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.
Amen.
I ask again.... What is life?.. What is it?..
The human body is a machine but what is life?..
What survives the machine?..
Ephesians 3:10-11 His intent was that now, through the church, the manifold wisdom of God should be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly realms, according to his eternal purpose which he accomplished in Christ Jesus our Lord.
We teach the angels in a sense through their observation of the unfolding work of redemption.
Have you read C.S. Lewis’ “Screwtape Letters”? It’s a bit like the plot you describe.
Yes I have.. but thats not anywhere near the scenario I have proposed.. But Screwtape letters is indeed messing about the margins of what I propose.. Basically what I propose is "the Screwtape Letters on Sanctification".. Evil Angels repenting of their deed(s) returning to God/father.. as a prodigal son.. AS HUMANS... With good angels and bad angels as benefactors or malefactors attending the process..
Meaning a human going to hell would be failure twice not once.. Once as an angel and once as a human.. An atheist and others then would be a double moron ugh! failure.. proving twice spiritual dysfunction..
The life of a person is his love. All religion has relation to life, and the life of religion is to do good.
Now, leave that there for a moment. You asked "What survives the machine?.."
We all have a natural and a spiritual, or external and internal. The spiritual or internal, although we are not conscious of it, is in the spiritual world. For good or evil, it's were our affections come from. We think from the spiritual.
The spiritual world is substantial and composed of 2 elements -- love and wisdom. Time and space do not exist there. There is a sun there which represents the Lord and it eminates heat (good) and light (truth).
We have 'dual citizenship' in both worlds while we are alive. The mind, will and understanding are real spiritual organs and are vessels for love and wisdom and survive the 'machine'.
Back to the original statement -- that formula will lead to Heaven. You will unite your thinking to good.
There are, of course, people and spirits who pervert the Lord's love and wisdom to evil and falsity. They, of course, are condemned to hell.
I can accept most that..
Pride does not necessarily enter into it at all, Dear Bro.
One could say . . . constructions on reality which have little to no basis on concrete fact
One could say . . . constructions on reality which have no congruence amongst others observing from an objective Proty perspective.
One could say . . . constructions on reality which have no grounding in the reality most Proties connect with Scripture and the tangibles of daily life.
etc.
Fantasies is a reasonable short hand. It is ONE perspective.
RC perspectives accuse Proties of various things which are more or less offensive to Proties. Most Proties are reasonably non-plussed by such unless the tone is super shrill or the hypocrisy is super glaring. It goes with the territory.
RC’s however, tend to take things particularly personally as though every bit of dogma and doctrine unique to the RC’s and/or Orthy’s was a cinder block sized chip on their shoulders over which they were obligated to go ballistic over should any Proty dare to comment about it in less than glowing terms.
That phenomenon has been standard hereon for many years. It’s less so amongst the RC’s I meet face to face, interestingly, and thankfully.
The whole counsel of God in Scripture includes tons of verses about the primacy of FAITH.
Of course
Faith without works is dead. I think that takes care of the verse you cite quite adequately.
Seems to me that Protestants incorporate “works” into repentence, while Catholics consider repentence a “work.” There, I’ve solved the justification divide. Let’s just declare it a mystery, hold hands, and sing Kumbaya.
= = =
Sounds more promising than a lot of other noise on the topic.
Pastor is, of course, Biblical as you note.
I don’t recall if I have ever referred to someone as “Reverend.”
I tend to avoid lofty pontifical titles like the plague.
I couldn’t agree more about drawing attention to oneself. I always used to say the object of the game was to be a window, not a wall, and the best windows are invisible.
= = =
I like that.
Mary conceived without sin?
Now the RC’s are bucking for Mary’s parents to also have been perfect from birth?
How long before Adam and Eve are rehabilitated?
There is only room for one leader for a man’s inner self. Accept no substitutes.
= =
INDEED!
OH! I get the difference, silly moi!. You are right. You’re reading substitute like, um, aspartame for sugar - a replacement - not as sweet and possibly bad for you in large doses. Anybody who presents himself or herself as THAT kind of substitute for God is gonna be REAL bad for you (and worse for him/her-self!)
= = =
Quite so.
However, MD, it does NOT seem to matter conclusively by far . . . what the language is THOUGH THE LANGUAGE SEEMS TO EFFECT DEGREE . . . and for some . . . probably a significant degree.
But Proties have more Scripturally kosher language about such leaders
and congregation members STILL emotionally and sometimes intellectually begin to construe anointed or attractive or loving, or seductive, coercive, . . .
leaders
as substitutes for at least Christ or at least Holy Spirit—just as some RC’s do with Mary et al.
It
IS
a
HUMAN
problem of significant proportions in ALL RELIGIOUS groups.
I do believe he was speaking of any man on earth who exalts himself and calls himself the “Holy Father”, “Christs’ Vicar on Earth”, and other such pretentious titles. This person will be humbled.
= = =
It has seemed to me that humility, like pride in lofty ecclesiastical leaders . . . including most of the Pontiffs of my 60 years . . .
is very spotty. They can be incredibly humble in this or that set of areas . . . and absolutely Machiavellian or at least . . . fiercely, sternly authoritarion with great chips on their shoulders in other areas.
Must be something about being human.
I read Chamber's devotions in the original language hardcover most mornings. Sometimes I 'cheat' and read ahead a few days, as I did this morning. I read up through June 20th. There are quite a few lines among those pages that are working like a scalpel on my heart today, but one in particular seems purposely orchestrated as a suitable reply to your metaphorical post:
The first thing God does is give us a spiritual spring cleaning;
there is no possibility of pride left in a man after that.
THE classic story about la dependency on the clergy is that of an event in a Protestant church (I cannot remember the denom) of a person ahvng a heart attack during a service and though three MD (in the sense of Doc, not of moi) aqre in the congregation and nobody moves until the cleric says,"Uh, get MOVING!"
My more embarrassing story is that I was preaching in Spotsylvania and this guy suddenly goes wite and keels over (and I'm saying, "Woah! I'm good but not THAT good!") and again nobody moves until I suggest that somebody call 911.
So yeah dependency is an issue, as is counter dependency. But look at how we've treated some of our Popes, and the general griping against the clergy You may have missed on a related thread, a RC poster said about that confounded Cardinal Mahoney of LA, "May God rebuke him, we humbly pray," That was an in-joke, a quote from a prayer to Saint Michael, which includes "Be our defense against the wickedness and snares of the devil. May God rebuke him we humbly pray."
So I don't worry all that much about an excessive dependence on the clergy ....
They are? Joachim and Anna? "THE RCs" or "SOME RC's". WHO's bucking for this. I sho' ain't, AND this is the first I've heard of it.
So, ever call anybody Mister? ( = master)? Sir (= Lord)? Doctor (= teacher). I hope you’ve never had cause to call somebody “Your Honor”, but if you did, you knew that it was about his gig not about him (or her) personally.
My interpretation and gloss would be something like: The works which show the vitality of the gift of Faith are themselves a part of the gift of new Life in Christ.
Battle cries and Slogans are kind of a nuisance, because one ends up defending them as though they were Scripture, and the contention gets simple-minded. "Faith alone" needs patient examination before it can be rightly understood in the context of Scripture or of one's own spiritual life. RC doctrine however can be -- ought to be -- mocked before understanding.
Then why not present it as such. "It looks like ..." "It seems to me ..." "What I cannot help thinking are fantasies."
I think the net is a hot medium, and just impresses people as aggressive.
I got contentious on the religion forum when I logged onto a thread and read someone completely mischaracterizing in an aggressive, hostile, and mendacious way our teaching on the Eucharist. The kindest possible construction that could be places on this was uncaring ignorance and a presumption that Catholic teaching ought to be condemned not understood, and any condemnation would do. Sweeping and sweepingly untrue statements couched in the rhetoric of certainty seem to be the norm
Darn, gotta go.
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.