Comments by "Scented-leaf Pelargonium" (@scented-leafpelargonium3366) on "In Sweden, female priests now outnumber their male counterparts | AFP" video.

  1. Why are only "Catholic" and "Orthodox" valid? The early Church was Jewish for the first 100 years until the razing of Jerusalem by the Europeans (Rome) in 135 CE, and most churches across Europe are named after Jews, such as St Peter's, St Paul's, St. Mary's etc. The first Church was not called Roman Catholic or Greek Orthodox, both named so by Gentiles, or non-Jews. The Church of Jesus Christ or Ha-Kehilat shel Yeshua Ha-Mashiach in Hebrew was supposed to be "One New Man" made up of both Jews and Gentiles, breaking down the wall of partition, which denominationalism has only redivided by lack of acceptance and doctrinal superiority. There are few Jews in today's churches due to many centuries of hate-filled sermons against them rooted in the Gentile early Church Fathers and by even murdering them in the Christian nations due to warped doctrine and Gentile-only Church teaching against all things "Jewish." The word "Catholic" means "universal" which the united Church should be, not just one system that rejects all others because they feel the more superior or entitled. The word "church" (KEHILAH) means CONGREGATION or gathering of PEOPLE, not a building or an institution, and no one wing should have dominance or superiority over another or of any. The name "Peter" means "stone" but Yeshua ("Jesus") is the Rock. Peter was MARRIED as Yeshua went to heal his mother-in-law in one of the Gospel accounts, and you don't have a mother-in-law unless you have a wife! The Papal example of enforced celibacy as a holy order is nowhere based on Scripture. Yeshua didn't marry, but He certainly didn't forbid His disciples to.
    6
  2.  @Lui_Jackal  Well I find the term "Christian priesthood" a bit of an anomaly as the office of "priest" is not listed anywhere in the New Testament, only pastors, teachers, deacons, prophets, evangelists, bishops etc., but no more "priests," save for the spiritual application where ALL believers collectively are spiritual kings and priests and saints, but not as a title of office. Otherwise we could call our pastors a king as well! Only the JEWS had a functioning PRIESTHOOD, the very people you so disdainfully describe, must actually be emulated enough (at least their 'system') by Christians in order to keep the obsolete order of "priests" going! That is why the Jews DO have something to do with conversation on the "Christian priesthood" as the Jews were ordained BY GOD to have a priesthood, but the New Testament Church ISN'T (apart from only spiritually as I have said). Jesus is a great High Priest (COHEN GADOL), but then He's got Jewish bloodline both Aaronic and Davidic. The Gentiles are only "grafted in" spiritually to the rich commonwealth of Israel as branches and Israel is the root, which Paul warns us not to despise, "for the root supports you" and not the other way round. The early Church was 100% Jewish in Jerusalem and had a golden age of 40 years until the Temple was destroyed by Europeans from Rome in 70 CE. There still remained a vibrant Jewish Church there until the city was ethnically cleansed of Jews again by Roman Europeans in 135 CE with some 13 Jewish bishops up to that point. Then the Gentiles named the city after Hadrian. A Jew would make much more sense of the "eucharist" you speak about because the unleavened bread and wine are symbols in the Jewish Passover with the story of the Passover lamb being slaughtered as told to their familes each year. A clear connection can be easily made if a Gentile Christian ever loved or cared enough for them to ever engage with them on the matter. Christians who attend "mass" and celebrate "Easter" with eggs and rabbits know less about the symbolism of why the feast exists than the Jews who were part of the story of the Passover redemption. Jesus Himself as a circumcisd Jew instituted the feast for both Jews and Gentiles. In fact it was some 15 years before Peter would even consider letting any Gentiles into the Jewish Church until God had to apprehend him by a vision in Joppa/Jaffa where I used to live in the 1990's. So the Jewish Church thrived for a good 100 years from Yeshua's ("Jesus") death until the razing of Jerusalem in 135. And now the haughty Gentiles say they are not welcome! The majority of Jews don't yet acknowledge the Messiah but Paul clearly explains this as a "mystery" from God as He had "blinded them" for a season, but a full restoration is yet to come. However, the majority of Gentiles also don't acknowledge the Messiah, but they are blinded by the devil, not by God. You describe the word "synagogue" as if it just pertains to Jews (in a negative way), however the word "sinagoga" in Greek or "Beit Knesset" in Hebrew is just a generic term for a "meeting house" of place of gathering, so Gentiles can meet in a "meeting house" (synagogue/sinagoga) too, it is not an exclusively Jewish word, but Gentile Christians treat it as such. Instead they prefer the word "church" to describe their buildings, but this is not the Biblical usage either. The word for "church" in Greek and in Hebrew simply means a CONGREGATION ("KEHILAH"), not a building. The building is the synagogue! But in their eagerness to separate and distance themselves from the "perfidious Jews" Gentile Christians and the early Church Fathers tried to make this distinction, but it does not match Biblical grammar or usage. Just because it was used in the New Testament to describe where some Jews met at those times does not make the generic terminology solely a Jewish one! This antipathy to all things "Jewish" has been endemic in the Gentile Church for centuries, yet their clergy want to call themselves "priests"! Seems illogical. The original "One New Man" Church instituted by Yeshua was for BOTH Jews AND Gentles(and still is!), not exclusively for non-Jews as you seem to suggest by saying, "Why would a Jew attend a catholic or orthodox mass and receive the euchatist?" I would say the Church is open to ALL, including all the Gentiles, who are in the majority. Why too would they attend either? For a start those within the churches need to make them welcome with Christ's love. That's the bit that's sadly lacking among all the self-righteousness and judgement.
    4