Posted on 05/03/2007 12:50:55 PM PDT by siunevada
CARAPICUIBA, Brazil (Reuters) - For years, Ronaldo da Silva's daily routine consisted of drinking himself into a stupor until he passed out on a sidewalk.
Now he spends his days praying and singing with hundreds of fellow Christians at the Universal Church of the Kingdom of God in Carapicuiba, a sprawling shantytown on the outskirts of Sao Paulo where Pentecostal congregations are found on just about every block.
"I'd probably be dead or in jail if it weren't for this church," said da Silva, a 38-year-old former Catholic who claims God cured him of epilepsy and helped him straighten out his life when he converted to Pentecostalism a decade ago.
Conversions like da Silva's are increasingly common all over Brazil, where a boom in evangelical Protestantism is steadily chipping away at the supremacy of the Roman Catholic Church.
The trend, which is playing out all across Latin America, poses a major challenge for Pope Benedict, who arrives in Brazil on May 9 for a five-day visit largely aimed at blunting the decline of Catholicism in this continent-sized nation.
Although Brazil still has more Catholics than any other country in the world, with about 125 million, the percentage of believers that practice the Vatican's brand of Christianity has been dropping rapidly in the last three decades.
When the late Pope John Paul II visited Brazil in 1980, 89 percent of Brazilians identified themselves as Catholic. By 2000, when the last census was taken, the share of Catholics in the population had fallen to 74 percent.
The number of evangelical Protestants nearly tripled in the same period to 26 million, or about 15 percent of the population.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Equally as meaningless as the links provided by NYer. Thrown in to balance the propaganda scale.
As to the lack of articles concerning Catholic Priests converting to Protestantism I think there are probably two main reasons:
1. Protestants don't play the propaganda war as much.
2. Most Ex-Priests don't become Protestant Ministers.
"10,000 men have left the Catholic priesthood...".
2.) In the past 25 years, over 20,000 priests have left the priesthood to marry--an average of 400 per state--and 110,000 throughout the world; 3.) We can assume, based on the tradition during Jesus' time, that his disciples were mostly married men. For further historical facts and reflections as well as insights from married priests, I highly recommend spending some time at www.rentapriest.com.
You say 10,000. He says 20,000. Neither of you knows the actual number.
NYer seems to be talking about globally; I was referring to nationally, and I was unsure of the number, so I rounded upward.
>> 1. Protestants don’t play the propaganda war as much. <<
That’s ridiculous. 90% of what I’ve ever heard on Christian Radio is the propaganda war. Rarely explicitly, but when they rail on and on endlessly against praying to idols in Virginia, for instance, I safely assume they’re trying to make people afraid of Catholics praying in front of statues. I mean, is praying to idols really the single, biggest threat to Christianity in Virginia?
>> 3.) We can assume, based on the tradition during Jesus’ time, that his disciples were mostly married men. <<
What tradition? Certainly, the bible makes no mention of any disciple having a wife. Since tradition records most of them (except John) dying violently, it’d be almost kinds cruel to never read about their kids and widows being taken care of. The closest reference to a wife is Peter’s mother-in-law, but even this passage, there’s no reference to his wife or kids. Was he a widower?
>> For further historical facts and reflections as well as insights from married priests, I highly recommend spending some time at www.rentapriest.com. <<
Seriously, what on Earth would you be doing browsing around rentapriest? The entire existence of that group is based on deceiving people that they’ve received valid sacraments. (”Receive Christ’s sacraments from a married Catholic priest.”)
Incidentally, the Catholic Church has never doctrinally forbidden a married priesthood, so trying to divert the conversation to a debate about whether the bible forbids a married priesthood is pointless. There are, in fact, thousands of valid, married Catholic priests, none of whom would have anything to do with rent-a-priest.
>> What you missed concerning my reply to kawaii was the rebuttal to his false claim atheism was born in Protestant countries. I had no other intention whatsoever. Your argument is wasted on me. <<
No, I got it. And while I would hesitate to make his claim myself, your rebuttal was 100% useless.
>> FWIW I left the Catholic Church in 1948-1949 (I don’t remember exactly when) and was not taken off the rolls until a few years ago. So much for the census. <<
How would you know that? Did you keep getting materials for the Bishop’s annual appeal? (That’s the only way of knowing that I can think of). That’s not just a rhetorical question; I’m interested know how reliable the data are.
>> I’m under no allusions whatsoever concerning what passes for Christianity, both Protestant and Catholic, in South America. Further, I don’t have the horrid opinion of Catholicism you seem to think I do. Disagreement is not disrespect. <<
Well, you sure seemed to be desperately holding onto the hope that the Catholic church is dying out in South America, and came back seeming bitterly defensive when I slammed the kooky churches of the Brazilian underclass.
The writer should know better.
I would hardly call the Brazilian counter-Catholics “Protestant,” wither, but many of the Brazilian churches are very far from Bible-adhering or Spirit-filled. Again, you’re demonstrating that wierd presumption that anti-Catholic must mean Bible-adhering or Spirit-filled. I repeat the assertion that i think that much of what goes on in non-Catholic Brazilian churches have as much to do with anything Luther, Calvin or Pat Robertson would approve of as Voodoo does.
Sorry, priest cannot forgive sin. If you think they can please produce a scripture that says so. Only God can forgive sin. This is just one more error taught by the RCC.
Paul was talking about the church which Jesus established and of which Paul was a member and missionary. Not the RCC which did not even exist at that time.
I thought they said he wanted to become an Episcopalian priest? Either way, he'll be working for his daddy. Satan. ;o)
Sure, there is demonic spiritism in Latin America, among people who would call themselves "Christians" (and "Cathollics" for that matter) but who said this is what the article refers to?
It’s not all Spiritism, and maybe the voodoo line was a bit misleading; what I meant is that they hardly are mainstream Protestants and Pentecostalists. Have you ever read some of the 7th day adventist threads, where they are certain all of Christendom, except 7th day adventists, are going to Hell because they are unknowingly worshiping Zeus? Some of it’s like that. Many of the sects would be happy to destroy the faith of a million people if they could get one convert. Most promise that God wants to make them rich, rich, rich. One prominent Latin American sect is even led by a self-proclaimed Messiah who now calls himself the anti-Christ. No kidding. (And, no, I am describing very different sects; 7th-day adventists don’t have anything in common with these other sects.)
What I am attacking is the presumption that if these groups are rabidly anti-Catholic then they must be more like mainstream denominations. Few are. But yes, there are several very mainstream-Protestant Christians, also... They’re just not typical.
It was referring to a church which existed in 108 AD. Call it anything u want to but it was not the pure church established by the apostles on Penticost.
My original reaction to the story was that the WaPo and Reuters could probably care less about Pentecostals or Catholics and the occasion of the Pope attending the Latin American Synod was an opportunity for them to fling a few grenades into the crowd.
Judging from the tenor of some of the comments I’ve seen, they may be on to something.
Thanks for your further explanation.
They need the Bible and peer review.
That’s what we all need.
Sure
so we have this example showing the use of the word catholic to describe the only church in existance at the time....CATHOLIC...no protestant deformation names...
All kinds of problems with your assumptions...Again, the word catholic that Ignatius used is not your church...Ignatius said a 'universal' church...Your's is the Catholic church...They are not the same...
And it was NOT the only church in existance at the time...There were numerous religious organizations around then...And even Paul talked about people preaching another gospel...
Did Ignatius ever say he was teaching Paul's gospel, or another???
CATHOLIC...no protestant deformation names...
Ignatius did not 'name' the churches Catholic...That honor belongs to your group...The name of God's church is the church of God...Ignatius describes a church with an adjective as being universal...
really? no popes, etc? the term “Catholic Church” was in a letter by Ignatius of Antioch in 107, who wrote: “Where the bishop appears, there let the people be, just as where Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.
Ignatius of Antioch. Letter to the Smyrnaeans. para. 8
Really, by what authority does Ignatius write to the churches??? The scriptures, letters written that we may know we have eternal life, were inspired by God...
God did not inspire Ignatius to write anything to the churches...It was already a done deal...You treat Ignatius' writings like they are scripture inspired by God...
“Where the bishop appears, there let the people be, just as where Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.
Oh really??? Did Paul ever say that??? Did Peter ever say that??? How about John??? DID JESUS EVER SAY THAT??? Looks like Iggy is trying to pull the wool over someone's eyes by making up scripture that WAS NOT inspired by God and sending it to the churches as authoratative teaching...
Or maybe someone like Constantine added it to Iggy's writings a couple centuries later...
Here's what Jesus says about it:
Mat 18:20 For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.
Jesus doesn't need a bishop or a priest, or a wafer to be in the presense of his followers...And he certainly doesn't need a building...
That said Reg is ignoring my point that protestants are oky with perpetuating lies about Christianity (for instance protestants often hapily suggest that constatine invented Christianity and made it the state religion neither of which are close to true!) Secondly protestant nations are happy to dispense with religion all together when it fails to suit their political ambitions.
Where are all the folks located who are suggesting Kosovo be carved out Serbia into a separate muslim state?
1. Protestants don’t play the numbers propaganda war as much.
>> For further historical facts and reflections as well as insights from married priests, I highly recommend spending some time at www.rentapriest.com. <<
Seriously, what on Earth would you be doing browsing around rentapriest? The entire existence of that group is based on deceiving people that they’ve received valid sacraments. (”Receive Christ’s sacraments from a married Catholic priest.”)
Who said I ever went to Rentapriest? I didn't say so nor did I go there.
We seem to have trouble in our communications.
You grab a site which says the loss is 10,000 priests. I grab a site which shows a loss of 20,000 priests.
Neither of us can back up those numbers so they are useless as "factual" material.
My whole point was it is foolish to grab a site which tickles your fancy and post it as the facts and nothing but the facts.
I made no comment whatsoever concerning the content or the reliability of the site. I merely pointed out "he said 10,000" and "he said 20,000" while I believed neither of them really knew the true number. You chose to attack everything but the point I was making.
Am I to believe you agree that atheism was born in Protest nations?
I agree my rebuttal was useless to one who cannot or will not understand the argument in the first place or what is necessary to prove the argument false.
Either atheism began in Protestant nations or it began elsewhere. That is a pretty simple argument. No?
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.