Friday/Saturday/Sunday morning preaching.

[Diamat]

The traditional Latin Catholic mass? I would think only Latin major atheistist would enjoy a Latin mass.

Yes. There is something moving about it. The precision of the ritual is beautiful. I don't understand why Catholics got rid of this. If they wanted more followers, they should have stuck to their traditions instead of becoming more like Protestants.



Even the "mea culpa" part at 4:35 is magnificent.

[Sir Adrian]

Catholicism really needs a hard reset imho. Between the tragedy that was Vatican II and over a millennium of reforms and changes it has really lost track of the original message.

[Prodromos]

Not a lot of people speak Latin today, so holding religious services in Latin doesn't make much sense. It's making an idol out of 'aesthetics' or 'tradition', when the object of worship should be God.

XXIV. Of Speaking in the Congregation in such a Tongue as the people understandeth.

It is a thing plainly repugnant to the Word of God, and the custom of the Primitive Church, to have publick Prayer in the Church, or to minister the Sacraments, in a tongue not understanded of the people.

[Cope]

Not a lot of people speak Latin today, so holding religious services in Latin doesn't make much sense. It's making an idol out of 'aesthetics' or 'tradition', when the object of worship should be God.

Weird that you'd cite the Articles of the "Norman" monarchs you think are so tyrannical and oppressive.

[Prodromos]

My aim is chiefly rhetorical. I cite the Articles (and other documents) not because they're an authority, but to make my arguments more persuasive, for example by showing that my claims aren't invented out of thin air but have long been mainstream teaching.

[Cope]

My aim is chiefly rhetorical. I cite the Articles (and other documents) not because they're an authority, but to make my arguments more persuasive, for example by showing that my claims aren't invented out of thin air but have long been mainstream teaching.

Citing the Articles makes your argument more "persuasive" precisely because they are an authority on religious tradition.

Though you aren't really answering my point: a tyrannical series of dynasties (which you classify as "Norman") would not have liberated the common people by insisting on the accessibility of scripture/services in English. It's not called the King James Bible for no reason.

[Prodromos]

Citing the Articles makes your argument more "persuasive" precisely because they are an authority on religious tradition.

To my knowledge neither Diamat nor Settra consider the 39 Articles to be authoritative, so appealing to them as an authority couldn't have been my intention. Anyway, I'd never appeal to the Articles or any other church document as an authority, since I'm thoroughly opposed to high-church conceptions of Christianity.

Though you aren't really answering my point: a tyrannical series of dynasties (which you classify as "Norman") would not have liberated the common people by insisting on the accessibility of scripture/services in English. It's not called the King James Bible for no reason.

If you're implying that the English Reformation was a top-down affair, or some sort of gift from the Norman rulers, I'm gonna have to disagree with you there, but that's a discussion for next year.

[Cope]

To my knowledge neither Diamat nor Settra consider the 39 Articles to be authoritative, so appealing to them as an authority couldn't have been my intention. Anyway, I'd never appeal to the Articles or any other church document as an authority, since I'm thoroughly opposed to high-church conceptions of Christianity.

How can you be "thoroughly opposed" to a "conception" with which you agree? If your point is that native/English scriptural translations are not the invention of the Anglican Church, then why cite its Articles in the first place? Why not refer to Luther or Wycliffe?

If you're implying that the English Reformation was a top-down affair, or some sort of gift from the Norman rulers, I'm gonna have to disagree with you there, but that's a discussion for next year.

The English Reformation was a "top-down affair" directed by HVIII and finalised by EI.

[Prodromos]

A great Protestant and [little-r] republican, Elder John Leland, died on this day in 1841. Leland was an itinerant Baptist preacher, slavery abolitionist, and one of the most prominent advocates of universal religious liberty in the nascent American republic.

Leland delivered a mammoth cheese to President Thomas Jefferson in 1802. Interesting and educational story:

Thomas Jefferson and the Mammoth Cheese

The colossal cheese was made by the staunchly Republican, Baptist citizens of Cheshire, a small farming community in the Berkshire Hills of western Massachusetts. The religious dissenters created the cheese to commemorate Jefferson’s long-standing devotion to religious liberty and to celebrate his recent electoral victory over Federalist rival John Adams.

At the time, the Federalist party dominated New England politics, and the Congregationalist church was legally established in Massachusetts. The cheese-makers were, thus, both a religious and a political minority subject to legal discrimination in Massachusetts.

The idea to make a giant cheese to celebrate Jefferson’s election was announced from the pulpit by Leland and was enthusiastically endorsed by his congregation. Much preparation and material were required for such a monumental project.

Some quotes by Leland:

“Every man must give an account of himself to God, and therefore every man ought to be at liberty to serve God in a way that he can best reconcile to his conscience.” - Rights of Conscience Inalienable (1791)

"Truth disdains the aid of law for its defense — it will stand upon its own merits." - Rights of Conscience Inalienable

"Resolved, that slavery is a violent deprivation of rights of nature and inconsistent with a republican government, and therefore, recommend it to our brethren to make use of every legal measure to extirpate this horrid evil from the land; and pray Almighty God that our honorable legislature may have it in their power to proclaim the great jubilee, consistent with the principles of good policy." - Resolution for the General Committee of Virginia Baptists meeting in Richmond, Virginia in 1789.

"The notion of a Christian commonwealth should be exploded forever...Government should protect every man in thinking and speaking freely, and see that one does not abuse another. The liberty I contend for is more than toleration. The very idea of toleration is despicable; it supposes that some have a pre-eminence above the rest to grant indulgence, whereas all should be equally free, Jews, Turks, Pagans and Christians." - A Chronicle of His Time in Virginia.

[Sar1n]

A little snippet that illustrates the insanity of religious laws.

An Ugandan imam met a woman in his mosque, instantly fell in love and went as far as marrying her quickly. Then it turned out that the woman was actually a man trying to scam him out of dowry and rob him.

Now the imam was fired and they are both facing charges of homosexuality, which are in Uganda more serious than impersonation and theft for the "wife".
https://www.nation.co.ke/news/africa...gtz/index.html
https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2020/01/1...frank-mugisha/

[Prodromos]

Søren Kierkegaard on state churches:

Kierkegaard's final years were taken up with a sustained, outright attack on the Church of Denmark by means of newspaper articles published in The Fatherland and a series of self-published pamphlets called The Moment.

Kierkegaard's pamphlets and polemical books criticized several aspects of church formalities and politics. According to Kierkegaard, the idea of congregations keeps individuals as children since Christians are disinclined from taking the initiative to take responsibility for their own relation to God. He stressed that "Christianity is the individual, here, the single individual".

Furthermore, since the Church was controlled by the State, Kierkegaard believed the State's bureaucratic mission was to increase membership and oversee the welfare of its members. More members would mean more power for the clergymen: a corrupt ideal. This mission would seem at odds with Christianity's true doctrine, which, to Kierkegaard, is to stress the importance of the individual, not the whole.

Thus, the state-church political structure is offensive and detrimental to individuals, since anyone can become "Christian" without knowing what it means to be Christian. It is also detrimental to the religion itself since it reduces Christianity to a mere fashionable tradition adhered to by unbelieving "believers", a "herd mentality" of the population, so to speak. Kierkegaard always stressed the importance of the conscience and the use of it.

When the unbelieving masses start to think of themselves as Christians, it's not a victory for Christianity, it's a total failure.

"Woe to the Christian Church when it will have been victorious in this world, for then it is not the Church that has been victorious but the world. Then the heterogeneity between Christianity and the world has vanished, the world has won, and Christianity has lost."

- Søren Kierkegaard, Practice in Christianity (1850)

[Prodromos]

England's Present Interest Considered (1675), by William Penn, Quaker and founder of the colony of Pennsylvania

Penn offers many weighty considerations of a political nature to show the necessity of toleration.

...

He lays down these great principles: That no man in England is born slave to another, neither hath one a right to inherit the sweat of the other's brow, or reap the benefit of his labour but by consent; therefore no man should be deprived of property unless he injure another man's, and then by legal judgement. But certainly nothing is more unreasonable than to sacrifice the liberty and property of any man for religion, when he is not found to be breaking any law relating to natural and civil things.

"Religion, under any modification, is no part of the old English government. A man may be a very good Englishman, and yet a very indifferent churchman.

...

He then proceeds to maintain a sentiment far in advance of that age, which is this: that so far from a government being weakened or endangered by a variety of religious sentiments, it is, on the contrary, strengthened by them, provided that all are equally tolerated, for it prevents combinations against the government; and he quotes from Livy to show that "Hannibal's army, which for thirteen years roved up and down the Roman empire, was made up of many countries, yet under all their successes of war and peace they never mutinied."

...

In the conclusion of this excellent treatise he draws this corollary: that the way to quiet differences and promote the public interest is, 1st, To maintain inviolably the rights of liberty and property; 2d. That the Prince govern himself upon a balance toward all religious interests; and Lastly, That minor differences be overlooked and practical religion promoted.

[Prodromos]

The evangelical overthrow of the Anglican state church in Virginia.



When church and state aren't separated:

[Prodromos]

How the story of Adam and Eve maps onto the story of Batman. Fascinating.

[Prodromos]

Every year on January 30, Ritualists in the Anglican Church (as well as some Roman Catholics) mourn the death of Charles I, the Norman absolute monarch who viciously persecuted Protestants in 17th-century England, before being overthrown and executed by the English people during the Civil War.

Ritualists worship Charles as a saint and martyr for dying while attempting to impose his religion on England by force. Ritualists also tend to be hostile to the very idea of representative government, yearning instead to reinstate absolute monarchy not only in the UK but in America as well.

Personally, I don't see the appeal.

Seven reasons why the Battle Of Naseby changed British history forever

6. It destroyed the idea of the divine right of kings

Charles believed, as his father and many others before him, that he was divinely appointed to be king by God himself. Therefore, whatever he wanted to do was – naturally – what God wanted and those who were against him were against the deity himself. Unfortunately, Parliament was becoming increasingly dominated by ultra-devout Puritans who believed THEY were the ones divinely appointed by God and their mission was to overcome the tyranny of fallible Earth-bound kings.

While the war was sparked by issues over forms of worship, money, and power, it soon took on a dangerously dogmatic religious tone. With the removal of their critics in a purged Parliament and the decisive defeat of the King’s army at Naseby, it seemed to the Puritans that God now agreed with them.

After Naseby, the Puritan ‘Independent’ faction would become a political force to be reckoned with. And with one stroke of the executioner’s axe, they irrevocably changed the relationship between England’s monarch and England’s people forever.

[Prodromos]

"Democracy is Christ's government in Church and in State." - Puritan minister John Wise (1652-1725)

Clinton Rossiter: "The Puritan theory of the origin of the church in the consent of the believers led directly to the popular theory of the origin of government in the consent of the governed. The doctrine of popular government held in many a Massachusetts village was largely a secularized and expanded Congregationalism."

Harry Stout: "Congregationalism, by its very nature, grants sovereign power to no one. So we find people in New England in these churches playing democratic politics from the start, without ever calling it that. As a matter of fact, I think if you were to stop the average New Englander in the early 18th century and mention the word politics, they would know that word, but would think instinctively of church politics."

Richard B. Morris, a professor in American history at Columbia University, writes: "Just as the church was created by covenantors, so, too, the political order comes into existence as a voluntary creation of the convenanting members of society—the 'We the People' of the Preamble to the Constitution. One can trace a direct movement from biblical covenant to church covenant (Congregationalism) to constitutions, whether state or federal. "

[Prodromos]

Thomas Jefferson on the alliance between Church and State. Seems to have been a Norman imposition with no basis in ancient English Christianity.

Having illustrated his belief in the rights of man with a historical substantiation of those rights in the face of British encroachment, Jefferson maintained his affection for both his Saxon ancestors and the wisdom his whig authors claimed for them. If tyranny came with the Norman conquest, and feudalism was its badge, then every care was needed to rid Virginia of all vestiges of feudal practices. ...

Perhaps typical of Jefferson’s efforts was his sustained attack on the established church of Virginia, beginning in 1776. While in Jefferson’s eyes the Anglican church’s tax-supported and privileged ecclesiastical status was inherently wrong, there were also readily available historical reasons for disestablishment. Jefferson entered two such objections to the continued support of the Anglican church in Virginia, and both were derived from his study of the Saxon past. First, he knew from reading Sullivan’s Treatise on the Feudal Law that “in the infancy of the Christian church … the clergy was supported by the voluntary contributions of the people,” and that the state tax-supported system came later... Secondly, and of greater importance to Jefferson, there was the question of the historical foundation of the Anglican establishment...

David Houard’s Traités sur les coutumes Anglo-Normandes contended that four chapters of Jewish law were appended to the body of King Alfred’s codification of common law by “some pious copyist.” Thus the basic connection of ecclesiastical and common law derived from an “awkward Monkish fabrication,” a fraud and forgery which to Jefferson was so obvious that English judges could only be accused of deliberately if piously avoiding the truth. Unfortunately, concluded Jefferson, the manner in which the clergy falsified the laws of Alfred was typical of “the alliance between Church and State in England,” and judges have always been “accomplices in the frauds of the clergy.”

The thoroughness with which Jefferson undertook his research into the antiquity of ecclesiastical pretensions reflected his abiding devotion to what he believed to be the system of his abused Saxon ancestors... In a very real sense Jefferson’s campaign for the disestablishment of the Anglican church was part of his protracted endeavor to reestablish the true Saxon form of government...

Jefferson had no hesitation in avowing his historical allegiance: “It has ever appeared to me,” he told Cartwright, “that the difference between the Whig and the Tory of England is, that the Whig deduces his rights from the Anglo-Saxon source, and the Tory from the Norman.”

[Prodromos]

More on the disestablishment of the Anglican church in Virginia.

During the Revolutionary War the Virginia legislature stopped collecting parish taxes and eased other regulations in order to encourage wartime unity. When the war ended, however, popular governor Patrick Henry proposed a bill that would have resumed the collection of parish taxes. Tensions between religious dissenters, especially upstart evangelical groups like the Presbyterians and the Baptists, and the Anglican-dominated planter elites peaked. There was an outpouring of petitions and pamphlets protesting the bill from local evangelical congregations, pastors, and fledgling organizations like the Baptist General Committee, headed by Baptist pastor John Leland. In 1785, the parish tax bill was narrowly defeated and establishment was all but legally dead. By early 1786, Virginian legislators saw the turning tide and overwhelmingly approved Jefferson's formal guarantee of religious freedom.

The Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom guaranteed freedom of religion to people of all religious faiths.

An act for establishing religious Freedom.

Whereas, Almighty God hath created the mind free;

That all attempts to influence it by temporal punishments or burthens, or by civil incapacitations tend only to beget habits of hypocrisy and meanness, and therefore are a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, who being Lord, both of body and mind yet chose not to propagate it by coercions on either, as was in his Almighty power to do,

That the impious presumption of legislators and rulers, civil as well as ecclesiastical, who, being themselves but fallible and uninspired men have assumed dominion over the faith of others, setting up their own opinions and modes of thinking as the only true and infallible, and as such endeavouring to impose them on others, hath established and maintained false religions over the greatest part of the world and through all time;

...

Be it enacted by General Assembly that no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief, but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of Religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge or affect their civil capacities.

Jefferson counted the Statute among his achievements for which he wanted "most to be remembered", and it's one of only three accomplishments he instructed be put in his epitaph.

James Madison, the Father of the Constitution, proclaimed that the Statute "extinguished for ever the ambitious hope of making laws for the human mind."

The Statute was a precursor of the Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

George Washington wrote to the members of the New Jerusalem Church of Baltimore, 27 January 1793:

...But to the manifest interposition of an over-ruling Providence, and to the patriotic exertions of united America, are to be ascribed those events which have given us a respectable rank among the nations of the Earth.

We have abundant reason to rejoice, that in this land the light of truth and reason have triumphed over the power of bigotry and superstition, and that every person may here worship God according to the dictates of his own heart. In this enlightened age and in this land of equal liberty, it is our boast, that a man’s religious tenets will not forfeit the protection of the laws, nor deprive him of the right of attaining and holding the highest offices that are known in the United States.

Your prayers for my present and future felicity are received with gratitude; and I sincerely wish, Gentlemen, that you may, in your social & individual capacities, taste those blessings which a gracious God bestows upon the righteous.

[Prodromos]

Parable of the Unforgiving Servant

Matthew 18:21 Then Peter came to Jesus and asked, “Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother or sister who sins against me? Up to seven times?”

22 Jesus answered, “I tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven times.

23 “Therefore, the kingdom of heaven is like a king who wanted to settle accounts with his servants. 24 As he began the settlement, a man who owed him ten thousand talents [a talent was worth about 20 years of a day laborer’s wages.] was brought to him. 25 Since he was not able to pay, the master ordered that he and his wife and his children and all that he had be sold to repay the debt.

26 “At this the servant fell on his knees before him. ‘Be patient with me,’ he begged, ‘and I will pay back everything.’ 27 The servant’s master took pity on him, canceled the debt and let him go.

28 “But when that servant went out, he found one of his fellow servants who owed him a hundred denarii. [a denarius was the usual daily wage of a day laborer] He grabbed him and began to choke him. ‘Pay back what you owe me!’ he demanded.

29 “His fellow servant fell to his knees and begged him, ‘Be patient with me, and I will pay it back.’

30 “But he refused. Instead, he went off and had the man thrown into prison until he could pay the debt. 31 When the other servants saw what had happened, they were outraged and went and told their master everything that had happened.

32 “Then the master called the servant in. ‘You wicked servant,’ he said, ‘I canceled all that debt of yours because you begged me to. 33 Shouldn’t you have had mercy on your fellow servant just as I had on you?’ 34 In anger his master handed him over to the jailers to be tortured, until he should pay back all he owed.

35 “This is how my heavenly Father will treat each of you unless you forgive your brother or sister from your heart.”

A modernization of the parable

Matthew Henry's Bible Commentary

Though we live wholly on mercy and forgiveness, we are backward to forgive the offences of our brethren. This parable shows how much provocation God has from his family on earth, and how untoward his servants are. There are three things in the parable:

1. The master's wonderful clemency. The debt of sin is so great, that we are not able to pay it. See here what every sin deserves; this is the wages of sin, to be sold as a slave. It is the folly of many who are under strong convictions of their sins, to fancy they can make God satisfaction for the wrong they have done him.

2. The servant's unreasonable severity toward his fellow-servant, notwithstanding his lord's clemency toward him. ...

3. The master reproved his servant's cruelty. ... We are not to suppose that God actually forgives men, and afterwards reckons their guilt to them to condemn them; but this latter part of the parable shows the false conclusions many draw as to their sins being pardoned, though their after-conduct shows that they never entered into the spirit, or experienced the sanctifying grace of the gospel. We do not forgive our offending brother aright, if we do not forgive from the heart. Yet this is not enough; we must seek the welfare even of those who offend us. How justly will those be condemned, who, though they bear the Christian name, persist in unmerciful treatment of their brethren! The humbled sinner relies only on free, abounding mercy, through the ransom of the death of Christ. Let us seek more and more for the renewing grace of God, to teach us to forgive others as we hope for forgiveness from him.

[Lord Thesaurian]

Hi guys, please remember to vote/nominate posts for the current round of POTF:

https://www.twcenter.net/forums/foru...ht-Competition