...

We live in an age where people are made to believe in the absence of their own capacity to think and make decisions on their own. This is not a new phenomenon to any extent of the imagination. The tendency for the powerful to oppress the weak has existed since the dawn of humanity. However,

In these days due to the prevalence and power of the media, brainwashing the masses has become much easier.

The masses are told not to believe their own eyes and their own thinking, but rather rely on the experts to tell them how to think, how to understand the world and how to live.

This phenomenon is not in the world only, but has become more prevalent within the church. Now all these priests are able to extend their authority and their perceived unilateral control over the faith all over the world by uploading some videos on youtube. They implicitly ask people to rely on what they say as the sole interpretation of the truth. They give the people distorted glasses to view the world through.

An example from my personal life, is a man, whom I used to know before he became a priest, recommended a few books to his listener and amended his recommendation, by saying, "I only recommend these books. I wouldn't recommend reading anything else". In effect elevating himself and his ability above all the other listeners. Of course, there is no way he can enforce his recommendation, at least not yet, but people who have come to rely on priests to tell them what to think and how to live, will inevitably take his words as gospel and persecute anyone who dares to oppose what he says.

Am I exaggerating, maybe. But I exaggerate to make my point. There exists people who have been put in a place of authority, who seek any way to oppress others, by giving themselves the unique position of the only people who can interpret the truth.

I'd like to express my thoughts of a particular incarnation of this phenomenon which I have encountered recently.

...

This becomes very problematic, when the institution of the church tries to interject itself in the personhood of man; when they try to tell men (and women) when they can and can not take communion; when they can and can not have intimate relationships with their spouses, what they ought to eat and not to eat, what they ought to think and not to think, what they ought to read and not to read, and the list goes on. They took the relationship between man and God and institutionalized it in such a way that they in effect erased the personhood of God in this relationship and replaced it by the institution of the church.

All this is done through fear of losing the original teachings of the church. You see, the coptic church believes in having the absolute truth as passed on from Christ, to the apostles all the way to today, without change. They believe in their absolute superiority over all other thoughtsbelief systems. And in this arrogance they attempt to justify every single rule they have even if they have to twist the rules of logic to do so; even if they have to bend the faith itself.

...

So although God has died for the sins of man and has cleansed man, the institution of the church by insisting and promoting these rules declares loudly the inefficacy of the death and the resurrection of Christ. We must, they say, keep these rules to remind us of our original sin. we must keep these rules because adherence to these rules makes us holy. And not adhering to these rules makes us unworthy of partaking in the body of Christ. Does this make sense? I leave it up to the reader to answer that.

...

By insisting on teaching rules which are clearly against the faith, and by justifying these rules in erroneous ways, the institution of the church has in effect imputed guilt and sin on members of the body of Christ for simply being who they are; for the way God has created them; and even for sticking by their principles. This falls in the following category

...

Institutionalists preserve this erroneous understanding of the institution of the church. I'm not saying they do so with ill will, but in their good intentions to keep the church united, they have in effect achieved the opposite. By vilifying people who simply stand for the truth just because they declare the institution of the church to be in the wrong , have they not created divisions in the church? Have they not divided the people of God? It is not dividing to seek the truth, but because the institutionalists view people seeking the truth and declaring the error of the institution of the church as rebels, they seek to put them to the side and in extreme cases completely excommunicate them from the church.

The existence of Truth

If you are a Christian, then by necessity you believe in absolute truth, since you believe in God the declarer of this absolute truth.

Absolute Truth is truth by definition, not due to the status of the person declaring it, but by its very nature. Therefore, if the worst of sinners declares the Truth and the most saintly individual to ever walk the earth declare the same truth, their personhood does not change the fact that they both declared the same truth. Truth is not more true because a saint said it, and Truth is not any less true because a vile person said it. Truth exists on its own and holds its power in its own.

Bringing this back to the above discussion.

When a rule violates the Truth, then itself becomes a non-truth; an anti-truth. If someone who "is not worthy" recognizes the anti-truth and points it out, his statement is correct independent of his "worthiness" status. And if a worthy person justifies the anti-truth, his statements are wrong irregardless of his status. Truth exists independent of a person's status:

There is no respect of persons with God. Just because the Holy Synod agreed on a falshood doesn't make their agreement a truth. It is still a falshood. And just because a layman declares the truth, which contradicts the Holy Synod's false statements, doesn't make the layman's declaration any less of a Truth. There is no respect of persons with God.

I ask again, if a group of people no matter who their status is agree on false statements, doesn't the above apply to them?

Conclusion

It is, therefore, my conclusion that the Institution of the Church must be viewed independent of the Church of God. The Church of God is the body of Christ, the Institution of the Church is a man made hierarchy which its sole purpose is to edify and protect the Body of Christ. Therefore, the institution of the church exists to serve the body of Christ and not the other way around.

If this institution ceases to perform its function it must be corrected. It doesn't matter from where this correction comes from, from within or from without the institution, it must be accepted by the institution. The institution bust be humble enough to recognize the truth and amend their ways without justifying their erroneous ways to make them seems less erroneous.

It is my belief that institutions are needed and are good as long as they serve their function and they cease to be good when they stop serving their function. People are not obliged to follow that which is false just because an institution declares it to be the opposite.

I thank God, that there is no practical way for the Institution of the Church to force these erroneous rules on the body of Christ. However, they have shaped the psyche of generations and distorted the image of God in the eyes of many generations by their insistence on falsehoods. For that they must stand before the Almighty and give account.