Posted on 02/18/2012 12:14:44 PM PST by CaptainKrunch
“Once the colleges fell, and those who were being educated in our institutions,” he said during the speech, “the next was the church. Now you’d say, ‘Well, wait, the Catholic Church?’ No.”
“We all know that this country was founded on a Judeo-Christian ethic, but the Judeo-Christian ethic was a Protestant Judeo-Christian ethic. Sure, the Catholics had some influence, but this was a Protestant country and the Protestant ethic. Mainstream, mainline Protestantism.
“And of course we look at the shape of mainline Protestantism in this country and it is a shambles. It is gone from the world of Christianity as I see it. So they attacked mainline Protestantism, they attacked the Church, and what better way to go after smart people who also believe they’re pious — to use both vanity and pride to go after the Church.”
It sue doesn't involve pro-life, pro-marriage voting, the Evangelicals vote against the left, not for it.
Mainline Protestantism = Liberal theology = Not Christian. That Santorum, as a Catholic, is aware of this tells me he is well-informed. There is a reason most conservative Protestants have utterly abandoned the mainlines. The exception are the conservative LCMS and WELS Lutheran synods, where Christian theology is still taught. As well as the conservative “confessing” denominations that resulted as Christians left the regular established mainlines to form mainline denominations that remained faithful to Christian doctrine. The PCA, one of whose churches I attend, is an example, having been formed as a response to the leftist activism of the PCUSA.
The last paragraph basically means that leftists got control of the mainlines by basically making liberalism look hip and intellectual to those who want people to think of them as brilliant and compassionate. “The Bible? Certainly a smart, intellectual, progressive person such as yourself doesn’t still believe that superstitious nonsense.”
Well, fair enough. Gracious apology accepted. If they delete yours, may as well delete mine too. No sense leaving it hanging there.
Tempers are high all around. It’s a phrase overused to the point of almost being trite, but we’d better hang together or we’ll surely hang separately.
It’s all too easy to fall into the partisan bickering, I know that well myself.
When only 9 individuals make up the Supreme Court, you cannot look for equal make up based on such criteria, it is possible for any sort of combination of types to happen there.
There could be times that it had 6 blacks and 3 Hispanics, or 2 Mormons and 7 Jews, or be all male again, they are handpicked as an individual judge, and there are only 9 of them.
None of the Founding Fathers would have used that hyphenated term, and nor would the majority of the Americans of the Revolutionary War era.
I am not a believer in any false unity of believers. I cannot ignore the fundamental doctrines of Catholicism so I can unite with them on a spiritual level agaisnt some common enemy. I can barely even do it politically, since more often than not they are also against me.
Thanks for the link.
I listened to it.
In it, Santorum is simply describing the long march of liberalism that has gone through all of our institutions, mainline Protestantism included.
There's plenty of things to criticize Santorum about. This isn't one of them.
Even mainline Protestants, as liberal as they are, vote to the right of Santorum’s church.
Absolutely right! Great book, and Boenhoffer famous for writing the line that American Christianity is “Protestantism without the Reformation,” by which he meant it was Protestant nominally, but had no commitment to obedience to the Word. He is right for a lot of American Christianity, but it is interesting to note that he recognized that only at the smaller, theologically conservative churches was the Word of God preached and taken seriously. Among those were the conservative black churches in Harlem, because that was before Word-Faith and Black Liberation Theology ruined a lot of the black churches in the same way that liberal theology and post-modernism has ruined many of the non-black churches.
Personally I have found, as a rule of thumb, that the size of a church’s weekly attendance is inversely proportional to her commitment to remaining faithful to the Word.
The problem with your guess, is that CINOS exist in Catholicism as well, not just among Protestants. Also the use of the ‘capital c’ Church is disconcerting. I’m wondering just how anti-protestant this guy is.
Well said by Santorum.
He is, of course, referring to the leftist infiltration of the Methodists, Episcopals, Presbies, and other old-line Protestant denominations, who have forsaken the gospel of Jesus Christ for gay marriage, abortion, liberation theology and other heresies.
Only 4 years ago, Santorum wanted to make a high ranking cult leader in an anti-Christian religion, President.
Catholics seems to revere everyone but Jesus apparently, making they should make Jesus a saint?
Christianity means Christ. Not worship of dead human ancestors.
It's certainly difficult to maintian a spirit of collegiality here, what with all the motes and beams flying around.
Why, one might get the impression that his and apparently your church has no such problems, lol.
You can only be referring to the Metropolitan Community Church. The MCC has never been regarded as a Mainline Protestant denomination. It's history does not tie into the history of Protestantism, so it's not even that. It's either a sham to undermine genuine Christianity, or a salve for the consciences of homosexuals who know what they're doing is wrong, but seek the appearance of approval from a church, any church. Their doctrine is more than just bad, it's leading souls to destruction.
Then comes the wacky Sunday social club that the Unitarians have become. As strange as they are, and as distant from Christ as they are, I have a hard time envisioning what you describe as having occurred there.
No one else fits the bill. Are you sure you weren't in a Jesuit seminary?
I've met quite a few "evangelical" freepers here who have insisted that "Mainline Protestants Are Not Christians", even if the "mainline" church is from the same protestant "family" as them! I've heard southern baptists hiss that northern baptists aren't Christians, there was some Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod freeper who was attacking the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America members as "non Christians" (and telling me that they're "mainline, not evangelical" despite the fact the church is named "Evangelical"!), and so on.
It seems the "evangelical" protestants hate the "mainline" protestants far more than any Catholic does. We don't have these disputes within Catholicism. All I can tell you is the "mainline" protestants seem to be losing a lot more members. Maybe you need to take it up with them.
I don't know. Ask the freepers here who loudly endorsed Romney over Huckabee and McCain in 2008, and now say Romney is the devil and must be defeated at all costs.
Name it. Location, too. I do not believe you.
I agree, it’s hard to get the context in that excerpt. Perhaps he’s speaking of the hard left turn that the mainstream Episcopalians and Lutherans have made recently. (as a former Episcopalian I should know)
“Also the use of the ‘capital c’ Church is disconcerting. I’m wondering just how anti-protestant this guy is.”
The article is quoting a speech he made, so whether he meant to capitalize that word or not is pretty ambiguous.
“It’s certainly difficult to maintain a spirit of collegiality here, what with all the motes and beams flying around.”
***********************************************************
Well said Regulator. And in case anyone doesn’t “get” your allusion, here’s the verse from Matthew 7:
“Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.”
And here’s some another admonition from a later Matthew 7 verse that we can all keep in mind. Both verses have some distilled wisdom from which we ALL could benefit.
“Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits.”
Doesn’t make much sense to judge the current state of various American churches based on men whose heyday was decades ago. It also doesn’t make any sense to judge to the state of churches based on a single member.
I think it might be difficult to ask anything of freepers who endorsed Romney in 2008, since most of them are banned :P
Ah, but Catholics have the ability to seek forgiveness, through confession, on a weekly basis.
Actually, I’m not concerned with Santorum’s religious views. I grew up in an Irish Catholic neighborhood, with a few Italians thrown in for good measure. I had more friends that went to Catholic School than I did in the public school. I get along with them quite well.
As a matter of fact, my husband used to be Catholic. When we were first married, if he felt particularly guilty about something, he would still go back to confession.
Interesing figures. What were the other 20%?
Interesing figures. What were the other 20%?
Here are two overly-detailed reports:
http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1112/religion-vote-2008-election
and
http://www.pewforum.org/Politics-and-Elections/How-the-Faithful-Voted.aspx
I think the other 20% is made up of Jews, Mormons, Orthodox, Eastern religions, unaffiliated and not religious.
Okay, but what does that have to do with the topic at hand?
Not very unifying. You can tell it wasn’t part of a stump speech. Evangelicals who claim the same Christ as their Lord might find that a bit pious and judgmental.
I guess this is why, according to Rick’s website, the #1 Issue he lists is Pornography.
I’m getting flashbacks of Jimmy Swaggart.
Goes both ways.
For much too long, cradle-to-grave cultural Catholics have looked down their noses at those not of “the Holy Mother Church” with no regard for their faithfulness and loving adherance to the Lord they serve in common.
Seems to me that believers do indeed need to “snap out of it” and start working together to defend the faith.
A Preliminary Analysis of the Hispanic Vote, 2008
Hispanics Participation Rates Continue to Increase – Despite an historically high turnout, the Hispanic share of the national vote increased from 8% in 2004 to 9% in 2008. In three of the battleground states with significant Latino populations, the share of the electorate that was Hispanic more than doubled in Colorado, increased 60% in Nevada, and increased almost 30 % in New Mexico (see table below).
Hispanics Have Decisively Swung to the Democrats – According to the exit polls, Barack Obama improved Democrats’ performance with Hispanics nationwide by 16 net percentage points.
In 2004, Senator John Kerry outperformed President George W. Bush with Latinos by 59% to 40%. In 2008, it was 67% Obama, 32% McCain. In the battleground Latino states, there was similar movement, with the vote shift in Florida from 44%-55% Kerry/Bush to 57% to 42% Obama/McCain. In each of these four states, the margin provided by the Latino vote played a significant role in President-elect Obama’s victory.
http://ndn.org/blog/2008/11/preliminary-analysis-hispanic-vote-2008 For further background, please check out NDN’s major study of Hispanic voting trends, Hispanics Rising II.
How they pick them is unimportant because we know how they pick them. It’s always politics, influence, money, race and religion. Qualifications is the least of their primary parameters.
The outcome of the SCOTUS decision and their votes is what is most important. Is it based on cronyism, religion, politics or objectivity? I’d actually prefer objectivity but reality is not typically the outcome.
Religion has always been the most important factor in any culture (their beliefs on how justice should be served) and in picking one’s cronies, and in the case of a SCOTUS ruling on their behalf. That has been the way it works since the beginning of time and religion, or has it suddenly changed in 2012? Wars have been fought over religion. Do you think something as simplistic as cronyism is above the Supreme Court? If so I’ve got a bridge for you to buy.
When my WASP, Catholic, Jewish or other tribe isn’t in the game it tells us we’ve been shafted by those who are in the game. Every ethnic and religious group and culture looks after their own. That’s how the game is played unless one is a naive fool.
So yes the SCOTUS appointments had better be sensitive to religion.
Most of the “new” Catholics are Hispanics who are replenishing the Catholic ranks.
The religious identity of Hispanics will affect politics, the report says. The Hispanic electorate is largely Democratic, despite being conservative on social issues like abortion and homosexuality. The gains for the Catholic Church in this country is due Latinos, from immigration and their higher fertility rates.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/25/us/25cnd-hispanic.html
It just doesn't work that way, among the mass voters, Protestants are conservative and Catholics are liberal, but when it comes to individuals as on the Supreme Court, these Catholic Justices are wonderful, now go and look at the infamous Warren court
Maybe impolitic, but probably correct.
Santorum speaking on religion? He made a strange religious endorsement in 2008, that is relevant.
The topic is Santorum and religion.
“The Episcopalian, mainline Methodist, Presbyterian and at least one Lutheran synod have fallen for political correctness - providing asylum to illegal invaders, ordaining openly homosexual ministers, performing homosexual marriages, denying the personality of Satan, etc, etc.”
I’m a methodist and they do not, yet, ordain homosexuals. Same sex marraiges are officially forbidden at this time. Every four years the UMC has it’s legislative body called General Conference and little by little the gay agenda is getting closer and closer to being passed.
The problem with the UMC is that it became a social club rather than a transformative agent for the world. The founder, John Wesley said, “I am not afraid that the people called Methodists should ever cease to exist either in Europe or America. But I am afraid lest they should only exist as a dead sect, having the form of religion without the power. And this undoubtedly will be the case unless they hold fast both the doctrine, spirit, and discipline with which they first set out.”
Looks like the methodist have become what Wesley feared...a dead sect. however, my church is alive and christ centered and reaches out to the community. We have to be careful about painting with a broad stroke ALL mainline churches. It’s the LEADERSHIP that is the problem, but many local churches, and pastors, are working hard to be faithful to the gospel of Jesus Christ.
Hmm, when did Santorum endorse a religion? You only said that he endorsed a candidate.
Opposition research bullcrap. Somebody is real scared of Santorum. Someone do the math. Why is it Romney never has to deal with this? Because the left know they can’t win an idealogical election! That’s the left in both parties btw.
I know this could degenerate into another "catholic bashing" session, but true Reformation Age Protestantism taught the then known world that biblical Christianity and the type of religion offered by the Catholic were mutually exclusive. There is no way they can be reconciled.
Romney backers aren't banned, just outspoken Romney backers. Same deal with McCain backers in 2008. There were a few of them during the primary season, they just laid low and didn't talk about it. Anyone on FR who supports Romney doesn't publicize it now.
I think I smell hypocrisy from those critizing Santorum over the Romney endorsement. "Do as we say, not as we did"
If any of the freepers who are now bashing Santorum were members of FR in 2008 can prove me wrong, go ahead. Let's see those threads where they parted ways with Santorum and endorsed McCain, Huckabee, or Paul.
He does not want to be the “vatican” candidate for sure. They advocate for socialized medicine (total state control over our lives and deaths and the collectivists love death), foreign invaders running over our borders and robbing us blind, and the Vatican wants a Global Fed of international bankersters and global taxation on Nations for wealth transfer which they call social justice (others would call it slavery.)
Rick, the world does not need more Marxism; it has already slaughtered and enslaved hundreds of millions.
Gee you are one of those guys that posts little cryptic private, internal messages and never gets to the point, we are already several posts into this exchange, make a point.
Only 4 years ago, Santorum wanted to make a high ranking cult leader in an anti-Christian religion, President.
In theological circles, “mainline protestant” means those denominations that are not considered the “evangelical” denominations.
Mainline Protestant would be: Presbyterian, Episcopal, Methodist, Lutheran, other Reformed branches, and the more liturgically oriented United Church of Christ and Church of Christ Disciples.
Now, those denominations (I am a minister in one of them) are subsidiaries of liberalism, and as such they have adopted most liberal ideology and have attempted to consecrate it with spurious theology based on a devalued bible and a re-imagined god.
They tend to support homosexuality, abortion, sexual license, and redefined marriage.
As such, anyone who would say that they are “in shambles” is exactly correct. They are out of step with mainstream Christianity.
This is immediately evident in the split in Anglicanism based on a modernist wing opposed by conservative patriarchs in other parts of the world. The Roman Catholic Church has recognized this “shambles” by offering avenues to their priesthood and union to the priests/ministers and congregants of some of these denominations.
Excellent commentary.
Some of us do, and have been saying that since the days of Francis Schaeffer.
I just don't see this speech as being anti-Protestant; I see it as being anti-liberal. I can affirm that.
35 posted on Saturday, February 18, 2012 3:29:25 PM by Girlene: “This was a speech from 2008 to a Catholic college. Kind of hard to tone it down now. I do believe it is others who are fanning these flames at this point, not Santorum.”
I think most evangelicals would be very happy to agree with Rick Santorum than mainline Protestantism is in shambles. As evangelicals, we're very used to attacking the Presbyterian Church (USA), United Church of Christ, ELCA Lutherans, Disciples of Christ, United Methodists, American Baptists, and other declining liberal mainline denominations.
Maybe a generation ago conservative Protestants would have been annoyed to hear a Roman Catholic attacking the pillars of WASP Protestantism, but I'm not so sure. Even back in the early 1900s, J. Gresham Machen, founder of Westminster Theological Seminary and the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, sometimes attended Roman Catholic speeches in the 1920s and 1930s and respected the Roman Catholic Church's stance for basic Christian truth compared to what he was facing in the PC(USA) and Princeton. Machen believed that while the Roman Catholic church may teach heresy, liberalism is an entirely different religion from Christianity and doesn't even belong in the same category of religions as monotheistic religions like Christianity and Judaism with an authoritative written Scripture.
Santorum is right, and most evangelicals have long ago left the mainline bodies or emotionally disconnected themselves from their own denominational leaders if they stayed. I regard it much like conservative Missouri Synod Lutherans or conservative Southern Baptists who praise their faithfulness to their historic doctrinal distinctives while attacking mainline Protestants. Santorum is Roman Catholic. Why shouldn't be believe his church's doctrine is true and should be followed?
And yes, from what I know about Ave Maria University, it's the Roman Catholic equivalent to something like Wheaton College.
I don’t think Santorum said anything controversial here. Anyone who follows religious news in America can understand his commentary (i.e homosexual agenda) I don’t think there is a war to be ginned up between Protestants & Catholics, rather,perhaps, a coming together. The Lord works in very mysterious ways indeed. JMO.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.