My Faith: Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN), from Catholic to Muslim

CNN ^ | 9/1/11 | Chris Welch

[marshmallow]

Minneapolis, Minnesota (CNN) –Prior to 2006, few people even knew that then-Minnesota state legislator Keith Ellison was a Muslim. Because of his English name, he said, no one thought to ask.

But five years ago, when he ran for a seat in the United States House of Representatives - a race he would go on to win - word of his religious affiliation began to spread.

“When I started running for Congress it actually took me by surprise that so many people were fascinated with me being the first Muslim in Congress,” said Ellison, a Democrat now serving his third term in the House.

“But someone said to me, ‘Look Keith, think of a person of Japanese origin running for Congress six years after Pearl Harbor–this might be a news story.’”

Though Ellison's status as the first Muslim elected to Congress is widely known, fewer are aware that he was born into a Catholic family in Detroit and was brought up attending Catholic schools.

But he said he was never comfortable with that faith.

“I just felt it was ritual and dogma,” Ellison said. “Of course, that’s not the reality of Catholicism, but it’s the reality I lived. So I just kind of lost interest and stopped going to Mass unless I was required to.”

It wasn’t until he was a student at Wayne State University in Detroit when Ellison began, “looking for other things.”

[smvoice]

This will make it clearer to me than anything else. Where is Mary right now? Is she standing at the right hand of Christ in heaven? Does she dispense the graces that save? That would mean that Christ redeemed us, but Mary through dispensing saving grace, saves us. That would make her a CO-redeemer. An equal redeemer to Christ. WIthout redemption, one cannot be redeemed. And at the same time, without grace, one cannot be saved. One is as important as the other in our redemption and salvation. Anyway, this is what I’m getting at.

[aruanan]

Except that He doesn’t “return” to earth at the rapture. We leave to meet Him in the air.

Geez, you're parsing this based on imagery to extricate yourself from a difficulty posed by the doctrine of a pre-trib rapture. You really should look at what the origin of parousia is. If you did, you wouldn't be engaged in this silly, "Oh, but he hasn't actually returned to the Earth because he didn't touch down" punt that has been around since at least the early 1970s. The parousia refers to the practice of people going out of town to meet the visiting ruler and accompanying him back into town for his visitation.

[Quix]

AS Scripture indicates . . .

So what.

It is the created creature’s

REASONABLE SERVICE

to be obedient.

There is no great honor or expected reward attributable to mere obedience.

That God does reward outrageously is not the issue. imho.

That’s NO justification for all manner of layers of man’s fantasies about God’s rewards.

[smvoice]

Actually, it's been around since Paul was given the dispensation of the grace of God, and the Church the Body of Christ, the mystery hid in God since the foundation of the world until made known to Paul by direct revelations from Jesus Christ. Paul told us when the Church the Body of Christ was formed, what it is doing in this present age of grace, and when it will end. During this present age, there is no difference between Jew and Greek, the middle wall of partition that separated us has been removed and we all stand equal before God. That was not true during Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and the entire OT. And it is not true during the tribulation, which Hebrews through Revelation picks up after the four Gospels and the first part of Acts. If we are not separated back with the middle wall of partition, then where are we? We are gone. The Church the Body of Christ is completed. The dispensation of the grace of God is over, and Christ has come to remove us before the wrath of God is poured out. We are told we are to be saved from the wrath of God. Which is the tribulation. When it begins, we are gone. Because Christ has come to redeem His Body of Believers, as He promised He would. He comes in the clouds to meet us in the air.

You may not believe, but it doesn't change the facts. If you would rightly divide your Bible, you would know where you are in this present age, and in God's plan for mankind.

[Jvette]

Would it make more sense to gather on Friday which would be the end of the work week when workers had been paid or the harvest had been made?

How much work did it involve? Did the deacons go to each of the Christians to collect the food and money and whatever else they gave, or did the Christians just bring it with them when they met to break bread?

And, of course I know that they gave things other than money, though Scripture very clearly says they sold possessions and gave money for the support of the community of believers.

You say the Church has strayed. Does this also mean that the shrub which grows out of the tiny mustard seed has strayed from that seed? Or, is the tree the organic growth which came from the seed, which God designed and made grow?

Jesus says the Kingdom of God is like that mustard seed. The Church is called the Kingdom of God on earth. And while that is disputed by some theologians, it should be noted that it is not just a Catholic belief. Many protestant churches make this claim and even name themselves as such.

For my purpose though, I merely seek to compare the Church to the parable that Jesus told. Jesus says the tree comes from the smallest of seeds and that birds come to make their nests there. The tree is a refuge for the birds, a place to take rest, make their homes and nurture their families. I see that as being true of the Church.

And, so I believe that Jesus planted the seed which the Apostles and their successors watered and God made grow, and we are the birds which make our home there.

Your belief is that the Church has strayed with the doctrines you mention, and I say that these doctrines are natural branches that have grown from the seed.

Which all brings us back to how we view Scripture and the church. I see Scripture and the Church as synergistic meaning that the two together are stronger than each individually. Scripture supports the church and the church illumines Scripture. This does not mean that I see Scripture as subordinate to the church, but that taken alone Scripture can be used wrongly.

To deny that is to deny the chaos in the Christian community regarding some very basic tenets.

As I said in an earlier post, I have never heard of replacementarianism. I have never heard, nor read anything Catholic which supports a belief that we somehow replaced Israel and the Jews. Christians are of the New Covenant, from the same God as revealed Himself to His people. One Lord of all. The New Covenant is the fulfillment of the promises to Israel.

Going back to the seeds. Jesus speaks of the sower and the good soil and the good seed. Israel, the Old Covenant is the fertile good soil, Jesus is the seed and the Church of Christian believers is the tree which has grown.

It seems that replacementarianism is another false belief that non Catholics ascribe to Catholics which Catholics do not believe.

[CynicalBear]

>> And that's your religion... <<

The Catholic Church already tried chaining the Bible to the pulpit by denying it to the people. They lost that battle so now attempt to keep the understanding from the people through double speak, obfuscation, and supposed mysteries.

The scriptures were written so that we can understand as Paul explains.

Ephesians 3:4 Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ)

[smvoice]

The "supposed mysteries" taught by the RCC have nothing to do with the mysteries hid in God until revealed to the Apostle Paul. THere are at least three. They were not made known before they were given to Paul by direct revelations from Jesus Christ. You would think the RCC would be curious about these mysteries. As much as they seem to like the word. But no.

These mysteries hid in God would turn their carefully constructed world upside down. So they trod on, changing wafers and wine, and speak of the sacraments as mysteries. All the while ignoring the REAL, TRUE, LIFE GIVING, LIFE CHANGING mysteries located right in God's word.

[count-your-change]

“roundly attacked”??? MD, you've been handled as gently as if you were a new born babe, as gently as if you were new born twins even!

When you said:

“Even among co-authors usually one takes the lead”,

I agreed and gave a supporting example of pilot and co-pilot. To others I commented that co didn't demand equality since the term was imprecise.

Roundly attacked? A fly on boiler plate would cut deeper.

“HERE the accusation was that by use of the word we necessarily were implying equality, and that to claim that ‘co-’ had any sense other than equality was specious and disingenuous or ignorant.”

Having established that you are neither specious or disingenuous nor ignorant (maybe a little) we can indeed go on to the question of what role Mary played, co or not.

What can I say? The logic fails. Elizabeth was not co with John the Baptist or the “certain daughter of Levi”, Moses’ mother anything co to Moses by virtue of carrying him.

If Elizabeth and the others weren't co anything why would Mary be termed such? That is the gist of the question.

Pipe? Trench? What?

[Jvette]

It is more like each protestant is the captain which makes for much wrangling at the wheel and that is why the course the ship is on is uncharted and erratic tossed about by every storm or new wave of theology.

[CynicalBear]

>>co-operate or contribute to Christ's redemptive work.<<

We can point to the redemptive work of Christ we cannot co-operate or contribute to that work. That’s the extent to which Mary could operate also while she was on earth.

[marbren]

IMHO If God wanted to use His Holy Spirit living inside each of us to guide us to truth I believe He is big enough to do it. I also believe that God is big enough to be able to handle a 24/7 personal relationship with each one of us. If we resist His Spirit I do not think God whines about it much. He lets us be.

[Jvette]

And in mine, I could accept that if it were not a fact that the many different truths born of individual interpretations have created chaos in the church and not unity.

On these forums I have rarely seen a protestant correct another, rather they are more a cheering section for each other in the sport of anti Catholicism.

Yet, we have Calvinist, dispensationalists, alienists, and individualists. There are those who believe in the rapture, those who don’t, just to name one glaring contradiction, yet there is no “attack” from other protestants against those beliefs. Beliefs which if in any way conflict or contradict with one’s own, would have to be unScriptural.

For, if one can accept that there is interpretation that is valid even if different that one’s own, then one would have to then admit that ALL interpretations are valid. Oh my, even that of Catholics.

[CynicalBear]

>>and accompanying him back into town for his visitation.<<

And so we will when He returns at the battle of Armageddon.

Revelation 19:11,14
11 Now I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse. And He who sat on him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He judges and makes war.14 And the armies in heaven, clothed in fine linen, white and clean, followed Him on white horses.

[CynicalBear]

>> On these forums I have rarely seen a protestant correct another, rather they are more a cheering section for each other in the sport of anti Catholicism.<<

If you have “rarely seen” Protestants correcting or disagreeing with each other you haven’t been paying attention or don’t know who claims to be Protestant. I, for instance, have had many contention with others who claim to be Protestant. As an example those who claim to follow Luther or Calvin. Then there are those Protestants who claim the church has replaced Israel or who are from the prosperity school of thought. There are many, many disagreements and debate amongst Protestants.

[Natural Law]

"The Catholic Church already tried chaining the Bible to the pulpit by denying it to the people."

That lie has been told for 500+ years and it still isn't true. What do you think your contributions to it's propagation will accomplish.

[marbren]

On these forums I have rarely seen a protestant correct another

smvoice taught me something new yesterday. I agree that the all flesh protestant and catholic want to be in control and right. No one wants to be wrong. This is why my I do not know, Thank God God knows position is so liberating.

My faith walk has really grown when I asked God for the truth, about Israel for instance with no preconceived notions of my own. Growth in Faith requires change.

individual interpretations have created chaos in the church and not unity.

I have spiritual unity with many on FR. I even count Catholic Mad Dawg as one I have unity with. He has a loving heart. Quix is also very loving, though God has called him to a tough love approach at times in his watchman role. The unity here transcends denominations and it is based on Love of God and each other. I love the diversity here. Weeds also exist and shall remain nameless.

We all see through a glass darkly. Pre conceived notions create walls to unity. We should all give room for each others convictions unless they oppose God's Word.

[bkaycee]

>> On these forums I have rarely seen a protestant correct another, rather they are more a cheering section for each other in the sport of anti Catholicism.<<

The Churches of the reformation disagree on relatively minor issues, like siblings in any family. However, we are unified in Jesus, we all saved by Grace only, thru Faith only, in Christ only. We are not concerned with carbon copy uniformity on issues where the bible is silent or vague. Non essentials are..... not essential.

[marbren]

I agree, One neat thing about being Protestant is we can protest If we disagree :)

[bkaycee]

lol :)

[CynicalBear]

>>How much work did it involve? Did the deacons go to each of the Christians to collect the food and money and whatever else they gave, or did the Christians just bring it with them when they met to break bread?<<

They “brought them in”.

>>Jesus says the Kingdom of God is like that mustard seed.<<

In that it grew and produce more.

>>The Church is called the Kingdom of God on earth.<<

At best that can be considered church with a small c. The church of Christ consists of ALL those who profess faith in Jesus as Lord and savior. The RCC does not have sole claim to that.

>>and I say that these doctrines are natural branches that have grown from the seed.<<

Natural branches would have their source in scripture. A doctrine like the assumption of Mary does not. If it is a true branch it must be rooted in God’s word. If not, it does not belong to that tree.

>>Scripture supports the church and the church illumines Scripture.<<

No support for the assumption of Mary and other doctrines of the RCC. Also there is no illumination of scripture on those points. They left the scriptures on those points thus the contention that the RCC strayed from the teachings of scripture.

>>To deny that is to deny the chaos in the Christian community regarding some very basic tenets.<<

Chaos comes from Satan and it’s not confined to the RCC. It is prevalent in all denominations and will get worse the closer we get to the end of time. That’s one of the reasons I strictly adhere to scripture for understanding and not on any organized religion.

>>The New Covenant is the fulfillment of the promises to Israel.<<

Some of the promises yes but not all. That statement alone says that the church replaced the Jewish people in the eyes of God. It did not. Israel still has a special place and promise from God separate from the church.

>>It seems that replacementarianism is another false belief that non Catholics ascribe to Catholics which Catholics do not believe.<<

Here are a couple of statements that give the Catholic position.

The true Israel is not Israel "in the flesh" (i.e., ethnic Judaism) but Israel in the spirit.

The Church is not a replacement for Israel of old, but an unbroken continuation of Israel under the promised King and Messiah of Israel, and His Church is His Kingdom of Israel, expanded to include all the Gentile peoples of the earth.

Essentially they claim that the church has “replaced” Israel and that Israel no longer has a special place in future prophecy.