature. So I am cool with differentiation in emphasis... But when it comes down to bare bones, I dare not offend by adhering to a doctrine I cannot fully endorse.
Perhaps some day I'll find my Church in the Wildwood, but I doubt it. He has put it in me to prefer rocky trails and high pastures to the safety of the sheepfolds.
And I say all that not to be critical of my brothers. But rather to define somehow the path I follow. When I say no one has it right, I would include me in that... But one must strive even yet, to get it right somehow, within the parameters he has laid down...
FWIW, as long as you stick with the 5 Solas you're on solid ground.
-
That's not true..Your Dem Party's main platform is Pro abortion...writing and pass inglaws to make it easier and *lawful* to kill unborn babies...IOW's murderers...imho
The only thing you have wrong. It is FACT.
Killing a human being is murder.
-
That's mostly right. And I too am strengthened in fellowship. Some of that I get from non-denominational Evangelicals I LOVE their praise. Some I get from Pentecostals. I LOVE their spirit. And some from the Baptists and the fire coming from their pulpits. But when it comes to religion, I am a meat-eater. I tire quickly of modern philosophy disguised as Word. It isn't. And in that, all I can do is go on my way.
Which is really alright. I have had my best fellowship along the trail, or in the camp. And while I hunger, I do not go hungry.
I'm with you! When a Pastor deviates from Scripture I'm among the first to talk with him. Literal first interpretation will always keep you on solid ground.
-
Have to hand it to the Ds and progressives for their gift of coining provocative, hyperbolic distortions.
I'm not Catholic, but I hope the USCCB makes clear that this discussion will take place in terms which reinforce the transcendent essentials of the Christian faith, not the false, transient doctrines of progressive ideology.
:amen:
It would be a big deal.
-
I'm Baptist, and we are among the most individualistic of the Christian denominations. The late Herschel Hobbes wrote that a "Baptist Distinctive" is the idea of "soul competence", meaning that each individual has an in-born capability to recognize right from wrong; when guided by the Holy Spirit this "soul competence" equips the believer to read and apply scripture in his or her own life, with no need for the intervening authority of an Ecclesiastical Magisterium.
Even from this tradition of individualistic polity, it is clear that The Church is not about individualism. It is about Communion; communion with other believers; and through Christ The Son, communion with God The Father. "Individual decisions that affect no one but the individual self" are essentially fiction in a Christian spiritual context, and even were they not fiction, abortion is not such a decision.
The Body of Christ can be neither complete nor even subject to His will when it tolerates the destruction of the mortal bodies of the most innocent and helpless, who, not yet having the opportunity to respond volitionally to God's will, represent His glory purely in their existence.
[/b]
Wow!
Just beautiful.
-
Every person owns his/her body - the church does not, the government does not, own that body. He/she can do what he/she wants with his/her body. If the person wants to cut off his/her right toe, he/she can. If a man wants to have surgery so he will not produce children, he can. If a woman wants to abort a pregnancy, she can. Others may think a man should not stop himself from having children, but those people do not own this man's body. Others may think a woman should not have an abortion, but those people do not own this woman's body.
Church denominations make their own rules. Baptist rules may be different than Methodists rules, Catholic rules may be different than Church-of-Christ rules. So, all denominations make their own rules. A Christian does not have to join any church to be a Christian. Catholics/other denominations are going to be surprised in heaven when there are other denominations there along with those Christians who belong to no church.
-----------------------------
Multi-tens of thousands of years past, the Wise asked themselves 'What formed the bedrock
of their culture/society?'. Their answer; The Family Unit of Father, Mother and Children!
Their next question was: 'What are the Rules of Behavior necessary to sustain the Family Unit, encouraging it to survive/thrive?'. As a consequence Abortion, Homosexuality, Transgenderism,
among severely neurotic behaviors (which existed) were discouraged, forbidden and punished.
These Rules of Behavior were defined by the Natural Law which had
ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO W/RELIGION OR ECONOMICS OR POLITICS!!!
Underlining these Rules was the understanding that while Rights existed, they were interlocked w/Responsibilities and this understanding governed Mankind for ageless millennia!
The break came from the French Enlightenment, the promoter of the nostrum that
LIBERTE'/Freedom w/o restraint, was the catalyst for the betterment of Mankind's condition.
Man has been paying for that fateful (if not fatal) transformation, as the history of the past
300 years affirms!!!
-
FWIW, as long as you stick with the 5 Solas you're on solid ground.
And I am pretty profoundly so... Which might seem an oddity coming from a Torah keeper... But I think you would find me fairly aligned on the principle things... I kinds dig principle things, you know. :laugh: But how I would present and secure those solas does not fit in the Reformed box... And that is whence I come - long, long ago... From Calvin and the Dutch Reformed... But I do not follow Calvin anymore... I follow Yeshua.
-
I'm Baptist
I could have predicted that. happy77 :seeya:
-
-----------------------------
Multi-tens of thousands of years past, the Wise asked themselves 'What formed the bedrock
of their culture/society?'. Their answer; The Family Unit of Father, Mother and Children!
Their next question was: 'What are the Rules of Behavior necessary to sustain the Family Unit, encouraging it to survive/thrive?'. As a consequence Abortion, Homosexuality, Transgenderism,
among severely neurotic behaviors (which existed) were discouraged, forbidden and punished.
These Rules of Behavior were defined by the Natural Law which had
ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO W/RELIGION OR ECONOMICS OR POLITICS!!!
Underlining these Rules was the understanding that while Rights existed, they were interlocked w/Responsibilities and this understanding governed Mankind for ageless millennia!
The break came from the French Enlightenment, the promoter of the nostrum that
LIBERTE'/Freedom w/o restraint, was the catalyst for the betterment of Mankind's condition.
Man has been paying for that fateful (if not fatal) transformation, as the history of the past
300 years affirms!!!
In the end, society is formed for the protection of women and the rearing of children... That is inevitably what it is for. And when it ceases to do either, it is doomed to fail.
-
I'm Baptist, and we are among the most individualistic of the Christian denominations. The late Herschel Hobbes wrote that a "Baptist Distinctive" is the idea of "soul competence", meaning that each individual has an in-born capability to recognize right from wrong; when guided by the Holy Spirit this "soul competence" equips the believer to read and apply scripture in his or her own life, with no need for the intervening authority of an Ecclesiastical Magisterium.
Even from this tradition of individualistic polity, it is clear that The Church is not about individualism. It is about Communion; communion with other believers; and through Christ The Son, communion with God The Father. "Individual decisions that affect no one but the individual self" are essentially fiction in a Christian spiritual context, and even were they not fiction, abortion is not such a decision.
The Body of Christ can be neither complete nor even subject to His will when it tolerates the destruction of the mortal bodies of the most innocent and helpless, who, not yet having the opportunity to respond volitionally to God's will, represent His glory purely in their existence.
----------------------------------
A respectful observation.
Certainly Religion has its place in the front row of Rule Makers, yet
Natural Law, discerned from Human Nature thru Logic and Reason
in the early existence of Mankind, precedes all Religions.
The Ancients grasped this, among them the Wise Plato who defined
the Psyche (Soul) of Man some 400 years before Jesus Christ and the
formation of Roman Catholicism.
-
----------------------------------
A respectful observation.
Certainly Religion has its place in the front row of Rule Makers, yet
Natural Law, discerned from Human Nature, thru Logic and Reason
in the early existence of Mankind, precedes all Religions.
The Ancients grasped this, among them the Wise Plato who defined
the Psyche (Soul) of Man some 400 years before Jesus Christ and the
formation of Roman Catholicism.
Ah, but not before Moses who walked with Yah... and told of the time before... long before. There is no philosophy of Man that predates Torah. It was, from the beginning.
-
‘I dare you’: Pro-abortion Democrat Ted Lieu challenges Catholic bishops to deny him Communion
June 19, 2021 | BPR Wire
Democratic California Rep. Ted Lieu publicly challenged Catholic bishops Friday to deny him Communion for supporting contraception, abortion, same sex marriage and more.
Lieu responded to news that the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) overwhelmingly approved a measure Friday to draft a statement discussing whether high profile pro-abortion politicians, like President Joe Biden, may be denied Communion.
more
https://www.bizpacreview.com/2021/06/19/i-dare-you-pro-abortion-democrat-ted-lieu-challenges-catholic-bishops-to-deny-him-communion-1091191/
Just excommunicate them.
-
I will assume that you are not an Evangelical Christian, or Catholic, based on your post.
Let me educate you a little bit on Christianity. As Christians we do not "own" our bodies. We are bondservants to our Savior Jesus Christ. IOW, if we truly abide in Christ we happily follow his commands, so we really don't get to do whatever we want with our bodies.
You are correct that a Christian does not have to be member of a congregation to be saved, but what you will find is all Christians that are saved have faith in Christ alone and having that faith lived their lives on earth trying to walk by faith abiding by God's will.
So in answer to your post Scripture is very clear about things we should not be doing, or supporting.
@Hoodat
@roamer_1
No argument, especially about how we treat these vessels WRT to that which we have been scripturally informed is the proper care and use of our bodies.
That said, The Almighty has given us the choice, to follow his will or not. Within the context of a Church (any church) the Church is free to lay down its rules and to give you the boot if you won't follow them.
Open and conspicuous defiance of Church doctrine against abortion and homosexuality is cause sufficient to deny the association with any church which doctrinally objects to those practices.
You want the sacraments, step in line or don't expect to get them there.
Maybe Ted and Joe and Nancy can start their own church, they act enough like Tudors already.
-
Ah, but not before Moses who walked with Yah... and told of the time before... long before. There is no philosophy of Man that predates Torah. It was, from the beginning.
--------------------------
Roamer,
Yes indeed Old Testament Judaism came first, yet the Rule
of Natural Law guided Man's behavior from earliest days,
as the Scholastics acknowledged.
As you already know, there is no fundamental clash between
the Precepts of Natural Law and the Commandments of
Roman Catholicism, along side the various Protestant Faiths.
Conflict arises when a Religion such as Islam, is politicized!
-
--------------------------
Roamer,
Yes indeed Old Testament Judaism came first, yet the Rule
of Natural Law guided Man's behavior from earliest days,
as the Scholastics acknowledged.
As you already know, there is no fundamental clash between
the Precepts of Natural Law and the Commandments of
Roman Catholicism, along side the various Protestant Faiths.
Conflict arises when a Religion such as Islam, is politicized!
Ah, but I would argue they are the commandments of Yah, not the Romans or the Protestants, or the Jews.
And the commandments of Yah inform natural law, not the other way around.
:beer:
-
Another religious debate? **nononono*
Why is it that every thread needs to stay on topic except this one?
@Cyber Liberty
@mystery-ak
@MOD3
-
"Why is it that every thread needs to stay on topic except this one?"
BECAUSE @mystery-ak OWNS THE PLACE - CAN DO WHAT SHE WANTS.
-
Ah, but I would argue they are the commandments of Yah, not the Romans or the Protestants, or the Jews.
And the commandments of Yah inform natural law, not the other way around.
:beer:
------------------------------
Roamer,
I'll accept you argument as I can't prove otherwise.
Most critically, time puts these events so far in the past, they are beyond scholarship.
Stay well.
-
------------------------------
Roamer,
I'll accept you argument as I can't prove otherwise.
Most critically, time puts these events so far in the past, they are beyond scholarship.
Stay well.
I won't go on, but there are stunning proofs contained within the Book that make scholarly opinions moot.
But that's a subject matter for the porch and about a gallon of sweet tea... And that would be a hella good time.
You stay well too friend :beer:
-
"Why is it that every thread needs to stay on topic except this one?"
BECAUSE @mystery-ak OWNS THE PLACE - CAN DO WHAT SHE WANTS.
WTH are you yapping about?
Nobody is questioning who owns the place. Shut your pie hole.
1) We are constantly being told to stay on topic of threads
2) This ain't a religious debate forum and have been warned about it more times than we can count.
-
WTH are you yapping about?
Nobody is questioning who owns the place. Shut your pie hole.
1) We are constantly being told to stay on topic of threads
2) This ain't a religious debate forum and have been warned about it more times than we can count.
Not today we ain't... And the conversation is pretty well over, so...
And nobody's making you look at it either.
-
I call heaven and earth as witnesses today against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing; therefore choose life, that both you and your descendants may live
Deuteronomy 30:19 (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2030%3A19&version=NKJV)
-
Every person owns his/her body - the church does not, the government does not, own that body. He/she can do what he/she wants with his/her body.
No government is standing in the way of that. No government is denying a woman the choice of doing with her body what she wants to do. No government is preventing a woman from using her womb as a sperm receptacle. She and she alone gets to choose whether she will engage in an action that leads to the creation of a new singular life.
If a woman wants to abort a pregnancy, she can.
You just moved the goal posts. We have shifted from the body of the mother to the body of the baby.
The mother already exercised her free choice. She chose to allow a man to ejaculate inside of her. And in doing so, she accepted the consequences of that action, just as the man does. When she gives birth, the father is obligated by law to provide financial support for that child. He doesn't get a choice in that, because his choice was already made.
-
And I am pretty profoundly so... Which might seem an oddity coming from a Torah keeper... But I think you would find me fairly aligned on the principle things... I kinds dig principle things, you know. :laugh: But how I would present and secure those solas does not fit in the Reformed box... And that is whence I come - long, long ago... From Calvin and the Dutch Reformed... But I do not follow Calvin anymore... I follow Yeshua.
FWIW, I'm a Baptist in a non-denominational church. I'm not Reformed either, but I do believe they have a lot of things right.
-
The mother already exercised her free choice. She chose to allow a man to ejaculate inside of her. And in doing so, she accepted the consequences of that action, just as the man does. When she gives birth, the father is obligated by law to provide financial support for that child. He doesn't get a choice in that, because his choice was already made.
Precisely. Legalized abortion doesn't just give a woman control over her own body, it gives her control over the body of the child and the resources of the father, and neither the child nor the father has any say in the decision.
If a woman has a right to reject motherhood when pregnancy resulted from casual sex, then why can't a man reject fatherhood when pregnancy resulted from casual sex? Why is it that the law enables a woman to kill the unborn child, but it will garnish the father's wages to provide for the child? The father simply abandoning the mother and child does far less harm to the child than the mother killing it in the womb.
Setting aside for the moment arguments about the humanity of the baby, if abortion remains legal then legally-enforced child support from an unmarried father must be ended. Woman's unilateral right means woman's unilateral responsibility.
-
@bilo
@roamer_1
@mystery-ak
@Cyber Liberty
When a Catholic cannot go to church, there is a "Spiritual Communion" one can use for the sacraments. I will send this to you by PM. No one can keep you from using this form of the sacraments. So this is available for Biden, Pelosi, anyone. It is between you and God; no priest/pastor needed.
-
So this is available for Biden, Pelosi, anyone. It is between you and God; no priest/pastor needed.
Just curious. In your own personal walk with G-d, what do you believe His position is on killing babies in the womb?
-
There is no philosophy of Man that predates Torah. It was, from the beginning.
Doesn't Zoroastrianism (the Avesta) predate the Torah?
-
Nope. Other than loosely Christian, and Messianic Christian, which again loosely denotes Christians who follow Torah as part of following Yeshua.
I asked because your use of "House of Yahweh" and Yeshua instead of Jesus Christ reminded me of this group I'd read about: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Yahweh
BTW, did you mean "Messianic Judaism" instead of "Messianic Christian"?
-
Doesn't Zoroastrianism (the Avesta) predate the Torah?
No.
-
BTW, did you mean "Messianic Judaism" instead of "Messianic Christian"?
No, I mean what I said. Messianic Judaism holds to the tradition of the Rabbis. I do not. In fact I do not hold to any tradition of men. Sola scriptura in spades.
-
@bilo
@roamer_1
@mystery-ak
@Cyber Liberty
When a Catholic cannot go to church, there is a "Spiritual Communion" one can use for the sacraments. I will send this to you by PM. No one can keep you from using this form of the sacraments. So this is available for Biden, Pelosi, anyone. It is between you and God; no priest/pastor needed.
It's really not complicated. If this is your belief then don't ignore the teachings of your church.
It's so typically liberal to expect that you can have all of the benefits with no responsibility or accountability.
-
Precisely. Legalized abortion doesn't just give a woman control over her own body, it gives her control over the body of the child and the resources of the father, and neither the child nor the father has any say in the decision.
Woman's unilateral right means woman's unilateral responsibility.
-------------------------
To your great credit, you linked Rights & Responsibilities, a core theme of Natural Law,
which guided Man from Eden till the Enlightenment, spanning multi-millennia.
Tragically, by embracing the heresy of exalting freedom while ignoring obligation,
Mankind has done irreparable damage to itself, a reality we pay for, each and
every day of our existence, which we have shortened by this choice!
-
-------------------------
To your great credit, you linked Rights & Responsibilities, a core theme of Natural Law,
which guided Man from Eden till the Enlightenment, spanning multi-millennia.
Tragically, by embracing the heresy of exalting freedom while ignoring obligation,
Mankind has done irreparable damage to itself, a reality we pay for, each and
every day of our existence, which we have shortened by this choice!
Exactly so...
Liberty has responsibilities.
Freedom has consequences.
-
Individual liberty and personal responsibility are inextricably linked together. You simply cannot have one without accepting the other.
-
Well worth repeating:
HoustonSam:
Precisely. Legalized abortion doesn't just give a woman control over her own body, it gives her control over the body of the child and the resources of the father, and neither the child nor the father has any say in the decision.
If a woman has a right to reject motherhood when pregnancy resulted from casual sex, then why can't a man reject fatherhood when pregnancy resulted from casual sex? Why is it that the law enables a woman to kill the unborn child, but it will garnish the father's wages to provide for the child? The father simply abandoning the mother and child does far less harm to the child than the mother killing it in the womb.
Setting aside for the moment arguments about the humanity of the baby, if abortion remains legal then legally-enforced child support from an unmarried father must be ended. Woman's unilateral right means woman's unilateral responsibility.
christian:
The evil and old wickednesses (cult religions)of the Old Testament brought back to life under the false posturing of rights of privileged groups.
-
Individual liberty and personal responsibility are inextricably linked together. You simply cannot have one without accepting the other.
That's right. And the government that doesn't allow for it is doomed to fail.
-
No.
It does. In fact, many scholars think the Torah "borrows" from Zoroastrianism.
-
I asked because your use of "House of Yahweh" and Yeshua instead of Jesus Christ reminded me of this group I'd read about:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Yahweh
BTW, did you mean "Messianic Judaism" instead of "Messianic Christian"?
No, I mean what I said. Messianic Judaism holds to the tradition of the Rabbis. I do not. In fact I do not hold to any tradition of men. Sola scriptura in spades.
I've not heard of "Messianic Christian" before @roamer_1 How does it differ from Christianity?
Thx.
-
It does. In fact, many scholars think the Torah "borrows" from Zoroastrianism.
No it doesn't... And 'scholars' who rely on oldest extant copies to date things are flat out ignorant... That brag went around for centuries against the Masoretic text when the earliest extant copy was from the 1100s
Oops! looky there, here comes the Dead Sea Scrolls to knock back the early extant copy of proto-Masoretic back to 300 BC.
And the Hinnom Scroll (c.700bc), fragmentary and small as it is, places formulaic biblical scripture at least contemporary with Zoroaster (c.600bc), at which point, which is borrowing from the other becomes a mystery.
Fortunately, internal proofs unique to the Biblical Scriptures blow any other thing right out of the water... Because once those proofs are understood, one first has to admit the intellect that put them there - Far far beyond the means of mere men. And one capable of such proofs aforehand has no need to borrow.
-
I've not heard of "Messianic Christian" before @roamer_1 How does it differ from Christianity?
Thx.
In short, I keep Torah, to include kosher, Saturday Sabbath, and Yah's Holy Days, eschewing later established Christian holidays, seeing imported paganism within. Yah said Torah would never change, not one jot or tittle... And I for one believe him.
And I claim discipleship in Yeshua, by his grace, rejecting traditions of men.
Always a stickler for principle things, you know... happy77
-
It does. In fact, many scholars think the Torah "borrows" from Zoroastrianism.
That would be quite a feat considering that the first written record or Zoroastrianism occurred around the same time the book of Malachi was written.
-
That would be quite a feat considering that the first written record or Zoroastrianism occurred around the same time the book of Malachi was written.
the Torah borrowed from Zorastrianism; they were first.
-
the Torah borrowed from Zorastrianism; they were first.
That is simply not true.