Posted on 06/10/2007 3:02:20 PM PDT by NYer
Many modern people have the notion that the principal mission of the Catholic Church is to impose belief on unbelievers. The reality is that most of its time is spent trying to restrain belief in everything from spoon-bending to the aliens who allegedly speak to us through a cat in Poughkeepsie.
The riptides and cross-currents of religious enthusiasm in American culture are kaleidoscopic and dizzying. Cradle Catholics can be forgiven for just ignoring the whole thing and many of them do. But it’s still worth taking into account because some religious trends can have decided real-world effects.
Some of the effects of unrestrained belief can be amusing.
For instance, after five centuries of being told by Protestant polemicists that we “Romanists” do not trust the saving grace of Jesus Christ and ignorantly seek salvation by the works of the law, it is a weird thing for a Catholic to see the spectacle of kooky apocalyptic Protestants eagerly excited about the birth of red heifers because this will (they hope) be the prelude to rebuilding the Temple of Solomon and the re-institution of the Mosaic sacrificial system. Just how that Temple will be rebuilt when the Dome of the Rock is situated on the site of the Temple is not quite as clearly worked out.
Which brings me to something just as kooky, but less amusing.
Recently, James Dobson, a leading Evangelical and a usually sensible man, hosted on his show one Joel Rosenberg, author of something called Epicenter: Why Current Rumblings in the Middle East Will Change Your Future. Rosenberg claims to know “what the Bible says” about what is happening in the Mideast and is not shy about making “predictions regarding the fate of the Middle East regarding issues such as Iran’s nuclear threats against Israel, the arms race and ultimately ... Armageddon.” Here’s a snippet:
Dobson: “Well, Joel, let’s explain to everybody how Ezekiel 38 turns out, because Israel is about to be attacked, and a huge number of troops from Russia and Iran are coming toward Israel to destroy it, and what happens?”
Rosenberg: “Well, God is going to move. You won’t find in the Scriptures that the United States is coming to rescue Israel or the European Union, but God says he is going to supernaturally intervene — we’re talking about fire from heaven, a massive earthquake, diseases spreading through the enemy forces. It is going to be such a clear judgment against the enemies of Israel that Ezekiel 39 says that it will take seven months to bury all the bodies of the slain enemies of Israel. “
Such standard-issue Evangelical prophetic cocksureness is an excellent example of why a magisterium is so useful and necessary.
Not only does the magisterium help us know what is essential to the faith, it also helps us remain free of what is unessential. For the various species of Protestantism, in addition to denying real biblical truths such as the Real Presence or infant baptism, also have a tendency to invent “biblical truths” that do not exist and impose them by means of a sort of cultural pressure via charismatic preachers with pet theories who, in their own sphere, are granted an infallibility the Pope could never dream of.
Now, a Catholic is quite free to have a kooky private reading of Ezekiel 38-39 as a prophecy of the “coming resurgent Soviet Union” and its alliance with Muslims, communist Chinese or whoever, all in a vast Cecil B. DeMille battle against Israel. The Church has all sorts of room for eccentrics, and everybody needs a hobby.
But a Catholic is not free to go around telling everybody that “this is the clear teaching of the Bible” and demand it be believed. For the fact is, this kooky theory is emphatically not the clear teaching of the Bible, nor does it have any sanction whatsoever from the Church, the tradition, the Fathers, the councils or the popes. It is a pure novelty we can and should ignore.
What we should not ignore is Rosenberg’s claim that, “Given the events going on in our world today, people at the Pentagon, people at the CIA, people at the White House are asking to sit down and talk about these issues, to understand the Biblical perspective, because it is uncanny what is happening out there and it deserves some study.”
I suspect that Rosenberg is exaggerating his clout with the big cheeses in DC. I doubt that the Pentagon’s intel meetings are dominated by exegeses of Ezekiel 38.
But I do think it matters if a significant portion of the American polity drinks in such bizarre theories as if they were God’s revealed Truth.
Ideas have consequences, especially crazy ones. Most crazy ideas do no harm.
Crazy ideas about the Middle East, backed by the force of arms, stand a better than average chance of killing millions.
lol. As is so often the case, the RCC instructs us not to believe in the written word, but in what men say about the written word.
According to Scripture.
You have presented another false statement about Roman Catholic Church teaching. (Are you trying to set a record?) It's quite the opposite. We're called to believe what the Bible teaches us, not the private personal interpretation of scripture offered by some stranger on the internet.
As you choose to interpret it.
Pardon me. I was led to believe (by one of your fellow travelers) that bold italic blue text was somehow more credible or true.
Is that not the case?
I try to speak only for myself.
I've noticed otherwise.
The YOPIOS rule is officially triggered. Petronski loses any debate, and is hereby chastised for invoking a false defense that precludes any rational response.
YOPIOS is disingenuous and arbitrary.
That’s the post that marks your surrender.
You get so sore when you’re forced to recognize that your interpretation of scripture is NOT final.
Once YOPIOS is invoked, the invoker has run the course of rational debate. His defense becomes, in the words of Pee Wee Herman, “I know you are, but what am I?!” That is, he sets up a defense that is insurmountable with rationality. From that moment on, the YOPIOS defender can claim that “it’s just your interpretation.”
The reality is that ALL interpretation of Scripture is YOPIOS, including that sanctioned by the RCC.
What’s next with the YOPIOS defense? Will you invoke it if I claim that John 11:35 means that Jesus shed tears? Where is it not (in)valid?
Nope, any invocation of YOPIOS must be taken as a concession of the debate.
What a shame that this thread has taken this turn.
Perhaps as thread host you can do something to salvage this. :)
When the word of God is contradicted as boldly as it is in the RCC regarding the fiction that surrounds Mary, it's not too difficult to understand.
Stand now with thine enchantments, and with the multitude of thy sorceries, wherein thou hast laboured from thy youth; if so be thou shalt be able to profit, if so be thou mayest prevail." -- Isaiah 47_11-12"Therefore shall evil come upon thee; thou shalt not know from whence it riseth: and mischief shall fall upon thee; thou shalt not be able to put it off: and desolation shall come upon thee suddenly, which thou shalt not know.
"For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus" -- 1 Timothy 2:5
I've noticed otherwise.
If all you've got is a nonsensical turn of phrase, then that's all you've got.
Praise God. Then believe it.
""For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus" -- 1 Timothy 2:5
"Be not afraid; only believe." -- Mark 5:36
You're entitled to interpret the Bible however you wish.
Ah, you're editing my words to twist their meaning again. Here's the whole thing (the part in bold refers to YOUR posts):
We're called to believe what the Bible teaches us, not the private personal interpretation of scripture offered by some stranger on the internet.
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.