Paper Tiger?

  • Thread starter Thread starter DPMartin
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

DPMartin

Guest
Has the Church become a paper tiger? In appearance it is very powerful but in reality it is nothing to be afraid of; it is a paper tiger. Outwardly a tiger, it is made of paper, unable to withstand the wind and the rain.

Therefore not respected to be, that which it says, or shows itself to be. Is the world to fear the Church’s judgement of good and evil. Or is the world to fear the Presence of God in the world?

Hence every knee shall bow. Not at the Church, but the Presence of God in the world. Our Lord Jesus Christ. Isn’t the beginning of Wisdom Knowledge and Understanding the fear of the Lord God? Doesn’t it preserve one alive?

Deut:6:24: And the LORD commanded us to do all these statutes, to fear the LORD our God, for our good always, that he might preserve us alive, as it is at this day.

If the Church does not serve the Presence of the God of Israel in the world, but serves it’s own judgement of good and evil. Then it becomes a paper tiger that is not to be respected, or feared.

How can social justice be anything else but, the Presence of God in the world? The enemies of Israel have no fear of Israel or the presence of Israel, but they do fear the Presence of the Lord their God with them.

The enemies of the Church have no fear of the Church nor the presence of the Church, and the truth is their not suppose to. The world is to respond to the Presence of the Lord their God with them.

In the OT the Presence of God was understood to be in the Temple, His House. And the Power of the Kingdom of Israel in the world but even through God’s Presence with Daniel was Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon taught otherwise, that the Kingdom of God is forever. And Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon learned to fear the God of Israel. Even now the fear is the Presence of God, in Jerusalem. There are those who are against it, and there are those who await it.
 
DPMartin said:
Has the Church become a paper tiger? In appearance it is very powerful but in reality it is nothing to be afraid of; it is a paper tiger. Outwardly a tiger, it is made of paper, unable to withstand the wind and the rain.

Therefore not respected to be, that which it says, or shows itself to be. Is the world to fear the Church’s judgement of good and evil. Or is the world to fear the Presence of God in the world?

Hence every knee shall bow. Not at the Church, but the Presence of God in the world. Our Lord Jesus Christ. Isn’t the beginning of Wisdom Knowledge and Understanding the fear of the Lord God? Doesn’t it preserve one alive?

Deut:6:24: And the LORD commanded us to do all these statutes, to fear the LORD our God, for our good always, that he might preserve us alive, as it is at this day.

If the Church does not serve the Presence of the God of Israel in the world, but serves it’s own judgement of good and evil. Then it becomes a paper tiger that is not to be respected, or feared.

How can social justice be anything else but, the Presence of God in the world? The enemies of Israel have no fear of Israel or the presence of Israel, but they do fear the Presence of the Lord their God with them.

The enemies of the Church have no fear of the Church nor the presence of the Church, and the truth is their not suppose to. The world is to respond to the Presence of the Lord their God with them.

In the OT the Presence of God was understood to be in the Temple, His House. And the Power of the Kingdom of Israel in the world but even through God’s Presence with Daniel was Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon taught otherwise, that the Kingdom of God is forever. And Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon learned to fear the God of Israel. Even now the fear is the Presence of God, in Jerusalem. There are those who are against it, and there are those who await it.
Click to expand...
Two words adress your concern: Free Will.

One can choose to follow Christ and his Church or decide not to. 🤷

Payback comes later. 😉
 
Newbie2 said:
Two words adress your concern: Free Will.

One can choose to follow Christ and his Church or decide not to. 🤷

Payback comes later. 😉
Click to expand...
Newbie2

Thanks for the reply

Though in such a view one could see one’s own truth, or judgement. (no offence intended)

History proves that it is a blessed thing that St Augustine did not think this way or he would of never ventured out to England.

To write the world off to free will choice, is to do the same, and be of the same to chose what is good and what is evil. It is God’s Choice that His People let His Light shine in the world and be fed the meat of His Offering in His Agreement, “Covenant” to the world. Are we not to be the Salt of the earth, according to God’s Word which is the expression of His Choice that is to be fulfilled?

Mt:5:13: Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men.

OT Ref.:

Lev:2:
10: And that which is left of the meat offering shall be Aaron’s and his sons’: it is a thing most holy of the offerings of the LORD made by fire.
11: No meat offering, which ye shall bring unto the LORD, shall be made with leaven: for ye shall burn no leaven, nor any honey, in any offering of the LORD made by fire.
12: As for the oblation of the firstfruits, ye shall offer them unto the LORD: but they shall not be burnt on the altar for a sweet savour.
13: And every oblation of thy meat offering shalt thou season with salt; neither shalt thou suffer the salt of the covenant of thy God to be lacking from thy meat offering: with all thine offerings thou shalt offer salt.
 
Which is better, Newbie2, in the Eyes of the Lord your God?

To God with the world, your fellow man?

Or to hell with the world, your fellow man?
 
Oh, please don’t get me wrong. We are the Almighty’s agents of change on this earth.

What I’m saying is that the world isn’t going to fear the Lord or his Church, and we need to look at that fact in perspective. That doesn’t mean we give up on the world, as a whole, but we do our best to bring the gospel to those who will listen and even those who will not listen. It’s then up to them to accept or reject, and we’ve got it on pretty good authority that a good deal of the time it’ll be rejected. 🤷
 
Newbie2 said:
Oh, please don’t get me wrong. We are the Almighty’s agents of change on this earth.

What I’m saying is that the world isn’t going to fear the Lord or his Church, and we need to look at that fact in perspective. That doesn’t mean we give up on the world, as a whole, but we do our best to bring the gospel to those who will listen and even those who will not listen. It’s then up to them to accept or reject, and we’ve got it on pretty good authority that a good deal of the time it’ll be rejected. 🤷
Click to expand...
Newbie2

thanks for the reply

I understand the desire to be at Peace with worlds given right of choice to not be in God’s Presence, in the respect that it is granted them. But God’s Presence shall be in the world, for it is His, and He shall be where ever it please Him.

There are those who stand inside the gate in recognition of the circumcised for they are circumcised. But there are those who stand out side the gate, pretending to have the keys to the gate, but are not circumcised, which is the reason they are not inside the gate. They insist that they should be obeyed, first, to get inside the gate they have no keys to. If one is not inside the gate, they know not the way in, for if they had keys to the gate, they would be inside the gate. Greeting the circumcised.

If you notice it is when the Presence of God is made known in the world, that changes the world, not the agents. The tool is in the hand of God, but it is God’s doing, that makes it happen. It is the Presence of God that held back the Jordan River, not the Israelites. What is it that the world seeks counsel with, that is something other then the Presence of God.

2Kings:1:
2: And Ahaziah fell down through a lattice in his upper chamber that was in Samaria, and was sick: and he sent messengers, and said unto them, Go, enquire of Baal-zebub the god of Ekron whether I shall recover of this disease.
3: But the angel of the LORD said to Elijah the Tishbite, Arise, go up to meet the messengers of the king of Samaria, and say unto them, **Is it not because there is not a God in Israel, that ye go to enquire of Baal-zebub the god of Ekron?**4: Now therefore thus saith the LORD, Thou shalt not come down from that bed on which thou art gone up, but shalt surely die. And Elijah departed.
 
Newbie2 said:
OK.

So what exactly is your point? You lost me.
Click to expand...
Newbie2

thanks for the reply

Fire and brimstone is not the answer (the Church’s Judgement of good and evil), it is the Mercy and Truth of God in His Grace and Peace, that acts in the interest of the Kingdom of God, and mankind.

How can one be with and for people if one is not with and for people? Is the Truth with and for people? Is the Truth against the nature of the beast? Or is the Truth, the ruler of the beast, that gives Mercy and Righteousness, and Judgement to the dweller in the beast?
 
Newbie2 and Rwoehmke

thanks for your replies

It’s not what I would want the Church to do, who am I to require any thing of the Church. It is what the Lord our God wants of His Church, His People that counts, that is the priority one.

Granted I maybe guilty of ranting or venting here. And I certainly do not seek to confuse. I apologize if this be the case. Of which seems to be apparent. Let me try to explain.
The beast is justified in the flesh by his eating. For it is so, that the beast lives to the next day. Also the rules it follows in order to succeed in breeding, (more of his own kind) and the strength of his flesh he relies on for the survival thereof. No different then the ways of man, who seeks his justification in the world. Making rules in his knowledge of good and evil to declare what is good and evil, for his own purposes, and reasons. Therefore to eat, of the knowledge of good and evil the man thinks he lives to the next day justifying one’s continuance in the world sustained in the functions of flesh. The flesh is, hence justified to be what it is. But what justifies the dweller in the beast, (men souls) which is God’s concern, for God cometh. And men need justification to be in the Presence of God, not justification to be in the flesh. Is it mans knowledge of good and evil? certainly not. How is it that the Heaven and the Earth where justified to be unto the next day.

God saw that is was Good.
Gen:1:10: And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.

And God sees men as Good through what, in His Presence? Certainly not men’s views on good and evil.

Therefore the well being of God’s Church, with God and the world is not to judge the world in the disobedient knowledge of good and evil. The well being of the Church with God and the world is to honor His Justification for man to be in His Presence. Which appeared on the Mercy set, the highest place in God’s Kingdom in the world Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ gave out Mercy and Forgiveness of God that could only be of God, the Almighty Power of Life, to anyone that requested it of Him, without mankind’s knowledge of good and evil or the use of, that continues from generation to generation until He come. For it is God’s Judgement that is apparent in the appearing in the world that God’s Mercy and Forgiveness is what is Good for all mankind. And the ones who did not receive, where the ones who relied on their knowledge of what is good and evil.

God Knows His Way, it is man that must come to know and understand His Way. Our Lord Jesus Christ is the Way of God in the Son of Man. Man certainly is not going to educate God on what is good and what is evil, for God Knows what is Good and what is evil. To be in His Presence and Live, because of His Graceful and Peaceful Presence is Good for man. But to be in His Presence and not live, because of His Presence is evil. It is His Holy Presence that Sanctifies unto Life. And the only Way that God sees you as Good is through His Son in whom He Declared as Good, that Justifies a man to be in God’s Presence and Live.

Mans knowledge of good and evil does not justify man’s Presence with God. Nor does it justify mans presence in the flesh, for it is the sweat of the face that justifies mans presence in the flesh, according to God’s Word.

The Church continues to burden it’s people with the knowledge of good and evil and insists that they respond to the Church’s interpretation of good and evil else the Church declares they are evil. Insisting that the People be wary of their judgement, rather than the Mercy of God to be in God’s Presence and Live. And this causes nothing but debate and strife. For it is to focus on the fatherless, those who do not have God the Father as their Father, the widow those who are betrothed to death and not the Life of Christ. And the poor, the poor in Spirit, that have not the Kingdom of God, that is now at hand. To live to the next day, is to eat of the Tree of Life, the Bread of Life, the Daily Bread, the Word of God. To eat of the knowledge of good and evil, in **that **day tho shall surly die. “**for in the day that thou eatest **thereof thou shalt surely die.” Why is there a constant feeding in the knowledge of good and evil?
But if there were ever a request of my own, to the Church would be a school of discipleship in Christ, Christ alone, where one would not have to be a celibate priest or a doctorate in some divinity, or doctorate in catechism, and have to pay huge quantities of money, to attend or participate in, or receive of, where guys like fishermen and tax collectors can become sons of God.

I apologize for any typos or the running together of thoughts the computer just doesn’t understand what I am thinking :rolleyes:

again thanks for your effort to understand.
 
So how would you have mankind do good and avoid evil if they do not know the difference? Why would God give us the ten commandments or the command to love God with our whole being and our neighbor as one’s self if we do not understand what obeying or disobeying those commands entails? It would seem to me that perhaps you are tending in the direction of gnosticism or other heresies where it did not matter what one did with ones body because only spirit counted for anything.:confused:🙂
 
rwoehmke said:
So how would you have mankind do good and avoid evil if they do not know the difference? Why would God give us the ten commandments or the command to love God with our whole being and our neighbor as one’s self if we do not understand what obeying or disobeying those commands entails? It would seem to me that perhaps you are tending in the direction of gnosticism or other heresies where it did not matter what one did with ones body because only spirit counted for anything.:confused:🙂
Click to expand...
Agreed. I find this comment particularly puzzling:
Insisting that the People be wary of their judgement, rather than the Mercy of God to be in God’s Presence and Live. And this causes nothing but debate and strife. For it is to focus on the fatherless, those who do not have God the Father as their Father, the widow those who are betrothed to death and not the Life of Christ.
Click to expand...
Didn’t Christ tell us our task was to focus precisely ON the fatherless and the widow? In a spiritual as well as literal sense? Didn’t He say He came to seek out the lost and sinners and lead THEM to God rather than merely the righteous? Your comment seems to suggest that we do the opposite, abandon them to their fate. 🤷

Didn’t He warn that His message would cause dissension? Simeon prophesied that He would be a sign of contradiction, and He Himself foretold that family members would be set against each other because of Him. He went further and said He did not come to bring peace but a sword.

And it is a critical part of the Church’s mission to do exactly what you would not have it do - ‘insisting that the people be wary of their judgement’. Christ, if you read the Gospels, spoke every bit as much of justice as mercy. Warned against sin and hell every bit as often as He exhorted to virtue and spoke of heaven.

Justice and mercy are two sides of the same coin - you can’t have, or speak of, one without the other and hope to be speaking truth.
 
Hi, Rwoehmke,

Me, too! 😃 I have had trouble with the OP and his efforts to clarify it…😃 Maybe, ‘…less art and more substance…’ would be helpful.

Seriously, when the Church (Vatican States) was a real tiger - complete with its own standing army plus mercenaries, it was feared by many. But, surely, this was not the vision of a meek and humble Christ leading souls on the path of righteousness.

The Church is to point out the direction we are to follow - this is its moral and ethical challenge in the World today. When we have scandals (selling of indulgences or sexually abusing children) we are much less then a ‘paper tiger’ and we lead others astray through sins of ommissin and commission.

Ultimately, the Church is Bride of Christ and as such to bring all to the Bridegroom - can any other course be stronger?

God bless
rwoehmke said:
I don’t get your point either. Lots of words, but no clear idea of what you want the Church to do, if that is your point. :confused::confused:
Click to expand...
 
Hi, y’all!

Interesting thoughts, which various of you have presented on this and related matters (for almost no C.A. forum remains completely and uniformly steady on the course of its stated purpose: LOL).

The Church can be no stronger than it is willing to be. There has been terrible laxity in the Roman Catholic Church since the universal episcopate of Pope Paul VI. Around his time and that of John XXIII, the papacy began taking its “public relations” part for the Church more seriously than its governing role. The local bishops also, too many of them, have failed to assert the teaching and praxis of the Church in their (arch)dioceses. Yes, there were fitful attempts to enforce obedience to Catholic doctrine and practice, and there have been some fine-sounding documents from Paul VI and John-Paul II (John-Paul I not having had the time to act during his aborted papacy), but they have not stemmed the tide of rising disobedience and unbelief in the Church. The reason? These popes mostly not exercised their authority to discipline dissent and disobedience in the Church; they have done so, fitfully, in some cases, but, for the most part, they have been rather passive in the face of unwanted change (that of the wrong kind).

Authority has to be exercised, justly and consistently, to remain authoritative. So much that is abnormal has occurred on the watch of the popes named, unchecked, that papal prerogatives have been undermined from inaction (or too little action). Benedict XVI seems willing to take stronger stands for Catholic normalcy in teaching, worship, and practice, but the time has arrived to see if the power of the papacy remains strong enough not just to propose but to implement on what the Papacy rules. Benedict has to act, relentlessly and step-by-step, to regain lost terrain in the Church. Retreat now is more harmful than it has tended to be in the past. Fine words and firm action need to go together in the face of so much mounting resistance to authority and outright mounting apostasy.

There would have been no such problem during the reign of the last consistently effective pope, Pius XII, but that was true only because Pius XII was a very pro-active and “hands-on” pope who was fearless in the face of dissent and, at times, of unpopularity and criticism. Can Benedict really make a difference now, really assert the prerogatives of the Papacy? If he cannot, perhaps the Papacy really has withered to being a “paper tiger”. If Benedict acts and there are splits in the Church, schisms from the left, that is better than that the entire Church drift into fecklessness. A “feel good” papacy and/or one devoid of authority from constant attrition is of less use to Christ than what the papacy of earlier ages, when it was not self-limiting from inner corruption and injustice (which were not the norm), had intended and been.

Pax, Jerry Parker
 
Rwoehmke, LilyM

thanks for the replies

Who is there that is the created that is able to fulfill the commandments of God, (God’s agreements, covenants) to man for man to the satisfaction of God unless it be His Word, in the Power of His Presence in man, the Son of God, of God in the Son of Man?

Who fulfilled God’s commandments to God’s satisfaction “that it was Good” before there was man on the face of the earth, in the day’s of creation?

Is the Light found in the knowledge of darkness? Or is the Light revealed into the darkness? Of which darkness has no power in.

What is it that God requires of His creation? Isn’t it the fulfillment of His Word to His satisfaction? Isn’t what God says shall be fulfilled, and He declares as Good in His site? Wouldn’t that have to be in His Presence? Didn’t Jesus say “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.” note, every word. Hence commandments, His Covenant. Even: of every tree you may eat, but of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. And in the result of Adam, man cannot fulfill the commandments of God (His Agreement), and live.

With out the fulfillment of God’s Word in the Power of God’s Holy Presence. With out the Power of God’s Holy Presence as Apostle Paul has said in so many words, is only words. (1Cor:2:4,1Thes:1:5)

And it is the big time Mercy and Grace of God to see to it that His Commandments where fulfilled for us. In order for us to be acceptable in His Presence.

So no one but Jesus has and can fulfill God’s Agreements with man, to God’s Satisfaction to be in God’s revealed Presence. (Did not Adam hear the coming of the Voice of the Lord in the garden and hid from the Presence thereof?) Therefore our trust is in the fulfillment of God’s agreement, new, yes, but notice only in the fulfillment of the old, to God’s satisfaction. That is acceptable in God’s Presence.

So to what good is there to judge the world in it’s lack of it’s ability to fulfill God’s Agreements to man (All of His Commandments) that you yourselves also agree, you do not have the ability to do yourselves. For only in Christ is the agreement fulfilled, of which no one but Jesus Christ has the Power to do and live, in the risen flesh.

It is to yield to His (Jesus Christ’s) Fulfillment of God’s Will for mankind in the Power of His Holy Spirit, for we are to be humble in the recognition that we have not the power to fulfill God’s commandments to His satisfaction, with out His fulfillment that has been done, already. Not the stiff-neck pride that in some self deceiving way that we are responsible, or should take credit for God’s satisfaction in our selves or others. (All, meaning all, Gory and Honor is unto The Father the Son and the Holy Spirit) It is to repent and yield to what has already been fulfilled. Hence the fulfillment of God’s Word in us in the Power of His Holy Presence. And the work is simply yielding unto, like the ground yields unto the instructions in the seed, that one become fruitful in the Spirit of the Lord our God. For the fruit of the Spirit, verify unto Truth the Way and the Life.
 
Jerry_Parker said:
Hi, y’all!

Interesting thoughts, which various of you have presented on this and related matters (for almost no C.A. forum remains completely and uniformly steady on the course of its stated purpose: LOL).

The Church can be no stronger than it is willing to be. There has been terrible laxity in the Roman Catholic Church since the universal episcopate of Pope Paul VI. Around his time and that of John XXIII, the papacy began taking its “public relations” part for the Church more seriously than its governing role. The local bishops also, too many of them, have failed to assert the teaching and praxis of the Church in their (arch)dioceses. Yes, there were fitful attempts to enforce obedience to Catholic doctrine and practice, and there have been some fine-sounding documents from Paul VI and John-Paul II (John-Paul I not having had the time to act during his aborted papacy), but they have not stemmed the tide of rising disobedience and unbelief in the Church. The reason? These popes mostly not exercised their authority to discipline dissent and disobedience in the Church; they have done so, fitfully, in some cases, but, for the most part, they have been rather passive in the face of unwanted change (that of the wrong kind).

Authority has to be exercised, justly and consistently, to remain authoritative. So much that is abnormal has occurred on the watch of the popes named, unchecked, that papal prerogatives have been undermined from inaction (or too little action). Benedict XVI seems willing to take stronger stands for Catholic normalcy in teaching, worship, and practice, but the time has arrived to see if the power of the papacy remains strong enough not just to propose but to implement on what the Papacy rules. Benedict has to act, relentlessly and step-by-step, to regain lost terrain in the Church. Retreat now is more harmful than it has tended to be in the past. Fine words and firm action need to go together in the face of so much mounting resistance to authority and outright mounting apostasy.

There would have been no such problem during the reign of the last consistently effective pope, Pius XII, but that was true only because Pius XII was a very pro-active and “hands-on” pope who was fearless in the face of dissent and, at times, of unpopularity and criticism. Can Benedict really make a difference now, really assert the prerogatives of the Papacy? If he cannot, perhaps the Papacy really has withered to being a “paper tiger”. If Benedict acts and there are splits in the Church, schisms from the left, that is better than that the entire Church drift into fecklessness. A “feel good” papacy and/or one devoid of authority from constant attrition is of less use to Christ than what the papacy of earlier ages, when it was not self-limiting from inner corruption and injustice (which were not the norm), had intended and been.

Pax, Jerry Parker
Click to expand...
Jerry Parker

I can see how when looking at the ways of men there seems to be hopelessness in the sustaining of ethics or morals. But I believe that in agreement there is the precepts or statutes of ethic or morals. In other words there is no ethic or moral to be held to, without agreement. Our’s is Jesus Christ, with God.

It seems that men seek to interpret what ever agreement for there own purposes (no love or trust or hope in the fulfillment of the agreement), and justify their actions accordingly. Rather than to discern in the love of the agreement more then one’s self. And in that is the motivation of ethics or morals to be within a man, and acts accordingly. Knowing that it is the loving trust in the fulfillment of the agreement that justifies him.

In the case of “will fail?” may seem true in a society that looks to justice or Justification in the holdings of money and property. A public view “He who dies with the most toys wins”. But I would point you to the success of percepts of morals and ethics that have effectively changed the not only the English speaking world, but the west as a whole. The concept of “Moral” and the root of the meaning thereof is pointed to (even in the Oxford) is Pope Gregory the Great and his Commentary on the Book of Job. Who, if my memory is correct, also sent St Augustine to the island of England (who it is attributed to as bring the concepts of civilization to England). Of which Gregory was going to do himself but was detained by the emperor of the day to be assigned to be pope, whether he liked it or not. (But it is my understanding there are many versions of that particular history).

But yes you are correct, and it is all about what is valued. But it is never hopeless, it just requires the right man in the right place at the right time, to re-institute the value of ethics.

I think part of the trouble is that what should be looked to for such, has seemed to decompose in itself “The Churches” therefore no one looks to the “Churches” for answers. It seems that the “Churches” have taken a Fire and brimstone attitude, or have fallen to the self satisfaction ways of the world, and that persuades no one, that the Voice of the Lord is with the “Church”, and does not honor, nor value the Truth in the world.
 
D.P. Martin,

**You wrote, in part: ** [Y]es, you are correct, and it is all about what is valued. But it is never hopeless, it just requires the right man in the right place at the right time, to re-institute the value of ethics.

I think part of the trouble is that what should be looked to for such, has seemed to decompose in itself “The Churches” therefore no one looks to the “Churches” for answers. It seems that the “Churches” have taken a Fire and brimstone attitude, or have fallen to the self satisfaction ways of the world, and that persuades no one, that the Voice of the Lord is with the “Church”, and does not honor, nor value the Truth in the world.​

Thanks for your reply, though much of it seems rather unclear to me. It sounds nice, at least—.

Your point about the increasing disconnect between the public stands of “churches”’ on issues and how the public receives them, mainly in uninterest, is a good one. A weak church, or array of denominations and sects, eager to express its opinions but slow to practical charity and action, does breed indifference or contempt with the public. When that is in harness (as it is, for example, in the Protestant Episcopal (U.S. Anglican and United Methodist “churches”) with tolerance for depravity and contempt for the beleaguered orthodoxy of the minority of relatively “orthodox” believers among them, it is hardly any wonder that the world pays them so little heed (or even should do so), the more so because at their meetings and convocations they dwell little on what is specifically Christian and religious, and too excessively on what is worldly (often taking very dubious stances on the issues). They become mere tiresome nags.

The Catholic Church can sink to that level, too, as the national Catholic bishops councils ape the ways of their separated and purblind sectarian brethren, but the Vatican has managed to retain some clout by not descending to the level of the Church’s bishops. However, it is not good complacently to wait for “the right man in the right place at the right time”, as if that were sufficient. The Church must ever and constantly strive to uphold what is good, and true, and orthodox, not merely to be “waiting for Godot”! The public holds even the Popes in some contempt for their endless vacillation when confronted with that is wrong in the Church itself as well as in the world.

Pax, Jerry Parker
 
Jerry_Parker said:
D.P. Martin,

**You wrote, in part: ** [Y]es, you are correct, and it is all about what is valued. But it is never hopeless, it just requires the right man in the right place at the right time, to re-institute the value of ethics.

I think part of the trouble is that what should be looked to for such, has seemed to decompose in itself “The Churches” therefore no one looks to the “Churches” for answers. It seems that the “Churches” have taken a Fire and brimstone attitude, or have fallen to the self satisfaction ways of the world, and that persuades no one, that the Voice of the Lord is with the “Church”, and does not honor, nor value the Truth in the world.​

Thanks for your reply, though much of it seems rather unclear to me. It sounds nice, at least—.

Your point about the increasing disconnect between the public stands of “churches”’ on issues and how the public receives them, mainly in uninterest, is a good one. A weak church, or array of denominations and sects, eager to express its opinions but slow to practical charity and action, does breed indifference or contempt with the public. When that is in harness (as it is, for example, in the Protestant Episcopal (U.S. Anglican and United Methodist “churches”) with tolerance for depravity and contempt for the beleaguered orthodoxy of the minority of relatively “orthodox” believers among them, it is hardly any wonder that the world pays them so little heed (or even should do so), the more so because at their meetings and convocations they dwell little on what is specifically Christian and religious, and too excessively on what is worldly (often taking very dubious stances on the issues). They become mere tiresome nags.

The Catholic Church can sink to that level, too, as the national Catholic bishops councils ape the ways of their separated and purblind sectarian brethren, but the Vatican has managed to retain some clout by not descending to the level of the Church’s bishops. However, it is not good complacently to wait for “the right man in the right place at the right time”, as if that were sufficient. The Church must ever and constantly strive to uphold what is good, and true, and orthodox, not merely to be “waiting for Godot”! The public holds even the Popes in some contempt for their endless vacillation when confronted with that is wrong in the Church itself as well as in the world.

Pax, Jerry Parker
Click to expand...
Jerry Parker

thanks for the reply

It has been God’s Wisdom to deal with the dreams and desires of His People, even look at how the Lord chose Abraham and dealt with Abraham’s desires for a son to inherit. And of course we don’t walk in the Shoes of the Fisherman, but those given charge in the Vatican do not walk in our shoes nether. It is the Lord who in the end Judges according to His Wisdom, in the fulfillment of God’s Word. Of which we should seek, whether the those in the Vatican seek it or not. If we seek the fulfillment of God’s Word in us, no matter what, the Lord will see us through.

If you look to the days of the Profits, the Light was with the People of God no matter the actions of their kings or princes. This is not to say the Vatican is this, or that, but what ever is in God’s Hand, He will not let go of, that is His Promise in Jesus Christ.
 
In the O/T there was certainly fear instilled into people,and worshipping of idols brought about severe repercussions such as the devastation of countries and dethroning of Kings.However the question of the church becoming a paper Tiger in the present context does not arise as the Church instituited by Jesus Christ entered into a new covenant with the people and salvation was brought about by his sacrfice on the cross and it is not fear that he instilled but love and faith in his Gospel which will give us everlasting life.The teachings of Jesus chrst is the vital element here and we haave to follow his doctrine and have faith.Our journey is towards salvation and eternal Glory.If people in the Chirch are paper Tigers and fault in the spreading of the word of God that is not relevent because the word of God and the new covenant is the factor that is material
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top