Now you just hold on there one darned minute, fella....
Posted on 05/17/2007 10:08:04 AM PDT by Gamecock
Reading Francis Beckwith's interview with David Neff in Christianity Today, reminded me of how idyllic the Roman church can seem in the minds of those who embrace it (Click here: Q&A: Francis Beckwith | Christianity Today | A Magazine of Evangelical Conviction).
But then this news report appeared today which gives a much different picture of the supposed glories of Romanism (Click here: Pope to canonize first Brazilian saint - Yahoo! News).
All discussion of justification, the authority of Scripture, and reciting the Creed aside, the Pope is heading to Brazil to canonize Antonio de Sant'Anna Galvao, a Franciscan monk who is credited with 5000 miraculous healings. Over 1 million people are expected to be in attendance. The healings supposedly come as a result of swallowing rice paper pills prepared by the monk over two hundred years ago. According to the AP news report . . .
"The Vatican has officially certified the medical cases of two Brazilian women as divinely inspired miracles that justify the sainthood of Galvao. Both of these women spoke of their faith with The Associated Press, claiming that their children would not be alive today were it not for the tiny rice-paper pills that Friar Galvao handed out two centuries ago.
Although the friar died in 1822, the tradition is carried on by Brazilian nuns who toil in the Sao Paulo monastery where Galvao is buried, preparing thousands of the Tic Tac-sized pills distributed free each day to people seeking cures for all manner of ailments. Each one is inscribed with a prayer in Latin: `After birth, the Virgin remained intact. Mother of God, intercede on our behalf.'
Sandra Grossi de Almeida, 37, is one such believer. She had a uterine malformation that should have made it impossible for her to carry a child for more than four months. But in 1999, after taking the pills, she gave birth to Enzo, now 7. `I have faith," Grossi said, pointing to her son. I believe in God, and the proof is right here.'
Nearly 10 years before that, Daniela Cristina da Silva, then 4 years old, entered a coma and suffered a heart attack after liver and kidney complications from hepatitis A. `The doctors told me to pray because only a miracle could save her,' Daniela's mother Jacyra said recently. `My sister sneaked into the intensive care unit and forced my daughter to swallow Friar Galvao's pills.'"
So, if you "return home" to Rome, you get the whole ball of wax, including the beatification of saints who give out Tic-Tac size rice-paper pills which supposedly heal. And Pope Benedict XVI will be there to bless it all.
By the way, confessional Protestants affirm the historical evangelical doctrine of justification by grace alone, through faith alone, on account of Christ alone, and the full authority of Scripture. And yes, we even recite the Creed every Lord's Day and we use a biblical-text based liturgy which is quite similar to that described by Justin Martyr in the second century.
Too bad Dr. Beckwith didn't consider a confessional Protestant church before embracing Romanism. Now he's stuck with Antonio de Sant'Anna Galvao and his rice-paper healing pills.
No more or less so than the term "protestant". We've learned to live with it.
If "Roman Catholics" were not so arrogant to use the word "catholic" to identify their particular denomination, folks would not need to find an alternative designation.
Or Mitt Romney. 8~)
Hi, TC. Ping to 40. Isn’t it music to our ears?
I agree, but you shouldn't be that hard on the Church of Rome, I mean calling it a morphed, castrated, abridged, pale imitation. After all, people around here are way too sensitive this evening.
Of course, we don’t NEED miracles. We don’t NEED signs. But that did not stop God from performing signs, through Moses, through many other Old Testament figures, through Christ Himself, through the apostles, and through many people since. God after all DID perform signs through Paul and Peter, as reported in Acts. Obviously, “apostolic miracles” ended with the apostles: that is what we call in logic a tautology. Just as “prophetic miracles” ended with the prophets, “Mosaic miracles” ended with Moses. The question is, did ALL miracles end with the apostles? There is no reason to think so. And the great majority of Protestants in the world do not think so. We are told not to demand miracles. But we also should also not mock the idea that God still may be performing them in today’s world.
Doubtless, there are many fraudulant claims of miracles. I strongly suspect that many of the miracles done by televangelists are fraudulant. I hesitate to say that they all are, as dubious as they seem, because it would be presumptuous of me to set limits to what God can do. I also suspect that the vast majority of purported apparitions of Mary, on drainpipes or whatever, are bogus. It is precisely because of the fact of fraudulant claims of the miraculous
that it is so useful that the Catholic Church does rigorous investigations of purported miracles. And the fact is, as anyone who looks into the matter will find, that many of the miracles documented in those investigations have enormously strong evidence in their favor. I say this as a person who is a research scientist and somewhat skeptical by nature.
I am Roman Catholic and I say Roman Catholic. I think your post is very silly. There is nothing particularly insulting about the term "Roman Catholic Church" (especially in contrast with Orthodox Catholic Church).
Romish, Romanist, papist, etc. seem pejorative to me, something similar to referring to expressions of Jewish faith as, for example, "that Jew religion and its Jew ways"--obviously snide and rather ugly.
But to say there is something pejorative about "Roman Catholic Church" is, I think, quite an embarrassing stretch.
Did not Dr. Gamecock post with approval something that asked why Beckwith chose Romanism over confessional Protestantism?
:)
Now you just hold on there one darned minute, fella....
"Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men." -- Mark 7:7
Have you apologized to Gamecock yet for bearing false witness that he used the word "Romanist?"
Is that a “No” that you won’t be apologizing to Gamecock for your incorrect assertion that he used the term “Romanist?”
So where's the "lie"?
-A8
If they weren't ill before his smacks to their noggin, they sure were afterward. 8~)
Calling onself a Roman Catholic refers to the Roman or Latin Rite of Liturgy. There are Chaldean Catholics, Byzantine Catholics, Maronite Catholics, Melkite Catholics——we are all Catholics.
I personally haven’t seen (or used) the terms such as Romish, Romanist, Papist, Popish, etc. except as perjoratives.
Excuse me if I don’t LOL about it.
I think that he was the one who exhorted people to touch their TV sets to receive his blessings.
You can’t win on this one. I’ve been berated for calling it the: Catholic Church, Roman Catholic Church, and Roman Church.
Romish is old school and I don’t talk that way, but it wouldn’t matter. Apparently, either I’m an equal opporunity offender, or the left hand doesn’t talk to the right hand in the R___C___C____
(I’ve also been castigated for RC....sigh...)
But those words in no way are like ethnic slurs which are to be avoided at all costs.
One is a matter of choice. The other is a matter of birth. Liberals confuse the two all the time, like when they equate any criticism of homosexuality with true and repugnant racism. We conservatives should be above that.
I’ve never heard “baby splasher.” That’s kinda cute.
The worst slur for the Reformed side, I think, is “snake handler.” I wasn’t aware “Protestant” was considered pejorative.
LOL,
No, I mean this one:
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.