I am aware that those of us who try to discuss the word, and what God commands, cause controversy. Dalrock has recently commented on a dual standard by some women — they demand evidence when challenged, but their very statements cannot be challenged. In the same way, Elspeth and Alte have been dealing with this. Joycalyn, one of her commentators, noted.
My friend posted this article on her FB page and asked for comments. The ladies were all over it with charges of “judgmental,” “my daughter can do anything she wants – this is just a weird Catholic dude with 5 kids being perverted,” “this is just a man trying to keep women down,” “I found this article completely offensive and misogynist,” and more such foolishness. When I pointed out that wanting things to be a certain way doesn’t make them that way and that refusing to acknowledge the reality of male/female sexual natures the next comment was “I don’t deny we have certain natures, the question is what should we do with those natures?” This was from the woman who found the article to be misogynist. Sigh. These are Christian women. Discouraging, to say the least.
Well. Patriactionarchy labeled these people correctly. As Christian Ferals.
John has some words about this.
1 The elder to the beloved Gaius, whom I love in truth.
2 Beloved, I pray that all may go well with you and that you may be in good health, just as it is well with your soul. 3 I was overjoyed when some of the friends arrived and testified to your faithfulness to the truth, namely how you walk in the truth. 4 I have no greater joy than this, to hear that my children are walking in the truth.
5 Beloved, you do faithfully whatever you do for the friends, even though they are strangers to you; 6 they have testified to your love before the church. You will do well to send them on in a manner worthy of God; 7 for they began their journey for the sake of Christ, accepting no support from non-believers. 8 Therefore we ought to support such people, so that we may become co-workers with the truth.
9 I have written something to the church; but Diotrephes, who likes to put himself first, does not acknowledge our authority. 10 So if I come, I will call attention to what he is doing in spreading false charges against us. And not content with those charges, he refuses to welcome the friends, and even prevents those who want to do so and expels them from the church.
11 Beloved, do not imitate what is evil but imitate what is good. Whoever does good is from God; whoever does evil has not seen God. 12 Everyone has testified favorably about Demetrius, and so has the truth itself. We also testify for him, and you know that our testimony is true.
13 I have much to write to you, but I would rather not write with pen and ink; 14 instead I hope to see you soon, and we will talk together face to face. 15 Peace to you. The friends send you their greetings. Greet the friends there, each by name.
Gauius is a faithful man. He does good. He refrains from evil, he is hospitable to the workers of the church, and he respects the authority of the apostle. Demetrius does not respect authority, does not practice hospitality and does no good. Within the church, we argue, but we respect authority. Within scripture. Within the church (see below). And those who teach that we can be solo, wild, or feral Christians forget Donne’s comment that none of us are self sufficient, none is an island.
[I am fully aware that some will take this as an argument for apostolic succession, which it could be. But I am reformed, and there are no bishops, but an elder and consistory (or session). At this point it does not matter. I have a duty to pray for these people, and to respect their leadership. I also have a duty to listen carefully to their teaching, and correct if there is error... but within the church.]
We are not taught to be feral, to do what is wrong. We are told to meet, to respect authority: to be civilised, not feral. For the poison of the left leads us to some pagan form of women’s spirituality, whilt the poison of the right leads to worship of the pagan volk. We have to return to the teachings of old. There is nothing new. If we were told not to rebel during the time of the Roman Imperium (which was by no means good, noble, kind or holy) then we must remain subjects and citizens now. And part of this is submission to authority, not claiming our own.
Lamenting a loss of authority is an interesting topic. The very teaching of the Reformation that everyone is their own authority and has the ability/wisdom to determine their own understanding of scripture has led to the modern day problems where everyone thinks they can make their own rules (at least within the Church seculars are a different discussion).
The Bible clearly shows Jesus gave the Apostles authority and history shows us they passed it on to others who were worthy of that trust. You can not change the model and expect good things to result.
@MK
“Lamenting a loss of authority is an interesting topic. The very teaching of the Reformation that everyone is their own authority and has the ability/wisdom to determine their own understanding of scripture has led to the modern day problems where everyone thinks they can make their own rules (at least within the Church seculars are a different discussion).”
Yes, indeed. I had a rude awakening out of my RC ignorance regarding “fundamentalists”. If someone were to ask me what’s the essence or what backs up a Christian’s Faith, I’d say it’s our belief that Jesus is God; He’s one Person of three in the Triune Godhead. Thus, being God, He spoke and acted with the ultimate authority. I can believe everything He said, did and promised, because He is God.
I think that one of the balancing things within the reformed movement is the idea of the church and the teaching of universialtiy remain. No reformed theologian pretends that they are perfect or have got it together. For instance, calvin struggled with usury. He wanted to ban it, but he could not find justification for this in scripture but only in the traditions of the fathers (and then not strongly there) but he was aware that to allow it opened up too much. But Calving would not go there. He did want what he called the consistory — those who were leading churches to be accountable to each other.
Now… this is a correction that has kept the confessing reformed churches from some heresies, as Will comments on below.
The idea of individuals deciding doctrine by themselves is not reformed. we are accountable to the eldership, who are accountable to each other, and each session must defend its decisions. Otherwise the ridiculous becomes normal.
My rude awakening came when I found out that fundamentalists (not all?) do not believe Jesus is God and do not believe in a Triune Godhead. With such differences, it would seem that the Bible is not as self-explanatory as Luther believed.
Wrong use of the term “fundamentalist”: The term refers to a bunch of evangelical pamphlets written by some fairly sophisticated theologians such as gresham at the end of WWI. And an example of protestants going feral. There is silliness in all churches: consider that the current poe has had to deal with some extremely heretical teaching from catholics which is clearly not doctrine of the Catholic church. hence the need to work this out within the church.
@ Carnivore: I’m not a fundy myself (I’m a confessing Reformed believer), but I haven’t ever encountered any who weren’t Trinitarian, in the proper understanding of that word. Most Fundamentalists are Fundamentalist Baptist; a few are Presbyterian (mostly from Ian Paisley’s church, the Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster); all of them are Trinitarian.
Now, there are certain evangelicals out there, like Oneness Pentecostals, who reject Trinitarianism; these, like Mormons, are heretics, as far as the rest of us in Protestantism are concerned.
I think it’s sad that there’s such a lack of community within [American] Christianity. & whatever Christian community that does exist, is extraordinarily divided. Baptists hate Pentecostals, Catholics hate Anglicans, Evangelists hate Mormons…
Although I’m not sure if feral is the correct adjective…more like belligerent. I have to walk on eggshells when interacting with Christians – it’s so easy to set them off. [I'm ditzy so I have the tendency to say the wrong thing & accidentally set them off].
Whoever does good is from God; whoever does evil has not seen God.
I like this passage. It’s hard for me to not blame Jesus for the flaws of Christianity. But he’s not responsible for evil, even when Christians commit evil in Christ’s name.
Yeah, this came from Vox Day, here:
http://voxday.blogspot.com/2011/12/mailvox-heretic.html
I didn’t follow the comments since they quickly devolved into a rant, however some supported the position. It did shock me to discover that a self-described Christian “fundamentalist” doesn’t believe in the Trinity or the Divinity of Christ.
OK, I see the key here is “self- described” and the definition of “fundamentalist”.
@Butterfly Flower
I agree with your sentiment but I am of Roman Catholic origin I find common ties with the author of this blog and enjoy the works knowing we are more similar than different even though by your analogy we would not get along. We are both men who wish we were born in a different era when things were simpler and easier. That is not our fate so we endure and make the best of this age seeking to change what we can and speak out against evil as we see it without fear of consequence. We are really allies and should embrace that truth vs. squabble over minor ideology which we are all prone to from time to time.