Posted on 06/23/2005 9:06:58 AM PDT by murphE
New York's massive Roman Catholic population will sit out this weekend's Billy Graham crusade in Queens because its parishes are too busy, spokesmen for the two closest dioceses say.
The 413 parishes in the Archdiocese of New York, representing 2.5 million Catholics, are too involved with school graduations, confirmations and the Vatican's emphasis on the Eucharist during 2005, spokesman Joseph Zwilling said yesterday.
The Graham crusade "asked if it would be possible for our churches to invite their people to come," he said, but "given everything happening in our parishes, especially it being the Year of the Eucharist, we didn't feel it'd be possible to ask our parishes to take on any additional activities."
Across the East River in the Diocese of Brooklyn, which lists 1.8 million Catholics, church leaders have also declined involvement, although the crusade will take place there in Flushing Meadows' Corona Park. Spokesman Frank DeRosa cited Year of the Eucharist preparations as a key reason.
Thus, none of that diocese's 217 parishes is among the 1,300 sponsoring congregations for the crusade, which is expected to draw up to 70,000 people a night for what's been billed as the evangelist's last American crusade. Neither are Catholics officially among the 15,000 volunteers amassed for the event.
The Rev. A.R. Bernard, crusade chairman, professed some puzzlement over the archdiocese's reasoning, noting Catholic involvement in other crusades.
"Those who were touched by the Catholic charismatic renewal will be there," he predicted. "You cannot judge by the leadership's protests because the lay people will come anyway."
Catholics are still welcome to attend, but the lack of official involvement amazed Graham biographer Bill Martin, who characterized the archdiocese's reasoning as a "change in policy" from Mr. Graham's 1991 Central Park crusade. Back then, he said, 630 Catholic churches cooperated with the crusade and information on the meetings was handed out at St. Patrick's Cathedral.
That 1991 stance had been a huge shift from Mr. Graham's first New York crusade in 1957, he said, when Catholics boycotted the event and Catholic clergy were instructed on how to counter Mr. Graham's preaching.
"So maybe something's come down from above saying not to be involved in this," Mr. Martin added.
Mr. Zwilling said he didn't remember any such cooperation from churches back then, but Catholic clergy in 1991 did receive names of Catholics who answered Mr. Graham's altar calls at the Central Park event.
In a column to be released Saturday in the diocesan newspaper the Tablet, Brooklyn Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio outlined the significant divide over how Catholics and Protestants understand salvation.
The bishop said he welcomed Mr. Graham into the area and promised to follow up on any names given to them by crusade organizers.
To forestall objections of "sheep stealing," crusade policy is that all Catholics attending the event who sign a card signifying a desire for salvation are referred to the diocese.
Another Graham biographer, David Aikman, said Mr. Graham had a "good relationship" with many Catholic prelates, such as the late Boston Cardinal Richard Cushing, who in 1964 praised the evangelist's talent for converting non-Christians, adding, "I only wish we had half a dozen men of his caliber to go forth and do likewise."
In 1997, Mr. Graham told New Man magazine, an evangelical publication, that "through the years I have made many friends within the Roman Catholic Church. In fact, when we hold a crusade in a city now, nearly all the Roman Catholic churches support it.
"And when we went to Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota, for the crusade [last year], we saw St. Paul, which is largely Catholic, and Minneapolis, which is largely Lutheran, both supporting the crusade. That wouldn't have happened 25 years ago."
###"but I wont get to heaven because of good works"###
Maybe! But you surely will not get there if you do not do good works.
###"to the non-Catholic, to be not only ridiculous, but also insulting."###
The reason is that corrections are needed for people who have never been in a Catholic Church and have no real idea of Church teaching. Most have second hand knowledge that the person has read or received from an apostate to the Church.
I raise a question to you. Do you believe that Jesus Christ is the second person of the Blessed Trinity who with the Father and Holy Spirit is one God?
As 34,000 Protestant denominations do not believe in transubstantiation, what is your interpretation of the Catholic Eucharist? Where did the Church get its approval for the Eucharist?
"Not only did the Savior command that all nations should enter the Church, but He also decreed the Church to be a means of salvation without which no one can enter the kingdom of eternal glory."
I read through the web link you posted. I think your definition of "Church" is not the same as what the link defines it. Again, the Roman Catholic Church is not the entirety of the definition "Church" when it is defined in your link, or Vatican 2.
We agree that the Church is necessary for salvation. However, it is clear from Scripture and Tradition that Baptism is the entry by which one becomes a member of the Church. I would ask you to consider the Re-Baptism disagreements during Cyprian's time. You will find that here, we see the Church considered those Baptized by Donatists were not required to be re-baptized to come back into full communion with the Catholic Church. I believe that this gives us insight into the mind of WHAT is the Church. Apparently, the Catholic Church found that those baptized by Donatists were already within the Church, though not fully, as a result of their Donatist Baptism.
In paragraph 15 of the Constitution on the Church, it says that those called to be Christians in other churches and with whom the pope is not yet fully united are nonetheless linked to the Church in many ways, united to Romans Catholics by Scripture, prayer, charity, and even sacraments. In paragraph 16, it even goes on to state that those who seek God whatsoever, if they are good and true, are also related to God's people (Church). ONLY those who persist in darkness and cultivate despair have cut off their relationship to the People of God. I think your definition of "Church" is too narrow. The Roman Church itself does NOT say that one must be a Roman Catholic to go to heaven.
Baptism, even implicit Baptism by desire, has been the means of entry into the Church since the very beginning. This does not mean that the Catholic Church is not necessary - it is the visible sacrament of unity among God's people. However, nowhere have you shown that one must be on the roles of a Roman Catholic diocese to enter heaven. Feeney was wrong, as Pius clarified.
Regards
I raise a question to you. Do you believe that Jesus Christ is the second person of the Blessed Trinity who with the Father and Holy Spirit is one God?
I believe that the "Blessed Trinity" is a reverent way of naming what to me is simply the triune nature of God. Yes, I believe that Jesus, the Father, and the Holy Spirit are all parts of one. Numerical position doesn't matter to me... Jesus was there in the beginning, all three were, and the last'll be first anyway, right?
As 34,000 Protestant denominations do not believe in transubstantiation, what is your interpretation of the Catholic Eucharist? Where did the Church get its approval for the Eucharist?
This, again, is Charlie-Brown's-teacher-ish to me. Are you talking about communion? Protestants take it too.
And I take issue with being called "Protestant" simply because I'm not Catholic.
Read Hebrews 11. (Romans 11 probably wouldn't hurt either.)
To suppose that the Catholic Church and the "Church" are not identical would be a grave mistake. Certainly the Holy Office in 1949 would not have thought so!:
"The practice of the Church has always been the same, as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the Fathers, who were wont to hold as outside Catholic communion, and alien to the Church, whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of doctrine proposed by her authoritative Magisterium. Epiphanius, Augustine, Theodoret, drew up a long list of the heresies of their times. St. Augustine notes that other heresies may spring up, to a single one of which, should any one give his assent, he is by the very fact cut off from Catholic unity" (Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum, §9).
"If we would define and describe this true Church of Jesus Christ - which is the One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic and Roman Church - we shall find nothing more noble, more sublime, or more divine than the expression 'the Mystical Body of Christ'" (Pius XII, Mystici Corporis Christi, §13)
"Some say they are not bound by the doctrine, explained in Our Encyclical Letter of a few years ago, and based on the Sources of Revelation, which teaches that the Mystical Body of Christ and the Roman Catholic Church are one and the same thing" (Pius XII, Humani Generis, §27)
Vatican II concurs, saying:
"Christ, the one Mediator, established and continually sustains here on earth His holy Church, the community of faith, hope and charity, as an entity with visible delineation through which He communicated truth and grace to all. But, the society structured with hierarchical organs and the Mystical Body of Christ, are not to be considered as two realities, nor are the visible assembly and the spiritual community, nor the earthly Church and the Church enriched with heavenly things; rather they form one complex reality which coalesces from a divine and a human element" (LG 8)
Note that the footnote following this statement is to Humani Generis - so the Council makes Pius' teaching its own. The statements about relationship you refer to are just that - relationships. LG 8-13 are very clear that the "People of God", or the Church, is composed only of the faithful, in accordance with the traditional definition of the Church as the "congregation of the faithful, subject to lawful pastors" (thus St. Robert Bellarmine).
To make the relationships the determination of the Church would be absurd - as the Council says, "And there belong to or are related to it in various ways, the Catholic faithful, all who believe in Christ, and indeed the whole of mankind". I say rather that the Church is composed only of the Catholic faithful: "Actually only those are to be included as members of the Church who have been baptized and profess the true faith, and who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the structure of the Body, or been excluded by legitimate authority" (Pius XII, Mystici Corporis Christi, §21), who are the only ones "fully incorporated in the society of the Church" (LG 14). If we should speak of the catechumens, or others in an analogous position (believing in the Catholic Faith inasmuch as they can, and infused by faith, hope, and charity), they are not properly speaking parts or members of the Church, since they do not belong bodily: "Actually only those", etc., although they do belong spiritually, since they are sons of God and therefore also of the Church which is the Mystical Body, in spirit although not in body: thus St. Augustine says that catechumens are conceived in the womb of the Church, but not yet sons. This is the distinction made by St. Robert Bellarmine in the De Ecclesia Militante, and by Cardinal Journet in the following words, which I embrace as my own: "Above all, we must not say that the just 'without' belong to the invisible Church. Say rather, if you will, that they belong invisibly to the visible Church."
However, it is clear from Scripture and Tradition that Baptism is the entry by which one becomes a member of the Church
Most true - for those baptized into the Catholic Church. But otherwise: "And if it is mere madness to assert this, then let them confess that a man can be baptized with the true baptism of Christ, and that yet his heart, persisting in malice or sacrilege, may not allow remission of sins to be given; and so let them understand that men may be baptized in communions severed from the Church, in which Christ's baptism is given and received in the said celebration of the sacrament, but that it will only then be of avail for the remission of sins, when the recipient, being reconciled to the unity of the Church, is purged from the sacrilege of deceit, by which his sins were retained, and their remission prevented" (St. Augustine, On Baptism, Against the Donatists, I, 12:18). This is why Pius XII states that not only true baptism, but also profession of the true faith and adherence to the structure of the Body is necessary for membership in the Church.
nowhere have you shown that one must be on the roles of a Roman Catholic diocese to enter heaven
I should hope not, since I don't believe it! The letter of the Holy Office summarizes my understanding of this matter: "Therefore, that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member, but it is necessary that at least he be united to her by desire and longing".
Membership in no corporation will provide salvation!
Only by covering yourself in the Blood of Y'shua can you be saved.
B'shem Y'shua
1991 stance had been a huge shift from Mr. Graham's first New York crusade in 1 957, he said, when Catholics boycotted the event and Catholic clergy were instructed on how to counter Mr. Graham's preaching
I was discouraged from going in 1957, when I was in a Jesuit Prep School.
I missed forty years of the joy of knowing Y'shua by listening to those ignorant Jesuits.
Praise G-d He called me to be one of His own.
B'shem Y'shua
It would be a mistake to think Jesuits are ignorant. I've heard them called a lot of names in recent history, many of which I heartily agree with, but ignorant is most definitely not one of them.
"Above all, we must not say that the just 'without' belong to the invisible Church. Say rather, if you will, that they belong invisibly to the visible Church."
Well said by Bellarmine. I think we are on the same page, it is that I was not able to express myself as I would have liked. We both agree on Baptism as the entry into the Church. From this, we can presume that some will enter heaven, while perhaps never entering into a Roman Catholic Church to celebrate Mass.
Thanks for the discussion.
Regards
Certainly.
God bless,
Hmmm, when you attended Mass with Grandma perhaps you missed all those prayers which conclude "...through Our Lord Jesus Christ".
Mary, as the first Christian and human closest to Jesus is one of many saints we ask to join their prayers to our own. It is no different then asking others in your church to pray for you. We believe that God, in His Mercy, allows all Christians, those with Him and those still on earth to pray for each other. The doctrine is known as 'the Communion of Saints'.
The Church wrote and protected the Bible you read today. The Church pre-dates the Bible, that is why we have tradition.
They were very knowledgeable of worldly pursuits
But they were ignorant of Y'shua
B'shem Y'shua
Actually, it seems to me I'm hearing about a rapproachment with orthodoxy. It seems that we protestants are considered "separated brethren" by Vatican II and are not considered heretics.
Hmmmmmm.....
Wonder what the right answer really is??
Hmmmmmm.....
Wonder what the right answer really is??
I'm not sure if I know the right answer, but I do know I don't need the Catholic Church for salvation.
"we protestants are considered "separated brethren" by Vatican II and are not considered heretics."
I think the Church has officially recognized that there are Protestants of good faith who worship Jesus, etc., who have not willingly, knowingly separated themselves from Christ's Church, the Catholic Church. They are considered "invincibly ignorant" - as they themselves did not actually leave the Church - but are following their own "traditions". The Church considers that they are not fully within the Church, not in unity completely with the Body of Christ, although in some mystical way, they are still related to Him.
I believe a heretic is considered someone who willfully separates himself from the Church. Thus, Vatican 2's definition.
Regards
I am a protestant...a methodist to be exact (and an ordained elder at that.) I am certain that most Christians I know accept as genuinely Christian any person who has a sincere belief in the death, burial, and resurrection of our incarnate Lord Jesus Christ. This includes Catholics, protestants, and even independents.
We, too, believe that the doctrine of those in certain denominational settings is less scriptural than others, but that does not change their salvation. Salvation is by the grace of God.
It is heartening to know that sincere believers from other Christian bodies are also acknowledged to be part of the family of God, even if considered a bit separated.
John 9:49 - " 49 Now John answered and said, "Master, we saw someone casting out demons in Your name, and we forbade him because he does not follow with us." 50 But Jesus said to him, "Do not forbid him, for he who is not against us is on our side." "
"John 9:49..."
Yes, brother, and ...
"And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth not us. But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me. For he that is not against us is on our part. (Mark 9:38-40)
I think this subject has been addressed above enough. Baptism is what brings one into the Kingdom. As far as I know, most Protestants offer valid Baptism, so in some way, they are somehow related to the Church, even though not formally part of the Roman Catholic Church.
Regards
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.