[blockquote] XVIII. Of obtaining eternal Salvation only by the Name of Christ:
They also are to be had accursed that presume to say, That every man shall be saved by the Law or Sect which he professeth, so that he be diligent to frame his life according to that Law, and the light of Nature. For Holy Scripture doth set out unto us only the Name of Jesus Christ, whereby men must be saved.[/blockquote]
Well, there’s one small flicker of hope. Now, after tens of thousands of departures, human debris all across the fields, and countless more problems erupting each month….
….SHE THAT MUST BE OBEYED FINALLY
….ADMITS
….THAT THERE IS A CRISIS.
“Just a short introduction by a man in a sport jacket that had the same electric lime green tint, and a similar pattern, to that worn by the Riddler.”
LOL! and who said reasserters couldn’t be funny?
To the substance of his post though, I am wondering does ++KJS not understand that at Calvary “it is finished” or is she counting on the willful ignorance of those listening? Neither answer gives one much comfort…
Episcopal Life Daily has the entire address in a pdf file.
She says all that, but perhaps a bit less directly than in Fr. Ashley’s piece. But that’s what she says.
I wonder how our “heretics” are feeling about now.? They are in our prayers.
Jesus said to the disciples, “And who do you say that I am?” The personal expression of faith is not about putting me in the center of the universe, but just the opposite, recognizing that I must come before Him who sits on the throne in the center of everything.
The PB’s address reveals that she does not understand the historic faith revealed in the Scriptures.
Which raises a most difficult question: when a person considers him/herself a Christian (as do Unitarians, Mormons, and others) but does not proclaim the Gospel of Jesus Christ as revealed in the Scriptures, how best does the Church state that that individual is not a Christian? The question has a parallel: how best do Anglicans tell others who claim to be Anglican that they are not Anglicans?
I will say clearly that I am no fan of the current presiding bishop. However, after reading her address, I must conclude that she is half right. God in Jesus Christ calls us into fellowship with fellow believers. In other words, we are not saved as individuals only to henceforth wonder around this planet by ourselves as we await His second coming. The Church (the community) is essential for our growth and service of the Triune God we worship. Having said that, I think she is totally wrong about the individual believer. More and more I am convinced that Mrs. Shori has never had a personal encounter with the living Lord. And such a person has no business leading what is supposed to be a Christian fellowship. Sadly it is fast becoming a national Optomist Club. Thanks be to God for the ACNA!
I understand the undercurrent of corporate service to God and man in her speech, but unless she is really of the poor intellect that her more viscious detractors claim, to have what amounts to an archbishop call the salvation of individuals a heresy can not be taken lightly.
I suppose now that songs along the theological line of Amazing Grace and, as Kendall posted in April, For I the Lord Have Slain just need to tossed aside as heretical drivel, then. Death to the children of the Reformation!
There’s a half-truth in the Schoriese spoken. She, like many things, overstates and underclarifies. She’s PARTIALLY right in that John Wesley spoke of knowing no religion other than “social religion”; one lived in an accountable group, one that touches ordinary life, and is lived among others. However, being Wesley, he also framed that view in light of a personal, heart-warmed faith in a direct relationship with Christ. Obviously, it is that portion that the PB underspoke so well, and not surprisingly for reasons that one can say are all too apparent.
Nothing…..[i]absolutely NOTHING[/i]…..this woman says…..surprises me. How on Earth she can claim to be the leader of a supposedly Christian Church is beyond me! I pity those who have been duped by the woman.
No Doubt, the PB’s statement was an attack on Creedal Christianity (not that there is a difference between confessional and creedal). But it should be noted, that the PB denounced the Creeds of the Church!
[blockquote] XVIII. Of obtaining eternal Salvation only by the Name of Christ:
They also are to be had accursed that presume to say, That every man shall be saved by the Law or Sect which he professeth, so that he be diligent to frame his life according to that Law, and the light of Nature. For Holy Scripture doth set out unto us only the Name of Jesus Christ, whereby men must be saved.[/blockquote]
Well, there’s one small flicker of hope. Now, after tens of thousands of departures, human debris all across the fields, and countless more problems erupting each month….
….SHE THAT MUST BE OBEYED FINALLY
….ADMITS
….THAT THERE IS A CRISIS.
“Just a short introduction by a man in a sport jacket that had the same electric lime green tint, and a similar pattern, to that worn by the Riddler.”
LOL! and who said reasserters couldn’t be funny?
To the substance of his post though, I am wondering does ++KJS not understand that at Calvary “it is finished” or is she counting on the willful ignorance of those listening? Neither answer gives one much comfort…
Episcopal Life Daily has the entire address in a pdf file.
She says all that, but perhaps a bit less directly than in Fr. Ashley’s piece. But that’s what she says.
I wonder how our “heretics” are feeling about now.? They are in our prayers.
Grandmother in SC
Jesus said to the disciples, “And who do you say that I am?” The personal expression of faith is not about putting me in the center of the universe, but just the opposite, recognizing that I must come before Him who sits on the throne in the center of everything.
The PB’s address reveals that she does not understand the historic faith revealed in the Scriptures.
Which raises a most difficult question: when a person considers him/herself a Christian (as do Unitarians, Mormons, and others) but does not proclaim the Gospel of Jesus Christ as revealed in the Scriptures, how best does the Church state that that individual is not a Christian? The question has a parallel: how best do Anglicans tell others who claim to be Anglican that they are not Anglicans?
I will say clearly that I am no fan of the current presiding bishop. However, after reading her address, I must conclude that she is half right. God in Jesus Christ calls us into fellowship with fellow believers. In other words, we are not saved as individuals only to henceforth wonder around this planet by ourselves as we await His second coming. The Church (the community) is essential for our growth and service of the Triune God we worship. Having said that, I think she is totally wrong about the individual believer. More and more I am convinced that Mrs. Shori has never had a personal encounter with the living Lord. And such a person has no business leading what is supposed to be a Christian fellowship. Sadly it is fast becoming a national Optomist Club. Thanks be to God for the ACNA!
I understand the undercurrent of corporate service to God and man in her speech, but unless she is really of the poor intellect that her more viscious detractors claim, to have what amounts to an archbishop call the salvation of individuals a heresy can not be taken lightly.
I suppose now that songs along the theological line of Amazing Grace and, as Kendall posted in April, For I the Lord Have Slain just need to tossed aside as heretical drivel, then. Death to the children of the Reformation!
Does anyone else notice the profound irony of an [i]individual[/i] pronouncing “heresy” against an individualistic focus?
There’s a half-truth in the Schoriese spoken. She, like many things, overstates and underclarifies. She’s PARTIALLY right in that John Wesley spoke of knowing no religion other than “social religion”; one lived in an accountable group, one that touches ordinary life, and is lived among others. However, being Wesley, he also framed that view in light of a personal, heart-warmed faith in a direct relationship with Christ. Obviously, it is that portion that the PB underspoke so well, and not surprisingly for reasons that one can say are all too apparent.
Nothing…..[i]absolutely NOTHING[/i]…..this woman says…..surprises me. How on Earth she can claim to be the leader of a supposedly Christian Church is beyond me! I pity those who have been duped by the woman.
No Doubt, the PB’s statement was an attack on Creedal Christianity (not that there is a difference between confessional and creedal). But it should be noted, that the PB denounced the Creeds of the Church!