Or, you know, crack open a Bible, read it, and pray to our Lord.
Matthew 27:51. There's no need for a priest or Orthodoxy to intermediary between you and God, my friend. Jesus took care of that. Just approach in faith and have a relationship.
Priesthood was not meant to serve as the middleman between you and God. Priests are servants of Christ that help people receive sacraments such as communion and confession akin to how to Apostles were given the duty to withhold sin and teach the word of God. John 20:21–23
Which is fine, but if that is true, then how can the catholic or orthodoxy church claim to not hold to sola scriptora. If their only job is to be a servant who help with the daily tasks of running a church and aid in the worship of followers, where does the dictation of new scripture, new practices, new laws and by-laws come into place?
The Orthodox Church does not create new dogmas and practices like the Roman Catholic Church does, it instead aims to preserve the holy practices and traditions of the Early Church (pre-schism), of which the Bible is a product of.
This ignores the commands to confess your sins to each other, be baptized, gather together, excommunicate those who are openly living in sin, take communion, do good works, be in submission to elders, pray for each other, and many more. The idea that the curtain tearing means you just need a relationship with Christ is steeped in pride, willful ignorance, and a total lack of connection to Christian thought prior to the mid 18th century.
Church is not a requirement for salvation. It is a gathering of followers to hone, perfect, and strengthen their bond with God. All of the actions you just called for can be done in the presence of other followers within a church, without the need of catholic or orthodoxy priesthood to oversee it. IN FACT! Most of the actions you just called for, Paul through his letters called for the churches to perform on his behalf as a collective unit. Prayer for a person, confession and excommunication of a person, doing good works, listening to the wisdom of elders (Someone who is older and more experienced in the faith, NOT a person with claims to being more holy or a special officer of God). But the church itself, baptism, they are all outward expressions of an inward faith. In fact, the scripture speaks about the actions of the church itself and what was performed by it was a group body, but no where can I find a single mention of a pope, nor a singular individual (Save Peter, more on that in a second) who was to be the sole command leader of the church. In Acts, when they send out the 7, they were sent out as more of a clerical, and church support role, not in any specific leadership capacity outside of the operation of their churches.
2 The Twelve summoned the whole company of the disciples and said, “It would not be right for us to give up preaching the word of God to wait on tables. 3 Brothers and sisters, select from among you seven men of good reputation, full of the Spirit and wisdom, whom we can appoint to this duty. 4 But we will devote ourselves to prayer and to the ministry of the word.” 5 This proposal pleased the whole company. So they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and the Holy Spirit, and Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolaus, a convert from Antioch. 6 They had them stand before the apostles, who prayed and laid their hands on them.
In the case of Peter, you are missing some very important facts. First: When Christ turned the keys over to him, it was done with expressed purpose of bringing the church to fruition, and to plant the seeds for a world wide spread of the knowledge of Jesus and his miracles. The same with the Apostles. The Apostles are direct witnesses of Jesus Christ who were given rights and privileges by Jesus Himself. The Holy Spirit was the later foretold Helper that would come and inbue all followers with a temple of God in their hearts. But again: Peter and the Apostles were select indivduals with select purpose. This can be clearly seen in how Matthias was chosen. Acts 1 21 and 22
21 Therefore it is necessary to choose one of the men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus was living among us, 22 beginning from John’s baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us. For one of these must become a witness with us of his resurrection.”
This was a requirement because the people who were planting the church needed to be first hand witnesses, and to have received the blessing of Christ during his earthly rein. This is actually why some feel that Paul's ministry was invalid, as he was blessed after the fact and was never a witness to the risen Christ. I do not subscribe to this personally, as what Paul experienced was a miracle. But you'll also STILL notice: When Paul was sent for healing, he was not send to a specific priest or pope. He was sent to a devout disciple, Ananias. Even during the healing, Ananias himself calls Paul "Brother", a word that denotes someone on equal footing.
The idea that the curtain tearing means you just need a relationship with Christ is steeped in pride, willful ignorance, and a total lack of connection to Christian thought prior to the mid 18th century.
Martin Luther firmly disagrees with you, as do every other Protestant since his teaching. And this all happened several hundred years prior to the 18th century.
Focusing just on the end, show me a quote from any theologian prior to 1700 that says or alludes to the tearing of the curtain meaning all you need is a relationship with Jesus. I will wait...
You misundertand Orthodoxy for Catholicism.
There is no "need" for a priest or intermediary.
But gathering together in his name and fellowship is good.
I agree that gathering is good. That is the whole point of church. What I take exception with are the practices and teaching or their churches. But I'm also viewing it from a protestant/ sola scriptoria mins set so my view will never match with theirs.
(post is archived)