Posted on 01/26/2018 1:04:07 PM PST by GoldenState_Rose
We are in a time of the first ever mass conversions of Muslims,” Father Mitch Pacwa SJ told me in a phone interview. “God is doing a mighty work among them.”
Pacwa said that mass conversions are happening even in very fundamentalist countries. There is rapidly growing number of conversions especially on the edges of the Muslim world in the western and southern parts of Africa, he said. “Africa is now growing predominantly Christian despite crackdowns,” Pacwa said.
Some of the noteworthy countries he mentioned include Iran, reported to have 3 million Christians, and Indonesia with reports of 2 million a year converting.
“In Mongolia, the president opened the country to Christians and there’s even an archbishop,” Pacwa said. “They built a Catholic school there too. If I was younger, I would have gone.” He said that the desire for a Western education was the impetus to open up the country to the Catholic Church.
There are even conversions happening in many strict Muslim countries, according to Pacwa. He did not want to go on record with particulars for fear of increased retribution. Mass conversions are also being reported among refugees that are filling up the Christian churches left empty by Europeans. Many wonder if those are authentic conversions or just a response to improving their chances for amnesty, but time will tell.
Signs of this conversion are showing up in the U.S. too, Pacwa said. “I was about to celebrate Mass at a Maronite church in San Diego and I said hi to a man who introduced himself as Achmad. I asked if he was a Christian. He said: ‘Yes, I was recently baptized.’ He said he from Morocco. Christians do not have the name Ahmad—that’s a form of Mohammad.”
(Excerpt) Read more at ncregister.com ...
See what happens when you've let others do the interpreting for you?
To introduce you to longfellowsmuse (last of the living nomads)
Oh; never mind...
| 1 | serve me . |
| 2. | I promise |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | to me by the recitation of the Rosary, shall not perish. |
| 6. | become worthy |
| 7. | |
| 8. | |
| 9. | I |
| 10. | |
| 11. | You shall obtain all you ask of me |
| 12. | aided by me |
| 13. | I |
| 14. | |
| 15. | Devotion of my Rosary . |
It seems to me that you CATHOLICS really need to get on the same page:
No other Rock.
I was merely responding to your post to me with the the link attached. Do you feel I need to comment on post number 265 since you spent so much time on it?
Hmmmmm... yourself :)
Seems better to me than most of what I hear people say... but so many baby mommies and daddies that father would be a welcome change for a lot of people.
Yawn...
Call No Man Father
by Sebastian R. Fama
Catholics are accused of violating the word of God whenever they address a priest as Father. This argument is based on a verse from the Gospel of Matthew which reads: “Call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven” (Matthew 23:9). A close look at the passage this verse came from quickly dispels any misunderstanding one might have concerning Jesus’ words:
Then said Jesus to the crowds and to his disciples, “The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat; so practice and observe whatever they tell you, but not what they do; for they preach, but do not practice. They bind heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on men’s shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with their finger. They do all their deeds to be seen by men; for they make their phylacteries broad and their fringes long, and they love the place of honor at feasts and the best seats in the synagogues, and salutations in the market places, and being called rabbi by men. But you are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher, and you are all brethren. And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven. Neither be called masters, for you have one master, the Christ. He who is greatest among you shall be your servant; whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted (Matthew 23:1-12).
Jesus is pointing out the hypocrisy of the Scribes and Pharisees. They teach the faith yet they fail to practice it. They enjoy the limelight and are very prideful concerning their positions. They enhance the outward appearances of their religion to make sure that they are noticed. In short, they thought they were something special and they wanted everyone else to think so too. Note what Jesus says in verses 6 and 7 which immediately precede the rejection of the titles of honor: “And they love the place of honor at feasts and the best seats in the Synagogues, and salutations in the market places, and being called rabbi.” The Scribes and Pharisees have effectively set God aside and put themselves in His place. True religion always points to God and not to self. That’s why Jesus closes His remarks with the comments on being humbled and being exalted (see also verses 12-36). Jesus didn’t object to titles but to the way they were used by the Scribes and Pharisees.
Many times in the Gospels Jesus refers to our earthly fathers as well as our Heavenly Father. Father Mitch Pacwa points out that “There are 144 occasions in the New Testament when the title of father is used for someone other than God. It is applied to the patriarchs of Israel, the fathers of families, to Jewish leaders and to Christian leaders” (Call no Man Father, This Rock January 1991).
If the command to call no one on earth father were meant in the strict literal sense, why would God sanction it in Scripture? The Ten Commandments tell us to: “Honor your father and mother” (Exodus 20:12). I think it is pretty obvious that the father spoken of here is not God the Father but the guy your mom fell in love with.
In Matthew 10:37 Jesus says: “He who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and he who loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.” And in Matthew 19:5 He says: “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one.” Is Jesus violating his own command? Why would He do something that He supposedly forbade? The only answer is that He didn’t forbid it. At least not in the strict literal sense.
The apostles themselves had no problem using the title of father for someone other than God. Paul calls himself the father of the Corinthians. “I do not write this to make you ashamed, but to admonish you as my beloved children. For though you have countless guides in Christ, you do not have many fathers. For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the Gospel” (1 Corinthians 4:14-15).
So if we can call priests father and the guy who impregnated our mother father why couldn’t we call the Scribes and the Pharisees father? Well, actually we can as long as it is done in the proper sense. And Scripture does just that. In Acts 7:2 Stephen refers to the leaders of Israel as fathers. He said: “”Brethren and fathers, hear me. The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham, when he was in Mesopotamia…” Paul addresses the crowd in Jerusalem in the same manner: “Brethren and fathers, hear the defense which I now make before you” (Acts 22:1).
As we noted earlier the Scribes and Pharisees effectively put themselves in Gods place. Thus Jesus’ statement: “for you have one Father, who is in heaven. I am sure the Scribes and Pharisees never said or thought that they were equal to God. But the fact remains that your God is whatever you think about most. And it is obvious that the Scribes and Pharisees were obsessed with themselves.
We call our priests father because they perform the role of spiritual fathers. Just as our biological fathers guide us in temporal matters our spiritual fathers guide us in spiritual matters. In the words of Philip Gray:
Our lives of faith are conceived by the acts of those who sow the seeds of faith. The apostles and their successors were commissioned by Christ Himself. They bear His Word in our lives and are ministers of His grace through the sacraments of the Church, beginning with our spiritual rebirth in Baptism. By sharing in the high priesthood of Christ, bishops and priests share in the attributes of the Father. As there is no father but the one Father in heaven, and no teacher or master but Christ, we properly understand that these men, having been commissioned by Christ to act in His person, also represent the Father, whom the Son reveals (cf. Jn. 1:14-18). Insofar as they uniquely participate in the spiritual begetting of God’s children, bishops and priests are our fathers. For they share in the mission of Christ who reveals the eternal Father. St. Ignatius of Antioch, who knew the apostles, expressed this well when he wrote: “Let everyone revere . . . the bishop as the image of the Father” (as quoted in Catechism, no. 1554) (Call No Man Father: Understanding Matthew 23:9, http://www.catholiceducation.org/).
Are Protestants wrong to call their ministers “Pastor?” Pastor is actually a Latin word and it means shepherd. In John 10:14-16 Jesus said:
I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me, as the Father knows me and I know the Father, and I lay down my life for the sheep. And I have other sheep that are not of this fold. I must bring them also, and they will heed my voice. So there shall be one flock, one shepherd.
If we reason that we cannot call a priest Father because we “have one Father who is in heaven,” then can we not also reason that we cannot call a minister Pastor because there is only “one Shepherd?” Pastors are called shepherds because that is what they are. God is Father and Jesus is Shepherd in the ultimate sense. Church leaders are shepherds and fathers in a lesser sense. Why else would Peter say:
Tend the flock of God that is your charge, not by constraint but willingly, not for shameful gain but eagerly, not as domineering over those in your charge but being examples to the flock. And when the chief shepherd is manifested you will obtain the unfading crown of glory (1 Peter 5:2-4).
The term “Chief Shepherd” indicates that there are subordinate shepherds. One scripture verse clarifies another, and so it is with the different verses pertaining to the title of father. When assuming these titles in their proper sense we share, in a subordinate way, in the priesthood of Jesus. As practiced by the Scribes and Pharisees, however, it was a way of exalting self while pretending to serve God. Practicing our faith should always result in our Glorifying God and showing others the way. It should never be an occasion for us to glorify ourselves.
Isolating and grabbing hold of one scripture verse is risky. It can be misleading or even dangerous. Even an honest and well-intentioned Christian can subconsciously bend a verse to suit his or her own needs. It is vitally important to understand the Bible as God intended. St. Augustine once said, “Not what one scripture says, but what all of Scripture says.” When reading any verse of Scripture we must always consider its context. Furthermore, we must consider what the rest of Scripture says about the subject in question. If we fail to do this we run the risk of stripping the Word of God of its meaning and consequently its power. Our reading of Scripture should never be motivated by a personal agenda. Rather it should be the result of an honest thirst for truth.
Copyright © 2016 StayCatholic.com
“See what happens when you’ve let others do the interpreting for you? “
YOPIOS.
Amazing what happens when people are freed from bondage like that of the islamic faith, social order, and forced, islamic governance.
JoMa
As usual, always the first with making it personal.
I’ve seen plenty of Protestant bashing by the Catholic directed at you right here on this thread.
They’re always the first to resort to insults or making it personal.
Well said.
There are MANY churches in the Western NY area that are chock-a-block full of Catholics who have found Christ and you are absolutely right.
I hate to say it, but I have to agree.
They have infiltrated our country. This is the next step.
The problem is, with genuine Christians, they will not get very far in trying to stealth convert them by making demands for accommodation to muslim faith.
Except maybe within the Catholic church and some liberal, mainline denominations who gave up on Scripture LONG ago.
The Holy Spirit (the filioque)
In EO - The third person of the Trinity, proceeding from the Father alone as in the original Nicene Creed. The Father sends the Spirit at the intercession of the Son. The Son is therefore an agent only in the procession of the Spirit.
In RC - 'When the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, He is not separated from the Father, He is not separated from the Son'.
Mary - Assumption and Immaculate conception of
EO - The Assumption is accepted and it is agreed that Mary experienced physical death, but the Immaculate conception is rejected. Orthodox belief is that the guilt of original sin is not transmitted from one generation to the next, thus obviating the need for Mary to be sinless.
RC - Both are dogmas of the church. The church has not as yet decided whether Mary actually experienced Physical death. The dogma of the Immaculate Conception states that Mary, was at conception 'preserved immaculate from all stain of original sin' and should not be confused with the virgin birth.
Pope - Authority of
EO - As the Bishop of Rome, he has a primacy of honour when Orthodox, not of jurisdiction. At present, his primacy is not effective as the papacy needs to be reformed in accordance with Orthodoxy. His authority is thus no greater or lesser than any of his fellow Bishops in the church.
RC - The Pope is the 'Vicar of Christ' i.e. the visible head of the church on earth and spiritual successor of St. Peter. He has supreme authority (including that over church councils) within Christendom (The Power of the keys).
Pope - Infallibility of
EO - Papal Infallibility is rejected. The Holy Spirit acts to guide the church into truth through (for example) ecumenical councils. This Orthodoxy recognises the first seven ecumenical councils (325-787) as being infallible.
RC - The Pope is infallible when, through the Holy Spirit, he defines a doctrine on faith and morals that is to be held by the whole church. This is a dogma and is therefore a required belief within Catholicism.
Purgatory
EO - An intermediate state between earth and heaven is recognised, but cleansing and purification occur in this life, not the next.
RC - A place of cleansing and preparation for heaven. Also a place where the punishment due to unremitted venial sins may be expiated.
I'd say these were the "biggies", but other differences also exist. These are explained here.
Acts 17:24-25 The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in temples made by man, nor is he served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all mankind life and breath and everything.
1 Corinthians 3:16-17 Do you not know that you are God's temple and that God's Spirit dwells in you? If anyone destroys God's temple, God will destroy him. For God's temple is holy and you are that temple.
1 Corinthians 6:19-20 Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own, for you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body.
RWC: >>Christians are the ones who read & follow the Holy Bible and believe who Jesus said He is.<<
ffj: “Nonsense.”
Interesting.
So what, in your opinion, makes one a Christian if it’s not believing and following Christ?
Amen to that. I was one of those back seat Catholics. I would sit in the back, so I could always leave before the mass was over. I figured it was enough to satisfy my Sunday obligation. Maybe it wasn’t. I just don’t know. I haven’t been to mass since 1970. 😀
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.