Here are some more highlights of the things (ideas, substantially but not entirely verbatim) I've written in an on-going conversation.
If it moves someone to be closer to God regardless of who devised the liturgy, I won't argue against it. [Of course, this concerns liturgy, per se, and not the particulars. I'm not going to hold to this position where someone thinks child sacrifice is going to move that one close to God.]
High Church and Feeding the Lambs and Sheep
The high church or hi-church is off putting for me only where it falls into fitting with Jesus's words as follows: Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone. Matthew 23:23. I'm simply substituting liturgy for tithes here, as you probably would have understood without my explaining it. If we can have grand buildings and moving music with feeding all the lambs and sheep in both body and soul, who am I to stand in the way of that? I do though wholeheartedly agree with Jesus that the weightier matter is the feeding. I agree with James that leaving the flesh to starve while asking people to believe is failing to comprehend the proper sequence of events. It is a disordering of priorities. I see no reason why you wouldn't also wholeheartedly embrace it. It would be our meeting of the minds. That's exactly what we are looking for after all. We need to reach out to people to have a meeting of the minds so we may bring forth. Jesus, our brother, is calling us to it. I love it. There is nothing to hate in it at all. He's perfectly right about it.
So, to be absolutely clear, I would trade all the church buildings and traditional church services to feed the lambs and sheep as Jesus prescribed. Jesus has no building except I say the Temple is rightly his (therefore everything is his). He has no liturgy except I say his last supper and all his revealing and worshipful acts constitute his liturgy. He said we are to be worshipping fulltime in every move we make. I agree with that completely.
I don't argue about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. It's a non-starter. I don't argue about transubstantiation. Jesus said, "This is." For me, when I do it (communion) in remembrance of him, it is. Is it still what it was [commonly understood wine and bread]? Well, I don't have an issue with it, because Jesus was fully man and fully God. God provisions us. We can do nothing without God. The mundane bread wouldn't be there if it weren't for God. The real bread of life is also there by God. This is not a mystery to me. It isn't a paradox to me. It's divine logic. I'm very comfortable with it. It isn't some mysticism that I don't understand. It's just the way it is, just as day follows night for awhile. I don't need a scientific experiment to prove to me that all my days here have followed all my nights. I know it without testing.
I am a believer. I don't take my cues from Benedict XVI. I take them from my heart. I've read several of Joseph Ratzinger's long philosophical papers. All have fallen woefully short.
Antichrists and the Anti-Christ
By the way, when I used the term "antichrist" [in reference to the top of the Roman Catholic Church], I wasn't meaning the Anti-Christ as the conservative, Southern Baptist fundamentalists used to mean. I'm using the term more as John wrote about there being many antichrists. Anything that doesn't run to the perfect is antichrist in the end. It's quite a narrow way Jesus blazes. It can be clearly marked out though with a softening heart. This is not to say that there isn't the Anti-Christ to come.
Norway and Ayn Rand Disciples
As for Norway and Ayn Rand, the so-called Christian capitalists are right behind the Christian-Zionists in presenting the biggest problem. The Christian-Zionists have been exposed and will continue being exposed. I'm working on the Christian capitalists now, not to punish them but to turn those who will and to warn away those who would be otherwise duped. Of course, the long-term plan is to bring forth. The Christian capitalists present a huge obstacle in that regard. They are in the palm of billionaire false-Zionists who really do hate Jesus, only they won't say it publicly on the record, yet. They are the most trolling, very contrived. They are backed by the think tanks paid for by super-rich antichrists.
Let me also quickly state that I believe women are very often moved by the Holy Spirit as much or more than their husbands. Very often, husbands would be well advised to heed the counsel of their wives. I've seen that done where males lose none of their masculinity or status within the family but rather gained by it. They reinforce one another in working to find the truth and right approach. Therefore, I don't hold with the male-centric theology attributed to Paul (the Pauline). To clarify, I don't hold with matriarchalism over patriarchalism. They are truly to be one flesh. I haven't found that in my own life, but that's part of my cross to bear. I was a bad boy even while I was good. The nursery rhyme applies to me.
The following should appear at the end of every post:
According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":
Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.
Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.
Political Campaign Intervention
Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.
Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.
Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:
- Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
- Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
- Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
- Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
- Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office
Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:
- The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
- Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
- We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
- When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
- It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
- We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
- We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
- When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
- We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
- It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.
And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)