Do you know what a "lector" does? "Lector" is Latinate for "reader". This is the person who stands up and reads, from the Bible, the passages that are on the schedule: an Old Testament passage and one of the Epistles, usually of Paul, The choir sings the Psalm, usually, and the Priest or Deacon reads the Gospel, usually.
So, what is the article bellyaching about? That WOMEN (gasp!) read the Bible in Mass. Heavens forfend! This is not "the way it was done" for 1400 years or so, so therefore it's "wrong".
Really?
That is tradition-mongering at its worst, the very thing that Protestants are always (sometimes rightly) screaming their heads off about.
So, is there something WRONG, in the eyes of God, with WOMEN reading the Bible?
If you say "Yes" to that, (1) Why do you believe that? and (2) How can you POSSIBLY really believe it?
Obviously there is nothing wrong with a woman reading the Bible. And obviously it has nothing at all to do with God, let alone sexuality.
The author of the article is bellyaching: clergymembers alone read the Bible for 1000 years, so therefor it is evil to change that and let other people do it. And doubly evil to let women do it.
Well, first, there aren't so many clergymembers left anymore.
And second, for 1000 years the Bible was in Latin, that only the educated clergy could read, so nobody COULD help them (and the people, hearing it, didn't understand what they were hearing anyway - the very thing that Protestants bellyache about).
Arch-traditionalists are classic Pharisees, raising the traditions above decency, and even above God Himself.
The Sanctuary has been likened to the womb wherein divine life is confected and thus it is only appropriate for the male, paternal figure of the priest or clergy to enter therein during the liturgy, like a husband approaching his wife.
What a freak show.
Can't wait for God to cleanse the earth of this cult.
In favor of what? Some other freak show cult? If there were a religion that actually listened to Jesus, I’d join it. None of the Christians do. For them, it’s all about who they say Jesus was, as opposed to what Jesus said for us to do. It’s fatiguing to the point of disgust. The Catholics ignore Jesus one way; the Protestants do it another another. It’s disgusting.
Vic: Sure. Now can we speak of the other things he said to do?
The curt reply regarding your spiritual rebirth gives me pause, considering being made a new creation in Christ is the greatest moment in one's life.
Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
And there are unmistakable evidences of being a new creature.
The first of which is a hunger for the milk and meat of God's Word.
as newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the Word, that ye may grow thereby, if so it be that ye have tasted that the Lord is gracious.
But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.
The part that concerns me is that you scarcely if ever include Scripture references in your discussions. You refer to Jesus or Paul, but you do not include the particular verses containing the precise words they said, which have brought you into agreement/disagreement with them. Rather, you will refer to Luther or some other human souce.
If you are indwelt by the Spirit, you will understand that the Word of God is the sword of the Spirit.
And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:
Unless, of course, the Word of God makes you uncomfortable. The sword of the Word is very sharp, and it will reveal all manner of things within our hearts. Our very thoughts and intentions. Unsaved people will drop a Bible like it's a hot rock...it burns and convicts them.
For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
So I'll leave you with this verse. Consider it well.
Examine yourselves, to see whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves. Or do you not realize this about yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you?—unless indeed you fail to meet the test! 2 Corinthians 13:5 English Standard Version
But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness unto him; neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
The only way you can know about anybody from another time is to read about him, see what he had to say, think about that. And that is how the people of Jesus’ own day knew him too: by hearing his words, and thinking about them. That’s why the Bible is so important: it records the words and deeds of Jesus.
Whereas you, you don't need the Bible. You don't need to read about Jesus, or know what he said. You just commune with a spirit (whom you call "The Spirit") and you just know. No learning for you!
And nobody can talk about Jesus, read about him, listen to what he said, nope. You've got to "know" him first, through mystic communications with a spirit.
That's what you say. I don't find that a very sound way to come to understand anything. Sometimes I talk to God. But to learn about what Jesus said and did, I have to read the Bible, like anyone else. God doesn't tell me that. He could, of course but that's not how I have ever seen him work.
