Tigers Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Tigers - Essay Example Above the orange, the tiger is the vertical column of the white waterfall. The line of the plants underneath the Tigers do a similar transfer of colors, but they also form the vague outline of a heart, suggesting a strong bond between the animals. All of these less noticeable elements contribute to the idea of deep friendship between the two tigers that are the subject of the image. As has been discussed, there are two tigers in the image, one white and one orange. They stand on their hind legs with their forelegs wrapped around each other’s shoulders so that their bodies meet in a strong diagonal slant. Only the white tiger’s face is visible, but it almost seems as if the animal is smiling as it rests on and supports the other. This embrace is seen as friendly instead of combative because of the other elements of the image that have already been discussed.As we look at the image above, we gain a sense of strong friendship between creatures rather than competitive fight ing. The viewer is soothed and grounded by the deep greens of the background and is given a strong sense of energy and harmony by the other colors involved in the image. Stability and comfort are added to by the shapes and lines included in the background and foreground. This all contributes to the way that the subject of the image, the two tigers, is interpreted by the viewer. In the end, we understand the image to be a picture of friendship between similar but different creatures that contribute to the harmony and health of the natural world.

Deutsche Allgemeinversicherung Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Deutsche Allgemeinversicherung - Case Study Example It finds out the accuracy rate of the company’s performance while measuring the quality of its processes (Doty, 1996). It helps the managers to understand the level of productivity in each department and operate those processes at full potential. It is beneficial to DAV because it will identify the quality of the forms filled by the customers and inserted by an employee. It would then help the company in monitoring and controlling the processes (Harvard Business School, 2009). Challenges and limitations in applying SPC (Services to manufacturing) More often the use of the statistical process control tool is used in the manufacturing industry, but its use in the service industry can be rather challenging because of the intangible product (Trip, Does, & Roes, 1999). Humans are the only source that could be referred to while using offering services. So, measuring the people is the biggest challenge in the SPC because the company has to find out the errors that an employee is comm itting instead of a machine which is used in the manufacturing industry. It makes it impossible for companies to consider the factors while measuring their performance. ... There was a conflict in judging the quality of the form as right or wrong. Senior managers suggested that forms should not be considered as wrong if critical information is missing. 2. Better teams do more sampling: There was an issue with some groups that had to increase the sample size which was becoming a burden for some other groups. One group claimed that they had the best accuracy rate of 98% but still they had to increase the sample size (Harvard Business School, 1997). 3. Measuring Lawyers: The lawyers that were working in the legal department had problems regarding measuring the legal work of the customer form. They could not decide between a good form and a bad one even while measuring on the scale (Harvard Business School, 1997). 4. Automatic Charting: There was an issue that the group wanted to measure the quality automatically and should develop and IT system that would monitor these forms. They claimed that this method would save them a lot of time and will make the com pany productive (Harvard Business School, 1997). 5. On the Prowl: The associates were beginning to feel hesitant in providing the accurate results to the senior managers because of their reactions when they find out about the low accuracy rate. They were thinking to work on measuring another type of work which would yield better results to make their senior managers happy. Why problems are occurring and how they can be resolved The solutions and recommendations for the problems are underlined below: Better Teams do more sampling As the quality improvement was being tested in 15 different departments of the company each group from those departments showed interest. But as the quality improvement program continued, it created a lack of interest. So the company should try to

Humanistic Theories of Organizations Essay Example for Free

Humanistic Theories of Organizations Essay The relationship between the â€Å"boss† and the employee is an important one indeed. It is a relationship that can make or brake an organization. While classical theorist such as Fredrick Taylor (Scientific Management Theory), Henri Fayol (Administrative Theory) and Max Weber (Theory of Bureaucracy) (Modaff, Butler, Dewine 2012 p26.) emphasized the literal structure of an organization; i.e. worker productivity, chain of command and preserving organizational authority, they were not too concerned with an organizations social structure. However, â€Å"Human Relations Theory† (Modaff, Butler, Dewine 2012 p43. ) builds more on an organizations social structure suggesting that an organization can benefit greatly from a positive social relationship between its supervisors and its employees. It is clear that there is a positive connection between â€Å"authentic leadership and employee voice behavior† (Hsin-Hua Hsiung 2012). Authentic Leadership, Employee Voice Behavior the Hawthorne Studies Hsin-Hua Hsiung (2012) quoting Walumbwa et al. 2008, p. 94 writes that â€Å"Authentic Leadership† refers to ‘‘a pattern of leader behavior that draws upon and promotes both positive psychological capacities and a positive ethical climate, to foster greater self-awareness, an internalized moral perspective, balanced processing of information, and relational transparency on the part of leaders working with followers, fostering positive self-development’’. In the referred to article Authentic Leadership and Employee Voice Behavior: A Multi-Level Psychological Process (Hsin-Hua Hsiung 2012) the author discusses an investigative study of the â€Å"psychological process of how authentic leadership affects employee voice†. He suggests that the â€Å"theoretical model† of the study proposes that positive mood of the employees and, what he terms, the â€Å"leader–member exchange† or LMX quality mediate the relationship between authentic leadership and voice behavior, while the procedural justice climate moderates the mediation effects of positive mood and LMX quality (Hsin-Hua Hsiung 2012). This study ultimately revealed â€Å"the cross-level effects of authentic leadership†, and provided practical suggestions to assist employees expressing themselves and their opinions in the organization (Hsin-Hua Hsiung 2012). Ironically, the Hawthorne Studies (Mayo, Roethlisberger Dickson 1939) in human relations had a similar conclusion. Among other implications these studies (Illumination, Relay Assembly Test Room, the Interviewing Program and Wiring Room Studies) collectively proposed that supervisors â€Å"pay attention to your workers to increase their satisfaction and productivityà ¢â‚¬  (Modaff, Butler, Dewine 2012 p). Conclusion, Strengths and Weaknesses In conclusion, the article in my opinion was a fair explanation of a study that concluded that there are positive implications for social interaction between supervisors and employees. The strength and weakness of the article is the authors supporting research material. While he quotes several researchers and documents to validate his findings and his theory is supported by what the author terms â€Å"multi-level data from 70 workgroups of a real estate agent company in Taiwan†, he failed to research or mention the Human Relation Theory or the Hawthorne Studies (Mayo, Roethlisberger Dickson 1939) which in my opinion would have further strengthened theory. References: Hsiung, H. H. (2012). Authentic leadership and employee voice behavior: A multi-level psychological process. . Journal of business ethics, 107 (3), 349-361. doi: 10.1007/s10551-011-1043-2 Modaff, D. P., Butler, J. A., Dewine, S. (2012). Organizational communication: foundations, challenges, and misunderstandings. (3rd ed.). Glenview Illinois: Pearson

VTE Prophylaxis after Joint Replacement

VTE Prophylaxis after Joint Replacement Clinical Management Plan Supplementary Prescribing for Nurses, Pharmacists  and Allied Health Professionals Student: Jade Keaney Background to Clinical Management Plan: Pharmacology, Monitoring and Evidence

Priesthood Of All Believers Theology Religion Essay

Priesthood Of All Believers Theology Religion Essay Luthers greatest contribution to Protestant ecclesiology was his doctrine of priesthood of all believers. It was a central teaching of Luther in the formation of Christian communities. Eric W. Gritsch has claimed, Luthers doctrine of the priesthood of all believers, developed particularly in his treatises of 1520, is one of the most revolutionary doctrines in the history of Christianity.  [1]  It is the clear biblical idea that we could see from the Genesis to Revelation. The doctrine of the priesthood of all believers opposes the unbiblical doctrine of sacerdotalism  [2]  and the existence of a Brahman-like  [3]  priestly class within the church. When Martin Luther nailed his Ninety-five Theses on the door of Wittenberg Castle Church on October 31, 1517, he was declaring war against the idea that salvation comes through the priesthood via the sacraments. His theses were anti-sacerdotalistic and he spoke against the theology that ex opere operato  [4]  supernatural li fe could be created through baptism, brought to growth by confirmation, nourished by the Mass, and healed of all diseases by penance and extreme unction. Luther vehemently rejected the idea that through sacraments a priest could control an individuals life both here and hereafter. Luther claimed that everyone who does have faith in Jesus Christ is a priest. He wrote that his hope was for a day when we shall recover that joyful liberty in which we shall understand that we are all equal in every right, and shall shake off the yoke of tyranny, and know that he who is a Christian has Christ, and he who has Christ has all things that are Christs, and can do all things.  [5]  The concept that all who believe in Christ are priests came into mind to Luther after he became convinced that Scripture was the only authority for a Christian. Believers are called to be the salt and the light (Matthew 5:13), this is only possible when the believers understands Christs priestly ministry and its own priestly role. This also has serious eschatological implications, as Christ comes to be united with his bride, the Church. Will He find a fragmented body or a united family of believers? Hence this paper mainly examines that where from the concept of priesthood of all believers begins in the Bible and for what purpose; what is the context that steered Luther to raise this idea of priesthood of all believers; the coherence between Luthers idea and the biblical idea of priesthood of all believers; and its implication to the present church of India. I. THE ORIGIN OF THE CONCEPT OF PRIESTHOOD OF ALL BELIEVERS IN THE BIBLE A priest is one who performs the sacrifices, makes the rituals and doing the work of mediator between God and man. He is the one responsible for offering the divinely appointed sacrifices to God, for executing ceremonies relating to the worship of God. In other sense, he is the representative between man and God. Scripture says, For every high priest, being taken from among men, is appointed for men in things pertaining to God, that he may offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins.  [6]  The priestly office came first in time, when our first parents sinned and fell from the high estate into which they had been created. God Himself performed the priestly office when He slew animals and provided a covering for Adam and Eve.  [7]   A. PRIESTHOOD IN THE OLD TESTAMENT There were three orders of men in the Old Testament times such as the kingly, the prophetical and the priestly orders. They were set apart by anointing with holy oil for a particular vocation. A king in the Old Testament was one who ruled men for God. A prophet was one who spoke for God to men. And a priest was one who spoke for men to God. Among all these three orders, even from the very beginning of the human race, the believers have performed priestly works. In the particular period, the head of the family was doing the priestly office. He would build an altar and offer a sacrifice for the help from God. Scripture gives enough evidence for that. 1. Priesthood in the Patriarchal Age In the Bible history, the first period is commonly known as Patriarchal Age. The word patriarch comes from two root words meaning father rule. It encompasses the period between the creation events, and the time when Israel was separated as a special nation at Sinai for the preparation of the coming Messiah. In Genesis 4:3-5 both Cain and Abel functioned in the capacity of priest in that each was responsible for his own offering to God. We could see that when Noah disembarked the ark following the great flood, he offered sacrifices on behalf of his family.  [8]  Abram, after a long march from Ur, came into Canaan and built an altar at Shechem.  [9]  Again and again, Abraham offered sacrifices to God, as did his sons and grandsons. Thus, originally in mans relations with God, every individual functioned as his own priest before God with no particular location established for sacrificing and with no intermediary between him and God.  [10]  When He gave the Law at Mount Sinai , the people of Israel had been given an opportunity to become a kingdom of priests. Now if you obey me fully and keep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasured possession. Although the whole earth is mine, you will be for me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.  [11]   Here God makes a covenant with all the people of Israel. Based on the above text, the people of Israel become Gods possession and are chosen for the privilege of service. God instituted the priesthood of Israel as a congregated unit for the purpose of service to the world. This is the vocation of the people of God of which each member stands under Gods call, and each is accountable for his or her response to it. 2. A Shift on Priesthood But Israel disobeyed and God removed the opportunity for becoming a kingdom of priests. When Moses went up to the mountain to receive a list of rules and regulations for the newly freed nation, God also gave him instructions to form a professional priesthood. Now each layman would no longer be his own priest, the individual could no longer take his sacrifices directly to God.  [12]  Here God selected Aaron and his family and the tribe of Levi to be His priests. They were set apart that when Israelites entered the Promised Land, the priests and Levites received no inheritance of land as the other eleven tribes. They had been set apart for the service of God and were to be supported by the tithes and offerings of the peoples sacrifices. The sons of Aaron and the tribe of Levi had at least three distinctive as priests. 1. They had direct access to God. At appointed times they went into the Holy Place and even the Holy of Holies to communicate with God. 2. The priests represented God to the people of Israel. They were mediators who communicated the Word of God to the people since they were considered holy. 3. The people represented the people of Israel to God. The people could not approach a holy God directly because of their sin. The priests were mediators for the people as they brought sacrifices before the altar. The high priest entered the Holy of Holies yearly once on the Day of Atonement to offer an atoning substitute of a bull or lamb offering. One of the most important features of the priestly system was to emphasize the absolutely holy nature of Almighty God. This is a concept repeatedly affirmed in the Scriptures.  [13]   B. PRIESTHOOD OF ALL BELIVERS IN THE NEW TESTAMENT This was the situation continued Jesus Christ was crucified. At the same moment of Jesus death, the veil of the Temple was ripped from top to bottom.  [14]  From then on there has been no need for select group of priests. At that point in time and ever since then believers became priests, a part of Gods royal or kingly priesthood. The elimination of the office of priests as a select group of people is based, then, upon the physical sacrifice of Jesus, the ultimate High Priest. Jesus completed and fulfilled the role of priest in His substitutionary death. . . . but He became a priest with an oath when God said to Him: The Lord has sworn and will not change His mind: You are a priest forever. Because of this oath, Jesus has become the guarantee of a better covenant . . . because Jesus lives forever, He has a permanent priesthood. Therefore he is able to savecompletely . . . Such a high priest meets our need-one who is holy, blameless, pure, set apart from sinners, exalted above the heavens. . . . Unlike the other high priests, He does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for His own sins, and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins once for all when He offered Himself. For the law appoints as high priest men who are weak; but the oath, which came after the law, appointed the Son, who has been made perfect forever.  [15]   The priest, then, is the person who himself has access to God and whose task it is to bring others to Him. While in the ancient world this access to God was the privilege of the professional priests, and in particular of the High Priest who alone could enter into the Holy of Holies. But now through Jesus Christ, the new and living way, access to God becomes the privilege of every Christian. The word priest comes from the Latin presbyter and the Greek presbyteros which simply means elder. This word was later used to describe the leader of a community. In modern usage the term priest seems to be derived more from the actual Greek word for priest hiereus.  [16]  In the New Testament this word is never used to describe a class or caste of people separate from the people of God. Instead, it is used in the sense all Gods people are a chosen race, a royal priesthood  [17]  The New Testament believers constitute the succession to the priesthood in old Israel, having been given the right of direct access to God through Christ. Furthermore, the ministry in the church has replaced the ancient priesthood. Hence, all the believers in Christ are priests in the New Testament. Put into historical perspective, the priesthood concept would look like this: for the first several thousand years mankinds history as recorded in the Bible, each man was responsible for functioning as a priest before God. Then, for approximately 1500 years, the time between Moses and when Christ appeared on earth, the priesthood of the professional existed. From the death of Christ until He returns again, we have reverted to the pre-Sinai days of the priesthood of the believer.  [18]   II. THE HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF MARTIN LUTHERS REFORMATIVE THOUGHT It is better to look back the history of the church to understand that how the New Testament idea of priesthood of all believers was perverted into the Roman Catholic Idea of Institutionalism. A. PRIESTHOOD OF ALL BELIEVERS IN THE EARLY CHURCH HISTORY The doctrine of the priesthood of all believers is found throughout the Scriptures and was practiced in the early church. As Dr. R. Laird Harris writes, First century Christianity had no priests. The New Testament nowhere uses the word to describe a leader in Christian service.  [19]  But this glorious doctrine was gradually replaced by sacerdotalism beginning in the third century, especially by Cyprian (c. 258) Bishop of Carthage. Cyprian treated all the passages in the Old Testament that refer to the privileges, the sanctions, the duties, and the responsibilities of the Aaronic Priesthood, as applying to the officers of the Christian Church.  [20]  He completely failed to grasp the central thesis of the Epistle to the Hebrews. He was blind to the fact that the only High Priest under the Gospel recognized by the apostolic writings is our Lord Himself  [21]  and not a solitary pope or bishop or priest of the church. So from the third century onwards the priesthood of all believers was not visible in theological thinking. But the Roman Catholic theologians justified sacerdotalism by saying that Jesus gave the keys of the kingdom to Peter, the rock upon whom Jesus would build his church. Further they says that Peter was the first pope of Rome, and so the pope of Rome by succession has the power of the keys of the kingdom to bind and loose, and even to save. Salvation is deposited in the Roman priesthood and dispensed through the sacraments. The sacraments are effectual ex opere operato, meaning the subjective condition of the priest or the recipient does not matter. The Roman Catholic Church teaches that there is no salvation outside of the priesthoods mediatorial function, and no person by grace alone through faith in Jesus Christ may approach the Father with confidence! B. PRIESTHOOD OF ALL BELIEVERS IN THE MEDIVAL PERIOD By the successive centuries, the Roman Catholic hierarchy and other religious groups make a sharp distinction between the laity and the clergy. Such distinction was foreign to the early church where the ultimate authority in ministry traces back to the risen Lord. Along with the structural hierarchy is the sacrament of ordination. The church in Rome imposes the sacrament of ordination that results in the marked separation between the clergy and the laity.  [22]  Christianity had been plagued with it ever since. More and more the church began to structure itself on the basis of the former Levitical order, rather than on the purely New Testament idea of each man is a priest perspective. The change was slow and evolutionary, but pastors gradually came to be called priests and the believers laity. The communion table became an altar and the elements a sacrifice. At the dawn of the Reformation Era, the institutionalized church already would have two major distinguished bodies within the community of believers: the clergy and laity. The status lay people, both in principle and in practice, would not only subordinate to the priests, but also widens the gap between clergy and laity. The gap became synonymous with the sacred and the profane.  [23]   But godly men such as Peter Waldo, John Wyclif and John Hus saw the distinct difference and distance between the clergy and laity. They didnt like it, for it was in opposition to the teachings of the New Testament. Until the dramatic impact of the Protestant Reformation, these smaller movements had little pervasive influence.  [24]   C. PRIESTHOOD OF ALL BELIEVERS IN THE REFORMATION ERA During the Reformation era the concept of the priesthood of all believers became very contentious within the structures of the Institutional church. The Reformation era provides a framework in tracing the concept of the priesthood of all believers. An elucidation on how Martin Luther formulated the doctrine of the priesthood of all believers will be dealt with in the pages to follow. The concept that all who believe in Christ are priests occurred to Luther after he became convinced that Scripture was the only authority for a Christian. As he studied the Bible, especially Pauls Epistle to the Romans, he discovered that in and through Jesus Christ a believer possessed the righteousness of God, and therefore, immediate access to God without the mediation of an arrogant priesthood. Thus, the doctrine of the priesthood of all believers is a sequel to the doctrine of justification by grace alone through faith alone. Those who are clothed in the perfect righteousness of God are welcome in the presence of God. No Christian needs a pontiff, meaning a bridge builder, because Jesus Christ alone is the way to the Father. There were other efforts at reforming the Catholic Church, seeking to bring it back to a more biblical posture, but they all fell short of their goal. It was not until such reforming seeds germinated in a favorable political climate that fruit would be born. The date was October 31, 1517. The place was Wittenberg, Germany. An obscure priest named Martin Luther nailed his grievances to the church door, the Reformation was born. A number of changes were called for by this bold, imaginative priest, but at the very core of the Reformation was the conviction that all believers are priests of the living God. He felt that all believers had the right and responsibility to study Gods Word, involve themselves in the ministry, make confession to God on their own, and even administer the sacraments.  [25]   What had started in 1517 as a protest against indulgences by an unknown monk, developed in 1520 into an irreconcilable conflict dividing the Western Church. The three treatises of To the Christian Nobility of the German Nation, The Babylonian Captivity of the Church, and The Freedom of a Christian are the heart of Luthers protest against the church of his day. The first was written in August, the second in October, and third in November. In great part, Luthers tract is a catalog of the deplorable state of Christendom. The pope exalts himself over secular rulers as well as over the church, and lives in unconscionable luxury. Rome is a moral cesspool where licenses to live in open debauchery can be bought and sold. The Church has become a machine for making money, and the popes henchmen, having bled Italy dry, have now turned their attention to Germany. Because of their inability to live up to the arbitrary rule of celibacy, many pious priests keep wives, yet do so secretly and with a bad conscience. The universities ignore the Bible and lecture on commentaries, and on commentaries on commentaries. The common people are ignorant even of basic Christianity.  [26]  In such a situation, Luther did write his treatises. Primarily, his first treatise of To the Christian Nobility of the German Nation occupied the central theme of the priesthood of all believers. Here it is better to examine the background that led Martin Luther to raise the concept of priesthood of all believers. 1. To the Christian Nobility of the German Nation a) Priesthood of All Believers As Social Implication In his first treatise of To the Christian Nobility of the German Nation the concept of priesthood of all believers has social, ecclesiastical and spiritual implications. At the dawn of the Reformation era, the institutionalized church already would have two major distinguished bodies within the community of believers such as clergy and laity. Socially, he accepted the context of western Christianity, where temporal rulers belong to the body of Christendom. Within the Christian social order, the rulers are ordained of God to punish evildoers and protect those who do good. When pressed by the temporal power the Romanists have made decrees and declared that the temporal power had no jurisdiction over them, but that, on the contrary, the spiritual power is above the temporal.  [27]   Luther argues against the medieval division between the temporal and the church authorities and their separate jurisdictions in all matters. First of all, he attacked the social distinction that emphasized by the Romanists, It is pure invention that pope, bishop, priests, and monks are called the spiritual estate while princes, lords, artisans, and farmers are called the temporal estate. This is indeed a piece of deceit and hypocrisy. Yet no one need be intimidated by it, and for this reason: all Christians are truly of the spiritual estate, and there is no difference among them except that of office.  [28]   He maintains that all Christians are equally Christian so that none is superior to any other as far possessing what is essential to the church, because we all have one baptism, one gospel, one faith, are all Christians alike; for baptism, gospel, and faith alone make us spiritual and a Christian people.  [29]   Relying upon 1Corinthians 12:12-13, which describes the Church as the body of Christ and each member a part of that body, Luther acknowledges differences between Christians, not as questions of status, however, but as occasions for service to others. All are not the same in what God has given them to do, but they are all the same in what God has given them to be in the Church, viz., His very own people. All Christians, therefore, have the same status. By quoting 1Peter 2:9 and Rev. 5:9-10, Luther describes that status as priest and ascribes it to every Christian, As far as that goes, we are all consecrated priests through baptism.  [30]  So what differentiates Christians is simply the work that God has given them to do: There is no true, basic difference between laymen and priests, prices and bishops, between religious and secular, except for the sake of office and work, but not for the same of status. They are all of the spiritual estate, al are truly priests, bishops, and popes  [31]   As part of the divine economy, God has given to each Christian a particular calling in this life whereby he serves others, Everyone must benefit and serve every other by means of his own work or office so that in this way many kinds of work may be done for the bodily and spiritual welfare of the community, just as all the members of the body serve one another (1Cor.12:14-26).  [32]   As examples of such vocations in the body of Christ, Luther mentions cobblers, smiths, peasants, and temporal authorities besides the clergy. But what is noteworthy about the last, those who have as their vocation the administration of the Word of God and Sacraments,  [33]  is that they are exercising an authority that belongs in the first instance to every Christian. For besides designating ones status before God, Luthers concept of the priesthood of believers also includes spiritual power in the church. b) Priesthood of All Believers as Ecclesiastical Implication Luther rejects ecclesiastically, the clergys monopoly on interpreting Scripture. He attacks the second wall of Romanists that only the pope may interpret the Scripture, determining correct doctrine, forgiving sins, and exercising discipline. There is no Scriptural warrant at all for the claim that only the pope may interpret the Bible. Here Luther clarifies the illusion that some of the Romanists claim of the power that was given to St. Peter. Although they allege that this power was given to St. Peter when the keys were given him, it is clear enough that the key were not given to Peter alone but to the whole community. Further, the keys were not ordained for doctrine or government, but only for the binding or loosing of sin.  [34]   As handlers of Scripture the Romanists are manifestly incompetent, and this makes their claim to hold a monopoly on biblical interpretation absurd. The Romanists must admit that there are among us good Christians who have the true faith, spirit, understanding, word, and mind of Christ. Luthers main point is that the Pope isnt the only person able to read the scriptures. He writes, Has not the Pope often erred? Here Luther implies that the Pope isnt God, and that he makes mistakes.  [35]  The Pope, therefore, can misinterpret the Bible. Luther shows that the Pope is like everyone else, so therefore others can interpret the scriptures as well. Luther then uses the Bible as a way to prove the second wall wrong. Luther quotes Christs words, And they shall be all taught of God(St. John vi. 45). Everyone should be able to interpret the scriptures and be taught of God, without the Popes help. Furthermore he questions, Besides, if we are all priests, as was said above, and all have one faith, one gospel, one sacrament, why should we not also have the power to test and judge what is right or wrong in matters of faith? What becomes of Pauls words in 1Corinthians 2:15, A spiritual man judges all things, yet he is judged by no one? And 2Corinthians 4:13, We all have one spirit of faith? Why, then, should not we perceive what is consistent with faith and what is not, just as well as an unbelieving pope does?  [36]   Even more, Luther attacks the third wall of Romanists. He argues that there is no basis either in the nature of a Christian society or in Scripture for the Romanists refusal to call a council. Luther brings up that St. Peter wasnt the only person to call a council: Thus we read in Acts 15 that the council of the Apostles was not called by St. Peter, but by all the Apostles and the elders.  [37]  Also, nowhere in the scriptures does it say that the Pope is allowed to call a council by himself. Therefore their threats can be safely ignored, and a council should be called without delay to deal with a long list of abuses in the Church. Ordinary people and temporal authorities have the right and duty to do this, not only by virtue of their status as kings and priests before God, but because the crisis in the Church demands it. Would it not be unnatural if a fire broke out in a city and everybody were to stand by and let it burn on and on and consume everything that could burn because nobody had the authority of the mayor, or because, perhaps, the fire broke out in the mayors house? à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦How much more should this be done in the spiritual city of Christ if a fire of offense breaks out, whether in the papal government, or anywhere else?  [38]   Therefore, Luther concludes that it is the duty of every Christian in the Church as having the responsibility of priesthood of all believers; he has to espouse the cause of the faith, to understand and defend it, and to denounce every error. c) Priesthood of All Believers as Spiritual Implication Luther declares that since we have one baptism, one gospel one faith, and are all Christians alike; for baptism, gospel, and faith alone make us spiritual and a Christian people. He quotes 1Peter 2:9, But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, Gods special possession, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light. Yet all are alike consecrated priests, everyone must benefit and serve every other by means of his own work or office so that in this way many kinds of work may be done for the bodily and spiritual welfare of the community, just as all the members of the body serve one another. Mainly all should share the three priestly functions such as prayer intercede with God on behalf of others, proclamation speak the gospel sharing it with the neighbor, and sacrifice living a cross-centered and servant oriented life. Since the Church is in a state of crisis and someone has to act. The temporal authorities and ordinary lay people can and should do so because there are no inherently unspiritual vocations, because all Christians in all vocations are kings and priests, and because the deplorable state of the Church is the concern of every Christian. 2. The Babylonian Captivity of the Church Nevertheless, the second treatise of Luther, The Babylonian Captivity of the Church also has the influence of the idea of priesthood of all believers. In this treatise, he discusses and dismantles the medieval sacramental system. In a measured but powerful way, Luther subjects each of the seven medieval sacraments such as baptism, Eucharist, penance, confirmation, marriage, ordination, and extreme unction to the critique of Gods Word and concludes that there are, strictly speaking, but two sacraments in the church of God baptism and the bread ( Eucharist). For only in these two do we find both the divinely instituted sign and the promise of forgiveness of sins  [39]   Not surprisingly, in his di

Sociology: The Study of Culture Essay -- Sociology Essays

Many times I have attempted to comprehend the actions of other people. I always wanted to know why people of different genders, descents, and colors had certain cultural, societal, and religious beliefs. It became apparent to me that all persons are a direct reflection of their environment. In other words, all persons unconsciously, and sometimes consciously, reflect and imitate their environment and the things that they see. Every culture has their own individual stereotypes and belief systems. The reason for this is that people place arbitrary meanings on life's occurrences based upon those of the individuals which preceded them. Thought patterns of an individual are all dependent upon the teachings of others. We perceive and understand the physical and social world based on the meanings we attach to people, things, and actions. To put it simply our minds are all guided by the force of "other minds" that are "more developed" than our own. This is all a part of Sociological study. These studies look at the predominant attitudes, behavior, and types of relationships within a society. A society is a group of people who have a similar cultural background and live in a specific geographical area. but before we get into this however Lets take a step back and look at the field in which these studies derive from. Sociology is a social science that studies individuals, groups, and institutions that make up human society. It is an observation of how people relate to one another and to their environments. They also study the formation of groups; the causes of various forms of social behavior; and the role of churches, schools, and other institutions within a society. Social behavior is studied extensively in the field of s... ...rom all secular practices. This includes watching television, listening to radio or partaking in any activities which is not in reverence of their religion. To a Christian however this practice would seem absurd. Their reality does not carry the same beliefs. Although these are just a few examples it gives you an idea of how a persons geographical location and cultural background can shape their individuals belief. Many of which are not practiced by other cultures. If you wanted to better understand a persons ways or why it is that people of different ethnic backgrounds have different beliefs and practices. It would be best to start with trying to understand that persons culture and their socialization process. Once you begin to grasp an understanding and they way they have grew up then it will be easier to understand why they do things in a certain way.

To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee :: Kill Mockingbird essays

To Kill a Mockingbird Comparison and Contrast of the Characters of Bob Ewell and Atticus Finch In this essay I will introduce you to the two main characters in Harper Lee's book "To kill a mockingbird", comparing them in their attitudes and actions. Atticus Finch is a single father raising two children in the small town of Maycomb, Alabama. Atticus works as a lawyer believing in equal justice for all Americans regardless of race or religion. Bob Ewell is also a single father raising eight children who also lives in Maycomb. Bob is unemployed collecting welfare who believes in racial segregation. He believes in different modes of justice for blacks and whites. Atticus is very compassionate while talking to his thirteen-year-old son Jem. Atticus was explaining to him that he would do anything just for Bob to stop beating his kids. As he said, "So if spitting in my face and threatening me saved Mayella one extra beating, that's something I'll gladly take. He had to take it out on somebody and I'd rather it be me than that houseful of children out there."(Pg. 221) In addition Atticus explains to Jem that he had to do what he had to do because he destroyed Bob's last shred of credibility, whereas Bob is a coward who doesn't deal with the matter but makes things worse. Bob proves himself to be very cowardly. He doesn't think before making his actions. As a result of this he tried to kill Atticus' children, Jem and Scout. As they were walking home from the Halloween pageant, Bob came out and tried to kill them. Bob got what he deserved when Boo Radley, a neighbor who hides his identity, came out and saved the children, killing Bob. Atticus and Sheriff Tate, the officer of Maycomb, proved to be fair and told Maycomb that Bob fell on his knife to help Boo from public recognition. Tom Robinson was accused of raping Bob Ewell's daughter Mayella. Tom Robinson is a black man who is defending himself against white people to win the case. Atticus has taken on the case to defend Tom because he treats everyone as equals and it was important for his self-esteem.