Posted on 10/11/2006 9:29:49 AM PDT by Antioch
Before criticizing Pentecostal churches that draw Catholics as members, Catholic leaders should ask why their own parishes aren't meeting the needs of those who leave, the Vatican's top ecumenical representative said yesterday at Duquesne University. "Our response cannot be in the form of a polemical approach, leaving ourselves to condemn the activities of other groups," said Cardinal Walter Kasper, president of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity. Such an approach "is not constructive and could even be counter-productive," he said. While Cardinal Kasper is known for outreach to traditional Protestant and Orthodox churches, he said it is crucial to be engaged with a diverse global Pentecostal movement that now claims 600 million adherents. He spoke to an audience of about 225, including Bishop Paul Bradley, administrator of the Catholic Diocese of Pittsburgh, Metropolitan Basil Schott of the Byzantine Catholic Archeparchy of Pittsburgh, Episcopal Bishop Robert Duncan of Pittsburgh and Metropolitan Nicholas of the Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Church of Johnstown.
(Excerpt) Read more at post-gazette.com ...
I do love your spunk.
Though I wish that line of dialogue were a different thread.
All around you.
They aren't.
There is one, it's just not big.
Ask Karl Keating.
They are.
Genesis (including both Ch1 and Ch2) are Divinely Inspired (not dictated; we aren't mohammedans). The Church has always taught this.
The Ancient Churches, as you call them, aren't afraid of any of the Sacred Scriptures.
But they don't go out of their way to attack it, do they?
There are individuals who will chime in against the miracles of Moses and then keep mysteriously silent when the miracles of St. Francis are discussed - but they certainly don't chime in to defend the miracles of St. Francis.
But why is this? Are the miracles of St. Francis more "rational?" More "likely to have happened?" Better researched? More Catholic? I think it's the latter. Rationalist Catholics won't attack St. Francis' stigmata because that's a "Catholic miracle" and it would arouse the masses, but apparently even the Catholic masses regard the miracles of Moses as Jewish or Baptist and therefore not a matter of concern, and certainly nothing one is required to believe "on Divine and Catholic faith."
And where are the people who do explicitly believe in the miracles of St. Francis or the Fatima sun dance? Why don't they ever take a moment of their time to defend the Six Day creation or Noah's Flood or the Tower of Babel? I don't believe they couldn't do it. These are obviously not "rationalist" Catholics, but they regard the inerrancy of the Bible (which they claim they gave the world) as not only a non-issue but are often positively against it! Shame on them. I know you are an exception, wideawake, but let's face it--you are an exception. How much company do you have in your positions?
Many Catholics, especially the millions who cultivate the Carmelite school of spirituality, have a strong devotion to Eliayahu HaNabi.
That is very good, but 'Eliyyahu HaNavi' (zakhur latov) was born to human parents. It's with people directly created by G-d that so many Catholics seem to have a problem. And do these Carmelite nuns accept the idea that 'Eliyyahu did not die but is still alive? That is precisely the reason that he gets a zakhur latov ("remembered for the good") instead of an `alayv hashalom ("peace be upon him").
Granted, Orthodox Jews haven't exactly been on the front lines either, though at least among themselves they assume inerrancy. For that matter Black Fundamentalist Protestants have also been sitting this one out. I have absolutely no idea why the rest of the world wishes to default the Bible entirely to us "rednecks."
You must be one of those illiterate Mayan peasants. How do you manage to use a computer? [joke]
It meant that when the gospel was originally being spread, people could understand it in their own language. It wasn't used for this:
I find that an ASSUMPTION.
Plausible in terms of folks hearing miraculous evidence of The Gospel at that time in their own language.
BUT A GROSS ASSUMPTION that THAT AND THAT ONLY was 100% ALL that was going on vis a vis tongues and/or that such was limited to that era.
It has nothing to do with the strange noises I see coming out of people in charismatic circles.
imho, that's another biased gross assumption.
And, in terms of such rationalizations . . . wholesale biased rationalizations . . .
millions of Pentecostal/Charismatic and simply new believers around the world are not the least hampered by such mere arguments
because
they have EXPERIENCED
THE LIVING GOD ALMIGHTY
rather directly and powerfully. NOTHING can take the place of that regardless of how high the pile of theological discourses.
As the blind man in the NT said so well to the PhD pharisees . . .
I only know I was blind and now I see.
Do you have any idea how many Catholics there are in the world and you want to judge all Catholics by some you meet on FR?
I happen to be a very conservative cradle Catholic who believes in the literal truth of Genesis.
It is really too bad that Catholics are so afraid of "their own" Bible. What's the use of arguing with Protestants that "we gave you the Bible in the first place" if you're going to regard everything in it as a threat?
Are you here to have a discussion with Catholics or are you only here to tell us what we all THINK?? You aren't Catholic, you're not an authority on it and Arrogant Bustard is right. He ought to know better about than those who aren't in the Church.
Granted, Orthodox Jews haven't exactly been on the front lines either, though at least among themselves they assume inerrancy. For that matter Black Fundamentalist Protestants have also been sitting this one out. I have absolutely no idea why the rest of the world wishes to default the Bible entirely to us "rednecks."
= = =
I enjoy and am enlightened by your perspective and knowledge.
Thanks.
An assumption? I think it states pretty clearly in the Bible what its use was for.
I only know I was blind and now I see.
You see what Quix? I tell you what I have seen, people thrashing about on the floor acting like they are epilectics having grand mal seizures and not a darn one of them understanding what the heck the other one has said!
I read a study where a couple of college students went to a Pentecostal revival and they deliberately repeated the words, "Pepsi cola" as fast as they could and the preacher there interpreted it into some kind of spiritual message!
Is this the work of the Holy Spirit? No, it's bogus.
Yes, and the Church has always been wrong.
Why do so many Catholics/Orthodox think that Mohammed invented the idea of a book written by G-d Himself? Judaism taught this a thousand years before chr*stianity and sixteen hunred years before islam. From the very time of the Revelation pious and orthodox Jews have always believed that every word and every letter of the Torah (Genesis-Exodus-Leviticus-Numbers-Deuteronomy) was dictated directly from the Mouth of HaShem to Moses, who wrote it down. But of course the ancient churches (the first Protestants) rejected this ancient Tradition merely in order to replace it with a new one of their own making. And you wonder where Protestants ever got their notion of a Divine Tradition erring!!!
Your own words betray you. Your reference to Chapter One and Chapter Two of Genesis obviously is a reference to the "two creation accounts" accepted by liberal critical scholars. And you, a conservative Catholic who is supposedly arguing against position, actually invokes it! How typical.
Counterfeit and bogus stuff abounds in all flavors and groups of Christianity.
It's still hazardous to throw out the baby with the bath.
If anything, the counterfeit proves there's an original worth bothering about.
Thank G-d for people like you.
Next time your co-religionists are attacking "intelligent design"(a form of Theistic evolution which claims that G-d's activity is scientifically observable) on the grounds that G-d doesn't "interfere" with the universe He created, I hope you will rebuke them.
I used to be Catholic, you know.
Dear Zionist Conspirator,
My own experiences are more akin to ArrogantBustard's and wideawake's.
I went to the Catholic University of America taking 24 credits of religion and philosophy. The folks who would deny manna in the desert usually found a way to denigrate or reduce (or eliminate) doctrines like transubstantiaion, or even the Resurrection.
I had a professor who insisted that the "Resurrection" was a psychological event in the minds and hearts of the apostles and disciples.
I can't speak for someone like that. I don't really know where he got the idea that he was actually Catholic.
Folks like me (maybe I'm a little bit of a fundamentalist Catholic??) believe in transubstantiation. And manna in the desert. In the Resurrection (you know, where Jesus stopped being physically dead, and walked around, eating, chatting, teaching) as well as in the parting of the Red Sea. In the Assumption of Mary as well as the Assumption of Elijah.
sitetest
That's not only incorrect, it's impossible.
To: Quix
I find that an ASSUMPTION.
An assumption? I think it states pretty clearly in the Bible what its use was for.
= = = =
But those passages don't get into praying in tongues which St Paul clearly practices.
And, it's convenient also to leave out . . . St Paul's
I THANK GOD THAT I SPEAK IN TONGUES MORE THAN YOU ALL.
1 Corinthians 14:17-19 (King James Version)
King James Version (KJV)
Public Domain
17For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified.
18I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all:
19Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue.
THE MESSAGE:
1 Corinthians 14:17-19 (The Message)
The Message (MSG)
Copyright © 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 2000, 2001, 2002 by Eugene H. Peterson
13-17So, when you pray in your private prayer language, don't hoard the experience for yourself. Pray for the insight and ability to bring others into that intimacy. If I pray in tongues, my spirit prays but my mind lies fallow, and all that intelligence is wasted. So what's the solution? The answer is simple enough. Do both. I should be spiritually free and expressive as I pray, but I should also be thoughtful and mindful as I pray. I should sing with my spirit, and sing with my mind. If you give a blessing using your private prayer language, which no one else understands, how can some outsider who has just shown up and has no idea what's going on know when to say "Amen"? Your blessing might be beautiful, but you have very effectively cut that person out of it.
18-19I'm grateful to God for the gift of praying in tongues that he gives us for praising him, which leads to wonderful intimacies we enjoy with him. I enter into this as much or more than any of you. But when I'm in a church assembled for worship, I'd rather say five words that everyone can understand and learn from than say ten thousand that sound to others like gibberish.
Many folks conveniently leave out as chaff precious verses like:
1 Corinthians 12:27-29 (King James Version)
King James Version (KJV)
Public Domain
27Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.
28And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.
29Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles?
THE MESSAGE:
1 Corinthians 12:27-29 (The Message)
The Message (MSG)
Copyright © 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 2000, 2001, 2002 by Eugene H. Peterson
27-31You are Christ's body—that's who you are! You must never forget this. Only as you accept your part of that body does your "part" mean anything. You're familiar with some of the parts that God has formed in his church, which is his "body":
apostles
prophets
teachers
miracle workers
healers
helpers
organizers
those who pray in tongues.
But it's obvious by now, isn't it, that Christ's church is a complete Body and not a gigantic, unidimensional Part? It's not all Apostle, not all Prophet, not all Miracle Worker, not all Healer, not all Prayer in Tongues, not all Interpreter of Tongues. And yet some of you keep competing for so-called "important" parts.
- - - - -
1 Corinthians 14:4-6 (The Message)
The Message (MSG)
Copyright © 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 2000, 2001, 2002 by Eugene H. Peterson
4-5The one who prays using a private "prayer language" certainly gets a lot out of it, but proclaiming God's truth to the church in its common language brings the whole church into growth and strength. I want all of you to develop intimacies with God in prayer, but please don't stop with that. Go on and proclaim his clear truth to others. It's more important that everyone have access to the knowledge and love of God in language everyone understands than that you go off and cultivate God's presence in a mysterious prayer language—unless, of course, there is someone who can interpret what you are saying for the benefit of all.
6-8Think, friends: If I come to you and all I do is pray privately to God in a way only he can understand, what are you going to get out of that? If I don't address you plainly with some insight or truth or proclamation or teaching, what help am I to you? If musical instruments—flutes, say, or harps—aren't played so that each note is distinct and in tune, how will anyone be able to catch the melody and enjoy the music? If the trumpet call can't be distinguished, will anyone show up for the battle?
AMPLIFIED:
1 Corinthians 14:4-6 (Amplified Bible)
Amplified Bible (AMP)
Copyright © 1954, 1958, 1962, 1964, 1965, 1987 by The Lockman Foundation
4He who speaks in a [strange] tongue edifies and improves himself, but he who prophesies [[a]interpreting the divine will and purpose and teaching with inspiration] edifies and improves the church and promotes growth [in Christian wisdom, piety, holiness, and happiness].
5Now I wish that you might all speak in [unknown] tongues, but more especially [I want you] to prophesy (to be inspired to preach and interpret the divine will and purpose). He who prophesies [who is inspired to preach and teach] is greater (more useful and more important) than he who speaks in [unknown] tongues, unless he should interpret [what he says], so that the church may be edified and receive good [from it].
6Now, brethren, if I come to you speaking in [unknown] tongues, how shall I make it to your advantage unless I speak to you either in revelation (disclosure of God's will to man) in knowledge or in prophecy or in instruction?
- - - - -
THOSE ARE PRECIOUS SCRIPTURES given for THE OPERATION OF THE CHURCH UNIVERSAL throughout the church age--it's obvious from the words, sentence structure and context.
Yet, folks rationalize it away . . . becuase it's not 'refined' or 'safe' or 'convenient' or it's too humbling . . . doesn't fit the intellectual character of "our group" etc. etc. etc.
Your quotes are from Paul in Titus 3 and are out of context.
You wrote:
"A man that is a heretic, after the first and second admonition, avoid: Knowing that he, that is such an one, is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned by his own judgment.
Paul wrote:
9But avoid stupid controversies, genealogies, dissensions, and quarrels about the law, for they are unprofitable and worthless. 10After a first and second admonition, have nothing more to do with anyone who causes divisions, 11since you know that such a person is perverted and sinful, being self-condemned.
This is about legalism which is prevalent amongst immature unfruitful Christians who are in error.
Here is the whole chapter of the letter for you to read in context:
Titus 3
3Remind them to be subject to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good work, 2to speak evil of no one, to avoid quarrelling, to be gentle, and to show every courtesy to everyone. 3For we ourselves were once foolish, disobedient, led astray, slaves to various passions and pleasures, passing our days in malice and envy, despicable, hating one another. 4But when the goodness and loving-kindness of God our Saviour appeared, 5he saved us, not because of any works of righteousness that we had done, but according to his mercy, through the water* of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit. 6This Spirit he poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Saviour, 7so that, having been justified by his grace, we might become heirs according to the hope of eternal life. 8The saying is sure.
I desire that you insist on these things, so that those who have come to believe in God may be careful to devote themselves to good works; these things are excellent and profitable to everyone. 9But avoid stupid controversies, genealogies, dissensions, and quarrels about the law, for they are unprofitable and worthless. 10After a first and second admonition, have nothing more to do with anyone who causes divisions, 11since you know that such a person is perverted and sinful, being self-condemned.
12 When I send Artemas to you, or Tychicus, do your best to come to me at Nicopolis, for I have decided to spend the winter there. 13Make every effort to send Zenas the lawyer and Apollos on their way, and see that they lack nothing. 14And let people learn to devote themselves to good works in order to meet urgent needs, so that they may not be unproductive.
15 All who are with me send greetings to you. Greet those who love us in the faith.
Grace be with all of you.*
Please refresh my memory, here: for how long did you used to be Catholic?
Note: this is not a personal attack; simply a request for complete information. I know we're supposed to discuss issues, not make it personal. You've made your personal experience an issue, so I think I'm within bounds to ask this.
Yes,but it also says that he that speaks in a tongue should pray for interpration. The authentic gift will always have someone or others with the ability to interpret.
1 Corinthians 14:39
Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues.
I realize it's much more COMFORTABLE to all kinds of fleshly sensibilities to forbid such.
The authentic gift will always have someone or others with the ability to interpret.
= = =
imho,
IF
it's for distribution/edification beyond the one speaking.
Praying in tongues direct to God unintended for other ears is a different matter, imho.
I'll give you my theory.
These people have successfully convinced themselves that St. Francis could have willed himself into the stigmata through some kind of scientifically explainable phenomenon.
These same people cannot come up with a scientifically plausible explanation as to how sweet, edible bread could fall out of a desert sky or how the world could have been created so quickly.
Certain things they cannot just explain away.
Why don't they ever take a moment of their time to defend the Six Day creation or Noah's Flood or the Tower of Babel?
The real reason - because they're afraid of looking silly to worldly people.
How much company do you have in your positions?
I notice that when I speak up, I suddenly have more company than I thought I would.
I think the compromising attitude that so many people adopt is people so used to being spoonfed anti-Scriptuural garbage by worldly pastors and by the culture that they go into camouflage mode.
And do these Carmelite nuns accept the idea that 'Eliyyahu did not die but is still alive?
Of course.
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.