Wednesday, March 21, 2012

On this day, 456 years ago, Archbishop Cranmer was martyred

On the announcement of the intention of Dr Rowan Williams to resign the See of Canterbury at the end of this year, former Bishop of Durham Tom Wright observed:
A measure of how much the struggle for unity has cost was Rowan’s moving sermon on the 450th anniversary of Thomas Cranmer’s death. Cranmer struggled with conflicting personal, political and theological loyalties. The careful balance of his prose reflects an anguished attempt to hold together a church and nation in crisis. Rowan clearly identified with his predecessor.
In commemoration of His Grace's martyrdom on this day 456 years ago, here is an excerpt from that sermon preached by his successor five years ago at the Church of St Mary the Virgin, Oxford:
Cranmer lived in the middle of controversies where striking for a kill was the aim of most debaters. Now of course we must beware of misunderstanding or modernising. He was not by any stretch of the imagination a man who had no care for the truth, a man who thought that any and every expression of Christian doctrine was equally valid; he could be fierce and lucidly uncompromising when up against an opponent like Bishop Gardiner. Yet even as a controversialist he shows signs of this penitent scrupulosity in language: yes, this is the truth, this is what obedience to the Word demands - but , when we have clarified what we must on no account say, we still have to come with patience and painstaking slowness to crafting what we do say. Our task is not to lay down some overwhelmingly simple formula but to suggest and guide, to build up the structure that will lead us from this angle and that towards the one luminous reality. 'Full, perfect and sufficient' - each word to the superficial ear capable of being replaced by either of the others, yet each with its own resonance, its own direction into the mystery, and, as we gradually realise, not one of them in fact dispensable.

...And in his last days, this was Cranmer's curse. If there was no easy certainty enough to kill for, was there certainty enough to die for? That habit of mind which had always circled and hovered, tested words and set them to work against each other in fruitful tension, sought to embody in words the reality of penitence and self-scrutiny, condemned him, especially in the midst of isolation, confusion, threats and seductions of spirit, to a long agony, whose end came only in this church minutes before his last hurrying, stumbling walk through the rain to the stake. It is extraordinary to think of him drafting two contradictory versions of his final public confession, still not knowing what words should sum up his struggles. But at the last, it is as if he emerges from the cloud of words heaped up in balance and argument and counterpoint, knowing almost nothing except that he cannot bring himself to lie, in the face of death and judgement. What he has to say is that he has 'written many things untrue' and that he cannot face God without admitting this. He cannot find a formula that will conceal his heart from God, and he knows that his heart is, as it has long been, given to the God whom the Reformation had let him see, the God of free grace, never bound by the works or words of men and women. Just because he faces a God who can never be captured in one set of words, a God who is transcendently holy in a way that exacts from human language the most scrupulous scepticism and the most painstaking elaboration possible, he cannot pretend that words alone will save him. 'If we deny him, he also will deny us'. He must repent and show his repentance with life as well as lips; 'forasmuch as my hand offended in writing contrary to my heart, therefore my hand shall first be punished'.

...So Cranmer draws the terrible and proper conclusion from a lifetime of skill and balance, of 'rightly dividing the word of truth': what appears bit by bit in our words about God as they are prompted and fired by the Word Incarnate is the realisation of the God who is always in excess of what can be said...

...It led Cranmer - as it led so many others in that nightmare age, as it led the martyrs of our own age - Bonhoeffer, Maria Skobtsova, Janani Luwum - to something more than a contemplative silence: to a real death. When we say that the word of God is not bound, we say that death itself can be the living speech of God, as the Word was uttered once and for all in the silence at the end of Good Friday. Cranmer speaks, not only in the controlled passion of those tight balances and repetitions in his Prayer Book, but in that chilling final quarter of an hour. He ran through the downpour to the town ditch and held out his right hand, his writing hand, for a final composition, a final liturgy. And, because the word of God is not bound, it is as if that hand in the flames becomes an icon of the right hand of Majesty stretched out to us for defence and mercy.

His Grace is not a Saint: today is not a Feast or Principal Holy Day in the Church of England; just a 'lesser festival' of remembrance - 'Thomas Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury, Reformation Martyr, 1556.' From His Grace's Book of Common Prayer, the gospel reading for today:
Be ye therefore merciful, as your Father also is merciful.
Judge not, and ye shall not be judged;
condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned;
forgive, and ye shall be forgiven;
give, and it shall be given unto you;
good measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and running over,
shall men give into your bosom.
For with the same measure that ye met withal,
it shall be measured to you again (Lk 6:36-38)


Blogger The Gray Monk said...

Well remembered, Your Grace. ++Rowan may not be everyone's favourite Archbishop of Canterbury, but he is an eminent historian, theologian and a great Christian. Ironically those who seek the "purity" of Anglicanism and join with the Sydney Diocese to bring it about are more likely to find themselves in the sort of presbyterianism that gave rise to Cromwell and his excesses ...

21 March 2012 at 19:54  
Blogger The Gray Monk said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

21 March 2012 at 19:54  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Your Grace. A good man, but if only he’d stayed with Rome and reformed what was there at home. What a fearsome cardinal he would have made...

21 March 2012 at 20:13  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

A complex man living in complex times.

21 March 2012 at 21:00  
Blogger bluedog said...

Mr Inspector @ 20.13, just as a matter of interest, how far do you think ++Rowan would have risen within the Roman hierarchy?

21 March 2012 at 21:27  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Bluedog. Very much doubt he would have gone beyond priest. You see, advancement in the episcopal Catholic church is dependant on towing the line. Maybe he would have opted for one of the religious orders and a life of contemplation, work and prayer...

21 March 2012 at 21:54  
Blogger bluedog said...

Mr Inspector, agreed!

Not sufficiently Regimental or Corporate, which in itself marks the differing cultures of the CofE and the RCC.

21 March 2012 at 22:16  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

I prefer the terms orthodox and loyal to the Truth of the Gospel and obedient to his superiors.

With the clarity of Catholic teaching, Rowan's indecisiveness and lack of political acumen in the face of theological division would not necessarily have held him back.

A man of diplomacy, loyalty, obedience, faith and intelligence in the Catholic Church would most certainly progress.

22 March 2012 at 00:24  
Blogger Oswin said...

Dodo: so don't be leaving your day job! :o)

22 March 2012 at 01:18  
Blogger Oswin said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

22 March 2012 at 01:18  
Blogger Atlas Shrugged said...

I beg to disagree.

A love for living in the most splendid of palaces, wearing of the finest jewellery, dressing in the finest of silks; an absolute obedience to the hierarchy, (or else) a propensity to disregard almost the entirety of holy scripture, talent to sell worthless trinkets at the most extortionate prices to the rich, as well as other perfectly useless snake oil products to the poor, is the way to certain progress within the Catholic Church, as it is when it comes to advancement within all other devoutly Godless large multi-national corporations.

Welcome to The Church of Rome, the institution that brought International Corporatism to the entire World, whether it liked it or not.

22 March 2012 at 01:19  
Blogger Alison Judith Bailey said...

Henry VIII on Cranmer:
"These cardinals trifle with me: I abhor
This dilatory sloth and tricks of Rome.
My learn'd and well-beloved servant, Cranmer,
Prithee, return: with thy approach, I know,
My comfort comes along".
Henry VIII 2.4 William Shakespeare

22 March 2012 at 09:01  
Blogger IanCad said...

Thank you YG for keeping alive the memory of this great martyr.
That he and others who preached the pure Gospel, foundational to our liberties, are largely forgotten today is a tragedy for which we all will have to pay the price.

22 March 2012 at 09:05  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...


"Rome won't do what I want but I can push this chap about and get what I want. That's why I promoted him from family chaplain to the Boylyn's."

22 March 2012 at 09:32  
Blogger The Judicious Hooker said...

A very worthy tribute, Your Grace, on this important date in English religious history and in this important year of anniversary for the Book of Common Prayer.

If our Prayer Book's ordered simplicity, its scriptural authenticity and its use of Christendom's best liturgical treasures were not enough to commend it, that the chief compiler suffered death for his reformed faith, has given that service book such credibility that it has never ceased to resonate all that is most worthy in the English Christian tradition.

The homily by Archbishop Williams moved me to the point of tears and captures in pure poetry the anguished vulnerability of the final hours of our first reformed Archbishop of Canterbury.

While I do not seek to antagonise the papistical blowflies around Your Grace's pyre, no honest remembrance of this day should, however, omit Thomas's last defiant cry before those who condemned him:

"And as for the pope, I refuse him, as Christ's enemy, and Antichrist with all his false doctrine!"

Nor should we forget his final words after the example of St Stephen the Protomartyr:

"Lord Jesus, receive my spirit... I see the heavens open and Jesus standing at the right hand of God."

22 March 2012 at 11:04  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Hooker said ...
"the papistical blowflies around Your Grace's pyre"

I believe that's a confused mataphor, Hooker.

In any event, no Catholic takes any pleasure from the fate of Archbishop Cranmer. You should also note he was condemned first for treason against his lawful Monarch and thereafter for heresy.

Perhaps if he had stayed true to English traditions and avoided the influences of continental reformers he would have proved loyal to his country and to its Church.

It is also sad to note that as Archbishop of Canterbury in 1533, before Henry XIII's excommunication, he was responsible for the death of John Firth, a protestant, for holding heretical views on Purgatory and on the Eucharist - views Cranmer would later come to agree with.

As I said, a complex man, living in complex times.

22 March 2012 at 12:06  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Dodo kindly pontified for us 'less superior' the RCC views

"I prefer the terms orthodox (?? Your church differs vastly from the views of early church fathers right up to Augustine, who led you on your continous path of error) and loyal to the Truth of the Gospel (Which Rome denies as sufficient for Sin..other things must be added that are non biblical) and obedient to his superiors (“Church discipline may be broadly defined as the confrontive and corrective measures taken by an individual, church leaders, or the congregation regarding a matter of sin in the life of a believer, whoever he/she/they are...Pope or Plebe!
The church is therefore to clean out the leaven of malice and wickedness from its ranks (1 Cor. 5:6-8). Whoever and Whatever. A failure to exercise discipline in the church evidences a lack of awareness of and concern for the holiness of God.
Further several examples of church discipline are found in Scripture. The Corinthian believers were to be “ALL gathered together” in order to take action against the offending brother (1 Cor. 5:4-5; Rom. 16:17; 2 Thess. 3:6-15; Phil. 3:17-19).

This is defined by Paul as “punishment inflicted by the majority” (2 Cor. 2:6). As a protective measure, we also find that the whole church in Rome and in Thessalonica were to take action with regard to the unruly and schismatic, NOT JUST A FEW (2 Thess. 3:6-15; Rom. 16:17).
Key is False Teaching; erroneous teaching and views which concern the fundamentals of the faith and not lesser differences of interpretation (1 Tim. 1:20; 2 Tim. 2:17-18; also implied in Rev. 2:14-16; Phil. 3:2-3, 15-19; Rom. 16:17-18).Need Ernst go on?.

With the clarity of Catholic teaching (The church that bases it's authority on it's own corrupt doctrines and practices!), Rowan's indecisiveness and lack of political acumen in the face of theological division would not necessarily have held him back.

A man of diplomacy, loyalty, obedience, faith and intelligence in the Catholic Church would most certainly progress.(Such as Cardinal Crescenzio Sepe who are able to claim immunity to crime as a Vatican diplomatic passport holder asnd others such as Villot, Cody, Marcinkus, Mennini, de Strobel, de Bonis and Poletti., yes? What a joke Rome is! A Bird would be better off remaining quiet least your church's sin are brought to the fore).

Roman Catholicism..A Complex Church that benefits during complex times.

Between a humble church Rock/Kettle that allows Roman Catholicism to exist in it's realm and a very Roman/Blackest hard place.

Ernst knows which he prefers!


God and Superiors;

Deut 10:17 "The great God, mighty and awesome, who shows no partiality …'

2 Chron. 19:7 "For with the LORD our God there is no injustice or partiality …"

Job 34:19 [God] "who shows no partiality …"

Acts 10:34 "I now realize how true it is that God does not show favoritism"

Romans 2:11 "For God does not show favoritism."

Galatians 2:6 "As for those who seemed to be important--whatever they were makes no difference to me; God does not judge by external appearance."

Ephesians 6:9 "and there is no favoritism with him."

Colossians 3:25 "… and there is no favoritism."

1 Peter 1:17 "Since you call on a Father who judges each man's work impartially …"

RCC adherents points of view..always good for a chuckle. Why let a little thing like history get in the way of a good lie!

Ernst S Blofeld

22 March 2012 at 14:20  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...


Sorry I disturbed your sleep. You can return to your slumbers now you've got all that bile off your chest. That's a good chap, cough it up.

22 March 2012 at 15:11  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Dodo, all duffered up

The truth hurts, does it not, or is it coz u is catlick?


22 March 2012 at 16:25  
Blogger len said...

There comes a times when one can compromise no more!.
Cranmer realised that compromise was the way to spiritual death and chose physical death to be preferable that that.
When we compromise with the Word of God by adding the 'works of men' we negate the Gospel and add credence to 'the lie'.It was preferring to believe the Truth above' the Lie 'which made a martyr of Cranmer and countless others in the past and present.
Jesus said I am the Way, the Truth and the Life and without honouring the Truth we open the doors to deception.

Paul said " Without Love we are nothing".......But if we do not have the Truth(and a love of the truth) then we are well and truly lost and without hope.

Some advocate compromise between religions as a means of obtaining 'peace' and those who contend for Biblical Christianity are seen as 'troublemakers' and 'divisive' but as J C Ryle said “Never let us be guilty of sacrificing any portion of truth on the altar of peace".

22 March 2012 at 18:58  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Len said most wonderfully


You quote from one of Ernst's favourite Preachers, the incomparable J C Ryle. The Prince of evangelical Anglicans.

Thank you my boy.


22 March 2012 at 19:47  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

And let'snotforget the Forty Martyrs of England and Wales, a group of men and women who were executed for treason and related offences of heresy in the Kingdom of England between 1535 and 1679. All were subjected to the religiously oppressive regimes of the Tudor and Stuart periods as part of the Protestant purge. They were canonized on 25 October 1970 by Pope Paul VI.

"There are not over a hundred people ... who hate the Catholic Church.

There are millions, however, who hate what they wrongly believe to be the Catholic Church — which is, of course, quite a different thing.

These millions can hardly be blamed for hating Catholics because Catholics "adore statues"; because they "put the Blessed Mother on the same level with God"; because they say "indulgence is a permission to commit sin"; because the Pope "is a Fascist"; because the "Church is the defender of Capitalism."

If the Church taught or believed any one of these things it should be hated, but the fact is that the Church does not believe nor teach any one of them.

It follows then that the hatred of the millions is directed against error and not against truth. As a matter of fact, if we Catholics believed all of the untruths and lies which were said against the Church, we probably would hate the Church a thousand times more than they do."
(Msgr. Fulton J. Sheen, D.D.)

22 March 2012 at 20:21  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Ernst stated

""There are not over a hundred people ... who hate the Catholic Church. " Then your (RCC) mathematics is as dodgy as your (RCC) total recall of history and events detailed!

All the above stated by, oh yes, a Roman Catholic apologist? Ernst is NOT expecting the 'Tiberian Turkeys' to vote for Christmas, now is he. If so, can Ernst provide some historical stuffing and the best roasting times per lb of nonsense to ensure it is well and truly cooked!

"A man of diplomacy, loyalty, obedience, faith and intelligence in the Catholic Church would most certainly progress." Or even for a man or woman to ignore the most obvious errors because obviously;

1. Catholics DO "adore statues";
2. because they DO "put the Blessed Mother on the same level with God"; 3. because they DO allow that "indulgence is a permission to commit sin".
4. and equally worse things than this.

Dear Birdie, if Ernst needed to get an opinion of Islam or Roman Catholicism or Extreme Protestantism, he would NOT ask Osama Bin Laden, he would NOT ask Msgr. Fulton J. Sheen, D.D., neither would he NOT ask Benny Hinn.
Ernsty would investigate the religious doctrines and statement materials concerned himself and arrive at an obvious conclusion, biblically speaking.

Ernst has on all three cases but ta for the propaganda.


22 March 2012 at 21:24  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...


You missed the most important part of the passage, a tendency I've noted amomgst some 'apologists' who protest.

"There are millions, however, who hate what they wrongly believe to be the Catholic Church — which is, of course, quite a different thing."

If I wanted to find out about Jesus, would I ask a member of the Sanhedrin?

22 March 2012 at 21:43  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...


It was You that missed the most important part of the comment of Ernst, a tendency amongst RCC 'apologists' such as yourself, who protest we do not know what you believe, whereas mostly WE DO.

Millions eh,?

EVIDENCE please, from these millions your church claims it knows!

HATE is such an emotive word.

Psalm 5:5, "The boastful shall not stand before Thine eyes; Thou dost hate all who do iniquity,"

Psalm 11:5, "The Lord tests the righteous and the wicked, and the one who loves violence His soul hates."

Lev. 20:23, "Moreover, you shall not follow the customs of the nation which I shall drive out before you, for they did all these things, and therefore I have abhorred them."

Prov. 6:16-19, "There are six things which the Lord hates, yes, seven which are an abomination to Him: 17 Haughty eyes, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, 18 A heart that devises wicked plans, feet that run rapidly to evil, 19 A false witness who utters lies, and one who spreads strife among brothers."

Hosea 9:15, "All their evil is at Gilgal; indeed, I came to hate them there! Because of the wickedness of their deeds I will drive them out of My house! I will love them no more; All their princes are rebels."

Can God hate a person? YES
Can Ernst,Dickie and others, hate a person? NO!
We do not have the same standard of holiness that would give us the authority to judge.
The Lord told us that love for others is the defining characteristic of our faith. (John 13:35)

Ernst stands by what he said.


22 March 2012 at 22:17  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...


But we're not talking here about individual people being hated. We're talking about the Roman Catholic Church, its teachings, sacraments and priesthood. Surely you don't need me to cite the hateful comments about the Church made over the centuries?

Naturally you don't hate me (who could?) or any other Catholic. It's not in your nature, even I can discern that.

God loves and protects His Catholic Church despite its many human failings and sin down the centuries. It is Christ's Bride and He is a faithful Spouse.

22 March 2012 at 22:53  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Enrst said ...

"Can God hate a person? YES"

This is one of the great divides between protestants and Catholics.

The God who is love does not hate his creatures. God hates no man - He is Justice.

"For as love is to the good, so hatred is to evil; for to those we love we will good, and to those we hate, evil. If, then, the will of God cannot be inclined to evil, as has been shown, it is impossible that He should hate anything."
(Thomas Aquinas)

"For thou lovest all things that are, and hatest none of the things which thou hast made: for thou didst not appoint, or make any thing hating it"
(Wis. 11:25)

"The Lord is good to all, and compassionate toward all his works"
(Ps. 144/145:9)

Well, what about these passages you've quoted?

God is said by similitude to hate some things in a twofold way. First, because God, in loving things and by willing the existence of their good, wills the non-existence of the contrary evil. Hence, He is said to have a hatred of evils, for we are said to hate what we will not to exist.

"And let none of you imagine evil in your hearts against his friend and love not a false oath. For all these are the things that I hate, saith the Lord."
(Zechariah 8:17)

These, however, are not effects in the manner of subsisting things, to which properly love and hate refer.

Secondly, God wills some greater good that cannot be without the loss of some lesser good. And thus He is said to hate, although this is rather to love.

For, inasmuch as God wills the good of justice or of the order of the universe, which cannot exist without the punishment or corruption of some things, God is said to hate the things whose punishment or corruption He wills.

"I have hated Esau";
(Malachi 1:3)

"You hate all workers of iniquity: You destroy all who speak a lie. The bloody and the deceitful man the Lord will abhor."
(Psalms 5:7)

Protestantism has such a low opinuion of God!

22 March 2012 at 23:39  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...


Your Monsignori makes such extravagant claims that 'MILLIONS' hate the church of Rome but in ignorance..Show me this survey where they detail how they unwittingly HATE the RCC.

"This is one of the great divides between protestants and Catholics." Then you quote Aquinas at me..LOL.Which epistle did he write under the Holy Spirit?

""And let none of you imagine evil in your hearts against his friend and love not a false oath. For all these are the things that I hate, saith the Lord."
(Zechariah 8:17)" Was Latimer, Ridley, Cranmer not a fellow believer in Christ, if not what is the point of a christian unity you desire?. The massacre of thousands of huguenots (Did they not believe in Christ also?) which led Pope Gregory XIII to write to France's King Charles IX: "We rejoice with you that with the help of God you have relieved the world of these wretched heretics."

""You hate all workers of iniquity: You destroy all who speak a lie. The bloody and the deceitful man the Lord will abhor."
(Psalms 5:7)" INDEED but has Rome ever listened to Him over the many bloody centuries?

"God is said by similitude to hate some things in a twofold way. First, because God, in loving things and by willing the existence of their good, wills the non-existence of the contrary evil.(Erm, yer what..God wills..Why did he not 'will' evil out of creation before man was created?. It is the same reason/way you cannot will/make someone love you!. You are trying to see the universe as somehow able to be different because you can imagine it so. Ernst can image that he has wings attached to his body because birds have them, he can fly above the atmosphere because space shuttles have wings so it must be possible for him to do so and as atoms are a part of Ernst's physical makeup he must be able to fly through the middle of the sun unharmed because atoms can? But the real world is NOT like that, is it? Evil is there because it is the exact opposite of Good, the propensity to do good or evil is to agree with God or disagree and rebel!It is the decree that you go against Him.

If it was impossible to disobey God, then we’d never have to choose to obey. We would be like robots and that wouldn’t bring glory to God and we were NOT created robots.Hence free will exists because HE willed it so!

The very reason of the seperating of the wheats and tares and those not found in the Lambs Book of Life is such. The Redeemed transformed to enter into eternity in love with and obeying their God and those who refused to accept the gift of salvation are cast into the Lake of fire. NO MORE EVIL! Also Satan was created as a good being but was granted with free will to follow God or not. He chose not to, did he not!. Angels and people were not created as robots. They were created with free will because if they chose to worship and obey God, that would bring Him glory).
Hence, He is said to have a hatred of evils, for we are said to hate what we will not to exist (Ernst is utterly lost by this statement, do expand in plain english as Ernst has."

His Love is in perfect harmony with His Judgments and ALL His attributes;



23 March 2012 at 02:06  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

or the use of the word hate in koine greek

Luke 14:26

26 If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.

Is Our Blessed Saviour really advocating hatred towards our family?

The word in the Greek is 'miseo' and is rendered by bible believing christians as 'love less than me'.
In Abraham Mitrie Rihbany best-known book, The Syrian Christ (1916), was highly influential in its time in explaining the cultural background to some situations and modes of expression to be found in the Gospels, he points to the use of "hate" in the Bible as an example of linguistic extreme in an Eastern culture. There is no word, he notes, for "like" in the Arabic tongue. "to us Orientals the only word which can express any cordial inclination of approval is 'love'." The word is used even of casual acquaintances. Extreme language is used to express even moderate relationships. The usage being something like the language of absoluteness used to express a preference, and that it may refer to "disattachment, indifference, or nonattachment without any feelings of revulsion involved." see Genesis 29:30-1: The usse of the word "hated" is clearly used synonymously with one who is loved less. It should be noted that if Jacob really hated Leah in a literal way, it is hardly believable that he would consent to take her as his wife at all.

or here is another example from Jesus in Luke 16:13:

13 No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other.

Such extremes of feeling would be atypical, but the extremes are not meant to be taken literally; the point is that one master will get more dedicated labor than the other.

The same is true in some secular works in koine greek with the same sort of hyperbolic language.

1. Poimandes 4:6:

"If you do not hate your body first, O child, you will not be able to love yourself." Does this this teach a literal hatred of the physical body is required? It does not, it emphasizes the need to give preference to the whole self before the body alone.

2. Poetae Lyrici Graeci:

"it is said that in battle, men "must count his own life his enemy for the honor of Sparta". Is this a literal hatred of one's own life being taught to the spartan warrior? No! It is emphasizing the need to make one's life secondary for Sparta's sake.

3. Epictetus 3.3.5:
"The good is preferable to every intimate relation." Seems like Jesus's words in Luke 14:26!

Ernst hates no man or thing. He merely expects Rome to examine itself against scripture and see it's error and repent and As The Lord requires of us all, Jeremiah 6:16:

Thus saith the LORD, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the OLD paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls.
But they said, we will not walk therein. (Could possibly be heard uttered from the mouths of 'superior' RC believers, could it not?).


23 March 2012 at 02:55  
Blogger len said...

Dodo standing on his 'religious soap box'(the 'moral high ground ' already having collapsed under his webbed feet)
hissed" Protestantism has such a low opinuion of God!
22 March 2012 23:39 "

(Having earlier accused Protestants of causing division!)

Well.......Protest -ants were created by the Catholic Churches`s refusal to follow the Word of God (doing 'their own thing.)...... following the 'traditions of men instead of the Word of God.

Does the 'duck' see the folly of his words........I seriously doubt it ...preferring to 'paddle around 'in his man made religion accusing others of the error he is too blind to see himself!.

23 March 2012 at 07:58  
Blogger len said...

Dodo there are only two conclusions I can make from your comments about the Catholic Church and its past history.

You are either totally ignorant of the history of the Catholic church (which you idolise)if that is the right word to use ....yes probably!)

Or ( I don`t like to say this but this is the only other conclusion I can come to )you are being economical with the truth about the ' dark side of Catholicism'.

23 March 2012 at 08:05  
Blogger len said...

If the Catholic Church is the Bride of Christ(as it claims to be) then it is going to meet the lord with a blood stained wedding garment and a history of consorting with the kings and princes of this World.'She' has also left piles of corpses to explain.

Not a position I would want to be in .

23 March 2012 at 08:12  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Ernsty and len

"And I say to you: That you are Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven."

Hard to get by this, isn't it?

I am neither ignorant nor duplicitous about the history of the Church. Christ never promised it would be sinless. He did promise that the Holy Spirit would protect it throughout time and, despite it being human, with all that that entails, it would not succumb to the powers of darkness.

Whatever Satan can do, either by himself, or through his agents, the Church has and will survive. The church is likened to a house, or fortress, built on a rock; the adverse powers are a contrary house or fortress, the whole strength, and all the efforts it can make, will never be able to prevail over the city or church of Christ. By this promise we are fully assured that neither idolatry, heresy, nor any pernicious error whatsoever shall at any time prevail over the church of Christ.

As for Aquinas, you would both do well to read him and to remember he applied human reason to the Word of God and his grasp of Scripture and its meaning was, in my opinion, inspired.

23 March 2012 at 18:29  
Blogger len said...

Dodo ,

If one scripture is contested then use scripture to interpret scripture.... look up who 'the rock' is in scripture.

I think(know) that you will find the 'rock' is Christ.

Let us (if all else fails) ask Peter himself who the rock is; '4 As you come to him, the living Stone—rejected by humans but chosen by God and precious to him— 5 you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house[a] to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. 6 For in Scripture it says:
“See, I lay a stone in Zion,
a chosen and precious cornerstone,
and the one who trusts in him
will never be put to shame.”[b]

7 Now to you who believe, this stone is precious. But to those who do not believe,

“The stone the builders rejected
has become the cornerstone,”[c]

8 and,

“A stone that causes people to stumble
and a rock that makes them fall.”[d]

They stumble because they disobey the message—which is also what they were destined for.

9 But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s special possession, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light. 10 Once you were not a people, but now you are the people of God; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy.'( Peter 2)

The 'Rock' could not be and never was Peter. )

23 March 2012 at 22:30  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Yes, len, we've been there, done that and bought the tee-shirt.

Christ is of course The Rock - who's questioning that? Nonetheless, before He left He appointed Peter and the Apostles as leaders as the earthly foundation of His Church until His return and gave this visible Body His authority and assurred it the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

Scripture is as pain as the nose on your face on this.

"And I say to you: That you are Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven."

And to answer your point about the blood stained wedding garment, Christ is the archtype groom - have a read of the Christian wedding vows to see what this entails.

Yes, the Church went astray and behaved appallingly. This cannot be defended. However, this is not a justification for abandoning it or setting up an alternative Church. 'Divorce' or 'annulment' just isn't an option between Christ and His Bride.

23 March 2012 at 23:51  
Blogger Mike Stallard said...

Thank you - a marvellous post which brought tears to my ancient eyes.

25 March 2012 at 07:57  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older