Surpeme Court Gay Marriage Cases....

[SlowwHand]

IIRC, there are "High Church" Methodists and "Low Church" Methodists. Some of the low church ones do not, I believe (basically indistinguishable from a lot of Southern Baptist congregations).

I'm unfamiliar with the terms. I only can speak for churches of which I've been a member.

[Dinner]

Salting slugs is entertainment on work breaks.

I used to make a "circle of death" around them so they're fine if they don't move but for some reason they always seemed to push one of their feelers into the salt and then the pain of having that melt causes them to go whole hog over the salt circle resulting in them turning into a puddle of goo.

Jesus, I haven't done that in 25+ years. I'm getting old.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Arguing that it has authority in that it is recited doesn't address why you're reciting the Nicene Creed in the first place. Why do they recite the Nicene creed at all? Why not something else?

Well some churches have decided this (the aforementioned evangelical churches). I assume the Nicene or Apostle's Creed is recited due to tradition - this is the historic way to stating the beliefs of Christianity.

And some liturgical mainline Protestant Churches claim Apostolic Succession (even if Rome disagrees).

Where does this requirement come from in your church?

The individual church itself, or perhaps the synod, or congregational authority. Not entirely sure.

[Ben Kenobi]

It seems simple to just admit everyone is equal and go on from there without trying to change the laws of every country on Earth.

Are you saying that unless you're married you're not equal?

[Imran Siddiqui]

I'm unfamiliar with the terms. I only can speak for churches of which I've been a member.

High and Low Church distinctions apply to how much they hold to liturgy and the liturgical calendar (ie, do they have something for Ash Wednesday, Lent, Maundy Thursday as well as Good Friday and Easter).

[Ben Kenobi]

Well some churches have decided this (the aforementioned evangelical churches). I assume the Nicene or Apostle's Creed is recited due to tradition - this is the historic way to stating the beliefs of Christianity.

Here's my point. The Creed comes from the Catholic Church - from the Bishops, which comprise as a whole - the magisterium. In using the Nicene Creed as a criteria for Orthodoxy, you're implicitly conferring the Catholic church as the source of said orthodoxy, or to better phrase it - the magisterium who wrote the thing. This authority isn't divisible - you can't go back and argue that the magisterium is authoritative in this thing without going back and looking at the rest of it.

Now, how do we get from here to authority in Scripture, in the New Testament? The same body - the bishops, the magisterium, about 80 years after Nicaea- set the Canon and published the Vulgate. All subsequent scriptural authority stems from this - stems from the Magisterium that decided that these books are what constitutes Christian scripture. In the NT. This is why you have the books in the bible that you do, at least for the NT - which is not a point of disagreement between the Catholic church and Protestants.

And some liturgical mainline Protestant Churches claim Apostolic Succession (even if Rome disagrees).

Well, it's all a question as to whom was the first bishop? Lutherans trace to Luther who was not a bishop. Anglican succession is more complex, but amounts to the same. I should know! I'm an ex-Anglican and I had to investigate this issue when I came over. This is the reason that the Catholic church treats the Anglican church different from the Orthodox - the Orthodox are a part of the same succession (and by extension the same magisterium), whereas the Anglicans are not. (Having no validly consecrated bishops).

The individual church itself, or perhaps the synod, or congregational authority. Not entirely sure.

Look into it. The Mennonite church I attended didn't recite the Creed. They were very low Church. So I guess you can say I went from Broad to Low to High.

[Ben Kenobi]

High and Low Church distinctions apply to how much they hold to liturgy and the liturgical calendar (ie, do they have something for Ash Wednesday, Lent, Maundy Thursday as well as Good Friday and Easter).

Nonsense.

It's a rating system.

High - Catholic church and Catholic wannabees.
Low - Evangelical churches that aren't liturgical.
Broad - Protestant Churches which are liturgical - ie, they have a set order by which they conduct services rather than just meeting.

Higher up the better.

[MichaeltheGreat]

I used to make a "circle of death" around them so they're fine if they don't move but for some reason they always seemed to push one of their feelers into the salt and then the pain of having that melt causes them to go whole hog over the salt circle resulting in them turning into a puddle of goo.

Jesus, I haven't done that in 25+ years. I'm getting old.

Yeah, their firmware is pretty simple. When in doubt, move your ass.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Here's my point. The Creed comes from the Catholic Church - from the Bishops, which comprise as a whole - the magisterium. In using the Nicene Creed as a criteria for Orthodoxy, you're implicitly conferring the Catholic church as the source of said orthodoxy, or to better phrase it - the magisterium who wrote the thing. This authority isn't divisible - you can't go back and argue that the magisterium is authoritative in this thing without going back and looking at the rest of it.

Now, how do we get from here to authority in Scripture, in the New Testament? The same body - the bishops, the magisterium, about 80 years after Nicaea- set the Canon and published the Vulgate. All subsequent scriptural authority stems from this - stems from the Magisterium that decided that these books are what constitutes Christian scripture. In the NT. This is why you have the books in the bible that you do, at least for the NT - which is not a point of disagreement between the Catholic church and Protestants.

Acknowledging Scripture (let's be careful here, the Church just authorized what was already accepted to be Canonical - saying it "set the Canon" gives credence to the crazies who want to say that the Church tossed out books it didn't like to assert power), doesn't necessarily make it all authoritative. After all, one of the reasons the Protestant reformers left is because they claimed the Western Church was not following Scripture and did not make it authoritative enough (sola scriptura and all that).

Acknowledging Canon and saying it is the literal inerrant word of God are two different things as well.

And also, one can argue that the Spirit can show us if our previous interpretations are incorrect (on say, slavery), so therefore "magisterium" designation doesn't always mean it continues.

Well, it's all a question as to whom was the first bishop? Lutherans trace to Luther who was not a bishop.

Not quite. When the ELCA did apostolic succession, I think they received it from the "Old Catholic Church" - it was part of the deal with being in communion with the Episcopal Church USA. It was incredibly contentious (ie, the idea that every man's a priest was at stake to some). The LCMS does not follow it. The point is, it depends.

[SlowwHand]

We must be broad. We have a program for the service and it's planned. Maundy Thursday, I don't know about at all. The others, sure.

[MichaeltheGreat]

The questions should be, "do you have broads?" and if so, "which way to they make you wanna run?"

[Ben Kenobi]

Acknowledging Scripture (let's be careful here, the Church just authorized what was already accepted to be Canonical

No, they did not. There was no set NT canon prior to the Vulgate. Codex Vaticanus and Sinaiticus confirm this to be the case as they are older than the Canon, and do not have the same listing of books as found in modern bibles.

The Canon was set by Pope Damasus, not before and not after. Anytime a Protestant uses the set NT canon - they are affirming Pope Damasus and the decision made in the 4th century. Why? Because that was how the Vulgate was, and it wasn't even until the 19th century that it became supplanted at least in the English world by the KJV.

saying it "set the Canon" gives credence to the crazies who want to say that the Church tossed out books it didn't like to assert power

That's the authority of the Magisterium. The books they excluded include things like the Didache, (while orthodox simply doesn't offer things the others don't) and the Shepherd. Was this their Authority as granted by Christ to the Apostles? Also yes. Let the crazies be the crazies. The fact is that the Magisterium has this authority. It is the correct exercise of this authority in establishing the Canon.

It doesn't necessarily make it all authoritative.

Yes, it does. That's how the authority of the Magisterium works - that's how it works with the ecumenical councils as well, with Nicaea, Constantinople, Chalcedon and Ephesus. All of which are accepted by the Protestants. You yourself are arguing this when you state that the Creeds sum up the substance of the Christian faith. I'm not disagreeing with you, am I Imran?

After all, one of the reasons the Protestant reformers left is because they claimed the Western Church was not following Scripture and did not make it authoritative enough (sola scriptura and all that).

Yet, they refused to use the Vulgate canon. Does that sound to me like they felt that scripture is authoritative - or that they desired to claim the authority of the magisterium to teach and interpret scripture for themselves?

Acknowledging Canon and saying it is the literal inerrant word of God are two different things as well.

I'm not even saying that either. I'm saying that insofar as concerns the essence of the Christian faith, that Scripture is authoritative (which is exactly what the catechism teaches). Beyond that is up to wiser heads than me.

And also, one can argue that the Spirit can show us if our previous interpretations are incorrect (on say, slavery), so therefore "magisterium" designation doesn't always mean it continues.

Where does scripture say that slavery is positive and beneficial? It doesn't. The interpretation hasn't changed that scripture condemns slavery. What everyone is angry and upset about is that Paul argues that slaves should exercise prudential judgement in seeking their freedom. Does Paul condemn the slaves for leaving? No, no he does not.

See, here's the problem - you want to claim that the authority of the magisterium is tainted by progressive revelation by changes over time. I'm not really convinced that this is the case. I was a Protestant, and every time I went to look back on an issue between the two - either it was indecisive (ie, I was arguing from silence), or the text actually supported Catholicism! That bothered me until I learned the history that I had it exactly backwards. It's like arguing against the Book of Mormon with the Book of Mormon as your primary authority! Which leaves you with just about the only argument, "the Church has fallen away", ie the Great Apostasy.

The LCMS does not follow it. The point is, it depends.

It doesn't depend. Any church that believes in Apostolic Succession argues that they have it. If the LCMS (which comes from the same root as Luther), explicitly argues that they do not have Apostolic Succession - is an admission that whatever instance that they possess it - it comes from after the split, with the ECLA, not before. The only real church which has an argument for it is the Anglicans, and there's no evidence that they had any validly consecrated bishops. It's not like with the Orthodox, who's bishops have always been a part of the Succession.

[MRT144]

Nonsense.

It's a rating system.

High - Catholic church and Catholic wannabees.
Low - Evangelical churches that aren't liturgical.
Broad - Protestant Churches which are liturgical - ie, they have a set order by which they conduct services rather than just meeting.

Higher up the better.

Where does child rape factor in.

[Tupac Shakur]

I used to make a "circle of death" around them so they're fine if they don't move but for some reason they always seemed to push one of their feelers into the salt and then the pain of having that melt causes them to go whole hog over the salt circle resulting in them turning into a puddle of goo.

****ing sociopath...

[Aeson]

I used to make a "circle of death" around them so they're fine if they don't move but for some reason they always seemed to push one of their feelers into the salt and then the pain of having that melt causes them to go whole hog over the salt circle resulting in them turning into a puddle of goo.

A great metaphor for how new posters are welcomed to the OT